ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 2

[patman]

How did you miss this Pat?

I've put all kinds of bells and whistles on it for you. I spent an hour, admittedly not more than that but this screamed at me like 3-D text.

Exodus 12:40 Notice 'after' the time (slavery in Egypt, 400 years), this comment is made. (and expanding) --> Moses wrote this down, coming out of that very exile. Either the whole ball of wax is completely wrong and in gross error even an OV view of God could not make, or we have to see the timescale as something completely different than just enslavement in Egypt.

I can think of several scenarios that might get you out of this but they all lead to a God who makes very huge blunders, a Bible that is errant, or a confusion so huge, no scholar in the history of the church was brilliant enough to catch and you've been fortunate enough to present an argument every atheist will pat you on the back for and say "well done, mate."

Lon, I am sorry, but I do not see what you are talking about or getting at?

Exodus 12:40 (New King James Version)

New King James Version (NKJV)
Copyright © 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.


40 Now the sojourn of the children of Israel who lived in Egypt[a]was four hundred and thirty years.

Footnotes:

Exodus 12:40 Samaritan Pentateuch and Septuagint read Egypt and Canaan.

Where is after? I looked at other translations too and did not see it.

Also, it is easier to ignore a problem than face it when it hurts your beliefs. I would rather handle it and have us change our beliefs so they match scripture rather than make scripture match our beliefs.

 

[patman]

Lon, also, please note that I am not talking about how long they were in Egypt and Canaan... I am talking about their slavery.

Genesis 15:13 Then He said to Abram: “Know certainly that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and will serve them, and they will afflict them four hundred years

This verse is the key verse, not the one in Exodus. There was no 400 year long slavery. That is my point.

 

[Lon]

Lon, I am sorry, but I do not see what you are talking about or getting at?



Where is after? I looked at other translations too and did not see it.

Also, it is easier to ignore a problem than face it when it hurts your beliefs. I would rather handle it and have us change our beliefs so they match scripture rather than make scripture match our beliefs.

Let's go to the next verse also:
Exodus 12:40Now the time that the sons of Israel lived in Egypt was four hundred and thirty years.

41And at the end of four hundred and thirty years, to the very day, all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt.

Moses is writing this and it is written 'after' the slavery.

So let's revisit what you are saying here:

1) it is the truth and your numbers are wrong
2) it is the truth, your numbers are correct but your assumption (400 years of slavery in Egypt) is wrong
3) it is incorrect and Moses wrote it down wrong
4) it is incorrect and scripture was copied incorrectly (errant)
5) it is incorrect, Moses wrote it correctly, but God was both mistaken in His prediction and ALSO His reiteration to Moses as it was written after the fact. However many years it was, God didn't seem to notice. He told Moses to write down 430 years to the day, but He was way off.
6) ???

It is easier to ignore a problem than face it when it hurts your beliefs. I would rather handle it and have us change our beliefs so they match scripture rather than make scripture match our beliefs.

What is our answer to be? Those are my 5 choices. I lean strongly toward only one of those. Which is the one we should believe together?

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

What of Gen 15? It is a thorn in that question's side. It shows that there is at least one time that God didn't predict the future that came about.

Not true. Please review this document View attachment 11996.

As you can see, there are numerous issues to be considered besides making a timeline. The document provides a scholarly analysis that settles the issue and confirms the 430 year number of the Scriptures. God does not lie or is never mistaken or unsure. Q.E.D.

 

[RobE]

RobE,

I will never deny the truth behind the words of God.

Gen 15:13 Then He said to Abram: “Know certainly that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, and will serve them, and they will afflict them four hundred years.​

Ok. How many years did God say they would be 'afflicted'? Remember you promised to leave your denial behind.

If Settled Theology is true, yes, God lied. If Open Theism is true, he did not.

Truth is applied differently, by you, towards your ideas and mine. It's the same thing you do when you approve of God standing by and watching evil, but claim that God is evil Himself if He knew of it beforehand. Somehow, you feel that there's a difference in accountability.

God said, "...and they will afflict them four hundred years."​

How is this a lie if God had foreknowledge, but is not a lie if God did not foreknow? Foreknowledge is completely irrelavent towards the discussion. If God said this then, according to your definition of lying, God lied unless the Jews were indeed 'afflicted' for four hundred years. Did God 'intentionally' state 400 years knowing that it might not be true?

I think that you mean God stated 400 years meaning that it might be conditional which is the same position that I, Lon, and AMR have.

Listen closely...ALL future events are conditional even though whatever God foreknows will occur. Open theists eternally stumble over the idea that foreknowledge and free will are incompatible. Their claim is that 'conditionality' is eliminated by foreknowledge. This simply isn't true.

With this in mind: You and I believe that the 400 years were conditional. You claim my position makes God to be a liar and your does not. How does my position differ from your position?

'Nineveh will be destroyed in 40 days!', Hezekiah's impending death, and the 400 years were all conditional. God foreknew Nineveh would repent, foreknew that Hezekiah would pray, and foreknew the Jews would be 'afflicted' 400 years. Foreknowledge didn't change the outcomes, it revealed them. Did God lie in any of these three cases?

God doesn't need to reveal all of His knowledge to man.

God sent a message to Hezekiah omitting the condition, God sent a message to Nineveh omitting the condition, and apparently God told Abraham with no condition present. Maybe God only makes conditional statements to His enemies in the form a what we would call a 'warning'.

The solution proffered here by Lon, Lee, and AMR is that 'afflicted' means other than 'enslaved'. The idea that 'afflicted' entails the entire time until the sins of the Amorites have matured per scripture. This seems reasonable.

Don't modify the word of God to fit your theology, modify your theology to fit God's words.

You should take your own advice. Open theism claims that its ideas supercede scripture. Do scriptures state that God foreknows free actions?

 

[themuzicman]

A bible study? What is the premise. I could see it becoming very long and time consuming. What do you propose?

Let's just take some of the Scripture that Calvinsts say support their theology, and look carefully at them. I propose we start with 1 Cor 2:14 and it's use in "T".

Prophecy. Hands pierced. Cross.

Prophesied? Where?

Michael

 

[lee_merrill]

I believe they had around 350 years to grow to the number they ended up in Egypt.

How so, if 10 sons must then have each had 860 sons? note also as stated previously that the genealogy given doesn't fit in 400 years.

The slavery, however, was only around 250 years.

Unless there are gaps in the genealogies.

I do not believe the "Truly, truly" question answers my point. There are many ways Jesus could know Peter would deny him besides the Future being settled.

So then a future free choice can be known, in all the various situations that might come up.

Lee, how do you explain "God is not lying" when he foretold "400 years of 'slavery'" while at the same time seeing the future and knowing the reality was only 250ish?

Because I believe it was 400 years of servitude and oppression, people can experience this without being officially slaves, and there might have even been 400 years of slavery, how do we know when this started, especially if there are gaps in genealogies?

"God said, '...and they will afflict them four hundred years.' How is this a lie if God had foreknowledge, but is not a lie if God did not foreknow? Foreknowledge is completely irrelevant towards the discussion. If God said this then, according to your definition of lying, God lied unless the Jews were indeed 'afflicted' for four hundred years. Did God 'intentionally' state 400 years knowing that it might not be true?" (RobE)

An excellent question.

 

[lee_merrill]

Let's just take some of the Scripture that Calvinsts say support their theology, and look carefully at them. I propose we start with 1 Cor 2:14 and it's use in "T".

But please, in another thread?

And if (as you have said) Peter had already decided to be faithful, after denying the Lord, and could not reverse this years later, how would faithfulness in martyrdom, when you could not change your decision made years before, bring special glory to God?

 

[patman]

How so, if 10 sons must then have each had 860 sons? note also as stated previously that the genealogy given doesn't fit in 400 years.


Unless there are gaps in the genealogies.


So then a future free choice can be known, in all the various situations that might come up.


Because I believe it was 400 years of servitude and oppression, people can experience this without being officially slaves, and there might have even been 400 years of slavery, how do we know when this started, especially if there are gaps in genealogies?

"God said, '...and they will afflict them four hundred years.' How is this a lie if God had foreknowledge, but is not a lie if God did not foreknow? Foreknowledge is completely irrelevant towards the discussion. If God said this then, according to your definition of lying, God lied unless the Jews were indeed 'afflicted' for four hundred years. Did God 'intentionally' state 400 years knowing that it might not be true?" (RobE)

An excellent question.

Lee, didn't you read my last post? There were 73 Israelites originally in Egypt. Where do you get 10 sons? Jacob had 12 sons, and they had children of their own when they all went to Egypt...

Lee, this is Bible 101 stuff?

 

[patman]

Not true. Please review this document View attachment 11996.

As you can see, there are numerous issues to be considered besides making a timeline. The document provides a scholarly analysis that settles the issue and confirms the 430 year number of the Scriptures. God does not lie or is never mistaken or unsure. Q.E.D.

AMR, before I read it, Let me say I have no doubts about the 430 years. It is that Israel was Slaves for only 200 of those years. Do you not agree that they were only slaves for between 200-300 years?

 

[Nang]

Let's just take some of the Scripture that Calvinsts say support their theology, and look carefully at them. I propose we start with 1 Cor 2:14 and it's use in "T".

Die Hard!

 

[patman]

Let's go to the next verse also:
Exodus 12:40Now the time that the sons of Israel lived in Egypt was four hundred and thirty years.

41And at the end of four hundred and thirty years, to the very day, all the hosts of the LORD went out from the land of Egypt.

Moses is writing this and it is written 'after' the slavery.

So let's revisit what you are saying here:

1) it is the truth and your numbers are wrong
2) it is the truth, your numbers are correct but your assumption (400 years of slavery in Egypt) is wrong
3) it is incorrect and Moses wrote it down wrong
4) it is incorrect and scripture was copied incorrectly (errant)
5) it is incorrect, Moses wrote it correctly, but God was both mistaken in His prediction and ALSO His reiteration to Moses as it was written after the fact. However many years it was, God didn't seem to notice. He told Moses to write down 430 years to the day, but He was way off.
6) ???


What is our answer to be? Those are my 5 choices. I lean strongly toward only one of those. Which is the one we should believe together?

Why is everyone so focused on the 430 years? I have said again and again that I agree with Moses.

Moses is not talking about the slavery. He is simply talking about how long they were "in Egypt." For many years, while Joseph was still in authority, they were not slaves. My numbers show only the maximum amount of time they were slaves. 270 tops.

The prophecy was 400. That is the problem.

 

[patman]

How is this a lie if God had foreknowledge, but is not a lie if God did not foreknow? Foreknowledge is completely irrelavent towards the discussion. If God said this then, according to your definition of lying, God lied unless the Jews were indeed 'afflicted' for four hundred years. Did God 'intentionally' state 400 years knowing that it might not be true?

I think that you mean God stated 400 years meaning that it might be conditional which is the same position that I, Lon, and AMR have.

Listen closely...ALL future events are conditional even though whatever God foreknows will occur. Open theists eternally stumble over the idea that foreknowledge and free will are incompatible. Their claim is that 'conditionality' is eliminated by foreknowledge. This simply isn't true.

RobE, we have spoke enough that you should already know my answer.

If the future is settled, there are no such a thing as a condition to God. There is only what happened. If he speaks about something that will happen, even if it is to bring about good, and it does not happen, it is just a lie. You can try to turn it around on me, but it is a big problem for you.

It is not a problem for OV at all. A lie is an intentional false statement. Look it up, I did. That is how I know. If the future is settled, it doesn't matter what good God want's to inspire, he had to do it via a lie.

The SV simply cannot claim conditions, and it cannot escape making God a liar. God is only good enough for you guys if he knows the future totally.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

AMR, before I read it, Let me say I have no doubts about the 430 years. It is that Israel was Slaves for only 200 of those years. Do you not agree that they were only slaves for between 200-300 years?

Read it or ignore it. Your choice. Either way, I have no issues with the conclusions drawn therein.

 

[lee_merrill]

Lee, didn't you read my last post? There were 73 Israelites originally in Egypt. Where do you get 10 sons?

Right here:

Kohath, the son of Levi, had 4 sons (Ex. 6:18), who in turn had a total of 10 sons (Ex. 6:20-21; 1 Chr. 24:23-24), who in turn had 8,600 sons (Num. 3:28)! Surely there is a gap in this genealogy somewhere, they are called "clans" in Num. 3:28, which also implies some substantial history, as is indicated by the life of Levi being 137 years (Ex. 6:16), Kohath being 133 years (Ex. 6:18), and Amram living 137 years, yet if we say that they had all their sons at the very end of their life, we only get 407 total years, yet the time in Egypt spanned 430 years (Ex. 12:40), so there is not enough time in this genealogy to cover the time in Egypt, thus we probably have gaps in this genealogy. And presumably these Hebrew folks could add these numbers back then, and would have noticed such a discrepancy, if this was simply a numerical error.

 

[Lon]

Let's just take some of the Scripture that Calvinsts say support their theology, and look carefully at them. I propose we start with 1 Cor 2:14 and it's use in "T".




Prophesied? Where?

Michael

I used to think you had a grip on OT prophecy concerning Christ. You are beginning to have me concerned.

 

[Lon]

Why is everyone so focused on the 430 years? I have said again and again that I agree with Moses.

Moses is not talking about the slavery. He is simply talking about how long they were "in Egypt." For many years, while Joseph was still in authority, they were not slaves. My numbers show only the maximum amount of time they were slaves. 270 tops.

The prophecy was 400. That is the problem.

Very coincidental they happen to coincide. In this case, Rob and I are on a different page (on this particular, specifically). God made a prophecy and the way I reckon it, it is wholly and completely fullfilled.

If you read AMR's link and take the time to ingest it. I mean really dig into what is being conveyed and why. You'll know 100% what I've been trying to share with you all along. I mean AMR could have said "Read what Lon is saying if you don't like links. He's essentially boiling them all down for you."

(He actually did say this, mine a paraphrase of his words).

 

[RobE]

It is not a problem for OV at all. A lie is an intentional false statement. Look it up, I did. That is how I know. If the future is settled, it doesn't matter what good God want's to inspire, he had to do it via a lie.

I'm sure we've covered this. If God says in '40 days Nineveh will be destroyed' and then it isn't. Then it must have been conditional, otherwise Nineveh would have been destroyed.

For God to say 'in 40 days Nineveh will be destroyed' is not a lie. God NOT saying ALL that He knows isn't a lie!

There is no demand for God to reveal all of His purposes.

 

[RobE]

Very coincidental they happen to coincide. In this case, Rob and I are on a different page (on this particular, specifically). God made a prophecy and the way I reckon it, it is wholly and completely fullfilled.

If you read AMR's link and take the time to ingest it. I mean really dig into what is being conveyed and why. You'll know 100% what I've been trying to share with you all along. I mean AMR could have said "Read what Lon is saying if you don't like links. He's essentially boiling them all down for you."

(He actually did say this, mine a paraphrase of his words).

You and I are not on a different page as far as the prophecy goes. The prophecy was wholly and completely fulfilled. All prophecy has been(or will be) wholly and completely fulfilled. Patrick's numbers are wrong.

The only issue, we might be at odds on, is compatibalism. Compatibalism requires that future actions be contingent while foreknown. In a sense we might say that all future actions are contingent. If my words suggested that I was saying other than what I'm saying in this post then I hope this clears it up.

I haven't done the math and it's a non-issue for me. Primarily because if the numbers don't add up, what does it mean to the argument? It has the same validity as Nineveh getting destroyed or Tyre getting destroyed. Tyre was destroyed by Neb. and the island was destroyed by Alexander; in exactly the way prophesied. Does this phase the open thiest? Of course not, since they are only interested in their own presuppositions. Nineveh wasn't destroyed so the 'ots' claim that God lied if He foreknew. It never occurs to these guys that God need not reveal all His mind to us. They think we're as smart as Our Lord.

In this case, I'm sure the numbers DO indeed add up, because of the reiteration in scripture of those same numbers. This argument ultimately proves nothing. It doesn't prove what Patrick claims whether it was 10 years, 400 years, or 430 years. God does not lie and the scriptures are the word of God. If Patrick wants to argue that the scriptures or God was wrong then let him. It only proves that Patman is wrong and nothing else. If we ignore the facts and take the position that the scriptures are wrong --- then what does this accomplish in opposing foreknowledge, really?

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Patman,

"Read what Lon is saying if you don't like links. He's essentially boiling them all down for you."

:thumb: