Does God know the future?

nancy

BANNED
Banned
1Cor 15:49 - Paul explains that we are conformed in His image at the ressurection. when we shall bear the image of man in heaven. These are the people who obtain glory in heaven.

Rom. 8: 29-30 - Paul writes that we are predestined to be conformed to the image of his son.

These two verses together is inescapable proof in Scripture that god knows who is predestined to heaven.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
nancy said:
Godrulz, the argument is crystal clear as I presented it. Your avoidance of confronting the argument proves you cannot refute it.


I must not have read your posts carefully. I do not understand what you are talking about. Ignoring long posts does not mean I cannot refute it. There is a difference between cannot and will not. Again, one must understand what you are saying and desire to invest some time in order to refute it. For all I know, you may be right. I have not paid close enough attention, nor am I obligated to, to comment at this time.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
nancy said:
1Cor 15:49 - Paul explains that we are conformed in His image at the ressurection. when we shall bear the image of man in heaven. These are the people who obtain glory in heaven.

Rom. 8: 29-30 - Paul writes that we are predestined to be conformed to the image of his son.

These two verses together is inescapable proof in Scripture that god knows who is predestined to heaven.


Corporate vs individual predestination is in view. He was also talking to those who already believed and are thus part of the corporate elect. God predestined that all who would believe would be conformed to His image. It is not explicit (but rather your preconceived idea) that He predestines individuals for salvation or reprobation before they even existed. This is sheer determinism and means that God does not save some that He could save. This is contrary to explicit verses about His universal, impartial love/justice.

You are reading more into the text than merited. The alternate understanding I am pointing out has been developed by many credible, non-Calvinistic scholars. Man, not God is culpable for some not appropriating His efficacious provision.
 

Z Man

New member
Knight said:
Why?

How can I be responsible for something I have no control over?
We've been over this discussion several times. And everytime we indulge in this debate, you leave after I bring in the Scriptures. Just to prove my point, here we go again:


In Luke 22:31-34 Jesus not only predicts that Peter will deny him three times that very night, but treats the act with such certainty that he is already praying for Peter's future repentance and future ministry.


Luke 22:31-34
"'Simon, Simon, behold, Satan has demanded to sift you like wheat; but I have prayed for you, that your faith may not fail; and you, when once you have turned again, strengthen your brothers.' But he said to Him, 'Lord, with You I am ready to go both to prison and to death!' And He said, 'I say to you, Peter, the rooster will not crow today until you have denied three times that you know Me.'"



This absolute knowledge that Peter would sin, how often he would sin, when he would sin, and that he would repent does not remove Peter's moral responsibility in the least, which is made plain by the fact that Peter weeps bitterly precisely when he remembers the words of Jesus' prediction. Peter does not say, "Well, you predicted this sin, and so it had to take place, and so it can't have been part of my free willing, and so I am not responsible for it." He wept bitterly. He was guilty and he knew it.

Jesus was glorious in the prediction, and Peter was guilty. Why do all four gospels tell this remarkable prediction in detail? Surely the deepest answer is the one given by John 13:19, "I am telling you before itcomes to pass, so that when it does occur, you may believe that I am." His foreknowledge of "all the things that were coming upon him" was an essential aspect of his glory as the incarnate Word, the Son of God. The denial of this foreknowledge is an assault on the deity of Christ.



Genesis 20:1-6
And Abraham journeyed from there to the South, and dwelt between Kadesh and Shur, and stayed in Gerar. Now Abraham said of Sarah his wife, "She is my sister." And Abimelech king of Gerar sent and took Sarah.

But God came to Abimelech in a dream by night, and said to him, "Indeed you are a dead man because of the woman whom you have taken, for she is a man's wife." But Abimelech had not come near her; and he said, "Lord, will You slay a righteous nation also? Did he not say to me, 'She is my sister'? And she, even she herself said, 'He is my brother.' In the integrity of my heart and innocence of my hands I have done this." And God said to him in a dream, "Yes, I know that you did this in the integrity of your heart. For I also withheld you from sinning against Me; therefore I did not let you touch her.




God did not allow Abimelech to touch Sarah, yet at the same time, it was Abimelech's integrity and innocence that forbade him to touch Sarah. He was still responsible for his actions although they were ordained by God.



2 Samuel 24:1-4; 9-10
Again the anger of the Lord was aroused against Israel, and He moved David against them to say, "Go, number Israel and Judah." So the king said to Joab the commander of the army who was with him, "Now go throughout all the tribes of Israel, from Dan to Beersheba, and count the people, that I may know the number of the people." And Joab said to the king, "Now may the Lord your God add to the people a hundred times more than there are, and may the eyes of my lord the king see it. But why does my lord the king desire this thing?" Nevertheless the king's word prevailed against Joab and against the captains of the army. Therefore Joab and the captains of the army went out from the presence of the king to count the people of Israel.

Then Joab gave the sum of the number of the people to the king. And there were in Israel eight hundred thousand valiant men who drew the sword, and the men of Judah were five hundred thousand men. And David's heart condemned him after he had numbered the people. So David said to the Lord, "I have sinned greatly in what I have done; but now, I pray, O Lord, take away the iniquity of Your servant, for I have done very foolishly."




If this isn't obvious, then I don't know what is. God moved David to take a census, and yet, David was guilty of doing it afterwards, and he knew it. God ordained and still, David was responsible.

Give up Knight. Only a fool would debate AGAINST Scriptures. And if I know you, that means you'll continue to debate... :rolleyes:
 

Z Man

New member
godrulz said:
Free will is self-evident. It is not a dirty word, unless you are a hyper-Calvinist.
It's an illusion that grants humans who wish it to exist some comfort in knowing that THEY are in control.

If you really have freewill, don't go to work tomorrow. Don't bother furthering your education by not going to class. Don't eat anything for the rest of the year. Choose not to pay your bills. Don't bother watering your plants, or brushing your teeth. Jump out of a 10 story building, or choose to stay under the water for more than an hour without any scuba gear. Choose to stop sinning.

With freewill, you can do all these things.

But can you?
Without free will/choice, you could not drive a car, procreate, etc. Without free will, there is no accountability/responsibility. God becomes responsible for heinous evil, contrary to His character.
See my above post.
 

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Z Man does a cat have your tongue?

YES or NO, am I (as a heretic Open Theist) fulfilling God's perfect plan for me that He created a millennia ago?
 

nancy

BANNED
Banned
Godrulz, the corporate elect includes the people on earth today and the souls in heaven. Catholics also believe the souls in purgatory.Election is not predestination.

Election belongs to God's will and is antecendant of predestination which belongs to God's intellect.

God has foreknowledge of who through their free will are predestined to glory. He then rewards them through election.
 

Johnny

New member
's impossible not because I can't understand it (it's actually a pretty simple concept) but rather because it is irrational.
Why is it irrational? Explain.

Time is not a thing. It does not have mass or energy, it cannot be seen, felt, smelt or perceived by any other sense.
Gravity does not have mass or energy. Time can be felt and observed. By definition (rough definition), time is the direction in which entropy increases. This can be measured and observed. I feel time pass as I sit here watching my fingers move over the keyboard. In fact, the very idea of motion requires the passage of time.

This is a theory, nothing more. In actuality it's an overstatement of Einstein's theory of General Relativity which combines the three dimensions of space with a fourth dimension which Einstein called time. He never proved that this fourth dimension was actually time nor did he even try to do so. I don't believe it ever occurred to him to try, he and the rest of the Physics world just assumed it was time and went with it.
First, don't use the YEC definition of "theory", it confuses a lot of people. Second, you can't prove dimensions, you define them by observation. That's like saying "prove the definition of a word". Third, it's a statement regarding both special relativity and general relativity, and it is not an overstatement of the implications of either SR or GR.

Further, the theory of relativity predicts things which are logically contradictory when objects approach the speed of light, and so there is major aspects of the theory which are incomplete (i.e. Einstein missed something).
Einstein's theories are not considered incomplete by any stretch of the imagination. The theory may predict things that are counter-intuitive, but they are not logically contradictory. Every day we hurl objects at speeds approaching light, and every day we observe everything Einstein predicted. I challenge you to a) find a logically contradictory prediction, and b) an academic reference which refers to Einstein's theory as an incomlete theory.

Not even Einstein would have agreed with you on this. Were you aware that there are physicists who are now developing theories which discount the existence of time altogether? You are on extremely thin ground here even scientifically speaking and you have nothing at all to stand on Biblically.
Yes, Einstein would have agreed with me on this. That is why he referred to it as the "fourth dimension". That's why his equations involve not only identifying your position in space, but identifying time as well. And yes, I'm aware of the current trends in physics. Far more aware than you, I assure you. There are ideas, conjectures, and discussions regarding whether or not time exists. And these border on metaphysics. There are not theories discounting the existence of time.

Time travel is not doable. All of existence is now. Both the future and the past do not exist.
Perhaps you should notify the physicists. You've already conclusively answered some major questions.

Now, back to my questions:

Wrong? No, I wouldn't say wrong, but there are several that did not come to pass.
What's the difference between being wrong and not coming to pass? And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him." Deuteronomy 18:20-22

And my final question: Why are you so anxious to limit God's forsight? It seems that you are more interested in maintaining your idea of free will than accepting that God can see the future. However, I don't see strong Biblical grounds to support the notion of complete free will. I do see that we are responsible for our decisions and actions, and that could be presented as an argument for free will. However, Paul says in Romans 9 that God raised up Pharaoh just so He could smack Him down. Did Pharaoh have a choice? Obviously not.

Rom 9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
Rom 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will [have mercy], and whom he will he hardeneth.
Rom 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
nancy said:
Godrulz, the corporate elect includes the people on earth today and the souls in heaven. Catholics also believe the souls in purgatory.Election is not predestination.

Election belongs to God's will and is antecendant of predestination which belongs to God's intellect.

God has foreknowledge of who through their free will are predestined to glory. He then rewards them through election.

Huh?
 

logos_x

New member
nancy said:
Godrulz, the corporate elect includes the people on earth today and the souls in heaven. Catholics also believe the souls in purgatory.Election is not predestination.

Election belongs to God's will and is antecendant of predestination which belongs to God's intellect.

God has foreknowledge of who through their free will are predestined to glory. He then rewards them through election.

Alll righty thennn...
 

Z Man

New member
Knight said:
Z Man does a cat have your tongue?

YES or NO, am I (as a heretic Open Theist) fulfilling God's perfect plan for me that He created a millennia ago?
Just as I predicted, you proved my point. As soon as I present Scripture, you ignore it and always, ALWAYS try to steer the conversation in another direction.

Your question is irrelevant to this argument. My opinion carries no weight in regards to what I have brought forth according to the Scriptures on this matter. Besides, I really don't have an answer to your question. It's a stupid one at best; who knows such things? Dare I say that I do and have the mind of God?

Now, getting back on point, respond to Scripture, or do what you usually do and ignore it, change the subject, or bail.
 

Poly

Blessed beyond measure
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Z Man said:
Just as I predicted, you proved my point. As soon as I present Scripture, you ignore it and always, ALWAYS try to steer the conversation in another direction.

Your question is irrelevant to this argument. My opinion carries no weight in regards to what I have brought forth according to the Scriptures on this matter. Besides, I really don't have an answer to your question. It's a stupid one at best; who knows such things? Dare I say that I do and have the mind of God?

Now, getting back on point, respond to Scripture, or do what you usually do and ignore it, change the subject, or bail.

That is freakin' hillarious! What a joke! I guess God predestined you to be a hypocrite.

Knight started asking you this question before you ever even posted your scriptures. And now you want to imply that he's ignoring you by simply continuing to ask the question that you're determined to ignore?

:doh: What is it with all the hypocrites and less than honest posters lately??!!

Ok, so what if he read you're so called scripture proof. What if everything you have to say is correct and all those scriptures supposedly show you are?

Knight said:
Knight said:
Knight said:
am I (as a heretic Open Theist) fulfilling God's perfect plan for me that He created a millennia ago?
 

Z Man

New member
Poly said:
That is freakin' hillarious! What a joke! I guess God predestined you to be a hypocrite.

Knight started asking you this question before you ever even posted your scriptures. And now you want to imply that he's ignoring you by simply continuing to ask the question that you're determined to ignore?

:doh: What is it with all the hypocrites and less than honest posters lately??!!

Ok, so what if he read you're so called scripture proof. What if everything you have to say is correct and all those scriptures supposedly show you are?


I answered his 'irrelevant question' Poly. Calm down.
 

Poly

Blessed beyond measure
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Z Man said:
I answered his 'irrelevant question' Poly. Calm down.

You mean this?

Z Man said:
Your question is irrelevant to this argument. My opinion carries no weight in regards to what I have brought forth according to the Scriptures on this matter. Besides, I really don't have an answer to your question. It's a stupid one at best; who knows such things? Dare I say that I do and have the mind of God?

I'm sorry, you must have giving a cowardly copout confused with giving an answer.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
Johnny said:
Why is it irrational? Explain.

Gravity does not have mass or energy. Time can be felt and observed. By definition (rough definition), time is the direction in which entropy increases. This can be measured and observed. I feel time pass as I sit here watching my fingers move over the keyboard. In fact, the very idea of motion requires the passage of time.

First, don't use the YEC definition of "theory", it confuses a lot of people. Second, you can't prove dimensions, you define them by observation. That's like saying "prove the definition of a word". Third, it's a statement regarding both special relativity and general relativity, and it is not an overstatement of the implications of either SR or GR.

Einstein's theories are not considered incomplete by any stretch of the imagination. The theory may predict things that are counter-intuitive, but they are not logically contradictory. Every day we hurl objects at speeds approaching light, and every day we observe everything Einstein predicted. I challenge you to a) find a logically contradictory prediction, and b) an academic reference which refers to Einstein's theory as an incomlete theory.

Yes, Einstein would have agreed with me on this. That is why he referred to it as the "fourth dimension". That's why his equations involve not only identifying your position in space, but identifying time as well. And yes, I'm aware of the current trends in physics. Far more aware than you, I assure you. There are ideas, conjectures, and discussions regarding whether or not time exists. And these border on metaphysics. There are not theories discounting the existence of time.

Perhaps you should notify the physicists. You've already conclusively answered some major questions.
While I did major in physics while in college, I do not consider myself a physicist by any stretch of the imagination. Relativity (both kinds) was one of my favorite things to read and to talk about for years and so I am quite familiar with both the theory (and I do mean the normal meaning of the word theory) and with what Einstein and his contemporaries thought of it. Be that as it may, I don't really care. If any scientific theory predicts anything unbiblical it is wrong, period. And since neither of us are physicists I am not willing to debate the merrits of Einstein's theories. It is a waste of time.

I will however respond to one point you made above...
Time can be felt and observed.
No events can be kept track of and observed, not time. Time does not exist.

By definition (rough definition), time is the direction in which entropy increases.
Entropy is an event or a series of events, all of which can be observed and kept track of but this does nothing to prove that time exists.

This can be measured and observed.
Entrope can be, time itself cannot.

I feel time pass as I sit here watching my fingers move over the keyboard.
Your typing is an event which you can observe, it is not time. Time is the succesion and duration of events, nothing more.

In fact, the very idea of motion requires the passage of time.

Now this is the point I really wanted to focus on.
Does God move, in any way whatsoever?
Yes or no, please.

Now, back to my questions:

What's the difference between being wrong and not coming to pass? And if thou say in thine heart, How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken? When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken, but the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously: thou shalt not be afraid of him." Deuteronomy 18:20-22
God can change His mind and repent of that which He said He would do. Jer. 18.
Thus when spoken they are quite correct and will come to pass but if circumstances change suffiently God will change His mind and His prophecy will not come to pass. This happen more than once in the Bible.

And my final question: Why are you so anxious to limit God's forsight? It seems that you are more interested in maintaining your idea of free will than accepting that God can see the future.
It is not God's foresight that I am anxious about it is His righteousness, His justice, His Holiness and His love that concerns me. All of which become meaningless if we do not have free will.

However, I don't see strong Biblical grounds to support the notion of complete free will. I do see that we are responsible for our decisions and actions, and that could be presented as an argument for free will. However, Paul says in Romans 9 that God raised up Pharaoh just so He could smack Him down. Did Pharaoh have a choice? Obviously not.
He most certainly did have a choice.

Rom 9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
Rom 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will [have mercy], and whom he will he hardeneth.
Rom 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
I've already reference Jer. 18 so it is very appropriate that you have brought up Rom. 9. The two chapters are making the same point. And Jer. 18 defines the symbolic terms used in Rom. 9 making both chapters impossible to misunderstand.

In response to your point about Pharoah I have a question for you.

Based on what we are told in Jer. 18, Why did God make the vessel for dishonor?


Resting in Him,
Clete
 

death2impiety

Maximeee's Husband
I'll take Knights advice and sharpen my sword...

Z Man said:
Yes, I know what 'choice' is, but why is it important to you. You said choice is important because it allows freewill; the option to choose God or deny Him. But, why is that important?

Choice is important to me because without it I'm a robot. Freedom is the beauty of the human experience...Choice is important because without it, I have no control over my life and control is important to me.

You lost me here. :confused:

I'm sorry to have lost you here, I'll try to make it more cogent.

If we have free will, than there are a myriad of choices associated with each individuals existance. If God knows the future than he knows all the choices you'll be confronted with, along with what your eventual action will be. If God knows that tomorrow I'm going to witness to someone and lead them to Christ, its been predetermined. My action is already set and there is nothing I can do about (unless God's perfect foreknowledge is fallable:confused: ). If he's guessing or predicting, that is something entirely different and acceptable. God can make predictions based on his immense knowledge of all things knowable, but if He already knows, there is no choice. Like Knight was saying:

Does God know that in 1010 years a [specific] boy will pick up a [specific] apple?

If the answer is yes, can that boy choose not to pick it up?
If the answer is that God knows he will not pick up the apple can he choose to pick it up?
 

death2impiety

Maximeee's Husband
nancy said:
1Cor 15:49 - Paul explains that we are conformed in His image at the ressurection. when we shall bear the image of man in heaven. These are the people who obtain glory in heaven.

Rom. 8: 29-30 - Paul writes that we are predestined to be conformed to the image of his son.

These two verses together is inescapable proof in Scripture that god knows who is predestined to heaven.


Did God predestine who is to be in heaven? I'd imagine if we are predestined to be there, that it must be by God's work, for only God has the power to do such a thing (unless you bring some other qualifier above God that has determined fate. If so, is God suseptable to this fate?). If He is responsible for any beings future than as a loving God He is responsible every beings future (He wouldn't favor one individual over another, we're all the same at birth). It would follow that He is responsible for EVERYTHING that happens including the fall of man in the first place.

If the future is set, than someone has set the future. Nothing exists without an explanation (except God). There is no way around it. If you want to argue against this, than explain your point clearly. You can't just obfuscate with a sentence loaded with big words. Your one liners are going right over my head.
 

Johnny

New member
And since neither of us are physicists I am not willing to debate the merrits of Einstein's theories. It is a waste of time.
I'll take that as a concession that:

a) You can't prove a dimension, you define a dimension
b) Einstein's theories don't predict logically contradictory events
c) Einstein's theories are considered complete

You see, my point about Einstein was important, because it shows that time is a real entity, and the passage of it is intricately linked to the very fabric our universe. To deny this is to deny the foundations of modern physics, deny observation, and to be downright silly.

Entrope can be, time itself cannot.
My clock in front of me is measuring time right now.

No events can be kept track of and observed, not time. Time does not exist.
I like how conclusive you appear to be. "Time does not exist". Perhaps you should notify the physicists again. Further, time does exist, and the passage of it is relative, based on your motion through space-time and nearby mass. Thus, this thing we have defined as time can be manipulated.

It is not God's foresight that I am anxious about it is His righteousness, His justice, His Holiness and His love that concerns me. All of which become meaningless if we do not have free will.
How so? Is God not just if we have no choice? This is what Paul is saying in Romans 9.

Thus when spoken they are quite correct and will come to pass but if circumstances change suffiently God will change His mind and His prophecy will not come to pass. This happen more than once in the Bible.
Could you give me two examples?

He most certainly did have a choice.
Even Paul noted that he didn't have a choice. That was the point everyone was making. How can God be fair if you don't have a choice? To which Paul says, "Who are you to question God?"

Rom 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will [have mercy], and whom he will he hardeneth.
Rom 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

Pauls says CLEARLY that God will harden who He wants to, and that no one can resist God's will.
Based on what we are told in Jer. 18, Why did God make the vessel for dishonor?
I'd have to read it, and I have to go for now. I'll respond when I return.
 
Top