Omniscience v Determinism

[Diaste]

19 hours ago, Josheb said:

This is reported in 1 Peter 1:20 where it is stated the sacrifice was foreknown before the foundation or creation of the earth. 

Thanks for the response.

I don't think the above can be argued sufficiently to conclude what you conclude.

What I have been seeing in scripture is the choice. We have one that is fully within our power and that is to listen to God or not. I have a couple examples in mind but the following is a good one.

 

At any time I might announce that a nation or kingdom will be uprooted, torn down, and destroyed. 8But if that nation I warned turns from its evil, then I will relent of the disaster I had planned to bring.

9And if at another time I announce that I will build up and establish a nation or kingdom, 10and if it does evil in My sight and does not listen to My voice, then I will relent of the good I had intended for it. -  Jeremiah 18:8-10

The future isn't written like the pages of a novel we haven't yet turned, it's formed by His will according to His plan, and it can be amended, even parts done away with.

All creation is directed to His ends. God isn't seeing the future as though every action and outcome is determined, He's forming it as He has spoken. "I will bring it to pass." In the case of the eternal He can say that from a very distant past to an equally distant future and make it happen.

We may have many choices we get to make of our own will freely and apart from direction, but we can't know that for certain. We do have the one in absolute certainty.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[David1701]

21 hours ago, Dennis1209 said:

Basic question, basic response.

Romans 8:28 (KJV) And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

Maybe the word "all" is selective?

1 Thessalonians 5:18 (KJV) In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you.

Except my examples.

Okay, just as a reminder for anyone who reads this: you claimed that God does not determine everything, so I asked, if that were the case, how you could give thanks for all things, as the Bible tells us to do.

I'm unsure how you think the verses you have quoted answer my question.

Rom. 8:28 (KJV) And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

This verse is an affirmation of God determining all things for good, to those who love him, the ones he called, according to his purpose.

The "all" is clearly not selective, and this is especially clear, if you read the whole passage.

1 Thessalonians 5:18 (KJV) In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you.

I specifically stated that I was not merely referring to giving thanks in all circumstances, but for all things.  This is a different issue.

Eph. 5:20 (KJV) Giving thanks always for all things unto God and the Father in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ;

Care to try again?

[Dennis1209]

1 hour ago, David1701 said:

Care to try again?

No, I have a better option, bye.

[David1701]

59 minutes ago, Dennis1209 said:

No, I have a better option, bye.

Well, never mind, God's word always accomplishes what he sends it out to achieve.

Is. 55:9-11 (Webster)

 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.
  10 For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returneth not there, but watereth the earth, and maketh it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:
  11 So shall my word be that proceedeth from my mouth: it shall not return to me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it.

Edited July 16, 2021 by David1701

[Willa]

Fact: God is outside of time--it is His creation as is light, and time is relative to the speed of light.

Fact: Jesus came as a man for a length of time, but when He died he received a spiritual eternal body that is no longer bound by time.

1Co 15:44  It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body; there is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.

Fact: God called Himself "I AM" in Genesis 3, (as did Jesus in John 8:58, claiming to be God the Son)..  That means He just IS. He was and is and is to come, the first and the last.  Rev. 1:11 & 4:8. That is how He can be present in the past, the present and the future all at the same time.  He is outside of our universe looking in and at the same time He is with us and in us.  Perhaps we need to be God to really understand this.

However, since God was in the present before creation, and He is present now, and is also in the present tense in the future, He knows the end from the beginning.  So He knew before creation who would love Him and who would reject Him because He sees it all in the present tense.  Isaiah 46:10

All who are in Christ are saved.  This is in Ephesians 1 and it explains God's perspective.  However, from our perspective we have free will to repent and receive Him when the Holy Spirit reveals our sin to us and reveals God to us as an all knowing personal God; He loves us and forgives us due to Christ dying in our place, purchasing us and reconciling us to God..  

We also have free will to resist the call and revelation of the Holy Spirit and remain in our sin, estranged from God.  But it is our own fault should we reject the light God has given us and reject His written word.  We harden our own hearts when we resist Him.  

Since this is the world we live in, bound by time, it is hard for us to understand a spiritual world outside of time.  For all I know, it might be another dimension.  

So I believe that both predestination and free will are correct.  Predestination is from God's perspective, but free will is from our perspective.

By the way, I am neither a Calvinist nor an Arminian.  

 

[Diaste]

20 hours ago, Josheb said:

The Jeremiah 18:8-10 text is 1) a conditional choice; God is still limiting the options and the consequences of each condition had already been decided, and 2) spoken to a group that is already living within a covenant relationship with God that was initiated by God without asking them. They did not have a choice to be God's chosen people; they only choice given them was whether to be obedient or not. Whole lots of limits on choices in those three verses. Do not ignore them.  Furthermore, we know the purpose of God's choosing was to provide an avenue for Christ. They didn't make that choice for themselves; they were largely ignorant of God's purpose in that regard. My points are proven by the dissent!

Um, I think the Jews came much later didn't they? Like after Isaac and Jacob? I don't know what covenant this references. No matter, not the point.

What you say is accurate but that's not really what I'm pointing out. 

God did limit actions and choices, but then also presented a choice. It was limited but the idea and the obvious lesson here is between heeding Him and not. 

This may be the only free will choice we have, it is the proving ground of our epistemology; are we going to listen to God and heed his words or not?

Abimelech was limited in his actions and thoughts by God until the visitation. Then God presented a choice. I wonder about the depth and scope of this. 

 

 

20 hours ago, Josheb said:

1) You'll have to take that up with someone who believes in strict determinism because that is not me, 2) I'm not sure what I posted was correctly understood if it is read to say I believe in the kind of determinism where the future is written like the pages of a novel, 3) Did God have a plan for creation before He created creation? If so then you've got a problem with the claim the future isn't written and if the answer is no then you've got a problem with a planless God who is supposedly immutable, and 4) I think you and I have discussed this before so I am wondering how I'd be misconstrued twice. Perhaps I am wrong in my recall. Go back and re-read what I posted because I did not espouse strict determinism. I explicitly stated there are two forms of knowledge for God (one is deterministic and the other is correlative), and I explicitly stated much of creation is dynamic and interactive, filled with volitional creatures and secondary causes. Every single regenerate and indwelt believe knows s/he has greater volitional liberty after conversation in comparison to before, yes? 

Not placing any thing on any one. This is exploratory only. I have held belief on this but I was never clear as to why or what evidence is in support. The topic is coming up more frequently and I need a solid position to defend, if one even exists in this particular study of an aspect of God's character.

I know what you stated and I'm not disputing that or opposing you. I'm looking to walk with someone in this, not battle.

At this point some think, and I have heard this before, that the future actually exists like a place that can be visited. But that's the movies and while interesting it's just entertaining and probably doesn't have any truth to it. 

At this point I'm of the mind the future does not exist as a real place even as it's been orchestrated and determined events will occur as per the overall plan. 

There is a plan. God will see to it His plan occurs when He decides. That's a whole lot of determinism and predestination. The problem for me is the level and scope. Maybe it's wide and deep. Maybe not. Maybe all we have as free choice is to heed His words or not. 

 

20 hours ago, Josheb said:

 

More importantly, the choice given the already-living-within-God's-covenant people in Jeremiah 18 is not an example of God's plan being amended. This could be understood many ways but one of them is by understanding what is later revealed about sin (all will sin) and the law (it shows us our sin and NO ONE can live up to it in its entirety). Furthermore, the Law to which they were given a choice to obey is the Law and the prophets that testified to the Messiah and the Messiah hadn't yet been fully or correctly formed in Judaism's theology. The choice they had was given to them; not one they came up with on their own. 

 

What did I say was one of the most frequently occurring errors? The taking of scriptures written by the regenerate to the regenerate about the regenerate and applying them to the unregenerate. Take out the word "regenerate" and replace it with "covenant" and the citing of Jeremiah 18:8-10 makes that same error. Don't take passages spoken by those living within a covenant with God to those living within a covenant with God about those living within a covenant with God and apply them to those without any such covenant. The Jews are not atheists. The Jews know about God and they have undeniably seen Him act up close and personal many times. God had revealed Himself to them in ways far beyond Romans 1:19-20. They are God's people, chosen by God, made holy without their consent and given choices only after the fact that were very limited.

See? It's not clear. On the one hand they choose and on the other they had no choice. Maybe they had no choice in the bylaws and/or charter but they did have a choice whether or not to be dues paying members in the first place.

If the choice to believe in and follow God is forced it's not a choice born of heart of the individual. 

20 hours ago, Josheb said:

Lastly, please clarify your use of "we." The word "we" can mean "all human beings including theists and atheists alike." The word "we" could mean "we Christians." Those two groups of "we" are not the same people because you an I - the regenerate of God - are much different than those not regenerate and effort should be made to avoid false equivalencies. Furthermore, when Jews are not Christians. Both believed in God so neither are comparable with atheists or antitheists. Both live(d) within covenant relationships but the covenant through Abraham, that through Moses, and that through Christ have similarities and overlaps but they are also different in very substantive ways so those groups should not be treated as a single homogenous group theologically, especially not soteriologically. 

I'm just looking for foundational precepts in this one thing. And it should cut across all lines. I want what God thinks and says not doctrinal or dogmatic stances of whatever group or several groups.

20 hours ago, Josheb said:

So you may disagree with my conclusions but it does not appear what I have said was sufficiently understood and the reasons for the dissent evidence my conclusions. Because God giving Jeremiah's audience a choice could have been part of His plan, the idea God's plan can be amended hasn't been proven.

"The LORD also said to Moses, “I have seen this people, and they are indeed a stiff-necked people. 10Now leave Me alone, so that My anger may burn against them and consume them. Then I will make you into a great nation.”"

"And the LORD regretted that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. 7So the LORD said, “I will blot out man, whom I have created, from the face of the earth—every man and beast and crawling creature and bird of the air—for I am grieved that I have made them"

I'm convinced neither of the above actions were part of the plan but are reactions based on necessity.

Then;

"

But Moses sought the favor of the LORD his God, saying, “O LORD, why does Your anger burn against Your people, whom You brought out of the land of Egypt with great power and a mighty hand? 12Why should the Egyptians declare, ‘He brought them out with evil intent, to kill them in the mountains and wipe them from the face of the earth’? Turn from Your fierce anger and relent from doing harm to Your people. 13Remember Your servants Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, to whom You swore by Your very self when You declared, ‘I will make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky, and I will give your descendants all this land that I have promised, and it shall be their inheritance forever.’ ”

14So the LORD relented from the calamity He had threatened to bring on His people.

The plan is determined but can be amended. 

[Diaste]

22 hours ago, Josheb said:

Not sure I follow. I said God knew ahead of time, ahead of His coming, that Jesus was coming. I said the evidence for that is 1 Pet. 1:20. 

How does out having choice preclude what I said about God foreknowing Jesus' coming? 

Now if you were referring to Jesus coming that I agree with.  Jesus preeminence on earth is the entirety of the plan of our Father from before the earth was formed. What I cannot fathom is that Jesus death on the cross was determined before man was formed. Some do. I think it's very sketchy.

[David1701]

12 hours ago, Josheb said:

Does God want us to thank Him for sin? 

Yes, he does.

Quote

Did God determine sin's occurrence...

Yes, he did.

Quote

..., and if so then did He do so causally?

Not directly.

What does the Bible say?

Eph. 1:11 (Webster) In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

---God works all things according to the counsel of his own will.

1 Kings 22:19-22 (Webster)

19 And he said, Hear thou therefore the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne, and all the host of heaven standing by him on his right hand and on his left.
  20 And the LORD said, Who shall persuade Ahab, that he may go up and fall at Ramothgilead? And one said in this manner, and another said in that manner. {persuade: or, deceive}
  21 And there came forth a spirit, and stood before the LORD, and said, I will persuade him.
  22 And the LORD said to him, How? And he said, I will go forth, and I will be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets. And he said, Thou shalt persuade him , and prevail also: go forth, and do so.

---But he does not do everything directly.

2 Sam. 24:1 (Webster) And again the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel and Judah.

---Numbering Israel was a sin; but, as we find elsewhere, God did not move David directly, he used an evil agency to do it.

1 Chr. 21:1 (Webster) And Satan stood up against Israel, and tempted David to number Israel.

Acts 4:26-28 (Webster)

26 The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ.
  27 For in truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,
  28 To do whatever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.

---God determined that evil men would sin against the Lord.  God again used evil agency, to bring his purposes to pass.

Job 1:20-22 (Webster)

 20 Then Job arose, and tore his mantle, and shaved his head, and fell upon the ground, and worshipped, {mantle: or, robe}
  21 And said, Naked came I from my mother's womb, and naked shall I return there: the LORD gave, and the LORD hath taken away; blessed be the name of the LORD.
  22 In all this Job sinned not, nor charged God foolishly. 

---Job realised that God was ultimately responsible for what happened to his children, servants and cattle, and he did not sin, not charge God foolishly in doing so.  We know what Job did not, that God had permitted Satan to attack him; but, still, God was in control and in charge.

God uses evil agency to bring his purposes to pass, when sin is part of the plan.

[Alive]

Yup--as I did mention recently in some thread or another. Its a fine and edifying thing to do so---read through the confessions, creeds and catechisms.

I suggest the Heidelberg and Westminster.

:-)

Look--I've interjected again.

 

[David1701]

1 hour ago, Josheb said:

Yes, you have a false-cause fallacy going. None of the verses you've cited say God caused "all things". They say He works all things according to His purpose, that we are to thank Him for all things and a variety of other things regarding all things but none  of them state He caused sin. 

What has been posted is this idea because we are to thank God for all things then we must infer God caused all those things for which we are to be thankful and that is a false-cause argument. The same goes for because God works all things for His purpose or will they must have been caused by Him, and that too is a false-cause argument. 

This will always be a problem anytime a post-Genesis 3:7 scripture is applied to pre-creation or pre-Genesis 3:7 conditions. This conflict will also occur anytime anyone (not just you, me, Diaste, or Dennis) argues the LawMaker acts lawlessly, or the Righteous One acts unrighteously..... in pre-sin conditions. After sin has occurred God can act anyway He likes with sin because He is sovereign over all. That means He can righteously and justly make evil happen in an already-evil world, but He cannot act against His own Self-claimed character. Humans do that. God does not. 

 

• Don't apply regenerate conditions to the unregenerate.
• Don't apply covenant conditions upon those absent a covenant.
• Don't apply post-sin conditions on a sinless creation. 

 

Otherwise well-meaning believers do this often. It has happened in this very thread. A lot of problems get avoided when we don't make those errors. A lot of seeming conflicts get resolved when we don't make these errors and even the most intelligent of ThDs have made these errors unwittingly. Anyone arguing the classic Reformed position cannot say God is the Author of sin. Neither can they argue God does violence to human volition. Either argument disqualifies  the self-styled Reformed thinker from being a Reformed thinker. The same holds true for any Christian denying total depravity. Denying total depravity makes one a Pelagian, a heretic, not a Christian. Lots of otherwise well-meaning Christians make this mistake. They argue the human's only real power is the power of choice but Christianity has ALWAYS repudiated that position when it comes to salvation. Always. It is one of the few things we have all always agreed upon so when someone argues otherwise all they argued is an inconsistency, an inconsistency with their own faith. 

And when this gets noted I get called names. 

I can quote Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Arminius and Wesley acknowledging, asserting, teaching, vigorously upholding the doctrine of total depravity (and have done so many times here in Worthy). If this is in dispute just ask and I will gladly provide the quotes. 

And then I will point out you are arguing a position you yourself do not adequately understand. 

And then I'll get called more names. 

I can also quote (and have already done so) the Westminster Confession and other formal doctrinal statements of the Church to prove Christianity has ALWAYS held God sinless and NOT the Author of sin. Shouldn't have to do so but I will for anyone who does not already know this and truly wants to understand. 

And then I will point out those who don't already know and understand these things has no business telling others what and how to believe. 

And then I'll get called more names. 

 

How about we work together to avoid that dross? 

 

Diaste, you apparently don't think my posts support my conclusions but everything you've posted in dissent evidences my case: God limits human choices and human actions often and He does determine somethings in an unavoidable or inescapable matter. Pre-sin, covenant, and regenerate conditions should not be applied to post-sin, non-covenant, and/or unregenerate people. David, God working post-sin conditions and out thanking Him for them does not mean He caused them. It just means He is sovereign over all (and we should acknowledge that). God is sovereign. Sin is despotic.. God is despotic over sin, not His people.

 

 

.

The only thing I said about whether or not God causes sin was "Not directly.".  As I proved, God uses evil agents, indirectly to cause sin to happen.  Although I was not referring to pre-Fall conditions, this indirect causation applies there as well. 

God permitted Satan to tempt Adam and Eve, knowing that, without his (God's) intervention, this would lead to sin.  This can be termed "determinative permission", or "indirect causation".

Quote

What has been posted is this idea because we are to thank God for all things then we must infer God caused all those things for which we are to be thankful and that is a false-cause argument. The same goes for because God works all things for His purpose or will they must have been caused by Him, and that too is a false-cause argument.

You can only thank God for what he causes, directly or indirectly.

Who took away Job's cattle, servants and children?  It was Satan, directly, and God, indirectly.  When Job worshipped God (even stronger than thanking him), he said that the Lord gives and the Lord takes away.  He was correct, even though it was an evil agent who took away, in this case, because God had given his determinative permission.  Job neither knew, nor needed to know, about Satan's  involvement.