What caused them to obey it? Sinners making a free will choice, or Gid granting a new heart?
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Does the Prescient View Deny God's Omniscience?
- Thread starter franklinmonroe
- Start date
What caused them to obey it? Sinners making a free will choice, or Gid granting a new heart?
Sinners making a free will choice. Romans 6:17 does not say God gave them a new heart. It was verse 18, AFTER they had already chosen to believe that they were made free from sin and BECAME servants of righteousness.
They became new creatures AFTER they believed.
How many more times are you going to need to ask this before it sinks in?
15 What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? May it never be! 16 Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin [j]resulting in death, or of obedience [k]resulting in righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that [l]though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed, 18 and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. 19 I am speaking in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness, [m]resulting in further lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness, [n]resulting in sanctification.
20 For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. 21 Therefore what [o]benefit were you then [p]deriving [q]from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the outcome of those things is death. 22 But now having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, you [r]derive your
Romans 6:15-20 Nasb
Paul, again, was adressing that since/due to them now being saved, they were able to be freed from sin, and ruled over by Christ!
And folks insist the MVs say the same thing as the KJB and do not change doctrine. Here is a perfect example where the MVs depart from the KJB.
The scriptures show that these Romans obeyed the gospel from their heart while they were yet sinners.
It was "then" upon their obedience and believing the gospel that they were freed from sin and became the servants of righteousness.
At least one of the MVs retained the original meaning of this verse. :thumbsup:
WEB- Rom 6:17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin; but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.
The word "then" in verse 18 points back to these Romans having "obeyed" the gospel in verse 17.
The moment you obey the gospel and believe on Jesus you are baptized into his death and died with Jesus to sin. This is the moment we are set free from sin. We are now bought by the blood of Christ and become his servants.
Get a better Bible. I suggest the KJB.
My answer would be yes concerning divine foreknowledge to be infinite. The issue then becomes, in this case, man’s attempt to box-in and define divine foreknowledge to fit soteriological views which unavoidably must logically hinge to Determinism. The Calvinist position logically limits divine foreknowledge to “deterministic sovereign control”.
True, that if I held to their limiting definition of divine foreknowledge I could not logically support the volition of man – thereby I would also have to logically deny human responsibility and along with that divine judgment and justice because of limiting God’s ability to both allow human volition and yet infinitely know the outcomes to man’s decisions.
Agreed.
Agreed again, yet, certain truths must be maintained (to avoid theological fatalism) as you are about to address.
I would agree and commonly make the claim that several of God’s attributes as well as God given human attributes are being sacrificed simply to support the Calvinist/Determinist’ systematic theological view. IMO, this comes at great cost, beginning with the Calvinist neglect of a true and transparent gospel message at the forefront which SHOULD "truthfully" proclaim that ALL men are offered God's grace, but doesn't.
franklinmonroe
Active Member
How could God know (or foreknow) about a person's choice before the person comes into existence? I am not limiting the person's existence to just being born physically in space/time. We do not require God to know about that which He has not yet conceived in His mind. God could not know about a person's choice before the persons exists (even in the mind of God).
So, if God does not know (or foreknow) about a person's choice BEFORE they exist, then He must either learn of their choice AFTER their existence, or SIMULTANEOUSLY know when they come into existence.
If God foreknows sometime after the person's existence then HE didn't know at some prior moment of existence; any interval would deny His omniscience. If God knows about the person's choice simultaneously with bringing the person into existence then God has essentially created the person inseparable from all that person's choices. That which God has conceived in His mind has all the characteristics in reality exactly as He has conceived it.
For example, God conceived the apple tree. The apple tree came into existence in the mind of God, even if it had not yet appeared in the physical realm. God cannot change His mind about the apple tree. If God conceives another fruit-bearing tree that is different than His previous concept of the apple tree then it is a different tree entirely (maybe a pear tree, or orange tree, etc.). God doesn't revise or improve upon His thoughts.
When it comes to people rather than trees, I suggest that when God conceived of this Frank Monroe He created me fully as I am and would be. I cannot, by taking thought, add one cubit to my stature. I cannot really change anything about me contrary to God's foreknowledge of me. I can only strive to make my choices align with His will. It was God's will that I would be converted and at one point in the past and my will did ultimately align with His foreknowledge in this regard. Praise God! My will and everything about me was on a collision course (which could not be avoided) with God's will for me.
