Omniscience v Determinism

[Alive]

There is an opportunity here for repair and reconciliation between parties.

God bless this interaction.

[Diaste]

17 hours ago, Josheb said:

The problem is this choice presented to Israel is assumed 1) to be a real choice upon which they can actually act successfully, and 2) scripture later tells us that isn't so. Their future was, largely, written.... especially in the book of Jeremiah!!!  Jeremiah 18 occurs within the context of God declaring them covenant-breakers and divorcing them. In other words, all the Laws of God about idolatry and adultery and breaching promise were coming to bear upon them. Cain can't not kill Abel but it's not because God made Cain kill Abel; it's because his will is not free; it is enslaved by sin and if he doesn't kill Abel tomorrow it is just a matter of time before he disobeys God in some other way..... in spite of the fact God has warned and asked him not to do so! Israel is not a free agent in the example provided. It might appear that way if all we read is just two or three verses but all the law is coming to bear upon them in these verses. All their lawlessness is coming to bear down upon them in these verse. All the pre-determined consequences of lawlessness are coming to bear upon them. More globally Christ crucified and resurrected, the eventual promise of a new covenant, and everything Paul, John, and the author of Hebrews wrote was bearing down on them. Neither their options nor their choice did not occur in a vacuum. Neither did the consequences.

Yeah, that's what I'm saying. It's compulsion by choice. Cain was compelled but could have made another choice as God pointed out. At best I'd say the plan is determined and whatever it takes for the Lord to bring it pass happens however that has to occur. And if that is control of an individual or nation, or removing restrictions on an individual or nation then that is what must happen. 

But in that we have the choice to listen or not and in that we are free to do as we will. As I listen to others and examine this I can see that dynamic in my life today. Not going into it but empirically this is the case.

17 hours ago, Josheb said:

You've said the future is not written; it is formed by God's will according to His plan and it can be amended and parts be done away with. Nothing yet posted proves that. So far only an inferential treatment of scripture - an inferential treatment of scripture that ignores the many, many determining factors - supports that position. I will agree the future is formed by God's will according to His plan (even though that might be the cart before the horse) but it  has not been demonstrated the future is unwritten. Heaven and earth will pass away. Jesus' words will not. That is written.

Well, that's not exactly what I said and if I did that's not what I meant. The plan is written, or at least laid out in the mind of God and remembered. I could be wrong but the future isn't like it's depicted in the movies as a place that exists and can be visited. What I see is that God has a plan and directs the here and now to His ends. Does he know the future? Of course. He forms it from now to the end and directs individuals and groups to accomplish it.

17 hours ago, Josheb said:

 

 He was foreknown as the perfect sacrifice before the world was created. 

BEFORE! 

This will get off track but that is not what scripture says. 

17 hours ago, Josheb said:

So things are not always what they seem to us. Those Israelites in Jeremiah 18 may have thought they were being given an otherwise unfettered pair of options with an unfettered ability to choose one way or another - and then possibly change their collective minds back again, and then possibly do the reverse, or reverse their reversal - but the whole of scripture teaches us there is a large pile of stuff applicable to that moment in history of which they were completely ignorant. 

Ignorant people are not free. They may possess some degree of volitional agency but they are not free. 

And again I'm saying that what I see in scripture that is wholly free is the choice to listen to the Lord or not. We may be allowed a great deal of free will choice in many areas, or not. The one thing that is free for us is to choose Him or not.

17 hours ago, Josheb said:

You have yet to prove any of this, and the attempts so far have proven to be eisegetic, not exegetic. When examined exegetically with whole scripture all the attempts end up evidencing what I posted in my op-reply. I wonder if you've done a study of what God does, doesn't, and promises to bring to pass because they are ALL examples of limited choices and some degree of conditional determinism, not autonomy. 

As I have said before...

 

17 hours ago, Josheb said:

And I would like to note this discussion is digressing away from omniscience versus determinism into human volitional agency versus divine determinism. Let me encourage you not to leave your own op or let issues of post-sin human agency interfere with God's knowledge. 

This is exploratory. No evidence or thought is out of bounds and the smallest bit of evidence from the most obscure source, innocuous sidebar or conversational tangent is welcome. 

I'm not trying to claim any particular thing about the topic. I'm trying to settle the matter personally. Your contributions are welcome but I neither expect nor require a last word or explanation. 

Edited July 18, 2021 by Diaste

[Diaste]

21 hours ago, Josheb said:

A determined and determining option with pre-determined outcomes.

It wasn't just limited; it was determining. Neither was it truly a choice about "heeding" because we later learn NO ONE can meet the standard of the whole law!!! God certainly knew that beforehand, yes? So, yes, they were given volitional agency but the outcome had already been decided. What God ordained did not do violence to the human will. 

 

I'll address the rest of your post later but you are supposed to be evidencing "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," and disputing my statements, "...God knew Jesus was going to enter what we call human history and live as a human, die a human's death as a sacrifice and be raised from that death.  is reported in 1 Peter 1:20 where it is stated the sacrifice was foreknown before the foundation or creation of the earth." 

And what I have said about the limitations, decided outcomes, and pre-existing covenants was just acknowledged as correct. 

 

Let me remind you again: at no point have I argued strict determinism. Nor have I denied limited human volitional agency. I have in fact stated asserted a dynamic and interactive creation where conditions of real but limited choice and real inescapable determinism exists. 

If you are going to prove choice is fully within our power you are going to have to prove that denying total depravity, which is a position ALL of Christendom has embraced since these things began to be debated. Even Arminius accepted what we now call total depravity. The unregenerate is not free to choose all choice and s/he has no power to choose otherwise apart from God's aid. Thrcie now have I encouraged you not to make the error of applying regenerate conditions onto the unregenerate. 

And you think others don't hear you.

We aren't disagreeing and I'm not interested in a merry go round. 

[Diaste]

15 hours ago, Josheb said:

Now as to Cain, Abel, God and sin, two of the points I was intending to make is that it was sin that compelled Cain, not God. However, God did already know that ahead of time and He knew what was going to happen. God knows who Cain's descendants are going to be and what interactions Cain's people will later have with God's people. It's not a mystery to God. So, the first point is, sin is much more deterministic, coercive, dictatorial, despotic, tyrannical, unyielding, etc. than God when it comes to the human experience. Sin does not ask our permission or negotiate with us. It kills.

Sin does kill, but not every soul must yield to this malevolence. I don't think it's in the scope here to walk this path. This seems like it's predestination and I have other thought on that. Maybe that isn't what you suggest.

15 hours ago, Josheb said:

 

God, on the other hand, is sovereign over sin and is portrayed quite diversely in scripture to be alternatively deterministic, negotiating, yielding, permissive, conditional but never not-knowing. The second point is simply God knows all of this!  You've said "The plan is written," and "laid out in His mind," and "God has a plan and directs the here and now to His ends," but statements saying God knows the future and forms it here and now, directing the created creatures to accomplish that future He knows, the future that is the plan He's directing here and now. The plan is written and He knows the future, but He is forming it now.

Yeah. So far this is what I see. I guess I'm more inclined toward finding the depth and scope of either what's allowed as free will and just what is determined. As before it looks to me like we have at least the one choice; believe God or not and it's completely free. We are made in His image and so clues to character may be found in our actions.  Not only does He exhibit the attributes you listed but even He brings evil when appropriate. 

And yes, omniscient. He knows all that can be known, the origin and master of all knowledge. 

 

15 hours ago, Josheb said:

Scripture opens with a statement, "In the beginning..." thereby indicating 1) there was a beginning to creation, 2) implying there is an end to that which was begun, 3) the beginning was initiated by God, and 4) presumably so too is the implied end. Do you agree? 

Possibly. Not sure I can go with such a implication. Not that it's impossible this is the case but maybe the end of what God envisioned is Man in the garden. I'm not of the mind it was set up to fail. Maybe God's whole plan was to live with Man just as we see depicted in Genesis, tending the Garden, walking with God for eternity in the perfection of initial creation.

15 hours ago, Josheb said:

While you and I and others may debate the degree to which God decided things beforehand, decides things as the singularity expands, or doesn't decide there is an end. Do you agree there is an end and that end is decided by God whatever that may turn out to be? In other words, whatever diversity and open-endedness today and tomorrow may possess there is a specific end and that end began with God's will and purpose and that end cannot be changed because that end is God's will and purpose for creation from the moment He first created creation and creation was not created without purpose or goal. Do you agree? 

To an extent. There are instances of God changing His mind and being grieved and repenting for what He did; the creation of man is one such example. The utter failure of mankind necessitated action on God's part. Was that a change in the overall plan? 

Did the Fall necessitate a change in the plan? 

