Context vs proof text. I stand by my view (cf. I Sam. 15 where God changes His mind on some vs all things. Will not is not cannot).
You are stubborn, I'll give you that.
All history of Christianity was proof-texting? That is a sad commentary on your historical understandings. Get out of OV books and really dig into some RC and Hebrew teachings on the matter. Your head is stuck in the sand...OV books.
Not all, but most, yes! That is exactly what was happening! The whole iron grip hold the Catholic church had practically on the whole civilized world for over a thousands years was based almost entirely (from a theological perspective) on proof-texting! The reason they got away with it was because no one had a Bible of their own that they could read and find out the truth.You are stubborn, I'll give you that.
All history of Christianity was proof-texting?
Blah, blah, blah!That is a sad commentary on your historical understandings. Get out of OV books and really dig into some RC and Hebrew teachings on the matter. Your head is stuck in the sand...OV books.
Not all, but most, yes! That is exactly what was happening! The whole iron grip hold the Catholic church had practically on the whole civilized world for over a thousands years was based almost entirely (from a theological perspective) on proof-texting! The reason they got away with it was because no one had a Bible of their own that they could read and find out the truth.
This is why Christian tradition (i.e. Christian history) is the singular worst test of theological truth that is possible!
Blah, blah, blah!
Make the argument, Lon! Make a Biblical argument that is rationally sound against Open Theism or admit that you cannot. I don't need to read a whole library of books or know the Hebrew language, and neither do you or anyone else. All you have to do is read the Bible. Read it and take it for what it plainly states. If you read something that confuses you, read it to a third grader (preferably a home schooler) and ask him what it means. Chances are he'll nail it. The Bible is not written in code. It's really quite simple. What's hard is getting past all the theological noise coming from all the egg heads in seminary who've educated themselves into blissful ignorance.
Resting in Him,
Clete
The issue with omniscience also involves a logical contradiction and does not compromise God's infinitude. God knows all that is knowable and knows reality as it is. The issue is not His omniscience (which we both affirm), but the nature of reality or creation that He knows/actualizes. By allowing genuine creaturely freedom, an inherent limitation on the nature of His future knowledge was voluntarily introduced. Exhaustive definite foreknowledge is possible in a deterministic view, but not in a libertarian free will view
(so perhaps the debate moves on to the nature of freedom and contingencies and whether God is timeless eternal now or experiences endless time/duration in a unidirectional manner).
So, God correctly knows some of the future as settled (by His ability) and some of the future as open (by His sovereign choice). He fully knows all that is knowable distinguishing possible from actual/certain. As possible contingencies become certain, they are then known as such (without a change in omniscience, but just a change in possible objects of certain knowledge...He is ignorant of nothing, but to know a non-existent nothing is absurd).
If you were consistent that last sentence would read....Of course I beg to differ simply because I believe God sovereign. He ALWAYS interceded and steered Israel back to the straight and narrow. Oddly enough, He never corrected their perception of His prescience. So, there is the argument. You're presuppositions about Hebrew, Greek or lack of old Hebrew commentary is specious. The Dead Sea scrolls came with scrolls and scrolls of commentary oddly enough. Also oddly, they match what was preserved until they were found. Greek tainting? Your premise is weak at best and parroting of some folks who should but don't know better. Pinnock, Boyd, and the rest have steered you into a horrible delusional mess.
If you were consistent that last sentence would read....
"By God's sovereign and unshakable decree, Pinnock, Boyd, and the rest have steered you into a horrible delusional mess, that you were then compelled to accept as the truth by the same divinely sovereign decree."
But of course you don't believe that, do you? Heaven forbid you actually take your own stupidity to its logical conclusion.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Eli: The Peter and Judas issue have alternate explanations. They are also proximal knowledge based on perfect past and present knowledge.
These e.g. cannot be extrapolated to support exhaustive definite foreknowledge of all future contingencies
(especially since there are texts that show the future as partially unsettled and known as such, even by an omniscient God).
God desires to save all men and to lead all men into truth.
There is no good reason why a holy, loving, truthful God would save some, but not save others whom He could save if He wanted to (TULIP).
There is no good reason to let some believers wallow in error while granting truth to others on an arbitrary basis.
Calvin was wrong to think that God's will is monothetic or the only factor in the universe.
By His sovereign choice, He has also given us significant, but not ultimate, freedom and ability (image of God, not image of a monkey or rock). Freedom is not the end in itself, but a means to love and relationship.
:bang: Someone does not get it yet.:singer:
God's love is impartial and unlimited. To say that none deserve salvation is not an excuse for saving the elect elite and damning those who do not win the coin toss. etc. etc. (cringe).
As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
18Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
19Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
20Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?
21Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?
22What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
23And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
:think:
Romans 9:13
Does this passage not directly rebuff your idea that God's love is impartial? Looks pretty clear He will have mercy on whomever he chooses (i.e. elects).
NASB7nor are they all children (S)because they are Abraham's descendants, but: "(T)THROUGH ISAAC YOUR DESCENDANTS WILL BE NAMED."
8That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are (U)children of God, but the (V)children of the promise are regarded as descendants.
9For this is the word of promise: "(W)AT THIS TIME I WILL COME, AND SARAH SHALL HAVE A SON."
10(X)And not only this, but there was (Y)Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac;
11for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that (Z)God's purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls,
12it was said to her, "(AA)THE OLDER WILL SERVE THE YOUNGER."
13Just as it is written, "(AB)JACOB I LOVED, BUT ESAU I HATED."
14(AC)What shall we say then? (AD)There is no injustice with God, is there? (AE)May it never be!
15For He says to Moses, "(AF)I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION."
16So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who (AG)runs, but on (AH)God who has mercy.
17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "(AI)FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH."
18So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He (AJ)hardens whom He desires.
19(AK)You will say to me then, "(AL)Why does He still find fault? For (AM)who resists His will?"
20On the contrary, who are you, (AN)O man, who (AO)answers back to God? (AP)The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it?
21Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?
22What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much (AQ)patience vessels of wrath (AR)prepared for destruction?
Hmmm . . .not answering for Lon, but I believe this is so. (Spiritual Principle: I Thessalonians 2:11-12)
However, I also believe God might yet grant you repentance, and provide you the light of correct doctrinal understanding, if He so wills to show you mercy and grace.
Nang