Featured What UNIQUELY sets apart a 'work of God' from every other common event in history?

Winman, re your post #17:

There's no disagreement here that God knows all. But I don't see how one can separate his foreknowlege from his determinate counsel. It may be that sometimes God's determinate counsel takes the form of withdrawing His restraint of evil, and allowing one to follow his sinful nature.

It seems to me that to separate foreknowledge from determinate counsel leaves God as passive, and we know that he's not, as we find in Daniel 4:35:

I wish I had some easy answers to these questions. If I must choose, I have to come down on the side of His sovereignty, even though that position creates further questions.

 

How far into the future can one carry the determinate counsel of God? Does the determinate counsel of God only cover one presently?

For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. 1 Cor 15:22
If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. 1 Cor 15:19

in regard to the dispensation of the fulness of the times, to bring into one the whole in the Christ, both the things in the heavens, and the things upon the earth -- in him; Eph 1:10 YLT that in the name of Jesus every knee may bow -- of heavenlies, and earthlies, and what are under the earth -- and every tongue may confess that Jesus Christ [is] Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Phil 2:10,11 YLT

Do we know what the determinate counsel of God is?

Just thinking out loud.

 

Easy, God simply knows what a person will do in a given situation. God could not cause Judas to betray Jesus, because the scripture is clear that God does not tempt any man to sin.

Jam 1:13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.

The scripture says God does not tempt ANY MAN, but that EVERY MAN is tempted when he is drawn away of his OWN lust and enticed.

So, you can't accuse God of tempting Judas, or at least I wouldn't.

But we know for a fact Jesus knew Judas would betray him.

Jhn 6:64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.

Jhn 6:70 Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?
71 He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve.

You may not like the idea that God can foreknow things that he did not cause, but that is what the scriptures teach. It was the devil who tempted Judas, not God.

Jhn 13:2 And supper being ended, the devil having now put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, to betray him;

God did not make Judas betray Jesus, he simply foreknew he would, and allowed Judas to betray him.

Jhn 18:3 Judas then, having received a band of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons.
4 Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye?

Does it say Jesus caused all things that came upon him?

Mat 27:51 And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear.
52 Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.
53 Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?
54 But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?

Jesus did not have to be taken, but this is what was determined. Jesus ALLOWED himself to be taken. Note that Jesus suggests he must be obedient for God's will to be fulfilled.

But God did not put it into Judas's heart to betray Jesus, Satan did. God simply foreknew it, and allowed the Jews to take Jesus and crucify him on the Passover for our sins.

You must distinguish that which God directly causes from that which he allows.

 

God in His sovereignity uses the evil choices of people to have His Will/plan/purposes get fulfilled, as He chose such a man as Judas to have the scriptures fullfilled of him betraying jesus, and He sent forth evil spirit unto king saul, so God uses even evil things to accomplish his Will!

 

God did not send an evil spirit into king Saul, he allowed it. Read the story.

1 Kngs 22:19 And he said, Hear thou therefore the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left.
20 And the LORD said, Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead? And one said on this manner, and another said on that manner.

Did God tell anyone what to do here? NO, he ASKED who shall persuade Ahab.

I get a real kick out of this story, as the angels seemed to have a big discussion over this matter. :laugh:

But notice the evil angel VOLUNTEERS.

1 Kngs 22:21 And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the LORD, and said, I will persuade him.
22 And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him, and prevail also: go forth, and do so.
23 Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the LORD hath spoken evil concerning thee.

This evil spirit volunteered to persuade Ahab, and the Lord allowed him to do so. But this was an act of JUDGMENT. The Lord had already decreed that Ahab would die in battle for his wicked ways.

1 Kngs 21:17 And the word of the LORD came to Elijah the Tishbite, saying,
18 Arise, go down to meet Ahab king of Israel, which is in Samaria: behold, he is in the vineyard of Naboth, whither he is gone down to possess it.
19 And thou shalt speak unto him, saying, Thus saith the LORD, Hast thou killed, and also taken possession? And thou shalt speak unto him, saying, Thus saith the LORD, In the place where dogs licked the blood of Naboth shall dogs lick thy blood, even thine.
20 And Ahab said to Elijah, Hast thou found me, O mine enemy? And he answered, I have found thee: because thou hast sold thyself to work evil in the sight of the LORD.
21 Behold, I will bring evil upon thee, and will take away thy posterity, and will cut off from Ahab him that pisseth against the wall, and him that is shut up and left in Israel,

King Ahab is like those persons described in the NT that will not listen to God, so God gives them over to a reprobate mind, and allows them to believe a lie. This is an act of judgment against an unrepentant sinner.

 

Point was that the Lord used evil demon to have His will acoomplished concerning saul!

He already had predetermine that the Demon would have that role, and the Demon 'willfully" agreed to do it!

 

I think the scripture teaches us the simple mystery that God is in control and there is comfort. There are a lot of deep mysterious questions, but we can still know that God is good and parodoxically controls even evil in His will perfectly without Himself sinning. The how questions or why questions should not be asked without forgetting the simple principle of sovereignty.

 

Not really, God was completely truthful with King Ahab, Ahab was told about the evil spirit that was allowed to speak through his false prophets. Ahab was told he would not return from the battle.

Even though God told Ahab the truth, he decided to go into battle anyway and was killed.

God never lied to Ahab. God told Ahab about the evil spirit.

 

Nothing.

The rose never opens against the morning sun but by the determinate counsel of God.

The grain of sand never shifts an atom's width one way or the other but by his divine power and under his purposeful control.

The sinking of the Titanic is no more an "act of God" than the sinking of a pebble after having been skipped across the lake by a child.

 

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

Luke is to be admired for being consistent here.

 

Maybe God reacts, "In the fulness of time, God."

Has the fulness of time come in which evil has been eradicated?

Will it so be?

 

We probably wouldn't be having this discussion if somehow we could separate out evil from God's sovereignty. We just don't like the idea of God's being so sovereign that he's ultimately responsible for evil

So, then, how do we deal with these scriptures?

Lamentations 3:37-38

Isaiah 45:7

Romans 9:15-18

 

I understand how it may come across as God playing two sides of the "chess board". whether you try to understand God from a non- cal perspective that seems to imply God is passive or from a cal side that seems to emphasize God being "active" you run into brick walls.

I dont totally appeal to mystery, which is why my view comes across as deterministic. We all get to arrogant and confident with our philosophical (we call logical) ideas we claim come from Scripture. We need a lot of humility here and to listen to each other carefully because each of our views has scripture blended with whatever else our backgrounds provide.

I personally believe my view is Biblical and that is that God is in control of every event small to large. By control one may see this as "active". While id say that defines Gods control better than Him being "passive" neither totally reveal how God can assure all things happen "after the counsel of His will". Our finite limitations darken our understanding of how God controls things. This doesnt mean to stop thinking but rather to be very careful (with humility) when trying to understand bc it is easy to be led away from Scriptures clear simple teaching.

Most of what I found from people disagreeing with me personally is human logic led views. Ex. "The bible cant mean this bc i think this, or this logically leads to this". We all use logic and our extra biblical reasoning between the lines has its place, but we simply have to be careful IMO.

 

Oh, but seems to me you obviously do have an easy answer (conclusion), Butler. No??? You’ve stated that “you don’t see how God can separate His foreknowledge from His determinate council” then you’ve simply gone forward and begged the question on that conclusion (that He can’t separate foreknowledge from derterminism). Let’s look at your “easy answer”:

You’ve clearly come down on the side of God‘s Sovereignty being “Deterministic Sovereignty” (also noting this choice is complete: “regardless of the consequences”).

Oh, not to forget you’ve also stated that God’s “determinate counsel” could take the form of “withdrawing His restraint” and “allowing one to follow his nature” in an effort to recognize and acknowledge the volition of God’s creatures to do evil on their own according to their “own” nature. But, in double-minded fashion you’ve turn right back around and restate the premise you’ve once again begged the question on to come to your final conclusion on (your “no easy answer – “If you had to choose” - “answer”):

Your conclusion is: Divine foreknowledge, “must” = a form Deterministic Sovereignty (despite the conseuences). But now you’ve even taken the next step to addressing WHY you are willing to accept those consequences: “If "Deterministic Sovereignty" is not true then God must be passive”. Confirming once again there is only one “easy answer” and again – “regardless of the consequences” to God’s Nature that He must be the “Author of Evil”. (your proof-texts to this “fact” about to be noted as forthcoming.)

Then one page later you say we wouldn’t be having this discussion if we could separate from attributing evil to God and so you “proof-text” scripture which you “proves” makes God ultimately responsible for evil:

Seems there is no escape that your “very humble” and “no easy answer” amounts to exactly the conclusion that: “God cannot separate His foreknowledge from Deterministic sovereignty and therefore He is responsible for evil.”

Do you see how you begged the question here???

The way I see it is that you’ve assumed that God is not Omnipotent enough to separate His foreknowledge from His “determinate counsel” which you then assume must equate to Him “determining evil” for Him to be Omnipotent in His Sovereignty.

Further, you have begged the question on this by assuming His “determinate counsel” can only equate to the “determinate action” of His creatures. Also, you’ve seem to have accepted the consequences of attributing evil to God.

So my question (actually two) to you about your “humbly” coming to your “not so easy answer” with an “easy answer” along with proof-texts that “God is in Deterministic Sovereign Control of all things including evil”, is:

Why isn’t God Omnipotent enough to separate His foreknowledge from “Deterministic Sovereignty”?

And could His “determinate counsel” not relate to that He has a form of “Provident Sovereignty” to counsel truly volitional creatures by which they are responsible for the evil in the world according to His judgment on them disobeying His determinate counsel???

I’m just curious on what you base your “not so easy” easy answer on if not on begging your question on that God “must” have “Deterministic Sovereign Control” due to His “Omnipotent inability” to separate foreknowledge from determinism by which you conclude would make Him less than Omnipotent?

Because it seems to me you have not only so “humbly chosen” your “no easy answer - answer” but are now going to about to decisively support it and declare it as true?

SO have you made up your mind all of a sudden or what?? (Being just a wee bit “double-minded” perhaps??) IOWs, if you haven’t made up your mind that God has Deterministic Sovereign Control over His creatures in all things THEN WHY are you proof-texting that evil is attributed to Him???

Come on! Fess up! Tell the truth now – and forever more, ..."Butler"! (You ever wonder why I call you, "Butler"? This is why.- "Its the name I've associated with your common tactic of talking out of both sides of your mouth, or maybe better said, "the other end", ...while "humbly" moving forward onto proof-texting and thereby "teaching" Determinist views!") You’ve already really chosen your easy answer to the not so easy answer, haven’t you?