Could Peter have done otherwise?

[Derf]

Highest authority. None higher than His.

In all things, right?

Yes. For instance, I have authority in my home.

Agreed.

Define what you mean by “responsible”.

It might sound crass, but "blameable" is a reasonable synonym.

 

[Hammster]

In all things, right?

Yes

Agreed.

Good.

It might sound crass, but "blameable" is a reasonable synonym.

That’s where it gets tricky. Did God want Joseph sold into slavery? Yes. Were his brothers culpable? Yes. So where is the blame?

 

[Derf]

Yes

Good.

That’s where it gets tricky. Did God want Joseph sold into slavery?

God wanted Joseph to go to Egypt.

Yes. Were his brothers culpable?

They (most of them) were guilty of murder in their hearts. God prevented murder. But God did not plan for Joseph to be sold into slavery from the foundation of the world, I don't think. He was reacting to murderous intent at the moment.

But if God wanted them to sell their brother AND hate him enough to murder him, then God is culpable, and the brothers are merely following God's will.

Yes. So where is the blame?

God, if God wanted them to have murderous thoughts.

 

[Hammster]

God wanted Joseph to go to Egypt.

They (most of them) were guilty of murder in their hearts. God prevented murder. But God did not plan for Joseph to be sold into slavery from the foundation of the world, I don't think. He was reacting to murderous intent at the moment.

Then we have way different views of God. Your view seems like Open Theism where God doesn’t know the future, and just reacts to what is in front of Him.

But if God wanted them to sell their brother AND hate him enough to murder him, then God is culpable, and the brothers are merely following God's will.

What they meant for evil, He meant for good. That’s what you need to deal with.

God, if God wanted them to have murderous thoughts.

Why else would they sell him into slavery?

 

[Derf]

Then we have way different views of God.

Sure, that's why we're having this conversation.

Your view seems like Open Theism where God doesn’t know the future, and just reacts to what is in front of Him.

I usually focus on HOW God knows the future. In this sense I think you and I are in agreement. God knows the future in all things that He has purposed and that pleases Him to do. (Do you agree with this that God knows the future exhaustively because all that will happen in the future is what He has purposed and what pleases Him?)

For instance, God was not reacting to what was in front of Him at creation, since nothing was in front of Him. He knew what kind of heavens and earth He would make, and He made them.

But He does also react to what people do. When He sent the flood, it was because the people were wicked to a very high degree, making Him sorry that He had created mankind. Note that it was not God's plan for men to be wicked in order for Him to have an excuse to destroy the earth, which would be how the "He meant it for good" would apply to the flood story.

And I think you are saying that God was not reacting to what was in front of Him when the Ninevites were not destroyed, or when King Hezekiah prayed and was granted a longer life, or in general when a nation repents and He spares them, or when a nation turns wicked and He destroys them. (I can give you reference's for these, but I'm assuming you know about them already. Let me know if you want the references.)

What they meant for evil, He meant for good. That’s what you need to deal with.

Right. He was reacting to what was in front of Him. What you have to deal with is that God means both sin and righteousness for good...in every single case there ever was and ever will be, including the most heinous acts against the most innocent and vulnerable. That means that every act of abortion, ripping the limbs of infants off their bodies, God means for good. Do you believe that?

In my view, God deals with sin by punishing the sinner, because the sinner actually chose to sin or not to sin. That means He doesn't go around killing the sinner before he has a chance to sin, else God would not have needed to flood the whole earth, but the population would not have ever gotten very far. In fact, God would have destroyed Adam and Eve before they ate the fruit, and, voila, no more sinful human problem.

Why else would they sell him into slavery?

I agree that God softened them from a posture of murder (selfishness) to a posture of profit (also selfishness) to achieve a greater good. God was able to keep Joseph alive that way, while getting him to Egypt, and probably teaching him some lessons in humility along the way.

Now you tell me how God meant the antediluvian wickedness (not the flood, but the wickedness) for good. And while you're at it, tell me how God means the ripping apart of innocent children for good. Not "works all things together for good", but that "all things are meant for good".

 

[bling]

Sure, that's why we're having this conversation.

I usually focus on HOW God knows the future. In this sense I think you and I are in agreement. God knows the future in all things that He has purposed and that pleases Him to do. (Do you agree with this that God knows the future exhaustively because all that will happen in the future is what He has purposed and what pleases Him?)

For instance, God was not reacting to what was in front of Him at creation, since nothing was in front of Him. He knew what kind of heavens and earth He would make, and He made them.

But He does also react to what people do. When He sent the flood, it was because the people were wicked to a very high degree, making Him sorry that He had created mankind. Note that it was not God's plan for men to be wicked in order for Him to have an excuse to destroy the earth, which would be how the "He meant it for good" would apply to the flood story.

And I think you are saying that God was not reacting to what was in front of Him when the Ninevites were not destroyed, or when King Hezekiah prayed and was granted a longer life, or in general when a nation repents and He spares them, or when a nation turns wicked and He destroys them. (I can give you reference's for these, but I'm assuming you know about them already. Let me know if you want the references.)

Right. He was reacting to what was in front of Him. What you have to deal with is that God means both sin and righteousness for good...in every single case there ever was and ever will be, including the most heinous acts against the most innocent and vulnerable. That means that every act of abortion, ripping the limbs of infants off their bodies, God means for good. Do you believe that?

In my view, God deals with sin by punishing the sinner, because the sinner actually chose to sin or not to sin. That means He doesn't go around killing the sinner before he has a chance to sin, else God would not have needed to flood the whole earth, but the population would not have ever gotten very far. In fact, God would have destroyed Adam and Eve before they ate the fruit, and, voila, no more sinful human problem.

I agree that God softened them from a posture of murder (selfishness) to a posture of profit (also selfishness) to achieve a greater good. God was able to keep Joseph alive that way, while getting him to Egypt, and probably teaching him some lessons in humility along the way.

Now you tell me how God meant the antediluvian wickedness (not the flood, but the wickedness) for good. And while you're at it, tell me how God means the ripping apart of innocent children for good. Not "works all things together for good", but that "all things are meant for good".

I want to give you an alternative to how God knows your future. Even Hammster believes time is relative. Your response has everything to do with: God being outside of time.

It is extremely difficult for us to place ourselves “outside of time” since we are only in time.

God would know most of Joseph’s brothers wanted to get rid of him (do evil to him), but also some brothers would not murder their father’s son, so God providing an alternative to killing Joseph by them selling him into slavery in a far-off country. They’re even wanting to kill Joseph is a sin, but God would keep them from the actual act of killing Joseph.



God is not limited by time and we experimentally have shown over the last 100 years; time is relative.

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 relative time.

Think about this: If I know 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 your 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.

With Peter, God at the end of time, this same God throughout time, knows what Peter and Christ chose to do with Christ being supplied the information by God at the end of time. Christ knowing the unrepentant state Peter was in can also realize His words will not keep Peter from sinning, but will help Peter to repent in the end, but it is still Peter’s choice.

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, so this knowledge is kept from us.

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 or it would not hurt him.

 

[Derf]

I want to give you an alternative to how God knows your future. Even Hammster believes time is relative. Your response has everything to do with: God being outside of time.

It is extremely difficult for us to place ourselves “outside of time” since we are only in time.

God would know most of Joseph’s brothers wanted to get rid of him (do evil to him), but also some brothers would not murder their father’s son, so God providing an alternative to killing Joseph by them selling him into slavery in a far-off country. They’re even wanting to kill Joseph is a sin, but God would keep them from the actual act of killing Joseph.



God is not limited by time and we experimentally have shown over the last 100 years; time is relative.

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 relative time.

Think about this: If I know 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 your 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.

With Peter, God at the end of time, this same God throughout time, knows what Peter and Christ chose to do with Christ being supplied the information by God at the end of time. Christ knowing the unrepentant state Peter was in can also realize His words will not keep Peter from sinning, but will help Peter to repent in the end, but it is still Peter’s choice.

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, so this knowledge is kept from us.

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 or it would not hurt him.

Do you think that God could see His own actions in time? In other words, did God see that He created the fish on day 5? After He saw that He created the fish on day 5, would He have been able to NOT create the fish on day 5? This is the same question as the OP, essentially.

If you believe that God saw Himself creating fish on day 5, and COULD choose to do otherwise, then what actually did God see? If God saw Himself creating fish on day 5, and COULDN'T do otherwise, is God really omnipotent? (I'm assuming, for purposes of discussion, that creating fish on day 5 vs some other day carries no moral implications.)

 

[bling]

Do you think that God could see His own actions in time? In other words, did God see that He created the fish on day 5? After He saw that He created the fish on day 5, would He have been able to NOT create the fish on day 5? This is the same question as the OP, essentially.

If you believe that God saw Himself creating fish on day 5, and COULD choose to do otherwise, then what actually did God see? If God saw Himself creating fish on day 5, and COULDN'T do otherwise, is God really omnipotent? (I'm assuming, for purposes of discussion, that creating fish on day 5 vs some other day carries no moral implications.)

The problem we have is trying to think what it is like to be outside of time.
It is like everything happens at the same time. The same "moment" God decided to make a fish all fish (the first to the last) fish were made lived and died for God.
Before God decided to create a fish, He could decide not to make the fish, but once He decided to make a fish, from God's perspective, they were made.
In God's Spiritual realm there could be a sequence of events, which He might allow, but time is relative for us.
To get really philosophical here: If there is "time" and there is an infinite amount of time prior to the creation of our universe, then there could be no universe, since an infinite amount of time has not past by yet, it is still going. Would that not mean God is outside of our time?

 

[Derf]

The problem we have is trying to think what it is like to be outside of time.
It is like everything happens at the same time. The same "moment" God decided to make a fish all fish (the first to the last) fish were made lived and died for God.
Before God decided to create a fish, He could decide not to make the fish, but once He decided to make a fish, from God's perspective, they were made.
In God's Spiritual realm there could be a sequence of events, which He might allow, but time is relative for us.
To get really philosophical here: If there is "time" and there is an infinite amount of time prior to the creation of our universe, then there could be no universe, since an infinite amount of time has not past by yet, it is still going. Would that not mean God is outside of our time?

What you're describing is something we don't understand. Why is it that the thing you don't understand is the way to explain something else you don't understand?

What your idea is missing is any kind of direct explanation that affirms it in the scriptures. My thought is that God does things in sequence, like creating the world, as described in Gen 1, when no one else was around to watch. Why then, if God describes His actions as if they are sequential and time oriented (day 1 thru day 6), would we say God doesn't act like that? In my mind, your description of God outside of time directly contradicts what God tells us about Himself, and therefore it is not a preferred explanation.

 

[bling]

What you're describing is something we don't understand. Why is it that the thing you don't understand is the way to explain something else you don't understand?

What your idea is missing is any kind of direct explanation that affirms it in the scriptures. My thought is that God does things in sequence, like creating the world, as described in Gen 1, when no one else was around to watch. Why then, if God describes His actions as if they are sequential and time oriented (day 1 thru day 6), would we say God doesn't act like that? In my mind, your description of God outside of time directly contradicts what God tells us about Himself, and therefore it is not a preferred explanation.

Do you believe time is relative, which Einstein theorized over 100 years ago and no experiment has disproved and all only supported the idea?
Why do you believe God would be limited by time, if it is relative?
Why could God not be outside of human time?
We do not know how God does any miracle but just the results.
You can easily believe God exists at the end of our time, so for God at the end of our time everything is pure unchangeable history, so why can't God at the end of our time send all that history back to Himself at the beginning of our time?
God in communicating with us is going to use what we know and understand.

 

[Derf]

Do you believe time is relative, which Einstein theorized over 100 years ago and no experiment has disproved and all only supported the idea?
Why do you believe God would be limited by time, if it is relative?
Why could God not be outside of human time?
We do not know how God does any miracle but just the results.
You can easily believe God exists at the end of our time, so for God at the end of our time everything is pure unchangeable history, so why can't God at the end of our time send all that history back to Himself at the beginning of our time?
God in communicating with us is going to use what we know and understand.

I don't believe God currently exists at the end of our time.

 

[Derf]

I don't believe God currently exists at the end of our time.

@bling
Because we are told He was, is, and will be. Not "already is in the future".

 

[bling]

@bling
Because we are told He was, is, and will be. Not "already is in the future".

Do you believe God "knows" human future "perfectly", like Christ knowing exactly what Peter would do that night?
If God today knows everything that happens one month from now, does He know what God a month from now, knows? Is that not very similar to the future existing for God?
To us God will be there in our future?

 

[Derf]

Do you believe God "knows" human future "perfectly",

No, not every aspect of it.

like Christ knowing exactly what Peter would do that night?

Christ did not tell exactly everything Peter would do in the future. He told what He knew about Satan being allowed to tempt Peter, and He expressed His understanding of Peter's character based on His knowledge of the events that were to transport that night. And He told Peter what He needed to do once he was "converted," not what He saw Peter doing in the future.

Do you believe God was right or wrong about Hezekiah's future when He said Hezzy would die before he recovered from his illness?

If God today knows everything that happens one month from now,

I don't think He does. Neither does the bible say "God knows everything that will happen one month from now."

does He know what God a month from now, knows?

Does God's knowledge change? Yes.

Is that not very similar to the future existing for God?

I don't think there is a Derf-future and a Bling-future that are currently having a dialog in an actual future time

To us God will be there in our future?

Yes, because He is everlasting. He will still exist when the future times come. But He's not already existing in the future with us.

 

[bling]

No, not every aspect of it.

I assume your suggesting “time”, is some cosmic power which limits God?

You seem to agree that “time” is relative, so why is it not relative for God?

Christ did not tell exactly everything Peter would do in the future. He told what He knew about Satan being allowed to tempt Peter, and He expressed His understanding of Peter's character based on His knowledge of the events that were to transport that night. And He told Peter what He needed to do once he was "converted," not what He saw Peter doing in the future.

Christ did not give a lengthy blow by blow description of what Peter would do, but Christ specifically said in the short time before sun rise you will deny me three times. Jesus did not just say: “you will deny me”, but said three time, so two would be a false prophecy and they had to be before the morning light. If Jesus had any doubt about this prophecy, He could just as easily made it contingent with the same impact, since what He said had no impact on Peter’s denials.

If Christ has the slightest of doubts about His prophecy about what Peter would do he must make it contingent, “if”. Which is not at all true for a God prophecy about what God will do (huge difference).

Do you believe God was right or wrong about Hezekiah's future when He said Hezzy would die before he recovered from his illness?

God is always 100% right, but you always have to keep in mind a God prophecy about what He will do:

Jer. 18: 7 If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, 8 and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. 9 And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, 10 and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it.

First off: I see a very logical reason why God would give prophecies this way, but do you have any logical reason for God not stating His future actions as being contingent?

Suppose for a moment, God knows the future perfectly of, a person or nation and thus knows they will repent in the future and He will not harm them but, how can God warn them which will bring about this repentance? If God says: “If you do not repent, I will destroy you”, that implies God does not know what they will do, when God does know. If God tell them the truth and says: “you will repent and I will not destroy you”, yet that is not a warning they need to repent, so they will not repent.

Jerimiah tells us what people must have known about God from the beginning: God’s promises about His actions are contingent on the actions of the people involved.

Again, it is about God’s future actions and not man’s future actions, since prophecies about human actions are not contingent.

Let us look at Hezekiah:

2 Kings 18:

5 Hezekiah trusted in the Lord, the God of Israel. There was no one like him among all the kings of Judah, either before him or after him.

Isaiah 38: 1 In those days Hezekiah became ill and was at the point of death. The prophet Isaiah son of Amoz went to him and said, “This is what the Lord says: Put your house in order, because you are going to die; you will not recover.”



2 Hezekiah turned his face to the wall and prayed to the Lord, 3 “Remember, Lord, how I have walked before you faithfully and with wholehearted devotion and have done what is good in your eyes.” And Hezekiah wept bitterly.



4 Then the word of the Lord came to Isaiah: 5 “Go and tell Hezekiah, ‘This is what the Lord, the God of your father David, says: I have heard your prayer and seen your tears; I will add fifteen years to your life. 6 And I will deliver you and this city from the hand of the king of Assyria. I will defend this city.

God tells this wonderful King he is going to die, which would be the best thing to happen for the Jews and Hezekiah, but look what Hezekiah says: “I have walked before you faithfully and with wholehearted devotion and have done what is good in your eyes.” Hezekiah is suggesting: “I deserve to live”, but who deserves anything “good” from God? Allowing Hezekiah to live 1 more years will result in Assyria taking all the silver and gold that Hezekiah boastfully showed them and Hezekiah will have a son who will be one of the most wicked kings (Hezekiah might have been a poor father).

Prophecies God makes about His future actions like, taking King Hezekiah’s life (which is the best for everyone), can change if Hezekiah turns to being selfish and boastful (not humble) before God. God’s will is the best way to go.

Does God's knowledge change? Yes.

I do feel there are things which are impossible to know, but what all do you think is not possible for God to know?

 

[Derf]

I assume your suggesting “time”, is some cosmic power which limits God?

I don't think I've ever suggested time is a "power". But God is not a God of disorder, but of order. (paraphrase of 1 Cor 14:33). In other words, God never does something in some weird sequence, like destroying a nation before it is built, or creating man before there's an earth where he can live.

You seem to agree that “time” is relative, so why is it not relative for God?

I'm not sure what meaning you are proposing for "time is relative". I agree that what we measure for time in one instance and from one vantage point could be measured differently from a different vantage point. But that doesn't mean God experiences the things we experience out of the order that we experience them. Such a concept is foreign to a God who created the heavens and the earth in "6 days", listing the different days on which He created the different things.

Christ did not give a lengthy blow by blow description of what Peter would do, but Christ specifically said in the short time before sun rise you will deny me three times.

Right. It is a specific comment about a specific part of Peter's life. That doesn't mean you can apply the same thing to everybody and everything they will do throughout their lives.

Jesus did not just say: “you will deny me”, but said three time, so two would be a false prophecy and they had to be before the morning light.

Right. Remember that Satan had requested to "sift Peter like wheat", and that request had been granted. So Jesus knew that a temptation was coming, He knew, probably, that the temptation would be repeated 3 times (like Satan's temptation of Christ in the wilderness), He knew the timeframes involved (because He was in the midst of fulfilling prophecy Himself), and He knew Peter's character and weaknesses. He, as God, is in control of animals, and can make roosters wait to crow, or make them crow more quickly/earlier than normal, but I don't think such a thing is needed.

If Jesus had any doubt about this prophecy, He could just as easily made it contingent with the same impact, since what He said had no impact on Peter’s denials.

Contingent on what?

If Christ has the slightest of doubts about His prophecy about what Peter would do he must make it contingent, “if”. Which is not at all true for a God prophecy about what God will do (huge difference).

This is demonstrably false, as you point out with your reference to Jeremiah 18, below.

God is always 100% right, but you always have to keep in mind a God prophecy about what He will do:

Jer. 18: 7 If at any time I announce

or "prophecy" when delivered through a prophet

that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, 8 and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. 9 And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, 10 and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it.

First off: I see a very logical reason why God would give prophecies this way, but do you have any logical reason for God not stating His future actions as being contingent?

That prophecy formula is decidedly contingent. It even uses the word "if", which you said above indicated a contingency. Please help me to understand your point better, because it looks like you have disproven your own statement.

Suppose for a moment, God knows the future perfectly of, a person or nation and thus knows they will repent in the future and He will not harm them but, how can God warn them which will bring about this repentance? If God says: “If you do not repent, I will destroy you”,

Which is part of the Jer 18 formula.

that implies God does not know what they will do, when God does know.

You're assuming God knows, so I'll go along with it. If it implies that God does not know, but you are assuming that He does, that makes your view of God inconsistent with scripture, which makes scripture false, assuming you have the right view of God.

If God tell them the truth and says: “you will repent and I will not destroy you”, yet that is not a warning they need to repent, so they will not repent.

It's worse than that, I think. It makes God unable to relate to His people, or any people. You are saying that He needs to lie to people to get them to repent. If God has to lie to make sure His will is fulfilled, then He isn't the God of scripture, described by the words "Who cannot lie."

Jerimiah tells us what people must have known about God from the beginning: God’s promises about His actions are contingent on the actions of the people involved.