Last edited by a moderator:
We might be in agreement that the depth and type of God’s knowledge cannot be fully understood and I’d explain our limited ability (“paradox”) to define divine knowledge in this comparative sense: neither we cannot fully understand the concept of Trinity, or the how, from man’s perspective yet we know it is true, we see this concept in the scriptures and maintain all truths of this concept regardless. Now relating to divine knowledge, within the Trinitarian Nature we see God becoming man, Jesus Christ being fully man as well as fully God. During this time we see Jesus say that He does not know something while the Father does: (Mar 13:32) “But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.” Obviously, then God is able to separate His knowledge at His will to accomplish His desire. I believe His desire is/was to create volitional creatures and He has the type of knowledge to allow such, in truth. In similar fashion as what happens in the Trinity, if you will…
You say, “I can only strive to make my choices align with His will.” That's because you know and love Him. I believe we have a loving God whose will is that all men (His volitional creatures) would repent, believe and should not perish. Could it be that God has put every man on a course to salvation, yet many do not conform to His influences? Do men (volitional creatures) not go against His will? We have many examples in the Bible regarding men going against His will. I say, yes, men do go against His will AND this in no way limit His sovereignty, it defines it as a form of “providential sovereign control” (influences and response) over the creatures He created in the world – rather than a “deterministic sovereign control” (cause and effect) over them. Further, I do not believe the type of knowledge God has limits Him from doing these things (providing genuine influences, judgment, etc.) over His volitional creatures.
We have Biblical examples that show man changing what God knows to be true within the element of time. Again, obviously Jesus/God was within the element of time when He did not know the day and hour. As per man having the ability to freely change the circumstances within time we’ve already heard of this possibility in this thread concerning Tyre and Sidon - Jesus demonstrates that He has knowledge of what would happen given a different set of circumstances.
In 1Samuel 23 we see God telling David what will happen, yet it doesn’t because David changed the circumstances. God didn’t lie about Saul coming down and David being delivered up, His knowledge was according to the circumstances at hand. God’s knowledge remains infinite as He allows man to change circumstances.
On that note, God knows what circumstances people will freely respond to His grace and providentially places people in circumstances in which each one receives sufficient grace for salvation if only that person will avail himself of that divine influence. Therefore, God gets all the credit for a person’s salvation and they get all the blame should they not freely receive His loving gift. The ambulance model gives an example of this:
“Imagine you wake up and discover that you are in an ambulance being transported to the emergency room. You clearly require serious medical help. If you do nothing, you will be delivered to the hospital. However, if for whatever reason you demand to be let out, the driver will comply. He may express his concern, warn you of the consequences, but he will abide by your wishes. You receive no credit for being taken to the hospital, you receive all the blame for getting out.”
Personally, I am not a Predestinarian and hold a strong view of divine providence along with non-deterministic sovereign control down to the smallest details of God knowingly deciding to create certain circumstances while maintaining free will and thereby responsibility.
God’s knowledge is a deep subject for sure. We will never understand all the how’s He accomplishes His loving purposes. The important thing, I think, is that we strive to maintain the truths of God and His Nature including all His attributes. To sacrifice many of His attributes in order to enforce our perception of how His knowledge must work to fit a particular systematic theology, or to be limiting Him from doing otherwise as if He is boxed-in, unable to do all He says He does, Who He says He is, is plain wrong, IMO.
Got to go, good subject, hope my contribution at least gives you something to chew on.
As Tom Butler would say, "Release the hounds!" :smilewinkgrin:
franklinmonroe
Active Member
Thanks for the reply. I don't wish to extend the discussion unnecessarily but wanted to respond to a couple things you wrote above.
Even though God the Son did not know "that day and that hour" at that particular time, God the Father still did. Therefore, the knowledge was never removed or unknown to the Godhead. I don't think this verse is a strong enough argument on its own for me to accept.
Furthermore, based upon you supposition you say you believe that His foreknowledge of election functions in a similar way (that He choses not to know or in some way 'hides' His knowledge). You don't offer any other scriptural support for that belief. I'm not sure you can. I don't think it is logically a necessary belief unless one has a preconceived theological construct that must account for 'free will' apart from God's sovereignty.
I appreciate what you wrote even though I don't necessarily agree 100%.
Last edited by a moderator: