The devil wants us fighting about this...why?

You are right.

 

Hi Larry;

What God knows doesn't have anything to do with a fate. There is nothing in scripture that says what God knows predestines us to a single thing. This whole line of thinking is nothing. It is just like "Can God create a rock so big He can't pick it up. If so God must not be all powerful." The same kind of thing here. God does not see the future. He plans it. then as time goes along he alters His plans to insure His prophecy comes about as He want it to. There no such thing as an unalterable plan. If there were God would no longer be sovereign but the plan would be sovereign over God.

Maybe your not wanting to admit that God can change his mind about us according to our actions. That Jeremiah 18 clearly shows that it is we who are responsible for our own fate. That we all are still clay in God's hands and he can still do what ever he wants with us and does so according to our actions. whether they be towards good or evil. He changes our destiny accordingly.
Jer 18:6 O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the LORD. Behold, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel.
Jer 18:7 At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it;
Jer 18:8 If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them.

Of course you might say well that was Israel and I'd just say well Israel are men aren't they. God changes His mind about us according to our actions. We alone are responsible for our own actions.
In a latter post;

Yes we do Ninevah was not in Israel even if some Jews lived there it still doesn't mean it was a Jewish city as you might hope. Ninevah was made up of people who were not elect and yet believed Jonah. The fact that it wasn't in Israel proves it wasn't all Jewish and yet they all believed.

May Christ Shine His Light On Us all;
Mike

 

Nope.

That is true of Him knowing about the 2nd coming AND of His knowing every decision Christ would ever make.

No chance that He is wrong.

Pretty tough to "BE God" </font>[/QUOTE]This is exactly my point. Substitute Joe committing adultery for X and you have my scenario. God knows that Joe will commit adultery. Because God knows it, Joe has no real choice (as you guys define choice) to do otherwise. You end up in the same place we do.

 

Yes.

Judgments are the consequences of actions. They are built in ... God doesn't change.

What about it?

What about Tyre and Sidon where Christ says if they had had the revelation that the first century Jews did, they would have repented in sackcloth and ashes. It indicates that God did not do everything he could have to bring repentance to them. To me, that is a difficult passage for those who say "God is willing that all should come to repentance." Tyre and Sidon seem to show a case of the opposite.

 

No one is talking about fate.

Not even remotely similar.

Even the sin of the future?

So God's plan keeps changing? That is precisely the position of process theology and open theism. The Bible describes the knowledge of God as eternal and infallible. God is not changing plans to insure his prophecy comes about. That was settled in eternity past.

I don't put any stock in teh idea of fate. Man is responsible for his choices. And the choices of unsaved man are always sinful, always choices ot reject God. Only when God regenerates him does man make any other choices. Jere 18 certainly doesn't contradict that.

Still making the major error of failing to distinguish between personal election to salvation and the election of Israel as a nation. There were no doubt some Ninevites who were of the former, though not of the latter.

I think your post has revealed some real weaknesses. You have put yourself close to the category of open theism, perhaps because you don't see the ramifications of what you are saying. Your position has you denying that God's knowledge is eternal, or that God's knowledge is infallible. I am not sure which. It seems that you deny the former, because you say that God keeps changing his plan to make sure his prophecies come true. Why would he have to do that? I see no reason for it, unless God doesn't really know the future.

 

Then why are Calvinists continually trying to "BE God"?? When they try to "think God's thoughts for Him" and explain HOW He maintains free will WHILE knowing all in the future - they fail to BE God and come up with a "solution" where even God HIMSELF has no free will!

How in the world can a Calvnist be satisfied with such thinking?

Why not just stop "playing God" and admit "it is tough to BE God"??

I agree. BOTH scenarios STILL have free will - we just don't know HOW God does it because we don't have His ability on foreknowledge.

Agreed?

I think that is "your definition" not mine.

And using "your definition" --- "God knows when the second coming will be and so God has NO REAL choice"???

Are you really comfortable with God having "no choice"??

I never describe this as "God having no choice" or "Joe having no choice" although they are BOTH scenarios in the same problem.

I conclude that BOTH have choice.

God knows the future like it was yesterday.

In Christ,

Bob

 

I don't think Calvinists are trying to play God or be God. I don't think its tough for God to be God.

The very point that you miss that is we believe God does hvae free will, and taht is why your definition of free will doesn't work. Calvinists don't deny God's free will. He does have a choice.

Free will is always the ability to act in accordance with his nature. God can do anything that his nature permits. He cannot contradict it. Since he is righteous, he can do no wrong. Man, in his natural state, has free will. He can do anyhting his nature permits. He will always sin because he is a sinner by nature. That is free will. No one forces him to sin.

But that completely misses the point that I think you recognize: Since God knows Joe will commit adultery, Joe has no free will as arminians typically define it. He can't do anything else. In that sense, at the very least, God's eternal knowledge has rendered Joe's free choice to commit adultery a certain choice. It will happen.

 

You are tempting me to be "cautiously optimistic".

If you can "Admit" that God HAS FREE WILL EVEN though HE KNOWS exactly what HE will do in the future -- and that knowing HIS OWN choice HE STILL has free will -- (such that foreknowledge in no way PREVENTS free will)...

Then we have a basis for common ground.

That is exactly how the Arminian views it.

What a great moment of success!

In Christ,

Bob

 

Since God knows John will accept salvation today...

Since God KNOWS when HE will arrive in the 2nd coming...

Since God KNOWS that Susan will be baptized today...

THEY ALL (like God) HAVE FREE WILL ANYWAY!

Because AS IN the case of God - His foreknowing does NOT stop God from having Free will and on that basis it ALSO can not stop them from having it!

It is simple - and even better -- consistent.

It sees the SAME solutions in place EVERY TIME the "since God knows the future" principle is brought into each scenario!!

What a perfect solution!

THIS AGAIN is the SAME scenario played over and over! And the SAME result -- Joe ALSO has free will just like Mary and Susan and John and GOD Himself as EACH of them are confronted with choices and options that are ALL fully FOREKNOWN!

Same scenario - over and over and over again.

On the other hand -- your attempt to do the same thing twice and get a "Different result" is not logical.

In Christ,

Bob

 

If you consistently use that logic with all "actors" then you end up with "God HIMSELF" not having free will - as you have defined it because the ONLY thing stopping Joe is God's foreknowledge and God KNOWS HIS OWN actions as well as He knows Joes!

That is where your scenario breaks down - time after time after time.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Larry;

Yes it is. What your asking for, is a confirmation for predestination being unalterable. It is not unalterable because, God is Sovereign, predestination isn't. The future is not Sovereign it is not set in place, but is planned for. God is the Architect he sees His plans in His mind. The future has not been created yet only planed for. As long as it is only a plan God can make alterations according to the actions of the people. As in Jeremiah 18 but, you seem to deny that man has any freedom to even act as the Natural man as you and other Calvinist have claimed. Is every action of man planned by God? I don't believe so. The Consequences of mans actions are planned for. Man is a free agent God created Him this way for a purpose. That purpose, is man cannot trully love God unless it is man's own will. Love is an act of the will.
May Christ Shine His Light On Us all;
Mike

 

Larry;

I don't understand why you think that. They didn't live in the same period. Some love darkness rather than light. So because they didn't come to the light they had, they're condemned unjustly? If every man could see the end from the beginning every man would repent. That includeds even the most rebellious. Knowing this would also mean they would know what Heaven and hell is like. This would have to be unalterable that every man look at the light. This is How I see your doctrine of predestination. Since some are unalterably predestined to be saved then they have no Chioce. It's going to happen regardless. It's believing in fate, even though you won't accept that.
May Christ Shine His Light On Us All;
Mike

 

It is the principle of the boiled frog. Christ was arguing that the water was "hotter" for the Jews (much hotter given the work of Christ in raising the dead, healing the sick and casting out demons right in front of them) than for Tyre and Sidon.

But the Jews of Christ's day "prove" that once you get used to it and come up with some evil rationalizations -- you can ignore "even that".

Christ is pointing out that the water is much hotter for the Jews of His day than Tyre -- and that if such hot water had suddenly been tossed on the frog of Tyre and Sidon - - the frog would have quickly jumped! At least until they came back with "another evil explanation" as did the Jews.

In Christ,

Bob

 

If you knew what you were talking about, then you would know that Calvinism affirms exactly this.

My point is that you are extremely inconsistent with it, but you just don't get it. You see, Joe has no real free choice as arminians define it because he can do only what God knows he will do. You are trying to redefine what arminians typically think free will is.

 

IT has nothign to do with what I think, but what Scripture says. I didn't make that up about Tyre and Sidon repenting if they had had more light. That is waht Christ said. You are getting caught on the horns of a dilemma, trapped by your own inconsistency.

Who said anything about unjust condemnation? That was not a part of this conversation. Like the deal with God making a rock, you are changing the subject.

And what I am pointing out is that God's forekknowledge, even defined as merely knowing beforehand, results in the same position. Since God has known from eternity past that Joe will commit adultery, or that Joe will get saved, he has no real choice. It will happen because God's knowledge is infallible. Think through how inconsistent you are being.

No, it's not. It is the outcome of choices.

 

How odd since we find Calvinists using this SAME argument to "prove" that "Joe does not have free will".

I am simply arguing that - "in that Case -- neither does God" (using the Calvinist's argument for that point).

And by your own confession above - you would also argue the point "You see God has no free will as Arminians define it" ??

(Why is it I never see you or any Calvinist make that point?)

It is in my search of that "missing Calvinist confession" that I keep slapping on the God-scenario to every one of your Joe-scenarios so that you will finally admit that the SAME principle would "stop both" IF it really did STOP free will at all.

(Having said that - I freely admit that there are some Arminians that ALSO balk at that SAME argument -- which is that FOREKNOWLEDGE stops God and Joe from having free will - and so they refuse to accept that God has foreknowledge. However that is a minority of Arminians.

By comparison it is a MAJORITY of Calvinists who will not admit that the problem foreknowledge is no more restrictive for Joe than it is for God when it comes to God having free will).

In Christ,

Bob

 

God has no free will as arminians define it. I have said that ad nauseum in here to prove wrong your own definition of free will.

My point is this Bob: Both God and Joe have free will, but not as your side defines free will. You have to use my definition of free will in order to claim that Joe has free will. That was my whole in bringing this up. You are trying to confuse the issue by changing the terms. Don't do that.

 

Can we have a show of hands - of how many Calvinists would go along with that definition of "unlimited free will"??

 

Free will, biblically, means you can act in accordance with your nature. That is why God is free yet cannot sin; and man is free yet cannot please God.