Does God know the future?

[nancy]

Clete, you deny that it is necessary to know who or how many individuals are in the group for God to do whatever with the group, but the whole argument is PREDESTINATION of the elect (God does know the indviduals as the Scripture is clear about predestination of the elect).

 

[Clete]

Clete, hmmm... and you already said in a previous post that I came up with the most significant argument against open theism.

The most philosophcially based argument, which you almost immediately proved to be completely incapable of even fleshing out never mind substanciating. I'd wager that you don't even understand the thought process that lead to the comments you were obviously quoting from a much better thinker than yourself.

You also said to me that if I want to leave and bury my head in the sand that's fine. Well i guess I can say the same to you.

Terrific! We'll get our nostrils stuffed with sand together then!

I guess you really can't sbstantiate your posts.

This is just the point nancy. I have repeatedly posted substantive arguments which you ignore completely. A dialog is supposed to be where one party makes a claim and attempt to give reasons why that claim should be accepted as the truth, then the other party either asks questions or raised substantive objections which should be answered in turn. You however raise objections and counter claims and then when the objections are answered and you counter claims refuted, you respond by simply repeating the objection or counter claim as though no one responded to it at all. This is dishonest, and dishonorable and a waste of everyone's time.
Now, I'm feeling unusually generous at the moment so I've decided to give you one final opprotunity to respond substantively to the arguments I've made. You can either respond to what I just told Zman or you can try again to flesh out your earlier argument that actually had me excited for a moment about this thread taking off in a fresh and relatively unexplored direction. I will not, however, be holding my breath waiting for either.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Freak]

The rest of the story is found in a myriad of other texts. Be cognizant of the present continuous verb tense in Greek when looking at words relating to faith/belief, etc. As well, other verses have a conditional element relating to this issue. No one verse has all possible truth. Your proof text, as interpreted, will contradict other verses properly interpreted.

In Romans 8:30 there is no condition except that you must be justified to experience glorification. You have embraced a lie!! Salvation is not conditional. For we are kept by God's power not by our power.

Homework:

Staying adopted is not condtional in light of Scripture.

Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband's will, but born of God.

Can you cease from being a "child?"

 

[Clete]

Clete, you deny that it is necessary to know who or how many individuals are in the group for God to do whatever with the group, but the whole argument is PREDESTINATION of the elect (God does know the indviduals as the Scripture is clear about predestination of the elect).

You become one of the elect by joining the group Nancy!

Resting in Him,
Clete

P.S. This must be what it feels like to argue theology with my wife! (My wife's name is Nancy :chuckle: )

 

[Freak]

Your proof text.

:dizzy: Here we go again....

 

[Emo]

But this wasn't you once, eh?

Obviously not, can't you tell that I think Calvinism is unbiblical?

Smarter and more caring people, such as yourselves, are the only ones 'bright' enough to 'get saved'?

Wrong again, I simply allow my faith in the work of Christ to save me. BTW, how do you know that you are actually saved anyway? Let me guess, you got lucky enough to be a part of the "elect", right?
It's too bad that you think only a predetermined set of individuals are saved which in turn causes you not to believe that the blood of Christ has the potential to save any & everyone who trusts in Him.

 

[Freak]

Obviously not, can't you tell that I think Calvinism is unbiblical?

Why the obession with Calvinism?

 

[nancy]

Clete, I think you are confusing God's providence (what he wills to do with a group) with God's predestination (God foreknowledge of who the elect will be).

That seems to be the problem with your argument.

 

[JCAtheist]

Clete, I think you are confusing God's providence (what he wills to do with a group) with God's predestination (God foreknowledge of who the elect will be).

That seems to be the problem with your argument.

And where does it say in scripture that God knows who will be in the 'elect' here and now? Can you prove that the book of life is already completed via scripture? I don't think you can, and many will argue that although some people never get written IN, it is not a completed work.

The idea of the 'elect' is like a high bar.. the bar exists, those that can jump over it are elected.. those that cannot, are not. God doesn't say from back in the beginning "You will not jump over the bar.. nor you.." etc. He says Here is MY Grace.. if you can jump over the bar, you are with me.

Do you not see the difference?


IN Love and Peace

JCAtheist

 

[Emo]

Why the obession with Calvinism?

For example, according to Calvinism, in order for me to be saved this is just 1 of the things that must be true..........

First, I am dead, blind, and deaf to the things of God because of sin & it takes regeneration by which the Spirit brings me to life. Ya know, what's funny is I'm not sure when I was dead before I was regenerated because as far as I know I've been alive since the day of my birth or maybe I'm still dead according to Calvinism. Now this really puts a twist on reality.

 

[drbrumley]

Why the obession with Calvinism?

If it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, has web feet like a duck, ITS A DUCK!!!

 

[nancy]

JCatheist;

Rom.8: 29-30

Eph.1: 5

Speak of God's foreknowledge of the elect.

 

[godrulz]

Because He's eternal, not limited by time. He lives outside of time. Eternity means yesterday, today, and forever, all at once. If God was a piece of paper, time would be a line drawn upon it.

Time is unidirectional moving from the potential future through the present into the fixed past. The 'eternal now' view and spatial analogy of time (time is not a thing nor is it space) are other wrong assumptions you have not critically thought through. "A Treatise on Time and Space" by J.R. Lucas may help you. There are actually 4 main evangelical views on time and eternity. Timelessness is not coherent for a personal being. An endless duration of time (sequence/succession) is just as 'eternal' (no beginning/no end) and is the common sense view in Scripture (i.e. it is coherent, not pagan philosophy like your Platonic view).

 

[Clete]

Clete, I think you are confusing God's providence (what he wills to do with a group) with God's predestination (God foreknowledge of who the elect will be).

That seems to be the problem with your argument.

Great. Explain it to me then. Make an argument, something, anything! Just making statements of this sort is a useless waste of time. This would make a great openning sentence to a substantive post but as it is, it's worthless to me.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[godrulz]

You said God is God, and no one can stop Him. But at the same time, you believe He 'influences' people to conform to His will. I don't see 'freewill' anywhere in any of this.

If you truly beleive all of this, why isn't everyone saved? Does not God desire that all be saved? Isn't He God? Who can stop Him from saving them?

There are governmental issues. God wants to freely forgive and extend mercy, but also has a responsibility as the Moral Governor of the universe to uphold love and holiness/justice. God has provided the grounds for salvation (reason for which), and insisted on wise conditions to appropriate His provision (not without which). He would be compromising His character and government to save everyone against their wills. Men are culpable for sin and rejecting the Savior. God's will can be thwarted (contrary to another one of your wrong assumptions).

 

[Clete]

JCatheist;

Rom.8: 29-30

Eph.1: 5

DO NOT speak of God's foreknowledge of the elect.



Boy! Now wasn't that productive! Proof texting really works well doesn't it?

 

[Clete]

If it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, has web feet like a duck, ITS A DUCK!!!

Isn't that the truth!
I've never seen such a group of people who spout Calvinist and/or Arminian dogma and then deny being either one in my whole life!

 

[godrulz]

Because...what seems totally irrational to man, is not always irrational to God. I'm just saying that when God says He knows ALL and has NO limitations, He means it. Saying God cannot know the future is a limitation. He may choose not to know the future sometimes, but He definately CAN if He chooses.

An omniscient God knows all that is knowable. He cannot chose to not know something that we can know. The reason He does not know the future as certain in every detail is that He created other free moral agents that introduce uncertainty due to contingency. It is irrational for us to imagine God lifting a mountain and throwing it into the sea. He can do this because it is possible for an omnipotent being. God cannot make black white at the same time. This is a logical contradiction, not a deficiency in God. Likewise, exhaustive foreknowledge of future free will contingencies is an absurdity. To deny it is not limiting God since it is impossible to know free will possibilities as certain until the choice is made.

 

[godrulz]

Yeah, it was just an analogy.

My point was that God is above time. My analogy came from a very famous theologian named C.S. Lewis.

Lewis is wonderful, but this is one analogy from Mere Christianity he did not think through. He adopted it uncritically as the common Anglican view. He got the idea from Augustine, who was great, but wrong on this point. Augustine was influenced by pagan philosophy. Thankfully, the wrong tradition is being challenged in academic circles, giving our views more credibility among non-religious scholars who see the problem with some areas of our theology. Lewis was a communicator for the common man, not a theologian par excellent. He also wrongly thought our animals would end up in heaven. I am sure you would disagree with other areas of Lewis beliefs.

 

[Agape4Robin]

An omniscient God knows all that is knowable. He cannot chose to not know something that we can know. The reason He does not know the future as certain in every detail is that He created other free moral agents that introduce uncertainty due to contingency. It is irrational for us to imagine God lifting a mountain and throwing it into the sea. He can do this because it is possible for an omnipotent being. God cannot make black white at the same time. This is a logical contradiction, not a deficiency in God. Likewise, exhaustive foreknowledge of future free will contingencies is an absurdity. To deny it is not limiting God since it is impossible to know free will possibilities as certain until the choice is made.

So, God is unwilling or unable to look through the corridors of time and see the future?