If God knows everything, why do we need to pray?

[Mark Quayle]

Of course, evil was done to Christ. Christ came to earth to be crucified in atonement for our sins.

I agree that without Adam's sin, there would have been no need for redemption. God desired and desires for all people to come to the knowledge of the truth and be saved, even Pharaoh and Judas. God knew what they were going to do before they did it, so his redemption plan encompassed these men's own free-will decisions.

God knew what they were going to do before he created —in fact, it was his plan for them to do that, according to Acts 2:23. What they did was part of what it takes to create the Bride of Christ.

 

[Jan001]

God knew what they were going to do before he created —in fact, it was his plan for them to do that, according to Acts 2:23. What they did was part of what it takes to create the Bride of Christ.

It was not God's plan for them to do evil. His plan was to bring good out of the evil he knew they were going to do.

Genesis 50:20 You thought evil against me: but God turned it into good, that he might exalt me, as at present you see, and might save many people.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I don’t see why free choice would imply that God didn’t know what was going to transpire. I think the root of the difference between our perspectives is what love is. I believe the purpose for God creating this world was to cultivate people who would love Him. I don’t know if you agree with this statement but I believe that’s why free will was absolutely necessary and why there is a randomness in salvation. What do you think, do you think God created the world to cultivate people who would love Him? If not what would be your reason for Him creating the world?

God created THE world, THIS particular world, not a random world, in which particular people would come to love him beyond their inherent ability to do so, in a way that requires he himself to do it in them. (We can do nothing, we have nothing of value, we are nothing worthy apart from him).

We are not even the complete beings he created us to be until we see him as he is. And each of us is an individual (particular, designated,) member of the Body of Christ. There's nothing haphazard or chance going on here.

 

[John Mullally]

God created THE world, THIS particular world, not a random world, in which particular people would come to love him beyond their inherent ability to do so, in a way that requires he himself to do it in them. (We can do nothing, we have nothing of value, we are nothing worthy apart from him).

Huh? By your logic Jesus would also have nothing of value as Jesus said that He could do nothing apart from the Father. Jesus is our example: He was infinitely triumphant because He loved the Father, made great effort to be in close communication with the Father (sometimes praying overnight), and did as instructed even under extreme duress. On earth Jesus operated as a man and His works were not due to His divinity, but were an outgrowth of freely (FREE WILL baby) lovingly submitting to the Father.

John 5:19 Jesus gave them this answer: “Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does. 20 For the Father loves the Son and shows him all he does. Yes, and he will show him even greater works than these, so that you will be amazed. 21 For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son gives life to whom he is pleased to give it.​

​

John 14:12 Very truly I tell you, whoever believes in me will do the works I have been doing, and they will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father.​

​

Luke 22:42 “Father, if you are willing, take this cup from me; yet not my will, but yours be done.”​

 

[Joseph G]

In regards to the OP, prayer also has two additional benefits:

He speaks TO us through our prayers also. One realizes such when they reflect on bits of His wisdom expressed that we didn't have prior to praying, which is subsequently backed up by Scripture.

Also, I believe He leads us to specifics in prayer so that when the answer comes to pass, we recognize that it came from Him - which gives us reason to praise Him, and encourage us to keep up our prayer life!

It's what relationship is all about...

 

[BNR32FAN]

God created THE world, THIS particular world, not a random world, in which particular people would come to love him beyond their inherent ability to do so, in a way that requires he himself to do it in them. (We can do nothing, we have nothing of value, we are nothing worthy apart from him).

We are not even the complete beings he created us to be until we see him as he is. And each of us is an individual (particular, designated,) member of the Body of Christ. There's nothing haphazard or chance going on here.

Yeah I know what you believe. You believe that God doesn’t allow people to love Him so that He can burn them in the lake of fire for all eternity. I just happen to disagree with it, along with the other 99% of Christians.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Have you seriously considered that God is not a control freak (with your very frequent first cause philosophizing), just because He could be? Just because scripture shows God planning the Exodus and the Crucifixion for mankind's benefit, doesn't mean everything (including our sin) is scripted. Whether or not events are haphazard, it can scientifically appear as haphazard. If everything is scripted as your fellow Monergist Calvin decrees, why are we judged for what we could not avoid doing?

“We hold that God is the disposer and ruler of all things, –that from the remotest eternity, according to his own wisdom, He decreed what he was to do, and now by his power executes what he decreed. Hence we maintain, that by His providence, not heaven and earth and inanimate creatures only, but also the counsels and wills of men are so governed as to move exactly in the course which he has destined.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 16, Paragraph 8)It is laughable that you post so frequently in favor of Calvin's doctrine, even terming yourself a Monergist (which is a new word made up by fellow Calvinists) while claiming you haven't studied Calvin's writings. Continuing to plead ignorance as to Calvinism, is pleading ignoramus.

Your mocking doesn't forward your thesis. Just saying.

Try arguing without the tone, please.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Yeah I know what you believe. You believe that God doesn’t allow people to love Him so that He can burn them in the lake of fire for all eternity. I just happen to disagree with it, along with the other 99% of Christians.

Strange how after years (I think) of having that fact that you are beating on a strawmen pointed out to you, you still insist on ripping them apart.

No! I don't believe that God doesn't allow... I believe that they WON'T and CAN'T love him, and I don't believe that his only —nor even his main— purpose for creating them is to burn them in hell. He made them for his use in producing his reason for creating —the Bride of Christ.

And, not to concede the notion that your POV is the same as that of 99% of Christians, but the numbers make no difference as to the truth of what anyone believes. (Elijah's numbers were even worse than 99%! But fwiw, even arminianism derives from calvinism. Calvinism, Reformed Theology and what I believe are not exactly outliers.)

 

[John Mullally]

Your mocking doesn't forward your thesis. Just saying.

Do you know an authority who manipulates people to do other than what they explicitly command them to do and then punishes them for not doing as commanded? That describes an evil duplicitous control freak. Your fellow Monergist Calvin argues that God does that.

Hence we maintain that, by his providence, not heaven and earth and inanimate creatures only, but also the counsels and wills of men are so governed as to move exactly in the course which he has destined.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 16, Paragraph 8)​

​

“Men do nothing save at the secret instigation of God, and do not discuss and deliberate on anything but what he has previously decreed with himself, and brings to pass by his secret direction.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 18, Paragraph 1)​

​

“The first man fell because the Lord deemed it meet that he should: why he deemed it meet, we know not… Man therefore falls, divine providence so ordaining but he falls by his own fault.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 8)​

That is other than the God of the Bible who is knowable, sent Jesus to redeem mankind from sin on His terms (believing the Gospel), wants good relationship with all men (1 Timothy 2:4), and reveals himself as Love (1 John 4:8). Love is described in 1 Corinthians 13.

 

[BNR32FAN]

No! I don't believe that God doesn't allow... I believe that they WON'T and CAN'T love him,

Unless God enables them right? And obviously God knows this? So if God knows they can’t love Him unless He enables them then He is not allowing them to love Him if He doesn’t enable them.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Do you know an authority who manipulates people to do other than what they explicitly command them to do and then punishes them for not doing as commanded? That describes an evil duplicitous control freak. Your fellow Monergist Calvin argues that God does that.

Hence we maintain that, by his providence, not heaven and earth and inanimate creatures only, but also the counsels and wills of men are so governed as to move exactly in the course which he has destined.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 16, Paragraph 8)​

​

“Men do nothing save at the secret instigation of God, and do not discuss and deliberate on anything but what he has previously decreed with himself, and brings to pass by his secret direction.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 18, Paragraph 1)​

​

“The first man fell because the Lord deemed it meet that he should: why he deemed it meet, we know not… Man therefore falls, divine providence so ordaining but he falls by his own fault.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 8)​

That is other than the God of the Bible who is knowable, sent Jesus to redeem mankind from sin on His terms (believing the Gospel), wants good relationship with all men (1 Timothy 2:4), and reveals himself as Love (1 John 4:8). Love is described in 1 Corinthians 13.

It is not by being a freak, that God controls all things. It is by simple foreknowledge and causation. You have yet to prove me wrong about that, but instead you insist on what works out to the illogical and perverse notion that God, along with us, is subject to chance. You have not shown how what you believe does not equate to causation by chance. You keep going on about how my view doesn't sound like love, and you keep mischaracterizing (such as to call my concept of God "control freak") and so on. You keep repeating your proof-texts out of context as if your use of them was never refuted.

I could go on for hours, and have done so with you, and I have tried to do so without mocking or using other logical fallacies. I don't remember you ever explaining the many places I have pointed out to you from scripture where God explicitly causes someone to do something and then punishes them for doing so. In the one story, he tells Balaam to go, then excoriates him for doing so. Several times he incites a foreign king to decimate Israel, and then punishes him for doing so. Yes, I know that wasn't all there was to the story, but he did do so. So it is with your characterization of what I believe. "He wants a good relationship with all men" is full of words needing definition, besides your use of the proof-text being refuted, and yet that, along with "God is love" (the use of which is entirely dependent on your notion of love) is what you use to support the validity of your worldview —self-determination.

But I see once again there is no point in talking further with you on a thread.

 

[John Mullally]

It is not by being a freak, that God controls all things. It is by simple foreknowledge and causation.

I think we agree that God works out His purposes, but that does not necessarily mean God controls our actions as Calvin states. Non-Calvinists view God as allowing people to make decisions and sin results from man's selfish bad decisions - not from God's causation.

You have yet to prove me wrong about that, but instead you insist on what works out to the illogical and perverse notion that God, along with us, is subject to chance. You have not shown how what you believe does not equate to causation by chance.

Man is a sentient being - which means under any set of circumstances, he is commonly not constrained to making a particular choice. The response is tied more to the person's character than circumstance - a good tree produces good fruit. Yet you refute all that by terming it chance. Don't confuse speculation with logic.

You keep going on about how my view doesn't sound like love, and you keep mischaracterizing (such as to call my concept of God "control freak") and so on. You keep repeating your proof-texts out of context as if your use of them was never refuted.

How exactly did I mischaracterize? Remind me how I am taking proof-texts out of context and how you refuted them. I relish showing how Calvinists do that.

I could go on for hours, and have done so with you, and I have tried to do so without mocking or using other logical fallacies. I don't remember you ever explaining the many places I have pointed out to you from scripture where God explicitly causes someone to do something and then punishes them for doing so. In the one story, he tells Balaam to go, then excoriates him for doing so.

I don't recall that conversation. God understands motives and Numbers 22:32 answers why Balaam was excoriated. And later we see Balaam's true colors. The donkey incident was a warning to Balaam which he did not heed.

Several times he incites a foreign king to decimate Israel, and then punishes him for doing so. Yes, I know that wasn't all there was to the story, but he did do so.

I don't recall that conversation. Incite can just amount to not restraining the foreign kings lust. That is the best you have?

So it is with your characterization of what I believe. "He wants a good relationship with all men" is full of words needing definition​

You don't need a PHD to understand what 1 Timothy 2:4 means, but it would help if you want to obfuscate it.

, besides your use of the proof-text being refuted, and yet that, along with "God is love" (the use of which is entirely dependent on your notion of love) is what you use to support the validity of your worldview —self-determination.

Per 1 Corinthians 13, Love is kind, but Calvin's statements indicate that God controls all our actions, and punishes us for the bad ones (sin). Is that kind? Is it kind or just to punish someone for that which they could not avoid?

Your frequent self-determination assessments of non-Calvinists are a joke. Of course there are many things we have no control over. Its Calvin and his followers who take the extreme fatalist position - where God scripts everyone's actions from eternity past and man cannot be differentiated from an intelligent puppet who has the perception he makes decisions.

“We hold that God is the disposer and ruler of all things, –that from the remotest eternity, according to his own wisdom, He decreed what he was to do, and now by his power executes what he decreed. Hence we maintain, that by His providence, not heaven and earth and inanimate creatures only, but also the counsels and wills of men are so governed as to move exactly in the course which he has destined.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 16, Paragraph 8)​

​

But I see once again there is no point in talking further with you on a thread.

I believe I am making points, but suit yourself

 

[Mark Quayle]

Unless God enables them right? And obviously God knows this? So if God knows they can’t love Him unless He enables them then He is not allowing them to love Him if He doesn’t enable them.

Nope. Bad reasoning. It is not a question of not allowing them to love him. (They will not to love him. If they would, in their self-determination, they would be allowed, but they won't.) In the language of John 3:18 they are already condemned. It is not by him not allowing what would otherwise happen that they fail to love him, but by what they already are —specifically, they are at enmity with him.

 

[John Mullally]

Nope. Bad reasoning. It is not a question of not allowing them to love him. (They will not to love him. If they would, in their self-determination, they would be allowed, but they won't.) In the language of John 3:18 they are already condemned. It is not by him not allowing what would otherwise happen that they fail to love him, but by what they already are —specifically, they are at enmity with him.

Again the laughable "self-determination" charge from a Calvin follower. Excuse me, Calvinists are on the extreme end of the spectrum where God control.

Hence we maintain that, by his providence, not heaven and earth and inanimate creatures only, but also the counsels and wills of men are so governed as to move exactly in the course which he has destined.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 16, Paragraph 8)​

“Men do nothing save at the secret instigation of God, and do not discuss and deliberate on anything but what he has previously decreed with himself, and brings to pass by his secret direction.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 18, Paragraph 1)​

“The first man fell because the Lord deemed it meet that he should: why he deemed it meet, we know not… Man therefore falls, divine providence so ordaining but he falls by his own fault.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 8​

​

Painting mankind as enemies of God, does not mean that we cannot confess our fallen state and reply to His Gospel message of reconciliation under the conviction of the Holy Spirit (John 16:8). There is nothing about being an enemy that implies or necessitates an inability to be reconciled to your enemy, just like there’s nothing about being a slave to sin which implies that you’re incapable of admitting that you’re enslaved when confronted. Just because you are a slave to sin, doesn’t mean that you cannot respond to God who offers to free you.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Again the laughable "self-determination" charge from a Calvin follower. Excuse me, Calvinists are on the extreme end of the spectrum where God control.

Hence we maintain that, by his providence, not heaven and earth and inanimate creatures only, but also the counsels and wills of men are so governed as to move exactly in the course which he has destined.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 16, Paragraph 8)​

“Men do nothing save at the secret instigation of God, and do not discuss and deliberate on anything but what he has previously decreed with himself, and brings to pass by his secret direction.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 18, Paragraph 1)​

“The first man fell because the Lord deemed it meet that he should: why he deemed it meet, we know not… Man therefore falls, divine providence so ordaining but he falls by his own fault.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 8​

​

Painting mankind as enemies of God, does not mean that we cannot confess our fallen state and reply to His Gospel message of reconciliation under the conviction of the Holy Spirit (John 16:8). There is nothing about being an enemy that implies or necessitates an inability to be reconciled to your enemy, just like there’s nothing about being a slave to sin which implies that you’re incapable of admitting that you’re enslaved when confronted. Just because you are a slave to sin, doesn’t mean that you cannot respond to God who offers to free you.

Painting?? Mankind is at enmity with God.

But, no, the unregenerated cannot truly confess, because their confession would be false —whatsoever is not of faith is sin! Without faith it is impossible to please God. Apart from Him you can do nothing.

The Spirit of God knows the depth of the horror that sin is, and the height of the mercy of God. We don't. The unregenerate certainly do not, having "the mind of the flesh".

 

[John Mullally]

Painting?? Mankind is at enmity with God.

But, no, the unregenerated cannot truly confess, because their confession would be false

We see from from the angel's declaration over Cornelius in Acts 10 that not all the unregenerate are that way.

—whatsoever is not of faith is sin! Without faith it is impossible to please God. Apart from Him you can do nothing.

Again, Jesus is our example as He also stated that He could do nothing without the Father and yet He was infinitely triumphant. Faith comes from hearing the word of God (Romans 10:17) and we all daily decide what we listen to - so it is not in the realm of the impossible for anyone to listen to God's word, receive saving faith, and go onto doing great works.

The Spirit of God knows the depth of the horror that sin is, and the height of the mercy of God. We don't. The unregenerate certainly do not, having "the mind of the flesh".

Man has Body (AKA flesh), Soul (AKA mind, will and emotion), and Spirit. Only the spirit (Proverbs 20:27) can commune with God's Spirit and be born again - so no need to concentrate on the weakness of the flesh as only our spirit communes with God. Per the parable of the Prodigal son, it is possible to come to yourself, repent and be welcomed. God desires all people to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4) - therefore our God does not block the path to salvation for anyone. despite the weakness of the flesh or Calvinist dogma.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Mark Quayle said:
Painting?? Mankind is at enmity with God.

But, no, the unregenerated cannot truly confess, because their confession would be false

We see from from the angel's declaration over Cornelius in Acts 10 that not all the unregenerate are that way.

What makes you think Cornelius was unregenerate? Or, even if I accept that he was not, what did the angel declare over Cornelius that demonstrates that someone unregenerate can confess truly?

Again, Jesus is our example as He also stated that He could do nothing without the Father and yet He was infinitely triumphant. Faith comes from hearing the word of God (Romans 10:17) and we all daily decide what we listen to - so it is not in the realm of the impossible for anyone to listen to God's word, receive saving faith, and go onto doing great works.

What has "doing great works" to do with this discussion? Did not those who cast out demons in Jesus name do great works? "Depart from me you workers of iniquity, for I never knew you!"

But yes, they receive saving faith! Who said otherwise? Faith comes by hearing. I agree. What's your point? How does that defeat anything I have said?

Man has Body (AKA flesh), Soul (AKA mind, will and emotion), and Spirit. Only the spirit (Proverbs 20:27) can commune with God's Spirit and be born again - so no need to concentrate on the weakness of the flesh as only our spirit communes with God. Per the parable of the Prodigal son, it is possible to come to yourself, repent and be welcomed. God desires all people to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Timothy 2:4) - therefore our God does not block the path to salvation for anyone. despite the weakness of the flesh or Calvinist dogma.

The spirit of man, you claim, is not spiritually dead, in the unregenerate?

Why do you characterize it as "God blocking the path to salvation?" That is not what I claim. Man WILL not.

 

[John Mullally]

Mark Quayle said:
Painting?? Mankind is at enmity with God.

But, no, the unregenerated cannot truly confess, because their confession would be false

What makes you think Cornelius was unregenerate? Or, even if I accept that he was not, what did the angel declare over Cornelius that demonstrates that someone unregenerate can confess truly?

Because regeneration, follows believing the Gospel message. Believing the Gospel is mentioned in many places scattered throughout the NT, whereas being born-again (i.e. regeneration) is only mentioned in John 3:3-8.

The only argument I have heard from the Bible for regeneration preceding faith is from John 3:5, where you have to be born again in order to enter the kingdom of God. But Jesus tells us in much more precise terms when the transition from death into life (i.e. into the kingdom of God) occurs - it is when we believe - thus regeneration cannot precede faith.

John 3:5 Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit.​

​

John 5:24 “Very truly I tell you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life.​

​

Ephesians 1:13 gives us the order of salvation - it is hear, believe, and then sealed by the Holy Spirit. Given that being born-again is only mention in one passage of the NT, I would take it to be included in the being sealed by the Holy Spirit.

Ephesians 1:13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit…​

But yes, they receive saving faith! Who said otherwise? Faith comes by hearing. I agree. What's your point? How does that defeat anything I have said?

The spirit of man, you claim, is not spiritually dead, in the unregenerate?

Spiritually dead just means separated from God. The spirit does not cease to exist or operate. It's like "dead to me" and is the same sense in which the prodigal son was termed "dead".