Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is God's Knowledge Dependent on God's Omnipotence?
Wycliffe Dictionary of Theology | Loraine Boettner

Posted on 06/05/2004 8:16:13 PM PDT by xzins

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-122 next last
To: nobdysfool; P-Marlowe

What I'm saying is that God is all three, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent. One of those is not dependent for its existence on any of the others.

Strip A away and B still remains.

In Boettner's mathematic B is dependent upon A. Therefore, Strip A away and B disappears because it is dependent upon A.

God foreknows because God planned CAN BE interpreted to mean that B (foreknowledge) is dependent upon A (foreappointment).

Do you agree that God foreknows ONLY because He foreappointed?


41 posted on 06/06/2004 8:26:41 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: The Grammarian; connectthedots
...And laid yourself bare to the charge of necessitarianism, the belief that everything necessarily (of necessity) happens, because God has decreed it, including all things sinful. Logically, this is a contradiction, since for it to be sinful, it must be against what God has commanded; yet God has commanded them to do it (or commanded them to follow their nature, which is to do it--ultimately, responsibility for the actions taken doesn't shift because of the mental gymnastics).

God created man with the ability to sin. Adam chose to sin. Because of that, all men are sinners. God didn't make man sin, but He allowed him to sin. One must conclude that since God allows sin, it must serve a purpose, else He would either have not allowed it in the first place, or He could have just judged Adam and Eve, not allowed them to reproduce, and ended it that way.

We must remember also that sin did not originate with Adam, it originated with Lucifer. Obviously it serves a better, higher purpose for sin to exist for now, although it will be done away with finally at the End of the Age. But sin is not chargeable to God, because He didn't commit it, nor is He responsible for those who bear its curse. That leaves Him free to show Mercy on whom He will, and to harden whom He will. He causes that which opposes Him to bring about His Purpose, something which we are not privy to, except for what he has chosen to reveal to us.

No man is judged for the circumstances of his birth. He is judged for the sins he commits in violation of the knowledge of God which he has. But his sinful nature ensures that he will reject that knowledge, and seal his fate. That sinful nature was inherited from Adam, not decreed upon the individual.

Wasn't it CTD that was arguing a while ago that there were several members of the Swarm that were of the belief that God was the author of all things, even sin? And wasn't that how he (and others) have defined hyper-Calvinism?

HyperCalvinism is the belief that evangelism is unnecessary, because God has decreed who will be saved, apart from any agency to bring about their salvation. ctd is trying to establish that a belief in Predestination and Election, as Calvin and Dordt defined it, are defacto HyperCalvinism. In other words, he is trying to state that mainstream Calvinism is hyper, something akin to saying that the political spectrum runs from Totalitarianism on the far left to Facism on the far right, when in reality that spectrum is entirely leftist, because the true spectrum is Totalitarianism on the Far Left to Total Anarchy on the Far Right. ctd starts from a faulty premise, and his conclusions are not supportable or accurate.

42 posted on 06/06/2004 8:43:25 PM PDT by nobdysfool (Faith in Christ is the evidence of God's choosing, not the cause of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: nobdysfool
God didn't make man sin, but He allowed him to sin. One must conclude that since God allows sin, it must serve a purpose...

Your conclusion is wrong. The only proper conclusion is that God allows sin, but the sins of men cannot alter God's ultimate plan for mankind. About the only sins that served a purpose were those related to the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ as prophesied.

43 posted on 06/06/2004 9:02:15 PM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: xzins
God foreknows because God planned CAN BE interpreted to mean that B (foreknowledge) is dependent upon A (foreappointment). Do you agree that God foreknows ONLY because He foreappointed?

Hmmm...You're changing definitons midstream. The three attributes are A - Omnipotence, B - Omniscience, and C - Omnipresence, according to your first sentence. A is the basis for the other two. C is not directly dependent on B, but it is a function of A. B is a logical result of A, because how can it be that God would create something He doesn't know? If A is not true, neither B or C can be true. If B and C are true, then A must be true. If B is true, then A and C must be true. In short, if God is not Omnipotent, then He cannot be Omniscient or Omnipresent.

God can Foreappoint on the basis of A, and His Word specifically says He does not Foreappoint on the basis of B. Foreappointment is not a function of C, nor is C dependent on it.

It seems you're saying that God can have absolute Foreknowledge, (B), but not be able to do anything about it (Not A). Of what possible benefit could that be to anyone? If that is so, then this world is a random accident, and we have no basis for hope in anything.

44 posted on 06/06/2004 9:05:40 PM PDT by nobdysfool (Faith in Christ is the evidence of God's choosing, not the cause of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots
The only proper conclusion is that God allows sin, but the sins of men cannot alter God's ultimate plan for mankind

That really is a difference without a distinction, because it is obvious from scripture that God uses the sins of men to accomplish His Purpose (Joseph and his brothers).

About the only sins that served a purpose were those related to the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ as prophesied.

And what sins were those, seeing that Christ was born sinless, of a virgin, and did not sin Himself, but rather bore the sins of All who believe on Him, died, and was raised again for their justification?? Your statement makes no sense.

45 posted on 06/06/2004 9:11:29 PM PDT by nobdysfool (Faith in Christ is the evidence of God's choosing, not the cause of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots

Your God only plays defense.


46 posted on 06/06/2004 9:12:31 PM PDT by Dr. Eckleburg (There are very few shades of gray.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: nobdysfool

Actually, what I've said is that A, B, and C are all independent of one another.

I would think that someone totally knowledgeable would be quite an asset EVEN IF he couldn't pick up a 2 pound weight.


47 posted on 06/06/2004 9:15:10 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: nobdysfool

Learn to read. "Related to" is not the same as "committed by". It isn't that my sentence is unclear; it's your poor reading comprehension.


48 posted on 06/06/2004 9:20:06 PM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg

I would not presume that your post has a meaningful point. In the off chance that you actually have one; what is it?


49 posted on 06/06/2004 9:22:26 PM PDT by connectthedots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: connectthedots

Who peed in your cheerios? I've been reading your replies for a while now, and you're going out of your way to insult everyone you can. I did not respond in that tone, and if you continue, you'll be talking to yourself.


50 posted on 06/06/2004 9:25:14 PM PDT by nobdysfool (Faith in Christ is the evidence of God's choosing, not the cause of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: xzins
Actually, what I've said is that A, B, and C are all independent of one another

Logically that does not follow, because God cannot be Omnipresent if He's not Omnipotent. Neither can He be Omniscient if he's not Omnipotent. If God is not Omnipotent, he's not God, for God IS Omnipotent.

51 posted on 06/06/2004 9:34:20 PM PDT by nobdysfool (Faith in Christ is the evidence of God's choosing, not the cause of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: nobdysfool

In international politics, does world-wide presence mean great power? Not necessarily.

Japan has a presence in every country on earth, but it is an insignificant nation in terms of power projection.


52 posted on 06/06/2004 9:41:55 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: xzins
I'm gonna let the questions in my mind float and I'll tackle them later. I don't intend to bait you with this reply, but I am hoping you'll get hooked into the conversation. I could net some good material for later, so I don't want to let this big one get away. Perhaps you'll get my drift and stay on line.

LOL! Count on freepers to come up with the best puns!

53 posted on 06/06/2004 11:41:44 PM PDT by ladyinred (RIP Governor/President Reagan, ride peacefully into that sunset.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred

:>)

Thanks


54 posted on 06/07/2004 5:47:06 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: xzins
In international politics, does world-wide presence mean great power? Not necessarily.

Apple and Oranges, xzins. We're not talking about international politics. We're talking about Almighty God. If you want to start limiting His attributes, you'll get no sympathy or agreement from me.

55 posted on 06/07/2004 5:48:01 AM PDT by nobdysfool (Faith in Christ is the evidence of God's choosing, not the cause of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: nobdysfool

Actually, if you'll reread the piece by Boettner you'll see that it is Boettner who appears to limit God's attributes.

He is the one who says that God can't know the future except via his omnipotence. Boettner is the one who discounts God's omniscience.

Just read the excerpts that lead off this thread. I've underlined the relevant comments by Boettner.

I am the one who believes that all of God's attributes are independently "all" without reference to any of the others.


56 posted on 06/07/2004 6:09:24 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: xzins
I am the one who believes that all of God's attributes are independently "all" without reference to any of the others.

Only You?? Logically, God's attributes are intertwined. Logically, without Omnipotence, the others cannot exist. They find their basis in His Omnipotence.

As I said before if God is not Omnipotent, He's not God. This is not limiting God's attributes, it is seeing that there is a logical reason for them, and a logical order to their function. His Foreknowledge flows from His Omnipotence, it does not exist separately from it. His Omnipresence likewise flows from His Omnipotence, for only an Omnipotent Being could be everywhere at the same time. His Love, His Mercy, His Justice, His Holiness, ALL flow from His Omnipotence.

When we refer to Him as God ALMIGHTY, we are acknowledging His Omnipotence. Without His Omnipotence, He is not God.

57 posted on 06/07/2004 6:40:19 AM PDT by nobdysfool (Faith in Christ is the evidence of God's choosing, not the cause of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: nobdysfool

I don't think they all derive from God's omnipotence.

Otherwise, we'd simply say, "God is omnipotent."


58 posted on 06/07/2004 6:53:49 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: xzins
I don't think they all derive from God's omnipotence. Otherwise, we'd simply say, "God is omnipotent."

Show me how, logically they don't. Just saying "I don't believe it" doesn't make it so. I have shown you logically how they must flow from His Omnipotence. You've got to do better than "I don't think so."

59 posted on 06/07/2004 6:57:58 AM PDT by nobdysfool (Faith in Christ is the evidence of God's choosing, not the cause of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: nobdysfool

I'm not sure you demonstrated what you thought you did.

You assert that one who is able to make all things happen exactly as he wishes is able to predict the future by simply stating his own plans.

Actually, I can explain things the same way. A timeless being who knows absolutely everything to include the method for making and creating will eventually control everything and be the most formidable power....even if that being cannot personally lift a 2 pound weight.

But that kind of human logic is not what we seek. We seek biblical evidence that God knows everything. The bible does indeed assert that God knows everything.

I've really got to go now. Later.


60 posted on 06/07/2004 7:16:53 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 121-122 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson