Question answered, but PREDESTINATION Deleted from the SCOPE of Answer.
Question answered, but PREDESTINATION Deleted from the SCOPE of Answer.
I admit, I'm appreciative that you did read everything carefully. I am exceptionally disappointed to have my mornings work returned "Un-Quoted", but I will brush it off and move forward.
You are employing a debate style that I favor, and thus... my Hat is off to you AMR. If a biblical truth is indeed true... the yes or no stipulation must be exacted. Thus, I will do so.
However... When you say "Ordained" and such... you are speaking of a non-divine, linear thinking that predestines, makes everything a mechanical ride on a rail and imparts the ordination of Evil to God.
I was sincerely hoping for some direct quoting of my words. I said such many times.
I have no proof that you are trying to at the very least, understand what I am saying, and to make matters more frustrating, you are employing yes or no questions with Calvinistic predestination, embedded into them.
I don't like this type of questioning... slight of hand. It's like asking...
Is God Omnipresent, but only able to be at one place at a time? The very question is loaded to stoop the answer into failure. I refrain from this!
I have noted an inadvertent denial of the ability of the Trinity to work together for a specific purpose written into your post (Highlighted in Red). This wording is reading as if God is UNE. You are questioning me as if you were a Modalist. I believe this is how classical reform is marginalizing Open Theism. It is a deceptive tactic and untrue to Open Theism. In other words... the Majority of Classical theists are purposefully mis-defining Open Theism to repress it with deception.
This is a matter that must be addressed by the collective theological community.
You are obfuscating my words and this is why I wanted you to quote and answer line by line. I specifically expounded on the large post to prevent this. There are specific matters you are inadvertently avoiding an address towards that are written into the previous post.
Instead of defining Omniscience... you are associating linear thinking, absolute predestination and false reality of a mechanical form into your questions wording.
The Trinities ability to work together for one purpose is being discounted by the reformed in light of OPEN VIEW to protect doctrines that impart the "Ordination of Evil" to God. I am now thoroughly convinced that deceptive wording is being employed by the classical and closed to prevent what is clearly a more scriptural view of He who SEPERATES LIGHT AND DARK AND never Ordained Evil.
To remain true to "Dispensation", The TriUnity and "Open Theism", while connecting to Reform (Classical Theology)... I will employ a direct yes and no answer scheme. However... I will employ a simple chart that acknowledges the TriUne nature of God and how it connects to your direct question that is specifically phrased to deny freewill and elevate the Calvinist doctrine of utter predestination. I have phrased my answer to respect [MENTION=3698]Tambora[/MENTION] 's explanation of Open Theism, with Dispensation in mind and the note that your very wording LIMITS God to Linear thinking, thus reducing His very Omnipotence.
I state that your total definition of Omniscience is linear and thus more limiting of God than Opentheisms Statement that God can Limit His Foreknowledge.
Tambora has addressed the quantum state of utter possibility to Omniscience... thus I insert her words in place of your highlighted in red words for my answers and retain that God is utterly omniscient, with the ability to limit His foreknowledge.
Yes = Full Omniscience. (A-Temporal Omniscience)
No = Limited Foreknowledge
Mediator = Person of Trinity that Mediates between the (A-Temporal) and the (Temporal) to Limit Foreknowledge and allow Free Will and Sincere, linear, relationship towards ALL Creation, while allowing Architectural intervention upon the needs of mankind and God's ultimate will.
View attachment 25497
I hope this is sufficient as a direct answer. To affirm Dispensation, the TriUne Nature of God and Classical Theology with QUANTUM OMNISCIENCE taken into account, I hope this clarifies matters. I suspect I may be quoting full snippets from my (8000 Character) post towards your future response. "Time" will tell.
At the very least, could you please address this...?
I have a strong counter argument to why God Created as "Architect" (Father) and "Creator" (Son), While willingly limiting/choosing to be limited in foreknowledge (through the Son, though the Father retains ALL foreknowledge/Omniscience)... This would seem preposterous... but we have scriptural evidence that God can do this through His Son (Body)... Php. 2:5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, 7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.
It is this...
"Another point to bring in now... Testing vs. Tempting. This very theological information is crucial to get right! One tests and one tempts! Also... There is Father Tree theology and there is Son Tree Theology.
Tree of Life (Son, Fruit of the Spirit, Faith, Trust, God's Provision)
(Tree of The Knowledge O.G.A.E.) (Father, Perfection, Law, Omniscience, LORDSHIP, Provider)
Testing... (Dt. 8:2) ... Tempt... (James 1:13)
Why is this imperative?
Because if the "Memra" (Word) had "foreknowledge" in Creation and Time... Placing the tree of the Father Tree within the garden and knowing the outcome would simultaneously be Testing and Tempting. Any theology that fails to distinguish that the Logos (Word/Memra) had purpose and design set forth (John 10:37, 5:19), yet didn't have the foreknowledge of the outcome is defining God as The Tempter.
One model of theology is clearly lacking next to the other! Let's get blunt through analogy. Instead of the Father Tree and the Garden... we'll use the analogy of a Loaded Gun and a Locked room.
-One theology has God locking a 7 year old in a room with many toys... including a loaded gun, knowing full well the Gun will be used to bring self-harm. This would make God "Evil".
-The other theology has God creating everything in sincerity and through co-collaboration of Omniscience and Limited foreknowledge... that Free Will could reign. How did the omniscient Father prepare matters to ensure sincerity? Self Saccrifice that would pay for the presence of the Loaded Gun and simultaneously allow... (Switching back to Spiritual Verbiage) Sincerity and Fertile soil of Love, with utter provision for all possible outcomes.
Two Trees...
But that would mean that the Father was the "Architect" and the Son was the "Builder"! Yup! The Architect Planned Sincerely and Perfectly and the "Builder" Built Perfectly! No Right hand hiding it's intentions from the Left hand... GOD is never a LEFT HAND! God is ONE!"
And so... I leave you with these questions...
Is God now, not Tri? Father, Son and Holy Spirit?
When did the Son, who we both Agree... per. (Col. 1:15, 16f, 18) is the Physical Creator ... "Finish Creation"?
Question answered, but PREDESTINATION Deleted from the SCOPE of Answer.
I admit, I'm appreciative that you did read everything carefully. I am exceptionally disappointed to have my mornings work returned "Un-Quoted", but I will brush it off and move forward.
You are employing a debate style that I favor, and thus... my Hat is off to you AMR. If a biblical truth is indeed true... the yes or no stipulation must be exacted. Thus, I will do so.
However... When you say "Ordained" and such... you are speaking of a non-divine, linear thinking that predestines, makes everything a mechanical ride on a rail and imparts the ordination of Evil to God.
I was sincerely hoping for some direct quoting of my words. I said such many times.
I have no proof that you are trying to at the very least, understand what I am saying, and to make matters more frustrating, you are employing yes or no questions with Calvinistic predestination, embedded into them.
I don't like this type of questioning... slight of hand. It's like asking...
Is God Omnipresent, but only able to be at one place at a time? The very question is loaded to stoop the answer into failure. I refrain from this!
I have noted an inadvertent denial of the ability of the Trinity to work together for a specific purpose written into your post (Highlighted in Red). This wording is reading as if God is UNE. You are questioning me as if you were a Modalist. I believe this is how classical reform is marginalizing Open Theism. It is a deceptive tactic and untrue to Open Theism. In other words... the Majority of Classical theists are purposefully mis-defining Open Theism to repress it with deception.
This is a matter that must be addressed by the collective theological community.
You are obfuscating my words and this is why I wanted you to quote and answer line by line. I specifically expounded on the large post to prevent this. There are specific matters you are inadvertently avoiding an address towards that are written into the previous post.
Instead of defining Omniscience... you are associating linear thinking, absolute predestination and false reality of a mechanical form into your questions wording.
The Trinities ability to work together for one purpose is being discounted by the reformed in light of OPEN VIEW to protect doctrines that impart the "Ordination of Evil" to God. I am now thoroughly convinced that deceptive wording is being employed by the classical and closed to prevent what is clearly a more scriptural view of He who SEPERATES LIGHT AND DARK AND never Ordained Evil.
To remain true to "Dispensation", The TriUnity and "Open Theism", while connecting to Reform (Classical Theology)... I will employ a direct yes and no answer scheme. However... I will employ a simple chart that acknowledges the TriUne nature of God and how it connects to your direct question that is specifically phrased to deny freewill and elevate the Calvinist doctrine of utter predestination. I have phrased my answer to respect [MENTION=3698]Tambora[/MENTION] 's explanation of Open Theism, with Dispensation in mind and the note that your very wording LIMITS God to Linear thinking, thus reducing His very Omnipotence.
I state that your total definition of Omniscience is linear and thus more limiting of God than Opentheisms Statement that God can Limit His Foreknowledge.
Tambora has addressed the quantum state of utter possibility to Omniscience... thus I insert her words in place of your highlighted in red words for my answers and retain that God is utterly omniscient, with the ability to limit His foreknowledge.
Spoiler
Yes = Full Omniscience. (A-Temporal Omniscience)
No = Limited Foreknowledge
Mediator = Person of Trinity that Mediates between the (A-Temporal) and the (Temporal) to Limit Foreknowledge and allow Free Will and Sincere, linear, relationship towards ALL Creation, while allowing Architectural intervention upon the needs of mankind and God's ultimate will.
View attachment 25497
I hope this is sufficient as a direct answer. To affirm Dispensation, the TriUne Nature of God and Classical Theology with QUANTUM OMNISCIENCE taken into account, I hope this clarifies matters. I suspect I may be quoting full snippets from my (8000 Character) post towards your future response. "Time" will tell.
At the very least, could you please address this...?
I have a strong counter argument to why God Created as "Architect" (Father) and "Creator" (Son), While willingly limiting/choosing to be limited in foreknowledge (through the Son, though the Father retains ALL foreknowledge/Omniscience)... This would seem preposterous... but we have scriptural evidence that God can do this through His Son (Body)... Php. 2:5 Let this mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, being in the form of God, did not consider it robbery to be equal with God, 7 but made Himself of no reputation, taking the form of a bondservant, and coming in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself and became obedient to the point of death, even the death of the cross.
It is this...
"Another point to bring in now... Testing vs. Tempting. This very theological information is crucial to get right! One tests and one tempts! Also... There is Father Tree theology and there is Son Tree Theology.
Tree of Life (Son, Fruit of the Spirit, Faith, Trust, God's Provision)
(Tree of The Knowledge O.G.A.E.) (Father, Perfection, Law, Omniscience, LORDSHIP, Provider)
Testing... (Dt. 8:2) ... Tempt... (James 1:13)
Why is this imperative?
Because if the "Memra" (Word) had "foreknowledge" in Creation and Time... Placing the tree of the Father Tree within the garden and knowing the outcome would simultaneously be Testing and Tempting. Any theology that fails to distinguish that the Logos (Word/Memra) had purpose and design set forth (John 10:37, 5:19), yet didn't have the foreknowledge of the outcome is defining God as The Tempter.
One model of theology is clearly lacking next to the other! Let's get blunt through analogy. Instead of the Father Tree and the Garden... we'll use the analogy of a Loaded Gun and a Locked room.
-One theology has God locking a 7 year old in a room with many toys... including a loaded gun, knowing full well the Gun will be used to bring self-harm. This would make God "Evil".
-The other theology has God creating everything in sincerity and through co-collaboration of Omniscience and Limited foreknowledge... that Free Will could reign. How did the omniscient Father prepare matters to ensure sincerity? Self Saccrifice that would pay for the presence of the Loaded Gun and simultaneously allow... (Switching back to Spiritual Verbiage) Sincerity and Fertile soil of Love, with utter provision for all possible outcomes.
Two Trees...
But that would mean that the Father was the "Architect" and the Son was the "Builder"! Yup! The Architect Planned Sincerely and Perfectly and the "Builder" Built Perfectly! No Right hand hiding it's intentions from the Left hand... GOD is never a LEFT HAND! God is ONE!"
And so... I leave you with these questions...
Is God now, not Tri? Father, Son and Holy Spirit?
When did the Son, who we both Agree... per. (Col. 1:15, 16f, 18) is the Physical Creator ... "Finish Creation"?
Spoiler
Last edited:
- Can we have true freedom of choice, even if God already KNOWS all, already? - Many in OV assume God CANNOT know the future, because it doesn't exist, but couldn't it exist to God, His infinite Being SEEING all that is past, present and future simultaneously? The question here is just how omniscient is God, and is his knowledge limited by space or time? Or is this just the case with our perceptions, hence we ASSUMING that God's knowledge is limited as ours is :think:
