Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BATTLE TALK ~ BRX (rounds 8 thru 10)

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • That's a fair question

    Originally posted by bobmyers
    I'm sorry, but how is this a logical fallacy?

    If someone - anyone - possesses knowledge of the future such that said future may be described with complete accuracy, then that future must already be determined. If an act now ("free will") could in any way alter that future, then there is always at the very least a chance that any prediction or description of that future is in error. Logically, then, any claim of foreknowledge which includes an implication of completeness of that knowledge and/or its absolute accuracy is incompatible with any notion of an alterable future, and therefore with the concept of "free will."

    If you can provide a logical argument which contradicts this, I would be most interested in seeing it.

    Bob M.
    Foreordination is a possible cause of foreknowledge.

    In my opinion Foresight is the cause of foreknowledge.

    Now, it could be argued that since God is the originator(first cause) of all outcomes that they are the same; but this would be at the expense of free will.

    To adequately answer the question beyond this point would require us to know exactly how 'free' our will actually is.

    Open Theism would say completely; whereas, I would say it's sufficient to make us responsible for our own salvation/damnation. I believe the scriptures sufficiently support foreknowledge as a fact and, therefore, must be a compatibalist in my belief.

    Rob
    His purpose was greater than suffering! GIT

    Three! Two! One! Cue the Rooster! from Open Theism Apologetics

    Comment


    • Originally posted by RobE
      Foreordination is a possible cause of foreknowledge.

      In my opinion Foresight is the cause of foreknowledge.

      Now, it could be argued that since God is the originator(first cause) of all outcomes that they are the same; but this would be at the expense of free will.

      To adequately answer the question beyond this point would require us to know exactly how 'free' our will actually is.

      Open Theism would say completely; whereas, I would say it's sufficient to make us responsible for our own salvation/damnation. I believe the scriptures sufficiently support foreknowledge as a fact and, therefore, must be a compatibalist in my belief.

      Rob
      Rob, when you said, "Now, it could be argued that since God is the originator(first cause) of all outcomes that they are the same; but this would be at the expense of free will," I almost passed out. You are right, and this is another reason to reject the idea. We have freewill, so it is clear we can't have both freewill and the originator also having absolute foreknowledge. We can't have our cake and eat it too.

      You are a smart guy, why don't you reject the idea that foreknowledge is not equal to foreordination when the creator is involved based on this one accurate logical reasoning? The answer "we are semi-free" doesn't suffice. Because the foreordination would effect every aspect of your life, leaving no room for freewill.

      Furthermore, I ask you give the scriptural proof for absolute foreknowledge. Yet again I ask it. No offense, you are a sharp dude, but you aren't the bible. I'd rather have the evidence from scripture than what is from your logic.
      - Changing wineskins, at last.

      - iPhone's Coolest Bible/, Touch Bible.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by patman
        Rob, when you said, "Now, it could be argued that since God is the originator(first cause) of all outcomes that they are the same; but this would be at the expense of free will," I almost passed out. You are right, and this is another reason to reject the idea. We have freewill, so it is clear we can't have both freewill and the originator also having absolute foreknowledge. We can't have our cake and eat it too.
        However, you miss the point that God is the orginator(first cause) of all outcomes whether He knows the future or not. This is a stake in the heart of Open Theism. If God's the First Cause then all other wills are subservient and caused to and by His will.

        You are willing to apply it to my position; but, for some reason, not your own.

        Calvin who believed in saved by Faith alone reasonably concluded that everything was foreordained because of this reasoning. Saved by Faith alone must end in foreordination by accepting God as the First Cause at its beginning and accept God as the first cause in its logical conclusion. In other words, God gives the Grace to some and not to others. The 'elect', 'predestined', etc.... This makes God responsible for everything and though you are saved by faith alone----God gave the faith to you and not to another! Calvinism! The most logical of Sola Fide!

        Traditional Christianity has always held that Grace combined with Faith is the cause of our salvation---to which I agree. An exchange of a gift(Grace) requires the recipient to accept(Faith) it or the event won't occur. In other words, sufficient Grace is given from God(originating at the cross) for all to attain salvation. This in no way eliminates God from 'foreknowing' who will and who won't avail themselves of this same Grace. This is where the scriptures say 'elect', 'predestined', etc........

        Originally posted by Patman
        You are a smart guy, why don't you reject the idea that foreknowledge is not equal to foreordination when the creator is involved based on this one accurate logical reasoning? The answer "we are semi-free" doesn't suffice. Because the foreordination would effect every aspect of your life, leaving no room for freewill.
        You're right! 'semi-free' doesn't suffice. Foreordination would effect every aspect of our life and leave no room for free will. That's why I reject it absolutely. I find it repugnate.

        Originally posted by Patman
        Furthermore, I ask you give the scriptural proof for absolute foreknowledge. Yet again I ask it. No offense, you are a sharp dude, but you aren't the bible. I'd rather have the evidence from scripture than what is from your logic.
        The scriptural proof that you require isn't there. I think you said not one instance,. but a scripture that plainly says "God knows the entire future". It doesn't exist. Just as "God knows how to tie a pair of shoelaces" doesn't exist.

        It is shown that God knows the future by His actions and His prophets.

        Rob
        His purpose was greater than suffering! GIT

        Three! Two! One! Cue the Rooster! from Open Theism Apologetics

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Patman
          Rob:You must present a verse that simply says he knows NONE of the future.

          I DO NOT present God as knowing none of the future. He does know some of it. He expresses his future knowledge many times. And I have explained HOW he does it many times in the past. So above I backed up my message with the word, showing how God's future knowledge is extensive but not complete.
          How can God know some of the future and not, by the same ability, know all of the future?

          Understand,
          Rob
          His purpose was greater than suffering! GIT

          Three! Two! One! Cue the Rooster! from Open Theism Apologetics

          Comment


          • ROB, some questions you and I ask, and answer:

            The OV’ers make a point, in saying if the future is known then you can not make a decision. There is logic behind that idea. The question I keep asking and really do not get an answer for is who is making the decision if the future is just, being known. What I am asking is how does knowing the future stop our decision making? The O.V. answer is simple, “it can not work.”
            I have tried to show a need for it to work, from my interpretation of scripture. I have gotten little satisfaction from other alternative interpretations of scripture and the few issues with my interpretations.

            If you have read agnostics’ lists of operant contradictions in scripture and Biblical scholars answers, their explanations hinge on showing just one possible way the scriptures can be shown to be consistent to disproof the inconsistency proofing anything. The scholars may agree that the explanation is a little far fetched or need some alternative word interpretations and have no real support for the explanation other then to remain consistent with other scripture.

            Just looking at the knowing the future philosophically:
            1. If God knew what you will do before you did it, what would be the noticeable change from God not knowing what you will do before you did it? What would be the difference if God could know and avoided knowing, compared to, if he could and did know? How could I tell? If I found that God had foreknowledge at Judgment, would I then be able to say, “You can not hold me accountable for all my decisions, because I did not make them?” Who would I argue made my decisions for me?
            2. How could God know your future decisions? This gets quite complicated: a. is foreordained; b. there is no future or past for God there is His present and we are living in different places in His present. (past and future are more like places then non existing nothings) and c. other explanations.

            The O.V. seems to say the first explanation is to say, we don’t really make decisions but feel we have made decisions. I do not know if that is all we need to be able to feel we love God in this world. This does mean we might have to redefine lots of Biblical words, but all explanations have to redefine words like foreknowledge, prophecy, and revelation.

            The O.V. likes to attack foreordaining everything. For God being outside of time, O.V. just says, we are using word games and ask for chapter and verse that show God is outside of time. I say, we all redefine Biblical words to meet our needs and there are very few verses on how God does anything we just see the results (like foreknowledge).

            I believe God can know what ever He wants to know and needs to know, but really does not need to know a lot of stuff. God can forgive and forget our sins, as an example.

            The main problem I have with the O.V. is: Jesus foretold things about Peter’s and Judas’ freewill future decisions. The idea that Jesus could not bare my sins on the cross (these are sins in general for O.V.?). I also think Cyrus has foretold and there are thinks foretold about Christ. With the O.V. understanding you would have to say, nothing is foretold/ foreknowledge it is all present knowledge that includes the future known most likely events, but details are not certain. This redefines the Biblical foreknowledge and prophecy. If that is the case it would be wrong to say, Matt. 3: 3for this is he who was spoken of by Isaiah the prophet, saying, `A voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, straight make ye His paths.' John the Baptist was not spoken of by, Isaiah only a possible individual like John the Baptist and John fulfilled the prophecy. BUT John was not the one Isaiah spoke about. Also how could an angel say before John was even born Luke 1: 17"It is he who will (X)go as a forerunner before Him in the spirit and power of (Y)Elijah, (Z)TO TURN THE HEARTS OF THE FATHERS BACK TO THE CHILDREN, and the disobedient to the attitude of the righteous, so as to (AA)make ready a people prepared for the Lord." That is saying a lot of free will decisions of John are foreknown to be this individual. Zacharias's Prophecy at John’s birth is a lot of future free will decisions of John.
            I use John the Baptist in stead of Christ because Christ can be foreordained to do for certain things in the future, because He is God, but that is not the cast with John the Baptist.

            Comment


            • Bling,

              I agree with your post. It isn't important for God to know all the future even though He does.

              You say: What I am asking is how does knowing the future stop our decision making? The O.V. answer is simple, “it can not work.”

              They always that it's a logical absurdity when I ask. The mention of miracles and God bringing matter from nothingness are easily believed because they believe it!!! However the miracle of seeing the future is impossible because they don't believe it. Does this make sense?

              You ask: Who would I argue made my decisions for me?

              Good question! According to Open Theism, God made them because He foresaw what you would do and created you anyway. What they fail to see is that God created you anyway, so not knowing the future, wouldn't excuse Him if the act of creation makes Him responsible for your actions. They absolutely refuse to believe that if He would allow you sin today for some reason; then, if He foreknew your sins He would allow you be created for that same reason. Make sense?

              Judas, Peter, and a myriad other verses in scripture support foreknowledge. It must be something that can be turned on and off at will.

              Rob
              His purpose was greater than suffering! GIT

              Three! Two! One! Cue the Rooster! from Open Theism Apologetics

              Comment


              • Originally Posted by RobE

                I agree with your post. It isn't important for God to know all the future even though He does
                .

                I am not trying to argue god knows all the future, just He could.


                Originally Posted by RobE
                You say: What I am asking is how does knowing the future stop our decision making? The O.V. answer is simple, “it can not work.”
                If they want me to join them in their conclusion they have to give more explanation on the mechanism and method and not just “because”. They will not let us use that argument. Even when I give them a possible method they immediately dismiss it because; The scriptures don’t give it and I have to redefine words. What they do not dismiss is the fact that scriptures do not define words like foreknowledge and prophecy the way they want it and the scriptures do not say, God does not have foreknowledge.

                Originally Posted by RobE
                They always that it's a logical absurdity when I ask. The mention of miracles and God bringing matter from nothingness are easily believed because they believe it!!! However the miracle of seeing the future is impossible because they don't believe it. Does this make sense?
                I agree that what is not logical to us does not mean it is impossible for God. To make a change from the O.V. to God having foreknowledge, I think you have to show man’s objective, the need for sin, define Godly love, and really show why God would allow for our sac the world to be as it is, or you would conclude God would only allow this to happen if He did not know it would happen. This is why I want to leave foreknowledge to after we understand at least the roll of sin with Patman. He has to much tide up in his philosophy of life that incorporates O.V. to begin to accept an other alternative.

                Originally Posted by RobE
                You ask: Who would I argue made my decisions for me?
                Good question! According to Open Theism, God made them because He foresaw what you would do and created you anyway. What they fail to see is that God created you anyway, so not knowing the future, wouldn't excuse Him if the act of creation makes Him responsible for your actions. They absolutely refuse to believe that if He would allow you sin today for some reason; then, if He foreknew your sins He would allow you be created for that same reason. Make sense?

                One of the fallacies to God being the decision maker is that it does not take anyone actually knowing the future just that it could be known. So Moral decisions and the ability to Godly love God go away with just the possibility of knowing and not the actual knowing. I want to know how that would work?

                Originally Posted by RobE
                Judas, Peter, and a myriad other verses in scripture support foreknowledge. It must be something that can be turned on and off at will.
                My above statements shows it does not matter if God turns it on or off as far as O.V.ers are concerned.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by bling
                  . I am not trying to argue god knows all the future, just He could.
                  Me too.

                  I'm pressing causality right now. There's is a lack of depth where Grace and Faith are concerned.

                  God's been better to us than Open Theism believes,

                  Rob
                  His purpose was greater than suffering! GIT

                  Three! Two! One! Cue the Rooster! from Open Theism Apologetics

                  Comment


                  • Hello Again

                    Originally posted by RobE
                    Me too.
                    Originally posted by bling
                    . I am not trying to argue god knows all the future, just He could.
                    I'm pressing causality right now. There's is a lack of depth where Grace and Faith are concerned.

                    God's been better to us than Open Theism believes,

                    Rob
                    Rob and Bling,

                    I ask you both to look at the word and find a passage that reveals God's absolute foreknowledge. If you cannot, your belief in God's future knowledge is based on assumption and that will blind you from other truths in the word that contradict that assumption.

                    A certain pastor did not believe the book of Genesis was accurate. He read Gen 1:1 and would assume that billions of years would pass until Gen 1:2. God creates Heaven and Earth, a billion years pass, and then he starts to fill it. Should he assert such a thing? Is he assuming something he shouldn't?

                    I would say yes. We should never say something is true about God that the Bible does not back up.

                    Rob would say "Find a verse that says he is wrong!"

                    I hope he understands you can't assert something into the word. There is far more evidence pointing towards an open future, and no verse to back up absolute foreknowledge. That one fact should humble everyone who believes and has read enough of the Bible to know it is true.

