Honest struggles on God’s omniscience.

[Nick M]

God wanted us to know Adam named the animals

Is that what the text says?

 

[way 2 go]

“They will not do otherwise” is not the same thing as “they cannot do otherwise.”

That distinction matters.

they are going to sin they are not going to repent , prophesied in scripture .
either you believe it or you don't
but you can't change it
“they cannot do otherwise.”

Reposting the same Revelation passages does not strengthen your argument.

You have shown that Revelation says they did not repent.

No one denies that.

What you have not shown is that Revelation is prewritten history, or that their non-repentance was eternally fixed before they existed.

God wrote it past tense

why are you saying it has to be written before the foundation of the world "And they did not repent of their deeds."
2000 years before they existed not enough

Revelation says they did not repent. I accept that.

do you accept that they won't repent ?

But it does not say they were incapable of repenting. It does not say they had no genuine alternative. It does not say the future was exhaustively settled.

it says "And they did not repent of their deeds."
[21] And they did not repent of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.

deeds , judgement and non-repentance past tense

appeal to silence

with that logic Jesus is not God because he did not say " I am God "

Neither.

My claim is that they have free will, and they will not repent.

so God's exhaustive infallible foreknowledge is no longer a problem.

A will is the ability to choose.

God's exhaustive infallible foreknowledge says they chose not to repent

So on my view, they could repent, but they will not, because they stubbornly refuse.

how in your view how could they repent when God says they did not repent ?

That places the blame for their sin and rebellion squarely on them.

same here , sin is still on them even tho God foreknew their sins

On your view, if their refusal was infallibly fixed beforehand, then they could not repent. Their non-repentance was necessary before they ever acted.

their sin and non-repentance

their sins, God's judgement their non-repentance is prophesied and
still their sins are their sins , not God's
all necessary

That removes responsibility from man, even if you do not explicitly place that responsibility on God.

So the question is not whether Revelation says they repent.

It says they do not.

The question is whether they could have repented.

So the question is whether Revelation is true and therefore necessary
their sins, God's judgement their non-repentance prophesied

If they could have repented, then the future was open, and their refusal is their own fault.

so God knows the will not repent
they can't do otherwise and yet it will still be their choice

"And they blasphemed the God of Heaven because of their pains and their sores. And they did not repent of their deeds."

If they could not have repented, then they were not free in any meaningful sense, and blaming them for what they could not avoid is unjust.

how could they repent if God knows they won't ?

 

[way 2 go]

Is that what the text says?

(Genesis 2:19) And out of the ground the LORD God formed every animal of the field and every fowl of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name.

like father to child , sometimes you ask question for the child's benefit not to gain knowledge


Psalm 147:5 Great is our Lord and mighty in power. His understanding is infinite.
(I John 3:20) For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things

you think God didn't know ?
(Genesis 3:9) And the LORD God called to Adam and said to him, Where are you?
(Genesis 3:11) And He said, Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten of the tree which I commanded you that you should not eat?
(Genesis 18:21) I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which has come to Me. And if not, I will know

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

so you read that as God didn't know
something knowable

I take it as an indication that God does not have exhaustive foreknowledge of the future.

 

[VladtheDestroyer]

no it doesn't sound like he changed his mind
he built the earth with enough water in the fountains of the great deep to flood the earth
and had a plan of redemption before he made the earth
(Revelation of John 13:8) And all dwelling on the earth will worship it, those whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain, from the foundation of

I think He regretted making man.

 

[ttruscott]

A will is the ability to choose.

Yes...

and a free will is the ability to choose without coercion from outside yourself forcing your choice.

This implies that the ability to choose does not prove we have a free will. Satan and the demons choose but are enslaved to only making sinful choices, the great addictive power of evil.

This brings us to understand that sinners have no free will unless, until, they are reborn, regenerated free from the enslaving addiction of the bonds of sin.

 

[ttruscott]

I think He regretted making man.

And, imCo, making mankind was HIS method to bring HIS sinful elect (the sheep of HIS flock who have gone astray into sin, HIS prodigal family) back to their Bishop and Saviour [1 Peter 2:25 For ye were as sheep going astray: but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls.] by forcing them live with the reprobate (non -elect sinners), Matt 13:27-30, until their eyes are opened by the suffering sin causes and they are thereby trained in righteousness and made heaven ready, Heb 12:5-11.

 

[Right Divider]

and a free will is the ability to choose without coercion from outside yourself forcing your choice.

This implies that the ability to choose does not prove we have a free will. Satan and the demons choose but are enslaved to only making sinful choices, the great addictive power of evil.

Free will is redundant. If it's not free, it's not a will. If it is a will, it's free.

A will is the freedom to make choices.

This brings us to understand that sinners have no free will unless, until, they are reborn, regenerated free from the enslaving addiction of the bonds of sin.

That is Calvinist claptrap.

 

[Nick M]

God's exhaustive infallible foreknowledge says they chose not to repent

12 And He said, “Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.”

 

[Nick M]

(Genesis 2:19) And out of the ground the LORD God formed every animal of the field and every fowl of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name.

I asked why did God bring the animals to Adam. It is right there in the text.

and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them

 

[JudgeRightly]

no it doesn't sound like he changed his mind

God made man, gave man dominion over the earth, then later regretted making man and determined to destroy mankind from the face of the earth.

That doesn't sound like a change in God's mind to you?

The text does not merely say man changed. It says God was sorry that He made man.

You can explain that away if you want, but don’t pretend the text itself doesn’t say it.

he built the earth with enough water in the fountains of the great deep to flood the earth

The far simpler explanation is that God can build contingency plans into His creation in case men rebel against Him.

God is wise. He can prepare for possible rebellion without making rebellion inevitable.

And having the means to judge the earth does not mean the judgment was inevitable.

God likes using physical means to bring judgement upon His physical universe.

and had a plan of redemption before he made the earth

(Revelation of John 13:8) And all dwelling on the earth will worship it, those whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain, from the foundation of the world.

Yes, of course God had a plan of redemption.

God is wise enough to know what men might do and powerful enough to provide for it before it happens.

But having a plan of redemption does not prove man’s rebellion was inevitable.

It proves God was prepared in case man rebelled.

A contingency plan does not make the contingency necessary.

so you read that as God didn't know something knowable

I read it as Jesus marveling, because that's what the text says.

Do you not know what “marvel” means?

It means to be amazed, astonished, or surprised by something.

If your theology requires “Jesus marveled” to mean “Jesus did not actually marvel,” then the text is being made to serve the system.

You're not explaining the verse, just explaining it away.

God wanted us to know Adam named the animals

Did God already know what Adam would call the animals?

If God already eternally knew exactly what Adam would call each animal, then Genesis 2:19 does not mean what it says on its face. Adam would not be naming the animals in any meaningful sense. He would merely be acting out names already settled beforehand.

But Genesis 2:19 says God brought the animals to Adam “to see what he would call them.”

The text presents Adam’s naming as open, not as a scripted exercise.

they are going to sin they are not going to repent , prophesied in scripture.
either you believe it or you don't

Nineveh will be destroyed, God will destroy them, prophesied by God Himself. Either you believe it or you don't... Then Nineveh repented, and God did not destroy them.

That is why your handling of prophecy does not work.

Prophecy is not prewritten history.

Sometimes prophecy is warning, judgment, promise, or declaration of intent. And in the case of judgment prophecy, the point is often repentance, not fulfillment.

Honestly! You sound like Jonah! Except Jonah understood the point of judgment prophecy better than you do. He believed they WOULD repent, and that is why he went the other direction.

but you can't change it

No one is trying to change scripture here but you.

“they cannot do otherwise.”

Then they do not have a choice in the matter.

God wrote it past tense

The Greek is aorist active indicative: “they did not repent.”

So yes, it is written as a completed action... within the vision.

But that does not prove the future is exhaustively settled.

John is describing what he saw in the vision. Prophetic visions are often narrated as events seen and reported, not as proof that every free choice involved was eternally fixed beforehand.

So once again, you are taking “they did not repent” and turning it into “they could not repent.”

The Greek does not say that. The text says what they did.

What it does not say is that they had no ability to do otherwise.

why are you saying it has to be written before the foundation of the world "And they did not repent of their deeds."

Again, prophecy is not prewritten history.

Just because something is written down beforehand doesn't mean that the future is exhaustively settled.

In case the analogy wasn't given yet in this thread, Delta Airlines knows that its scheduled flights will go from Dallas to Atlanta.

Does Delta have exhaustive divine foreknowledge? No, of course not.

It is possible to know that certain things will happen before they happen without knowing every future free action involved.

Delta can know those flights will happen without knowing, days or weeks beforehand, exactly who will board, who will miss the flight, who will cancel, who will get bumped, who will change seats, and so on.

So pointing to Revelation and saying, “God said they did not repent,” does not prove exhaustive foreknowledge of every future free choice.

It proves God can know and declare future events.

No one denies that.

2000 years before they existed not enough

The amount of time beforehand is irrelevant.

Whether a prophecy is given 20 minutes beforehand or 2,000 years beforehand, the question is still the same:

Does the prophecy prove that every future free choice involved was exhaustively settled before it happened?

No.

Length of time does not change the nature of prophecy.

God can declare, warn, promise, judge, plan, and bring things to pass without every future choice being eternally fixed.

do you accept that they won't repent?

Yes, I accept that Revelation says they will not repent.

The issue is what you are trying to smuggle into that statement.

You are interpreting “they will not repent” as though it means every future free choice involved was exhaustively settled from eternity.

That does not follow.

God can know that certain groups of people will not repent in a given circumstance, because God made man, he knows how men operate. He knows, even from experience, that when some men are confronted with His power directly, they harden their hearts and rebel even more. Pharaoh is an obvious example.

It does not require that every individual decision was exhaustively settled from eternity. God can prophesy a corporate response, a judgment, or an outcome without every free act being eternally fixed.

And that is what much of Revelation is about, a corporate response to Christ's return.

it says "And they did not repent of their deeds."
[21] And they did not repent of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.

deeds , judgement and non-repentance past tense

So what?

Yes, John describes what he saw in the vision. He says they did not repent. That's not in dispute.

But you're still leaping from “they did not repent” to “they could not repent.”

The past tense does not prove that their refusal was eternally fixed before they existed.

It proves that, in the vision John saw, they did not repent.

What's in dispute is whether their non-repentance was necessary.

The text says they did not repent. It does not say they had no ability to repent.

appeal to silence

with that logic Jesus is not God because he did not say "I am God"

That doesn't follow.

We know Jesus is God from scripture because scripture teaches the concept.

It does not need to use the exact phrase “I am God” for the doctrine to be taught.

But the concept still has to actually be there.

And that is the problem with your position.

What Scripture does not teach is that every future free choice already exists as a settled truth claim before it is made.

You are not deriving that from the text.

You are assuming it, then reading it back into the text.

so God's exhaustive infallible foreknowledge is no longer a problem.

Saying it doesn't make the problem go away, w2g.

Again, because you missed it, my claim is that they have a will, and they will not repent.

That wording is intentional.

"They WILL NOT repent."

Their will is to not repent.

If they have no ability to choose, then they do not have a will. They are merely acting out an inevitability. If they do not have a will, then punishing them for what they do is unjust, because they had no choice in the matter.

So yes, exhaustive infallible foreknowledge is still the problem.

You are trying to say they “will not” repent while also saying they “cannot” repent.

Those are not the same claim.

God's exhaustive infallible foreknowledge says they chose not to repent

This is begging the question.

You haven't established exhaustive infallible foreknowledge as a fact.

You are assuming God has exhaustive infallible foreknowledge, then using that assumption to interpret Revelation, then claiming Revelation proves exhaustive infallible foreknowledge.

That is circular.

Revelation says they did not repent within John's vision.

It does not say every future free choice was already exhaustively known as settled before it happened.

how in your view how could they repent when God says they did not repent ?

Because "did not repent" and "could not repent" are two very different things.

Revelation tells us what they did.

It does not say they had no ability to do otherwise.

A man can refuse to repent without being incapable of repentance.

That is exactly why the blame remains on him.

He could repent.
He should repent.
He will not repent.

That is rebellion.

same here, sin is still on them even tho God foreknew their sins

Again, that is question begging.

You are assuming the very thing in dispute.

The question is whether God exhaustively foreknew their future sins as settled facts before they committed them.

You cannot just assume that and then say, “See? God foreknew it.”

More importantly, you still have not explained how their sin is “still on them” if their sin was necessary before they ever acted.

If they could do otherwise, then it was not infallibly settled.

If they could not do otherwise, then their sin was necessary.

You cannot have both.

their sin and non-repentance

their sins, God's judgement their non-repentance is prophesied and
still their sins are their sins, not God's
all necessary

“All necessary” is the problem.

You're trying to have your cake and eat it too.

If their sin and non-repentance are necessary, then they could not do otherwise.

And if they could not do otherwise, then calling it “their choice” does not solve the problem. It just changes the label.

If their actions are infallibly foreknown as settled before they happen, then they could not do otherwise.

If they could do otherwise, then their future decisions were not infallibly settled beforehand.

The two concepts of infallible exhaustive foreknowledge and will are mutually exclusive.

If the outcome cannot be otherwise, then there is no will involved. There is only inevitability.

So the question is whether Revelation is true and therefore necessary
their sins, God's judgement their non-repentance prophesied

Non-sequitur.

Revelation is true.

That does not mean every event described in Revelation was necessary before it happened.

Truth and necessity are not the same thing.

A statement can be true without the event being unavoidable.

Revelation is prophecy, not prewritten history.

Just as the prophecy that Nineveh would be destroyed was true when it was given, yet Nineveh repented and God relented.

So no, the question is not whether Revelation is true.

I accept that it is true.

The question is whether Revelation proves their sins and non-repentance were necessary.

It does not.

so God knows the will not repent

Yes, just like I know that I will receive my renewed driver's license in the mail soon. It does not mean I have exhaustive infallible foreknowledge of the future.

It means I know enough about the process already underway to know what is coming. I went to the DMV, paid the fees, completed the process. The license has been renewed, the state is sending it, and it will arrive when the mailman comes to my house.

Likewise, God can know what a wicked, hardened group of men will do under certain circumstances without that meaning every future free choice was eternally fixed.

You keep treating any knowledge of a future event as though it requires exhaustive infallible foreknowledge of all future events.

That does not follow.

they can't do otherwise and yet it will still be their choice

Stomping your foot and demanding it doesn't make it so.

If they cannot do otherwise, then they do not have a choice.

If they have a choice, then they could do otherwise.

The two claims are mutually exclusive.

You cannot have your cake and eat it too.

"And they blasphemed the God of Heaven because of their pains and their sores. And they did not repent of their deeds."

how could they repent if God knows they won't?

Because God knowing they won't does not automatically mean every future free choice is exhaustively settled from eternity.

I know you won't concede this argument.

Does that mean I have exhaustive infallible foreknowledge of the future? Does it mean that you don't have any other choice but to not concede the argument?

Of course, not at all!

It means someone can know what another person is going to do based on his character, pattern, circumstances, and present trajectory without making that action necessary.

Likewise, God can know that hardened rebels will not repent under judgment without their refusal being eternally fixed before they ever existed.

(Genesis 2:19) And out of the ground the LORD God formed every animal of the field and every fowl of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them. And whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name.

like father to child, sometimes you ask question for the child's benefit not to gain knowledge

Genesis 2:19 does not say God asked Adam a question.

It says God brought the animals to Adam “to see what he would call them.”

That is not the same thing.

You are importing Genesis 3 into Genesis 2 and then treating both passages as though they must mean the same thing.

Genesis 2 presents Adam’s naming of the animals as an open event. God brings the animals to Adam, Adam names them, and “whatever Adam called each living creature, that was its name.”

If God already eternally knew each name as a settled fact before Adam named them, then Adam was not meaningfully naming the animals. He was merely acting out names that were already fixed beforehand.
But that is not how the text presents it.

Psalm 147:5 Great is our Lord and mighty in power. His understanding is infinite.

Amen.

God’s understanding is infinite.

But “infinite understanding” does not mean “exhaustive foreknowledge of every future free choice.”

You are importing that into the verse.

The verse says God’s understanding is infinite.

It does not say God eternally knows every future human decision before the person makes it.

God is wise, powerful, and perfectly capable of understanding men, judging men, testing men, responding to men, and bringing His purposes to pass.

Psalm 147:5 proves God’s greatness.

It does not prove your doctrine of exhaustive settled foreknowledge.

(I John 3:20) For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things

One chapter earlier, John says this:

But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you know all things.

Bible Gateway passage: 1 John 2:20 - New King James Version

But you have an anointing from the Holy One, and you know all things.

www.biblegateway.com

So unless you think men also have exhaustive infallible foreknowledge of every future free choice, “know all things” obviously does not always mean that.

Context matters.

In 1 John 3:20, John is talking about the heart:

By this we know love, because He laid down His life for us. And we also ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. But whoever has this world’s goods, and sees his brother in need, and shuts up his heart from him, how does the love of God abide in him? My little children, let us not love in word or in tongue, but in deed and in truth. And by this we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before Him. For if our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart, and knows all things. Beloved, if our heart does not condemn us, we have confidence toward God. And whatever we ask we receive from Him, because we keep His commandments and do those things that are pleasing in His sight. And this is His commandment: that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ and love one another, as He gave us commandment.

Bible Gateway passage: 1 John 3:16-23 - New King James Version

The Outworking of Love - By this we know love, because He laid down His life for us. And we also ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. But whoever has this world’s goods, and sees his brother in need, and shuts up his heart from him, how does the love of God abide in him? My little...

www.biblegateway.com

The point is not that God eternally foreknows every future decision every man will ever make.

The point is that God knows men's hearts better than the men know themselves.

And that actually supports my position.

God does not deal with men as lifeless entries in an eternal database. He deals with men personally, relationally, and morally.

He sees who they are. He sees their hearts. He sees whether they love Him, hate Him, trust Him, rebel against Him, repent, harden themselves, obey, or deceive themselves.

That is why Scripture constantly presents God as testing men, searching hearts, judging conduct, responding to repentance, and dealing with men according to what they actually do.

1 John 3:20 is not teaching exhaustive settled foreknowledge.

It is teaching that God knows men better than they know themselves.

That fits my position just fine.

you think God didn't know?
(Genesis 3:9) And the LORD God called to Adam and said to him, Where are you?
(Genesis 3:11) And He said, Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten of the tree which I commanded you that you should not eat?
(Genesis 18:21) I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the cry of it, which has come to Me. And if not, I will know

You are mixing different kinds of passages together.

In Genesis 3, God is confronting Adam.

A judge can ask a guilty man, “What have you done?” without being ignorant. That is not the issue.

But Genesis 18:21 is different. God does not merely ask a question there.

He says:

I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry against it that has come to Me; and if not, I will know. ”

Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 18:21 - New King James Version

I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry against it that has come to Me; and if not, I will know.”

www.biblegateway.com

That is not phrased as a question for Sodom’s benefit.

It is God saying He will investigate, see, and know.

And again, that fits perfectly with how Scripture presents God. God tests men, searches hearts, responds to repentance, judges wickedness, relents from threatened judgment, and deals with men according to what they actually do.

And the larger passage makes the point even stronger.

And the Lord said, “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am doing,

Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 18:17 - New King James Version

And the Lord said, “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am doing,

www.biblegateway.com

Then He considers Abraham, His covenant purpose for Abraham, and what Abraham’s household is supposed to become.

That is relational language.

Then Abraham intercedes and appeals to God’s righteousness:

Far be it from You to do such a thing as this, to slay the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous should be as the wicked; far be it from You! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?”

Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 18:25 - New King James Version

Far be it from You to do such a thing as this, to slay the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous should be as the wicked; far be it from You! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?”

www.biblegateway.com

And God responds.

“If I find fifty... I will spare.”
“If I find forty-five... I will not destroy.”
“If I find forty... I will not do it.”

All the way down to ten.

That does not read like Abraham is watching God act out an eternally settled script.

It reads like God is personally involved, relationally engaged, responsive to intercession, and concerned with righteousness and justice.

I'm not saying God is stupid or oblivious.

I'm saying Scripture presents God as dealing with men according to what they actually do.

You can claim Genesis 18:21 is figurative if you want.

But the text itself does not say that.

That is your theology stepping in to rescue your system.

I mean, just read the passage! It does not read as though the future is settled knowledge:

Then the men rose from there and looked toward Sodom, and Abraham went with them to send them on the way. And the Lord said, “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am doing, since Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him? For I have known him, in order that he may command his children and his household after him, that they keep the way of the Lord, to do righteousness and justice, that the Lord may bring to Abraham what He has spoken to him. ” And the Lord said, “Because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is great, and because their sin is very grave, I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry against it that has come to Me; and if not, I will know. ” Then the men turned away from there and went toward Sodom, but Abraham still stood before the Lord. And Abraham came near and said, “Would You also destroy the righteous with the wicked? Suppose there were fifty righteous within the city; would You also destroy the place and not spare it for the fifty righteous that were in it? Far be it from You to do such a thing as this, to slay the righteous with the wicked, so that the righteous should be as the wicked; far be it from You! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?” So the Lord said, “If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes. ” Then Abraham answered and said, “Indeed now, I who am but dust and ashes have taken it upon myself to speak to the Lord: Suppose there were five less than the fifty righteous; would You destroy all of the city for lack of five?”So He said, “If I find there forty-five, I will not destroy it. ” And he spoke to Him yet again and said, “Suppose there should be forty found there?”So He said, “I will not do it for the sake of forty. ” Then he said, “Let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak: Suppose thirty should be found there?”So He said, “I will not do it if I find thirty there. ” And he said, “Indeed now, I have taken it upon myself to speak to the Lord: Suppose twenty should be found there?”So He said, “I will not destroy it for the sake of twenty. ” Then he said, “Let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak but once more: Suppose ten should be found there?”And He said, “I will not destroy it for the sake of ten. ” So the Lord went His way as soon as He had finished speaking with Abraham; and Abraham returned to his place.

Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 18:16-33 - New King James Version

Abraham Intercedes for Sodom - Then the men rose from there and looked toward Sodom, and Abraham went with them to send them on the way. And the Lord said, “Shall I hide from Abraham what I am doing, since Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth...

www.biblegateway.com

Scripture comes alive when you stop assuming that every event within it had to be fixed before it happened.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Yes...

and a free will is the ability to choose without coercion from outside yourself forcing your choice.

This implies that the ability to choose does not prove we have a free will. Satan and the demons choose but are enslaved to only making sinful choices, the great addictive power of evil.

This brings us to understand that sinners have no free will unless, until, they are reborn, regenerated free from the enslaving addiction of the bonds of sin.

As RD said: if it's not free, it's not a will.

 

[Nick M]

Just believe what God says about himself.

and a free will is the ability to choose without coercion from outside yourself forcing your choice.

Like this.

“Now it shall come to pass, if you diligently obey the voice of the Lord your God, to observe carefully all His commandments which I command you today, that the Lord your God will set you high above all nations of the earth.