|
Forums118
Topics9,199
Posts195,630
Members1,323
| |
Most Online5,850
Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
3 registered members (Karen Y, Daryl, 1 invisible),
3,366
guests, and 15
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: How Can a Person Know if a Prophecy is Conditional or Unconditional? - Part 2
[Re: Tom]
#128219
10/16/10 06:01 PM
10/16/10 06:01 PM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
The fact Jesus "could have come ere this" is similar to saying Jesus "could have sinned". Saying it could have happened does not imply God does not know the exact "day and hour" it will happen. However, the onus is upon you to prove the passages reposted below cannot be taken at face value. The exact time of the second coming of the Son of man is God's mystery. {DA 632.4}
But there is a day that God hath appointed for the close of this world's history. {FE 335.2}
Every week counts one week less, every day one day nearer to the appointed time of the judgment. {Mar 55.5}
Instead of exhausting the powers of our mind in speculations in regard to the times and seasons [regarding the day and hour of Jesus' return] which the Lord has placed in his own power, and withheld from men, we are to yield ourselves to the control of the Holy Spirit, to do present duties, to give the bread of life, unadulterated with human opinions, to souls who are perishing for the truth. {RH, March 22, 1892 par. 3}
We must cherish and cultivate the faith of which prophets and apostles have testified--the faith that lays hold on the promises of God and waits for deliverance in His appointed time and way. The sure word of prophecy will meet its final fulfillment in the glorious advent of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, as King of kings and Lord of lords. {Mar 66.3}
No material can be used in the erection of buildings that will preserve them from destruction when God's appointed time comes to send retribution on men for their disregard of His law and for their selfish ambition. {CCh 38.2}
All must wait for the appointed time, until the warning shall have gone to all parts of the world, until sufficient light and evidence have been given to every soul. {LDE 217.1}
Antichrist, meaning all who exalt themselves against the will and work of God, will at the appointed time feel the wrath of Him who gave Himself that they might not perish but have eternal life. {3SM 402.1}
The times and seasons God has put in His own power. And why has not God given us this knowledge?-- Because we would not make a right use of it if He did. {Ev 221.1}
The Lord has wisely concealed this from us that we may always be in a state of expectancy and preparation for the second appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ in the clouds of heaven. {LDE 33.3}
The voice of God is heard from heaven, declaring the day and hour of Jesus' coming, and delivering the everlasting covenant to His people. ... And when the blessing is pronounced on those who have honored God by keeping His Sabbath holy, there is a mighty shout of victory. {FLB 182.7} Again, she unequivocally says the exact "day and hour" is set, has been appointed, and that God hasn't revealed it to us yet but that He will during the outpouring of the seven last plagues.
|
|
|
Re: How Can a Person Know if a Prophecy is Conditional or Unconditional? - Part 2
[Re: Tom]
#128220
10/16/10 06:42 PM
10/16/10 06:42 PM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
M: I believe God exists in the past, present, and future simultaneously, which means all of the above is open and multi-threaded, the beginning and the end and everything in between are happening simultaneously.
T: You're basically saying everything is like the present to God. Is the present single-threaded or multi-threaded? It's single-threaded, because only one thing can be happening. . . Another way to see that this is so is to ask the question, when God looks into the past, what does He see? He sees what happened, right? The ONE thing that happened. That's single-threaded. Similarly, under your view, when God looks to the future (which you say is Him looking backwards, because to God the future has already happened), what does He see? He likewise would see the ONE thing that "happened." That's single-threaded. . . God cannot exist in the future if the future is multi-threaded, unless you believe this means that God's existence in the future is multi-threaded as well, sort of like existing in parallel universes. Is this your thought? Good point. Yes, the present is single-threaded. Since parallel universes do not exist, God experiences time in a single-threaded sense. But His experience has no effect on our experience with time. The future is wide open. We can make decisions that impact the future. It doesn’t matter that God exists in the past, present, and future simultaneously so far as our relationship to the future is concerned. Just because God knows precisely how things will play out, it doesn’t mean our present or future are somehow limited or restricted. Since you and I both agree we are free to choose as we please, as if God doesn’t exist in the past, present, and future simultaneously, what difference does it make? “It” being the fact God exists in the past, present, and future simultaneously. In other words, so what if time is single-threaded for God? What difference does it make? It doesn't change a thing! All things remain the same. The future is wide open in a multi-threaded sense.
|
|
|
Re: How Can a Person Know if a Prophecy is Conditional or Unconditional? - Part 2
[Re: Tom]
#128221
10/16/10 08:16 PM
10/16/10 08:16 PM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
T: What I'm asking, and you're not addressing, is that if God acted in such a way that He was certain that sin would be the result of His actions, how is He not responsible? God could have acted in some other way, which He would be certain would not have resulted in sin instead. That would have been better, unless there's something about sin which is better than righteousness.
M: Ellen addresses this point in the following passages: “The plan for our redemption was not an afterthought, a plan formulated after the fall of Adam. It was a revelation of "the mystery which hath been kept in silence through times eternal." Romans 16:25, R. V. It was an unfolding of the principles that from eternal ages have been the foundation of God's throne. From the beginning, God and Christ knew of the apostasy of Satan, and of the fall of man through the deceptive power of the apostate. God did not ordain that sin should exist, but He foresaw its existence, and made provision to meet the terrible emergency. So great was His love for the world, that He covenanted to give His only-begotten Son, "that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:16. {DA 22.2}
“The purpose and plan of grace existed from all eternity. Before the foundation of the world it was according to the determinate counsel of God that man should be created, endowed with power to do the divine will. But the defection of man, with all its consequences, was not hidden from the Omnipotent, and yet it did not deter him from carrying out his eternal purpose; for the Lord would establish his throne in righteousness. God knows the end from the beginning; "known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world." Therefore redemption was not an afterthought--a plan formulated after the fall of Adam--but an eternal purpose to be wrought out for the blessing not only of this atom of a world but for the good of all the worlds which God has created. {ST, April 25, 1892 par. 1}
T: No, she didn't. That is, she didn't address the point I was making. In other passages she speaks in hypothetical voice. These would have to be considered as well. That is, she speaks of God's plans in case Adam sinned. She never presents sin as being inevitable. That's your idea. “God did not ordain that sin should exist, but He foresaw its existence, and made provision to meet the terrible emergency.” God formulated the plan of salvation before He created FMAs. Why do you think He made provision for sin before anyone capable of sinning existed? “He foresaw its existence”, not its possibility. Here are the statements you referred to: Before the foundations of the world were laid, Christ, the Only Begotten of God, pledged Himself to become the Redeemer of the human race, should Adam sin. {1SM 226.1}
But provisions had been made in the counsels of the Father and the Son to meet this emergency. It had been provided that, should Adam fall a prey to the tempter's power, a ransom should be found in the Son of God, who should become man's Redeemer. {ST, October 8, 1894 par. 7} You seem to be saying we need to interpret the passages I posted to mean God did not know Lucifer and Adam would certainly sin because in the passages you referred to she says “should Adam sin”. However, I think the reverse of your idea is more reasonable, namely, she qualifies the ambiguous “should Adam sin” by stating emphatically from “the beginning, God and Christ knew of the apostasy of Satan, and of the fall of man through the deceptive power of the apostate. God did not ordain that sin should exist, but He foresaw its existence, and made provision to meet the terrible emergency. . . But the defection of man, with all its consequences, was not hidden from the Omnipotent, and yet it did not deter him from carrying out his eternal purpose; for the Lord would establish his throne in righteousness.” M: Although it is true God created beings He knew would sin and die, He did not create them to sin and die. He is not responsible for the fact they chose to sin. He created them perfectly holy and sinless. Yes, He could have chosen not to create them without interfering with free will.
T: This last sentence is a bit confusing. You're saying that God could have chosen not to create the being who would sin, and that doing so would not have interfered with their free will? If this is what you're saying, I agree with this. And, indeed, this is what God would have done, unless sin has some advantage over righteousness. Can you think of any other reason why God would have chosen to create them even though He knew they would sin and die? “Yet it did not deter him from carrying out his eternal purpose; for the Lord would establish his throne in righteousness.”
T: So you're saying that God needed sin in order to establish His throne in righteousness? If this isn't what you're saying, why wouldn't God simply establish His throne in righteousness without sin existing? What's the advantage of sin? Again, we both agree that no matter what God did not create holy and sinless beings so that they could sin and die. Ellen clearly stated the fact God knew in advance precisely who would sin and die that it did not deter Him from carrying out “His eternal purpose”. What is His eternal purpose? The following insights speak to it: Let Israel hope in God. The Master of the vineyard is even now gathering from among men of all nations and peoples the precious fruits for which He has long been waiting. Soon He will come unto His own; and in that glad day His eternal purpose for the house of Israel will finally be fulfilled. "He shall cause them that come of Jacob to take root: Israel shall blossom and bud, and fill the face of the world with fruit." Verse 6. {PK 22.2}
Through Jeremiah in Jerusalem, through Daniel in the court of Babylon, through Ezekiel on the banks of the Chebar, the Lord in mercy made clear His eternal purpose and gave assurance of His willingness to fulfill to His chosen people the promises recorded in the writings of Moses. That which He had said He would do for those who should prove true to Him, He would surely bring to pass. "The word of God . . . liveth and abideth forever." 1 Peter 1:23. {PK 464.1}
If the remnant people of God will walk before Him in humility and faith, He will carry out through them His eternal purpose, enabling them to work harmoniously in giving to the world the truth as it is in Jesus. He will use all --men, women, and children--in making the light shine forth to the world and calling out a people that will be true to His commandments. Through the faith that His people exercise in Him, God will make known to the world that He is the true God, the God of Israel. {9T 274.1}
The man who exiled John was not released from responsibility in the matter, but he became an instrument in the hands of God to carry out His eternal purpose; and the very effort to extinguish light placed the truth in bold relief. {YRP 282.1} Apparently, God’s eternal purpose is to demonstrate beyond doubt that His law and love is holy, just, and good, and that Lucifer’s accusations are untrue. The fact He knew Adam and many of the human race would sin and require redemption did not deter Him creating Adam because He also knew many of his descendants would embrace Jesus and thereby disprove Lucifer’s lies. In this way God will “establish his throne in righteousness”, instead of simply wiping out the evil angels, choosing not to create Adam, and then demanding unfallen beings to love and serve Him. M: By the way, do you think God had no idea Lucifer and Adam would sin?
T: Why do you think I think this? I've been very clear in what I believe, and have stated such many, many times. It's very perplexing how you could ask something like this. What I've said is that God knew of the possibility that Lucifer and Adam would sin, and the same is true of all the other beings that He created. All the beings He created had the possibility of sinning. This is all I've said. I've never said God had no idea that Lucifer or Adam would sin. I don't see how you could get from what I actually said to your question. What were you thinking? My question was designed to ascertain what you believe – not to state what you believe. So, is it safe to conclude you believe God had no idea Lucifer or Adam would certainly sin? T: It's not that God knows that the time has already played out that makes it the case that the future is settled, but that time has already played out. It's not the knowledge of the fact that is the issue, but the fact itself. The fact (according to you) is that time has already played out. That fact means the future is settled.
M: Unless, of course, God surpasses your ability to comprehend Him.
T: No, MM, this is the same error. There is an *ontological* issue (i.e., an issue having to do with how things are, with reality). My *comprehension* of things (e.g., my comprehension of God) is an *epistemological* issue. I'm saying the epistemological issue doesn't matter; it's not the relevant thing. It's the ontological issue which matters. To say the same thing more simply, it's "just the facts." What are the facts? Whatever God knows is a fact. This is not true of me, so my comprehension of God may be wrong, but regardless of whether or not it is, it would still be the case that what God knows to be facts are indeed facts.
M: The only reason why we know the past, present, and future exist simultaneously is because God exists in the past, present, and future simultaneously. This fact, as you have vehemently affirmed, in no way means the future is fixed or settled.
T: No, I've not affirmed this at all, vehemently or otherwise. Where did you get this idea from? In another post you said: “You seem to be saying it is impossible for God to exist in the past, present, and future simultaneously without it meaning the future is single-threaded and without it meaning it is impossible for us to make choices that impact the future (i.e. result in a different outcome).” so when you wrote this post you understood I was saying the reverse of what you're now saying I am vehemently affirming. What happened? Yes, God’s reality is fact. However, this fact doesn’t change the fact we are free to choose as we please and that the future is wide open. God knowing the future like history doesn’t alter time or limit our options. This is what you have vehemently affirmed. Sorry I goofed it up. M: Time plays out just as it always does. The fact time, as it relates to human history, is in reality finished makes no difference so far as how we experience time right now, which is also reality.
T: You're contradicting yourself. You assert: Time is in reality finished. If time is in reality finished, then our perception that it is not in reality finished is wrong, an illusion, a perceived reality which is false.
M: It is not an illusion or perceived reality.
T: If this is true, then your statement that time is in reality finished is false. That is, if our perception that time is in reality not finished is not an illusion or perceived reality, then it must be the case that time is in reality not finished. So we have: 1.Time is in reality finished. 2.Time is in reality not finished. These are mutually exclusive.
M: We are limited in our ability to experience time, that is, we can only experience time in the present tense. The choices we make now impact the future (which essentially begins the instant we make the choice). We cannot go back in time and make a different choice, although technically we can change our mind the instant we make a choice and thereby thwart what might have happened, or we can repent and receive forgiveness and radically change the outcome.
T: If time is in reality finished, nothing we can do can alter anything related to that. That should be clear to see. You are assuming the future does not exist and that, therefore, God cannot know precisely how it will play out. You are also assuming God cannot know how the future will play out without making it fixed or settled. But so what? You seem to think it means we are, nevertheless, free to choose as we please. So what difference does it make?
|
|
|
Re: How Can a Person Know if a Prophecy is Conditional or Unconditional? - Part 2
[Re: Mountain Man]
#128222
10/16/10 08:20 PM
10/16/10 08:20 PM
|
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
M: So, do you believe God knows all the different ways the future can play out but doesn't know precisely which one will play out?
T: It depends upon the circumstances. The future is comprised of some things which are settled, and some which aren't. Of the things which aren't, God sees all the possibilities. God could only know which of these would occur if one of these possibilities was a certainty and all of the other "possibilities" were in reality "impossibilities. Please list everything you believe was/is settled.
|
|
|
Re: How Can a Person Know if a Prophecy is Conditional or Unconditional? - Part 2
[Re: Mountain Man]
#128226
10/17/10 12:59 AM
10/17/10 12:59 AM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Please list everything you believe was/is settled. That would be too long a list, but I can give some examples. Say you are wavering over a decision, but finally make up your mind what you're going to do. Say from the moment that you finally make up your mind, it's 100% certain that you will do what you've decided to do. What was previously a possibility becomes settled. That "Cyrus" would be the name of the ruler that would deliver Israel is an example. There are many examples of God's declaring what He will do which are examples. That the sun will rise tomorrow is an example.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: How Can a Person Know if a Prophecy is Conditional or Unconditional? - Part 2
[Re: Tom]
#128227
10/17/10 01:04 AM
10/17/10 01:04 AM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
The fact Jesus "could have come ere this" is similar to saying Jesus "could have sinned". I agree! Christ could have sinned, and God foresaw that possibility, but took the risk to send Him anyway, which is to His everlasting glory. It's mind-boggling that God would send His Son at the risk of failure and eternal loss. Saying it could have happened does not imply God does not know the exact "day and hour" it will happen. ??? Sure it does. Saying that 2+2 = 4 implies that 2+2 <> 5. However, the onus is upon you to prove the passages reposted below cannot be taken at face value. Why isn't the onus upon you to prove the passages reposted below cannot be taken at face value? Christ is waiting with longing desire for the manifestation of Himself in His church. When the character of Christ shall be perfectly reproduced in His people, then He will come to claim them as His own.
It is the privilege of every Christian not only to look for but to hasten the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, (2 Peter 3:12, margin). Remember that Christ risked all. For our redemption, heaven itself was imperiled. At the foot of the cross, remembering that for one sinner Christ would have laid down His life, you may estimate the value of a soul. (COL 196)
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: How Can a Person Know if a Prophecy is Conditional or Unconditional? - Part 2
[Re: Tom]
#128228
10/17/10 01:30 AM
10/17/10 01:30 AM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Again, she unequivocally says the exact "day and hour" is set, has been appointed, and that God hasn't revealed it to us yet but that He will during the outpouring of the seven last plagues. It's your thought that a time has been set for the outpouring of the seven last plagues? Here's how I see things. The coming of Christ depends upon the Gospel being given and received. When I say "the Gospel," I mean the message which God gives to prepare the world for the coming of Christ, such as which the 1888 message was the beginning. At some point a message like that one will be given and not resisted by the leadership of our church, but will instead have the result which God had purposed back then. The reception of the Gospel will have the result of which EGW speaks in COL 69, of reproducing the character of Christ in His people. When Satan sees this happen, he knows his time is truly short, and he takes pains to do something about it. He issues a counterfeit message, a counterfeit revival, which is almost overpowering in its deception. Part of what Satan does involves the mark of the beast. Satan will also use the principles of his government, force and violence, to try to get his way, as the seven plagues are poured out. The wicked have passed the boundary of their probation; the Spirit of God, persistently resisted, has been at last withdrawn. Unsheltered by divine grace, they have no protection from the wicked one. Satan will then plunge the inhabitants of the earth into one great, final trouble. As the angels of God cease to hold in check the fierce winds of human passion, all the elements of strife will be let loose. The whole world will be involved in ruin more terrible than that which came upon Jerusalem of old.(GC 614) So we have on the one hand, God working to bring about an end to sin, and Satan fighting against God. The persecutions, mark of the beast, plagues, counterfeit movements, which mark the beginning of the end, all come as a result of the positive effects of the Gospel, as the enemy fights back. When people have made their decision, so all receive either the mark of the beast, or the seal of God, then God can announce the date of Christ's coming. That makes sense. But this is a conditional pronouncement, as the time for these things happening has not been set, as these are things which involve free will decisions.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: How Can a Person Know if a Prophecy is Conditional or Unconditional? - Part 2
[Re: Tom]
#128229
10/17/10 01:47 AM
10/17/10 01:47 AM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
T: You're basically saying everything is like the present to God. Is the present single-threaded or multi-threaded? It's single-threaded, because only one thing can be happening. . . Another way to see that this is so is to ask the question, when God looks into the past, what does He see? He sees what happened, right? The ONE thing that happened. That's single-threaded. Similarly, under your view, when God looks to the future (which you say is Him looking backwards, because to God the future has already happened), what does He see? He likewise would see the ONE thing that "happened." That's single-threaded. . . God cannot exist in the future if the future is multi-threaded, unless you believe this means that God's existence in the future is multi-threaded as well, sort of like existing in parallel universes. Is this your thought?
M:Good point. Yes, the present is single-threaded. Since parallel universes do not exist, God experiences time in a single-threaded sense. So time is single-threaded then. You see this, right? If God experiences time as single-threaded, then time is single-threaded, as God's experience can't be wrong; that is, His perception of time can't be an illusion. That doesn't make sense. But His experience has no effect on our experience with time. Not in the sense of causation, but there is a logical connection. If God experiences time as single-threaded, and perceives it as single-threaded, then it *is* single-threaded. And if time were single-threaded, that would have an impact on us. The future is single-threaded, or open. One or the other. Not both. We can make decisions that impact the future. Then time is not single-threaded, and this contradicts your first statement that God experiences it as single-threaded. It doesn’t matter that God exists in the past, present, and future simultaneously so far as our relationship to the future is concerned. Of course it matters. If the future is single-threaded, that impacts our relation to the future. Just because God knows precisely how things will play out, it doesn’t mean our present or future are somehow limited or restricted. If the future is single-threaded, then it's single-threaded, MM. That impacts us. Since you and I both agree we are free to choose as we please, as if God doesn’t exist in the past, present, and future simultaneously, what difference does it make? I started a post on what difference it makes. There are a number of differences it makes if the future is single-threaded. For one thing, our perception that it's not would be wrong. Our perception that our decisions impact the future would be wrong. There are questions regarding God's character. For example, why would He create beings He was sure would sin? “It” being the fact God exists in the past, present, and future simultaneously. In other words, so what if time is single-threaded for God? What difference does it make? It doesn't change a thing! All things remain the same. The future is wide open in a multi-threaded sense. If the future is single-threaded, that changes things! For one thing, that would mean the future is not multi-threaded. You agree with this, right? Let's start with this question. Is the future single-threaded, or multi-threaded? I mean in reality, not according to our experience. If the future is single-threaded, then it's not multi-threaded, do you agree with this? Let's continue. If the future is single-threaded, that would impact us, right?
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: How Can a Person Know if a Prophecy is Conditional or Unconditional? - Part 2
[Re: Tom]
#128230
10/17/10 02:00 AM
10/17/10 02:00 AM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
“God did not ordain that sin should exist, but He foresaw its existence, and made provision to meet the terrible emergency.” God formulated the plan of salvation before He created FMAs. Why do you think He made provision for sin before anyone capable of sinning existed? “He foresaw its existence”, not its possibility.
Here are the statements you referred to:
Before the foundations of the world were laid, Christ, the Only Begotten of God, pledged Himself to become the Redeemer of the human race, should Adam sin. {1SM 226.1}
But provisions had been made in the counsels of the Father and the Son to meet this emergency. It had been provided that, should Adam fall a prey to the tempter's power, a ransom should be found in the Son of God, who should become man's Redeemer. {ST, October 8, 1894 par. 7}
You seem to be saying we need to interpret the passages I posted to mean God did not know Lucifer and Adam would certainly sin because in the passages you referred to she says “should Adam sin”. However, I think the reverse of your idea is more reasonable, namely, she qualifies the ambiguous “should Adam sin” by stating emphatically from “the beginning, God and Christ knew of the apostasy of Satan, and of the fall of man through the deceptive power of the apostate. God did not ordain that sin should exist, but He foresaw its existence, and made provision to meet the terrible emergency. . . But the defection of man, with all its consequences, was not hidden from the Omnipotent, and yet it did not deter him from carrying out his eternal purpose; for the Lord would establish his throne in righteousness.” Why? Why do you think multi-threadedness should be interpreted in the light of single-threadedness, and not the other way around? (More later)
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
Re: How Can a Person Know if a Prophecy is Conditional or Unconditional? - Part 2
[Re: Tom]
#128232
10/17/10 03:17 AM
10/17/10 03:17 AM
|
OP
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
M: Although it is true God created beings He knew would sin and die, He did not create them to sin and die. He is not responsible for the fact they chose to sin. He created them perfectly holy and sinless. Yes, He could have chosen not to create them without interfering with free will.
T: This last sentence is a bit confusing. You're saying that God could have chosen not to create the being who would sin, and that doing so would not have interfered with their free will? If this is what you're saying, I agree with this. And, indeed, this is what God would have done, unless sin has some advantage over righteousness.
M:Can you think of any other reason why God would have chosen to create them even though He knew they would sin and die? That's my question to you, of course. What advantage to you see in sin? “Yet it did not deter him from carrying out his eternal purpose; for the Lord would establish his throne in righteousness.”
T: So you're saying that God needed sin in order to establish His throne in righteousness? If this isn't what you're saying, why wouldn't God simply establish His throne in righteousness without sin existing? What's the advantage of sin?
M:Again, we both agree that no matter what God did not create holy and sinless beings so that they could sin and die. I agree with this. I don't think this is what you believe though. You believe sin was inevitable. And that there is some advantage to sin. And that God set into motion a course of action which made sin inevitable. Right? Ellen clearly stated the fact God knew in advance precisely who would sin and die that it did not deter Him from carrying out “His eternal purpose”. What is His eternal purpose? The following insights speak to it:...
Apparently, God’s eternal purpose is to demonstrate beyond doubt that His law and love is holy, just, and good, and that Lucifer’s accusations are untrue. The fact He knew Adam and many of the human race would sin and require redemption did not deter Him creating Adam because He also knew many of his descendants would embrace Jesus and thereby disprove Lucifer’s lies. In this way God will “establish his throne in righteousness”, instead of simply wiping out the evil angels, choosing not to create Adam, and then demanding unfallen beings to love and serve Him. So you don't think God could have done this without sin? Is this your idea? Or sin helped Him do so? And this is the advantage of sin?
M: By the way, do you think God had no idea Lucifer and Adam would sin?
T: Why do you think I think this? I've been very clear in what I believe, and have stated such many, many times. It's very perplexing how you could ask something like this. What I've said is that God knew of the possibility that Lucifer and Adam would sin, and the same is true of all the other beings that He created. All the beings He created had the possibility of sinning. This is all I've said. I've never said God had no idea that Lucifer or Adam would sin. I don't see how you could get from what I actually said to your question. What were you thinking?
M:My question was designed to ascertain what you believe – not to state what you believe. So, is it safe to conclude you believe God had no idea Lucifer or Adam would certainly sin?
It doesn't sound like you read what I wrote. Please read what I wrote (just above your question).
T: It's not that God knows that the time has already played out that makes it the case that the future is settled, but that time has already played out. It's not the knowledge of the fact that is the issue, but the fact itself. The fact (according to you) is that time has already played out. That fact means the future is settled.
M: Unless, of course, God surpasses your ability to comprehend Him.
T: No, MM, this is the same error. There is an *ontological* issue (i.e., an issue having to do with how things are, with reality). My *comprehension* of things (e.g., my comprehension of God) is an *epistemological* issue. I'm saying the epistemological issue doesn't matter; it's not the relevant thing. It's the ontological issue which matters. To say the same thing more simply, it's "just the facts." What are the facts? Whatever God knows is a fact. This is not true of me, so my comprehension of God may be wrong, but regardless of whether or not it is, it would still be the case that what God knows to be facts are indeed facts.
M: The only reason why we know the past, present, and future exist simultaneously is because God exists in the past, present, and future simultaneously. This fact, as you have vehemently affirmed, in no way means the future is fixed or settled.
T: No, I've not affirmed this at all, vehemently or otherwise. Where did you get this idea from? In another post you said: “You seem to be saying it is impossible for God to exist in the past, present, and future simultaneously without it meaning the future is single-threaded and without it meaning it is impossible for us to make choices that impact the future (i.e. result in a different outcome).” so when you wrote this post you understood I was saying the reverse of what you're now saying I am vehemently affirming. What happened?
M:Yes, God’s reality is fact. However, this fact doesn’t change the fact we are free to choose as we please and that the future is wide open.
God's reality is that the future is single-threaded. That means the fact is that the future is single-threaded. If we experience it as multi-threaded, then our experience doesn't coincide with reality. God knowing the future like history doesn’t alter time or limit our options. Please pay attention, MM, because I keep repeating the same thing. 1.If God knows the future to be single-threaded, then the future is single-threaded. 2.If the future is single-threaded, then it is not multi-threaded. 3.This impacts us. If the future is single-threaded, that limits our options. Got it! (Please say yes. Please, please, please). It's fine if you disagree with what I'm saying, but please understand what I'm saying, and disagree with that. Please don't keep repeating this thing about God's knowing the future not limiting our options. This is what you have vehemently affirmed. Sorry I goofed it up. I don't know what you're saying here. M: Time plays out just as it always does. The fact time, as it relates to human history, is in reality finished makes no difference so far as how we experience time right now, which is also reality.
T: You're contradicting yourself. You assert: Time is in reality finished. If time is in reality finished, then our perception that it is not in reality finished is wrong, an illusion, a perceived reality which is false.
M: It is not an illusion or perceived reality.
T: If this is true, then your statement that time is in reality finished is false. That is, if our perception that time is in reality not finished is not an illusion or perceived reality, then it must be the case that time is in reality not finished. So we have: 1.Time is in reality finished. 2.Time is in reality not finished. These are mutually exclusive.
M: We are limited in our ability to experience time, that is, we can only experience time in the present tense. The choices we make now impact the future (which essentially begins the instant we make the choice). We cannot go back in time and make a different choice, although technically we can change our mind the instant we make a choice and thereby thwart what might have happened, or we can repent and receive forgiveness and radically change the outcome.
T: If time is in reality finished, nothing we can do can alter anything related to that. That should be clear to see.
M:You are assuming the future does not exist No I'm not. I'm assuming your point of view is correct, and stating conclusions from that assumption. and that, therefore, God cannot know precisely how it will play out. No again. Please read what I wrote again. You are also assuming God cannot know how the future will play out without making it fixed or settled. But so what? You seem to think it means we are, nevertheless, free to choose as we please. So what difference does it make? If the future is fixed or settled, we are to free to choose as we please, but not free to alter the future. Do you understand this? I'm not asking if you agree with this, just if you understand it.
Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, "Behold your God." The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love.
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
