Could Peter have done otherwise?

[2PhiloVoid]

Peter answered him, “Though they all fall away because of you, I will never fall away.” Jesus said to him, “Truly, I tell you, this very night, before the rooster crows, you will deny me three times.” Peter said to him, “Even if I must die with you, I will not deny you!” And all the disciples said the same.
— Matthew 26:33-35

Could Peter have stuck to his guns and shown Jesus that He was wrong?

Peter could have tried, and I'm guessing he did try since he was aware of Jesus' divine prognosis against Peter's human nature.

But, as per what we read in places like John 2:23-25 and how this then comes to bear on the meaning of John 13:38, Jesus simply told Peter what He knew was inside of Peter and how that would be acted upon under certain impending social pressures.

 

[Hammster]

Of course Jesus new the desired results happened (Peter humbly repented of his own free will) and Jesus also knew from prophecy Judas would hang himself of his own free will. All Jesus says helps people to make the right choice, but the choice is still theirs to make.

You seemed to have missed the point of my post.

 

[Guojing]

Because if Jesus only said it because He saw what Peter would do, it changes the whole narrative.

How do you conclude that?

 

[Guojing]

Let’s say that Peter was going to deny Christ three times regardless of anything else happening. So let’s assume that Jesus knew this, and because He knew this, He made His proclamation. What changes is how and why Peter wept. It’s possible that Jesus saw him weep out of guilt. So there still could be weeping. But after Jesus made His proclamation, Peter wept when he remembered Jesus’ words. So by interjecting Himself into the story, He changed the narrative.

Your conclusion does not follow from your premises.

 

[Hammster]

Your conclusion does not follow from your premises.

Yes it does.

 

[Studyman]

Did Peter not have free will to do otherwise?

Yes, Peter did have free will to do otherwise, but God knew what he would choose to do because God sees the end from the beginning and told him. In Peter's realm it had not happened yet, but in God's Realm it had already happened. Peter had no power to change what he had already done.

 

[Hammster]

Yes, Peter did have free will to do otherwise, but God knew what he would choose to do because God sees the end from the beginning and told him. In Peter's realm it had not happened yet, but in God's Realm it had already happened. Peter had no power to change what he had already done.

Let’s say that Peter was going to deny Christ three times regardless of anything else happening. So let’s assume that Jesus knew this, and because He knew this, He made His proclamation. What changes is how and why Peter wept. It’s possible that Jesus saw him weep out of guilt. So there still could be weeping. But after Jesus made His proclamation, Peter wept when he remembered Jesus’ words. So by interjecting Himself into the story, He changed the narrative.

 

[Studyman]

Let’s say that Peter was going to deny Christ three times regardless of anything else happening. So let’s assume that Jesus knew this, and because He knew this, He made His proclamation. What changes is how and why Peter wept. It’s possible that Jesus saw him weep out of guilt. So there still could be weeping. But after Jesus made His proclamation, Peter wept when he remembered Jesus’ words. So by interjecting Himself into the story, He changed the narrative.

But from the very beginning of "time" God knew Jesus and Peter's relationship because HE saw it happen because in God's realm it had already happened. Because God sees the end from the beginning. So the "narrative" didn't change at all, and Jesus didn't alter the narrative, or change anything. God knew Jesus would come, and God knew Jesus would tell Peter the future and knew it happened because in God's realm it had already happened. And in God's realm, HE saw Peter weep from the foundation of the world because Peter did what Jesus said he would do even though Peter didn't believe he would do it. And this because God saw him do it, from the foundation of the world.

How can it be any different for a God that sees the end of our life, before we are even born?

 

[Derf]

But from the very beginning of "time" God knew Jesus and Peter's relationship because HE saw it happen because in God's realm it had already happened. Because God sees the end from the beginning. So the "narrative" didn't change at all, and Jesus didn't alter the narrative, or change anything. God knew Jesus would come, and God knew Jesus would tell Peter the future and knew it happened because in God's realm it had already happened. And in God's realm, HE saw Peter weep from the foundation of the world because Peter did what Jesus said he would do even though Peter didn't believe he would do it. And this because God saw him do it, from the foundation of the world.