Yes. And if contingent on people's actions, there are two possibilities:
1. That people's actions are all determined from the foundation of the world, and there is no free will, or
2. That people are able to make choices about their actions in real time, and God, working with people in real time, reacts to their choices. [Deu 30:19 KJV] I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, [that] I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:

Your view, to be consistent, would have God say, "I know what you will choose, because the record was written a long time ago."

Again, it is about God’s future actions and not man’s future actions, since prophecies about human actions are not contingent.

You are saying that God does not know His own future actions?

Let us look at Hezekiah:

2 Kings 18:

5 Hezekiah trusted in the Lord, the God of Israel. There was no one like him among all the kings of Judah, either before him or after him.

Isaiah 38: 1 In those days Hezekiah became ill and was at the point of death. The prophet Isaiah son of Amoz went to him and said, “This is what the Lord says: Put your house in order, because you are going to die; you will not recover.”



2 Hezekiah turned his face to the wall and prayed to the Lord, 3 “Remember, Lord, how I have walked before you faithfully and with wholehearted devotion and have done what is good in your eyes.” And Hezekiah wept bitterly.



4 Then the word of the Lord came to Isaiah: 5 “Go and tell Hezekiah, ‘This is what the Lord, the God of your father David, says: I have heard your prayer and seen your tears; I will add fifteen years to your life. 6 And I will deliver you and this city from the hand of the king of Assyria. I will defend this city.

God tells this wonderful King he is going to die, which would be the best thing to happen for the Jews and Hezekiah,

I don't see where you get the idea that Hezekiah dying is the best thing for Jews and Hezekiah. It's not from scripture.

but look what Hezekiah says: “I have walked before you faithfully and with wholehearted devotion and have done what is good in your eyes.” Hezekiah is suggesting: “I deserve to live”, but who deserves anything “good” from God? Allowing Hezekiah to live 1 more years will result in Assyria taking all the silver and gold that Hezekiah boastfully showed them

That was Babylon, not Assyria, and it was AFTER he recovered.

and Hezekiah will have a son who will be one of the most wicked kings (Hezekiah might have been a poor father).

Prophecies God makes about His future actions like, taking King Hezekiah’s life (which is the best for everyone),

You haven't established that it would be best, or even suggested why it might be best. If you think it is because Hezekiah later did evil, then it would be best for all of us to die in infancy or earlier. But God is looking for people who will repent of evil, not just never do any. See Jer 18 again.

can change if Hezekiah turns to being selfish and boastful (not humble) before God. God’s will is the best way to go.

Again, are you saying that God doesn't know His own future actions?

I do feel there are things which are impossible to know, but what all do you think is not possible for God to know?

Things that aren't factual is the first that comes to mind. What do you think is impossible for God to know?

 

[bling]

I don't think I've ever suggested time is a "power". But God is not a God of disorder, but of order. (paraphrase of 1 Cor 14:33). In other words, God never does something in some weird sequence, like destroying a nation before it is built, or creating man before there's an earth where he can live.

the “Lamb slain from the foundation of the world”? (Revelation 13:8).

God is a perfect organizer.

I'm not sure what meaning you are proposing for "time is relative". I agree that what we measure for time in one instance and from one vantage point could be measured differently from a different vantage point. But that doesn't mean God experiences the things we experience out of the order that we experience them. Such a concept is foreign to a God who created the heavens and the earth in "6 days", listing the different days on which He created the different things.

I did not come up with the idea that “time is relative”, Einstein gets that credit.

There is definitely a sequencing of events for us, but for God there may not be the same sequencing of events for Him.

Time restrictions and control is definitely something we need, but why would God need it?

Right. It is a specific comment about a specific part of Peter's life. That doesn't mean you can apply the same thing to everybody and everything they will do throughout their lives.

What do we “loss” in having God/Christ know everything throughout time?

I am explaining how Christ logically can emphatically without any doubt tell the future and there still be free will. My explanation would include everyone and everything, because we are talking about Deity knowing historically everything and everyone.

Right. Remember that Satan had requested to "sift Peter like wheat", and that request had been granted. So Jesus knew that a temptation was coming, He knew, probably, that the temptation would be repeated 3 times (like Satan's temptation of Christ in the wilderness), He knew the timeframes involved (because He was in the midst of fulfilling prophecy Himself), and He knew Peter's character and weaknesses. He, as God, is in control of animals, and can make roosters wait to crow, or make them crow more quickly/earlier than normal, but I don't think such a thing is needed.

You are suggesting Christ made a lot of “assumptions” from really good knowledge to conclude what Peter and satan would do, but those are still assumptions and so the conclusion should include a contingency factor, which is perfectly fine if it is contingent on some assumptions, but Jesus did not do that.

Contingent on what?

Peter, if you do not repent (of your own free will) you will go on to denying me.

This is demonstrably false, as you point out with your reference to Jeremiah 18, below.

You’re not understanding Jeremiah 18.

Jeremiah 18 only applies to God’s future prophesied actions being contingent, while with Peter’s future actions they have to be exactly as Christ prophesied.

That prophecy formula is decidedly contingent. It even uses the word "if", which you said above indicated a contingency. Please help me to understand your point better, because it looks like you have disproven your own statement.

I cannot do a better job than Jeremiah’s inspired words. Yes!!! Very good, Jerinaih if telling us it is “if” contingent, but this is not a specific: time, place, nation, or person, so we can talk generally about the contingency of a prophecy about God’s actions.
Think about like this: If Jeremiah 18 did not exist, how could Jonah tell the people of Ninevah, “God might destroy you in 40 days if you do not repent”, when God knows He definitely will not be destroying them in 40 days. God would be lying about what He might do, since that is not what He might do.

God through Jeremiah can explain generally prophecies about His future actions as being contingent without stating it as God not knowing.

Which is part of the Jer 18 formula.

You're assuming God knows, so I'll go along with it. If it implies that God does not know, but you are assuming that He does, that makes your view of God inconsistent with scripture, which makes scripture false, assuming you have the right view of God.

If God did not know the future perfectly there would be no need for Jer. 18 and God could state all warnings as contingent without lying. Jeremiah 18 is only needed if God knows perfectly His future actions and thus cannot make contingent statements.

It's worse than that, I think. It makes God unable to relate to His people, or any people. You are saying that He needs to lie to people to get them to repent. If God has to lie to make sure His will is fulfilled, then He isn't the God of scripture, described by the words "Who cannot lie."

God is not lying because of Jerimiah 18, which is a truism about God most likely known by all people from day one. God would be lying if it was stated contingent, when God’s future actions are fully known by God.

Yes. And if contingent on people's actions, there are two possibilities:
1. That people's actions are all determined from the foundation of the world, and there is no free will, or
2. That people are able to make choices about their actions in real time, and God, working with people in real time, reacts to their choices. [Deu 30:19 KJV] I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, [that] I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:

Your view, to be consistent, would have God say, "I know what you will choose, because the record was written a long time ago."

Obviously you do not understand:

You are the author of your free will choices, which were written long ago, so yes, God can know your free will choices from the beginning of human time by reading a history book recorded at the end of human time, which you personally contributed to.

You are saying that God does not know His own future actions?

No! What God did in man’s future was contingent on man’s previous actions.

I don't see where you get the idea that Hezekiah dying is the best thing for Jews and Hezekiah. It's not from scripture.

From scripture you can see what Hezekiah did and did not do, plus how he changed. His young son he had in those 15 years was terrible. He showed off His (God’s) riches to his enemy.

It is hard to say if things could have been better, but they were really bad for the people of Juda.

What is really bad for Hezekiah is his reaction to God telling him: “You are going to die shortly”, Hezekiah showed boasting, pride, and lack of respect for God’s will.

That was Babylon, not Assyria, and it was AFTER he recovered.

You haven't established that it would be best, or even suggested why it might be best. If you think it is because Hezekiah later did evil, then it would be best for all of us to die in infancy or earlier. But God is looking for people who will repent of evil, not just never do any. See Jer 18 again.

Hezekiah was doing wonderfully prior to his last 15 years. We all have an earthly objective, which requires becoming a mature adult. Those who die before having the opportunity to fulfill their earthly objective would go on to heaven, but sadly will not have obtained Godly type Love.

Again, are you saying that God doesn't know His own future actions?

No! Hopefully Hezekiah (and all of us) can learn from Hezekiah’s choice to go against God’s desire. We often do not see the good, which should come from any tragedy or death and we cannot see it with Hezekiah’s early death since he did not want to accept God’s plan and die earlier.

Things that aren't factual is the first that comes to mind. What do you think is impossible for God to know?

You might have to explain what you mean by “not factual”, God can know all about fantasies like Star Wars.

What cannot be known by God is the exact free will choices of a person who will never be made. If God is “going to make them in man’s future”, then God knows what they did. God would know all the possible choices a person could make that will never be made, but not the choice that never to exist person would make.

 

[Derf]

the “Lamb slain from the foundation of the world”? (Revelation 13:8).

Thanks for mentioning this. The Lamb was not slain "before" the foundation of the world, but "from". Why the difference? Because the Father and the Son had already agreed that the Son would have to die to save mankind if they were to create mankind.

God is a perfect organizer.

I did not come up with the idea that “time is relative”, Einstein gets that credit.

There is definitely a sequencing of events for us, but for God there may not be the same sequencing of events for Him.

Then you are assuming your view is possible, if not the only possible option. As an assumption, it doesn't seem to be mandated by scripture.

Time restrictions and control is definitely something we need, but why would God need it?

He doesn't need it, it is part of His character, that He does things decently and in good order. If God is all wise, then He doesn't need to go back and erase past mistakes, but that is what you are suggesting He does.

What do we “loss” in having God/Christ know everything throughout time?

Relationship. If God knows everything we will ever do before we do it, then He is merely planning all of His responses to us--there's no need to plead with us, to cajole us, to tell us to make good choices.

We also lose free-will. If all of our choices are already determined before we exist, then our choices are not really our choices, but someone else's. Loss of free-will also means loss of relationship. You can't really have a meaningful relationship with a robot that you yourself programmed.

I am explaining how Christ logically can emphatically without any doubt tell the future and there still be free will.

No, you are not.

My explanation would include everyone and everything, because we are talking about Deity knowing historically everything and everyone.

What you have described is a system that is predetermined in all aspects. And if predetermined (including all of our thoughts, words, deeds, choices) before we exist, we are not involved in the determination. That's the definition of "loss of free-will".

