How, then, is the Calvinist refuted? (2)

[cygnusx1]

no scripture has been given that shows when a person is in Christ , that is because it isn't faith that "places us in Christ" , it is predestination !


what does faith cause ?

it doesn't cause anything!!

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Heb 11:1


most people treat faith as indicative of power , or credit , it is niether , faith is the assurance , the evidence of things hoped for , such as salvation , justification , election , sanctification , predestination , reconcilation , these things not seen are absolutely complete and finished.... faith does not make them so , it only evidences they are so , if you don't believe these things are so , then where is your faith ?

 

[frumanchu]

Therefore, Calvinists have no response to the passage.
...
Calvinism has no answer for this one....

Ben, I myself responded to this argument from this passage YEARS AGO, and have continued to post the answer...[post=39422850]EVEN IN THIS VERY THREAD[/post]. How can you possibly claim Calvinists have "no response" and "no answer" for this passage when we've clearly and undeniably provided you with one time and again for years.

You say earlier in this thread that "It always goes in circles; we refute a point or two, then the same points show up a dozen posts later as if never refuted." Yet you then claim Calvinists have no answer for that passage in Hebrews only a couple dozen posts after I post one!

Ben, how can you expect to have meaningful or constructive conversation with us when you make statements such as these. It is statements like these from you that have made it impossible for us to have rational discussion. How can you expect us to hold conversation with you when you either do not listen to us or blatantly ignore what we say and pretend as though we never said it?

 

[cygnusx1]

one can only conclude ben by his own standards and beliefs has lost his salvation , for lying is a sin > sinning is not trusting God > and he who loses faith and trust loses salvation ..... so ben says anyway.

 

[Ben johnson]

no scripture has been given that shows when a person is in Christ, that is because it isn't faith that "places us in Christ", it is predestination !

If that was true, then Paul wouldn't have warned us to "examine ourselves, to see if we are IN CHRIST; we can be unapproved/failed". 2Cor13:5

what does faith cause ?

it doesn't cause anything!!

God responds to man's faith; we do not respond to God's predestination. This is the foundational difference between our views.

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. Heb 11:1

And "Without faith it is impossible to please God; for he who COMES to God must believe God IS (must come BY faith), and that God is a rewarder of those who SEEK Him." Heb11:6

God receives man's faith --- He doesn't generate it.
"Now we live, IF you stand firm in the Lord." 1Thess3:8

most people treat faith as indicative of power, or credit, it is niether, faith is the assurance, the evidence of things hoped for, such as salvation, justification, election , sanctification, predestination, reconcilation, these things not seen are absolutely complete and finished.... faith does not make them so, it only evidences they are so, if you don't believe these things are so, then where is your faith?

Faith is causal, Cygnus. God receives man's faith; if faith was consequential, then God would cause it.

 

[Ben johnson]

one can only conclude ben by his own standards and beliefs has lost his salvation , for lying is a sin > sinning is not trusting God > and he who loses faith and trust loses salvation ..... so ben says anyway.

Heb4:11 says "WE must be diligent to enter God's rest, lest anyone FALL by imitating their unbelief and disobedience."

Support the assertion that "it's not talking to the saved" --- prove that the unsaved, can excercise diligence in anything OTHER than unbelief.

Support the assertion that "it's not talking about falling-from-salvation" --- prove that we can be "unbelieving/disobedient-SAVED".

Support the assertion that "it's 100% effective MEANS of persevering us, yes it says do NOT be unbelieving/disobedient, yes it says don't FALL, but it's really God dealing with us so that we will NOT fall". (Include 3:6-14 in your argument.)

These are your choices, Cygnus; you must choose one of these challenges of "support", or you can instead ignore the challenge. But if you do, then the passage will continue, unrefuted.

The last option is to recognize that he's really warning us towards "diligence in faith, and in salvation".

 

[cygnusx1]

Faith is causal, Cygnus. God receives man's faith; if faith was consequential, then God would cause it.

Faith is never causal , it is ;


Hbr 11:1¶Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. KJV


Here faith is responsive , it is the evidence of things NOT SEEN , ie, things that already exist but are unseen are evidenced / made known/ revealed by faith .


Abraham was saved "by" his faith not because of it!

tell me when was Abraham justified ?


Faith is the EVIDENCE of things not seen , not the cause or instigator !

 

[frumanchu]

Heb4:11 says "WE must be diligent to enter God's rest, lest anyone FALL by imitating their unbelief and disobedience."

Support the assertion that "it's not talking to the saved" --- prove that the unsaved, can excercise diligence in anything OTHER than unbelief.

Support the assertion that "it's not talking about falling-from-salvation" --- prove that we can be "unbelieving/disobedient-SAVED".

Support the assertion that "it's 100% effective MEANS of persevering us, yes it says do NOT be unbelieving/disobedient, yes it says don't FALL, but it's really God dealing with us so that we will NOT fall". (Include 3:6-14 in your argument.)

These are your choices, Cygnus; you must choose one of these challenges of "support", or you can instead ignore the challenge. But if you do, then the passage will continue, unrefuted.

The last option is to recognize that he's really warning us towards "diligence in faith, and in salvation".

FALSE DILEMMA!

Several have put forth a different explanation which does not fit into the convenience of your predefined "five way" categories, Ben, and that is that the audience of Hebrews is being addressed by their confession, NOT by their soteriological status.

I have asked you before whether you believed one could confess faith in Christ but not actually possess faith in Christ. For the benefit of those who did not witness that conversation, I will ask again.

Do you or do you not believe that men can confess to have faith in Christ but not actually possess faith in Christ?


BTW, if you want to ignore me and try to pretend I'm not posting in direct response to your arguments, that's fine. But don't expect them to go away because I will continue to post criticisms and refutations of your positions whether you acknowledge them or not, and your unwillingness to defend against them will only further weaken your arguments.

 

[Ben johnson]

Faith is never causal , it is ;

Hbr 11:1¶Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. KJV

This does not exclusively endorse "consequential faith". But Heb11:6, endorses "causal faith". What do you do with that verse, in the translation you use?

And also, Acts10:34-35?

Here faith is responsive , it is the evidence of things NOT SEEN, ie, things that already exist but are unseen are evidenced / made known/ revealed by faith.

OK, work with me here --- in Jesus' response to Thomas (John20:29), Jesus praised unseen faith, over seen faith. NOTE that Thomas' belief was BECAUSE he saw.

If faith is the evidence of things not seen (or in Thomas' case, it is the evidence of SEEN things) --- meaning, "consequential-to-God's-sovereign-choosing") --- how could unseen faith be praised higher by Jesus? Both "faiths" would be ORDAINED, and therefore EQUAL.

Abraham was saved "by" his faith not because of it!

By, because, tomato tomahto.

tell me when was Abraham justified ?

Per James2:21, it was by works, when he offered up Isaac.

Faith is the EVIDENCE of things not seen , not the cause or instigator !

God's position is RECEIVING our faith, not authoring it.

...btw, I once was in a tourist shop, and they had a can labelled "Instigator". The directions were:
1. Open canned instigator
2. Add 3 cups water
3. Run like crazy before he can bite you.

 

[cygnusx1]

ben still thinks "by faith" means because of faith , he ignores completely the instrumentality of faith ;

ben , faith makes none alive , God's word raises the dead not our faith , while we were dead in trespasses and sins , God raised us ............ God's work not yours !

faith is purely instrumental in salvation , in that we are saved THROUGH faith , just as a person is saved from a house fire through passing through an open window on the shoulder of a FIREMAN , the open window didn't save him , the firemen did!

 

[nobdysfool]

This does not exclusively endorse "consequential faith". But Heb11:6, endorses "causal faith". What do you do with that verse, in the translation you use?

Ben, faith is the conduit, not the cause. as long as you believe that our faith causes our salvation, you cannot avoid the clear fact that you believe that we must add our faith to God's Grace in order to be saved, which means salvation is no longer of Grace, but of man's faith. You cannot adequately explain why one man has sufficient faith and another doesn't, if that faith is homegrown, nor can you explain how the "faith" arising from an unregenerate heart can ever be pleasing to God.

OK, work with me here --- in Jesus' response to Thomas (John20:29), Jesus praised unseen faith, over seen faith. NOTE that Thomas' belief was BECAUSE he saw.

You present a false dichotomy. Jesus said to Thomas "you believe because you see. Blessed are those who do not see yet believe". That doesn't mean that those who saw (the other Disciples) were not blessed. They all saw and believed, Thomas was just a little late. They all were blessed. You make a bid deal out of this, as though it proved something huge for your doctrines, and it is nothing.

If faith is the evidence of things not seen (or in Thomas' case, it is the evidence of SEEN things) --- meaning, "consequential-to-God's-sovereign-choosing") --- how could unseen faith be praised higher by Jesus? Both "faiths" would be ORDAINED, and therefore EQUAL.

Nothing more than assumption, because you want to see it that way, even though it isn't that way.

By, because, tomato tomahto.

Whistling in the dark. Your statement that "faith is causal" is flat out wrong. Faith is evidence, it is assurance, of that which already is, yet unseen. Faith is the conduit through which God works.

Per James2:21, it was by works, when he offered up Isaac.

Abraham was justified long before that event. Justification before God is always by faith, never by works. "By works shall no man be justified."

Here is a clear error you've made. Will you admit it?

God's position is RECEIVING our faith, not authoring it.

Wrong. God is both the source of our faith, and He receives the faith of those whom He has saved. Faith is imparted by the hearing of the Word. Therefore, saving faith is sourced from outside of man. Man receives it, and then utilizes it, but it wasn't sourced from within him.

...btw, I once was in a tourist shop, and they had a can labelled "Instigator". The directions were:
1. Open canned instigator
2. Add 3 cups water
3. Run like crazy before he can bite you.

Let me guess....you bought a case of them.....

 

[CCWoody]

LOL!!!

You know you're desperate when you start quoting fictional time travel movies to support your theology

Especially when in that analogy what God knows to happen in the future becomes a lie. God knew an event would occur yet man changed that event so that what God knew was false. Perhaps God has senile demetia. He has been around a while you know.

It also illustrates that Ben still can't give a single answer as to what the knowledge of God is. He is back to the view that God doesn't really know the future. He is back in the Open Theism band wagon.

Recognize that all true Christians will be Calvinists in glory....

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.​

 

[CCWoody]

It was a "Freudian Slip", Woody. Your platform does found on "by grace alone".

Well, yeah. That is what the Bible teaches and what the ENTIRE church has believed. Too bad that many in the modern church think that salvation is by something other than grace.

Because there is a clarification later does not invalidate this cite as you would like. Salvation is by grace. ~ CCWoody (earlier citation)

Sure it does;....

So, let me get this straight. A later verse invalidates an earlier verse. Well, Ben, your argument is not with me. It is obviously with the Bible if you think that Scripture invalidates Scripture.

How much of the Bible do you think is invalid???

?????

Simply state that you deny it and we can move on. At least then we would have the honesty of knowing that you really believe that salvation is by grace PLUS something you provide. ~ CCWoody. (earlier cite)

No, it's not --- it's not something I PROVIDE.

You are waffling, again...

Earlier Ben Johnson statements:
Without faith it is impossible to please God, Woody; as A.T.Robertson said, "Grace is God's gift, faith is ours".

Since we are discussing salvation and Eph 2, and since you assert that Grace is God's gift and faith is our gift, it is clear that faith is something we provide.

Please make up your mind, Ben. Is the faith ours. Is it what we provide or is it what God provides. Stand up and be counted for what you believe.

If I give you a birthday present, do you not have the ability to receive it, or refuse it? If you accept it --- have you changed anything of the gift, added anything to the gift, taken anything away from the gift? No. The gift remains all of me, but received by you.

You would not "congratulate yourself on your wise choice to RECEIVE it" --- instead, you would have grattitude, thinking "BEN! I've been wanting this for YEARS!"

Yes, Ben, faith does not change grace. Nor does a verse with faith invalidate a verse with grace as you EXPLICITLY asserted.

Yet, salvation cannot happen without YOUR part. If you don't provide faith, no salvation. As you interpret in your theology and your earlier statements, you will save yourself with YOUR faith.

Salvation is only to be obtained if you control God's grace. It is NOT as you have declared adamantly a salvation by grace.

Yet, grace is represented in the shed blood and person of Christ. In your theology, unless you can control Christ, you will not have salvation. And, the shed grace of God is not a play thing.

Somehow, I don't think the Lord is at your beck and call.


Recognize that all true Christians will be Calvinists in glory....

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.​

 

[CCWoody]

You still cannot deny Jesus' words in Matt7:24-27.
Doc Brown knew about Marty's collision with the Mercedes ("Back to the Future"). But Marty learned not to be provoked by being called "chicken".

Did Marty change? He didn't hit the Mercedes, did he? God being aware of the future, changes nothing of our responsibility in deciding our eternity.

Ben, please pick one and quit waffling back and forth on what you believe:

1. The knowledge of God is exhaustive. He knows a fixed future.
2. The knowledge of God is NOT exhaustive. He doesn't know the future with certaintity.

You have now denied your earlier position (God knows the future) with the postulation that what God knows (represented in your analogy by Emmet Brown) can be changed (a known future event never happens).

Pick your position!!!

He knows what we will do;

Well, in your Back to the Future analogy you have God totally ignorant of what we will do and what the future holds.

Which is it, Ben. Does God know or does he NOT know. You can't have it both ways.

Recognize that all true Christians will be Calvinists in glory....

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.​

 

[Ben johnson]

Ben, faith is the conduit not the cause. as long as you believe that our faith causes our salvation...

How do you understand 1Pet1:9?

...you cannot avoid the clear fact

Why is it "clear"?

... that you believe that we must add our faith to god's Grace in order to be saved...

No, we add nothing --- grace is the gift, faith receives the gift. Rom5:17. John1:12. Etcetera.

...which means salvation is no longer of Grace, but of man's faith.

It is nothing more, and nothing less, than what Paul said: "By grace through faith". Your doctrine reduces faith to passivity ("by grace through grace have you been saved") --- when Jesus plainly said "action".

"He WHO hears AND acts, is ...wise...
...he who hears and DOES NOT ACT, is ...foolish...."

You cannot adequately explain why one man has sufficient faith and another doesn't...

Sure I can --- one chooses God, the other chooses sin. Man is conscious, NBF, and makes responsible decisions.

That's the only way Jesus' many rebukes fit; look at Matt11:21-24 --- He is only rebuking willful unbelief.

if that faith is homegrown, nor can you explain how the "faith" arising from an unregenerate heart can ever be pleasing to God.

Look again at Heb11:6; he who COMES to God must believe God exists --- no way no how it's accommodating "God chooses who has faith".

You present a false dichotomy. Jesus said to Thomas "you believe because you see.

Because. Causal. Established. He saw, and seeing (for him) was believing. (And once again, there is Jesus' rebuke just mentioned, "if THEY had seen what YOU have seen, THEY WOULD HAVE BELIEVED! It will go better for THEM in the Judgment, than for YOU!"

Blessed are those who do not see yet believe". that doesn't mean that those who saw (the other Disciples) were not blessed.

He's clearly differentiating "seeing-belief", from "unseen-belief"; the latter is better. Do you deny this?

They all saw and believed, Thomas was just a little late. They all were blessed. You make a bid deal out of this, as though it proved something huge for your doctrines, and it is nothing.

Why did Jesus compare "seen", with "unseen"? Do you deny "unseen faith, is better"?

Nothing more than assumption, because you want to see it that way, even though it isn't that way.

Then why did Jesus say it?

Whistling in the dark. Your statement that "faith is causal" is flat out wrong.

Based on what?

Faith is evidence, it is assurance, of that which already is, yet unseen. Faith is the conduit through which God works.

Yes, it is; and without faith it is impossible to please God.

He who COMES to God, comes by faith.

God is not partial, but welcomes (receives!) those WHO revere/seek.

Calvinism is the partiality God is not.

Abraham was justified long before that event. Justification before God is always by faith, never by works. "By works shall no man be jusitified." Here is a clear error you've made. Will you admit it?

Do you deny what James wrote? How do you explain it?

Wrong. God is both the source of our faith

Show me the verse that says that.

and He receives the faith of those whom He has saved.

Sorry --- "saved", follows "faith".

Let me guess....you bought a case of them.....

Nope, just the one. But running wasn't necessary; he was so sweet and gentle, he made a wonderful pet. I took him everywhere, and all loved him. I remember once I was walking him on a leash, and we stopped into a soda-shop. I said, "Excuse me, do you serve IRS agents?" He said, "Certainly, sir! What will you have?"

I said, "OK, give me a sasparilla, and Harvey here will have an IRS agent..."