How can it be any different for a God that sees the end of our life, before we are even born?

Can you give scripture for your view? I've never seen one that says "God sees the end from the beginning." If all of mankind's actions are visible to God at the beginning of creation, then all of mankind's actions are determined before mankind, including you and me, existed. Thus, you are a proponent of determinism, thus you believe Peter could not have done otherwise, he was determined, before he even existed, to deny Christ.

 

[Hammster]

But from the very beginning of "time" God knew Jesus and Peter's relationship because HE saw it happen because in God's realm it had already happened. Because God sees the end from the beginning. So the "narrative" didn't change at all, and Jesus didn't alter the narrative, or change anything. God knew Jesus would come, and God knew Jesus would tell Peter the future and knew it happened because in God's realm it had already happened. And in God's realm, HE saw Peter weep from the foundation of the world because Peter did what Jesus said he would do even though Peter didn't believe he would do it. And this because God saw him do it, from the foundation of the world.

How can it be any different for a God that sees the end of our life, before we are even born?

I brought that up because many people in this thread have said that the reason Jesus could tell Peter about his denial is because Jesus “saw” that he would do it.

 

[Studyman]

Can you give scripture for your view? I've never seen one that says "God sees the end from the beginning." If all of mankind's actions are visible to God at the beginning of creation, then all of mankind's actions are determined before mankind, including you and me, existed. Thus, you are a proponent of determinism, thus you believe Peter could not have done otherwise, he was determined, before he even existed, to deny Christ.

Is. 46: 9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, 10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

John 1: 47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile! 48 Nathanael saith unto him, Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered and said unto him, Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.

I am simply saying what God says. Jesus saw into the future what Peter did. God has already seen the end from the beginning. He knew what men would do to Him when HE became a man. He created a "Feast" centered on a future event HE knew was coming called "Passover", centuries before the event occurred. I never used the word "determined", that is your word. I am simply pointing out what God Himself says.

Jer. 1: 5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

Regarding Peter, God seen him deny the Christ and told Peter what He did in the future. And Peter did exactly what God saw him do.

 

[Studyman]

I brought that up because many people in this thread have said that the reason Jesus could tell Peter about his denial is because Jesus “saw” that he would do it.

Yes, In God's realm, Peter had already done it.

For me it's simple. Everything we know is seen through the prism of "Time". "Time" is a realm that God created. We cannot comprehend life outside of Time. Since God created "Time", He is able to see the end from the beginning. Like HE holds all of "Time" in His hands like a ball and can see the end from the beginning. At some point this realm will end, and those who have been changed will live in a realm outside of Time, like God.

Rev. 10: 6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be "time" no longer:

No more "Ends", "life eternal".

Matt. 28: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. (Time)

Amen.

 

[Derf]

Is. 46: 9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:

He "declares" the end from the beginning, promising to do "all His pleasure", not everything that ever will happen. If it means what you say, then God is DOING all that He sees, so He is forcing Peter to deny Christ. He also took pleasure in the denial. Peter may have wept, but God was rejoicing in his denial. That's a strange way to read the passage, don't you think?

John 1: 47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile! 48 Nathanael saith unto him, Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered and said unto him, Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.

That passage has Jesus seeing something that happened in the past: "when though wast", not "when though wilt be in the future". Neither of those verses tell us God sees the future.

I am simply saying what God says.

No, you're reading your own ideas into scripture, ideas that make God the author of all sin.

Jesus saw into the future what Peter did. God has already seen the end from the beginning. He knew what men would do to Him when HE became a man. He created a "Feast" centered on a future event HE knew was coming called "Passover", centuries before the event occurred. I never used the word "determined", that is your word. I am simply pointing out what God Himself says.

Jer. 1: 5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

Regarding Peter, God seen him deny the Christ and told Peter what He did in the future. And Peter did exactly what God saw him do.