                    A redundant verse I have used that has not been addressed:

                    Num 14:11-12 Then the LORD said to Moses: “How long will these people reject Me? And how long will they not believe Me, with all the signs which I have performed among them? 12 I will strike them with the pestilence and disinherit them, and I will make of you a nation greater and mightier than they.” 19-20 “Pardon the iniquity of this people, I pray, according to the greatness of Your mercy, just as You have forgiven this people, from Egypt even until now.” 20 Then the LORD said: “I have pardoned, according to your word;

                    How is it possible that God would not lie, say one thing, then the other, at the same time knowing the future event that he would change his decision, as this verse illustrates?

                    The evidence points away from the very thing you assume, that cannot be found in the Bible. Time after time, story after story, God changes his mind, his decision to carry out an event, or He wonders what will happen IF this is done, and you both know the examples and stories that show this.

                    And time and time again I have requested biblical proof, a verse, not an assumption, not a theologic philosophy, that would show God's future knowledge was absolute. And there is none.

                    So it is your responsibility to admit to it and stop putting words and ideas into the bible that it does not promote.

                    This is how it works. Does the Bible say God has 100% future knowledge? No. . Does the Bible say he has 0/zip/no/none future knowledge? No. Does the Bible say God has some Future knowledge? Yes. With that factual information, what do we say of God's future knowledge?

                    We say he has the future knowledge he tells us he has, no more, no less. We should not go beyond nor below that revelation. To do so knowingly is, among other choice words, wrong.

                    Thus, if we come across a verse that shows us God was not able to predict a future event, even an event that is his own actions, we can conclude that the Future knowledge is not total in any respect because there is at least one example that he didn't know his own future actions.
                    - Changing wineskins, at last.

                    - iPhone's Coolest Bible/, Touch Bible.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Patman
                      Num 14:11-12 Then the LORD said to Moses: “How long will these people reject Me? And how long will they not believe Me, with all the signs which I have performed among them? 12 I will strike them with the pestilence and disinherit them, and I will make of you a nation greater and mightier than they.” 19-20 “Pardon the iniquity of this people, I pray, according to the greatness of Your mercy, just as You have forgiven this people, from Egypt even until now.” 20 Then the LORD said: “I have pardoned, according to your word;

                      How is it possible that God would not lie, say one thing, then the other, at the same time knowing the future event that he would change his decision, as this verse illustrates?
                      He was saying that A would happen unless B happened. Omitting all of the truth is not a lie! To say "I will utterly destroy Tyre" doesn't omit the fact that there is a way out for Tyre----Repentance or subjection to Neb.

                      Rob
                      His purpose was greater than suffering! GIT

                      Three! Two! One! Cue the Rooster! from Open Theism Apologetics

                      Comment


                      • RobE

                        Originally posted by RobE
                        He was saying that A would happen unless B happened. Omitting all of the truth is not a lie! To say "I will utterly destroy Tyre" doesn't omit the fact that there is a way out for Tyre----Repentance or subjection to Neb.

                        Rob
                        Rob,
                        You are using reasoning to explain what you believe this verse could be saying, but where there is reasoning to explain this, there is other reasoning to explain that. I appreciate your input, but it will never be good enough to settle this.

                        We need something from scripture.

                        Let me present a point to you that I presented to Lee a long time ago. I will try to say it more perfectly this time. If I were all knowing, and knew the future and every aspect of the outcome of every event, I would be able to tell someone what I knew.

                        If I said to you, "If you wash my car tomorrow evening, I will give you a million dollars," knowing as I spoke those words to you (even before I spoke them to you I knew the outcome) that tomorrow morning my car would explode in a freak accident involving a fire cracker and happy go lucky myth busters, It would mean my promise to give you a million dollars was a lie. Why? Because I knew all along that under no circumstances would I have to give you a million dollars. Why say it if it wasn't going to happen?

                        When you speak truth to someone, you tell them an accurate depiction of the subject. A promise for something to someone knowing it will not come about because circumstances will prevent it anyway is a Lie. It is like a fixed bet.

                        I wasn't even talking about Tyre in that verse. The situation in the verse was not a circumstantial promise as was presented by the Tyre situation. Read it again:

                        "I will strike them with the pestilence and disinherit them, and I will make of you (Moses) a nation greater and mightier than they."

                        No circumstance. God was ready to do it. But after prayer from Moses, God changed his mind:

                        "Then the LORD said: “I have pardoned, according to your word;""

                        So he didn't do what he clearly and unwaveringly said he would do. Not out of a lie, because he planned on doing it. But if there is no set future, there is freedom for God to change his mind out of mercy if he wishes to do so.

                        Yes, many times God puts circumstances on his promises. The verse I presented was not one of those times, and should convict you. And the verses that are circumstantial promises that also do not pass should convict you to because of the understanding you should have about what a lie is (considering God's alleged 100% future knowledge would require him to make no promises that he knew wouldn't come about from circumstances he knew wouldn't be meet).

