As far as 2 Kings 20 is concerned, I think YHWH was genuinely moved by Hezekiah's tearful prayer for his life.
Agreed.
As far as 2 Kings 20 is concerned, I think YHWH was genuinely moved by Hezekiah's tearful prayer for his life.No problem. I hope I've sufficiently clarified my position concerning this in one of my more recent posts where I explain:
"If time is linear, then certainly God knows all possible outcomes among all present causes. He certainly knows what he himself is going to do in the future (which accounts for biblical prophecy). But the attribute of omniscience is not put in jeopardy here, even if God's knowledge of all future events is neither perfect nor complete, simply because the future hasn't happened yet; there's nothing there to be known."
Thank you for the repeat. It leaves me uncertain whether you believe time is linear or if you are uncertain whether it is. I for one am uncomfortable with certain theological abstractions about time if only because I don't know what to make of them wrt Scripture. More palatable to me is the notion that God foreknows what He will do in the future (as prophesied in examples in the Scriptures), but such prophecies sometimes require and engage the actions and sins of humans yet unborn at the time of prophecy deliverance (e.g., Cyrus' decree regarding the return of exiles, Jacob's stature over Esau, Herod's slaughter of the innocents, Jewish and Roman roles in the death of the Lamb of God). More response below.
I don't really believe that God's actions have to make much sense to us. Indeed, most often they don't!
I agree with your illustrations, for example that God's kingdom in history usually appears rather less glorious than I think I would have advised (!), but in my view also, there is mystery rather than nonsense between God's wisdom and His reactions; my argument is that the Scriptures show both in ways I often cannot explain.
What I rather meant to communicate was simply that, other than to satisfy certain Calvinist presuppositions, there is absolutely no hermeneutical reason whatsoever to surmise that God foreknew that he would change his mind here. If I know well ahead of time that, say, rather than vacation in Mexico, due to given circumstances, I'm going to change my vacation plans and instead go to Hawaii, why would I book reservations at a resort in Mexico, tell everyone that there is where we're going, and even purchase airline tickets to fly us there?!? This would be made even more nonsensical if I knew the whole time that everyone in my family really, really, REALLY wanted to go to Hawaii in the first place!
Oh, I imagine God knew that Hezekiah would plead for his life, but he probably didn't know how much he'd be moved and consequently persuaded by Hezekiah's prayer to change his mind and instead save him. I know ahead of time that my kids are going to plead with me to allow them to stay up after I tell them it's bedtime. But I don't necessarily know that I might actually be persuaded to allow them to stay up depending on the content and manner of their pleading. (I'm especially a softy when it comes to my 6-yr old little girl. Who knew her eyes could get that big?!?)
I agree your representation has its attraction (with which I partly agree), and your method its place in theological construction. God's reaction to Hezekiah's plea was sincere and engaged genuine, divine, paternal-like emotion, or whatever the analogy of paternal human emotion might be in the divine. But I have reservations too.
1) I am unconvinced your portrayal gives God sufficient credit for what we might call intelligence given the picture of God in Isaiah and elsewhere. Aside from the implications about divine intelligence that may be gleaned from the prophecies (including from Isaiah) I note above, the inference appears weak that (as you say you "imagine") "God knew that Hezekiah would plead for his life, but he [God] probably didn't know how much he'd be moved and consequently persuaded by Hezekiah's prayer to change his mind and instead save him." Granted again the view takes divine reaction seriously, but I think the limitation on divine intelligence unconvincing.
If God knew what Tyre and Sidon "would have done if" the miracles done in the Galilean cities previously cited per Matt. 11:21 were done in Tyre and Sidon, is it too much to claim He knew in advance of the events what Hezekiah was to say and what His own response would be?
2) I recall an American adult then lately come from Mexico's rural setting relate how his father would take a switch to his boy's calves (below the knee, and more painfully when the knee was hit) for failure to find such-and-such items on the farm when told to do so. The adult speaking to me related how in each case, he tried valiantly to find the objects in question, but sometimes failed (not for want of trying). My unsolicited comment was that the father seemed cruel (or the like)--a claim forcefully and immediately denied by the adult (son). The son knew his father loved him.