You are suggesting Christ made a lot of “assumptions” from really good knowledge to conclude what Peter and satan would do, but those are still assumptions and so the conclusion should include a contingency factor, which is perfectly fine if it is contingent on some assumptions, but Jesus did not do that.

No, not assumptions. There are things He would KNOW (Satan's plans, at least to some degree, Satan's character, Satan's past activities, Satan's cognitive abilities, Satan's imagination, and the amount of corruption of Satan's mental capacity since his fall; Peter's character, zeal, the basis of Peter's bravado, and probably Peter's breaking points; His own plans to get the authorities to let the disciples go free, the type of punishment He would undergo, etc, etc.). And based on those things, He can reasonably predict Peter's behavior in the upcoming scenario.

Peter, if you do not repent (of your own free will) you will go on to denying me.

So you are saying that if the text doesn't say "if", then Jer 18 doesn't apply? You need to be consistent. With that statement you've just said that Nineveh's destruction was not contingent. But it was. That Hezekiah's death was not contingent, but it was.

You’re not understanding Jeremiah 18.

Jeremiah 18 only applies to God’s future prophesied actions being contingent, while with Peter’s future actions they have to be exactly as Christ prophesied.

God's actions are contingent on the nations' actions. If God already knows the nations' actions (whether they repent or not), then there's no reason for God to change His actions. Peter's prophecy was about his own actions without any kind of threat of destruction. Jeremiah 18 doesn't apply with regard to God's actions, because no actions of God are provided. But it DOES apply in that the nations or individuals (to extrapolate to Peter) CAN repent, CAN change their minds. This is not possible if the nations' and individuals' actions are all known from eternity, unless they are spurred to do it by God deceiving them.

I cannot do a better job than Jeremiah’s inspired words. Yes!!! Very good, Jerinaih if telling us it is “if” contingent, but this is not a specific: time, place, nation, or person, so we can talk generally about the contingency of a prophecy about God’s actions.
Think about like this: If Jeremiah 18 did not exist, how could Jonah tell the people of Ninevah, “God might destroy you in 40 days if you do not repent”, when God knows He definitely will not be destroying them in 40 days. God would be lying about what He might do, since that is not what He might do.

Jer 18 did not exist when Jonah went to Nineveh. But even without Jer 18, we know from the Ninevites' experience that God is willing to forgive a nation if they repent. In other words, the book of Jonah gives an example of God's dealing with nations, while Jer 18 gives the policy.

God through Jeremiah can explain generally prophecies about His future actions as being contingent without stating it as God not knowing.

But if God tells someone that they will be destroyed, period, it implies that they have a chance, by repenting, not to be destroyed. Peter had a chance not to be humbled by his infidelity, if he first humbled himself, in which case the additional humility was not needed. And Christ would have, in my opinion, welcomed that change in Peter and the scenario would not have needed to play out.

If God did not know the future perfectly there would be no need for Jer. 18 and God could state all warnings as contingent without lying. Jeremiah 18 is only needed if God knows perfectly His future actions and thus cannot make contingent statements.

It doesn't change the fact that God is lying if He knows the future perfectly, yet tells something different from the future as perfectly known future events.

God is not lying because of Jerimiah 18, which is a truism about God most likely known by all people from day one.

If it was known by everyone, then Jer 18 wasn't necessary, which is what I proposed above anyway.

God would be lying if it was stated contingent, when God’s future actions are fully known by God.

God's future actions can change, according to Jer 18. If they are fully known by God, and then they change, then they weren't fully known by God.

Obviously you do not understand:

You are the author of your free will choices, which were written long ago,

That statement is self-contradictory. If the choices we will make were written long ago, before we existed, then we were not the ones making the choices. It amazes me that you have to contort logic so in order to get your system to work.

so yes, God can know your free will choices from the beginning of human time by reading a history book recorded at the end of human time, which you personally contributed to.

No! What God did in man’s future was contingent on man’s previous actions.

Right. Which you are saying God has to know ahead of time, before the man's previous actions occur.

From scripture you can see what Hezekiah did and did not do, plus how he changed. His young son he had in those 15 years was terrible. He showed off His (God’s) riches to his enemy.

Ok, I get what you are saying, but you have no idea what would have happened if Hezekiah had died in the middle of the Assyrian invasion. So your assertion has no grounds.

It is hard to say if things could have been better,

Yes, that's my point--you can't know what would have happened purely based on what did happen.

but they were really bad for the people of Juda.

What is really bad for Hezekiah is his reaction to God telling him: “You are going to die shortly”, Hezekiah showed boasting, pride, and lack of respect for God’s will.

Was it bad? God accepted it. I don't think it is wrong to remind God of the things we have done for Him.

Hezekiah was doing wonderfully prior to his last 15 years. We all have an earthly objective, which requires becoming a mature adult. Those who die before having the opportunity to fulfill their earthly objective would go on to heaven, but sadly will not have obtained Godly type Love.

No! Hopefully Hezekiah (and all of us) can learn from Hezekiah’s choice to go against God’s desire.

It wasn't against God's desire. God was not hard pressed to maintain the current life-time plans He had for Hezekiah, but was more than willing to change at a moment's notice. Isaiah had not even made it out of the courtyard after delivering the first message before God told him to go back in and deliver the opposite message.

We often do not see the good, which should come from any tragedy or death and we cannot see it with Hezekiah’s early death since he did not want to accept God’s plan and die earlier.

Not seeing it, you have no idea how good or bad it would be. But losing a king during a siege is almost always disheartening to a people.

You might have to explain what you mean by “not factual”, God can know all about fantasies like Star Wars.

It is factual that there is a series of fictional stories called "Star Wars". God knows about those things, since they are written/acted out.

What cannot be known by God is the exact free will choices of a person who will never be made. If God is “going to make them in man’s future”, then God knows what they did. God would know all the possible choices a person could make that will never be made, but not the choice that never to exist person would make.

Can God know about the free will choices of a person in the Star Wars movies? Why or why not?

 

[Derf]

Thanks for mentioning this. The Lamb was not slain "before" the foundation of the world, but "from". Why the difference? Because the Father and the Son had already agreed that the Son would have to die to save mankind if they were to create mankind.

Then you are assuming your view is possible, if not the only possible option. As an assumption, it doesn't seem to be mandated by scripture.

He doesn't need it, it is part of His character, that He does things decently and in good order. If God is all wise, then He doesn't need to go back and erase past mistakes, but that is what you are suggesting He does.

Relationship. If God knows everything we will ever do before we do it, then He is merely planning all of His responses to us--there's no need to plead with us, to cajole us, to tell us to make good choices.

We also lose free-will. If all of our choices are already determined before we exist, then our choices are not really our choices, but someone else's. Loss of free-will also means loss of relationship. You can't really have a meaningful relationship with a robot that you yourself programmed.

No, you are not.

What you have described is a system that is predetermined in all aspects. And if predetermined (including all of our thoughts, words, deeds, choices) before we exist, we are not involved in the determination. That's the definition of "loss of free-will".

No, not assumptions. There are things He would KNOW (Satan's plans, at least to some degree, Satan's character, Satan's past activities, Satan's cognitive abilities, Satan's imagination, and the amount of corruption of Satan's mental capacity since his fall; Peter's character, zeal, the basis of Peter's bravado, and probably Peter's breaking points; His own plans to get the authorities to let the disciples go free, the type of punishment He would undergo, etc, etc.). And based on those things, He can reasonably predict Peter's behavior in the upcoming scenario.

So you are saying that if the text doesn't say "if", then Jer 18 doesn't apply? You need to be consistent. With that statement you've just said that Nineveh's destruction was not contingent. But it was. That Hezekiah's death was not contingent, but it was.

God's actions are contingent on the nations' actions. If God already knows the nations' actions (whether they repent or not), then there's no reason for God to change His actions. Peter's prophecy was about his own actions without any kind of threat of destruction. Jeremiah 18 doesn't apply with regard to God's actions, because no actions of God are provided. But it DOES apply in that the nations or individuals (to extrapolate to Peter) CAN repent, CAN change their minds. This is not possible if the nations' and individuals' actions are all known from eternity, unless they are spurred to do it by God deceiving them.

Jer 18 did not exist when Jonah went to Nineveh. But even without Jer 18, we know from the Ninevites' experience that God is willing to forgive a nation if they repent. In other words, the book of Jonah gives an example of God's dealing with nations, while Jer 18 gives the policy.

But if God tells someone that they will be destroyed, period, it implies that they have a chance, by repenting, not to be destroyed. Peter had a chance not to be humbled by his infidelity, if he first humbled himself, in which case the additional humility was not needed. And Christ would have, in my opinion, welcomed that change in Peter and the scenario would not have needed to play out.

It doesn't change the fact that God is lying if He knows the future perfectly, yet tells something different from the future as perfectly known future events.

If it was known by everyone, then Jer 18 wasn't necessary, which is what I proposed above anyway.

God's future actions can change, according to Jer 18. If they are fully known by God, and then they change, then they weren't fully known by God.

That statement is self-contradictory. If the choices we will make were written long ago, before we existed, then we were not the ones making the choices. It amazes me that you have to contort logic so in order to get your system to work.

Right. Which you are saying God has to know ahead of time, before the man's previous actions occur.

Ok, I get what you are saying, but you have no idea what would have happened if Hezekiah had died in the middle of the Assyrian invasion. So your assertion has no grounds.

Yes, that's my point--you can't know what would have happened purely based on what did happen.

Was it bad? God accepted it. I don't think it is wrong to remind God of the things we have done for Him.

It wasn't against God's desire. God was not hard pressed to maintain the current life-time plans He had for Hezekiah, but was more than willing to change at a moment's notice. Isaiah had not even made it out of the courtyard after delivering the first message before God told him to go back in and deliver the opposite message.

Not seeing it, you have no idea how good or bad it would be. But losing a king during a siege is almost always disheartening to a people.

It is factual that there is a series of fictional stories called "Star Wars". God knows about those things, since they are written/acted out.

Can God know about the free will choices of a person in the Star Wars movies? Why or why not?

Ping @bling

 

[The Liturgist]

No, not every aspect of it.

That violates the Scriptural doctrine of divine omniscience. Are you an adherent of Process Theology?