Open Theism Stirs Controversy on College Campuses

[STONE]

Originally posted by godrulz

God outside of time...this would still assume the future has already happened like a filmed movie. Time is unidirectional. It is moving from the possible future into the fixed past. The future is simply not there to know. Even if God is 'timeless', the 2009 Superbowl has not been played yet and is not an object of knowledge even for an omniscient God (knows all that is logically knowable...future free will contingencies are not an object of knowledge unless they are predetermined).

If God is timeless, and hence outside and not within or hindered by time, then He could clearly know all time. To assume otherwise is to assume something has not happeded yet for God also, which again suggests time for God; we are discussing timelessness.

The Peter prediction is very proximal to the event. These things were knowable. One cannot argue from this the exhaustive foreknowledge of all future free will choices from trillions of years ago based on this one event.

We can get to all future free will choices after. Let's take this one event first.
The question is: Is there a possibility, considering free choice as a variable, for another outcome: Peter to go somewhere else, trip and twist his ankle, break his leg, hit his head, find the other disciples first, go to another fire, cover his head, not answer, ...anything? Why are there no other choices possible? Could not Peter have done or said something different?

Also consider Peter vehemently said he would not deny Jesus even if he would die. He also stood up to the multitude that came to arrest Jesus.

 

[Delmar]

Originally posted by STONE


When Jesus said:
"Verily I say unto thee, That this day, even in this night, before the rooster crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice."

Could Jesus have been proved wrong? Why or why not?

Let's say for example that at the moment Jesus made this statement Peter had humbled himself and said yes Lord your right! My faith is weak! I do believe Jesus would have modified his statement and the events would not have happened as Jesus stated. This would, of coarse, in no way prove Jesus wrong!

 

[STONE]

Originally posted by deardelmar

Let's say for example that at the moment Jesus made this statement Peter had humbled himself and said yes Lord your right! My faith is weak! I do believe Jesus would have modified his statement and the events would not have happened as Jesus stated. This would, of coarse, in no way prove Jesus wrong!

That does not explain why Peter could have made no other free will choices hence proving Jesus wrong.


Let me help you all here: Jesus could not have been wrong because the Father showed him the future. It is innevitable.

 

[Sozo]

Originally posted by STONE


Let me help you all here: Jesus could not have been wrong because the Father showed him the future.

You are the one that needs help. God did know the future, but not because it had already happened because God dwells outside of time (as you suggest), but because God knows what is in man.

 

[Delmar]

Originally posted by deardelmar

Let's say for example that at the moment Jesus made this statement Peter had humbled himself and said yes Lord your right! My faith is weak! I do believe Jesus would have modified his statement and the events would not have happened as Jesus stated. This would, of coarse, in no way prove Jesus wrong!

Originally posted by STONE

That does not explain why Peter could have made no other free will choices hence proving Jesus wrong.


Let me help you all here: Jesus could not have been wrong because the Father showed him the future. It is innevitable.

If it had happened exactly the way I stated you would just conclude that Jesus' original statment was a figure of speech that didn't really mean that Peter would deny him!

 

[STONE]

Originally posted by Sozo

You are the one that needs help. God did know the future, but not because it had already happened because God dwells outside of time (as you suggest), but because God knows what is in man.

Yes God knows what is in man. Free will. Can anyone here reasonably explain in detail why Peter could have done nothing different?

 

[Delmar]

Originally posted by STONE

Yes God knows what is in man. Free will. Can anyone here reasonably explain in detail why Peter could have done nothing different?

I just explained why Peter could have done somthing different!

 

[STONE]

Originally posted by deardelmar

If it had happened exactly the way I stated you would just conclude that Jesus' original statment was a figure of speach that didn't really mean that Peter would deny him!

Deardelmar,
That is not part of scripture, neither would I respond as you said.

 

[Frank Ernest]

Originally posted by STONE

Yes God knows what is in man. Free will. Can anyone here reasonably explain in detail why Peter could have done nothing different?

God knows what is in everyone.
2Pe 3:1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
2Pe 3:2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:
2Pe 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
2Pe 3:4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
2Pe 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
2Pe 3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
2Pe 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

 

[STONE]

Originally posted by deardelmar

I just explained why Peter could have done somthing different!

If I understand you correctly, what you have stated is Jesus's statement could have been negated if Peter humbled himself, but not if he didn't. Since according to your supposition Peter did not humble himself, how was Peter's future to reject Jesus secured infallibly?

 

[Delmar]

Originally posted by STONE

Deardelmar,
That is not part of scripture, neither would I respond as you said.

I'm well aware of that and sure you would!

 

[STONE]

Originally posted by Frank Ernest

God knows what is in everyone.
2Pe 3:1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
2Pe 3:2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:
2Pe 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
2Pe 3:4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
2Pe 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
2Pe 3:6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
2Pe 3:7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Yes, God does know the inner most workings of man.

 

[STONE]

Originally posted by deardelmar

... and sure you would!

Can you show any evidence of that? If you can't then are the rest of your statements weak also?

 

[Delmar]

Originally posted by STONE

If I understand you correctly, what you have stated is Jesus's statement could have been negated if Peter humbled himself, but not if he didn't. Since according to your supposition Peter did not humble himself, how was Peter's future to reject Jesus secured infallibly?

Remember that Jesus' statement "Verily I say unto thee, That this day, even in this night, before the rooster crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice." was in response to Peter's " I would never deny you" If Peters immediate response would have been yes Lord your right. Jesus' response would have been one of forgiveness.

 

[Delmar]

Originally posted by STONE

Can you show any evidence of that? If you can't then are the rest of your statements weak also?

since you beliveve in exhaustive foreknowledge it would have to be so!

BTW what does this statment have to do with any other statment I have made. If I make one weak argument all others are weak? you prove that!

 

[STONE]

Since it is unlikely anyone will explain why Jesus's "prediction" is ultimately infallible I will go on to the next instance:

"If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but now they are hid from thine eyes. For the days shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of thy visitation."

We know from history when the Romans were done destroying Jerusalem that no one could even tell there was ever a city there.
Click Link Here

How could Jesus infallibly know that even a broken shell of a city (at least) wouldnt be left, or that the Romans would do something else with the city?
Could Jesus have been proved wrong here?

 

[Delmar]

Originally posted by STONE


Could Jesus have been proved wrong here?

no!

 

[STONE]

Originally posted by deardelmar

since you beliveve in exhaustive foreknowledge it would have to be so!

BTW what does this statment have to do with any other statment I have made. If I make one weak argument all others are weak? you prove that!

Now you are suggesting you are making a weak argument?
Why if I believe in exhaustive forknowledge would it have to be so.

My point regarding your other arguments is if you would take an adamant position of what I would say with no evidence, even after I told you that I would take that position, then you would not be credible.

You could always recant or appologize.

 

[STONE]

Originally posted by deardelmar

no!

Why not?

 

[Delmar]

Originally posted by STONE

Why not?

you don't believe Jesus is ever wrong and neither do I.