                        Above all what should convict you is the lack of Scripture you have to prove absolute foreknowledge. I have pointed it out again and again. You should consider yourself as you take communion next sunday, and look at the Bible you preach, and know that the words you proclaim it to say are unable to be found by you. Yet you preach anyway.... You preach your own message rather than God's.

                        And I stand here as witness that you are doing so. When you are found guilty of such, I will say I warned you to your accuser, yet you continued and never found proof from Scripture as is demanded when you are a teacher of the Word. Every time you partake of the bread and the cup I hope you are convicted by your deeds and consider the way you assert things into the word that you know you never read. And remember that if it weren't for the Grace that saves you, you would be considered lesser than Tyre in God's judgement, for saying things that He never said, and you never read, and saying they are of him. Thank God, for the grace of bought by Christ, for your sake. And mine too, for I was once like you, but thank God for his patience, I saw the error in my ways.
                        - Changing wineskins, at last.

                        - iPhone's Coolest Bible/, Touch Bible.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by patman
                          Rob,
                          You are using reasoning to explain what you believe this verse could be saying, but where there is reasoning to explain this, there is other reasoning to explain that. I appreciate your input, but it will never be good enough to settle this.
                          Is part of God's personality to be merciful.

                          Originally posted by Patman
                          If I said to you, "If you wash my car tomorrow evening, I will give you a million dollars," knowing as I spoke those words to you (even before I spoke them to you I knew the outcome) that tomorrow morning my car would explode in a freak accident involving a fire cracker and happy go lucky myth busters, It would mean my promise to give you a million dollars was a lie. Why? Because I knew all along that under no circumstances would I have to give you a million dollars. Why say it if it wasn't going to happen?
                          If I said, "Patman, if you crush the moon in the palm of your hand I'll give you a turnip.". It isn't a lie. I intend to give you the turnip if you accomplish what I tell you.

                          Originally posted by Patman
                          When you speak truth to someone, you tell them an accurate depiction of the subject. A promise for something to someone knowing it will not come about because circumstances will prevent it anyway is a Lie. It is like a fixed bet.
                          Not true especially if you are teaching someone.

                          Originally posted by Patman
                          I wasn't even talking about Tyre in that verse. The situation in the verse was not a circumstantial promise as was presented by the Tyre situation. Read it again:

                          "I will strike them with the pestilence and disinherit them, and I will make of you (Moses) a nation greater and mightier than they."

                          No circumstance. God was ready to do it. But after prayer from Moses, God changed his mind:

                          "Then the LORD said: “I have pardoned, according to your word;""

                          So he didn't do what he clearly and unwaveringly said he would do. Not out of a lie, because he planned on doing it. But if there is no set future, there is freedom for God to change his mind out of mercy if he wishes to do so.
                          Absolutely God is free!!! You miss that God was interacting with Moses though.

                          Originally posted by Patman
                          Yes, many times God puts circumstances on his promises. The verse I presented was not one of those times, and should convict you. And the verses that are circumstantial promises that also do not pass should convict you to because of the understanding you should have about what a lie is (considering God's alleged 100% future knowledge would require him to make no promises that he knew wouldn't come about from circumstances he knew wouldn't be meet).
                          God is always merciful.

                          Originally posted by Patman
                          Above all what should convict you is the lack of Scripture you have to prove absolute foreknowledge. I have pointed it out again and again. You should consider yourself as you take communion next sunday, and look at the Bible you preach, and know that the words you proclaim it to say are unable to be found by you. Yet you preach anyway.... You preach your own message rather than God's.
                          And you should announce to your congregation that you are too complex for God to figure out because that's your position.

                          Originally posted by Patman
                          And remember that if it weren't for the Grace that saves you, you would be considered lesser than Tyre in God's judgement, for saying things that He never said, and you never read, and saying they are of him. Thank God, for the grace of bought by Christ, for your sake. And mine too, for I was once like you, but thank God for his patience, I saw the error in my ways.
                          And yet you think that a diminished God is greater than a perfect God. Don't you see it? God is in control not us.

                          Friends,
                          Rob

                          Hope everything is well.
                          His purpose was greater than suffering! GIT

                          Three! Two! One! Cue the Rooster! from Open Theism Apologetics

                          Comment


                          • This is the first day in a long time I have looked at this section, I had really given up. It is good to have you back. You might leave me a personal message if I do not get back to you.

                            Originally Posted by Patman
                            I ask you both to look at the word and find a passage that reveals God's absolute foreknowledge. If you cannot, your belief in God's future knowledge is based on assumption and that will blind you from other truths in the word that contradict that assumption.
                            I have said before, I do not know if God has absolute foreknowledge. God (through Jesus, prophets and angles) has shown foreknowledge, so I am saying at least some of the time God has used foreknowledge. We are both making assumptions to come to our conclusions and we are both interpreting some scripture differently. If there was a verse that said God has (some) foreknowledge or God does not have any foreknowledge, we would not be having this discussion because we both believe the Bible. Like any and all miracles we have no explanation of how they are done just the results.
                            John 13: 38Then Jesus answered, "Will you really lay down your life for me? I tell you the truth, before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times!
                            Patman you make some bold assumptions about the above scripture and I just feel Jesus knew perfectly Peter’s future decision and said what He new was true.
                            The same thing happens with Judas and with the angel foretell about John the Baptist’s future decisions. I don’t know what else I would assume from reading these passages unless I had some preconceived idea that foreknowledge was not possible then of course I would have to interpret these passages differently.

                            Originally Posted by Patman
                            A certain pastor did not believe the book of Genesis was accurate. He read Gen 1:1 and would assume that billions of years would pass until Gen 1:2. God creates Heaven and Earth, a billion years pass, and then he starts to fill it. Should he assert such a thing? Is he assuming something he shouldn't?
                            I would say yes. We should never say something is true about God that the Bible does not back up.

                            I don’t understand the question?

                            Originally Posted by Patman
                            Rob would say "Find a verse that says he is wrong!"

                            I hope he understands you can't assert something into the word. There is far more evidence pointing towards an open future, and no verse to back up absolute foreknowledge. That one fact should humble everyone who believes and has read enough of the Bible to know it is true.
                            Maybe Rob can address this.

                            Originally Posted by Patman
                            A redundant verse I have used that has not been addressed:

                            Num 14:11-12 Then the LORD said to Moses: “How long will these people reject Me? And how long will they not believe Me, with all the signs which I have performed among them? 12 I will strike them with the pestilence and disinherit them, and I will make of you a nation greater and mightier than they.” 19-20 “Pardon the iniquity of this people, I pray, according to the greatness of Your mercy, just as You have forgiven this people, from Egypt even until now.” 20 Then the LORD said: “I have pardoned, according to your word;

                            How is it possible that God would not lie, say one thing, then the other, at the same time knowing the future event that he would change his decision, as this verse illustrates?
                            The same problem holds for both of us: God would know before the words came out, that He might not do as is directly quoted with or without foreknowledge. God is always aware of every option and knows the strength of every option prior to saying anything (this is not the case with humans). When God speaks of doing anything (as far as I remember), He does not express doubt, He is only shown giving the one option at a time with it “understood” that man’s pray or interaction can changes God’s action in reaction to man’s pray this is understood by both of us. This is a lesson for all of us on the power of our decision to pray and the affect on God changing in response to our decision of pray. This has nothing to do with God have or not having foreknowledge, He knows the options and Moses (at least potential) reaction to His statement, He would be lying either way, but if we take God’s purpose at the moment before our pray and His purpose after our pray it is the pray that changes the out come.

                            We all realize God changes very consistently to human behavior, pray changes God. This is not to say, “God does not know what He will do” (when) if man prays, He can know with or without foreknowledge (W/WO FN). God appears to be saying one thing and doing another, but that is because God speaks definitively about His own future actions, which He only can do, in the present, but that is prior to man’s reaction (in this case, pray) which He is showing will change God’s reaction. God could still know all this ( W/WO FN) and say and do the same thing.

                            I would like you to notice the difference here between: 1. What God says He will do? And 2. What God (Jesus or angel) says, man’s free will decision will be in the future? God can change with human’s interaction (even predictable human interaction), but man does not change God’s predicted reaction of man.

                            I am probably confusing you and I am sure it can be stated better, so I will just leave it for further discussion, hopefully you see where I am going.

                            Originally Posted by Patman
                            The evidence points away from the very thing you assume, that cannot be found in the Bible. Time after time, story after story, God changes his mind, his decision to carry out an event, or He wonders what will happen IF this is done, and you both know the examples and stories that show this.
                            Yes, and they have to be explained by both of us, to show God does not lie.

                            Originally Posted by Patman
                            And time and time again I have requested biblical proof, a verse, not an assumption, not a theologic philosophy, that would show God's future knowledge was absolute. And there is none.

                            So it is your responsibility to admit to it and stop putting words and ideas into the bible that it does not promote.
                            I don’t know if God’s future knowledge is total, but I do not think it does not have to be. What I see the most logical alternative to the interpretation of passages that refer to Jesus’ foreknowledge of Peter and Judas and the angles foreknowledge of John the Baptist include having foreknowledge. I also have a big issue with: 1 Peter 2: 24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree,
                            We can say, “that is what it says but it means something else.”
                            You seem to be saying (help me here): Jesus bore all sins (symbolically or figuratively) and not just those that were forgiven, which has some issues:
                            1. This is universalism or universal salvation, in which everyone eventually is saved, with only a few spending some time in “hell”.
                            2. The idea that I really have only a perception of a burden of sin and am not burdened with sin itself and all I have to do is recognize what Christ has already done to remove this false psychological believe.
                            3. I really have no dept that can be paid only a dept that has already been paid, so I am prior to requesting my dept to be paid by Christ dept free.
                            4. The burden of sin I feel is only imaginary.
                            5. Christ is not taking my sins upon Himself, because they do not exist when Christ goes to the cross.
                            6. Sins are no longer around, because Christ took them away, so we just think we are sinning.
                            7. The exchange of the gift of forgiveness (the transaction itself) took place before I was born and before I became a servant of the master. All the scripture references on forgiveness and getting free gifts do not address the concept of being debt free all along and just not knowing it.
                            I can’t seem to get around the information on our sins going back to the cross to be bore by Christ.


                            Originally Posted by Patman
                            This is how it works. Does the Bible say God has 100% future knowledge? No. . Does the Bible say he has 0/zip/no/none future knowledge? No. Does the Bible say God has some Future knowledge? Yes. With that factual information, what do we say of God's future knowledge?
                            I say God at least has some foreknowledge of some human’s free will decisions some times. Which is not possible with an O.V.T. position.

                            Originally Posted by Patman
                            We say he has the future knowledge he tells us he has, no more, no less. We should not go beyond nor below that revelation. To do so knowingly is, among other choice words, wrong.
                            That still includes, Peter, Judas and John the Baptist.

                            Originally Posted by Patman
                            Thus, if we come across a verse that shows us God was not able to predict a future event, even an event that is his own actions, we can conclude that the Future knowledge is not total in any respect because there is at least one example that he didn't know his own future actions.
                            God presents His future actions without man’s interaction; to give human’s freedom to make free will decisions which can include trying to change God’s future actions. This may sound a little confusing, but God’s action will be the same (W/WO FN), because He always does what is best in every situation. God is fully trying to help each individual achieve his/her objective, of developing Godly type love for God and others. God is trying to show man as best He can that man’s love for Him expressed in pray works wonders, this will encourage man to continue in close relationship with pray, that will increase man’s love. His actions or words in any moment in our time are the best for human’s to develop Godly type love for him and others. That might include God saying something, He knows (Will not or) might not happen, which God has explained in Jer. is not a lie. This is all done for man’s sac. There are apparent lies, like Rahab’s lie for the spies, that are not considered lies. This sounds like subjective ethics. How do you handle it? I do not want to write a book on it.

                            Comment


                            • Thanks Bling

                              Bling,

                              Thank you so much for the answer you gave.

                              Originally posted by bling
                              I have said before, I do not know if God has absolute foreknowledge. God (through Jesus, prophets and angles) has shown foreknowledge, so I am saying at least some of the time God has used foreknowledge. We are both making assumptions to come to our conclusions and we are both interpreting some scripture differently. If there was a verse that said God has (some) foreknowledge or God does not have any foreknowledge, we would not be having this discussion because we both believe the Bible. Like any and all miracles we have no explanation of how they are done just the results.
                              John 13: 38Then Jesus answered, "Will you really lay down your life for me? I tell you the truth, before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times!
                              Patman you make some bold assumptions about the above scripture and I just feel Jesus knew perfectly Peter’s future decision and said what He new was true.
                              The same thing happens with Judas and with the angel foretell about John the Baptist’s future decisions. I don’t know what else I would assume from reading these passages unless I had some preconceived idea that foreknowledge was not possible then of course I would have to interpret these passages differently.

                              .....

                              I would say yes. We should never say something is true about God that the Bible does not back up.
                              I know that God has some future knowledge. I know of no O.V.T. who say otherwise. The mistake made by the S.V. is to take the instances that God exercises foreknowledge and blow it up to mean more than it says.

                              This is my beef with the S.V. Don't make it into more than it is. Keep to the word, don't add stuff to it.

                              The evidence is that God has limited future knowledge. You point out verses that make his ability to see the future very compellingly extensive. My answer is the S.V. Equation... aka the S.V. Fallacy. All S.V. Evidence is based on these ideas:

                              “A” knows the future because “A” accurately predicted “B”.

                              “A” knows the future because of the large number of accurate predictions.

                              “A” is powerful. Therefore A can do A-Z (i.e. everything).

                              These three lines of thinking are all what make up the evidence of an ALL future knowing God... none of which hold up. With this faulty evidence, and the understanding the claims are assumptions based on these rules, along with the fact there are no verses to back up the claims, S.V. should no longer be a view held by any bible believing Christian.

                              Originally posted by bling
                              I don’t know if God’s future knowledge is total, but I do not think it does not have to be. What I see the most logical alternative to the interpretation of passages that refer to Jesus’ foreknowledge of Peter and Judas and the angles foreknowledge of John the Baptist include having foreknowledge. I also have a big issue with: 1 Peter 2: 24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree,
                              We can say, “that is what it says but it means something else.”
                              You seem to be saying (help me here): Jesus bore all sins (symbolically or figuratively) and not just those that were forgiven, which has some issues:
                              1. This is universalism or universal salvation, in which everyone eventually is saved, with only a few spending some time in “hell”.
                              2. The idea that I really have only a perception of a burden of sin and am not burdened with sin itself and all I have to do is recognize what Christ has already done to remove this false psychological believe.
                              3. I really have no dept that can be paid only a dept that has already been paid, so I am prior to requesting my dept to be paid by Christ dept free.
                              4. The burden of sin I feel is only imaginary.
                              5. Christ is not taking my sins upon Himself, because they do not exist when Christ goes to the cross.
                              6. Sins are no longer around, because Christ took them away, so we just think we are sinning.
                              7. The exchange of the gift of forgiveness (the transaction itself) took place before I was born and before I became a servant of the master. All the scripture references on forgiveness and getting free gifts do not address the concept of being debt free all along and just not knowing it.
                              I can’t seem to get around the information on our sins going back to the cross to be bore by Christ.

                              .....

                              There are apparent lies, like Rahab’s lie for the spies, that are not considered lies. This sounds like subjective ethics. How do you handle it? I do not want to write a book on it.
                              The burden/weight of sin is death. It is the punishment of our sins Jesus took on. A punishment that is and was and will be very real for all sinners. In this he bore our sins. The context speaks that we are dead to sin because Jesus died to make us so. It explains this as a side note as possible by the verb "bore." What does it mean, what of sin is one able to bear?

                              The definition is below if you want to check me on this....

                              bore 4 past of bear 1 . bear 1 |be(?)r| verb ( past bore |bôr|; past part. borne |bôrn|) [ trans. ] 1 (of a person) carry : he was bearing a tray of brimming glasses | the warriors bore lances tipped with iron. • (of a vehicle or boat) convey (passengers or cargo) : steamboats bear the traveler out of Kerrerra Sound. • have or display as a visible mark or feature : a small boat bearing a white flag | many of the papers bore his flamboyant signature. • be called by (a name or title) : he bore the surname Tiller. • ( bear oneself) [with adverbial ] carry or conduct oneself in a particular manner : she bore herself with dignity. 2 support : walls that cannot bear a stone vault. • take responsibility for : no one likes to bear the responsibility for such decisions | the expert's fee shall be borne by the tenant. • be able to accept or stand up to : it is doubtful whether either of these distinctions would bear scrutiny. 3 endure (an ordeal or difficulty) : she bore the pain stoically. • [with modal and negative ] manage to tolerate (a situation or experience) : she could hardly bear his sarcasm | [with infinitive ] I cannot bear to see you hurt • ( cannot bear someone/something) strongly dislike : I can't bear caviar. 4 give birth to (a child) : she bore six daughters | [with two objs. ] his wife had borne him a son. • (of a tree or plant) produce (fruit or flowers) : a squash that bears fruit shaped like cucumbers. 5 [ intrans. ] turn and proceed in a specified direction : bear left and follow the old road.

                              This is why I say it is the weight, sin itself is, is what he bore, the death that results. The thing that is and always was and always will be real... not the future undefined actions.

                              As to Rahab, her lie and past sins were forgiven because of her faith.
                              - Changing wineskins, at last.

                              - iPhone's Coolest Bible/, Touch Bible.

                              Comment


                              • Rob...

                                Originally posted by RobE
                                If I said, "Patman, if you crush the moon in the palm of your hand I'll give you a turnip.". It isn't a lie. I intend to give you the turnip if you accomplish what I tell you.

                                .....

                                And you should announce to your congregation that you are too complex for God to figure out because that's your position.
                                Rob, it worries me that you still say nothing to the fact your entire S.V. Position is based on assumptions alone. And there is no verse to help you.

                                I am also concerned that you cannot discern that God's promise for a good life he knew he wouldn't have to deliver because the circumstances were impossible as a result of fate(as S.V. says) would make that promise a dishonest one. The only way to make it honest is to remove "fate" from the story... oooh. wait, it wasn't there to begin with. The S.V. just assume it in.

                                And lastly you again show your lack of comprehension of written word and tendency to add to the words of others mouths with your last statement above. Our complexity and Gods ability to figure things out do not equal absolute foreknowledge. Something I have said before is that God can figure things out, but freewill means we can go a way other than what God says we should go.

                                Anyway... it's like talking to a wall.. Anything I say doesn't sink in. Just bounces off. You are quite good at misrepresenting and misunderstanding the O.V.. And my positions within the O.V.. Yet again I must correct you.

                                But that isn't what I am interested in your input. Please address the problem that exists in the S.V. world: There is no scripture nor evidence from scripture to support absolute foreknowledge. For the tenth time?
                                - Changing wineskins, at last.

                                - iPhone's Coolest Bible/, Touch Bible.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X