Omniscience and Predestination- Can't Have One Without the Other

[SemperReformanda]

Every thinking Christian is faced with a choice. He can either believe in both predestination and God's omniscience, or he is forced to abandon both of them. There are many inconsistent Christians out there, likely many who are reading this, who maintain that God is omniscient, yet He doesn't predestine the eternal destinies of men.

Inevitably their argument consists of this: "God FOREKNOWS what choice people make, so therefore He predestines them according to what He foresees them doing--accepting or rejecting Christ."

First of all, this definition in no way coincides with how the Bible (as opposed to Webster's Dictionary) uses the word. But even accepting the anemic Free Will definition of foreknowledge as merely precognition, this in no way helps the Free Will position.

Let's posit, for the sake of discussion, that God merely looks into a Celestial Magic View Finder and foresees what decision people are going to make, and then predestines accordingly. The typical argument goes, basically, that God foresees men going to Hell, but has such an abiding respect for their Free Will that He creates them anyway to give them the privilege of choosing Hell.

But the thinking here misses a step. It's not as if, from eternity, God was BOUND and OBLIGATED to create only the exact people He chose to create. God in eternity was bound by nothing, and was free to create from an infinite number of possible individuals, as befits an infinite mind.

To help us visualize this, take the current world population--around 6 billion people. Let us, for argument's sake, say that 2 billion of these people will eventually choose Christ and go to Heaven.

God could EASILY have chosen, from the infinite number of possibilities in His mind, 6 billion people who would, of their own Free Will, choose to accept Christ. And then in turn NOT created the other 4 billion which He invariably and utterly "foreknew" would never accept Christ.

But He didn't. He chose to create X number who would invariably accept Christ, and X number whom He knew, without a shadow of a doubt, would go to Hell. And they go to Hell simply because they CHOSE to. Which is entirely the Calvinist position.

So we're left with a choice. Either the Reformed position of omniscience and predestination; or the new Openness people, who deny both.

 

[SemperReformanda]

Another thing to ponder is this. Many view the Fall as something God reacted to, rather than something He ordained. Thereby making His eternal plan to redeem a people to Himself and bring all things under the headship of Christ as a cosmic Plan B.

How many possible variations was God, as God, able to imagine in eternity before creating Adam? An infinite number. But He chose, sovereignly, for the representative for our entire race to be someone whom God knew would absolutely and inevitably rebel and Fall.

God is God, and everything that happens is as He ordains, despite the efforts of many to dethrone Him.

 

[Ben johnson]

Do you know, that in both of your posts, there is not a single reference to Scripture? (Aside from that oblique one to Romans 8:29.) The discussion of theology must found itself on common ground, else there is no basis for even the pretention of discussion. Last year I tried to argue with the girl in the "pro-abortion" booth at our state fair---but I quickly realized that we couldn't even DISCUSS. She saw nothing wrong with abortion, viewed euthanasia as "harmless and desireable" (after a person has exceeded his/her "quality-of-life"---the term "QUALITY" must be used because she totally rejected any defined "religion", thus "sanctity" {which means HOLY} of life cannot be a consideration) (ignoring the fact that her embracement of "Humanism" WAS accepting a religion---the Humanist Manifesto of 1933 admits it is a religious perspective in precept #1; she simply was opposed to any religion BUT HER OWN!). She challenged me on my supposed hypocrisy, if I should "get a girl pregnant"---never entered her mind that I might be CHASTE and MORAL---these concepts simply did not occur to her. There was no discussion, for she could not relate to the slightest aspect of my perspective.

Likewise, in theology, which Webster's defines as "the study of divinity and doctrines of God", must confine itself to Scripture. THIS is the only "common ground" that offers itself, the only possible basis for agreement.

And, really, all Christians do agree on the Bible being the "Inspired Word of God". So, theological questions, can be discussed on the basis of, "What does Scripture say?"

You make some bold statements:
Every thinking Christian is faced with a choice. He can either believe in both predestination and God's omniscience, or he is forced to abandon both of them. There are many inconsistent Christians out there, likely many who are reading this, who maintain that God is omniscient, yet He doesn't predestine the eternal destinies of men.

Who decides what is consistent or not? Is this not, opinion? What if there is another choice, that is extremely Scriptural?

Inevitably their argument consists of this: "God FOREKNOWS what choice people make, so therefore He predestines them according to what He foresees them doing--accepting or rejecting Christ."
Really, the argument hinges on the question, "Does God CAUSE a person to be saved?" So that we can turn to Scripture and see if there is an answer, to: "Where does SAVING-FAITH/BELIEF, come from?"

First of all, this definition in no way coincides with how the Bible (as opposed to Webster's Dictionary) uses the word. But even accepting the anemic Free Will definition of foreknowledge as merely precognition, this in no way helps the Free Will position.
Again, the underlying question, is: "Does God KNOW a person will believe, or does God CAUSE a person TO believe?" It is obvious that those who BELIEVE, are CALLED. But is there ANYONE who is called but does NOT believe? Is God's calling, universal or selective?

Do you think Scripture answers these questions? Does it define how one "comes-to-saving-faith"? And what about the question, "Once TRULY SAVED, is there any Scriptural evidence of a person being able to FALL from salvation? The really critical issue behind all of the discussion, is, "What IS salvation? Is it a RELATIONSHIP, apart from FELLOWSHIP? Or is fellowship important? Do we do anything to RECEIVE salvation, or does God do all the work outside of our choice? Is there anything that we do to ENDURE in salvation, or does God change our hearts so that we can do naught BUT to endure?

What is salvation?

Do we need "dilligence" or "perseverence" in salvation?

Is "faith-unto-salvation" ("belief") something that comes from US, or does God BESTOW it on those whom He chooses?

What separates a saved person, from one who is NOT-saved? Why were some who "cast out demons and prophesied and did mighty works" in Matt7, to be REJECTED by Jesus?

Jesus said you must be BORN AGAIN to enter Heaven. Under the banner of "Predestined-Election", lies the belief that "BORN-AGAIN", is something that God INSTALLS---and it causes BELIEF. Does Scripture tell whether "born-again" causes belief, or "belief causes born-again?"

The discussion of theology is contrained to Scripture. Scripture is God-inspired---I hope we all agree on that. And I do believe that the Bible answers these questions.

I do know some Scriptures on the subject. Say the word, and I will be happy to cite verses on any or all of these points. I am not an expert or genius, but I believe we can come to agreement on what Scripture really says.

 

[seebs]

It is not true that they are mutually exclusive. It is true that they seem to be, but this is because, with our flawed minds, we can't actually handle things moving in the "wrong direction" in time. We know that effect follows cause, not the other way around.

If I do a thing, and years later, you know what I did, no one thinks for a minute that your knowledge determined my action, even though it is impossible for me to have chosen to act in a way other than that which you later know I acted.

It is logically consistent to claim that we freely make choices, and that God is aware of the outcomes of those choices, and it remains consistent even if He knows before we decide.

This is a brain-twister, certainly - but all that should do is warn us not to be too confident that we have easily pierced the veil of mystery surrounding the hard questions.

 

[SemperReformanda]

Ben Jonson-

Likewise, in theology, which Webster's defines as "the study of divinity and doctrines of God", must confine itself to Scripture. THIS is the only "common ground" that offers itself, the only possible basis for agreement.

I agree. But I assumed the Scripture which posited God as omnipotent and omniscient were pretty commonly held by my readers. I'll post them for you.

But the rest of your post is absolutely irrelevant to the points I've made. I'll do a clarifying paragraph later to help you grasp it better. I am NOT discussing foreknowledge, I've granted for this discussion that it just means "to know ahead of time." I'm not even discussing the nature of salvation, I'll grant virtually any definition of that for the sake of discussion. Please try to understand, I am expanding the box with this question beyond the standard, and tired, TULIP debate which you seem to think you're having with me.

Really, the argument hinges on the question, "Does God CAUSE a person to be saved?"

Actually, my argument in no way hinges on this. Please reread my post, and respond to what I've actually posted, which is on the implications of God as omniscient Creator.

I do know some Scriptures on the subject. Say the word, and I will be happy to cite verses on any or all of these points.

I'm sure you know Scriptures on myriad subjects. But I'd appreciate us discussing the one I've posted. Thanks...

I hope none of this sounds impatient, btw. Your post was very well-written and friendly. I've read a few of your posts on other threads, and have been looking forward to meeting you...

 

[SemperReformanda]

seebs-

Thank you for your thoughts! I agree that it is certainly a brain twister. But it twists even farther than you've let it so far. I'll show you in a later post.

 

[SemperReformanda]

God is omniscient- "For God is greater than our hearts, and He knows everything." -1 John 3:20

Even if someone here denies God's omniscience, it's irrelevant to this discussion. I've already said my argument here isn't with those who deny His omniscience, but with those who attempt to hold it in common with a non-predestinarian position.

God is omnipotent-"For nothing is impossible for God." -Luke 1:37

Again, if you deny God's omnipotence, this isn't the debate for you.

God is the sovereign Creator- "For by Him all things were created; things in Heaven and on earth, visible and invisible..." Col. 1:16-18

My argument is based upon the necessary results of having a God who is omnipotent, omniscient, and the Creator of all things. If you deny any of the above 3 attributes, this is not the discussion for you. Far from being Humanistic, my argument finds its ground entirely in the Scriptures which teach us of God's attributes.

 

[SemperReformanda]

Claifying Statement

My argument doesn't hinge on the "mechanics" of salvation. I'm not arguing for the specifically Calvinistic understanding of soteriology. My argument is broader than that. I'm pointing out the complete illegitimacy of the other side's denial of predestination in any meaningful sense. This is not a thread to discuss perseverence, irresitible grace, or any number of interesting topics. These are more than adequately covered in other threads.

Now, on to the clarification.

If God is omnipotent, then God wasn't limited in any way in what He created.

If God is omniscient, then He comprehends all things, both actual and potential.

Because of this omniscience, there are an infinite number of potential objects and events and combinations of objects and items that could have existed. But since they do not all exist, their knowledge is restricted to the mind of God, since only He could conceive of an infinite number of potential objects and events.

Because of this, there are an infinite number of potential objects and events that were not chosen by God (through His creative action) to exist outside of His mind. Therefore, the present world is the world that God has chosen to exist out of an infinite number of possible existences.

God's decision to create these particular things out of an infinite number of potentialities was done freely (He is omnipotent after all.) Therefore, whatever happens and exists is because God sovereignly CHOSE to create those things.

Every human being, every wind current, every drop of rain, every word which is spoken was ultimately chosen from an infinite number of possibilities. And because God is omnipotent, they were chosen under duress of no outside force. So, unless someone can show me how God's moral nature FORCED Him somehow to create the particular people He did, we're left with the following conclusion, that from eternity, and from an infinite number of choices:

God chose to create X number of people who would come to faith (by whatever means your particular theological bent believes), and X number who would never come to faith.

 

[SemperReformanda]

To boil it down further...

Everything that happens in this world happens because this is the precise and exact world that God chose to create.

Seebs-

I said that it twists farther than you think. By now you may have seen what I mean, but I'll give you an illustration.

God is your creator. Since you were born, He has done no violence to your will. You have freely grown up making decisions and choices.

BUT, God wasn't bound by anything to create the Seebs that He did. His infinite mind could just as easily created someone who in all respects was identical to you except: 1. Had a different color of hair. 2. A different name. 3. Born a different place. 4. Never came to this forum and had this conversation. 5. Never believed in Christ.

I just came up with 5 variations, and my mind is far from infinite. God wasn't bound to create the Seebs that He did, but He chose to. You freely live your life, but it is the life which God omnisciently foresaw and chose to create.

Now THAT is a mind-twist.


Ben Jonson-

Far from being Humanistic, my position allows God to be God. And it is completely grounded in who Scripture says God is. If anything I said is inaccurate, I'm certainly open to correction. Scripture is our common authority, for which I am thankful.

 

[SemperReformanda]

Ben Jonson-

I almost forgot. Are you acquiesing to the statement I made about God ordaining the Fall?

Or do you have a Scripture that in some way states that God was militated to create a representative for our race which He, without a shadow of a doubt, knew would Fall?

If not, then I see no way to escape the conclusion that the Fall was ordained.

Unless God was FORCED to create a representative who would Fall, and was forced NOT to create a representative who would not Fall, we're left with the choice that God chose to create, deliberately and sovereignly, a representative who WOULD Fall.

Which is pretty much the definition of ordained.

 

[seebs]

Originally posted by SemperReformanda

BUT, God wasn't bound by anything to create the Seebs that He did. His infinite mind could just as easily created someone who in all respects was identical to you except: 1. Had a different color of hair. 2. A different name. 3. Born a different place. 4. Never came to this forum and had this conversation. 5. Never believed in Christ.

I just came up with 5 variations, and my mind is far from infinite. God wasn't bound to create the Seebs that He did, but He chose to. You freely live your life, but it is the life which God omnisciently foresaw and chose to create.

I think there's a problem here: What if not all possible lives can be determined simply by the starting conditions?

In half a page of code, I can give you a program where you can give it one of a hundred inputs, and it will give you a hundred possible outputs... but the outputs are large, and you could easily describe other possible outputs, but *NOTHING* you give that program will ever produce any of them.

For that matter, what if God's creation of me consists purely of making a free-willed spirit, which then enters the world and acts in it according to pre-existing laws?

God's omnipotence extends so far that He can, indeed, refrain from intervention if He wishes to leave us entirely free.

I believe that He chooses only some of the inputs, and others are subject to our free choices. Thus, when I decide whether or not to witness to someone, that's not *entirely* a function of how God made me; it's substantially a question of *my* choices. And, because it's a question of my free choices, that person's life may be changed by a decision that God didn't make.

I believe He gives us a fair amount of free rein to explore His creation, and make our own decisions. I don't believe that, at the instant that we are created, all of our choices are already inherent in us; I think we have many options open to us, and that it really is us choosing them.

 

[SemperReformanda]

Seebs-

Thank you very much for your thoughtful response. Unfortunately though, you haven't answered to my point.

I think there's a problem here: What if not all possible lives can be determined simply by the starting conditions?

There is no problem, in that I said nothing of the kind. If you'll notice, 2 out of 5 of the variations I tossed out were specifically NOT dealing with "starting conditions."

You're still not seeing the the necessary implications of omniscience. God is not bound by our time, He transcends it. His omniscience embraces not only your origins, but every decision you make at any time in your life, period. It is/was all completely forseen by God. He chose to create the person who makes all of the decisions you will ever make in your life. He could have created someone who He forsaw would make different choices, or someone who made nearly identical choices. But He created YOU, the person He forsaw freely, of their own mind, making certain decisions.

You haven't grasped this yet? God doesn't HAVE to coerce, because He is the Creator. Nothing comes into existence apart from His will, and the fact that you are in existence as the person you are is because He chose to make this particular person, who would make these particular decisions.

Unless you can come up with a reason that God was FORCED to create someone with these traits and forseen decisions. Outside of you coming up with one of those, you are left with the conclusion that everything you say, do and feel is ultimately owing to God's sovereign ordination.

Thus, when I decide whether or not to witness to someone, that's not *entirely* a function of how God made me; it's substantially a question of *my* choices. And, because it's a question of my free choices, that person's life may be changed by a decision that God didn't make.

Yo're arguing against something I never said. I never said you didn't have a free choice. I simply said that God created the person who would ultimately make the free choices which were in line with His sovereign will. Unless you think that God was somehow forced from some outside source to create things which He didn't want to create. Please list any of them which spring to mind...

Further, do you have any answer to my point about God ordaining the Fall? What outside source forced God to select someone as our representative that He utterly and completely knew would Fall and bring death into the world?

I'm waiting for any response on this point from either of you two... Thanks!

 

[SemperReformanda]

Seebs-

I would also, as a side note, point out that the concept of "pre-existing laws" running the world rather than God providentially guiding it is Deism, rather than Christianity. God is not a cosmic watchmaker who plops us down in the world to make our way, but rather an immanent God who is intimately involved with the workings of His world, one who "works all things according to the counsel of His will," and in whom we "live and move and have our being."

But this is incidental to our discussion, and even if I granted your point for the sake of argument it would change nothing. Even positing the Deistic view that you hold to, God's ominiscience would still have been total in forseeing everything you would ever do, and God's omnipotence would still have been utterly free to create whatever and whomever He chose. And He chose to create you, and everyone else in the world. Both those He foresaw with no shred of doubt coming to Christ, and those whom He foresaw never doing it. And these numbers were subject to no outside force. He could easily chosen to create only people whom He omnisciently foresaw freely coming to Christ. But He didn't.

Could you please explain to me how God was FORCED to create people whom He knew would never accept Him? What external force, or aspect of His moral will FORCED Him to create people whom He knew would be d@mned for all eternity? Because outside of this FORCE, we're left with the conclusion that He CHOSE to. And that would pretty much prove my point, don't you think?

 

[seebs]

Originally posted by SemperReformanda
Seebs-

I would also, as a side note, point out that the concept of "pre-existing laws" running the world rather than God providentially guiding it is Deism, rather than Christianity. God is not a cosmic watchmaker who plops us down in the world to make our way, but rather an immanent God who is intimately involved with the workings of His world, one who "works all things according to the counsel of His will," and in whom we "live and move and have our being."

It's only deism if you say He *NEVER* changes anything. Saying merely that He leaves some things (us, for instance) alone is not the same.

But this is incidental to our discussion, and even if I granted your point for the sake of argument it would change nothing. Even positing the Deistic view that you hold to, God's ominiscience would still have been total in forseeing everything you would ever do, and God's omnipotence would still have been utterly free to create whatever and whomever He chose.

You're still making the same mistake. You're assuming that it is meaningful to speak of a thing which, once created, would be a person just like me except that he wouldn't choose to follow Christ. That may not mean anything.

You're assuming that, given that knowledge, God creates certain people whose exact behaviors throughout their lives are *inevitable outcomes of their nature*. I don't believe that to be the case. I believe He creates people whose exact behaviors are chosen by them freely, and not determined by anything.

And He chose to create you, and everyone else in the world. Both those He foresaw with no shred of doubt coming to Christ, and those whom He foresaw never doing it. And these numbers were subject to no outside force. He could easily chosen to create only people whom He omnisciently foresaw freely coming to Christ. But He didn't.

He couldn't have done that and preserved the genuine freedom of will He gave us.

Could you please explain to me how God was FORCED to create people whom He knew would never accept Him?

You're still stuck in the human forwards-only concept of causality.

God was not FORCED to do anything. God *CHOSE* to create people, and to create them TOTALLY FREE. He knows that some of us will not accept Him, but He doesn't choose whether or not to create us based on that. He chooses to create us, and then gives us the freedom to choose.

What external force, or aspect of His moral will FORCED Him to create people whom He knew would be d@mned for all eternity? Because outside of this FORCE, we're left with the conclusion that He CHOSE to. And that would pretty much prove my point, don't you think?

No, not at all.

You're still assuming that He is sitting there playing with inputs and numbers and saying "Gee, if I give this guy .5 more credibility units, he'll definitely accept me in 2005." He's not. He's making us free from the start, and while He knows what we'll do, He knows *BECAUSE* we make free choices; He doesn't make us based on those outcomes, He makes us based on His love.

This is the "agree to disagree" point. You can't prove your point; you can only assert that the alternatives don't make sense to you. I don't think your version makes any sense, either. Obviously, since both versions are still common Christian beliefs after two thousand years, both of them make sense to some people. We will eventually find out, but we probably won't get anywhere by arguing.

In the end, God chose to give us the choice of what to do. He does this for all of us, knowing that only some of us will make the choice He would like best, for the same reason that we raise children to think for themselves, and not to always depend on our judgements; because it is the most loving thing to do.

 

[seebs]

Originally posted by SemperReformanda

You're still not seeing the the necessary implications of omniscience. God is not bound by our time, He transcends it. His omniscience embraces not only your origins, but every decision you make at any time in your life, period. It is/was all completely forseen by God. He chose to create the person who makes all of the decisions you will ever make in your life.

*BUT*:

If you were to describe someone similar to me, but *VERY* slightly different, it may not be *POSSIBLE* for God to create such a person without contradicting His nature.

Could God create a person just like me, only who chose to follow Islam, but otherwise made the same decisions as me? Perhaps - but perhaps not.

God has created something that is much greater than anything you seem to be able to credit Him with: True freedom. The ability to change the universe in ways which, while He may know what we'll do, He did not choose or decide on.

You haven't grasped this yet? God doesn't HAVE to coerce, because He is the Creator. Nothing comes into existence apart from His will, and the fact that you are in existence as the person you are is because He chose to make this particular person, who would make these particular decisions.

The fallacy here is that you assume that every set of decisions you can describe in words was a person God could have made. Some of them are inconsistent, and could be made only through coercion, and God doesn't do that.

If God wants to create a person who accepts Him and is intelligent and compassionate, God probably can't also make that person a serial killer, because that person is logically contradictory.

Unless you can come up with a reason that God was FORCED to create someone with these traits and forseen decisions. Outside of you coming up with one of those, you are left with the conclusion that everything you say, do and feel is ultimately owing to God's sovereign ordination.

Logical consistency. God doesn't lie, and He doesn't coerce. Having made us to make our own decisions, He can't pick and choose among those decisions, only among whole *lifetimes*. And not every lifetime you can name makes any sense.

When I chose to make some pasta this morning, it wasn't because God looked very closely at two people - one who made pasta this morning, and another who made pizza this morning - and preferred one over the other. When I decide to continue writing this, rather than take a break to go upstairs and brutally murder my wife, it's not because God considered making a person just like me, but who would interrupt this message to brutally murder his wife. It's because there's no meaningful way for a person like that to exist, so there is no way God could have created one.

God does not choose our specific decisions; He chooses people who will make many decisions, and sometimes, you can't have one decision without another. I don't even know that He intervenes that much, unless we ask Him too.

 

[SemperReformanda]

seebs-

First of all, thank you for your perseverence in all of this. I'm enjoying exploring this issue with you.

You haven't given a shred of evidence that God holds this so-called "Free Will" in the esteem that you claim. You've made pious assertions about it, but shown nothing except that you really, really want it to be true.

On the other hand, I have shown that God is omnipotent, omniscient and our Creator, and that as such, He had absolute control over whom He created. And that X number are born with one eternal destiny, and X with another.

Also, you have made no attempt to refute that the Fall was ordained. Do you have any response of any kind to this? Or do you think God had his arm somehow twisted into creating Adam? Was there some cosmic force pressing in upon God causing Him to create a man whom He knew would be the secondary cause of billions of people going to Hell?

 

[SemperReformanda]

Seebs-

I'm going to post a series of propositions, please note any with which you disagree:

1. God knows all things, both actual and potential.

2. God created all things.

3. God is limited only by His moral nature.

4. God was entirely free in His decision to create mankind, as well as in His decision to create the particular people He created.

5. God, being infinitely creative, could have created an infinite number of different people.

6. God, in His omniscience, was able to foresee every decision that each of these people would ever make.

6. God chose to create specific people.

7. God wasn't bound by any external force when creating these specific people.

8. God knew which of these specific people He created would ultimately come to faith.

9. None of these people can do anything differently than what God has foreseen, because then He wouldn't be omniscient.

10. Therefore, God created specific people who are, absolutely and positively, going to either one place or another.

11. The choice of creating these specific people was entirely the sovereign choice of God, and He was in no way bound to create these particular people.

Again, please let me know which of these doesn't necessarily follow from the attributes of God.

 

[SemperReformanda]

seebs-

As far as you getting bogged down in some of the minutae of "logic" and "whole lifetimes", I can only say that your view of the hands-off God is a pretty tiny little God.

And I'm not treating some of it specifically, because it in no way impinges on my central point. Which is, to reiterate, that given omniscience, predestination is a necessary reality. Please get back with me about those propositions, and about Adam, when you can.

 

[seebs]

Originally posted by SemperReformanda
seebs-

As far as you getting bogged down in some of the minutae of "logic" and "whole lifetimes", I can only say that your view of the hands-off God is a pretty tiny little God.

And I'm not treating some of it specifically, because it in no way impinges on my central point. Which is, to reiterate, that given omniscience, predestination is a necessary reality. Please get back with me about those propositions, and about Adam, when you can.

My argument isn't that God necessarily *doesn't* intervene; it's merely that omniscience and omnipotence together *STILL* don't necessarily imply predestination.

I've gone 'round this argument a dozen times by now on this board. It's been clearly demonstrated that neither of us will ever find the other's argument persuasive.

In the end, God's knowledge of what we do no more implies predestination than my knowledge of what Napolean did in the past implies predestination. It's just information; it's not a decision.

You could argue that, if you "fast forward" to the end of time, the existance of a final outcome implies "predestination", but that's really an illusion caused by trying to hop around in time.

 

[SemperReformanda]

You could argue that, if you "fast forward" to the end of time, the existance of a final outcome implies "predestination", but that's really an illusion caused by trying to hop around in time.

That's the real irony here. I'm not hopping anywhere, but positing that GOD is eternal, we are finite, and that God's decision to create what He created is the context in which man's choices unfold. You, on the other hand, have mired God in time.

In the end, God's knowledge of what we do no more implies predestination than my knowledge of what Napolean did in the past implies predestination. It's just information; it's not a decision.

And this is where you finally state the real fallacy of your argument. You've abstracted God's omniscience away from His role as Creator. Unless you somehow foreknew he would become Napolean and wreak havoc on Europe, chose him from an infinite number of other people you could have created, and then went ahead and created him.

Since the number of propositions I posted for you was apparently bewildering, I'll pare it down for you. Please answer it this time:

1. God foreknew, from all eternity, which of the people He created would come to faith, and which would not.

2. God was under no obligation to create these particular people, and could have created an infinite number of different people.

3. Nevertheless, God chose to create these particular people, knowing that X number would never choose Him.

Now, it's down to 3. Could you give a response now, please?