Omniscience means fatalism.

[Clete]

LOL, do you always read prophesy as literal? Do you read this passage and declare that God is ignorant? Come on Clete, stop being a moron.

I take it to mean what it says and I formulate my doctrine accordingly. Unlike most, who do the opposite.

Romans 1 tells us that God gives them over to their lusts. This means God ordains that humans can act sinfully.

Actually, what God said through Jeremiah is that it never entered His mind that they should do such a thing. That's what it says. Your doctrine tells you that God ordained everything that was to happen before creation, not at some point after their lusts took hold to which He then turned them over too.

Your interpretation of Romans 1 is Open Theism, not Calvinist or Arminian. You're arguing my side of the debate one sentence after calling me a moron.

In Job we read of Satan asking to sift Job. God said...yes. God ordained that Job would lose his wealth, his family and his health. None of these things could have happened unless God ordained it.

Again, this is Open Theism! This is not normal Calvinist doctrine at all. Your doctrine claims that God ordained the entire episode, including Satan's asking for permission and every event that motivated him to do so. It is Open Theism that teaches that God considered Satan's request and granted it.

Additionally, we can know from the context of Job that it is a special case and not the normal way God deals with every human being.

Sometimes God's plans are to allow great sorrow and tragedy to fall upon us. That does not make God evil.

It does if He allows such things arbitrary as Calvinism teaches.

That means that a good God uses the corruption of this world to bring about His good will.

Once again, this is Open Theism, not Calvinist doctrine.

Read Habakkuk and see how God ordains the rising up of wicked Babylon as His choice to discipline Judah. This is an example of the Sovereignty of God and our limited vision to understand God’s plans.

Jeremiah 18 explains why God does such things and it also explains that it isn't set in stone.

Jeremiah 18:7 The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, 8 if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will repent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. 9 And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, 10 if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will repent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it.​

Habakkuk is a good example of this playing out, so it Romans 9 and perhaps one of the best is Jonah...

Jonah 3:10 Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it.​

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Clete]

Clete, let's read the verses surrounding Jeremiah 19:5. In so doing we will see the ordained will of God.
Jeremiah 19:1-9
[1]This is what the lord said to me: “Go and buy a clay jar. Then ask some of the leaders of the people and of the priests to follow you.
[2]Go out through the Gate of Broken Pots to the garbage dump in the valley of Ben-Hinnom, and give them this message.
[3]Say to them, ‘Listen to this message from the lord, you kings of Judah and citizens of Jerusalem! This is what the lord of Heaven’s Armies, the God of Israel, says: I will bring a terrible disaster on this place, and the ears of those who hear about it will ring!
[4]“‘For Israel has forsaken me and turned this valley into a place of wickedness. The people burn incense to foreign gods—idols never before acknowledged by this generation, by their ancestors, or by the kings of Judah. And they have filled this place with the blood of innocent children.
[5]They have built pagan shrines to Baal, and there they burn their sons as sacrifices to Baal. I have never commanded such a horrible deed; it never even crossed my mind to command such a thing!
[6]So beware, for the time is coming, says the lord, when this garbage dump will no longer be called Topheth or the valley of Ben-Hinnom, but the Valley of Slaughter.
[7]“‘For I will upset the careful plans of Judah and Jerusalem. I will allow the people to be slaughtered by invading armies, and I will leave their dead bodies as food for the vultures and wild animals.
[8]I will reduce Jerusalem to ruins, making it a monument to their stupidity. All who pass by will be astonished and will gasp at the destruction they see there.
[9]I will see to it that your enemies lay siege to the city until all the food is gone. Then those trapped inside will eat their own sons and daughters and friends. They will be driven to utter despair.’

Use the quote tags when responding to me or be ignored. You choose.

 

[Clete]

No one has said that God desires people to sin. That would be contrary to His character. What I am saying is that God ordains (determines) that sin be allowed to be active.
God could end all sin immediately and throw all us sinners into hell immediately. He would be justified in so doing. But that is not God's ordination for this moment. At this moment, God is using sin to bring about His perfect will.

The tried and true false dichotomy of the permisive vs. perfect will of God. ALWAYS used as if there is a difference between the two.

But there is no difference! According to the Calvinist doctrine, everything that happens is what God wanted to happen. There is no rogue molecule in the universe! Calvinists claim that everything that happens does so according to God will - period. So where's the difference between the two wills? God's ordains His perfect will and everything that actually happens is His permissive will and everything that happens was ordained by God. Perfectly circular, self repeating, stupidity.

And why would God have two wills anyway?

Clete

 

[Clete]

God can't both know you are going to do something AND stop you from doing it.

Perfectly simple, totally brilliant and completely irrefutable elegant logic.

Great post!

Clete

 

[Derf]

God is, and always was so perfectly wise, that nothing ever did, or does, or can elude His knowledge. God knew, from all eternity, not only what He Himself intended to do, but also what He would incline and permit others to do. "Known unto God are all His works from eternity" (Acts 15:18).

Consequently, God knows nothing now, nor will know anything hereafter, which He did not know and foresee from everlasting, His foreknowledge being co-eternal with Himself, and extending to everything that is or shall be done (Heb 4:13).

That's how He knows what everyone will do, He inclines them to do it? That seems a step worse than tempting someone to sin.

What's worse is that He has never known a time (or state) where He didn't know what someone would do, thus God was fated to create him with those inclinations.

The influence which God's divine foreknowledge has on the certain futurition of the things foreknown does not render the intervention of second causes needless, nor destroy the nature of the things themselves.

He can't destroy the nature of something that doesn't exist.

By this, I mean that the prescience of God does not lay any coercive necessity on the wills of beings naturally free. For instance, man, even in his fallen state, is endued with a natural freedom of will, yet he acts, from the first to the last moment of his life, in absolute subserviency (though, perhaps, he does not know it nor design it) to the purposes and decrees of God concerning him, notwithstanding which, he is sensible of no compulsion, but acts as freely and voluntarily as if he was sui juris, subject to no control and absolutely lord of himself.

Secondary causes only relieve God from responsibility if they are independent in their sin. But if He knew before He created them that they would sin, He must have created them to do so, meaning He created their inclinations that way. Unless it was just a general knowledge that independent beings would sin.

This made Luther—after he had shown how all things necessarily and inevitably come to pass, in consequence of the sovereign will and infallible foreknowledge of God—to say that "we should carefully distinguish between a necessity of infallibility and a necessity of coaction, since both good and evil men, though by their actions they fulfil the decree and appointment of God, yet are not forcibly constrained to do any thing, but act willingly."

Doesn't this answer the thread's question? God's knowledge of all future things amounts to fatalism--"all things necessarily and inevitably come to pass"?

Being the cause of all things, God knows everything by knowing Himself; all things possible, by the knowledge of His power, and all things actual, by the knowledge of His own purposes.

This distinction between the possible and actual, is the foundation of the distinction between the knowledge of simple intelligence and the knowledge of vision.

Simple intelligence is founded on God's power, and knowledge of vision upon God's will. This only means that, in virtue of God's omniscient intelligence, He knows whatever infinite power can effect; and that from the consciousness of His own purposes, He knows what He has determined to effect or to permit to occur. This is a distinction which the moderns, like yourself, Derf, ignore. Nothing, according to your philosophy is possible, but the actual. All that can be, either is, or is to be. This follows from the idea of God as but mere cause. He produces all that can be; and there is in God no causality for what does not exist.

Maybe you have me confused with someone else. I have no doubt that God can do more than He has done, and more than He will do in our timeframe. And God's infinite power to create new could easily result in God's creating more once we are with Him in the eternal state. And even here in this timeframe, God could react to whatever comes along with wisdom and justice and mercy, according to what He wants to accomplish and according to his character. I not only can imagine that there were other possibilities God considered before he created the world, but he deals with other possibilities in the here and now--each day, each second--as He works with His created beings that He endowed with creative powers, and that are quite adept at finding ways to rebel against Him, but that could be just as adept at finding ways to honor and obey Him should they allow His spirit to control their lives and mind.

secondly:

He knows what He has determined to effect or to permit to occur.

He can't "permit" something to occur unless the idea of that thing at some point enters into His mind, but more importantly, He can't "determine" to effect something without changing his purposes. Are you saying now that God is not so changeless? Then we seem to be reaching a consensus!

Further such a view as yours necessarily implies if God creates by thinking or knowing, then all God knows must be, and must be as soon as He knows or thinks it, that is, from eternity. If, however, we retain the Scriptural idea of God as a spirit, who can do more than He does; if we ascribe to Him what we know to be a perfection in ourselves, namely, that our power exceeds our acts, that a faculty and the exercise of that faculty are not identical, then we can understand how God can know the possible as well as the actual. God is not limited to the universe, which of necessity is finite. God has not exhausted Himself in determining to cause the present order of things to be.

Rather, if God never changes, and His purposes were finalized at some point (however such an oxymoron works), then he is always on that one path and no other path is allowed to Him. He's a puppet to His own sovereignty or the greater god of fatalism in such a scenario.

 

[Derf]

The tried and true false dichotomy of the permisive vs. perfect will of God. ALWAYS used as if there is a difference between the two.

But there is no difference! According to the Calvinist doctrine, everything that happens is what God wanted to happen. There is no rogue molecule in the universe! Calvinists claim that everything that happens does so according to God will - period. So where's the difference between the two wills? God's ordains His perfect will and everything that actually happens is His permissive will and everything that happens was ordained by God. Perfectly circular, self repeating, stupidity.

And why would God have two wills anyway?

Clete

I think it's obvious: If Jesus told the disciples to pray "God's will be done on earth as it is in heaven", showing that God's will is not always happening on earth, a different will is required to maintain that nothing happens outside of God's will.

 

[MennoSota]

In another thread you said that sin was perpetuated for infinity and refreshed with fresh instances of sin in hell, thus justifying its continued torment in response to the sin that it continues to foster and perpetuate. I think that was you?

Did you mean for that to say "God could end all sin immediately or throw all us sinners into hell immediately" to state them as mutually exclusive actions?

Just saying, that it seems that you are contradicting yourself.

You are mistaken. I never stated what you claim. Perhaps you are thinking of someone else.
What I state is that sinners will spend eternity in hell. God declares it and I believe God.

 

[MennoSota]

I take it to mean what it says and I formulate my doctrine accordingly. Unlike most, who do the opposite.


Actually, what God said through Jeremiah is that it never entered His mind that they should do such a thing. That's what it says. Your doctrine tells you that God ordained everything that was to happen before creation, not at some point after their lusts took hold to which He then turned them over too.

Your interpretation of Romans 1 is Open Theism, not Calvinist or Arminian. You're arguing my side of the debate one sentence after calling me a moron.


Again, this is Open Theism! This is not normal Calvinist doctrine at all. Your doctrine claims that God ordained the entire episode, including Satan's asking for permission and every event that motivated him to do so. It is Open Theism that teaches that God considered Satan's request and granted it.

Additionally, we can know from the context of Job that it is a special case and not the normal way God deals with every human being.


It does if He allows such things arbitrary as Calvinism teaches.


Once again, this is Open Theism, not Calvinist doctrine.


Jeremiah 18 explains why God does such things and it also explains that it isn't set in stone.

Jeremiah 18:7 The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, 8 if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will repent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. 9 And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, 10 if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will repent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it.​

Habakkuk is a good example of this playing out, so it Romans 9 and perhaps one of the best is Jonah...

Jonah 3:10 Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it.​

Resting in Him,
Clete

No open theism on my end. God knows all things and he has set them in place by His providence.
I shared the context around the two passages you shared so that you would stop attempting a prooftext by using only a couple sentences.

 

[Rosenritter]

I think it's obvious: If Jesus told the disciples to pray "God's will be done on earth as it is in heaven", showing that God's will is not always happening on earth, a different will is required to maintain that nothing happens outside of God's will.

I think that Calvinism and fatalism both say that prayer has no effect on God, that feeble man cannot affect the sovereign will of God. This is justified by the circular definition that "sovereign" means "not affected by man." Yet if prayer cannot affect God nor hope to change his will, why would he say this?

