An open challenge to all closed theists

[God_Is_Truth]

I don't believe He does.

that's good to know :up:

Wait a minute there! Just because the city was not destroyed doesn't mean that God is a liar!

i didn't mean that if the city isn't destroyed that God is a liar. if God genuinely changed his mind of what he was going to do, THEN it's not a lie. but if he KNEW for sure that ninevah was not going to be destroyed and thus he never intended to actually destroy them but said he was going to, THEN it's a lie.

I assure you, He never lies. When He said "in 40 days the city would be destroyed", He meant it

he CANNOT have meant IF he had exhaustive foreknowledge of the future! if he had EFK (exhaustive foreknowledge), then when he said it, he already knew they would repent and that HE would NOT do it! there is no way he could know full well he would not do it and still honestly mean it when he said it! it simply CANNOT be.

 

[God_Is_Truth]

If that is is true, then it must be true whether your position is open or closed.

but it is true when God is saying it in my view. God is genuinely planning to destroy ninevah in 40 days according to the OV. in the closed view, God is saying something that in NO WAY can come true. in the OV, what God is saying is what he is planning to do. he is truly stating something he's planning to do. so, it's true when God says it. it doesn't have to come about because God can change his course of action, but it's not even true when God says it in the closed view. in the closed view God is saying something that he himself NEVER is planning to do. God is NEVER planning to actualy destroy them in the closed view. in the OV he is and then changes his mind.

 

[lee_merrill]

Hi God is Truth,

God is genuinely planning to destroy ninevah in 40 days according to the OV. in the closed view, God is saying something that in NO WAY can come true.

The closed view says there was an implied, and an understood, condition. So given the implied condition, God did not lie.

And you have not made your escape on this one! If God did plan to destroy Ninevah unconditionally, he certainly said something that was not true. So my question is, did God make a false statement unintentionally? That seems to be what you are saying here.

This implies that God thought the Ninevites would not repent, and thus he was mistaken. This also implies that God cannot be trusted, for he can be wrong in his thinking.

The promises of God must now be questioned, for God can be mistaken in his evaluation of the situation, it may change, and God may have to change his plan.

And apparently Jonah knew better than God did! Jonah thought the Ninevites would repent, so he ran. The Ninevites knew better than God did, too, they thought they could repent, and God apparently did not.

And also! If God thought the Ninevites would not repent, why did he send Jonah, apparently on a mission of mercy? It actually spoiled his plan. Why didn't God see this possibility, and just destroy them right away?

Blessings,
Lee

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by lee_merrill

Hi God is Truth,



The closed view says there was an implied, and an understood, condition. So given the implied condition, God did not lie.

And you have not made your escape on this one! If God did plan to destroy Ninevah unconditionally, he certainly said something that was not true. So my question is, did God make a false statement unintentionally? That seems to be what you are saying here.

This implies that God thought the Ninevites would not repent, and thus he was mistaken. This also implies that God cannot be trusted, for he can be wrong in his thinking.

The promises of God must now be questioned, for God can be mistaken in his evaluation of the situation, it may change, and God may have to change his plan.

And apparently Jonah knew better than God did! Jonah thought the Ninevites would repent, so he ran. The Ninevites knew better than God did, too, they thought they could repent, and God apparently did not.

And also! If God thought the Ninevites would not repent, why did he send Jonah, apparently on a mission of mercy? It actually spoiled his plan. Why didn't God see this possibility, and just destroy them right away?

Blessings,
Lee

Awesome observations! It seems the OV'ers are conered on this one; it will be interesting to see them "squirm"....

:chuckle:

 

[God_Is_Truth]

The closed view says there was an implied, and an understood, condition. So given the implied condition, God did not lie.

why is saying something as true when you know that it is absolutely not true NOT a lie?

And you have not made your escape on this one! If God did plan to destroy Ninevah unconditionally, he certainly said something that was not true. So my question is, did God make a false statement unintentionally? That seems to be what you are saying here.

i never said he planned to destroy them unconditionally. God was planning to destroy them but allowed for the possibility of their repentence and for a change in his plan. that is not possible in the closed view because in the closed view there is ONE plan only.

This implies that God thought the Ninevites would not repent, and thus he was mistaken. This also implies that God cannot be trusted, for he can be wrong in his thinking.

whether they would repent or not was unknown. God knew that it was possible they would repent but not for sure whether they would or not. God was not mistaken about anything. God is never wrong in his thinking.

The promises of God must now be questioned, for God can be mistaken in his evaluation of the situation, it may change, and God may have to change his plan.

if it depends on God, it is trustworthy. if it depends on man, it can be changed.

And also! If God thought the Ninevites would not repent, why did he send Jonah, apparently on a mission of mercy? It actually spoiled his plan. Why didn't God see this possibility, and just destroy them right away?

in sending Jonah God would either announce the judgement upon them and seal their fate or he would show them their wickedness and have them repent and be spared.

 

[lee_merrill]

why is saying something as true when you know that it is absolutely not true NOT a lie?

The condition was understood, and thus did not have to be stated. If a child is misbehaving, and his mother says "you are going to be in hot water, young man!" and then he reforms his behaviour, then the punishment is averted, still the mother didn't lie to the child, because the condition was understood. She didn't do what she threatened, but she didn't lie, either.

God was not mistaken about anything. God is never wrong in his thinking.

I don't see how you can say this, though, because on your view, God was mistaken about the outcome, and had to change his plan.

if it depends on God, it is trustworthy. if it depends on man, it can be changed.

But wasn't it God who sent Jonah, and spoiled his own plan? Thus we can't trust God, because he himself may do something that spoils his own plan, and voids his own promise.

in sending Jonah God would either announce the judgement upon them and seal their fate or he would show them their wickedness and have them repent and be spared.

So there was an implied condition! Thus God didn't lie when he threatened destruction, because Jonah and the Ninevites understood this implied condition, too. That's the closed view, too...

Blessings,
Lee

 

[billwald]

God doesn't lie but he also doesn't always tell the whole truth.

 

[God_Is_Truth]

The condition was understood, and thus did not have to be stated. If a child is misbehaving, and his mother says "you are going to be in hot water, young man!" and then he reforms his behaviour, then the punishment is averted, still the mother didn't lie to the child, because the condition was understood. She didn't do what she threatened, but she didn't lie, either.

even in your example, the mother clearly CHANGED HER MIND! this CANNOT be in the closed view! the mother was going to truly punish the child if the child kept on doing what it was doing! the mother MEANT IT when she said he'd be in hot water if he didn't shape up!

but also in the example, the mother DID NOT have exhaustive foreknowledge that her child would stop doing the behavior. IF she did, and then said he'd be in hot water, but truly didn't mean it because she knows it will not happen, it'd be a lie.

to say something that you know full well is not true is a lie. plain and simple. if God knew full well that ninevah would not be destroyed in 40 days then he can not have meant his statement of destruction to be true and this alone contradicts God's word.

i'll say it again. IF God knew that ninevah was going to repent and not be destroyed, then he is NOT planning to destroy them and he must not mean it when he says he is planning to have them destroyed. and if God doesn't mean what he says, then HOW can we trust him? we can't.

but God did mean what he said about destroying ninevah. he truly was planning to destroy them. if he was not planning to and said he was anyways, he's a liar. there is no way around it.

I don't see how you can say this, though, because on your view, God was mistaken about the outcome, and had to change his plan.

when God said "40 days and ninevah will be overturned" he said it as a announcement of what he was going to do the city of ninevah. he was NOT stating it as a matter of fact or something that had already happened. only if you believe he has EFK and the future is settled could he be saying that and even then it wouldn't make sense.

so, God is not mistaken about anything UNLESS he knows he is NOT actually planning to destroy them and says he is. THEN he's mistaken! it's your view then that says God is mistaken because when he says "40 more days and ninevah will be overturned" as his plan of action, he's actually not planning that at all! he's mistaken about what he himself is planning to do! :chuckle:

But wasn't it God who sent Jonah, and spoiled his own plan? Thus we can't trust God, because he himself may do something that spoils his own plan, and voids his own promise.

how is announcing judgement and wrath upon a city "spoiling the plan"? it is only spoiling the plan IF the plan can be changed. that is something that's impossible for the closed view. God cannot change his plan.

God is trustworthy and true.

So there was an implied condition! Thus God didn't lie when he threatened destruction, because Jonah and the Ninevites understood this implied condition, too. That's the closed view, too...

God said he was planning to destroy ninevah. if he is in fact NOT planning to do this because he knows they will repent, it's a lie. there is NO way around it!

sorry if i sound kinda harsh during these posts. i'm not upset at anyone and nothing i say should be taken personally. i disagree with your theology and i'm just kinda confused sometimes as to why points aren't understood as well as i'd hoped.

oh well. God bless you all and have a great week :thumb:

God_Is_Truth

 

[1Way]

Billwald – That seems pretty reasonable and accurate, yet still somewhat incomplete. What about when God sent an angle to spread lies among His enemy's prophets? If God approves of using lies to oppose His enemy, then such an approval affirming it’s commission can not be easily dismissed. Let’s say it was an unmistakable evil instead of just lying, like adultery or murder for example. Can we rightly conceive of God approving of, as well as commanding it to be done? I don’t think so. Plus God blessed the Hebrew midwives who plainly lied (saying these Hebrew women just deliver their babies too fast, instead of them simply not reporting the births) to protect the newborn babies who would otherwise be murdered! So there are clear exceptions to the rule that otherwise indicates that lying is wrong. Keep reading to see why exceptions apply, and for what is not subject to exception.

I repeat what is more foundational than a list of dos and don’ts, is understand the relationship of what we should ALWAYS accept and ALWAYS reject. Please consider the following and tell me if it is right or not.

• It is always right to oppose and reject what is evil,
  it is always wrong to go along with and accept what is evil.
  
  It’s always right to accept and go along with what is good,
  it’s always wrong to oppose and reject what is good.

Until someone refutes this rather necessary relationship, if you are presented with the opportunity to oppose great wickedness by simply not telling the truth, then you are being evil for supporting instead of opposing evil. Again, I sight God’s word for the reasoning, God directed and approved of lying against His enemy, and God rewarded the Hebrew midwives for lying in order to protect the innocent new born babies. I also reference the love good and hate evil teachings that set good and evil as being "absolute" opposites.

G I T – I posted two at length posts in an attempt at aiding your understanding over these matters. I hope I am not asking too much to learn of your response to them. Perhaps you responded but did not address my handle. Because there are so many posts flying around I mostly just search for my handle to see if anyone is responding to me. Sorry if I missed your response.

Lee - I find this post is fitting to refute your view that lying is always wrong. Please respond.

 

[smaller]

Jonah's position in God's wanting him to preach to Nineveh was quite inevitable as God's ACTIONS with Nineveh itself.

Jonah knew that God pulled all the strings in the entire transaction with Nineveh.

Had He wanted to harden and destroy, then harden and destroy He would. HIStory tells us that repentence was and is THE RESULT OF GOD and not of men.

Romans 2:4
Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

2 Timothy 2:25
In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth

"Salvation is of the Lord."

 

[1Way]

smaller – God’s word says that Jonah thought that God has a reputation for repenting from doing harm.

Doing harm is a statement of action.
Repenting concerns intentions.
Repenting from doing harm means God changed his intended course of action.

So by trusting in God’s word, we can be confident that you contradict it by suggesting that Jonah believed that God controls everything.

Yes, God’s goodness leads people to repentance and faith in Him. That is a natural fact. But Romans 2:4 does not support your view. All good things ultimately come from God as He is the ultimate source for goodness and righteousness itself. And God, who is good, gives light from Himself to every man coming into the world! So when any man repents and trusts in God, it always involves God’s leading, not control.

But your control verse might be hard to refute, if I did not have the awareness that the context matters. The following demonstrates all to clearly my point and denies your view altogether.

• 2Ti 2:26 and [that] they may come to their senses [and escape] the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to [do] his will.

So God says that concerning who’s will is in charge, sometimes it is the devil’s will, not God’s that captivates men. Any righteous faith in God is connected with God’s will being done, so saying that God grants repentance implies that God controls everything without exception is simply not true.

Here’s another one to show that God will is not always done.

• Lu 7:30 But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the will of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.

Violating and contradicting scripture is not a respectable thing to do.

 

[God_Is_Truth]

1Way,

sorry for not responding sooner. i guess i got caught up in the other posts and overlooked yours :doh:

you seem to be saying that sometimes lying is ok if done for a righteous reason. do you believe that God can lie? if yes, then what about Hebrews 6:18? if God can lie then it can't mean what it is plainly saying and you must provide an alternative interpretation that doesn't void the text of it's truth

Hebrews 6:18
God did this so that, by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled to take hold of the hope offered to us may be greatly encouraged.

if you believe that lying can be a good thing if done for a righteous reason but God still cannot do it, then my point against the calvinists which shows that God lied about ninevah if he had EFK is valid.

 

[1Way]

G I T – Now now, I put you on the spot first. You first.

I think you are right on target here. But you don’t need to figure out if God may or may not lie in order to know that lying is wrong when there is no righteous justification for it. My argument against the Calvinists and them making God a liar is because after Nineveh’s repentance, which was before verse 10(!), there was no longer a justification to not tell the truth, so for God to then say that He was going to bring a national disaster and also correlate that with His anger and intention of doing harm, then such truth claims would be unjustifiable lies if He never changed His mind and/or if He only meant the “overthrow” prophesy to be a conditional warning that He did comply with accomplishing. We all agree that unjustified anything is wrong, so of course God lying after the justification has been removed would be wrong.

I admit that I do not have a very polished answer for Heb 6:18 just this moment. See the paragraph just above yours in my post #289 to get a better picture of God’s pro lying stance because of the more foundational precept, and that is that it is absolutely always right and good to oppose evil, and the converse is also true, it is absolutely always wrong and evil not to oppose evil.

“Always” and “never” are tremendous concepts and I do not use them lightly. But in this case I think scripture is clear that “good” and “evil” are absolutely opposed to each other and are mutually exclusive. Since that much is certain, the rest becomes much easier. I’d suggest hyperbole for the verse, but I do not want to act without a better understanding first. And as a very interesting side note. Consider the contradiction if you were a Calvinist over the following two scripture teachings. (1) God can do anything including the impossible (2) God can not do what man can easily do, lie. Again, if godly righteousness and goodness are absolute standards then this issue is pretty much cut and dried. Absolutely always and never trumps possibly-sometimes every time!

 

[lee_merrill]

Hi everyone,

God is Truth: even in your example, the mother clearly CHANGED HER MIND!

Let's give her foreknowledge, too, and then say that she knew her child would straighten up if she threatened him with punishment. Is it then a lie to warn him in that way?

IF she did, and then said he'd be in hot water, but truly didn't mean it because she knows it will not happen, it'd be a lie.

"You'll be in hot water" was the statement, and there was an implied condition, "If you don't straighten up, you'll be in hot water." Is that a true statement? Yes, it is! Knowing that the child will indeed change doesn't falsify this whole statement, with the implied condition.

Thus the mother still didn't lie, it was a true statement that without repentance, there would have been punishment. And she also didn't do the punishment she had threatened to do.

to say something that you know full well is not true is a lie. plain and simple. if God knew full well that ninevah would not be destroyed in 40 days then he can not have meant his statement of destruction to be true and this alone contradicts God's word.

But everyone understood the condition! Here's another example: "I'll meet you for lunch tomorrow at Friskies". Now there are lots of implied conditions, that everyone understands. "If a tornado doesn't hit my house tonight, if my car doesn't break down, if my boss doesn't tackle me and make me finish the Percolator Project, etc. etc." If you don't show up for lunch for one of these reasons, and apologize to your friend, you don't have to apologize for lying, because all the conditions were understood, though they weren't stated.

i'll say it again. IF God knew that ninevah was going to repent and not be destroyed, then he is NOT planning to destroy them and he must not mean it when he says he is planning to have them destroyed. and if God doesn't mean what he says, then HOW can we trust him? we can't.

Sure we can! God will let us know if there is a condition, and then the condition must be met, for the promise to be fulfilled. So I don't understand where the problem is here...

but God did mean what he said about destroying ninevah. he truly was planning to destroy them.

This is why I think you all are saying there was no implied condition. Was there an implied condition? If so, how can you say God was truly planning to destroy them?

If there was an implied condition, on your view, then he was conditionally planning to destroy them, not truly planning to do that. But maybe I don't understand what you mean. On to the questions for you all!

Lee: on your view, God was mistaken about the outcome, and had to change his plan.

G I T: when God said "40 days and ninevah will be overturned" he said it as a announcement of what he was going to do the city of ninevah. he was NOT stating it as a matter of fact or something that had already happened.

Then what he meant was "I plan to destroy Ninevah in 40 days". And then he changed his plan. So how is he not mistaken, if he thought he would indeed destroy Ninevah?

it's your view then that says God is mistaken because when he says "40 more days and ninevah will be overturned" as his plan of action, he's actually not planning that at all! he's mistaken about what he himself is planning to do!

Not at all! His plan is to save Ninevah, and what everyone understood his statement to be was "with no repentance, Ninevah will be overturned." The statement was not mistaken, with no repentance, there would have been destruction, and God also accomplished his purpose, and did not change his plan.

Lee: But wasn't it God who sent Jonah, and spoiled his own plan?

G I T: how is announcing judgement and wrath upon a city "spoiling the plan"? it is only spoiling the plan IF the plan can be changed. that is something that's impossible for the closed view.

You all are the ones saying that God changed his plan, I'm basing this question on your view. The announcement caused the repentance, and thus God had to change his plan. So again I ask, how can we trust God if he can do something that spoils his own plan?

God is trustworthy and true.

I agree!

Lee: So there was an implied condition!

G I T: God said he was planning to destroy ninevah.

1Way: Repenting from doing harm means God changed his intended course of action.

I do need to know what you all think about this area. Was there an implied condition in God's threat to the Ninevites? Yes or no, please!

God bless you all and have a great week.

Blessings to you all, too!

Lee

 

[lee_merrill]

Hi 1Way,

So God says that concerning who’s will is in charge, sometimes it is the devil’s will, not God’s that captivates men.

Does the devil get to frustrate God, though?

1JN 3:8 The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the devil's work.

All the devil's works will come to zero, nothing. So I think the devil will not frustrate God in any way, thus when people do the devil's will, they do not frustrate God either, and thus God is always in control, his will is always done:

PS 33:10-11 The Lord foils the plans of the nations; he thwarts the purposes of the peoples. But the plans of the Lord stand firm forever, the purposes of his heart through all generations.

Here’s another one to show that God will is not always done.

• Lu 7:30 But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the will of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.

But if all people may be saved (I think it's possible, and I think Smaller believes in that), then God's will is not frustrated even here.

Blessings,
Lee

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Lee,

where do you find this idea of an implied condition?

the way i see it is that God is planning to destroy ninevah and he tells them this. he sees that they repent of their ways and so he repents of the destruction he had planned for them.

do you find a implied condition from the text itself or from theology?

i know i agree that God was always ready to cease planning to destroy the people of ninevah if they repented, but i think we disagree in whether or not God was actually planning to destroy them before they repented. i say he was and you say he was not.

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

i know i agree that God was always ready to cease planning to destroy the people of ninevah if they repented, but i think we disagree in whether or not God was actually planning to destroy them before they repented. i say he was and you say he was not.

It's a moot point, since they repented and they were spared from being destroyed. The question still remains; if God's intent was to destroy Ninevah, why did He send Jonah?

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Originally posted by Z Man

It's a moot point, since they repented and they were spared from being destroyed. The question still remains; if God's intent was to destroy Ninevah, why did He send Jonah?

because disaster at that point could still be averted. that's why it's called a PLAN. it's what you are GOING to do. Jonah was sent sort of as a last gasp if you will. it was their last chance to avoid the destruction God was going to bring on them. God was at that point ready to destroy them. he had the means, the motive and the will to do it. in 40 days, God was planning to destroy ninevah if they continued on in their ways. but because they repented, God relented of his PLANNED destruction.

you cannot relent of something you aren't planning to do. that's impossible.

it's kinda like when two countries who hate each other are preparing to go to war for each other and they send their ambassadors one last time in the hope that the disaster can be averted. when the ambassadors are sent, the countries are planning to make war. but the war can be averted at which point both countries have changed their minds.

 

[smaller]

Greetings 1Way

I hope to find entertainment here similar to what you so graciously provided in the General Forum tonight. What a treat....

smaller – God’s word says that Jonah thought that God has a reputation for repenting from doing harm.

Yes, there has been that rumour. Heaven forbid that God should not DESTROY, but SAVE eh?

Doing harm is a statement of action.

And sometimes DESTRUCTION is TO SAVE eh? Come on, humor me here. I want to see you dispute this one.

Repenting concerns intentions.

If SALVATION is OF THE LORD (the discovery of Johah) then it is RIGHT that God put all the pieces in place for the transaction.

Repenting from doing harm means God changed his intended course of action.

Ah, in case you hadn't noticed DEATH is the common methodology of departure from this place. As such it would appear that DEATH is FOR US eh?

So what many may view as HARM may actually be QUITE the opposite. A ticket home so to speak.

So by trusting in God’s word, we can be confident that you contradict it by suggesting that Jonah believed that God controls everything.

There is no reason to believe otherwise 1Way. To do so only minimalizes God. That is always a DEAD END street.

Yes, God’s goodness leads people to repentance and faith in Him. That is a natural fact. But Romans 2:4 does not support your view.

That GOD GRANTS repentence??? Is this where you want to go? That GOD does not GRANT repentence???

Before we waste our time on this one, let us AGREE that repentence is A GOOD THING...

then you can go to this text for the SOURCE of REPENTENCE eh?:

James 1:17
Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.

I know you will have a HARD TIME saying that the GOOD THINGS are not from YOU, but you will just have to learn to live with it.

All good things ultimately come from God as He is the ultimate source for goodness and righteousness itself.

Well, it looks like I just wasted my efforts. SO it WAS God that GRANTED repentence to NINEVEH??? Perhaps this was indeed His Intentions.

You may also want to consider that HIS INTENTION TO DESTROY that which plagued NINEVEH will indeed be fulfilled ON THE DAY OF WRATH.

You see the SIN INDWELLING THEM and the EVIL PRESENT with ALL PEOPLE in Nineveh has not yet BEEN DESTROYED or PUT AWAY.

So OPEN a few other perspectives and don't focus EVERY WORD on people. Not ALL of God's Words were TO PEOPLE eh????

I could have pointed this out much earlier but sometimes it is good to wrestle for LIGHT. It is GOD'S WAY. To FIGHT against the DARKNESS.

And God, who is good, gives light from Himself to every man coming into the world! So when any man repents and trusts in God, it always involves God’s leading, not control.

Well, I don't believe any person will be frustrating the WILL OF GOD anytime soon....sorry. Those who are slated for BELIEF will in fact BELIEVE. Some will remain BLINDED. God DOES BOTH.

YET He even saves the ENEMIES of the Gospel (Romans 11:26-32)

go figure...That God is really a GOOD GOD eh?

But your control verse might be hard to refute, if I did not have the awareness that the context matters. The following demonstrates all to clearly my point and denies your view altogether.

You will have to work a little harder to do that 1way. Declarations without specifics make for poor victory celebrations.

2Ti 2:26 and [that] they may come to their senses [and escape] the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to [do] his will.

Yeah, like ANYONE has PREVAILED over THE DEVIL except JESUS CHRIST. When THE DEVIL is prevailed AGAINST it is A GOOD THING eh? Back to JAMES...

So God says that concerning who’s will is in charge, sometimes it is the devil’s will, not God’s that captivates men.

Oh, but you see THE DEVIL would not even be around if God had not created it. Do you really think THE DEVIL has POWER OVER God???

Any righteous faith in God is connected with God’s will being done, so saying that God grants repentance implies that God controls everything without exception is simply not true.

No, I am willing to admit that THE DEVIL has his territory of RESISTANCE, but even THIS is GOD'S PLAN. He has even DISCLOSED HIS PLAN to them.

Here’s another one to show that God will is not always done.
Lu 7:30 But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the will of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.
Violating and contradicting scripture is not a respectable thing to do.

But you see 1Way, THE EVIL that worked in the PHARISEES will indeed BE JUDGED, SENTENCED, AND CONDEMNED FOREVER by God. In this way EVEN the unrepentant PHARISEES serve GOD'S PURPOSES in JUDGMENT!

and in this way NOTHING is EVER wasted in this world.

God has His Act Together.

enjoy!

smaller

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

because disaster at that point could still be averted. that's why it's called a PLAN. it's what you are GOING to do. Jonah was sent sort of as a last gasp if you will. it was their last chance to avoid the destruction God was going to bring on them. God was at that point ready to destroy them. he had the means, the motive and the will to do it. in 40 days, God was planning to destroy ninevah if they continued on in their ways. but because they repented, God relented of his PLANNED destruction.

you cannot relent of something you aren't planning to do. that's impossible.

Right. We agree. However, you said that God's intent was solely on the destruction of Ninevah. Then, you turn right around and state that Jonah was sent to give Ninevah one last chance. This implies that God's "hope" and intention of sending Jonah was to have Ninevah repent.

But, again, why would He send Jonah if His intended plan was to destroy Ninevah?

If your desire, intent, and plan was to work everyday next week, why in the world would you send your boss a note asking for a few days off? Obviously, your real intent was not to work everyday after all....

:think:

The difference between man and God is that God does not "hope".