You've been addressed on this multiple times already.
Repeating yourself ad nauseum isn't going to further your argument.
Prophecy is not the same thing as exhaustive foreknowledge of every future free choice.
Honest struggles on God’s omniscience.
- Thread starter Skywatch89
- Start date
You've been addressed on this multiple times already.
Repeating yourself ad nauseum isn't going to further your argument.
Prophecy is not the same thing as exhaustive foreknowledge of every future free choice.
Derf
Well-known member
I'll offer you 2 choices of who is making the choice for these men in your theology:
1, God
2. Someone else.
If you choose #1, then you need to explain why the men are culpable for their unrepentance.
If you choose #2, then tell me who it is, if you know, and how do they have such control over men's choices.
In neither case can it be the men who would not repent, because they didn't exist when the prophecies were made, and if the prophecies are 100 percent accurate, their choices were determined for them before they existed. Who determined their choices??
way 2 go
Well-known member
(Revelation of John 4:1) After these things I looked, and behold, a door was opened in Heaven. And the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me, saying, Come up here, and I will show you what must occur after these things
you pretend this is not settled
(Revelation of John 9:20-21) [20] And the rest of the men who were not killed by these plagues still did not repent of the works of their hands, that they should not worship demons, and golden, and silver, and bronze, and stone, and wooden idols (which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk). [21] And they did not repent of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.
your reply #67
Open theists do not deny prophecy. We do not deny that God can reveal future events. We do not deny that God can know or declare particular future outcomes.
Revelation says they “did not repent.” It does not say God eternally decreed their non-repentance, rendered it certain before they existed, and then punished them for doing what they could never avoid.
#97
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.
Revelation says they did not repent. I accept that.
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.
---------------------------------------------------
I never claimed they were incapable of repenting , it says "And they did not repent" God has foreknowledge on what choice they settle on.
Revelation 4 (must occur )and 9 presents it as a certain future outcome, not a mere possibility or a conditional warning ,And they did not repent .
God declares as settled "they did not repent" , how is that open?
I believe their choice is free and they are responsible for their choices
open theism accuses God of being unjust if God has a settled foreknowledge of their free choice "And they did not repent"
why does God's foreknowledge of "they did not repent" make him unjust while people not repenting make them guilty ?
foreknowledge is not a force
Right Divider
Body part
100% exhaustive foreknowledge of ALL future "free" choices is not a thing at all.
It is a myth that you will cling to regardless of the evidence shown that refutes it.
way 2 go
Well-known member
foreknowledge is not a force
#3 the ones committing the acts listed are making the choices ,And they did not repent
(Revelation of John 4:1) After these things I looked, and behold, a door was opened in Heaven. And the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me, saying, Come up here, and I will show you what must occur after these things
you pretend this is not settled
(Revelation of John 9:20-21) [20] And the rest of the men who were not killed by these plagues still did not repent of the works of their hands, that they should not worship demons, and golden, and silver, and bronze, and stone, and wooden idols (which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk). [21] And they did not repent of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.
way 2 go
Well-known member
God cannot have exhaustive foreknowledge of future "free" choices. verse that says that ?
Revelation 4 says these events ‘must occur,’ and Revelation 9 states as fact that "they did not repent."
How do you know God cannot know this in advance ?
are you claiming you have exhaustive knowledge of what God can know ?
Derf
Well-known member
No, but if it is infallible, it cannot be changed. If any of your choices were known to God before you existed, then you aren't the one making the choice. Power to decree is a force. And if your choices are known before you existed, someone besides you made those choices. The choices are "determined", so you believe in determinism. Determination is made when the chiice is made, and that is the earliest God can infallibly know what your choices will be. If that happens before you exist, then YOU, not being in existence yet, cannot be the one making the choice.
But you don't have specifics, only generalities. "They" is a generality, because it doesn't say who they are. One way to interpret this passage is to say that "they" only includes those who were already unrepentant, making it specific only to the point previous passages were specific.
Who does "they" include? Names or descriptions of specific people would be helpful. But all you have is that "they" whoever they are, will be unrepentant.
Is this helpful to you, to keep repeating it as if repetition is somehow convincing. Some say it is. But those are the kind of people you should trust with your theology:
If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself.
Joseph Goebbels
Right Divider
Body part
Your understanding of reason and logic is a complete failure.
I know that you will not understand this, but I'll post it for the benefit of others.
Your little attempts to show SOME future knowledge does NOT support 100% exhaustive knowledge of ALL FUTURE "FREE" CHOICES.
NOW I KNOW has a clear meaning that you refuse to accept. It is YOU that has problems believing the PLAIN READING of SCRIPTURE.
Typo here?
You do not have to use the words “incapable of repenting” for your view to imply it.
If God infallibly foreknew before they existed that they would not repent, then they could not repent without making God’s foreknowledge false.
So the issue is not whether you say they were incapable. The issue is whether your doctrine makes the alternative impossible by necessity.
No one said foreknowledge is a force.
The issue is necessity, not force.
If the future act is infallibly foreknown, then it cannot be otherwise. If it can be otherwise, then it is not infallibly foreknown.
There's no in-between.
Genesis 22:12.
“Now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.”
God tested Abraham, Abraham obeyed, and then God said, “Now I know.”
Your view requires “Now I know” to mean “I eternally knew before Abraham existed.”
That is not exegesis. That is replacing the text with your doctrine.
No.
I am saying your proof does not prove your claim.
Revelation proves prophecy. It does not prove exhaustive foreknowledge of every future free choice.
Revelation 9 says they did not repent. Genesis 22 says, “Now I know.” You cannot use the former to erase the latter.
way 2 go
Well-known member
you say "no" foreknowledge is not a force , then ignore it
Power to decree is an authority not a force
foreknowledge is not a force
these people are not being forced , they are freely choosing not to repent
(Revelation of John 9:20-21) [20] And the rest of the men who were not killed by these plagues still did not repent of the works of their hands, that they should not worship demons, and golden, and silver, and bronze, and stone, and wooden idols (which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk). [21] And they did not repent of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.
back to your MO special pleading ,needing hyper specific only when it suits you
It is written as a factual statement about what will happen with these people
And they did not repent of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.
the verse strikes at the heart of open theism verses Jeremiah 18:7-8
God says what he will do and what the people who are having the
judgements poured out on them will do And they did not repent .
and
infallible foreknowledge
you seem full of hate ?
Matthew 15:18-19
way 2 go
Well-known member
ad hominem
what is the benefit
God states what he will do and states what they do in response to the judgements by his infallible foreknowledge
(Revelation of John 16:11) and they blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores; and they repented not of their works.
more ad hominem
shows infallible foreknowledge which you refuse to accept
(Revelation of John 4:1) After these things I looked, and behold, a door was opened in Heaven. And the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me, saying, Come up here, and I will show you what must occur after these things
you pretend this is not settled
(Revelation of John 9:20-21) [20] And the rest of the men who were not killed by these plagues still did not repent of the works of their hands, that they should not worship demons, and golden, and silver, and bronze, and stone, and wooden idols (which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk). [21] And they did not repent of their murders, nor of their sorceries, nor of their fornication, nor of their thefts.
Right Divider
Body part
Again, you are extrapolating from SOME foreknowledge of a future time to ALL (100% exhaustive foreknowledge of every future FREE CHOICE) foreknowledge.
You have NO SUPPORT from SCRIPTURE for your theory of 100% exhaustive foreknowledge of every future FREE CHOICE.
Derf
Well-known member
What is authority, if not the power to force someone to do something? So power to decree is a force ("power" and "force" are synonyms. Decree and force are synonyms). But I agree foreknowledge is not a force. However, to know infallibly someone is going to do something before that person exists means that person has no choice in the matter.
Yes, which means that their actions were not determined 2000 years before they existed. Therefore something else is happening. If they are predetermined to never repent, that means they are predetermined to be evil. Who do you think predetermined them to be evil? Was it God? Who else would be able to predetermine such a thing 2000 years before those people existed?
My point, which you seem eager to avoid, is that God is not telling us predetermined actions that predetermined people will do, but is telling us about an indeterminate group of people, based on what He understands about groups of people in general. That they don't normally repent, even when bad and worse things happen to them, especially (my conjecture here) if they have been brought up never being taught to confess their sins and repent to God.
Which leads to determinism. Which is something that completely removes any purpose in God making those people, except that He just likes (takes pleasure in) seeing them suffer.
I was offering some help for you to suggest you are convincing yourself of something by repetition. Why do you think that is hateful?
way 2 go
Well-known member
foreknowledge is not a force
The cause of them not repenting is their own free choice. Foreknowledge is not a force that makes them choose that way. It is necessarily true that if God foreknows they will not repent, then they will not repent. But the necessity is logical, not causal. Their own will is the real cause of the action.
Revelation 4 & 9 proves a pattern of foreknowledge that open theist pretend is not foreknowledge and want to limit
I call Genesis 22:12 anthropomorphic
God already chose Abraham and made promises
God has exhaustive foreknowledge Revelation 4 & 9 etc
God's Foreknowledge is not a force they choose not to repent not forced as the open theist suggest
Right Divider
Body part
What you call things is irrelevant. It's easy to make that claim when you don't need to prove it (but you DO!)
You don't know what you're talking about. You just keep trying to force scripture to agree with you. You have it backwards.
God tested Abraham and God learned the results of that test. Scripture could not be more clear.
Gen 22:12 (AKJV/PCE)
(22:12) And he said, Lay not thine hand upon the lad, neither do thou any thing unto him: for now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only [son] from me.
There is no more plain text in all of scripture.
Nonsense... @JudgeRightly has already explained this perfectly well. Your stubborn ignorance is the only issue.
Derf
Well-known member
Not if the result is known before they exist. Their own will doesn't exist if they don't exist.
But God says he was still testing Abraham. Calling it anthropomorphic doesn't allow you to say it means the opposite of what the text reads, but that's how you are taking it.
God's foreknowledge in the 1st century AD can't be of their will 2000 or more years later, or foreknowledge is indeed a force. Somebody else has to make it happen.
No one said it was.
Then their choice could not be infallibly known by God beforehand as a settled fact before they made it.
Again, no one said it is.
Correct.
Which means they could not have done otherwise. And if they could not have done otherwise, then their non-repentance was not a genuine choice. It was simply them acting out a script.
You are giving them an excuse before God:
“But why am I being held accountable for not repenting if I could not have done otherwise?”
And under your doctrine, that excuse would be valid.
Correct.
That has been the argument all along.
The issue is necessity, not force.
Thus:
It is illogical to say that "their own will is the real cause of the action" if your doctrine removes the very thing that makes a will a will. Here's why:
Again, a will is the ability to choose.
If it's not free, it's not a will. Period.
If their “choice” is infallibly foreknown before they exist, then there is no genuine alternative available to them. They cannot repent without making God’s foreknowledge false.
So their so-called choice is not actually a choice. It is merely the outworking of necessity.
Either they have a will and can genuinely do otherwise, in which case their choice cannot be infallibly foreknown as settled beforehand, or their choice is infallibly foreknown as settled beforehand, in which case they cannot genuinely do otherwise.
Revelation 4 and 9 prove prophecy.
They do not prove exhaustive foreknowledge of every future free choice.
You keep moving from “God can reveal future events” to “therefore God exhaustively foreknows every future free choice.” That does not follow.
Calling it anthropomorphic does not make it so.
Genesis 22 says God tested Abraham, Abraham obeyed, and then God said:
“Now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.”
Your doctrine requires “Now I know” to mean “I already eternally knew before Abraham existed.”
That is not interpretation. That is reversal.
Yes.
And then God tested Abraham.
God choosing Abraham and making promises does not erase the test, nor does it erase what God said after Abraham obeyed.
The text does not say, "Now everyone else knows."
The text does not say, "I already knew."
It says, “Now I know.”
Revelation 4 and 9 do not erase Genesis 22.
Revelation says they did not repent.
Genesis says, “Now I know.”
You cannot use the former to cancel the latter.
Again, no one said foreknowledge is a force.
The issue is necessity.
If their non-repentance was infallibly foreknown before they existed, then they could not repent without making God’s knowledge false.
That makes the alternative impossible by necessity, not by force.
ttruscott
Well-known member
...but predestination probably is.