Is Anything Not Predestinated by God?

[Sipsey]

Never assume God's attributes, but allow scripture to define them. Also, if God has chosen not to know certain outcomes in the future, why does that make him less powerful? Nobody is saying he cannot know all future outcomes, but that he has chosen not to know all future outcomes.

The assumptions I refer to have been taken from the scrolls and texts for a couple of thousand years. Seeing God through various lenses is nothing new and much of the NT is laced with warnings about those that creep in with unorthodox views. To see the God of the Bible as lacking in any way, leads to a long list of compromises.

Good luck with that.

 

[John146]

The assumptions I refer to have been taken from the scrolls and texts for a couple of thousand years. Seeing God through various lenses is nothing new and much of the NT is laced with warnings about those that creep in with unorthodox views. To see the God of the Bible as lacking in any way, leads to a long list of compromises.

Good luck with that.

See the book of Jonah. God is either a liar, or he changed his mind. You decide.

 

[Jordon]

See the book of Jonah. God is either a liar, or he changed his mind. You decide.

The understanding Johna represents is the people of Nineveh and there future was already set, which was they where going to pay for there sins.

If God's alive and active word never caused there heart to repent by the prophet Whom God sent, there life would of gone the way it way already set ,

What God did was look at there future and gave them the chance to change, and if they hadn't of changed God would of took the action in there life which was also already going to go the way it was.

The understanding is God can change the future. God can change how he interacts with people also, by helping people to change there future, and if they don't change when his word drives home, there interactions with God will go exactly how there future would go with God, which they will pay.


It's a simple understanding.

 

[John146]

The understanding Johna represents is the people of Nineveh and there future was already set, which was they where going to pay for there sins.

If God's alive and active word never caused there heart to repent by the prophet Whom God sent, there life would of gone the way it way already set ,

What God did was look at there future and gave them the chance to change, and if they hadn't of changed God would of took the action in there life which was also already going to go the way it was.

The understanding is God can change the future. God can change how he interacts with people also, by helping people to change there future, and if they don't change when his word drives home, there interactions with God will go exactly how there future would go with God, which they will pay.


It's a simple understanding.

Jonah 3:
4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day's journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.
5 So the people of Nineveh believed God, and proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest of them even to the least of them.

9 Who can tell if God will turn and repent, and turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not?
10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

Did the people of Nineveh believe that God was going to overthrow them in forty days? Absolutely.
What was their response? Repentance, fasting, crying out to God, changing their evil ways...it was their only hope to change the course of their future destruction (Who can tell?).

1. God lied about overthrowing them in forty days.
2. God changed his mind about overthrowing them in forty days.

It is simple to understand.

 

[Jordon]

1. God lied about overthrowing them in forty days.
2. God changed his mind about overthrowing them in forty days.

It is simple to understand.

Theese questions you pose just really is one of two ways you believe your understanding.


The fact is within forty days there life coming was to come an end which would of ended exactly how God knew there futures was going to end with him.

It's no different in 2 kings 20:1-7

And Isaiah 38:1-8

Where God knew king Hezekiah life was about to end and God grants him more time with him because he changed his heart by telling the prophet Isaiah to deliver his alive and active word, which changed his heart and his future with God.

Another simple understanding that lines up with scripture, but you can close it with two questions if you wants.

Here's one more the devine nature of the father is set with a person until God changes a persons nature to have both the father and the son. Where by that persons interactions with God changes, as if it didn't they would only have the devine nature of the father in them which can take any direction it wants.

Now you and your crew can make see this how you see fit. But I know in my heart it's a good understanding thats very plausible to me. Where as you and your crews are not worthy of any long-term consideration to me.

 

[John146]

Theese questions you pose just really is one of two ways you believe your understanding.


The fact is within forty days there life coming was to come an end which would of ended exactly how God knew there futures was going to end with him.

It's no different in 2 kings 20:1-7

And Isaiah 38:1-8

Where God knew king Hezekiah life was about to end and God grants him more time with him because he changed his heart by telling the prophet Isaiah to deliver his alive and active word, which changed his heart and his future with God.

Another simple understanding that lines up with scripture, but you can close it with two questions if you wants.

Here's one more the devine nature of the father is set with a person until God changes a persons nature to have both the father and the son. Where by that persons interactions with God changes, as if it didn't they would only have the devine nature of the father in them which can take any direction it wants.

Now you and your crew can make see this how you see fit. But I know in my heart it's a good understanding thats very plausible to me. Where as you and your crews are not worthy of any long-term consideration to me.

God did not lie in either scenario. He simply changed his mind. If you say that God knew ahead of time that he would change his mind, then you make God a liar. God is not a liar. I simply believe scripture as stated. If scripture does not line up with your theology, then change your theology to align with scripture. We should not invent "isms" to explain away the clear meaning of scripture simply because it does not line up with our theology.

 

[Sipsey]

See the book of Jonah. God is either a liar, or he changed his mind. You decide.

You just don’t get It.
Scripture is not flat prose. It is law, poetry, wisdom, prophecy, narrative, epistle, and apocalypse—each genre employing many literary devices intentionally. Ignoring these devices leads to misinterpretation; recognizing them deepens clarity, reverence, and theological precision.

 

[Jordon]

God did not lie in either scenario. He simply changed his mind. If you say that God knew ahead of time that he would change his mind, then you make God a liar. God is not a liar. I simply believe scripture as stated. If scripture does not line up with your theology, then change your theology to align with scripture. We should not invent "isms" to explain away the clear meaning of scripture simply because it does not line up with our theology.

again you haven't listened and again you label these very plausible understanding as just theology, when actually Theese understandings line up with very good credibility.

Theres many more people who take this approach here,and one member who calls theology the doctrine of demons and theologians nothing but rubbish in his book,

It's beyond me how people can be so ignorant to simple teachings.

I just feel they are not upright in any Decency when it comes to having respect when talking about his word, his devine power his sovereignty, its like there God is there's and nobody elses.

It's very disappointing to witness this so much here, it just makes me think people have very awkward manners.

 

[John146]

You just don’t get It.
Scripture is not flat prose. It is law, poetry, wisdom, prophecy, narrative, epistle, and apocalypse—each genre employing many literary devices intentionally. Ignoring these devices leads to misinterpretation; recognizing them deepens clarity, reverence, and theological precision.

There is nothing in chapter 3 that allows us to take it anyway but literally.

 

[John146]

You just don’t get It.
Scripture is not flat prose. It is law, poetry, wisdom, prophecy, narrative, epistle, and apocalypse—each genre employing many literary devices intentionally. Ignoring these devices leads to misinterpretation; recognizing them deepens clarity, reverence, and theological precision.

With your view, you are allowing private interpretations.

 

[John146]

again you haven't listened and again you label these very plausible understanding as just theology, when actually Theese understandings line up with very good credibility.

Theres many more people who take this approach here,and one member who calls theology the doctrine of demons and theologians nothing but rubbish in his book,

It's beyond me how people can be so ignorant to simple teachings.

I just feel they are not upright in any Decency when it comes to having respect when talking about his word, his devine power his sovereignty, its like there God is there's and nobody elses.

It's very disappointing to witness this so much here, it just makes me think people have very awkward manners.

God lied about destroying them in forty days to get Nineveh to repent. Is this your view?

 

[Jordon]

God did not lie in either scenario. He simply changed his mind. If you say that God knew ahead of time that he would change his mind, then you make God a liar. God is not a liar.

This nothing more than an irrational opinion. It's like believing God lives in a box.

 

[Dino246]

all supplied here like it was in previous threads.

Actually, you didn't provide any Scripture here. You made references to Scripture, but supplied neither the actual wording nor the chapter and verse references.

no it wasnt.

That doesn't relate to anything I wrote.

and your clever words in how you choose to ditch doesn't impress me

"Choose to ditch" doesn't relate to anything I said. As for impressing you, that's not my intention.

 

[Jordon]

God lied about destroying them in forty days to get Nineveh to repent. Is this your view?

Its your closed lid view mate that I never asked for.

You where given sound understanding that you've chose to put in a box with this inappropriate dialogue

 

[Dino246]

Looks like your not accountable by your own accusations to me, you say I don't provide scripture to backup what I'm saying, which ive done several times already here, and in other threads, then when I do provide them, you ignore them and dont provide any scripture of your own. Which really is highly hypocritical to say I don't provide any Scripture, when you do not provide any in return, and what you do mostly provide is a reason to argue.

If I am making an argument based on Scripture, I provide or at least cite Scripture. If I'm not, I have no need to do so. Telling you that you are employing a logical fallacy doesn't require Scripture.

Your not a person I can talk to..

The word is "you're". Of course, I've told you that many times previously, but you have chosen not to learn. You just don't like being called out for your ridiculous claims and comments. Grow a thicker skin instead of whining or hiding.

 

[Jordon]

Theese questions you pose just really is one of two ways you believe your understanding.


The fact is within forty days there life coming was to come an end which would of ended exactly how God knew there futures was going to end with him.

It's no different in 2 kings 20:1-7

And Isaiah 38:1-8

Where God knew king Hezekiah life was about to end and God grants him more time with him because he changed his heart by telling the prophet Isaiah to deliver his alive and active word, which changed his heart and his future with God.

Another simple understanding that lines up with scripture, but you can close it with two questions if you wants.

Here's one more the devine nature of the father is set with a person until God changes a persons nature to have both the father and the son. Where by that persons interactions with God changes, as if it didn't they would only have the devine nature of the father in them which can take any direction it wants.

Now you and your crew can make see this how you see fit. But I know in my heart it's a good understanding thats very plausible to me. Where as you and your crews are not worthy of any long-term consideration to me.

I Supplied a good sound understanding here , that anyone with sound mind, who is not just intent on being argumentive could at least acknowledge @Dino246

But is there any,.well no just more silly behaviour

 

[Jordon]

If I am making an argument based on Scripture, I provide or at least cite Scripture. If I'm not, I have no need to do so. Telling you that you are employing a logical fallacy doesn't require Scripture.


The word is "you're". Of course, I've told you that many times previously, but you have chosen not to learn. You just don't like being called out for your ridiculous claims and comments. Grow a thicker skin instead of whining or hiding.

Here we see you escalating pettiness again

 

[Dino246]

Its your closed lid view mate that I never asked for.

He asked a fairly straightforward question. An appropriate response would either be "Yes", or "No".

You where given sound understanding that you've chose to put in a box with this inappropriate dialogue

No, you provided your unsupported opinion, and you have engaged in inappropriate dialogue. Asking you questions, requiring Scripture to support your view, and calling you out on your errors is not inappropriate.

 

[John146]

Its your closed lid view mate that I never asked for.

You where given sound understanding that you've chose to put in a box with this inappropriate dialogue

I was given your opinion without scripture, once again.

 

[Jordon]

He asked a fairly straightforward question. An appropriate response would either be "Yes", or "No".


No, you provided your unsupported opinion, and you have engaged in inappropriate dialogue. Asking you questions, requiring Scripture to support your view, and calling you out on your errors is not inappropriate.

respectfully I disagree with your ideas about me, and totally disagree with your approach to constantly dismiss that which is true, with theese. imaginary ideas ,

If I want a teacher I will not pick you as one,.I have my boundaries which you've crossed to many times with your abrupt behaviour.