It will be difficult to convince me that God knew He was going to destroy all the earth because of the Fall before the earth was formed. To me, at this point, that would tantamount to entrapment, purposed to fail, created to death and destruction for millennia and I find that to be the actions of Satan and not a good God. 

This is not to say God didn't know the possibility of this occurrence, but to say He directed that to occur and He knew that's what he was going to do from the singularity is beyond my ability.

And this is why the questions arise. No doubt much will remain a mystery.

16 hours ago, Josheb said:

Lastly, God exists outside of time and space. Yes? He can and does enter creation and intervene in history. I do not mean to imply otherwise. However, time and space (singularity, as we now understand time and space) are creations of God. They are constituent elements of creation. The Creator existed prior to that which He created, so He is not bound by the limits of the created limits in the creation He created. Yes?

This sounds correct. From what I see God is bound by His nature alone and not the works of His hands.

[Diaste]

20 hours ago, Josheb said:

Could you clarify that? 

1) You said, "Every soul..." Do you mean to include unregenerate non-believers when saying "Every soul...."?

2) Do you mean to suggest a person can be sinless on this side of the grave?

Nope. But the nature of sin is another subject. I try not to get into this one too much and I don't want to get going on it here for sure.

[Diaste]

19 hours ago, Josheb said:

Can God be sovereign over that which He does not know? 

 

I'm unsure about the reason for such a question as I thought we already established God knows all about every aspect of creation. He is that which inhabits the space between atoms and holds it all together.

[Diaste]

20 hours ago, Josheb said:

Hmmm.... I don't believe "it was set up to fail." Don't know where or how you got that from what I posted. I just got done saying 1) God is sovereign and 2) He is sovereign even over sin. A sovereign and ALLmighty God NEVER fails. I believe just the opposite is true and correct and have argued that position a couple of different ways in this op. 

Just because I reveal a thought doesn't mean it was shot across the bow. I'm just thinking here, trying to coalesce info into something I can recognize. I'm not directing anything at anyone. It's an exploration is all. 

 

 

20 hours ago, Josheb said:

God's will willed a plan in which Jesus - the one by whom, through whom, and for whom creation was created - would come into the world to be the perfect sacrifice. Jesus is, has always been, and will always be the perfect blemish-free sacrifice no matter whether sin ever occurred! What? Josh, that doesn't make sense. What kind of sacrifice is needed if sin hadn't ever occurred? 

Well, first consider this: a plan that is dependent upon the existence of sin makes God and His plan dependent on sin and The Righteous God is NEVER dependent upon sin's existence. 

More importantly REMEMBER WHO AND WHAT IS JESUS. 

• Jesus is the tree of life.
• Jesus is the way; the ONLY way, to God. 
• Jesus is the resurrection. There is no resurrection apart from Christ crucified and resurrected. 
   

These things are not dependent upon sin existing. These are aspects of guaranteed victory. They exist because flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God (1 Cor. 15:50). Humans were sown corruptible (1 Cor. 15:42 -  otherwise sin would never have occurred) and always need to be made incorruptible; that occurs ONLY through the resurrection. God created humans 1) good, 2) unashamed, and 3) sinless. BUT.... He also created us corruptible = able to be corrupted, able to become corrupt and that is exactly what happened. Calvary is not a contingency plan. God did not invent Calvary after the fact (after sin's occurrence)

 

20 hours ago, Josheb said:

 

 1 Peter 1:17-21 makes it impossible for anyone to think Calvary occurred post hoc. Jesus was foreknown prior to the creation of the world as the perfect, blemish-free sacrifice and that sacrifice is not dependent upon the existence of sin. 

I think this abuts a whole other discussion.

20 hours ago, Josheb said:

How can that be? 

• There is no death without life.
• There is not resurrection without death.
• We cannot be raised incorruptible and immortal apart from the resurrection. 

Christ came to defeat the works of the devil but it is a mistake to insert the word "only" in that verse. Jesus came to raise up the sons and daughters of The Most High God and sin is NOT a hinderance to God. I call it "onlyism," the practice of mistakenly assuming "only" should be included in a verse (such as "sin is ONLY lawlessness). Jesus was always coming but his coming was not dependent upon the existence of sin. The occurrence of sin is not an obstacle to God. He didn't make a poct hoc plan; His plan always and already covered all conditions that might ever occur because His plan is, like Him, omnipotent; nothing can defeat God's plan for creation. 

It was not set up to fail.

And nothing I posted should be construed to suggest, imply, or in any way insinuate the notion I think God set up creation to fail. 

The whole idea here is if God knows every choice that will ever be made by every person ever born or not; and how does omniscience and determinism either conflict or merge into one, or if that's the case.

[Diaste]

19 hours ago, Josheb said:

I strongly encourage a closer examination of those texts, especially in the original languages, because they do not say God changed. 

A change of mind does not necessitate a change in nature or character. God repented of making mankind, God listened to Abraham in the destruction of Sodom, Moses was able to change the mind of God over the destruction of the Jews.

I didn't say God changed, but God is open to changing His mind and has.

19 hours ago, Josheb said:

No. The entrance of sin into creation did not provide any problem whatsoever for God's already existing plan. 

I didn't say it did. I'm wondering if the actions of mankind at the deception of Satan caused either the creation of plan or if it necessitated a plan already in existence. I'm not sure that can be known in the here and now.

A huge problem I have is thinking God knew mankind would fail before He created them. That's a setup, entrapment. That is evil. God is not evil therefore God did not entrap. God tempts no man.

"When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He tempt anyone."

If God does not change then mankind in the garden was not tempted by God but tempted by lust and desire and pride. 

So if we say the Creator knew what mankind would do in the garden the tree was the temptation and again we could ascribe evil to God through entrapment. So then I'm back to preliminary conclusion in that we have the free will to choose to believe God or not, and probably not much else.

 

 

19 hours ago, Josheb said:

Well, then I suggest you change the idea God's knowing He was going to destroy all the earth is a problem. The only thing eternal is God. Perhaps a little consideration of the concept of "eternal" or "eternity" is in order because you've said....

At this point I don't think I can based on the above. If He knew it all then why would He do it? Was it a risk reward thing? A simple ROI calculation? 

God certainly knew what could happen as in the case of Abimelech. Abimelech was faced with a choice and the rewards and consequences of each. Did God know what Abimelech would do before the earth was created? 

Does God know every choice beforehand or does he use His great power to form the future according to an existing plan that has nothing to do with the mind of mankind and which plan cannot be thwarted by mind or word or deed of the creature?

 

19 hours ago, Josheb said:

Now you might have to clarify for me what exactly you mean by "destroy all the earth," because Has yet to destroy all the earth. There is language wherein God does speak of heaven and earth passing away and the elements being dissolved and/or burned up and there are certainly many believers who take those verses literally but the truth of God's word is that it ends with the New City of Peace coming down out of heaven........ to earth. Heaven and earth will pass away..... but not one word Christ spoke will do so. So I am not sure to what it is you're referring if it is not that. Go back and re-read what I actually posted and consider what was actually posted because if it is being construed I believe God destroyed His own creation then what I actually wrote needs to be re-read. 

Dude. Why must this happen? You have to know what I was referring to.

"Then God said to Noah, “The end of all living creatures has come before Me, because through them the earth is full of violence. Now behold, I will destroy both them and the earth."

So yeah. But I wasn't talking about what destroying the earth might mean or not and if and when it may have happened or not; I was referring to knowing ahead of time before the creation of the earth that total cataclysm would come upon the earth wiping out all flesh, and that it also known why this would happen and it would be based on mankind's failure; and all of it predetermined. Which I do not hold to as it certainly seem to violate the His character.

19 hours ago, Josheb said:

You've said God had a will and a plan from the beginning. Have you considered what His sovereignty, His grace, His character means for ANY plan He wills? 

Um yeah. That's what's going on in this discussion.

 

19 hours ago, Josheb said:

 

God planned for Jesus, the one by whom, through, whom and for whom the creation was created, to come into the world and live, die, and be resurrected as the perfect blemish-free sacrifice and that was planned before the world was created!!! The "Fall" did not necessitate a change in plan. God having to change His plan due to sin makes God dependent on sin - He cannot work out His previous plan if sin prevents Him from doing so. That god is not a God, and he most certainly is not the God of the Bible. The Law Maker is not subject in any way to lawlessness. God is sovereign even over sin. 

Again this appears to me to be an altogether different conversation.

19 hours ago, Josheb said:

 

God knows His own will. Yes?
God knows His own plan? Yes? 
If God's will has a beginning and and end then God knows the beginning and end of His own plan. Yes? 

The issue is when the plan was formed and if it was based on what people think omniscience is instead of what it really is and the nature of our relationship to God in the area of choice and what those choices reflect or affect.

19 hours ago, Josheb said:

 

If He is working it out as He goes, as I believe you previously stated, then that is not evidence of His not-knowing but of His knowing. Similarly, if He is working out His already-existing will and plan then that is evidence of determinism, not a lack thereof. 

The crux. But not working it out on the spot as much as knowing the paths leading from action and directing events to His ends. Even there was a plan in place events and people must be directed to those ends.

19 hours ago, Josheb said:

For us not all things are profitable, even where they are permissible. God, however, ALWAYS, accomplished what He sets out to do. God always bears fruit and bears fruit according to His will. Yes? 

Quite. This is what I'm getting at. He ACCOMPLISHES His will. Actively so.

19 hours ago, Josheb said:

 

 

If you haven't already done so let me encourage you to read Francis Schaeffer's trilogy. If memory serves me correctly you live in the contiguous US (Wyoming?). I will gladly pay for the book on Amazon and have them send it to you general delivery so no personal contact beyond your name need be provided. The book is not specifically about God's omni-attributes or determinism but it shows us how to think presuppositionally. I also encourage reading some Cornelius Van Till. I make these recommendations because these posts indicate a knowledge of core concepts but some lack of follow-through in regards to their logically necessary and inescapable meaning(s). For example, and I am sure you would agree....

I appreciate the offer but will decline.

19 hours ago, Josheb said:

IF a big-G, sovereign and almighty GOD actually factually exists...
Then certain things MUST be....
Else we have reason not to believe in God.  

This "if... then... else..." syllogism is applicable in many ways and very useful for discerning the true nature of God, the veracity of scripture and the failing of all competing paganism/theisms. For example, you and I have already agree God exists prior to and external to that which He creates. This is a logical necessity. Any God that exists solely within that which he creates might be a very impressive being, but he is not omnipotent because he is bound by the limits of his own creation. The God of the Bible exists prior to and external to all that He created AND He is capable of "entering" and "exiting" that which He created anywhere anytime for any purpose anytime (no pun intended) He so chooses. 

Yes? 

Well then...... 

If a big-G sovereign and almighty GOD actually factually exists...... 

 

Then we are NOT in charge. 

Of course not. None of what I said violates the nature and character of God. I think it odd that we must assume God can and does remain true to Himself and this means a change of mind destroys that character. 

19 hours ago, Josheb said:

 

It does not get any more presuppositional than that. The meaning of the word "GOD" necessitates this - especially as the Bible asserts God (as God has revealed Himself in His word. Do you understand the meaning and significance of our actually having a written word? 

 

God rent the fabric of time and space and revealed Himself. 

 

That was part of His already-existing plan willed by His eternally existing will that is limited only by His character. We would not know Him at all were it not for that deterministic act. It would be like the amoeba on earth having knowledge of of the star Icarus* (if Icarus existed outside of the universe ). 

The word "God" means something. 

 

 

 

 

 

*Icarus is the farthest known star

Not what I'm thinking about determinism. Of course God reveals Himself. Does he determine every thought and action of everyone ever born? Do we have a choice in everything? Is our free choice limited to heeding the Most High God?

In this way is His omniscience limited by His decision to allow that one profound choice of believing Him or not? And then do the results of that choice have an affect, not on God's character, but on His response?

[Diaste]

19 hours ago, Josheb said:

He was not free and neither were his choices.

And you are differentiating here between the believer and unbeliever which you have done from the start. That could be a valid idea. 

So then do you suppose believers are also in the same boat? And would we even realize we didn't have free choice? I'm no closer to settling the matter. 

It's hardly irrelevant as the story appears in scripture and there is a lesson to be learned from the interaction, and a few more from the entire story. 

[Diaste]

20 hours ago, Josheb said:

Examine the original language. Our English translations do not do the Hebrew justice and if you build your argument on this it will fail. A human-centric interpretation of those texts fails. 

What give you the impression there's 'human-centric' interpretation?

I have interpreted nothing as of yet. I'm looking for understanding, understanding that is close but still elusive. And the only reason I want the understanding is for others that I may present solid reasons either for or against and with[hopefully] common ground. 

I literally do not care what the conclusion is as long as it's evidence based and the truth and not a conclusion arrived at through sophistry. 

I do appreciate the interaction and your time.