U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
Old 09-22-2011, 01:44 PM
 
Location: Canada
4,371 posts, read 1,688,315 times
Reputation: 247

Advertisements

Quote:
Well, I definitely don't see a "30 second" foreknowledge in the bible, based on the idea that the OT stories foreSHADOWED and foreTOLD the need for and the coming of the Christ as well as the final, ultimate result of that coming. So, at the very least, it seems to me that God sees all of history as it has and will unfold. Combined with my understanding (above), various scriptures that have probably already been brought up in this thread, seem to me to support the idea of God's foreknowledge.

But, I can't off-hand think of a specific scripture that necessarily supports the idea of God knowing before creation (the beginning of time) that things would unfold as they did. I'll have to think about that and consider if that's just my pre-assumption having been read into things over the years.

I've watched your back-and-forth on that passage and tend to side with the fore-knowledge pov making more sense. HOWEVER, I'm not putting a lot of stock in it either way -- I tend to see the OT stories more like parables. And when reading (NT) parables, I've always been cautioned it's important to look at the story as a whole, seeking it's overall theme, rather than trying to make every single element of the story equate exactly to what it is representing.

And, not that there isn't likely much historical truth to some or even most of the OT stories, but I think that the "communications" from God in many instances were sort of creative license used by the authors, I guess you could say. So, I don't know that nit-picking those stories to try to make a "doctrine" based on a literal reading of what God supposedly "said" is the way to go ... not to me anyway. Kwim? I'm more about looking for symbolic and spiritual meaning.


Sis I was just using 30 sec. As an example to show God foreknowledge does not have to be before man was created. Foreknowledge could be 100 or a 1000 or even 6000 years. I don't believe foreknowledge has to be static (fixed in a position of before man was created)

I also look for a spiritual understanding of these things sis, scriptures are a spiritual language so to understand them correctly we must understand them spiritually.




Quote:
I agree. And I think that's why BOTH sides of this argument possibly (imvvvho) could fall a little short. Pneuma seems to be defending the idea of NO foreknowledge so adamantly because he thinks that if God KNEW that evil would occur and let it happen anyway, that makes God evil. I don't agree ... as you said, God is not required to directly intervene if that goes against his purpose of allowing us to mature into His nature.



Seems you have been misunderstanding me, sis I don't defend the idea of NO foreknowledge, I just don't believe foreknowledge is or has to be static as everyone else seems to believe.

I see foreknowledge from two perspectives.
1 with regards to God
2 with regards to man

1 God foreknows everything He will do as He knows Himself.
2 God foreknows what man will do as He looks at the intent of mans heart.



Quote:
Perhaps. But apparently the ONLY one who ever DID understand it was Jesus. That makes him unique beyond our uniqueness


Jesus was no more unique then we are sis, we to are sons of God, we to have the Spirit in us to guide us as it did Him. His always listened to the moving of the Spirit is what makes Him more unique then us. Scripture states Adam was a son of God, therefore he had the Spirit of God within Him, He knew the will of the Father but did it not. Spiritually speaking we are Adam.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-22-2011, 01:47 PM
 
Location: Canada
4,371 posts, read 1,688,315 times
Reputation: 247
Quote:
I think pneuma just objects to the "God MUST intend the evil" because He knows about it.


Close brother, my objection is that man had to be disobedient and sin in order to know/understand evil and sin. Evil and sin are all around us, that does not mean we have to become evil and sin to understand them, Which is what almost every UR'er believes.

That is why I keep pointing them to Jesus, evil and sin was all around Jesus yet He never had to become or do evil and sin to understand them, and as He is our example and the WAY.

Evil and sin was already in the earth when God created man and put him in the garden, evil and sin was already in the earth when Jesus came into it.

So which was Gods plan for man? To fall into sin through disobedience as Adam did in order to experience evil and sin and gain a knowledge of such, or to be obedient as Jesus was and gain a knowledge of evil and sin.

For myself I see no other way, no other plan, no other truth, no other life then that of Jesus Christ. He and He alone is my example and I press on in His way, His plan, His truth, His life and refuse to look at man/Adam in order to find these things.

I know you know this brother, but most Ur'ers still look at Adam in order to understand God plan for man, thus they see mans disobedience and evil as a part of His grand design.

And that brother is what I object to and I know a few other like you and I who object to it also.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2011, 01:50 PM
 
Location: Canada
4,371 posts, read 1,688,315 times
Reputation: 247
Quote:
You didn't totally get what I was saying. I agree that God threatened Nineveh with evil and I said so in my previous post. I am saying that God worded His threat in such a way that two things would be accomplished by the same exact sentence "Yet in 40 days Nineveh will be overthrown"
1. It would properly be taken as a threat of evil while the Ninevites remained in their wickedness.
2. It would be true in even a greater way, a spiritual way, after the Ninevites repented.