2Ch 7:14 KJV
(14) If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

I count the word "if" some 1595 times in my Bible, and some portion of those are used in relation to God or in relation to man. If God had foreknowledge of every thing that should ever happen in advance, why does our language even have the word "if?"

Gen 4:7 KJV
(7) If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Psa 81:8 KJV
(8) Hear, O my people, and I will testify unto thee: O Israel, if thou wilt hearken unto me;

1Jn 1:9 KJV
(9) If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

And on a final note that directly states that prayer does have an effect on our sovereign Lord,

Jas 5:16-20 KJV
(16) Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.
(17) Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months.
(18) And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought forth her fruit.
(19) Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him;
(20) Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.

Unless God gave us a language that was deceptive in nature and wrote our scriptures in that deceitful language, that word "if" disproves fatalism.

 

[MennoSota]

The tried and true false dichotomy of the permisive vs. perfect will of God. ALWAYS used as if there is a difference between the two.

But there is no difference! According to the Calvinist doctrine, everything that happens is what God wanted to happen. There is no rogue molecule in the universe! Calvinists claim that everything that happens does so according to God will - period. So where's the difference between the two wills? God's ordains His perfect will and everything that actually happens is His permissive will and everything that happens was ordained by God. Perfectly circular, self repeating, stupidity.

And why would God have two wills anyway?

Clete

Where do I say God has two wills. It seems you are constructing a fantasy doctrine and applying it to me as though it will stick.

God does what He wills.

 

[Derf]

I think that Calvinism and fatalism both say that prayer has no effect on God, that feeble man cannot affect the sovereign will of God. This is justified by the circular definition that "sovereign" means "not affected by man." Yet if prayer cannot affect God nor hope to change his will, why would he say this?

2Ch 7:14 KJV
(14) If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

...
Gen 4:7 KJV
(7) If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Psa 81:8 KJV
(8) Hear, O my people, and I will testify unto thee: O Israel, if thou wilt hearken unto me;

1Jn 1:9 KJV
(9) If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

...

Jas 5:16-20 KJV
(16) Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.
(17) Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months.
(18) And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought forth her fruit.
(19) Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him;
(20) Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.

...

Anthropomorphism?

 

[Rosenritter]

In another thread you said that sin was perpetuated for infinity and refreshed with fresh instances of sin in hell, thus justifying its continued torment in response to the sin that it continues to foster and perpetuate. I think that was you?

Did you mean for that to say "God could end all sin immediately or throw all us sinners into hell immediately" to state them as mutually exclusive actions?

Just saying, that it seems that you are contradicting yourself.

You are mistaken. I never stated what you claim. Perhaps you are thinking of someone else.
What I state is that sinners will spend eternity in hell. God declares it and I believe God.

But am I thinking of something else? This is what you posted as your answer to prove that eternal torment was justice:

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...itution-Of-All-Things-AKA-Universalism/page87

How can God exact infinite punishment for a finite sin? First, because the person against whom all sin is committed is infinite. Crimes against the infinitely holy, infinitely kind, infinitely good, and infinitely supreme Ruler of the world deserve unending punishment. In addition to that, those condemned to hell will go on sinning for eternity. There is no repentance in hell. So the punishment will continue as long as the sinning does.

That was your answer, using text quoted from Tom Ascol. If you didn't agree with him, why did you use his words as your answer?

So it does seem to me that you are contradicting yourself... that, or posting things that you haven't bothered to read very carefully.

 

[MennoSota]

But am I thinking of something else? This is what you posted as your answer to prove that eternal torment was justice:

http://theologyonline.com/member.php?20836-MennoSota



That was your answer, quoted from Tom Ascol. If you didn't agree with him, why did you use his words as your answer?

So it does seem to me that you are contradicting yourself... that, or posting things that you haven't bothered to read very carefully.

I didn't write that. You are mistaken or the TOL got screwed up. Either way, it's not my statement.

 

[MennoSota]

Use the quote tags when responding to me or be ignored. You choose.

Please God, let Clete ignore me. Amen. [emoji56]

 

[MennoSota]

I think that Calvinism and fatalism both say that prayer has no effect on God, that feeble man cannot affect the sovereign will of God. This is justified by the circular definition that "sovereign" means "not affected by man." Yet if prayer cannot affect God nor hope to change his will, why would he say this?

2Ch 7:14 KJV
(14) If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.

I count the word "if" some 1595 times in my Bible, and some portion of those are used in relation to God or in relation to man. If God had foreknowledge of every thing that should ever happen in advance, why does our language even have the word "if?"

Gen 4:7 KJV
(7) If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Psa 81:8 KJV
(8) Hear, O my people, and I will testify unto thee: O Israel, if thou wilt hearken unto me;

1Jn 1:9 KJV
(9) If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

And on a final note that directly states that prayer does have an effect on our sovereign Lord,

Jas 5:16-20 KJV
(16) Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.
(17) Elias was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months.
(18) And he prayed again, and the heaven gave rain, and the earth brought forth her fruit.
(19) Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him;
(20) Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins.

Unless God gave us a language that was deceptive in nature and wrote our scriptures in that deceitful language, that word "if" disproves fatalism.

I'm curious if you have a quote from Calvin that says "Prayer has no effect on God."
Please divulge.

 

[quip]

Or...

We are made in the image of God and find no comfort until we return to Him.

Not "or".... "ergo".

 

[Rosenritter]

I didn't write that. You are mistaken or the TOL got screwed up. Either way, it's not my statement.

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...itution-Of-All-Things-AKA-Universalism/page87

The wages of sin is death.

I will quote Tom Ascol from Ligonier as he answers this well.

Spoiler

“There is one very serious defect to my mind in Christ’s moral character, and that is that He believed in hell.” So wrote the agnostic British philosopher Bertrand Russell in 1967. The idea of eternal punishment for sin, he further notes, is “a doctrine that put cruelty in the world and gave the world generations of cruel torture.”

His views are at least more consistent than religious philosopher John Hick, who refers to hell as a “grim fantasy” that is not only “morally revolting” but also “a serious perversion of the Christian Gospel.” Worse yet was theologian Clark Pinnock who, despite having regarded himself as an evangelical, dismissed hell with a rhetorical question: “How can one imagine for a moment that the God who gave His Son to die for sinners because of His great love for them would install a torture chamber somewhere in the new creation in order to subject those who reject Him to everlasting pain?”

So, what should we think of hell? Is the idea of it really responsible for all the cruelty and torture in the world? Is the doctrine of hell incompatible with the way of Jesus Christ? Hardly. In fact, the most prolific teacher of hell in the Bible is Jesus, and He spoke more about it than He did about heaven. In Matthew 25:41–46 He teaches us four truths about hell that should cause us to grieve over the prospect of anyone experiencing its horrors.

1. Hell is a state of separation from God.

On the day of judgment, Jesus will say to all unbelievers, “Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire” (v. 41). This is the same sort of language that Jesus uses elsewhere to describe the final judgment of unbelievers (see 7:23).

To be separated from God is to be separated from anything and everything good. That is hard to conceive because even the most miserable person enjoys some of God’s blessings. We breathe His air, are nourished by food that He supplies, and experience many other aspects of His common grace.

On earth even atheists enjoy the benefits of God’s goodness. But in hell, these blessings will be nonexistent. Those consigned there will remember God’s goodness, and will even have some awareness of the unending pleasures of heaven, but they will have no access to them.

This does not mean that God will be completely absent from hell. He is and will remain omnipresent (Ps. 139:7-8). To be separated from the Lord and cast into hell does not mean that a person will finally be free of God. That person will remain eternally accountable to Him. He will remain Lord over the person’s existence. But in hell, a person will be forever separated from God in His kindness, mercy, grace, and goodness. He will be consigned to deal with Him in His holy wrath.

2. Hell is a state of association.

Jesus says that the eternal fire of hell was “prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matt. 25:41). People were made for God. Hell was made for the Devil. Yet people who die in their sin, without Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, will spend eternity in hell with the one being who is most unlike God. It is a tragic irony that many who do not believe in the Devil in this life will wind up spending eternity being tormented with him in hell.

3. Hell is a state of punishment.

Jesus describes it as “fire” (v. 41) and a place of “punishment” (v. 46). Hell is a place of retribution where justice is served through the payment for crimes.

The punishment must fit the crime. The misery and torment of hell point to the wickedness and seriousness of sin. Those who protest the biblical doctrine of hell as being excessive betray their inadequate comprehension of the sinfulness of sin. For sinners to be consigned to anything less than the horrors of eternal punishment would be a miscarriage of justice.

4. Hell is an everlasting state.

Though some would like to shorten the duration of this state, Jesus’ words are very clear. He uses the same adjective to describe both punishment and life in verse 46. If hell is not eternal, neither is the new heaven and earth.

How can God exact infinite punishment for a finite sin? First, because the person against whom all sin is committed is infinite. Crimes against the infinitely holy, infinitely kind, infinitely good, and infinitely supreme Ruler of the world deserve unending punishment. In addition to that, those condemned to hell will go on sinning for eternity. There is no repentance in hell. So the punishment will continue as long as the sinning does.

Spoiler

The dreadfulness of hell deepens our grateful praise for the salvation we have in Jesus Christ. Hell is what we deserve. And hell is what He experienced on the cross in our place.

Believing the truth about hell also motivates us to persuade people to be reconciled to God. By God’s grace those of us who are trusting Christ have been rescued from this horrible destiny. How can we love people and refuse to speak plainly to them about the realities of eternal damnation and God’s gracious provision of salvation?

Clearer visions of hell will give us greater love for both God and people.
https://www.ligonier.org/blog/4-truths-about-hell/

If you didn't post that, then who has been hacking into your account? After dodging the question several times, that was your answer for the justice of hell, that it would never finish punishing its victims because sin would constantly be continued and renewed afresh with new sin.

Now compare that with your more recent statement, when you seem to want to have it both ways:

No one has said that God desires people to sin. That would be contrary to His character. What I am saying is that God ordains (determines) that sin be allowed to be active.
God could end all sin immediately and throw all us sinners into hell immediately. He would be justified in so doing. But that is not God's ordination for this moment. At this moment, God is using sin to bring about His perfect will.

So which is it MennoSota? Does God end all sin by destroying sinners in hell, or does he perpetuate sin for ever without end by prolonging continued sinning for eternity? You're going to have to take something back either way, so think carefully.

P.S. The links WORK this time, so please stop denying that they are your posts. I remembered what you wrote, even if you didn't.

 

[Lon]

God can't both know you are going to do something AND stop you from doing it.

I can see in my dog's eyes, he is going to run into the street. A word stops him. Wouldn't it be correct to say BOTH I knew what he was going to do AND that I stopped him from doing it?

 

[MennoSota]

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...itution-Of-All-Things-AKA-Universalism/page87



If you didn't post that, then who has been hacking into your account? After dodging the question several times, that was your answer for the justice of hell, that it would never finish punishing its victims because sin would constantly be continued and renewed afresh with new sin.

Now compare that with your more recent statement, when you seem to want to have it both ways:



So which is it MennoSota? Does God end all sin by destroying sinners in hell, or does he perpetuate sin for ever without end by prolonging continued sinning for eternity? You're going to have to take something back either way, so think carefully.

P.S. The links WORK this time, so please stop denying that they are your posts. I remembered what you wrote, even if you didn't.

Sinners are in hell. Will they continue in sin? I have no idea. They will gnash their teeth in hatred of God, so I suppose that would be continuous sin throughout eternity.
Send us back a report when you get there. [emoji41]

 

[Derf]

I can see in my dog's eyes, he is going to run into the street. A word stops him. Wouldn't it be correct to say BOTH I knew what he was going to do AND that I stopped him from doing it?

Only if you are limited to dealing with potential and not actual future. Are you limiting God now, saying He doesn't know the actual future?

You can't know for sure that he's actually going into the street, because your words actually prevented him from doing so.

Everybody is an open theist when it gets down to brass tacks.