You're saying that Peter did exactly what God forced him to do. If so, then God doesn't need to see into the future, He just makes the future happen as He designed it to happen. And you and I and Peter are mere puppets on his strings.

 

[Studyman]

He "declares" the end from the beginning, promising to do "all His pleasure", not everything that ever will happen. If it means what you say, then God is DOING all that He sees, so He is forcing Peter to deny Christ.

Please don't work to justify yourself by making up falsehoods about what I said. It's quite simple really. God can see the end from the beginning. He saw Peter deny the Christ. He "declared" to Peter, "I saw what you will do". Please don't twist my words as if I'm saying that God made Peter deny the Christ. I never said that, and I don't believe that.

We can disagree without you being dishonest about what I said, in my view.

He also took pleasure in the denial. Peter may have wept, but God was rejoicing in his denial. That's a strange way to read the passage, don't you think?

It was His Pleasure to show Peter what he would do. It was also God's pleasure to forgive Peter when Peter sorrowed to repentance. I believe this story is a blessing, and God told me it to show His Power of knowing the future, and also to show His Longsuffering and compassion.

Only you are promoting the philosophy that "God was rejoicing in his denial". I certainly didn't, and there is no indication in Scriptures that God did either. Perhaps you should spend a little time in front of a mirror to find out where these words of yours are coming from.

That passage has Jesus seeing something that happened in the past: "when though wast", not "when though wilt be in the future". Neither of those verses tell us God sees the future.

It seems prudent to post more of the exchange, so as to determine God's truth.

45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. 47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile!

So here we find Phillip first finding, and then speaking to Nathanael about Jesus who Nathanael had never met, yet Jesus knew who he was.

48 Nathanael saith unto him, Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered and said unto him, Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.

So even before Phillip called Nathanael, Jesus knew him. I would go so far as to say that even before Nathaneal was born, God seen him under the fig tree.

No, you're reading your own ideas into scripture, ideas that make God the author of all sin.

Again, the dishonesty about my posts. What spirit would move you to make up such falsehoods?

You're saying that Peter did exactly what God forced him to do.

Again, can you even speak truth? God saw what Peter would choose to do. No one but you are saying God forced Peter to do it.

If so, then God doesn't need to see into the future, He just makes the future happen as He designed it to happen. And you and I and Peter are mere puppets on his strings.

Oh my goodness, are you OK? I don't know you, and perhaps you are having some mental issues here so maybe you can't help it. If this is the case, I'm sorry for you and will keep you in my prayers. But I never even implied one time that God made Peter deny the Christ, or that God made the mainstream preachers of Jesus Time murder Him. I'm simply posting God's Own Words in which HE tells us He knows the end from the beginning and has declared to us a lot of things that HE saw happen. Like the murder of Jesus and the fall of Jerusalem etc.

I never said or even implied that He makes them happen, He sees them happen and then declares it to us, as He did to Peter.

 

[bling]

Can you give scripture for your view? I've never seen one that says "God sees the end from the beginning." If all of mankind's actions are visible to God at the beginning of creation, then all of mankind's actions are determined before mankind, including you and me, existed. Thus, you are a proponent of determinism, thus you believe Peter could not have done otherwise, he was determined, before he even existed, to deny Christ.

Time has been shown experimentally over the last 100 years to be relative and no experiment has shown time to not be relative. God may have created time, but even if God did not He still would not be limited by time, His relative time does not have to be controlled by our time.

Think about this: If I know perfectly a truly free will choice you made yesterday that choice is fixed and cannot be changed since it is history. The fact I know your free will choice of yesterday, does not keep it from being a free will choice.

Just because your free will choice tomorrow is fixed does not mean God is the one fixing it, since you are the one who fixed the choice by making the choice of your own free will.

History cannot be changed even if God was the only one to knew about something that has happened, since it still happened it is history. Since God does everything right perfectly the first time, there is no reason to do it over again.

God is outside of time and omnipresent throughout time, so God at the end of time knows everything historically that has happened throughout time, making it unchangeable (fixed). Yet again just because God at the end of time knows all things that happened throughout time perfectly, does not mean human autonomous free will choices were not made and thus “fixed” by man making the choice.

God’s actions are also fixed and can be called foreordained or predestined.

God did not present this miraculous method of “how” He knows the future, but that is not unusual while communicating to man from man’s perspective is also God’s way.

There is another reason the Bible does not explain God’s time being even different from human time and thus presenting the idea of “time being relative”. If the Bible did say, “Time is relative”, then there would be scientific “proof” of the Biblical God, since the idea of time being relative comes up thousands of years later. The nonbeliever doe not need “knowledge” of the Biblical God, but faith in the Biblical God.

There are other ways God can know stuff, but He is outside of time, so He also knows everything historically throughout time?

God is very much interacting with humans, and He does the absolute best thing, so there is no reason for a do over.

Jesus knew when He was teaching His disciple, what He would be going through on the cross as pure history, but that does not mean He was on the cross constantly.

 

[Derf]

Please don't work to justify yourself by making up falsehoods about what I said. It's quite simple really. God can see the end from the beginning.

You used a verse that says God declares the end from the beginning, not that God "sees" the end from the beginning. The verse continues on to explain how God knows the end from the beginning so that He can declare it. The how is expressed as those future things are "His pleasure" and "His counsel."

He saw Peter deny the Christ.

You don't know that, you merely assert it without proof.

He "declared" to Peter, "I saw what you will do". Please don't twist my words as if I'm saying that God made Peter deny the Christ. I never said that, and I don't believe that.

So, using Is 46:10 as your evidence that God sees the end from the beginning and declares it confirms what I said, that Jesus was declaring His pleasure that Peter would deny Him. Is 46:10 definitely doesn't say that it is merely God's pleasure to declare future stuff to us.

We can disagree without you being dishonest about what I said, in my view.




It was His Pleasure to show Peter what he would do. It was also God's pleasure to forgive Peter when Peter sorrowed to repentance.

I agree that God takes pleasure in repentance, and is eager to forgive!

I believe this story is a blessing, and God told me it to show His Power of knowing the future, and also to show His Longsuffering and compassion.

Only you are promoting the philosophy that "God was rejoicing in his denial". I certainly didn't, and there is no indication in Scriptures that God did either.

I'm glad such an interpretation is offensive to you. That's why I explained that your use of Is 46:10 as a verse confirming God knows all future things logically leads to the conclusion that God knows all because He does all ("I will do all...") and that all that happens is God's pleasure ("I will do all my pleasure.") If you don't agree with that, then you can't logically use that verse for saying God sees all the future.

Perhaps you should spend a little time in front of a mirror to find out where these words of yours are coming from.

The words are expressing what Is 46:10 means when used as you used it. So I'd you don't mean it like that, you will need to stop using for that purpose.

It seems prudent to post more of the exchange, so as to determine God's truth.

45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. 47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile!

So here we find Phillip first finding, and then speaking to Nathanael about Jesus who Nathanael had never met, yet Jesus knew who he was.

Nathanael had never met Jesus, and maybe Jesus had never met Nathaiel, but that doesn't mean Jesus had never seen Nathanael.

48 Nathanael saith unto him, Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered and said unto him, Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.

So even before Phillip called Nathanael, Jesus knew him. I would go so far as to say that even before Nathaneal was born, God seen him under the fig tree.

I'm not denying that Jesus knew Nathanael, but the text is written expressing past actions, not future: "though wast under the fig tree" (not "will be"), and "I saw thee" (not I will see thee). To take it as a seeing of future events has no basis in scripture.

Again, the dishonesty about my posts. What spirit would move you to make up such falsehoods?

Again, the spirit is thereason whether I comment on it or not, when you use scripture to support a point that it doesn't support.

Again, can you even speak truth? God saw what Peter would choose to do. No one but you are saying God forced Peter to do it.

You have absolutely no warrant from the verses you've provided to say that God "saw" Peter do anything. And if God is declaring the end of the matter based on "doing His pleasure" and "His counsel", then you have made the case, without realizing it I'm sure, that 1. God is doing something to make sure Peter denies Christ, and 2. That God is doing it because it pleases him to do so.

Oh my goodness, are you OK? I don't know you, and perhaps you are having some mental issues here so maybe you can't help it. If this is the case, I'm sorry for you and will keep you in my prayers. But I never even implied one time that God made Peter deny the Christ, or that God made the mainstream preachers of Jesus Time murder Him. I'm simply posting God's Own Words in which HE tells us He knows the end from the beginning and has declared to us a lot of things that HE saw happen. Like the murder of Jesus and the fall of Jerusalem etc.

You don't think God was involved in the murder of Jesus and the fall of Jerusalem?

I never said or even implied that He makes them happen, He sees them happen and then declares it to us, as He did to Peter.

As I stated above, by using Is 46:10 that way, you are indeed implying such, and I'm happy to help you see your error, since you don't like the conclusion we all must draw from your use of the verse.

I'm not trying to be harsh or pretend you are saying something horrible, but by implication, you were unintentionally saying something horrible.

 

[Bob Crowley]

At the Last Supper, Jesus warned Simon Peter that a test of faith was coming: “Simon, Simon! Indeed, Satan has asked for you, that he may sift you as wheat” (Luke 22:31, NKJV).

Google Search

www.google.com

The devil and his cohorts would have been present in strength in the Garden of Gethesemane and during the following trial. There would have been an overwhelming sense of fear.

Peter could have resisted, but the fact they all ran away from the Garden gives some sense of the baleful influence that would have overshadowed everything at the time.

 

[Studyman]

You used a verse that says God declares the end from the beginning, not that God "sees" the end from the beginning. The verse continues on to explain how God knows the end from the beginning so that He can declare it. The how is expressed as those future things are "His pleasure" and "His counsel."

If God watches a race between you and I this morning, and HE saw the end of the race, and you won. Would HE then not declare "You won", because HE saw you win? He didn't make you win, cause you to win, slow me down so you could win. He saw the race and "Declared" what HE saw.

Clearly God Sees the future. To deny that is to deny the existence of Prophesy in Scriptures.

Therefore, if you and I had a race next year, we wouldn't know the outcome because we can't see the future, but God can. And God would see the race, and then if it was HIS Pleasure, HE could "declare" the winner to us before the race even happened. Thus "Declaring the end from the beginning".

God saw Peter's future and chose to "Declare" to him what he would do before the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] crowed, which HE also saw, 3 times.

He didn't make the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] crow, HE didn't make Peter deny the Christ 3 times, He simple declared what HE saw Peter would do, before Peter did it. "Declaring the end from the beginning".

I don't know how better to explain my understanding.

Can you disagree with me? Of course. And you are free to do so. Please Just don't make up stuff about my posts, if you are able.

 

[Hammster]

If God watches a race between you and I this morning, and HE saw the end of the race, and you won. Would HE then not declare "You won", because HE saw you win? He didn't make you win, cause you to win, slow me down so you could win. He saw the race and "Declared" what HE saw.

Clearly God Sees the future. To deny that is to deny the existence of Prophesy in Scriptures.

Therefore, if you and I had a race next year, we wouldn't know the outcome because we can't see the future, but God can. And God would see the race, and then if it was HIS Pleasure, HE could "declare" the winner to us before the race even happened. Thus "Declaring the end from the beginning".

God saw Peter's future and chose to "Declare" to him what he would do before the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] crowed, which HE also saw, 3 times.

He didn't make the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] crow, HE didn't make Peter deny the Christ 3 times, He simple declared what HE saw Peter would do, before Peter did it. "Declaring the end from the beginning".

I don't know how better to explain my understanding.

Can you disagree with me? Of course. And you are free to do so. Please Just don't make up stuff about my posts, if you are able.

The race had the outcome it did because that’s what God wanted to happen.

 

[bling]

The race had the outcome it did because that’s what God wanted to happen.

God can certainly cause whoever He wants to win the race, but God can also allow us of our own free will to determine the outcome if God wants to.