An open challenge to all closed theists

[Z Man]

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer

All right then, for the sake of clarity...

Z Man,

When God repented/relented, as the Bible repeatedly says, did He change in anyway whatsoever?

Resting in Him,
Clete

Did God change? No. God never changes. He is always God, Alpha and Omega, beginning and end. His ways are still the same, yesterday, today, and forever. His goal is still to display His glory; He never waivers from that.

When God repents, as the Bible repeatedly says like in Jonah, for example, it's not that God is going to plan B, as if man caught Him off guard or thwarted His original plan; God repenting is just a show of God's mercy and love and patience. God's threat against Ninevah is what drove them to repent; that was His ordained plan the whole time. Because THEY repented, God's threat was no longer needed against them. Thus, He repented from that. It wasn't to conform to man's will, but rather, His repentance was an act of His will being brought forth. He did not plan on destroying Ninevah IF they repented, and He knew that threatening them like that would cause them to repent, thus He knew that He was not going to destroy them. God had ordained that Ninevah repent, and the best way that He saw fit in getting them to repent was to threaten them. Because they repented, God's threat was also repented.

In no way does this imply that God literally changes.

 

[smaller]

The OPEN VIEW presents that GOD CAN CHANGE and DOES CHANGE both His Mind and His Ways...

EXCEPT of course if you apply their OWN position to THEIR OWN PET DOCTRINES...

go figure....

 

[Clete]

Originally posted by Z Man

Did God change? No. God never changes. He is always God, Alpha and Omega, beginning and end. His ways are still the same, yesterday, today, and forever. His goal is still to display His glory; He never waivers from that.

When God repents, as the Bible repeatedly says like in Jonah, for example, it's not that God is going to plan B, as if man caught Him off guard or thwarted His original plan; God repenting is just a show of God's mercy and love and patience. God's threat against Ninevah is what drove them to repent; that was His ordained plan the whole time. Because THEY repented, God's threat was no longer needed against them. Thus, He repented from that. It wasn't to conform to man's will, but rather, His repentance was an act of His will being brought forth. He did not plan on destroying Ninevah IF they repented, and He knew that threatening them like that would cause them to repent, thus He knew that He was not going to destroy them. God had ordained that Ninevah repent, and the best way that He saw fit in getting them to repent was to threaten them. Because they repented, God's threat was also repented.

In no way does this imply that God literally changes.

Sounds great except that it is in open conflict with the text.

Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste anything; do not let them eat, or drink water. 8 But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily to God; yes, let every one turn from his evil way and from the violence that is in his hands. 9 Who can tell if God will turn and relent, and turn away from His fierce anger, so that we may not perish?


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.

Jeremiah 18:8 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.

Notice the conditional "if, then" statement in Jeremiah 18. IF the nation repents THEN I will repent, IF they don't then I won't. Perhaps someone reading this knows the original languages well enough to tell us if these statements are in fact communicated in the original as genuinely conditional statements or if something else is going on.

What else could these passages mean? If you are right, they mean precisely the opposite of what they say. Do you have anything besides you theology that would compel us to think that these passages are saying the opposite of what they seem to be saying?

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer

Sounds great except that it is in open conflict with the text.

Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste anything; do not let them eat, or drink water. 8 But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily to God; yes, let every one turn from his evil way and from the violence that is in his hands. 9 Who can tell if God will turn and relent, and turn away from His fierce anger, so that we may not perish?


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.

Jeremiah 18:8 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.

Notice the conditional "if, then" statement in Jeremiah 18. IF the nation repents THEN I will repent, IF they don't then I won't. Perhaps someone reading this knows the original languages well enough to tell us if these statements are in fact communicated in the original as genuinely conditional statements or if something else is going on.

What else could these passages mean? If you are right, they mean precisely the opposite of what they say. Do you have anything besides you theology that would compel us to think that these passages are saying the opposite of what they seem to be saying?

Resting in Him,
Clete

Clete,

In both cases, God did exaclty as He said He would. Ninevah repented, thus God relented from destroying them, just as He said He would do. Nothing changed. If Ninevah had repented, and God destroyed them anyway, then yes, that would mean that God does indeed change His mind. But that's not what happened. Ninevah repented, and God did exactly what He said He would do; He repented His wrath from them. No change there. Just a fulfillment of His will being carried out, as planned.

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Originally posted by Z Man

Clete,

In both cases, God did exaclty as He said He would. Ninevah repented, thus God relented from destroying them, just as He said He would do. Nothing changed. If Ninevah had repented, and God destroyed them anyway, then yes, that would mean that God does indeed change His mind. But that's not what happened. Ninevah repented, and God did exactly what He said He would do; He repented His wrath from them. No change there. Just a fulfillment of His will being carried out, as planned.

was God's mind ever set on actually destroying ninevah?

 

[Swordsman]

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

was God's mind ever set on actually destroying ninevah?

Good question GIT. However, the Scripture never indicates this.

God was testing Jonah throughout this whole ordeal. Jonah did know that God told him Ninevah would be destroyed. That is why he warned the Ninevites and they repented. He pleaded with God to deliver him from the great fish so that he may go do God's will.

Why do you think God told the fish to spit Jonah back up onto dry ground? Perhaps to carry our His will? That is absolutely apparent. God knew His servant Jonah. And through Jonah, God would spare or save Ninevah from destruction.

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Swordsman,

in my bible, Jonah doesn't want to go preach to the ninevites because he knows that they could repent and be spared. that is why he get's thrown into a whale, because he was trying to run away from ninevah and God's work. he didn't want them saved and knew that God was the kind of person who would spare them if they repented.

are we reading the same bible?

 

[Clete]

Originally posted by Z Man

Clete,

In both cases, God did exaclty as He said He would.....

NO!!! This is precisely the opposite of what the text says...

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.

 

[Swordsman]

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

Swordsman,

in my bible, Jonah doesn't want to go preach to the ninevites because he knows that they could repent and be spared. that is why he get's thrown into a whale, because he was trying to run away from ninevah and God's work. he didn't want them saved and knew that God was the kind of person who would spare them if they repented.

Jonah 1:1-3
1 Now the word of the Lord came to Jonah the son of Amittai, saying, 2 "Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and cry out against it; for their wickedness has come up before Me." 3 But Jonah arose to flee to Tarshish from the presence of the Lord. He went down to Joppa, and found a ship going to Tarshish; so he paid the fare, and went down into it, to go with them to Tarshish from the presence of the Lord.

Where does this imply that Jonah knew the Ninevites could repent and be spared? And where does this imply "he didn't want them saved and knew that God was the kind of person who would spare them if they repented."?

are we reading the same bible?

Now that I think about it, I don't know. I'm reading the NKJV.

 

[Clete]

Originally posted by Swordsman

Jonah 1:1-3
1 Now the word of the Lord came to Jonah the son of Amittai, saying, 2 "Arise, go to Nineveh, that great city, and cry out against it; for their wickedness has come up before Me." 3 But Jonah arose to flee to Tarshish from the presence of the Lord. He went down to Joppa, and found a ship going to Tarshish; so he paid the fare, and went down into it, to go with them to Tarshish from the presence of the Lord.

Where does this imply that Jonah knew the Ninevites could repent and be spared? And where does this imply "he didn't want them saved and knew that God was the kind of person who would spare them if they repented."?



Now that I think about it, I don't know. I'm reading the NKJV.

:doh:

Try reading the whole book Swordsman.

 

[Clete]

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

was God's mind ever set on actually destroying ninevah?

Yes.

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer

NO!!! This is precisely the opposite of what the text says...

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.

Clete,

If Ninevah had repented, yet God destroyed them anyway, like He said He would, would that mean that God does not change? You see, if you believe that God changes because He relented from destroying them after they had repented, then you must believe that if God destroyed them even after they did repent, that God does not change. Or in both cases does it mean that God changes? Could you clarify?

Originally posted by Clete

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

was God's mind ever set on actually destroying ninevah?

Yes.

If that was the case, why did God send Jonah?

 

[Swordsman]

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer

:doh:

Try reading the whole book Swordsman.

I have. But there is a difference in reading Scripture with the Spirit guiding you and reading it like you would read Oliver Twist.

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth
was God's mind ever set on actually destroying ninevah?

Originally posted by Clete
Yes.

Originally posted by Z Man
If that was the case, why did God send Jonah?

Exactly. See Z Man, what they do not see is that God uses chosen vessels to carry out His will. They just think God arbitrarily changes His will on a whim responding to His creation. And they just love those few verses in the OT that they twist to create their ideology.

 

[Yorzhik]

I believe that when God repents, it does not change who He is.

We agree.

God can't change.

This isn't what you just said in the previous statement. I change everyday, but I don't change who I am.

Can you explain this?

 

[1Way]

This is the tenor of this entire debate. Demonstrated by correlating (hypothetical) example.



General overview


OV
The open view (more so) reasons by quoting God's word and rests it’s case on that. We literally accept it without violating it's contextual development.

Concerning His previous spoken honest intended course of action (What God said He “was going to DO”).

God’s word says that He repented from it (changed His mind) and did not do what He said He would DO.

CV
The closed view (more so) reasons extra biblically and rests their case primarily on sources other than what is specifically provided by scripture. They reject (void of meaning) entire portions of scripture that deny their view and they also violate the context by doing so. And they effectively make God out to be a liar in order to maintain their views as being more authoritative. All while claiming “spiritual” correctness.

Concerning His previous spoken honest intended course of action (What God said He “was going to DO”).

Who cares about what God said about Him changing His intended course of action by not doing what He said He would do, the closed view maintains that God can not change even if God says He does, so we are right and that is that.



Specific arguments


OV

God’s word is true and authoritative
It is a clear case of divine repentance against complying
with what God said and/or thought He was going to do

So what do the words mean then if they don’t literally mean what they literally say?

• Jonah 3:10 subsection part b
  ... and God relented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it.

CV
It does not mean (bla bla bla, wha wha wha, bla wha bla) and it does not mean (bla bla bla, wha wha wha, bla wha bla), man changed and therefore God simply did not need to punish them, so God did not change and that is that.

OV
That does not tell me what those specific words mean, it tells me that you are ignoring and perhaps violating them instead. If you do not have a suitable (specific) biblically provided replacement meaning for the text in question, then you have no standing to effectively deny it’s literal meaning.

CV
Oh, it means what it says alright, but there’s simply no Change in God.

OV
You mean where God says that

• He did not do what He said He would do, and He did not do it,

you mean THAT means that

• He DID DO what He said He would DO? And He did do it?

CV
God always gets His will done, it all happened with out any change in God. Your wrong and we’re right, stop trying to confuse us with details.
:doh:

OV

The context denies the prophesy message was conditional
It was honestly going to be a national disaster and
it was honestly going to be brought upon them

It could not have been a conditional warning of possible destruction as in “shape up or else”. God described the prophesy with the following contextual build up. This is the truth, and you are in error for violating scripture. Please reconsider the following.

The prophesied “overthrow” was said to be:

1. understood as lethal (3:9)
2. A national disaster (3:10)
3. that God would “bring upon them” (3:10)
4. correlated with God’s anger verses His lovingkingness (4:2)
5. correlated with God doing harm (4:2)

And remember, God recorded this account after the fact of it all happening. He would not have allowed the context to be falsifying what actually did happen.

If a nation repents from doing great wickedness, and puts their faith in God for their very lives, that is a good and righteous thing, it is not harmful, it is not a demonstration of God’s disapproving anger, it is not a national disaster that was brought upon them. So every single contextual consideration about God’s prophesy contradicts the idea that it was conditional, including the conclusive example, that God said concerning that prophesy of intended course of action, that He did not do it, God did "not" comply with what He said He would do.

CV
No, since God sent Jonah ahead of time, the condition is only obvious, get real and read your bible, we’re right and your wrong. They repented which is what God ordained the entire time, they were overthrown, so God accomplished His intentions.

OV
You argue that God did overthrow Nineveh by their repentance. But God said that concerning what He said He would do, He did not do it, so if the prophecy was primarily or literally to get them to repent, and they did repent, they why did God lie when He said that He did not accomplish what He said He would do?

CV
God does not lie, and He does not change, your wrong, we’re right. Actually, it was a conditional prophesy, that is why we know that God never changed His mind, since it was conditional, there was no possible way for God to reverse from complying with His prophesy. It was a shape up or else conditional prophecy, why else would God send His prophet 40 days in advance if He only had in mind destroying them.

OV
The conditionality rests within God, His word was not conditional, it was honest and truthful just as is described in scripture. For God’s nature to hold conditionality, necessarily means He can change depending upon what happens with newly brought about circumstances.

CV
No, the condition was not in God, it was in His word. God did do what He said He would do.


OV

The law of non-contradiction and moral integrity
It’s dishonest to contradict the truth
even if you use a lie to cover up a lie
to cover up a lie

Surely you can see the dishonesty in:

1. Absolutely and perfectly knowing that you will not do something
   and then
2. lying by saying you will do it anyway
   and then
3. lying again (after the fact of you not doing it) by saying, that you repented and did not do what you (honestly) said you would do, and you did not do it.

Making double statement that this was an issue of intended action, it was unequivocally an issue of honest course of action.

CV
No, it just was not, we don’t care what you think it means, your wrong, we’re right, God never intended on destroying them.

OV
No, your wrong for violating what God’s word plainly says, along with violating the entire context involved, and for promoting your manmade traditions that contradict scripture, voiding scripture and replacing it’s meaning with nothing (scripturally and contextually) fitting.

CV
We’ve already answered all your questions, just because you don’t like them does not mean their wrong.

OV
You have? Then what does Jonah 3:10 subsection part b specifically mean?

CV
(go back to the beginning and replay the same story without ever answering the question about what those words mean.)
:doh:


Conclusion


What a state of affairs! I love it that this is going on in the thread who’s entire quest is over one single bible conformity challenge, and yet not one single closed theist has even come close to answering it. They are absolutely terrified of the text because it is in direct contradiction against their beliefs and thus it perfectly denies their viewpoint, so they just ignore and violate it because there is no middle ground on this issue. As long as they believe they are right (i.e. their false manmade presupposition of classic divine immutability), then they can not agree with God repenting as is literally and repeatedly described in scripture. The two ideas are contradictory and can not be reconciled.


Conform your faith to the bible!!! :up:

Don’t violate against the bible
because of manmade tradition! :down:

 

[smaller]

but but but 1Way GOD DIRECTED LYING in the O.T.

1 Kings 22:22
And the LORD said unto him, Wherewith? 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.

1 Kings 22:23
Now therefore, behold, the LORD hath put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the LORD hath spoken evil concerning thee.

You see IF GOD SPOKE EVIL concerning THEE 1Way He will roll you over.

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by Yorzhik

We agree.


This isn't what you just said in the previous statement. I change everyday, but I don't change who I am.

Can you explain this?

God repenting does not change who He is; good, we agree on that. Does it mean that God has changed His mind? I don't believe so. Again, I'll use the Ninevites as an example. If they had not repented, yet God repented from destroying them, then yes, God could be said to change His mind. But that's not the case; Ninevah repented, thus God no longer needed to threaten them. God's threat of destroying Ninevah is what led to their repentance; it was all planned by God. He knew that threatening to destroy them would cause them to repent; that's why He sent Jonah.

Jonah 3:5, 10; 4:1-2
So the people of Nineveh believed God, proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest to the least of them. . . . Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God relented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it.

But it displeased Jonah exceedingly, and he became angry. So he prayed to the Lord, and said, "Ah, Lord, was not this what I said when I was still in my country? Therefore I fled previously to Tarshish; for I know that You are a gracious and merciful God, slow to anger and abundant in lovingkindness, One who relents from doing harm.

Jonah knew that the reason God sent him was so that Ninevah would repent; he knew that God's purpose was to have Ninevah repent, not to destroy them. God's plan was not thwarted by the Ninevites repentance; it was precisly carried out, as He had ordained it to be done, through His prophet Jonah.

 

[Yorzhik]

Does it mean that God has changed His mind? I don't believe so.

Are you sure? Let's try it:

Jonah 3:5, 10; 4:1-2
So the people of Nineveh believed God, proclaimed a fast, and put on sackcloth, from the greatest to the least of them. . . . Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God did not change His mind from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it.

Does that work? Can you replace the bolded words with something better (without using the words "repented" or "relented"?

 

[1Way]

Yorzhik - What sorta little critter fur ball munchkin you got there in your avatar? And what sort of hat is that? Is it sitting or standing or what? I can’t tell if it has a tale or legs, etc.

I realize that you are asking Z Man, and I realize that you understand my view, but while were waiting, maybe we can (shhh) type quietly amongst ourselves a bit. The answer to your question is the opposite of what he said.

(Answer is) God “repented” means God “changed His mind”
or better yet,
God “reversed His intended course of action”.

God doubly emphasizes that this repentance was concerning action. It was concerning what He said was going to “do” (bring disaster upon them), but did not “do”. That is a hard cold bible fact.

God plainly repented from complying with His previous intended course of action. So the point is that He did not just simply “change His mind”, He also reversed His intended course of action in the process of changing His mind. And, as if that was not enough, God’s repentance also involved Him contradicting by way of reversal His own prophetic word as to what He was going to do!

All you have to do to make all that fit perfectly together without a problem, is to accept instead of violating the bible’s doctrine of divine repentance and that God can acquire new knowledge as it comes into existence. I.E. God waited until “after” they repented to honestly say “now” I know...

So because of their much learning in the tradition of the closed view, when God says that He did not do what He said He would do, that effectively means that He did do what He said He would do. Go figure.

 

[Yorzhik]

My avatar is a hedgehog, which is what my username is in Russian. The little guy I show has a russian hat on.

Yes, it seems obvious now, but I didn't switch to the OV until a few things fell into place. The first was that I heard a Rabbi destroy some Christian scholars in a debate about what "Now I know" means. That was the seed that started it all. I didn't realize the Jews held the OV! When did the Christian church change to the closed view? Was it all Augustine?

When I realized this was a new view, that to change views means to lose your friends at church. It's a pretty high mountain to get over. The OV has to be incredibly convincing to actually get people to pay the price. But I'm glad I paid it - the truth is better in the end.