Does God Know From All Eternity Who Will Die Having Rejected Sound Doctrine?
- Thread starter ByTheGraceOfGod
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Jonah 4:2
And he prayed to the LORD and said,
"O LORD, is not this what I said when I was yet in my country? That is why I made haste to flee to Tarshish; for I knew that you are a gracious God and merciful, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love, and relenting from disaster."
so, Jonah knew more than God?
If you claim God is a liar because He didn't destroy Nineveh,
then He's still a liar whether He didn't know if He would or not, or if He knew from the beginning they would repent.
because in either case, He did not bring the disaster on them that the prophet threatened.
if that makes Him a liar, you're certainly calling Him one, just making an argument about whether He became a liar unintentionally or not.
then He's still a liar whether He didn't know if He would or not, or if He knew from the beginning they would repent.
because in either case, He did not bring the disaster on them that the prophet threatened.
if that makes Him a liar, you're certainly calling Him one, just making an argument about whether He became a liar unintentionally or not.
-
1
- Show all
Here is a good read on this for you ------explains essentials and non essentials -----
https://www.marketfaith.org/is-there-such-a-thing-as-non-essential-christian-beliefs/
https://www.marketfaith.org/is-there-such-a-thing-as-non-essential-christian-beliefs/
When you resort to ad hominems to protect your interpretation of texts from the critical thinking done by others of your interpretations, you merely demonstrate that you have run out of rational rebuttals of your interpretations. Ad homnem is a logical fallacious means of arguing that attempts to "poison the well", i.e. cause an audience to not even consider the other persons arguments seriously because they are a bad person in some way.
A nay-sayer is someone who just says "No it isn't," to someone else's assertions. The term does not rightly apply to someone who keeps on disagreeing and giving reasons for their disagreement.
Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. (2 Tim 2:19)
You are smuggling the Greek philosophers' theoretical construct of the nature of the uncaused cause into the bible to find your Greek understanding of God in the text.
"Knows" and "are" are present tense verbs . This verse simply says that God at any time knows knows at that time who are His. It does not say God has always known those individuals who will one day be His. Nor does it say that God Has always considered His those individuals who are His at the present time.
Those two ideas you are reading into the text because you believe in the Greek assumptions that the uncaused cause cannot change in any way and therefore cannot experience the flow of time.
A nay-sayer is someone who just says "No it isn't," to someone else's assertions. The term does not rightly apply to someone who keeps on disagreeing and giving reasons for their disagreement.
Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. (2 Tim 2:19)
You are smuggling the Greek philosophers' theoretical construct of the nature of the uncaused cause into the bible to find your Greek understanding of God in the text.
"Knows" and "are" are present tense verbs . This verse simply says that God at any time knows knows at that time who are His. It does not say God has always known those individuals who will one day be His. Nor does it say that God Has always considered His those individuals who are His at the present time.
Those two ideas you are reading into the text because you believe in the Greek assumptions that the uncaused cause cannot change in any way and therefore cannot experience the flow of time.
-
1
- Show all
What do you make of Romans 8:29-30? For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become
conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; And those
He predestined, He also called; those He called, He also justified; those He justified, He also glorified.
Romans 8:28
conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; And those
He predestined, He also called; those He called, He also justified; those He justified, He also glorified.
Romans 8:28
The context is vv. 28-33.
28. And we know that all things work together for good for those who love God, to them who are called according to His purpose .
29. FOR whom He did foreknow He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the first-born of many siblings.
So far, Paul is saying that God's purpose was a family of humans conformed to the image of the Son, and what God foresaw was this family that loves Him and that He called to be His family of Jesus-like children. It does say He foreknew the family. It does not say He foreknew the specific individuals in the family.
30. Moreover, whom He did predestinate, them He also called; and whom he called, them He also justified; and whom He also justified, them He also glorified.
Should we view this text through a modern individualistic worldview, or a first century communalistic mindset? Leaving Egypt, a community of freed slaves was predestined since the promise to Abraham to dwell in Canaan. A community was issued a call to serve only YHWH together. A community was justified before the nations as claiming to be God's people through themselves and God both keeping to the covenant making them so. A community was glorified (made of repute) among the nations. So too with the new covenant. A community was predestined to Christlikeness until we all together attain the maturity of the fullness of stature of Christ; a community has been called out of the world to be that family. A community has been justified as being God's family by their expression together of the Father's nature as His children. And a community has been glorified and continues to be changed from glory to glory as we behold the face of Christ.
31. What shall we say then?I fGod is for this community, who can be against us? (Not, if God be for ME, who can be against ME?)
32. He that spared not His own son, but delivered Him up for is all, how shall he not with Him freely give us all things (not ME all things)?
Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect ones? It is God that justifies.
I do not see Paul here saying that specific individuals were predestined from before the world began to become children of God. But that since God's promise to Eve a redeemed community has been predestined to come into being.
28. And we know that all things work together for good for those who love God, to them who are called according to His purpose .
29. FOR whom He did foreknow He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the first-born of many siblings.
So far, Paul is saying that God's purpose was a family of humans conformed to the image of the Son, and what God foresaw was this family that loves Him and that He called to be His family of Jesus-like children. It does say He foreknew the family. It does not say He foreknew the specific individuals in the family.
30. Moreover, whom He did predestinate, them He also called; and whom he called, them He also justified; and whom He also justified, them He also glorified.
Should we view this text through a modern individualistic worldview, or a first century communalistic mindset? Leaving Egypt, a community of freed slaves was predestined since the promise to Abraham to dwell in Canaan. A community was issued a call to serve only YHWH together. A community was justified before the nations as claiming to be God's people through themselves and God both keeping to the covenant making them so. A community was glorified (made of repute) among the nations. So too with the new covenant. A community was predestined to Christlikeness until we all together attain the maturity of the fullness of stature of Christ; a community has been called out of the world to be that family. A community has been justified as being God's family by their expression together of the Father's nature as His children. And a community has been glorified and continues to be changed from glory to glory as we behold the face of Christ.
31. What shall we say then?I fGod is for this community, who can be against us? (Not, if God be for ME, who can be against ME?)
32. He that spared not His own son, but delivered Him up for is all, how shall he not with Him freely give us all things (not ME all things)?
Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect ones? It is God that justifies.
I do not see Paul here saying that specific individuals were predestined from before the world began to become children of God. But that since God's promise to Eve a redeemed community has been predestined to come into being.
Please explain how "the idea that information and knowledge is 'created' by man exercising free will is also neoplatonic".
It may grate against your neoplatonic view that God cannot change or learn but also be infinite in understanding, but it is an indisputable fact that something infinite can be added to. For instance. toan infinite set of odd numbers we can ad 2,4,6 and 8 and both configurations are infinite. So the idea that God cannot be infinite in knowledge and still add new knowledge is demonstrably false.
"
"but scripture says He knows our thoughts before we think them -
It may grate against your neoplatonic view that God cannot change or learn but also be infinite in understanding, but it is an indisputable fact that something infinite can be added to. For instance. toan infinite set of odd numbers we can ad 2,4,6 and 8 and both configurations are infinite. So the idea that God cannot be infinite in knowledge and still add new knowledge is demonstrably false.
"
"but scripture says He knows our thoughts before we think them -
Psalms 139:4
For [there is] not a word on my tongue, [But] behold, O LORD, You know it altogether."
The verse you cited in no way says what you asserted.
and all our deeds before we do them -Psalms 139:16
Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed. And in Your book they all were written, The days fashioned for me, When [as yet there were] none of them.
The Hebrew here actually says, "Your eyes saw (Qal perfect tense of Ra'aH) my unformed substance, and in your book all (m. pl.) the days (m. pl.) were being written (Niphal imperfect tense of KaTaB) and not one of them (m. pl. i.e. the days) had been pre-determined (Pual perfect tense of YaTsaR, TWOT reference: 898 ... C. (Pual) to be predetermined, be preordained).
Open theism is completely compatible with the biblical text preserved down the centuries as the received text in Hebrew, Greek and Chaldee. Although, it may not be compatible with your traditions and the translational interpretations you rely on