The literalist will respond to you "Then either God lied or God made a mistake." And you will respond "an IF is implied". And they will respond "...but no IF was spoken so God either lied or made a mistake".

But they were overthrown: In the spiritual war that was going on, God won the battle and overthrew Nineveh's wickedness. God turned their hearts. So the prophecy was true... But God worded that true prophecy in a perfect way... a way that the Ninevites would properly understand as a threat of evil. Because had Nineveh remained unchanged, the threat of evil would have been carried out.



I understood you just fine Bob, I actually looked at it that way to see if it was consistent with the scriptures. It is NOT. That scripture states God repented of the evil that He said He would do.

It would go like this

God said (spiritually speaking) I will overthrow Nineveh in 40 days.
God repented of what He was going to do.
Thus spiritually speaking Nineveh was not overthrown.

Your whole scenario falls apart because the scriptures state God repented.




Quote:
It's in chapter 29 that God says they do not have eyes to see. Yet in chapter 30 God gives them both IF's anyway. In chapter 31 God tells Moses they will choose the evil way. Yet in chapter 32 Moses again gives them the positive IF.



Those scriptures actually back up more towards what I believe then your belief Bob.
Is it any wonder that after 40 years of God dealing with Israel that He would know their hearts and that they would not do as they were told.

And as I have said an "IF" being in prophecy shows that the prophecy is contingent on mans choice not on Gods foreknowledge of mans choice.


Quote:
God repenting does not imply that God did not have foreknowledge that Nineveh would repent or that God would repent. In Deuteronomy 32 God foreknows that His wicked people will humble themselves and that God will repent when God sees that the do this.


This is where you guys seem to be misunderstanding me. God foreknows everything He will do in order to correct man. Man moves a pawn, God counters that move. When man has come to his last move/used up all his strength and can not make another move the game is over and God repents/stops the correction when He sees that mans power has gone out of him.

This is contingent on what God will do, not on what man will do.


Quote:
If we underline different words then we can equally conclude that God is a grape farmer and a wine maker. But the parable is not about wine-making or foreknowledge. It's about wicked servants and judgment.

The scriptures plainly teach that God knew Christ would die prior to the Father sending Christ.

Matthew 26:54 But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?

Luke 24:25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken: 26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? 27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

Luke 24:46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day.

1 Corinthians 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures.

Acts 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, 3 Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ

Matthew 26:24 The Son of man goeth as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born

Isaiah 53:2 For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.3 He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.




God has foreknowledge of everything He will do, thus because man sinned God knew He would have to send Jesus.

However, All those things are based on prophecy, all prophecy is contingent on what man will do.
Jesus purposely fulfilled every prophecy concerning Himself, but He did NOT have to fulfill them. He said so Himself.

Read post 352 about half way down.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2011, 01:53 PM
 
1,263 posts, read 532,199 times
Reputation: 169
God knows everything and of course he intervenes in our lives and in our governments. Mankind would have NEVER lasted but a short while if he were not a major player on this earth.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2011, 01:55 PM
 
Location: Canada
4,371 posts, read 1,688,315 times
Reputation: 247
Quote:
I probably should have crossed off your added "thing" before agreeing. Let me use an example. God intended to bring evil upon Nineveh unless they repented. Right?

So which is the fruit?
1. the bringing of evil by God
2. the evil itself

The answer is #1


Sorry but God has nothing to do with evil or evil fruit, Jesus says so.
The writer of Jonah, like so many OT writer as well as many today saw/see a god who did evil and good and so write after their understanding. That does NOT make their understanding correct.

The way I see it was that God said He was going to spank Nineveh in order to correct them, but Nineveh repented at His words before they got a spanking, so God repented and did not spank them in order to correct them.


Quote:
But you said even the man who sins is still good and there is no such thing as an evil man. Yet Christ referred to evil men in the exact passage you are quoting about trees/fruit.

Christ called those men evil. You call all men good. Whatever made them evil won't changed the fact that Christ refers to them as evil men.



Your speaking for me again Bob, I never said the man who sins is still good. I said everything God created was good and that includes man. When man was created by God he was good, however Satan sowed tares among man and man became the children of the devil (this was NOT the way God created man). Or said another way man became grafted into Satan. And that is why man has to be grafted back into the tree of LIFE.

The child of God still bring forth good fruit.
The child of the devil brings forth evil fruit.






Quote:
I said God made man weak. It is your interpretation of that statement that turns it into "God sowed evil". I could just as well say "pneuma SAYS or BELIEVES God is impotent" by a skewed interpretation of what you say. But I don't do that because you never said that.

If you want to say "Bob's belief implies X" then that is your opinion to have and state. But when you say "Bob SAYS X" or "Bob believes X" you should be sure a SAID exactly that thing.



Well you just spoke for me above brother, said I said something I did not.

However, I was not speaking about your statement about God creating man weak (which He did NOT). I said, In response to your statement about God creating man weak

Well unless you have changed your stance on these things Bob, you have also said that God knew man would sin and intended/planned man to sin. Thus God sowed EVIL and SIN into man and that is the crux of our disagreement.


But as to your statement about God creating man weak, I will now address it. God created MAN brother, not a babe or a child, A MAN. Strong in spirit and mind, don't think so, just try naming all the animals. Adam walked with God in the garden and knew the mind of God. Those are NOT traits of someone who is weak.



Quote:
That is your opinion. If it is good that a parent bring forth a child they know with 99.999% certainty will do some evil... then it might be good to intend the whole thing to be that way. I could just was well say... it was evil that God made a man who MIGHT sin. What God should have done was make man perfect from the get go.


So if a parent brought a child into this world and taught it to murder from the get go is not evil in your eyes what in your eyes is evil?


Quote:
You just said it is necessary and good for man to be tested by evil. Therefore IF evil did not already exist, it would have been necessary and good for God to create it.


Sorry but there is NO IF required, sin was already in the earth, no need for God to create it.

Quote:
No that is not what I believe. Being tested is being tested. Man does not have to fail a test to be tested. Man has to fail the test in order to gain experience of good & evil, wrath and mercy. This is what Romans says. The answer to "why does He still find fault?" and "why has thou made me thus?" is


Nonsense brother, man does NOT have to fail the test in order to gain experience of good & evil, wrath and mercy.

Did Jesus fail any test?
Did Jesus experience good and evil, wrath and mercy?

If failing the test is needful to understand these things brother then Jesus never understood them.

Quote:
What if God
1. Wanted to demonstrate his wrath (hot displeasure with sin and evil)
2. Wanted to demonstrate his mercy on the vessels of mercy

If everyone passed the test there would be no demonstration of God's displeasure with sin, and no need for mercy towards sinners. Nor would there be any opportunity for a man to pass the test of forgiving a sinner if there were no sinners to forgive (since everyone passed the test).


Potter and the clay brother

The Potter and His Clay

Jeremiah 18:1-17
The word which came to Jeremiah from the LORD, saying, 2 Arise, and go down to the potterís house, and there I will cause thee to hear my words. 3 Then I went down to the potterís house, and, behold, he wrought a work on the wheels. 4 And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter:

A funny thing about clay is that it has a memory of its own and always wants to return to its clay form. So when one is fashioning a vase the clay tries to fall back into its natural form. Thus being marred in the hands of the potter. It is NOT the potter who mars the clay in his hands, it is the clay trying to return to clay that mars itself. The potter wants to make a vase, the clay wants to return to its natural form.

So if we look at man who is formed from the dust of the earth and placed into the garden to be fashioned into Gods image and likeness, we can see the clay in the potters hands.
Now through mans own disobedience man marred himself in the potters hands and returned to the dust/clay from whence he was taken. Dust thou art and unto dust shalt thou return.

Now lets look at those same scriptures out of the Septuagint.

18:1 The word that came from the Lord to 2 Jeremias, saying, Arise, and go down to the potterís house, and there thou shalt hear my words. 3 So I went down to the potterís house, and behold, he was making a vessel on the stones. 4 And the vessel which he was making with his hands fell:

And we know that Adam fell by disobedience. Thus the potter did NOT mar the vessel
the vessel fell and marred itself.

so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it.

Thus the potter takes up the same clay and makes a NEW vessel out of it.
We are a NEW creation in Christ Jesus.

5 Then the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 6 O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the LORD. Behold, as the clay is in the potterís hand, so are ye in mine hand, O house of Israel.

Does nor matter how many time the clay falls from the masters hand, God will keep moulding the clay until it is fashion after His will, and once fashioned after His will the vessel is put into the fire to keep it from ever returning to its old form .

Thus proving that all vessels pass through the fire, for without the baking process the vessel will always retain itís own will and turn to itís old form.


Septuagint

16 Behold, I have created thee, not as the coppersmith blowing coals, and bringing out a vessel fit for work; but I have created thee, not for ruin, that I should destroy thee. 17 I will not suffer any weapon formed against thee to prosper; and every voice that shall rise up against thee for judgment, thou shalt vanquish them all; and thine adversaries shall be condemned thereby. There is an inheritance to them that serve the Lord, and ye shall be righteous before me, saith the Lord.

MAN are NOT CREATED FOR RUIN.


Quote:

Yes. He is our example of passing the test. A test that all will need to pass.


He is MORE then just our example He is our WAY, God never planned man to fall into sin and disobedience for that is NOT His WAY, Gods WAY is the WAY of Jesus Christ. As long as you continue to look at Adam/man as Gods WAY your eyes are not on Christ and your looking at the fleshly vail, which vail is done AWAY with in Christ.

Take your eyes off of man and put them squarely on Christ and then and only then will you understand God WAY.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2011, 02:02 PM
 
Location: Canada
4,371 posts, read 1,688,315 times
Reputation: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by saved33 View Post
Well, these forums are ramblings of men as well.

Any time you go outside of scripture to define scripture, it will be biased in one way or another.

This is true, but why should I give up what I see for a bunch of dead men who I can't reason the scriptures with. Who knows maybe they would have changed their stance on their view of scriptures.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2011, 02:05 PM
 
Location: Top of the South (Nelson), NZ
7,301 posts, read 3,677,370 times
Reputation: 2540
Quote:
Originally Posted by saved33 View Post
God knows everything and of course he intervenes in our lives and in our governments. Mankind would have NEVER lasted but a short while if he were not a major player on this earth.
He also butchers us any time he wants, there was even a mass drowning once. Then there is the whole torture business, which could be some weird sexual thing. It's all recorded . I vote we throw a rope around his neck and give him a taste of his own medicine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2011, 02:26 PM
 
Location: Canada
4,371 posts, read 1,688,315 times
Reputation: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe90 View Post
He also butchers us any time he wants, there was even a mass drowning once. Then there is the whole torture business, which could be some weird sexual thing. It's all recorded . I vote we throw a rope around his neck and give him a taste of his own medicine.
This is a perfect example of the way people see God when they see God as being the author of both good and evil.

This is the impression almost every christian, does not matter whether it be UR, or ET leave the unbeliever.

Tis one of the reason I stay in a debate longer then I would really like to.

Joe God is NOT as you have been told He is.

If you have not read the whole thread, you might want to as it might be of interest to you to see a different view of God then the norm.

either way take care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2011, 03:00 PM
 
16,310 posts, read 14,891,373 times
Reputation: 7990
Quote:
Originally Posted by saved33 View Post
God knows everything and of course he intervenes in our lives and in our governments. Mankind would have NEVER lasted but a short while if he were not a major player on this earth.
And that would why things are so peach keen right now

Society would be a much better place today without the beliefs of some really unpleasant gods from ancient mythology, for many atrocities are committed my man and god is only the excuse.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-22-2011, 03:17 PM
 
6,209 posts, read 3,999,710 times
Reputation: 649
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma View Post
Evil and sin was already in the earth when God created man and put him in the garden
Quote:
Originally Posted by pneuma
Everything God created is GOOD, if God created Satan as you believe then Satan is GOOD.
Hi pneuma,

I've just been rereading over parts of this thread, and the above just seems unresolved to me. I don't see how you reconcile this with your viewpoint.

You keep saying evil was already in the earth when God put man in the garden.
Did God not know the evil was there? Or he just put man in the garden anyway and wish him best of luck and give him a few tips (don't eat from that tree, watch out for evil...)?

OK everything God created was good - He created the earth - so how did the evil get "in the earth"? An enemy sowed it. Satan sowed the tares.
But where did the enemy come from? Where did Satan come from?

Here we have a conundrum. Everything God created was good, so where did Satan come from? I read your response to Pleroo, you said we didn't really know how Satan came to be, but implied he was a being that did "something" to become Satan. So where did this other "being" (angel/spirit/lucifer/whatever) come from?

But again here is the problem. Everything God created was good - so how can any being/spirit/angel do "something" so terrible that would cause them to turn into Satan the adversary? How can that be "good" in the way you are meaning it?

You are saying everything God created was good - meaning it was uncorrupt and free from evil & sin - so how did sin & evil ever enter since everything was "good"? How did Satan "create himself" if the original being was "good"? Why did man sin the first chance they got if they were "good"?

I see only two possible solutions:
1. God did not create Satan or the spirit being that became Satan - this has the giant problem of something existing outside of the creation of God - I believe this is un-scriptural for many reasons.

OR

2. We are not understanding the meaning "it was very good" in Genesis. If the earth was "very good", why was there evil & sin in it? I believe in this case the phrase "very good" must be understood to mean "very good for achieving what God intended".

Regardless this is a giant dilemma that is tied into the whole foreknowledge debate, I believe it is solved with #2 above, but I don't see how your view explains this. So I'm wondering how you see this.

If everything God created was good, how and where could sin & evil possibly enter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $89,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Christianity
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:30 AM.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top