 

[Ben johnson]

ben still thinks "by faith" means because of faith, he ignores completely the instrumentality of faith;

Which comes first, Cygnus? "Made-alive", or "faith"?

ben, faith makes none alive, God's word raises the dead not our faith, while we were dead in trespasses and sins , God raised us ............ God's work not yours!

We're back to Eph2:5-8; WHEN we were dead in sins, God made us alive, by grace THROUGH FAITH.

There is no escaping the fact that "saving-faith", occurred WHEN we were dead in sins.

faith is purely instrumental in salvation, in that we are saved THROUGH faith, just as a person is saved from a house fire through passing through an open window on the shoulder of a FIREMAN, the open window didn't save him, the firemen did!

Tell me how you understand Peter's words?

"Receiving as the OUTCOME of YOUR FAITH the salvation of your souls." 1:1:9

 

[cygnusx1]

If the Arminian Christian were to be asked, “Why are you a Christian but your neighbour isn’t?” it would most likely prompt a response along the lines of, “Because I accepted Jesus as my Saviour, and my neighbour didn’t.” However, this answer isn’t sufficient – it is incomplete, so the Arminian must be asked, “Why were you able to accept Jesus when your neighbour wasn’t?”

The Arminian can only give a self-centred answer – it may be, “Because I was willing to admit I was a sinner”. But again, it is a leading answer which brings the inevitable question of, “Why were you able to admit your sin when your neighbour wasn’t?” Without embracing the doctrine of unconditional election, the Arminian is left with the answer “Because I was more humble” – a proud, self-centred answer without a shred of Biblical text in support.

 

[Ben johnson]

I'm not "Arminian"; but "Responsible Grace" is much closer to "Arminianism", than "Calvinism".

Conviction is what brings someone to faith. It's clear in Peter's words, Acts2; he was telling them: "You've been waiting for the Messiah --- but He came, and you KILLED Him." When they heard this, they were "pierced to the heart" (smitten in conscience), and BELIEVED. 2:37.

It was conviction that turned them to Christ, not "God's sovereign election".

Probably the greatest obstacle impeding Calvinists' rejection of their doctrine, is the question of "why does one believe, and another not?" Yet --- the idea of "belief being a free choice", is well-established in Scripture. Jesus rebuked listeners often for willful UNBELIEF. Matt11:21-24, John5:39-47 are excellent examples. And nowhere in Jesus' words is even a hint of an idea of "You will believe, if God has sovereignly-elected you to".

Even in John3, verses 18-20 --- men (who!) prefer sin, turn to the darkness and refuse the light; but men (who!) pursue righteousness, SEEK the light, that their righteous deeds be seen. The idea of "free will", that is, one CAN seek God and righteousness, or one CAN seek sin and darkness, is replete in Scripture; very much so in the OT. One verse Calvinists thought supported them (Ezk36:26-27), instead betrayed Calvinism, when read from 11:18-21 --- men turned to God, and away from abominations, and THEN received new hearts --- or stubbornly CHOSE abominations (rejecting God) and He condemned their choice.

Always, God's position is "receiving of men's faith" --- He welcomes/rewards/is-well-pleased-to-SAVE those who seek/revere/repent/believe. Acts10:34-35, Heb11:6, 1Cor1:21.

If God authors faith, then He does not receive it --- for it was His from the BEGINNING, it was never in a place to be GIVEN to Him.

Make sense? No one can "receive", what he has always had (or what he has created from the start).

 

[Ben johnson]

Especially when in that analogy what God knows to happen in the future becomes a lie. God knew an event would occur yet man changed that event so that what God knew was false. Perhaps God has senile demetia. He has been around a while you know.

It also illustrates that Ben still can't give a single answer as to what the knowledge of God is. He is back to the view that God doesn't really know the future. He is back in the Open Theism band wagon.

Of course God knows the future. But let's see how you do with a simple question.

"When God saw their deeds, that they had turned from their wicked way, THEN God REPENTED of the calamity which He had declared He would bring upon them, and He did not DO it." Jonah3:10

God changed His mind, when He saw they had repented.

Do you have any explanation for that, Woody?

 

[Ben johnson]

Well, yeah. That is what the Bible teaches and what the ENTIRE church has believed. Too bad that many in the modern church think that salvation is by something other than grace.

Actually --- the Bible teaches "by grace through faith". Show me church teaching before Augustine that was "predestinary".

Because there is a clarification later does not invalidate this cite as you would like.

The "later clarification", is "clarification".

Salvation is by grace. ~ CCWoody (earlier citation)

No, it's "by grace, by grace THROUGH FAITH". We cannot throw away "through faith", merely because we don't like it.

So, let me get this straight. A later verse invalidates an earlier verse.

Not at ALL. The "later verse", explains the "earlier" --- iow, they are the SAME. Thus it's established, that "through faith", occurred WHEN we were dead in our sins. We were "made alive", THROUGH faith, not BEFORE.

Well, Ben, your argument is not with me. It is obviously with the Bible if you think that Scripture invalidates Scripture.

Scripture does not invalidate Scripture --- it invalidates Calvinism.

How much of the Bible do you think is invalid???

Uhm, pretty much all of the Book of Calvin.

Simply state that you deny it and we can move on. At least then we would have the honesty of knowing that you really believe that salvation is by grace PLUS something you provide. ~ CCWoody. (earlier cite)

Not "grace PLUS", but "grace THROUGH". Viva la difere'nce.

You are waffling, again...

No I'm not; but now that you mention it, a good Belgian waffle, with some pure maple syrup, some strawberries and whipped cream, does sound good...

Earlier Ben Johnson statements:
Without faith it is impossible to please God, Woody; as A.T.Robertson said, "Grace is God's gift, faith is ours".

Since we are discussing salvation and Eph 2, and since you assert that Grace is God's gift and faith is our gift, it is clear that faith is something we provide.

Faith that accepts a gift, adds nothing TO that gift. I'll say that hundreds of times until it's accepted.

Please make up your mind, Ben. Is the faith ours. Is it what we provide or is it what God provides. Stand up and be counted for what you believe.

"Receive as the outcome of YOUR FAITH the salvation of your souls." 1Pet1:9 It couldn't be clearer.

Yes, Ben, faith does not change grace. Nor does a verse with faith invalidate a verse with grace as you EXPLICITLY asserted.

No "invalidation" --- rather, "explanation".

"By grace", is shown not to have meant "by grace alone" --- he clearly wrote, "by grace THROUGH FAITH". And that position is coincident with the time WHEN we were dead, it is the means by which God MADE us alive.

Mark my words, Woody --- WHEN we were dead, God made us alive, through faith. "Faith", precedes "made-alive". And that ruins "Calvinism".

Yet, salvation cannot happen without YOUR part. If you don't provide faith, no salvation. As you interpret in your theology and your earlier statements, you will save yourself with YOUR faith.

"Beginning to ending faith" (Rom1:17), and by our diligent perseverance we save ourselves (1Tim4:16). No matter how hard a Calvinist tries, there's no way to remove Paul's statements from Scripture.

I'm sorry if that offended anyone; I meant no disrespect.

Salvation is only to be obtained if you control God's grace.

"RECEIVE", not "control". Look up "receive" --- you'll find passages like Jn1:12, Rom5:17, etcetera.

It is NOT as you have declared adamantly a salvation by grace.

It is "salvation by grace". But we are not saved until we RECEIVE it.

Yet, grace is represented in the shed blood and person of Christ. In your theology, unless you can control Christ, you will not have salvation. And, the shed grace of God is not a play thing.

I would respectfully hope you have a life-jacket --- your ship is sinking.

Somehow, I don't think the Lord is at your beck and call.

He is not; but His Gospel is at my discretion, to receive or to reject.

 

[Ben johnson]

Ben, please pick one and quit waffling back and forth on what you believe:

1. The knowledge of God is exhaustive. He knows a fixed future.
2. The knowledge of God is NOT exhaustive. He doesn't know the future with certaintity.

Did God know that Ninevah would REPENT?

Yes, or no, Woody?

You have now denied your earlier position (God knows the future) with the postulation that what God knows (represented in your analogy by Emmet Brown) can be changed (a known future event never happens).

If the future is changed (by a Delorean and a Flux Capacitor), then God knew from the beginning about the change. YET --- it was still changed.

Do you admit the difference between "caused", and "knew"?

Pick your position!!!

How 'bout, "head of the class"?

Well, in your Back to the Future analogy you have God totally ignorant of what we will do and what the future holds.

Do not.

Which is it, Ben. Does God know or does he NOT know. You can't have it both ways.

Back to Ninevah --- did He KNOW they would repent, or not?