How much, in other words, of our view of God's reaction to Hezekiah's plea is tainted by our culture ... and how much is actually representative of God?
3) I don't see (perhaps from obtuseness of mind) that your Mexico/Hawaii vacation analogy fits the Hezekiah narrative (2 Kings 20) very well; the analogy seems to carry some extremes I don't see in the Hezekiah narrative. But if it did fit well, I am not sure I see how it requires a change in my view of divine foreknowledge.
As a general statement, we too often read biblical texts as early 21st-century Westerners and interpret them from an individualistic perspective, whereas the people of the ancient world simply didn't think in such terms, and I think that fact impacts at least a few of the passages you've cited above.
Granted, and granted the references I cited must be perused, as you wrote, "in their respective contexts." I was aware my citations were at fault for brevity, though I hoped sufficient to instantiate the notion that we may not fully understand divine causality and nature. And I had other reasons.
One could argue this way. But again, why? The only answer I can think of would be to force the otherwise plain meaning of the text so that it corresponds with Calvinist doctrine.
But even apart from that, a Calvinist interpretation renders it all so meaningless. It wouldn't matter whether Hezekiah lacked faith or had his faith meter burning red hot, because it's not really him anyway; it's all God. God foreordained and predestined Hezekiah's level of faith. He foreordained Hezekiah's reaction. He predestined the thoughts and words Hezekiah would use in his prayer. Within Calvinist thought God is unavoidably the cosmic puppeteer and we're all his marionettes as he pulls the strings and feeds us our lines from the great script he concocted... uhhh, when? Why? For what purpose? Self-entertainment? Couldn't he have done that without so much pain and carnage?
(Your quote immediately above is offered in response to my words, again repeated as follows:
"Similarly, why must God be cruel in the scenario argument you have outlined above [wrt the God-Hezekiah interaction in 2 Kings 20:1-6]? Could one not argue Hezekiah's distress (at hearing the news he was about to die) stemmed in part from his own lack of trust in and acceptance of Providence? Or that Hezekiah lacked faith, but God meant Hezekiah's distress for his own good as well as God's glory?")
I do not know how much my alternative reading of the God-Hezekiah interaction (in my quote of me immediately above) was informed by Calvinism per se, nor did I intend to defend Calvinism per se in those words, although other wording in my previous post was so intended. Rather my motivation here (however successfully or unsuccessfully expressed) stemmed from (a) a desire to take human (i.e., Hezekiah's) responsibility seriously and (b) my view of God as it relates to theodicy.
In this connection for example, was God cruel to Job in granting Satan sway over Job's property and body? Was God cruel in calling Jeremiah and Paul to suffer? If not--and I believe the answer is "no" in all cases (although I am confident I do not handle my own suffering always in an entirely "theologically correct" way)--why is it necessarily the case (a case surely of lesser degree) that God must have been cruel to Hezekiah if God knew Hezekiah's plea/His response in advance of the fact?
Granted, the implications return us to the potential weakness of not taking God's reaction seriously, but is that necessarily the case? We are weighing weaknesses on one side and the other ... and I realize I might not have the biblical balance right.
... But your representation above of Calvinism in my (limited) experience is a cariciturization in my view even if, at the end of the day, not entirely in yours. In my view, divine foreknowledge and foreordination of Hezekiah's plea does not require a reduction in Hezekiah's human experience to something other than whatever may be read from a plain reading of the passage. How this is possible I do not know; my question is whether my view represents the whole counsel of God, and at present I have no better reading.
Nor are accusations of God causing "so much [unecessary? pointless? cruel?] pain and carnage" limited to calvinist views. And denying oneself, taking up one's cross, and following Jesus daily is no easy task. Who in his right mind, afterall, would seek to model his life on a scourged and executed God nailed and hung on a gibbet, subject to public humiliation?
In not unrelated fashion, the goal of our debate is not scoring personal victory (as no doubt I need reminding), but edification of God's church.
I'm sorry to "hear" [of Lookup's health challenges]. You're in my prayers, LU.
My thanks. My body is more "concluded" than this debate.