The powerless Arminian Jesus

[makesends]

You say you know what hypothetical means, but then your actions deny that. There is nothing in Hebrews 6 to indicate that it is hypothetical. If you really knew what it means, you would see that. "It is impossible for those..." Where is the "if" in that? Implied or otherwise?

Maybe it would have been better for me to use the term, "abstract". The author of Hebrews lays out a line of reasoning, a line in which the necessary result of one who falls away means impossible things, such as putting Christ to death again. The author does NOT say there is or ever was such a person, but only lays out what such a thing would mean.

Then he says, "But we are convinced of better things in your case.", which demonstrates further that the warning was intended to urge the readers to not fall away.

Notice, in the context, what the author considers part of the same discussion —land that soaks in the rain often falling on it, maturity vs immaturity, faith and patience, diligence. All things in keeping with salvation.

 

[makesends]

I did not say that foreknowing and ordaining were the same thing, though of course God can't ordain what He doesn't know. I suggested that given the scriptures that were presented that show us what God says about Himself, when it is said that God foreknows something, He knows it because He ordained it, rather than because He learned it. Is that possible?

Simple logic. God is First Cause, from which all other things descend causally. If God knows something that will happen, it happens because it descends causally from him. To pretend that he did not know what would happen as a result of his causing it to happen is to deny his omniscience. God does nothing without knowing what he is doing.

It also is logical according to his simplicity. God's omniscience is not separate from his power nor his intent. You may not agree, but one useful way to look at this question is that when God created all things, he spoke the 'completed project' into existence. What we see is the many years it took to accomplish that. But he does not 'see' the years the way we do. They are only tools, a means of accomplishing what he set out to do. Here-in is the Biblical meaning of "foreknowledge". You might want to look at Bible lexicons and Bible commentaries to see that the word in the originals did not mean what comes to our temporal minds at the notion of seeing into the future. For God to know is to cause.

Once again, I find it worthwhile to point out that this whole creation, from first to last, was not something that happened to God. He is not an onlooker, nor does he change to suit his environment.

 

[Mercy_Shown]

Maybe it would have been better for me to use the term, "abstract". The author of Hebrews lays out a line of reasoning, a line in which the necessary result of one who falls away means impossible things, such as putting Christ to death again. The author does NOT say there is or ever was such a person, but only lays out what such a thing would mean.

Then he says, "But we are convinced of better things in your case.", which demonstrates further that the warning was intended to urge the readers to not fall away.

Notice, in the context, what the author considers part of the same discussion —land that soaks in the rain often falling on it, maturity vs immaturity, faith and patience, diligence. All things in keeping with salvation.

Even if you are correct, you tacitly admit that people can fall away or else the author would not be warning against it. But there is still no evidence that theses people are anything but real.

 

[Mercy_Shown]

If that is a confession of a lack of understanding, then that disqualifies you from having anything to contribute to this discussion on foreknowledge.

It is more about the clumsy attempt to sound like one has a command of the English language.

But..... I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and walk with you through the logical necessities.

1. Does the Creator exist apart from and external to that which He created?
2. Does creation have a beginning?
3. Did God exist beforehand?
4. Did the Creator know anything before He created creation (or was He a completely ignorant God whose mind lacked any and all knowledge)?
5. Does the Creator have a purpose for creating creation?
6. If He has a purpose, does he have and know that purpose prior to creation being created?

Let's start with just those six questions. Four yeses or four nos is all that is requested. Each question can and should be answered immediately, directly, unequivocally, and quickly (so we can move the conversation forward). Lemme have them.

No, earth’s does, eternally, he’s omniscient, yes, he’s omniscient

And if you suddenly understand Post 434 then just say so and save us both the time.

No, you spent too much time trying to convince me that you understood English conventions specifically passive and active voice.

 

[Mercy_Shown]

Sure.

The word diatagas is conjugated and used differently in Acts 7:53 than it is in Romans 13:2. In general an aorist indicative is much different than an aorist imperative. The former is used for a general occurrence without relevance to a specific time while the latter is used of a specific, one-time command.

A appreciate your attempt but I think you fail to understand what is meant by active and passive . In both of your examples ordinance or ordinances are still active.

An ordinance is actively created and actively controls behavior whereas foreknowledge is informed by observing events or knowing events before hand. The first is active the second is passive.

Knowing that the window is shattered is passive even if it was caused by one throwing a rock which would be active.

 

[Mercy_Shown]

Sure.

The word diatagas is conjugated and used differently in Acts 7:53 than it is in Romans 13:2. In general an aorist indicative is much different than an aorist imperative. The former is used for a general occurrence without relevance to a specific time while the latter is used of a specific, one-time command.

Nope.

Which is why I asked, "Before what?". When the foreknowledge, when the "hand" in the knowledge beforehand is before time itself was created then that is an entirely different meaning than knowing in time when something is known in time before that things later happens in time. Time is irrelevant to an externally, eternally-existing God.

It is you who does not get to redefine scripture's use of its own words.

When the Bible says, for example, some guy "knew" some woman that "knew" is not epistemological. It means they had sex. More relevant to this discussion is the difference between "eternal" and "everlasting." There is no beginning or end in eternity. Everlasting has a beginning but no end.

God's foreknowledge, what God knows before creation - before time ever existed - is eternal. It does not have a beginning (or an end).

You do not get to say otherwise.

Foreknowledge means knowing before the event takes place.

 

[Arial]

Simple logic. God is First Cause, from which all other things descend causally. If God knows something that will happen, it happens because it descends causally from him. To pretend that he did not know what would happen as a result of his causing it to happen is to deny his omniscience. God does nothing without knowing what he is doing.

It also is logical according to his simplicity. God's omniscience is not separate from his power nor his intent. You may not agree, but one useful way to look at this question is that when God created all things, he spoke the 'completed project' into existence. What we see is the many years it took to accomplish that. But he does not 'see' the years the way we do. They are only tools, a means of accomplishing what he set out to do. Here-in is the Biblical meaning of "foreknowledge". You might want to look at Bible lexicons and Bible commentaries to see that the word in the originals did not mean what comes to our temporal minds at the notion of seeing into the future. For God to know is to cause.

Once again, I find it worthwhile to point out that this whole creation, from first to last, was not something that happened to God. He is not an onlooker, nor does he change to suit his environment.

I agree with you. It is what we tend to not see, or to forget, in these types of discussions, because we see things take place piece by piece. As though God is watching and observing and adjusting accordingly. In reality, logic says, God being who He is, He knows because He ordains. Before He created He saw the beginning from the end and every hair on every head, every sparrow and grain of sand, because none of it could exist if He did not.

 

[Arial]

False premise that makes no sense. God can and does set up systems that work out natural effects.

Do you think that "In the beginning---" the Father, Son and Holy Spirit were in effect saying "Let's create this and see how it plays out?" Or do you think that God (Godhead)had a specific purpose and complete plan for the creation, none of which He had to learn and adjust to, from the creation?

 

[Arial]

This is a false premise. He can let the natural results of behavior manifest itself. Personally I think that is what the punishment of sin will be in a large part.

What He "can" do does not make that a false premise.

 

[Mercy_Shown]

What He "can" do does not make that a false premise.

Then, the premise includes God allowing natural consequences to occur, Correct?

 

[Mercy_Shown]

Do you think that "In the beginning---" the Father, Son and Holy Spirit were in effect saying "Let's create this and see how it plays out?" Or do you think that God (Godhead)had a specific purpose and complete plan for the creation, none of which He had to learn and adjust to, from the creation?

He had a complete plan, which included allowing the natural consequences of sin to play out. God did not want sin to exist with all of its horrors, nor did He plan it. But He did foreknow it would exist.

 

[Mercy_Shown]

I agree with you. It is what we tend to not see, or to forget, in these types of discussions, because we see things take place piece by piece. As though God is watching and observing and adjusting accordingly. In reality, logic says, God being who He is, He knows because He ordains. Before He created He saw the beginning from the end and every hair on every head, every sparrow and grain of sand, because none of it could exist if He did not.

Are you ready to say that sin would not have existed if He did not ordain it? Are you willing to say that the little girl whose drunk stepfather stuffed into a construction trash bag for wetting the bed and who consequently died alone, soiled, and afraid in the night had this happen because God ordained it?

 

[makesends]

Are you ready to say that sin would not have existed if He did not ordain it? Are you willing to say that the little girl whose drunk stepfather stuffed into a construction trash bag for wetting the bed and who consequently died alone, soiled, and afraid in the night had this happen because God ordained it?

Does darkness exist? Does cold exist? Or only in our minds.

Sin is the privation of good. It is not of itself anything.

But to answer your presumptive question, yes, he ordained that there be sin. Yes, the most horrible things that ever came about, did so because God ordained that they happen. As @Arial has been telling you, these things (what happened to the little girl, for example), are not the whole story in and of themselves, except in our considering of each event or fact; what Joseph's brothers did to him was INTENDED by God to happen, FOR A PURPOSE, and we can know that even the one purpose stated outright in Scripture —the saving of many lives— was not the only purpose. The little girl will be dealt with on that day, in total justice, so that even if she goes to the Lake of Fire unredeemed, her 'level of torment' will only be precise. Her stepfather will also be dealt with thoroughly and in precise measure with his deeds. If the little girl goes to Heaven, she will be more than happy that God has done everything to her in this life that has happened. Our present sufferings don't compare with what is to come.

Are you prepared to say that God could not have stopped that drunk stepfather from doing that to that precious little girl? Are you wanting to tell us that God esteems free will so highly that even though he knew that the little girl would be murdered in such a horrible way, it was worth it to him to go ahead and make all creation? Is the little girl unfortunate collateral damage? Poor God; I guess it couldn't be helped.

Or, are you willing to say that God is not omnipotent and not omniscient, and that what reason presumes as axiomatic (the pervasiveness of cause-and-effect), does not apply to creation and its results?

 

[Josheb]

A appreciate your attempt but I think you fail to understand what is meant by active and passive .

Because you say so?

In both of your examples ordinance or ordinances are still active.

An ordinance is actively created and actively controls behavior whereas foreknowledge is informed by observing events or knowing events before hand. The first is active the second is passive.

Knowing that the window is shattered is passive even if it was caused by one throwing a rock which would be active.

You're confusing active with activity and what I posted was not disproven.

It is more about the clumsy attempt to sound like one has a command of the English language.

Appeal to ridicule

No, earth’s does, eternally, he’s omniscient, yes, he’s omniscient

Half of those answers are incorrect.

1. Does the Creator exist apart from and external to that which He created? Your answer: "No" incorrect
2. Does creation have a beginning? Your answer: "earth's does" incorrect
3. Did God exist beforehand? Your answer: "eternally" correct
4. Did the Creator know anything before He created creation (or was He a completely ignorant God whose mind lacked any and all knowledge)? Your answer: "He's omniscient" correct; and that answer contradicts your posts
5. Does the Creator have a purpose for creating creation? Your answer: "Yes" correct
6. If He has a purpose, does he have and know that purpose prior to creation being created? Your answer: "He's omniscient" correct, but that is not a yes or know answer that actually addresses what is asked (and I suspect that was an intentional effort to avoid a conflict with your prior posts).

1. God existed prior to His creating creation. He existed when there was no creation existing. God existed and He created. Creation does not exist apart from Him, but He exists apart from creation. Failing to correctly understand God's inherent, ontological, logically necessary, wholly scriptural pre-existing necessarily leads to an incorrect understanding of knowledge and foreknowledge.

2. The first verse in the Bible explicitly states, "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." It's not just the earth that has a beginning. The heavens also have a beginning. John 1:3 explicitly states, "All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him not even one thing came into being that has come into being." 1 Corinthians 8:6 states, "...yet for us there is but one God, the Father, from whom all things came and for whom we exist." Hebrews 11:3 states, "By faith we understand that the universe was formed at God's command, so that what is seen was not made out of what was visible." God existed prior to creation being created, all on His own. There was not heavens, no earth, nothing seen or unseen existed; they were all formed by God's command. God existed beforehand.

3. See #2. God existed eternally, prior to creation's creation.

4. Yes, He's omniscient. That means He knows EVERYTHING that is possible to know AND He does so always and everywhere. In other words, if there is something He does not know prior to creating creation then He is not omniscient. If He has to create in order to know then He is not omniscient (or omnipotent). If He lacks any kind of logically possible knowledge then He is not omniscient, and if He doesn't know something and later learns it then He is not omniscient. This too is critically important to correctly understanding knowledge and foreknowledge. If God does not know beforehand then He is not omniscient.

5. Yes. Proverbs 16:4 states God has made everything for Himself (even the wicked for the day of destruction). At the end of each day's creation God evaluated everything He'd made and declared it good (both morally and utilitarianly), necessarily implying He had a pre-existing (beforehand) purpose, goal, and constituent criteria needing to be met. Not only does scripture state God created creation for a purpose, Job 42:2 states, "...no purpose of Yours can be thwarted." Isaiah 46:10 states God's purpose will be established, and He will accomplish ALL His good pleasure.

6. The correct answer is "Yes." God has a purpose for creation. Since God is omniscient, He also knows His own purpose AND everything in creation serves that purpose AND there is nothing in creation that does not serve His purpose and God omnisciently knows ALL of the everything and nothing prior to His creating creation. Romans 8:28 explicitly states, "God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose." Furthermore, there more than four dozen verses in the Bible declaring God is constantly entering into and proactively involved in creation to accomplish His purpose. He knows it all beforehand. He is omniscient. Any argument saying God does not already know every constituent detail of His purpose ends up contradicting the fact of His eternal omniscience.


So let's run the tally. You're on record stating you don't understand Post #434, on record confusing active with activity, only half of the six questions asked were answered correctly, and the ones that were answered correctly contradict your own posts.

God knows everything beforehand.

You have defined foreknowledge as knowing beforehand. You have also said God is omniscient and eternally omniscient BUT you have denied His existence prior to and apart from His creating creation = the heavens AND the earth, and all that is visible and invisible. The heavens and the earth, all creation, has a beginning, but God does not. NOTHING about God has a beginning. That includes His eternally omniscient knowledge. And these are the kind of things that prove the powerlessness of a synergist Jesus. They prove the poverty of the position you've argued in this thread.





Next question: What is God's purpose?

 

[makesends]

Even if you are correct, you tacitly admit that people can fall away or else the author would not be warning against it. But there is still no evidence that theses people are anything but real.

"People"? Why vague, all the sudden? The Elect will never fall away, in the Hebrews 6 sense.

Once again: What God has set out to do, he will complete.

 

[Josheb]

Foreknowledge means knowing before the event takes place.

And the first event to take place was Genesis 1:1. EVERYTHING - all other events that have ever occurred, are occurring, and will ever occur in creation are predicated upon that event. God foreknew that event beforehand, and He foreknew that event AND all that would ensue eternally omniscient - before time, before any "hand" ever existed.

 

[Arial]

Then, the premise includes God allowing natural consequences to occur, Correct?

I am going to quote both our responses from the beginning of this particular issue, so as to keep the subject on track and not lose it to a rabbit trail that becomes argument, before I address it.

But if God does not ordain all that comes to pass that means something happens outside His sovereignty.

No, it doesn't. God can choose to allow the natural consequences of life to happen if He so chooses.

It takes a minute to think about it. Sovereign when it comes to God means that He is King over all creation. Supreme power and governor of all. If He is All in all, then if He did not ordain all things, it would mean there is another equal or greater than Himself.

This is a false premise. He can let the natural results of behavior manifest itself. Personally I think that is what the punishment of sin will be in a large part.

False premise that makes no sense. God can and does set up systems that work out natural effects.

What He "can" do does not make that a false premise.

Then, the premise includes God allowing natural consequences to occur, Correct?

I simply said saying God "can" do something does not make something else a false premise. So the question does not address the original statement: "But if God does not ordain all things something happens outside His sovereignty." and is still operating on what He "can" do as a premise instead of what He did do.

For the premise of all things to come, ever, and in this discussion, go back to Gen 1:1. That is the premise of interpretation of all the Bible. "In the beginning God-----" With the correct understanding, as far as is possible, by what He reveals of Himself, we arrive at a God centered view instead of a man centered view. And how interpretations more likely to be accurate, instead of "can do's", "could have's", "maybe's", etc. Or what we imagine about God.

The beginning of what? The creation of our world and all that is in it. It was not the beginning of God. It was God beginning some - thing, and for His purpose. All of which He knew and purposed before He created this world, in full and in detail, not because He looked into the future, but because He ordained it. It is His plan and His purpose. The very first thing He created was space and time---boundaries for all that would be put in it. Every bit of it subject to Him, none of it circumstance or happenstance but for His purpose. None of it unknown, none of it reactionary, but fully conceived and known by Him, down to every speck of sand and where it lay. For His purpose.

He planted a Garden, setting the boundaries for Adam and Eve, giving them work and giving them commands. And we see man's place in it. He intentionally created them as mortals (able to die) and as corruptible (able to be corrupted) but not corrupt. They had a will that could make choices (part of His image they bore) but it was never free, for it was never free of His will. They were commanded and obligated to trust and obey their Creator. Thus the ability to sin, which they did. Were put out of their boundaries where they tabernacled with God, and all of creation became subject to death.

That was not the creation of evil, and I posit evil is not a creation but the absence of good.

In any case, this was God's intent in creating our world and putting us in it. And the only why of all this is the end result that He gives us. A new heaven and a new earth, that already exist in God's economy, it is only us who travel to it through the perspective of time. This new heaven and new earth existed in God---for nothing exists outside of Him---before the creation of our world and God has always been working towards that through our creation. You might very well say, to put it in human terms, that this aspect of creation is only the first stage of what God is doing. The goal of His purpose is a new creation, first from within humanity, through and in Christ, and ultimately in a creation in which sin, death, evil, no longer exist. Christ destroys them---forever. IOW a creation and creature (s) who are then immortal and incorruptible. A new creation in Christ. By Him, through Him, for Him.

Not a single thing is dependant on the actions of men apart from God, because none of the actions of men are apart from God.

 

[Arial]

He had a complete plan, which included allowing the natural consequences of sin to play out. God did not want sin to exist with all of its horrors, nor did He plan it. But He did foreknow it would exist.

Sin already existed, it is not created. Sin is missing the mark and the mark is the holiness of God, our Creator. And if it was not His intent that it would exist in the creation of our world, then something happened outside His sovereignty. It would mean that now man is pulling the strings. His plan in that view went belly up with the first human He created. The fact that the natural consequences of sin "play out" is really beside the point. God says He subjected all of creation to futility (under the sun)and for His purpose. Romans 8:20-23 For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from it bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God. For we now that the whole creation has been groaning together in the pains of childbirh until now. And not only the creation, but we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies.

He did not learn it would exist. He knows all things because it is His plan and His purpose. He is subject to nothing, not even what appears as happenstance and circumstance to us. Sin exists in our world because He intended for it to exist. The Bible never says He foreknew it would exist. So you cannot legitimately take your definition of that word and apply it to creation or to God.

 

[Arial]

Are you ready to say that sin would not have existed if He did not ordain it?

We became sinners because God intended for us to have the ability to become sinners. Sin already existed before ever the "Let there be---" of our creation was ever spoken. Sin is not a creation, it is missing the mark and the mark is the holiness of our Creator. If He did not intend it, the serpent would not have been in the garden.

Are you willing to say that the little girl whose drunk stepfather stuffed into a construction trash bag for wetting the bed and who consequently died alone, soiled, and afraid in the night had this happen because God ordained it?

These types of arguments are an appeal to emotion fallacy, and are not based on facts or understanding. Phrasing it as a question is like asking if someone has stopped beating their wife. Only far, far, worse because it strikes at the very character of God and accuses people of believing what you say about them and God here, if they do not agree with you. So I will not even attempt to write the thesis it would take that would disabuse your notion in reality---but would also not disabuse you of your notion. I will simply ask another that at least shines a light on the fallacy and intent of your question, and show that you yourself do not have a better answer to the scenario you give. If God has the power to stop the drunk stepfather, why doesn't He? Why did He permit it to happen? Would your answer be, "Because He ordained to not interfere with man's free will?"

 

[Arial]

Defiantly the first one.

You say that because it is yours, and it agrees with your view of God. Which one agrees with those scripture I posted of what God says about Himself was the question. And because you took my question to be asking only you, (understandable) but is really a generic question. A question meant to be answered by anyone, ultimately everyone, by simply looking at the facts of God presented and comparing them to the two views.

For you to just say definitely the first one does not suffice. You must demonstrate that it is the first one.