BobRyan said: ↑
Matt 18:32-35 - Christ teaches " full forgiveness revoked" at the end of the chapter
Mat 18: 32-35 is a parable
Not sure I understand you clear enough here, but first to be realized is that this issue is a hypothetical assumption based on "if ye be circumcised" (5:2),
which is a continuation of 5:3, 3, "Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect (complete) by the flesh? They were still ignorant of what their rebirth involved.
I see that the point of the parable is the teaching of being forgiven and forgiving others. I would rather understand it that it demonstrates that we forgive because we are forgiven, which is a manifestation of being in the love of God and reborn. Conversely, if we do not forgive all, we have not received forgiveness (unsaved). Otherwise to me, the sense of it would not support God's omniscience, as if He didn't already know one was not going to be forgiving, e.g. God forgives then has to take it back![QUOTE="BobRyan, post: 76488005, member: 235244" “So My heavenly Father also will do to you if each of you, from his heart, does not forgive his brother his trespasses.”
Vs 35 is not part of the parable - it is real Christ speaking to his real disciples giving His real teaching. The parable ends in vs 34 where servants, the king, and the unforgiving servant are the ones quoted as if speaking. Vs 35 is none of the characters in the parable -- it is Christ "teaching" outside the parable.
I see that the point of the parable is the teaching of being forgiven and forgiving others.
Though I admire your persistence, I can't get around the idea that God would give salvation to one He knows really isn't genuine about being right with Him (and not that I'm suspecting you think this). Besides, if God gives one eternal life, He couldn't take it back, being "eternal."“Pretty clear
Though I admire your persistence, I can't get around the idea that God would give salvation to one He knows really isn't genuine about being right with Him
God's blessings to your Family Bob (I'm a Bob also)!
I can understand why many do not accept the permanency of salvation because of the way Scripture reads with related passages, but in my nearly 45 years of study and application, and from being informed of the commentators views often, I don't see any possible scriptural collation for support otherwise, considering the overwhelming mass of passages supporting permanency.I think you may be inserting OSAS in and causing a bit of a problem for the parable as a result. If OSAS is true then this person could not really have been forgiven (as you point out) -- so then we "change it" to "never forgiven".
I can understand why many do not accept the permanency of salvation because of the way Scripture reads with related passages
, but in my nearly 45 years of study and application, and from being informed of the commentators views often, I don't see any possible scriptural collation for support otherwise
It would require me to accept that God did not know one would eventually reject the idea of salvation,
. God knew that Adam would partake of the forbidden "Tree" when He was commanding him not to eat of it.
. God couldn't confuse Adam by saying, "I know you're going to partake of the Tree, but don't do it!
Nothing personal but judging from your replies I don't see a definition of God's omniscience, without which our issue at hand (permanency) can only remain at an impasse, due to our understanding being too different from one another. Is there anything God hasn't known that He has always known, even from eternity past ("from everlasting")?if we ignore contradicting texts we risk infusing a given text with sooo much "inference" we then push it out of alignment with the rest of scripture.
Nothing personal but judging from your replies I don't see a definition of God's omniscience
It's obvious that we are done with this issue. My final word is that God knows all that will occur and has planned it all to work "according to what He has purposed."Then I think you are missing the point of my last post
============================== begin quote
in Gen 6 God does not say
"oh wow mankind has failed just as I always knew they would - I guess I will have to drown every man woman and child on planet Earth just as I always knew I would do"..
r God says "I REPENT that I have made man" - as if He could not see this end point, because that more closely reflects the true parenting , loving nature of God.
Is 5:4
"what MORE could I have done than that which I have already done? WHY then when I expected this plant to produce GOOD fruit did it produce bad???"
Certain Calvinist arguments claim the above scenario "cannot exist" -- there can be no such thing as God actually "Doing everything He knows to do" for salvation and yet failing ... it is impossible.
Just as a close look into each of the texts in my list of texts shows that they too "cannot exist" if OSAS is to survive.
But in the Arminian model God sovereignly chooses "free will" for mankind and freely limits His own actions so as not to violate free will of the individual. It was His own sovereign choice to use that limit.
=============================== end quote
The "reason" I give for God saying in Gen 6 "I repent that I have made mankind" - is not because God "did not know something".
7 The Lord said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them.”
rather it is because the "I repent" statement is much closer to "the truth" - the real heart of God in that example than the statement ;
"oh wow mankind has failed just as I always knew they would - I guess I will have to drown every man woman and child on planet Earth just as I always knew I would do".The statement above is heartless and cruel - and is not at all a reflection of the true heart of God - so He does not say it EVEN THOUGH He does "know the end from the beginning".
When some child gets a bad grade God does not say "ahh hah you failed just as I always knew you would do" - He is not "That" kind of parent. Who in the Bible is "exactly that kind" of being?
Calvinism's form of humanism does not "allow" for Gen 6:7 and Is 5:4 statements to even exist! It goes against everything Calvinism teaches about God.
God knew of Lucifer's fall from before the day He created Lucifer but because of the degree of freedom inherent in "free will" (regarding cause and effect ) God did not have to "insert a defect" into Lucifer and "make him fail" as Calvinism suggests. That is certainly how a finite human would make Lucifer fail if a human were the creator - but God does not do anything at all "to make Lucifer fail".
In Calvinism's humanist view of God - He would not create Lucifer to succeed as a sinless being only to have Lucifer fail. And He would not create Lucifer at all if He actually knew Lucifer would fail. Calvinism is wrong on both counts.
The problem is not God - it is Calvinism. It is when man tries to "Sit in God's chair and then reason AS God" that we see failure - and we can test that theory by real examples in the Bible. God says things that prove Calvinism is wrong (as in the case of Gen 6 and Isaiah 5:4) yet does not prove God is not all-knowing.
My final word is that God knows all that will occur and has planned it all to work "according to what He has purposed."
Thanks Brother for your input! Concerning Gen 6:6, 7, this passage is like many others which only presents an appearance of conflicting with omniscience and requires understanding that complies with omniscience, which may not in this life be revealed. It's certain though that if God is not omniscient, He doesn't exist, thus there's always an explanation that may or may not be understood. Thankfully, understanding His omniscience is sufficient for answering most mysteries of the Word of Truth which have not been clearly explained; and I believe unexplained knowledge of God's Word always tests genuine patience and faith.Agreed.
Mat 18: 32-35 is a parable explaining that being unforgiving to others means you are not forgiven,
in Gen 6 God does not say
"oh wow mankind has failed just as I always knew they would - I guess I will have to drown every man woman and child on planet Earth just as I always knew I would do".
Rather God says "I REPENT that I have made man" - as if He could not see this end point, because that more closely reflects the true parenting , loving nature of God. (Not because He did not always know it - as some might suppose)
Is 5:4
"what MORE could I have done than that which I have already done? WHY then when I expected this plant to produce GOOD fruit did it produce bad???"
Certain Calvinist arguments claim the above scenario "cannot exist" -- there can be no such thing as God actually "Doing everything He knows to do" for salvation and yet failing ... it is impossible.
Just as a close look into each of the texts in my list of texts shows that they too "cannot exist" if OSAS is to survive.
But in the Arminian model God sovereignly chooses "free will" for mankind and freely limits His own actions so as not to violate free will of the individual. It was His own sovereign choice to use that limit.
=============================== end quote
The "reason" I give for God saying in Gen 6 "I repent that I have made mankind" - is not because God "did not know something".
7 The Lord said, “I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky; for I am sorry that I have made them.”
rather it is because the "I repent" statement is much closer to "the truth" - the real heart of God in that example than the statement ;
"oh wow mankind has failed just as I always knew they would - I guess I will have to drown every man woman and child on planet Earth just as I always knew I would do".The statement above is heartless and cruel - and is not at all a reflection of the true heart of God - so He does not say it EVEN THOUGH He does "know the end from the beginning".
When some child gets a bad grade God does not say "ahh hah you failed just as I always knew you would do" - He is not "That" kind of parent. Who in the Bible is "exactly that kind" of being?
Calvinism's form of humanism does not "allow" for Gen 6:7 and Is 5:4 statements to even exist! It goes against everything Calvinism teaches about God.
God knew of Lucifer's fall from before the day He created Lucifer but because of the degree of freedom inherent in "free will" (regarding cause and effect ) God did not have to "insert a defect" into Lucifer and "make him fail" as Calvinism suggests. That is certainly how a finite human would make Lucifer fail if a human were the creator - but God does not do anything at all "to make Lucifer fail".
In Calvinism's humanist view of God - He would not create Lucifer to succeed as a sinless being only to have Lucifer fail. And He would not create Lucifer at all if He actually knew Lucifer would fail. Calvinism is wrong on both counts.
The problem is not God - it is Calvinism. It is when man tries to "Sit in God's chair and then reason AS God" that we see failure - and we can test that theory by real examples in the Bible. God says things that prove Calvinism is wrong (as in the case of Gen 6 and Isaiah 5:4) yet does not prove God is not all-knowing.
Concerning Gen 6:6, 7, this passage is like many others which only presents an appearance of conflicting with omniscience and requires understanding that complies with omniscience
God's way of a broken heart, anger, etc. is not the same as ours. We will just continue to be of a different understanding on this issue. God bless!Just as I gave it above. This is God conveying His real heartbreak over the situation rather than Him just coldly commenting on the fact that knows all things past, present and future (as noted in my post above.) God reveals His true heart of love even though he also knows everything in advance.