Is God Finished With Israel?
Posted by truthtalklive on 17 March, 2009
This post was filed in Israel and has 103 comments
Today’s guest host is Dr. Michael Brown president of Fire School of Ministry and host of The Line of Fire which can be heard on many of these same stations! As always thanks for listening and we look foward to your comments!
103 Comments on “Is God Finished With Israel?”
God forbid! Romans 11.
I believe that Amos 9 refers to Israel when the Tabernacle of David is mentioned. Also in Revelations the scripture states that there will be 144,000 jews sealed on the forehead with a mark that will be saved.
Even though God is not done with national Israel we can’t assume that the modsern state of Israel is righteous. Modern Israel is guilty of much evil, e.g., Israel has nuclear weapons but refuses to sign the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. We also can’t be ignorant of the unhealthy amount of influence that Israel has in US policies. Fro example, Michael Chertoff, the former Secretary of the Dept. of Homeland Security is a dual citizen of Israel. Pres. Obama’s Chief of staff Rahm Immanuel is also a joint citizen of Israel and the USA. In fact President Obama has been groomed and is controlled by globalists who want to destroy the national sovereignty of the USA and establish a new world order/global government. The video “The Obama Deception” below explains this in detail. See
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw
Dr. Brown,
I’m just curious which position you were contrasting to your own. You mentioned that the argument was that the nation of Israel is “replaced” and whatever theology you were arguing against, brings God’s faithfulness into question because His promises wouldn’t be fulfilled. I only got to hear the first segment of the show so maybe in the other sections you quoted someone of the position you were opposing: full preterism perhaps or some strange form of postmillennialism, maybe. I believe it would be helpful for your listeners to know if anyone actually holds the position you chose to contrast to Dispensational Premillennialism.
The kingdoms of Judah and Israel described in the Bible never actually existed. Neither did David, Solomon, the temple or any of the other 40 kings. Just try to find evidence for any of them. None exists nor did it ever. We can document 400 years of Egyptian occupation and domination of Israel that took place during the time the mythical kingdoms of Israel and Judah supposedly existed. The Bible doesn’t mention one word about this but it is historical fact. This fact alone proves that the Bible is fiction. But narratives with word for word dialog in them prove themselves to be fiction as no historical narratives have ever been written containing dialog. Historical narratives don’t contain poetry, prose, songs, absurd tales of the supernatural and the set of and payoff of prophecy and fulfillment. All of those are standard elements of ancient fiction and never of ancient history writing.
Modern Israel has no right to exist. I find it interesting that American Christians support a nation with the highest percentage of atheists of any country in the world and one whose prime ministers have almost all been atheists. Just one more thing your cult leaders don’t want you to know.
Wow, I didn’t know that Dudley. Interesting stuff.
Stanley,
I recommend a book called Mythic Past, Biblical Archaeology and the Myth of Israel by archaeologist, historian and Bible scholar Thomas Thompson for anyone interested in just exactly how the study of the history of Palestine has moved far away from using the Bible as a basis for history. There are several others that have been out for a while now you can find at the public library. Also several Christian publications have reported on this subject: “Archaeological data have now definitely confirmed that the Empire of David and Solomon never existed.” – Biblical Archaeological Revue 31, no. 1 (Jan/Feb 2005): 16-17.
Christian apologists and Christians on these blogs love to attack science, liberal thinking, atheism and all the things that are bringing a quick end to their religion now. Atheists waste their time trying to defend these things to people who admit they could never be swayed by any kind of evidence supernatural or otherwise that the beliefs other PEOPLE preconditioned them to hold are not true. I’ve already upset a bunch of bloggers here because I don’t bother to go on the defensive argue about those things with closed minds. Instead as you can see I attack the paper idol their cult leaders and peers and parents have brainwashed them into worshiping in lieu of any evidence of a God. Their beliefs are nonsensical and indefensible and when they are forced to read and consider harsh criticisms of them they become emotionally unstable as you can see from many of their posts. My goal is to force people to think, I’m a forceful writer and I can do this. Sometimes you just have to push people to the edge to make them start thinking. I’m here to tell the truth and I mean no harm to anyone, only to their religion.
Stanley,
The arguments of this fellow who calls himself Dudley are quite reminiscent of those of an atheist named Fred Weis (aka Boris). Sadly, Dudley (Boris? Fred?) needs to rely on insults and attacks, since the factual data is against him.
On the way to my Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University, I studied only with skeptics and non-believers and non-Christians, allowing my faith to be thoroughly tested, and the more I studied, the more my confidence grew in the reliability of the biblical material. God’s Word is thoroughly trustworthy!
If you’re in the least bit troubled by the claims that “Dudley” made, then read the very-full volume called On the Reliability of the Old Testament written by Sir Kenneth Kitchen, one of the world’s foremost Egyptologists. You will quickly see that is the writings of the skeptics and anti-religious which should be dismissed, not the writings of the biblical authors!
Those who follow the Scriptures find themselves intellectually rewarded and spiritually transformed.
Jason,
Many different groups hold to the veracity of God’s promises to Israel. Mine would be in basic harmony with historic premillenialists such as George Eldon Ladd. Dispensationalism, of course, is a relatively recent phenomenon.
I really wish we could admit our mistake and stop supporting Israel. It was wrong to take that land away, and they have every right to be pissed. That doesn’t make the suicide bombers justified, but I can understand why they’re angry.
The arguments of this fellow who calls himself Dudley are quite reminiscent of those of an atheist named Fred Weis (aka Boris). Sadly, Dudley (Boris? Fred?) needs to rely on insults and attacks, since the factual data is against him.
Response: The factual data is AGAINST the Bible and Dr. Brown is well aware of this.
On the way to my Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Literatures from New York University, I studied only with skeptics and non-believers and non-Christians, allowing my faith to be thoroughly tested, and the more I studied, the more my confidence grew in the reliability of the biblical material. God’s Word is thoroughly trustworthy!
Response: Dr. Brown is blowing smoke here of course. His faith came after sticking a needle in his arm a few times as a kid and realizing what miserable excuse for human being he was acting like. As he grew older and studied the Bible he sort of became enamored with the fact that as a Jew and a Bible student he could be a big fish in the pond and use his Jewishness as a boost to give him more authority to tell the rest of us how to live. If he just remained a Jew no one would pay any attention to him and he’s well aware of this. Dr. Brown hides his arrogance well, but not from all of us.
If you’re in the least bit troubled by the claims that “Dudley” made, then read the very-full volume called On the Reliability of the Old Testament written by Sir Kenneth Kitchen, one of the world’s foremost Egyptologists. You will quickly see that is the writings of the skeptics and anti-religious which should be dismissed, not the writings of the biblical authors!
Response: Dr. Brown uses the logical fallacy called “an appeal to authority” a lot when he has no argument, which is most of the time when he’s dealing with infidels and skeptics, and some of the time with the hard core fanatics on his show. I could tell you to read Gerald Massey and few other Egyptologists who refute what Kitchen says but tossing books back and forth goes nowhere in a debate. But one thing is for sure. NEVER get information ABOUT a religion FROM a person who is a member OF that religion. This includes Kenneth Kitchen and especially Michael Brown.
Those who follow the Scriptures find themselves intellectually rewarded and spiritually transformed.
“If a man would follow, today, the teachings of the Old Testament, he would be a criminal. If he would follow strictly the teachings of the New, he would be insane.” – Robert Ingersoll
Here’s an article that tells the truth about how the nation of Israel actually came about. It’s appalling and once you learn how the Jews used terrorism to establish themselves in Palestine you will understand why the Palestinians refuse to ever negotiate with them again. Burn us once, burn us twice… The Israelies negotiated with the Palestinians the same way we did with the native Americans.
Zionist Jews- Godfathers Of Terrorism
Written by http://www.daily.pk
Thursday, 22 January 2009 18:52
Christian apologists like Michael Brown don’t want you to know this stuff. These people not only base their entire worldview on the Bible and piece of desert being special to a deity that supposedly created hundreds of billions of other galaxies and at the same time was pleased by the smell of burning goat flesh and the sight of the spilled blood of a defenseless animal, but they make their entire living hawking their religion. If you think people with so much to lose and who know they are on VERY thin ice will be honest with you about their religion then so be it. But you don’t, now do you?
Aww, I miss Boris.
Dudley: You are very keen to point things out and then presumptuously tell us that we ”KNOW” that, or we are ”WELL AWARE” of that. Don’t presume to tell us what we do and do not know…..it is you who seems to be oblivious to truth….you KNOW nothing Dudley (nothing of any significance) and it is revealed in your posts. I wonder what you do other than come on here to insult us and God. Do you work? Do you have any other interests apart from being here? What is your lifes ambition? But whatever you say here will not make one iota of difference to my faith nor anyone else here who is a born-again spirit-filled Christian.
Dudley: All I am going to say about what Israel did in the OT is this: they were a nation chosen to show Gods Holiness and Righteousness in the earth. But they miserably failed, none the less God told them to destroy the wicked nations that then existed….nations that burnt their own children in fire…..nations, that if they had been allowed to survive today would have turned this world into a blood bath and perversions of every kind, for that is what they were like. They didn’t go round killing ‘innocent’ people, God used Israel to rid the earth of wickedness and to set up a nation who would live according to His laws and His ways. It was a war between righteousness and wickedness. Today, God is gathering His people back to their land…..the land He promised them, to live in it in peace. But there are those who want to obliterate them from the earth……those who spew hatred out continually for Israels death!! There will be no peace in the Middle East according to some until Israel is no more……all Israel is asking is that they can live in peace in their land. They are fighting to survive!
Chris: #2…This is the scripture in Amos…”And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel, and they shall build the waste cities; and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink their wine; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them. And I will plant then upin their own land, and they shall NO MORE BE PULLED UP OUT OF THEIR LAND WHICH I HAVE GIVEN THEM SAITH THE LORD, YOUR GOD.” Amos 9 v 14,15.
Since May 1948 this has happened. We use to get a lot of fruit from Israel……they have grown fruit where only desert was once. Israel is still in Gods calendar.
Dr. Brown,
As a “Realized Millennialist”, such as it has been referred to by Anthony Hoekema (Amillennialist) I too hold to the veracity of God’s promises to Israel, how can you be regenerated and believe that God would or even can break a promise? Of course we would likely agree that one can’t. However, just as in all forms of Post-Millennialism I am aware of, Realized Millennialism would dispute just who those promises are actually made to: physical, ethnic Israel (as it may appear at first blush by exclusively reading the grammatical/historical OT accounts) or Spiritual Israel (as indicated by the redemptive/historical interpretation provided for us in the NT). I guess my question is this, who makes the arguments (the ones against which you intended to opine) you cited in the first segment of the show.
Also, for some reason I got the impression that you bleieved in the literal and physical fulfillment of the temple mentioned in places like Ezekeil 40-48, and that perhaps animal sacrifices would be reinstituted (a teaching of Dispensational Premillennnialism). But you said in your post above that you basically lined up with Ladd (representing historic Premillennialism) who is, for all practical purposes, a covenant theologian who believes in a literal 1000 year manifestation of the kingdom prior to Christ’s return in glory.
Maz, If you could refute even one thing I said you would happily do so. So would you cult leader Dr. Brown, but instead he makes character attacks and spews logical fallacies because like you, he has no case for his beliefs either but, unlike you he, KNOWS it. He desperately defends his religion because it is the only source of income for him, not because it’s true. He knows it isn’t. Your personal attacks reveal the fact that you have no arguments and have already lost this debate. Where is that extra-biblical evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ you said there was so much of and I asked you to provide? You couldn’t find any could you? That’s because there isn’t one word outside the Bible about Jesus Christ that was written before the third century. Something your cult leaders have kept hidden from you by convincing you not to question what they have told you. The Bible claims the earth is flat and immovable and sits on a foundation supported by pillars while the sun hurries across the sky (unless someone stops it!). So Maz tell us all, does the sun orbit the earth or is the Bible wrong about that?
Despite your cult leader’s claims to the contrary science has completely disproved the Bible. Why do you think no one outside the United State believes it anymore and only 7 per cent of the American population takes the Bible literally? Of them, over 90 per cent have no college education. You can find harsh criticisms of the apologetic nonsense and mindless drivel that hoaxers like your cult leaders Dr. Michael Brown have written on the Internet. Notice how Dr. Brown has attacked people on this blog who have crushed him in debates in the past and exposed the fallacies behind the dogma and doctrine he’s promoting. This proves he has no case.
“Why do you think no one outside the United State believes it anymore” You are ignoring the third world, of course. “And only 7 per cent of the American population takes the Bible literally?” That’s proof that you can be a thinking Christian, since most Christians don’t take the Bible literally but recognize the transformative power of Christ in their lives, and understand that the Bible needs to be read with the gospels in mind, not vice versa.
Stanley, Dudley is very clever, and a lot of the criticisms he makes are valid when it comes to certain types of believers. But don’t make the mistake of thinking that because literal fundamentalist types are easy to poke fun of that Christ Himself has no meaning or saving power for modern humanity. Dudley and Bob Griffin represent two extremes. As usual, the truth is somewhere in the middle.
When God mentions Israel in the scriptures, he is specifically referring to the children of Israel who was called Jacob, the second born of Isaac whom Sarah bore to Abraham the Hebew (a descendant of Eber), and not to a modern-day political nation state or a geographic region within recently drawn political boundaries. To confuse these two things is greivous error.
While there is some debate about what parts of God’s word concerning Israel applies to all who are of Israel or only to those who are called, there should be no question that none of it applies to the modern political nation state.
Paul writes about his brethren, “Who are Israelites; to whom [pertaineth] the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service [of God], and the promises; Whose [are] the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ [came], who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they [are] not all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, [are they] all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these [are] not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.”
Considering this, the preeminent ministry that we ought to have toward those who are of Israel is the word of God wherein is found the promises whereby they may be begotten again to the one lively hope that is in Christ alone.
I mis-typed Hebrew. Abraham was a Hebrew, a descendant of Eber.
Some helpful resources in this area of debate are:
Sam Waldron – “End Times Made Simple” and “MacArthur’s Millennial Manifesto: A Friendly Response”
Kim Riddlebarger – “A Case for Amillennialism: Understanding the End Times”
Anthony Hoekema – “The Bible and the Future” and his article titled, “Amillennialism”
Mike Horton – “God of Promise”
Dudley, really, WHO is attacking who and WHO is spewing? If I wanted to refute even one thing you said I would….but I have a free will and I choose not to. I don’t bow to intimidation or threat, you can think I have no answers but why not just look on some of the other sites and you will find I have given many answers to many things….but ONLY when the person I am debating is reasonable and respectful. YOU ARE NOT.
Ben: Modern Israelis are the descendents of Jacob or they aren’t Jews atall.
I can’t speak for Ben but unbelieving, ethnic Jews who exist today are not the “Israel of God” spoken of in the NT.
Jason: There are those who think the Church is the Israel of God, that is not scriptural. Jesus spoke of two folds not just one. The Church comprises of Jews and Gentiles who believe in Christ as the Messiah. But God still has a week left for Israel in His prophetic calendar, the seventeeth week of Daniel. There were 490 years to go on Israel, there were only 483 years up till the Messiah came…..then He was ”cut off”, but there is still a week left for God to deal with Israel and that week will include the Tribulation, because it is called ‘Jacobs trouble’.
Maz,
People believe that the Church is a part of the Israel of God because the NT says so: Eph. 2:11-22, Gal. 6:15-16, etc. and if you remember there was one tree with gentiles grafted in and the believing natural branches grafted back in…not two separate and eternally distinct trees as Dispy Premil would seem to suggest.
I’m fascinated how dispy dremils seem to think that their eschatology just jumps off the pages of scripture, no interpretation necessary. The fact is, premils, postmils, and amils alike, have operating assumptions that lead us to interpret scripture the way we do…premils with the assumed radical distinction between spiritual Israel and the Church, postmils with the assumption that Christ will return to a (b/c of the gospel of course) saved earth, and amils with the assumption of the kingdom tension – the already/not yet schema. Note: “A” and post mils are essentially the same, but with a different view of the nature of the kingdom in this age. Practically speaking, “A” or “Realized” millennialism is a form of postmil.
At the beginning of the 2nd paragraph of post #27 I said, “dispy dremils” and I meant, “dispy premils”
“To Dispensationalists, a “spiritualizing” hermeneutic is the most dangerous way to interpret the Old Testament. Professor John Walvoord has written that this is the hermeneutic which characterizes modern Roman Catholic, modern liberal, and modern non-dispensational conservative writers (The Millennial Kingdom, Dunham, 1959, p. 71). The present writer feels that he must adopt a spiritualizing hermeneutic because he finds the New Testament applying to the spiritual church promises which in the Old Testament refer to literal Israel. he does not do this because of any preconceived covenant theology but because he is bound by the Word of God.” – G.E. Ladd – from his article, “What About Israel?”
Maz, don’t be confused by modern recycling of terms. Most modern references to “Israelis” in the news today is a reference to the government of a nation state of people within political boundaries drawn in 1948. It is not a reference to ethnicity or religion, but to a nation-state and its citizens. The term “Jews” is likewise ambigous. To some people it means a modern Israeli national, to others it identifies an ethnicity, and to others still it defines a religious group. The etymology of the word suggests it originally referred to subjects of the kingdom of Judah, or members of the tribe of Judah, which would have been formed primarily of persons patriarchically descended from Judah, one of Israel’s 12 sons.
Jason, I would be tempted to agree with the notion that the Church is God’s Israel, but it depends greatly on how one defines the church. I know you don’t believe that the promises belong to a 501(c)3 corporation. Maz, even though I agree that there was another fold, Christ said there would be be one fold. I know there is some debate about whether a scripture or another applies to one fold or another and when the folds will be made one, but it seems to me that Israel’s time has been ready, Jesus said their time is always ready. It seems to me that they are not all Israel who are of Israel. Jesus said of some of them that they are of their father the devil. Has that changed? But as many as believed on him to them gave he the power to become the sons of God.
Ben: The truth is Jewish people are coming back to their homeland…..Israel. The nation is in unbelief, but they will one day see ”whom they have pierced” and know what they have done to their Messiah who they reject. Many Jews are coming to know Yeshua as their Messiah, which is a wonderful thing, but there will come a day when God will deal with the nation of Israel again.
Maz,
Ethnic Jews going back to that land is one thing, God doing as He pleases in the City of Man, and no one would deny the historical importance of what happened in 1948, however, it isn’t the fulfillment of any specific prophesy, except that it seems to be God’s preparation for what He says He will do in Rom. 11, save “all Israel”. Though we would disagree on who Israel is there, and how God will do that, we do agree that God will graft large numbers of ethnic Jews back into the tree by making then believers.
Jason: I think we can agree that God will have His way and do His will as He promised in His Word.
Maz,
Amen.
So, are we agreed that the current state of Israel is NOT the same Israel that was “prophesied” in the Bible? I mean, we created it, and stole the name.
Why do we keep supporting them when its quite obvious it was a mistake to steal the land from the Palestinians? I mean, how would you feel if the U.N. took away your land to give it to your enemy?
I think if we were really “doing unto others,” then we wouldn’t steal.
Stanely, the bible refers to Israel as a people, not a state. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t some of those people in the place where the state is today.
“We” didn’t create anything. You and I weren’t even born when the modern State of Israel was formed in 1948, and if you’re referring to the US, it didn’t create or even support the formation of modern Israel. The idea of the modern Israeli nation is attributed to a British mandate in the early 20th century, which the British government actually withdrew from. If the history I read is accurate, it was actually Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union that provided the most support for the formation of Zionist Israel at the time the nation was actually created in 1948. Stalin was apparently hoping the Zionists would favor socialism and the result would be the decline of the British which had become a mutual enemy of the Zionists and the Soviet Union at the beginning of the Cold War. The British actually abstained from voting for the UN Partition Plan and while the US did vote for it, it is not likely that it would have succeeded without support from the Soviet Union and the eastern bloc nations over which it had influence like the Byelorussian SSR, Czechoslovakia, and the Ukrainian SSR which collectively had more influence in the UN than did the US.
Stanley: No we didn’t…..atleast I didn’t! Israel is still in Gods calendar as I said before. Those who believe in Replacement Theology believe God has given up on Israel and now the Church is IT.
And as far as I know the Palestinians were not the original occupants of Israel. The land belongs to God and God originally gave it to the Jewish people. Now they are claiming their own land back.
I forgot about Poland – that was another Soviet vote for the UN Partition Plan. As far as I read, the Soviets didn’t reverse their support for Israel until around 1955. The logical conclusion is that like most Cold War politics, the “West” began to support the Zionists to prevent further Soviet influence in the world. So the answer to your question about why the US supports Israel is because at the time the decision was made to do so the alternative was to give them over to the expansion of Soviet and Communist influence.
PS: The Jews were dispersed throughout the world a couple of thousand years ago, but they were always Jews, the chosen people of God (as were their children)….they just didn’t live in their own homeland. They were more or less a national people without a land, but now God has been regathering them back to the land He promised them several thousand years ago.
I bet if I was an old testament writer, I’d call myself God’s chosen people as well.
Sounds like a con-man said that his people were God’s chosen people, thus giving the land to themselves.
Maz, I don’t disagree with your statement that the land belongs to God and that he promised it to Abraham and that God has not given up on Israel. I do not subscribe to a replacement theology that wipes out any meaningfulness of Israel in God’s doings in the past and in his plan. But you also wrote that “they are claiming their own land back.” This is a terrible mistake to confuse global politics with biblical prophesy. Just remember that according to the scriptures the re-establishment of Israel is culminated in the Antichrist sitting on the thone. In prophesy there is no resestablishment of national Israel except when they also setup the abomination that maketh desolate. If that is what is happening, why would anyone want to support that? If that is not what is happening, then where is the biblical mandate for what you are claiming? God scattered Israel. If it is God who is gathering them, where does this occur in prophesy?
Stanley: If you were an old testement writer would you also write about their rebelliousness, their sin, their wickness…..your wickedness and sin? Would you write about the warts-and-all, because that’s a lot of what is written in the Bible….even Moses recorded his failures and sins….murder being one of them. David committed adultery and murder…….the list goes on. Gods cosen people they were but they didn’t ACT like Gods people.
Cosen….meaning chosen.
Sounds like every group of people in the history of humanity. What I don’t understand is why would you trust the same rebelliousness, sinful and wicked people to be open and honest about them receiving land from God, when they “speak” for him? I would expect that they made that up so people would support them stealing away those lands.
Ben: I’m glad you agree on most things, but I was speaking of the people Israel rather than the secular nation…if you see what I mean. And seeing as blindness has been in part to Israel they are still looking for their Messiah…..and they will accept the Anti-Christ and be fooled by his amazing ablility to establish peace…..but it won’t be for long as we all know. National Israel exists today for no other reason than God made it possible, so God wants His people back in the land He promised to them, and He is the One doing the regathering as He also promised in the Word. We support the nation of Israel because it is Gods will they be back there….but ofcourse we don’t support the Anti-Christ or the evils that he will commit. I shall come back with scripture but I have already quoted Amos 9 which speaks of Israel coming back to the land…NEVER TO BE UPROOTED AGAIN. This has never happened…..but it is beginning to happen now and will culminate in the future.
Stanley: People have always had a weakness to sin, (after all we are all sinners) but the amazing thing is God still uses them to do His will. Moses did murder, but he did it on the spur of the moment without thinking, he was trying to protect one of his own people. (Hey, that sounds like another thread!!) But he did have an experience with God that changed his life and he lead millions of people out of Egypt and across the wilderness……only two actually made it through after 40 years…..but he made mistakes along the way.
I meant to say…only two of the original millions made it through to the Promised land.
Here are some scriptures on the regathering of Israel:
Jer: 31 v 8-10, 16,17. (Jer. 30 v 11, 17: 46 v 28).
Zech. 8 v 78. Mal. 3 v 16-18. Isa. 43 v 5-7. Isa: 54 v 7-10. Jer. 32 v 37,38, (40). Ezek: 11 v 17-20. I thot I’d just put the references and you can look them up in your own Bible.
I don’t see how Amos 9 can be fulfilled as you say until Revelation 21 is fulfilled, but I cannot speak with authority concerning these things.
Ben: As the Jewish people come back to their land, I do not believe that they will ever be unprooted again, fulfilling that prophecy, and they will finally……and this is a personal belief…… that they will inherit the land forever in the New Earth. We shall be residing in the New Jerusalem as the Lambs Bride that comes down out of heaven. But I cannot speak with absolute authority concerning these things either.
I just feel like we’re being played.
Well you don’t have to play the game if you don’t want to……it’s your free choice.
So you believe those promises will be fulfilled before God’s enemies will be put under his feet? How can there be any meaningfulness in God’s purpose in doing so if it is only to be destroyed later? Isn’t this the same expectation that some had of Christ at his coming, that the kingdom should appear immediately, and who rejected the Messiah because he didn’t re-establish the kind of political nation state they were expecting? If the antichrist did give people the political entity they expect to fulfill these promises, no wonder they would mistake him for God.
Ben: In part. At the end it will be completed. I’m not looking for a political state, I’m lookig forward to Israel being in their land with their King on the throne. That will happen when Jesus returns to the earth (Zech 14) and reigns from Jerusalem for 1000 years. Afterwards, His enemies will be destroyed completely and forever.
Maz,
As per #37: you said, “Those who believe in Replacement Theology believe God has given up on Israel and now the Church is IT.” Who believes that?
Secondly, you have to remember that the OT prophesies exhibited a “prophetic perspective”, where a prophesy in its grammatical/historical presentation appeared to foresee 1 event but it actually ends up being two; the prophets saw the Christ’s comings and the resultant situations as one event when in fact they are two, His birth and His coming in glory. Also, you have prophets describing eternal salvation from the guilt and power of sin as eternal life in an eternal state (a concept largely foreign to the OT Jews) in terms that they could understand: as people living as long as 100 years, and lions lying down with lambs. Just like Christ did in the so called, “Olivet Discourse” which was an answer to two different questions that the disciples had, “when will the temple be destroyed”, and “what will be the sign of your coming and of the close of the age?”. Jesus’ answers: the temple destruction in 70AD and the end of time as we know it, and the beginning of the eternal state, were mixed together in the discourse so it appears that we was prophesying one event. But later revelation exposits the prophesies and helps us to understand what Jesus meant.
Those who believe in Replacement Theology. The ones I know are mostly in the Baptist Denomination. But it’s a Doctrine many believe in the Church today.
Jason: That last post was in response to yours. Also I do believe in many meanings to seemingly single prohecies. What I might call the mountain peak perspective. You only see one peak when there are many in line of sight.
Yes, the mountain peak perspective.
The only Baptists I know who could even come close to having the charge of “Replacement Theology” stick to them would be Reformed Baptists, and they don’t believe what you described as Replacement Theology. I just think that it is a term that has been attached to a theology that no one actually believes in…it’s pure polemic, and is a result of the opponents of non-millennial eschatology who either don’t understand their opponents or are willfully misrepresenting them. I’d be interested if you could generate a quote or two from someone who says (maybe not in so many words, but means) “God has given up on Israel and now the Church is IT”.
It was never God’s intention for Israel to remain as they were in the Old Covenant, nor for them to accept an offer of a political kingdom at Christ’s first advent. So maybe, when you and others have heard that non-mils believe that God has grafted Christians in this present age into the one true spiritual Israel, you have misunderstood them to say that the Church IS ethnic, national Israel.
I am also curious about what Dr. Brownwould say regarding the Ladd quote I posted in #29 because he seemed to think that his theology lined up with the hist. premil theology of Ladd. Perhaps I misunderstood what Brown was saying, but I think Amil has more in common with Ladd than he does.
Jasin: You may find something if youu google in Replacement Theology, but there are a lot of people in my part of the country that believe in it. The Christians I know, also believe in Calvinism. The two seem to go hand-in-hand. They feel that God has chosen them (predestination) and so they have now adopted all the promises that were given to Israel. Ofcourse this presents a lot of prolems. If they adopt the blessings and promises, what about the curses aswell? It can’t be done nt unless you really twist scripture. I’v had many a discussion with these people, but they are very much set in concrete with their beliefs even though they are really lovely people. I am surprised you have not had more experience with it in USA.
No, no, the Church isn’t ethnic Israel, they are supposedly the spiritual Israel of God….they say they have replaced Israel, hence Replacement Theology.
Sorry Jason….my i and my o have been rubbed out on my keyboard and I often hit the wrong one!!
Well Maz, I don’t know anyone who holds to RT, and I hold to (and read lots who claim to be) Calvinistic Covenant Theologians. So, as long as your and others aren’t claiming that Amillennialism = RT, then the point for me is mute. On the other hand, Calvinism and RT absolutely do not normally fit together, and definately not for the reason you mentioned above.
You said, “The Christians I know, also believe in Calvinism. The two seem to go hand-in-hand. They feel that God has chosen them (predestination) and so they have now adopted all the promises that were given to Israel. Ofcourse this presents a lot of prolems. If they adopt the blessings and promises, what about the curses aswell? It can’t be done nt unless you really twist scripture.”
But this isn’t Cov theo at all, so whatever theology you’re opposing here, I am not aware of; it completely misunderstands the progress of the biblical covenants under the structure of the outworking of the Cov of grace, the New covs fulfillment of the Abe cov and so on. Thinking that the curses would apply to NC members misses the point.
Jason: I really don’t know why they believe that way, my friend got it from her parents. I guess there are a lot of Christians out there that believe Bassetts Alsorts…..and they all seem to have scripture to back up their belief!! It just goes to show that the devil does a lot of his work within the Church rather than outside! Anything to get Christians off the Truth!
Let me tell you Christian what your conversations boil down to. I’m more indoctrinated than you are. No I’m more indoctrinated than YOU are. Nanny, nanny boo boo.
Maz,
Though I strongly disagree with the theology that is being described as RT on this thread, it doesn’t to me, appear to be heresy. And I must say that i would find myself in greater disagreement with those who deny inerrancy or who embrace Molinism or who forsake the gathering together of believers.
“And I must say that i would find myself in greater disagreement with those who deny inerrancy or who embrace Molinism” Hmmm, that would probably be me
“or who forsake the gathering together of believers.” That would NOT be me
I’m an amillenialist, so I agree with Jason on eschatology, but I am not a hyper Calvinist, I probably lean reformed on some things but arminian on others. I am a theology mutt!
Jason: Molinism? Now that’s a new one to me!
Kash,
Your statement in #67 insinuated that I am a hyper-Calvinist. A hyper-Calvinist is one who denies God’s use of human means: preaching, the gospel, etc. Reformed theology doesn’t lead to or condone Hyper-Calvinism, I am not a hyper-Calvinist, and most Reformed folk would put it in the same pail as full-preterism—heresy.
Maz,
In very very short terms, Molinism is the belief that God knows all the possible futures that result from man’s possible free choices rather than the Reformed view, that God knows everything that will come to pass because He has ordained all things that come to pass.
One human quality God possesses is curiosity although he is often thought to be omniscient. By definition that would mean God can see into the future but in fact neither the word future nor any form of the word omniscient ever appear in the Bible so the Bible never makes that claim. Once Adam was on the scene God let him name things like animals to see what he would call them (Gen 2:19). Some people might believe God already knew what Adam would call the animals but the Bible clearly says He didn’t. God had a vineyard (Judah) and he expected it to yield grapes, but it yielded wild grapes (Isa 5:2), which proves it is impossible to know how things will turn out once human beings are involved. It’s much easier to predict how grapes will turn out than it is people.
Jason: The scriptures tell us that God knows the beginning from the end, but I believe that He has a sovereign will and a permissive will. I don’t pretend to know how, what, or why He does some things but if God had completely orchestrated every single second of every day and made it happen the way it happened, that would mean he would have caused Adam and Eve to sin at the very beginning and all history down through the ages was His will…..God forbid, there are some things that have happened that were deffinitely NOT His will, but the scriptures also tell us that ”ALL THINGS work together for good to those who love God”….and that means He can work everything round (whatever happens) to His divine will and purpose. The scriptures say that He is ”not willing that any should perish but that ALL should come to repentence”….but it is clear that ALL don’t, so in that case His will is never realised in the lost who go to Hell………it was their free will, their sin and rebelliousness that took them there. In the end we cannot work out God, He is GOD, and we can only know Him as much as He reveals Himself to us through His Word. Is this what you would believe?
Jason: BTW Thanks for the explanation.
In as much as God knew for certain that Adam would sin, He had caused it. It is clear that God is not the author of sin, for there is no shadow of turning in Him, and that Adam chose to sin but if God had desired to prevent it, He would have. He permitted it to happen b/c it was part of His plan…that’s what we can’t understand. I don’t claim to “comprehend” anything about God: His triunity, His knowledge of future things, but by the Word, there are many things we can “apprehend”. One thing is for sure, God is not passive regarding historical events, even when it comes to the sin of man.
As for your quotation of 2 Pet. 3:9, you pulled it from the context of the passage. That whole passage is about the parusia (the 2nd coming) and the “ALL” in the verse you quoted refers to the elect. Here it is,
“The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.”
It says He is not slow concerning His PROMISE, has He promised to save everyone? No, but that is how you would have to read the verse for it to say what you mean.
Jason: I really don’t think Adams sin was ”part of His plan”, it was because God gave man free will and man chose to disobey, it is not what God wanted to happen, but because it did, He knew and He made a way of salvation even before it happened.
”As for your quotation of 2 Pet. 3:9, you pulled it from the context of the passage. That whole passage is about the parusia (the 2nd coming) and the “ALL” in the verse you quoted refers to the elect. Here it is,”
He speaks about wanting ALL to reach REPENTANCE. If He has chosen all of them and elected them to life this passage would not really make sense…..none would perish would they? Only those who don’t repent actually perish.
Maz,
So would you say that God makes lemonade out of lemons? I don’t think so. Consider these:
Daniel 4:34 At the end of the days I, Nebuchadnezzar, lifted my eyes to heaven, and my reason returned to me, and I blessed the Most High, and praised and honored him who lives forever, for his dominion is an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom endures from generation to generation; 35 all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, and he does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth; and none can stay his hand or say to him, “What have you done?”
Isaiah 43:11 I, I am the LORD, and besides me there is no savior. 12 I declared and saved and proclaimed, when there was no strange god among you; and you are my witnesses,” declares the LORD, “and I am God. 13 Also henceforth I am he; there is none who can deliver from my hand; I work, and who can turn it back?”
Isaiah 44:24 Thus says the LORD, your Redeemer, who formed you from the womb:” I am the LORD, who made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself, 25 who frustrates the signs of liars and makes fools of diviners, who turns wise men back and makes their knowledge foolish, 26 who confirms the word of his servant and fulfills the counsel of his messengers, who says of Jerusalem, ‘She shall be inhabited,’ and of the cities of Judah, ‘They shall be built, and I will raise up their ruins’; 27 who says to the deep, ‘Be dry; I will dry up your rivers’; 28 who says of Cyrus, ‘He is my shepherd, and he shall fulfill all my purpose’; saying of Jerusalem, ‘She shall be built,’ and of the temple, ‘Your foundation shall be laid.’”
Isaiah 45:7 I form light and create darkness, I make well-being and create calamity, I am the LORD, who does all these things.
Psalm 103:19 The LORD has established his throne in the heavens, and his kingdom rules over all.
Psalm 115:3 Our God is in the heavens; he does all that he pleases.
Psalm 135:6 Whatever the LORD pleases, he does, in heaven and on earth, in the seas and all deeps.
Lamentations 3:37 Who has spoken and it came to pass, unless the Lord has commanded it?
Psalm 33:10 The LORD brings the counsel of the nations to nothing; he frustrates the plans of the peoples. 11 The counsel of the LORD stands forever, the plans of his heart to all generations.
And as for the compatibalism of God’s sovereignty and a biblical view of free-will:
Gen. 20As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today.
As for 2 Pet. 3:9 Well, yes it makes perfect sense that God is waiting for the ful number of the elect to come in. Try reading the passage in its context and you will see that it really has no didactic purpose regarding the scope of those who will be saved anyway…it is all about refuting nay-sayers who ask the question, “where is the promise of His coming?” And Peter’s answer is that God is waiting for the full number of the called (specially) to come to repentance. I’m afraid you presupposed notion of unbiblical free-will and “unlimited” atonement forces you to read the passage wrongly.
2 Pet. 3:1This is now the second letter that I am writing to you, beloved. In both of them I am stirring up your sincere mind by way of reminder, 2 that you should remember the predictions of the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior through your apostles, 3knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. 4 They will say, “Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things are continuing as they were from the beginning of creation.” 5For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, 6and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. 7But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.
8But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slow to fulfill his promise as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance. 10But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed.
11Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of people ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, 12 waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be set on fire and dissolved, and the heavenly bodies will melt as they burn! 13But according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells.
Dr. Brown, enjoyed the comments and challenges on whether God is finished with Israel. Your statement of the arguments at the beginning were pretty convincing until you showed by scripture that He is not! My wife and I have been through quite a study on this in recent years due to attendance at a church that essentially believes replacement theology. We concluded right away they were wrong and became much more grounded in the scripture as a result. God is not finished with Israel. If He were the sun and moon would have gone out. God is not finished with the rest of the people in this evil world either. He intends to set them straight ultimately, if they will allow Him to. Now for a comment that may be hard for you to take: All Israel will be saved. That’s what Romans says and I believe it. Most do not believe it. Think about God blinding Israel, except for a remnant. He Himself must take responsibility for their salvation if He blinds them. (I exclude from this those who willfully and knowingly reject God; He will not take away freedom of choice). One more point: a lot more people will ultimately be saved than most think. Revelation 20 talks about a second resurrection. What’s it for? So all those who never had a chance to know Christ in this life will have a chance. It’s not just to wake up all the dead people to torment them. God is not the tormentor, but the saviour who wills for all to be saved; especially those who believe (Again I exclude those who willfully reject God.) Finally, the lake of fire is created for the Devil and his angels–not for man. What a shame that some men will be thrown there, but freedom of choice demands it. Feel free to debate my theology, but prove all things with scripture.
Jason: God is not only loving and kind, He is Holy, Righteous, True and Just. I know all those scriptures, but if they were interpreted to mean that there is absolutely no freewill in this world and God has made everything happen the way it has happened then God cannot be Holy, Righteous, and Just, for He would have caused people to sin, and rebell, and disobey and gone against His commandments and His Word. The question is…can God sin? Well, ofcourse not…so how can He plan and cause man to sin? Man was made in His image. God HATES sin, He would never have planned sin to come into the wolrd and death through sin. This takes responsiblility for sin away from man and places it back into Gods lap, that is asinide and absurd. MAN is responsible for this sin and death in this world, and man is JUSTLY judged and punished for it……But thanks be to God that He sent Jesus Christ, His Only Son to save us from our sin. Praise be to God!!!
Jason: Just a thot, but does that mean that God has planned for those atheists on here to be the way they are? GOD FORBID! If that were true and I was Stanley, I would be peeved off too!
Maz,
Your description of God in #77 deny the descriptions and actions of God in the verses I presented. In the end, whatever has come to pass, God was to have planned or He isn’t God because He must not have had the power to do as He pleased. Exactly how God works His plan using those who actively disobey His Law is somewhat of a mystery, however, we can say that God uses means: sinful men, and not just unbelievers, but if God was removed from the situation of sin as you claim, then how can He use anyone to accomplish His plan? God doesn’t just know the future passively and sit back wringing His hands hoping things work out the way He desires…that’s what I do—and I don’t even know the future. If wicked unbelievers can thwart the plans of God (and that is the implication of what you’ve said) then how can God work all things together for the good of those who love Him?
Jason: I never said God wasn’t in control, and could’nt do what He liked, but He has made laws which He Himself does not break……His promises….once made, cannot be broken. God is GOD but He can do anything that pleases Him as far as His very character allows…..for He cannot lie, and He cannot sin, and He cannot die…except as a man dying for our sins. But God chose to give man freewill and in His omnipotence He can use whatever happens for His good. Whatever happens. So when Adam sinned He already had a way of salvation, Jesus was crucified from the foundation of the world, because God knew…….but He did not plan or make Adam sin, or He would have been party to that sin. God cannot sin. It’s late, I could say more, but if God has orchestrated history from the very creation to the end, then what is the purpose of life? What is God waiting for? Why does He ask us to preach the gospel to EVERY creature? It’s 22.35, will talk more tomorrow.
Maz,
I never suggested that God would, or even could, do anything that violated His character—controlling His creation by bringing His perfect plan to pass certainly doesn’t do that. But if you believe that God could have planned one thing and something else has come to pass, then He isn’t in control, but perhaps that isn’t what you believe, only the implication of the statements you’ve made. Furthermore, God “planning” for Adam to sin and God “making” Him sin are two different things—you should recognize the subtle distinction.
I have a question for you, Did God know with absolute certainty that Adam would sin? The one who answers no is well on his way to Open Theism. If you answer yes, then was it ever actually possible for Adam not to have sinned? And if not, then isn’t that a violation of his volition in your model? You might be tempted to say, well, some things about God’s knowledge of the future we just cannot know. But I submit that this is not one of those things. This has been the point where all of our conversations on this topic have lead and have ended.
Jason: No, I don’t believe that anyhting has happened that has taken God by surprise and therefore out of His control. I believe, because of free will, that He allows so much to happen, but in His sovereign will, will do things to bring about His purpose and plan. Maybe I am misunderstanding your meaning of what you mean by ‘planning’. Do you believe that He has planned everything and not only is the Great Potter but a Great Puppeteer in the sky pulling our strings and making things work the way He wants them to work…..that is the sense in which I am reading your idea of God.
The fact is that God knows the beginning from the end and therefore knew even before He created the Universe and man in it…what would happen. Yes, He knew Adam would sin, because He planned for his redemption when He created the foundation of the world. That is amazing to me that God made man even though He knew He would have to sacrifice His Son to redeem him from the sin he would commit. What Amazing Love! What Amazing Grace!
Now that
doesn’t mean He made it happen that way, but He was in control of what happened all the time. (Through allowing it to happen). It is something we will never get to grips with as far as His omnipotent omniscience. We don’t know how a Being can know the way Gods knows, and so it is a futile exercise to explain the how’s and why’s of His plan and purpose. We can only understand Him as much as He has revealed Himself to us.
Maz,
The problem with similes like, The Great Puppeteer” is that they way oversimplify the description and are often used as a polemic against another description, so to equate the belief that God has ordained (which happens to be the way this has historically been spoken of) all things that come to pass, with being a puppeteer is inaccurate—tell that to the Reformers. I think you affirmed that it is accurate to describe God as the Potter, sense that is how Paul describes Him. Even though He allowed Adam to sin, everything will have gone according to plan; we do not have a God who, in the end, will have to say that He wished it had gone better.
The distinction between “plan” and “made” is this: God didn’t have to make Adam sin, because Adam wanted to sin so he did, but that was part of God’s plan. It isn’t as though God had to look down the corridor of time and see Adam sin, and then have to decide to make a plan of redemption.
Jason: ”The Great Puppeteer”….. It was the way I saw your explanation that God ”planned” everything. As if He just pulled the strings and everything and everyone did what He wanted. If that isn’t the way you believe it then that is fine. But when you say ”Adam wanted to sin so he did, but that was part of God’s plan.” I disagree, the first part is correct but God did’nt plan for Adam to sin, He planned salvation because Adam sinned….of his own will….not Gods.
” It isn’t as though God had to look down the corridor of time and see Adam sin, and then have to decide to make a plan of redemption.” I have already said that God made the way of salvation before Adam sinned because of His foreknowledge and that Jesus was crucified from the foundation of the world. Salvation was in place right at the beginning because God knew Adam was going to sin. Are we not saying the same thing or are we not explaining it clearly enough to each other?
First of all the story of Adam and Eve is a poem, NOT a historical narrative. The Jewish people have never taken this stupid story literally because they know it’s poetry and they have several different versions of it in their traditions. Second Christians haven’t read this story carefully or they wouldn’t believe it either and I will now prove this beyond any doubt. What Christian wants to tell me what day of Creation Adam was formed on? Just about every Christian blogger on this site has had some claim or statement refuted by me now. Do any of the rest of you feel up to my challenge or are you afraid that the atheist is going to shoot more holes in your silly arguments and absurd belief system?
Maz,
I think your understanding of the way God knows the future and acts is reactionary and I think the bible presents Him as being preemptive…to put it in human terms. I’d like to see your exegesis of the verses I presented in post #75.
Maz,
In answer to my question, did God know Adam would sin, you answered yes. But if Adam could never have not sinned because God knew for certain that he would sin, then how, in your view, could Adam really be free? If God knew he would sin, then was Adam actually free to not sin? Below is a quote from Open Theist Clark Pinnock:
“In contrast to other, more abstract approaches to theism, the open view of God is a relational model of understanding. In conventional theism, God is seen as an all-controlling and unchangeable Being who determines directly or indirectly all things that happen. He exists out of time and is unaffected by anything. He knows all things in advance and sovereignly ordains what he knows. The open view, on the other hand, sees God as a relational and triune God who exists as a community (Father, Son, and Spirit) and seeks loving relationships with creatures. In order for such relationships to be possible, God imparts genuine (or “libertarian”) freedom to human beings. This freedom allows them the possibility of loving God or of acting in ways unconstrained by God’s will. God chooses to achieve his goals by means of collaboration with humans rather than by predetermination. Out of this view emerges a God who is vulnerable as he experiences the pain of human rejection and the consequences of disobedience. But God is also infinitely resourceful and competent, responding to our choices in ways that enable him, in cooperation with us, to achieve his purposes. One aspect of this approach has to do with God’s foreknowledge. God does not (we think) have exhaustive, definite foreknowledge of every detail of the future, but has so arranged things that the future would be created through divine-creaturely interaction. In terms of divine sovereignty, it means that God exercises general rather than meticulous providence; that is, he leaves the future partly settled and partly unsettled. It is settled in that much can be foreseen and God’s victory is assured. It is unsettled in that the circumstances in which God achieves his ends are open to change. As we like to say, God’s goals have open routes.”
Jason: No I don’t believe that, it is His ability to KNOW EVERYTHING that He does things….but ‘reactionary’ would not be the word I’d use. I do not think for one minute that we can understand or figure out how an infinite, allpowerful, all knowing God, does the things He does.
”But if Adam could never have not sinned because God knew for certain that he would sin, then how, in your view, could Adam really be free? If God knew he would sin, then was Adam actually free to not sin?”
Who said Adam could never have not sinned? He was free to choose…..so could he have chosen not to sin? I think he had the free will not to, but the very nature of free will makes it highly probably that he would. Just because God knew He would sin did not negate the possibility that he had the ability not to sin. I’v often thot on these things and have never come to a conclusion, but at the moment I believe that 1) Adam had freewill. 2) He had the choice to sin or not 3) God knew what would happen 4) Because He had foreknowledge of what Adam would choose with his free will to do, He provided a way of salvation. I’m not really prepared to go into depth with this….I’m still thinking about it!
I think what Pinnock said in this line sums up how I see it….”He knows all things in advance and sovereignly ordains what he knows.” It is because of what He KNOWS…..and the other part of your quote is also how I see it…… ”God as a relational and triune God who exists as a community (Father, Son, and Spirit) and seeks loving relationships with creatures. In order for such relationships to be possible, God imparts genuine (or “libertarian”) freedom to human beings. This freedom allows them the possibility of loving God or of acting in ways unconstrained by God’s will. God chooses to achieve his goals by means of collaboration with humans rather than by predetermination. Out of this view emerges a God who is vulnerable as he experiences the pain of human rejection and the consequences of disobedience. ”
I believe God does make Himself vunerable to rejection and pain….and especially when He came to earth as the Son. God could not have placed Himself in a more vunerable position….YET….He was in complete control all the time because He told Pilate (John 19 v 11) ”You could have no power at all against me, except it were given to you from above;..”
”God does not (we think) have exhaustive, definite foreknowledge of every detail of the future,”
This I disagree with…God knows ALL things. If He knows every hair on every head in the Universe that certainly means ALL.
God is far more than our space and time limited minds can comprehend so I leave what I can’t understand to Him to reveal to me when I am ready to receive it.
Maz,
What word would you use instead of “reactionary”? And of course I don’t believe that we can understand more about God than He has revealed, but He has revealed no less than I have mentioned. Again, I’d like to see your exegesis of the verses I mentioned before.
You said, “Just because God knew He would sin did not negate the possibility that he had the ability not to sin”
That’s not what I’m asking…of course he had the “ability” to sin…he did sin. What I asked, and the particular point I don’t believe you addressed was this: if God knows for certain that Adam would sin, then it is not possible that he would have chosen otherwise or else, God’s knowledge of that choice would have been imperfect. That is why someone like Pinnock (with who’s quote I do not disagree entirely…just the heretical parts) and other Open Theists devise a theory of God’s knowledge that says that He cannot know the future free (libertarian) choices of man because if He did, then the choices persons make (because, according to the orthodox view, they ultimately could not choose otherwise due to God’s perfect knowledge of them) are necessarily not free choices.
Using a bit of common sense, we can easily demonstrate that omniscience cannot coexist with freewill. Likewise, prayers are not truly answerable by an omniscient God because he would have already envisioned the concrete results of the future. Of course Christians never think about these things. They’re to busy trying to rationalize ways to believe it all.
Jason: ”You said, “Just because God knew He would sin did not negate the possibility that he had the ability not to sin”
That’s not what I’m asking…of course he had the “ability” to sin…he did sin. ”
You misquoted me. I said ”the possibility that he had the ability NOT to sin.”
And if Adam hadn’t sinned, then God would have known THAT and not that he sinned. I don’t know why you can’t see what I am seeing. Whatever Adam chose with his free will…..THAT is what God would known. Adam sinned, so God knew THAT. If Adam hadn’t sinned, then God would have known THAT. God KNEW and KNOWS what HAPPENED before it happened. God is outside of space and time and as a mortal creature I don’t begin to understand that reality. We are linear, but God is not. And reading some of those scriptures you gave doesn’t, to me, oppose what I believe. I don’t really know what else to say….so I won’t. God Bless.
I just had to respond to this YET AGAIN absolute falseness. Dudley said, ” Of course Christians never think about these things.”
”I DO…….quite a lot as it happens!!! Give up telling us what we do and don’t do when you havn’t a clue about either!!!
Maz,
You said, “Whatever Adam chose with his free will…..THAT is what God would known. Adam sinned, so God knew THAT. If Adam hadn’t sinned, then God would have known THAT.”
That is exactly backwards. It happens because God has ordained it.
Jason: There is no backwards with God. What was and is and is to come THAT He would know. But man still has freewill to obey or rebell, accept or reject, sin and not. But God knows ALL things.
IMaz,
I was saying that your explanation was backwards.
I too believe that man may obey or disobey, accept or reject, but it is all under the purview of a sovereign God. I would say that the unregenerate man does not have the power to not sin, but only when one believes can his thoughts or actions be “in faith” and thus pleasing to God. Unsaved persons will do horizontal good, but they aren’t even capable of doing God towards God, and such where we before we believed…praise be to God that we believe!
Jason: Yes, I agree that the unregenerate man hasn’t the power not to sin. But when we become born-again believers the Bible tells us in Romans 6 v 14 that ‘’sin shall have no more dominion over you.” That is why the drug addict can overcome drugs and get delivered from their power. That is why the alcaholic can overcome drink and live a clean life with Jesus. That’s why the terrorist can have a change of life through Christ and never want to blow anyone up again. We don’t have to sin if we resisted evil by faith and prayer. The trouble is we tend to still struggle with it wihtout realising we don’t need to. Can we live a completely sinless life?……I think it would be possible…..Jesus lived a sinless life as a man….not because He was God but He was born as a man without a sinful nature and so could live in close fellowship with His Father and resist the sin that Adam succumbed to. He was sinless when He died…He had to be to tae our sin on the cross. You may not agree with that, but what would you say Romans 6 v 14 means?
So you believe that we repent or reject Gods salvation because He has sovereignly caused us to do one or the other?
Maz,
Well, I think Romans 7 is the description of the saved man struggling with sin. Though I do believe some individuals who get saved do go on never to be tempted by former habitual sins, but this would be very rare cases in deed. I don’t think the idea of a believer living a completely sinless life is even possible. For one thing, even after regeneration, the sin nature still remains, and in addition to that, I don’t think we have biblical evidence to support our complete victory over temptations. Even if we renounce our old ones, new ones are likely to creep in. I believe the biblical picture of sanctification is a continued belief and repentance. So many topics must come together to form our systematic view on this. Consider this. Based on the conclusions I’ve drawn regarding the reality of the warnings given to Christians in Scripture I’ve developed the following syllogism. Believers persevere in faith by struggling against sin; unbelievers will be tormented by eternal fire: If you do not continue to struggle against sin, then you will be tormented by eternal fire. I believe this argument preserves both the assurances given to believers about the reality of Christ’s righteousness imputed to them, and the reality of the warnings given to those who do not persevere in faith.
Jason: I can agree with that. What would you say about Hebrews 10 v 26?
”For if we sin willfully after we have known the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for sin.
And also Hebrews 12 v 1, ”Wherefore, seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily does beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith…”
What would you say is willful sin?
I’v made some corrections, I bet this is going to mess my typing up!
Maz,
It’s possible that the author of Hebrews intended to define the willful sinner in verse 29″How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has spurned the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace?”
So we run the race, but looking to Jesus the Author and Finisher of our faith; the ex nihilo creator and perfecter of our faith.
Dudley: “Using a bit of common sense, we can easily demonstrate that omniscience cannot coexist with freewill.” It can if God transcends linear time. He can simultaneously apprehend all possible outcomes. The whole omniscience vs free will problem only exists for our temporal reality, not God’s.
Dudley,
You know, a wise person once said that if you were selling Chevys on a car lot and a man driving a Ford came to look around, the last thing you would want to do is tell him how lousy Fords are. You really should work on your method of persuasion.
Kash: I agree!! Hallelujah!
Jason: When we look at what Dudley offers and what Christ offers us….there is absolutely no comparison!! Atheists really don’t know what they are missing do they.