ARCHIVE:God is NOT an OV'er (He said so)

Jaltus

New member
Edgar,

Paul could say that because it is an assertion for the sake of argument, not a real condition (for all you fellow Greek geeks, it is a fourth class conditional, "ean" with a subjunctive).
 

jobeth

Member
Edgar:
Yes, you could say that.
The reason I use the term "no choice" is to correct the notion that we do have a choice whether to obey or not.

How can you disobey an Omnicausal God?

Nothing is impossible with God.
 

Surly-DwarF

New member
I said:

He can't know that even if He does send Jesus to pay for our sins that a group of wicked men will condemn Him to death and specifically by crucifixion outside the city gates.

1013 replied thusly:

of course he can know that. Not at the beginning and maybe not for a long time, but quite possibly long before it happened

Well, ok then. Glad you cleared that up for us. Would you care to explain exactly how He can know this, and specifically not at hte beginning, maybe not for a long time, but quite possibly long before it happened? I want you to know that the above is essentially a non-answer and is totally insufficient to dismiss the charge. Although I have little hope of getting you to acknowledge it.
 

1013

Post Modern Fundamentalist
Would you care to explain exactly how He can know this

the most simple answer is that he destined it. When? not at the beginning but when man's evil was sufficient such that such a prediction was possible, if there was a prediction at all.

As I've said, I have no problem with God destining the specific way in which evil works out provided that the necessity of the evil is not traced back to him.

However, I don't know that we should believe that this was destined. I'm fine with it if there is a scripture that you could point to, and I'm sure that there is, but I doubt it is a prophecy such that it had to come to pass. If it was though, then of course that is the earliest that it was destined.

So how can God know that there would be evil men to do such. one reasonable answer is out of statistical necessity, which is a necessity that allows for indeterminism and does not require reprobation or that any particular should sin without lending himself to a certain degree of depravity such that he should willingly take an innocent man to be condemned to death.

That necessity arose from the rebellion of God's people though and was not foreknown before the people went down a certain road.

And there is always the possibility that this was a conditional prophecy, (again if there was such a predictive prophecy at all).

concerning an earlier post of yours.

Though I’d note that the WC also, in addition to that bit you just quoted, states that God does this in such a way that no violence is done to the will of the creature, etc.

the problem that I was citing is not directly with the WC's view of free will. It's with the role of foreknowledge that you posited earlier.

If we consider God and what He knows prior to Creation, and grant that He has foreknowledge of everything that will come to pass, whether those things will be caused by Him directly or freely performed by creatures, then if He proceeds and effectuates that potential creation, by virtue of His certain foreknowledge, everything that comes to pass has been predestined.

The WC explicitely says that God does not predestine according to foreknowledge. For many Calvinist theologians, including Calvin I believe, God's foreknowledge is based solely on predestination and there is no fact of the matter about the way creation will be apart from that. God doesn't look at the free actions that will be taken if He does such and such. He ordains everything precisely according to his will. What you've described sounds more like molinism.
 
Last edited:

Edgar Caiña

New member
Jobeth

Jobeth

How can you disobey an Omnicausal God?
Of course in your view it is impossible to disobey God since it is God who causes the disobedience and not you. But the Bible never teaches that. It is man who disobeys and God is up for judgment because of this disobedience. How could God judge something He causes to happen (i.e., disobedience)? That is untenable unless of course God Himself is in a charade and just playing with man.
 

geoff

New member
Edgar,

Just remember that calvinists (orthodox ones.. lets say conservative) would consider JoBeth to be heretical.
 

Edgar Caiña

New member
Originally posted by Jaltus
Edgar,

Paul could say that because it is an assertion for the sake of argument, not a real condition (for all you fellow Greek geeks, it is a fourth class conditional, "ean" with a subjunctive).
I dont know Greek, maybe you are correct and maybe not. But I understand Paul's assertion as something a possibility of happening, that Christ could have not been crucified. Are you saying that there's no weight in Paul's word because that's impossible to happen?
 

geoff

New member
Edgar,

She already knows. JoBeth has her own little branch of Christianity, that we affectionately call 'jobethianism'.
 

geoff

New member
Beth is usually short for Elizabeth... I cant think of a european guys name that it would fit... it would be a very unfortunate name for a boy..

heh
 

jobeth

Member
Edgar:
Exacty. How can God judge something as wrong if He caused it to happen? That is why those who believe and know God as He truly is (Sole Creator and Agent of ALL things) are not condemned. It is God who hath declared us (all) NOT GUILTY.

But unbelievers deny this truth and are condemned, not by HIM, but by their own mouths - because they confess before God that they have indeed sinned of their own will and agency.

And in fact, it their confession that keeps the truth about God from being known in the world.

They call Him Lord, but they don't believe He is LORD.

Don't you know that Christ died for the sins of the whole world? That the penalty for ALL SIN has already been paid for by the ONE LORD, Jesus Christ, who is ultimately responsible for ALL THINGS? That by Him and through Him are ALL THINGS? And that it is IN HIM that all things consist and have their being and existence?

Including you and all that you do?
 

Edgar Caiña

New member
Hi jobeth,

I'll have no problem with your view if you would also believe and agree that everything that happens in the world is mere pretension or charade on the part of God, and that there in no real or genuine acccountability on the part of man to God. But if you are going to say that there is real and genuine accountability, then I think, there is inconsistency in your view.

For example, you said
But unbelievers deny this truth and are condemned, not by HIM, but by their own mouths - because they confess before God that they have indeed sinned of their own will and agency.
But the reality (according to your view) is that unbeliever do not deny that truth by themselves, rather God caused them to deny that truth. They are also not condemned by their own mouths because it is God who causes them to open their mouth and causes them to confess what they confess. In such case, there is no real or genuine guilt on their part.

"they have indeed sinned of their own will and agency." This cannot be in your view if you are to be consistent.

What you've said above could be best stated this way according to your view:
But GOD CAUSES THEM TO deny this truth and are condemned, not by HIM, but by GOD CAUSING their own mouths - because GOD CAUSES THEM TO confess before God that they have indeed sinned BECAUSE GOD CAUSED THEM TO.
 
Last edited:

geralduk

New member
Originally posted by Edgar Caiña
I see the crucifixion as something which was already in the mind of God (a plan, so to speak) and that He knew from eternity past how costly the price would have to pay for the redemption of man in the event of a fall. If that would happen (the fall), God's plan was to send Jesus to die on the Cross.

I dont feel it's necessary for one to believe that Jesus was predestined to die. Because if He was, it would leave Jesus no choice but to wait for the actual event. But Jesus and Paul gave us at least a little room to believe other than the view that Jesus was predestined to die. If Paul's theology was that Jesus was predestined to die, I dont know how could he have said that.

This pasaage is misunderstood.
He was not praying so that the cross could be avoided BUT that The Scriptures MIGHT be fullfilledand He WOULD die on the cross.
The problem was that He was dying THERE in the garden and at the wrong time.
For with all the pressures that were on Him and the weight of the worlds sin already pressing in upon Him,He was DYING.
So He was not praying to avoid calvary but that the cup of DEATH would pass fromHim
And we read in peter that "In that He feared He was heard" and angels came and inistered strength to HIm.
 
Last edited:

Edgar Caiña

New member
Geoff, i think the use of "IF" was just right because Christ didn't know if it was possible. Because if he was sure or certain that it could happen that way (the cup pass from Him), He would not say, "Father, if it is possible", but "Father, let this cup pass from me."
 

Edgar Caiña

New member
Geralduk, exactly, it was the cup of death, and that was the very thing that Christ was praying that if possible be avoided.
 

geoff

New member
Edgar,

Its quite clear that there are things that Jesus didnt know, He said so Himself. Thats got nothing to do with it. You are reading meaning into this passage it can not support, and in fact, has nothing to do with the argument you are trying to make.

If you read the parallel accounts, you read:
"Father all things are possible for you, if it were possible, I ask you to take this from me, and yet it isnt, let your will be done". (my paraphrase).

The point is NOT that Jesus doesnt know something, but rather that HE DOES know it is not possible for the cup to be taken from him. ALL things ARE possible for God, but there is no way around this one. It HAS to be done, it was destined from the beginning to happen.
 
Top