|
Forums118
Topics9,232
Posts196,213
Members1,325
| |
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
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
9 registered members (TheophilusOne, dedication, daylily, Daryl, Karen Y, 4 invisible),
2,639
guests, and 5
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Is the date of the second coming fixed or flexible?
#15136
08/11/05 12:04 AM
08/11/05 12:04 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Old Tom:Yes. He sees the vast web of options, which of course includes what we will actually do. MM: Okay, when I asked you, “Does God know what we will do before we do it”, you answered, “Yes.” Great. We agree on something. All along I thought you were saying God does not know which option we will choose before we choose it. Tom: If there is more than one option available, then God knows what will happen whichever option we choose. God knows the end from the beginning. As to which option we will pick, for God to know which one we would choose would imply the future is fixed, wouldn't it? I don't believe the future is fixed. MM: So, since we agree that God knows which option we are going to choose before we choose it, tell me, does He also know the outcome of our choices before we choose it? That is, does He know exactly how it will play out? And, how long has He known it? From eternity? Tom: God knows how each option would play out if we chose it. Since the future is not fixed, He must see the sum of our choices, not just one choice. How could God know which choice we will choose (with 100% certainty) if the future were not fixed? Consider the example of God sending His Son at the risk of failure and eternal loss. If God knew which option Christ would choose, then the future would have to be fixed; only one option would have been available to Christ, and God would have known that. However, given that there was a risk involved, God could not have known with 100% certainty which option Christ would choose, correct? Because then there wouldn't be any risk. Well our situation in this regard is no different than Christ's. We are in risk of failure and eternal loss just as Christ was. Old Tom: [S]o how could you be moved by something which states the exact opposite of what you believe? MM: Who said it is the exact opposite of what I believe? As I see it, it agrees perfectly with what I believe. Even though God knew in advance that Jesus would succeed on the cross it doesn’t take away from the fact it caused Him great suffering to watch His Son suffer so. Tom: The original statement I referred to was not dealing with watching His Son suffering. Here's the statement: quote:
Yet into the world where Satan claimed dominion God permitted His Son to come, a helpless babe, subject to the weakness of humanity. He permitted Him to meet life's peril in common with every human soul, to fight the battle as every child of humanity must fight it, at the risk of failure and eternal loss. (DA 49)
This is not saying that God knew in advance with 100% certainty that Christ would succeed on the cross. It says the opposite, so you are simply repeating what I said you said. You are being "moved" by something which says the opposite of what you believe.
It says that God sent His Son at the risk of failure and eternal loss. "Risk" means the possibility of loss, which means God did NOT know with 100% certain that Christ would succeed, because in that case there were have been NO possibility of loss (the opposite of risk).
MM: That God was willing to allow His only begotten Son to go through all that to save us is more than moving.
Tom: Here's what I said:
"God really did, well and truly, take a risk in sending His Son on our behalf, and this fact should fill our hearts with awe and praise."
to which you replied:
"Yes, it does have that affect on me."
But this is the opposite of what you believe! You have been asserting that all along, and are still asserting it. So I repeat, how can you say you are moved by something which is the opposite of what you believe? Or do you really think God took a risk in sending His Son on our behalf? If so, what was the risk God took?
Old Tom: If it were not possible for Christ to fail, then God would have seen that, and there wouldn't have been any risk.
MM: It was possible for Jesus to sin and fail. But God knew He wouldn’t
Tom: So it wasn't possible. Unless it's possible for something God knows will happen not to happen. Perhaps you could explain this to me, but I don't see how anything that God knows will happen can not happen. IOW, if God knew Christ wouldn't sin, then it's not possible for Christ to have sin, because that would mean that something God knew would happen didn't happen.
Unless you disagree with the statement that if God knows something will happen, then it will happen. Do you disagree with this?
MM:, which didn’t lessen His personal suffering. The “risk” that God took in sending Jesus to earth involved losing FMAs if Jesus decided to abandon the plan of salvation. The “risk” God took didn’t have anything to do with losing Jesus forever. That wasn’t possible. “Deity did not sink and die; that would have been impossible.” (LHU 76)
Tom: It was the risk of losing Christ that EGW was referring to in the three quotes. Here's a portion of one of them:
quote:
Then as the glories of the eternal home burst upon our enraptured senses we shall remember that Jesus left all this for us, that He not only became an exile from the heavenly courts, but for us took the risk of failure and eternal loss. (DA 131)
Notice it says Christ took the risk of failure and eternal loss for us.
MM: The “risk” that God took was hypothetical. He knew Jesus would be successful on the cross, that He would satisfy all the requirements necessary to qualify to serve as our Saviour and to save all who call upon His name. Ellen White used words like “risk” to emphasize the enormous sacrifice that God made in sending Jesus to live and die for us.
Tom: This is not a reasonable interpretation of what she wrote. Christ "not only" became an exile for us, but "took the risk of failure and eternal loss" for us.
MM: I realize you totally reject this explanation, and you are entitled, of course, to your own opinion. So please, let’s just agree to disagree on this particular point. Okay?
Tom: Well certainly you can disagree with the statments, but I think it's highly likely I'll come back to them because they are the clearest statements from the Spirit of Prophesy that I'm aware of which deal with this subject.
Old Tom: If God was 100% certain Christ would succeed, He could hardly have told us He took a risk in so doing, could He?
MM: Alright, then, do I have your permission to say - You do not believe God knew in advance that Jesus would succeed on the cross on our behalf.
Tom: I'll repeat my question, If God was 100% certain Christ would succeed, He could hardly have told us He took a risk in so doing, could He?
Old Tom: Now any vision of the future would have to cover ALL of these options.
MM: Not if you’re God and have already watched it play out, like a rerun.
Tom: But God doesn't have the power to perceive things in a way they aren't. He can't mistake a square for a triangle. He could only see the future play out like a re-run if it really were like a re-run.
MM: That’s my whole point. I watched a movie years ago where a guy kept going back in time to change things to prevent something bad from happening. But each time he went back in time and changed something, new bad things happened, which made it necessary for him to go back in time again to stop that new thing from happening. And on and on it went until he died. My point? God knows exactly what is going to happen, before it happens, therefore it isn’t necessary for God to know all the alternate outcomes, especially since time travel isn’t possible for us.
Tom: Then in this case the future is fixed, because there's only one thing that can happen, which is the one thing which God sees.
MM: At any rate, so far as salvation is concerned, all the different ways and reasons we can be lost all boil down to one thing, namely, we failed to choose Jesus. “Our condemnation in the judgment will not result from the fact that we have been in error, but from the fact that we have neglected heaven-sent opportunities for learning what is truth.” (DA 489) Jesus said, “I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.” (John 14:6) “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.” (Acts 14:12) Clearly our choices are limited to one. Praise the Lord.
Tom: This point is irrelevant to the discussion of the future being fixed.
Old Tom: 1) Do you understand what I mean by stating that God can only know the future as it is?
MM: I think so. You mean God only knows the myriad of options and outcomes that are possible based on the choices we are free to make.
Tom: No, that's not what I meant. I mean that if God sees the future as X, regardless of what X is, then the future is really X. X could be a myriad of possibilities, or just one, it wouldn't matter as far as the validity of my statement is concerned.
Old Tom: 2) Do you disagree with the statement?
MM: No. I believe God knows exactly which options we will choose, before we choose them, and that He knows the outcome of every choice we will ever make throughout our entire lifetime.
Tom: By "no" here do you mean "yes"? I asked if you disagreed with my statement. You said no, but then went on as if you meant yes, although the yes you appeared to be going on about had nothing to do with what I asked you.
MM: He knows the future as it is, like a rerun, not just how it can or might turn out if we choose this or that option (which in and of itself would require God to know the future like a rerun).
Tom: So here you appear to be agreeing with what I have been stating, which is that God must know the future as it is. You asserted:
1) God knows the future as it is,
2) Like a rerun.
meaning that that future is like a rerun, or fixed. This is what I have been asserting all along. You believe the future is fixed. This is not a question of perspective, but of reality.
So just to be clear, you believe the future is like a rerun, not just because God sees it that way, but because it is that way. I'm saying this because you said, "He knows the future as it is, like a rerun..." Do you agree with my assessment of your position?
|
|
|
Re: Is the date of the second coming fixed or flexible?
#15137
08/12/05 02:27 AM
08/12/05 02:27 AM
|
OP
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
quote:
MM: All along I thought you were saying God does not know which option we will choose before we choose it.
Tom: As to which option we will pick, for God to know which one we would choose would imply the future is fixed, wouldn't it? I don't believe the future is fixed.
So, I guess I was right all along. It’s a bummer we don’t agree. Well, at least I’m not guessing anymore. I couldn't live my life that way, that is, believing God doesn't know exactly what is going to happen before it happens.
quote:
… God did NOT know with 100% certain that Christ would succeed …
Finally, I straight answer. Whew! That took a long time.
quote:
IOW, if God knew Christ wouldn't sin, then it's not possible for Christ to have sin, because that would mean that something God knew would happen didn't happen.
You and I both agree God knows how the final outcome of the great controversy will play out, right? Not the various possibilities, but He knows exactly how it will all play out. Does that mean no one is truly free to choose as they please? Of course not! Just because God knows the end from the beginning doesn’t mean we are not free to choose as we please. Well, the same thing applies to Christ. As a human, Christ possessed the power to sin, but God knew, from eternity, that Jesus would not choose to sin.
quote:
It was the risk of losing Christ that EGW was referring to in the three quotes.
This is not a reasonable interpretation of what she wrote.
I absolutely disagree. Deity cannot die. The “risk” she referred to was hypothetical. The fact Jesus was successful on the cross is proof He fulfilled the messianic prophecies, and proof He is the promised Messiah. If He had failed on the cross it would have been evidence that He wasn’t the Messiah. The risk inherent in such a failure was losing FMAs to rebellion and destruction.
If He had failed on the cross God would have lost all the FMAs throughout His vast universe. Why? Because it would have been impossible for God to refute Satan’s accusations and rebellion would have broke out among the FMAs. Knowing this in advance God would have preempted it. Out of love and mercy, He would have put them out of their misery before their insecurities turned into fear, anger, and rebellion.
quote:
But God doesn't have the power to perceive things in a way they aren't. He can't mistake a square for a triangle. He could only see the future play out like a re-run if it really were like a re-run.
My point precisely. In the mind of God, who is all knowing, who sees the end from the beginning, the future is a rerun. He has already watched it play out from beginning to end. He knows exactly what we will do before we do it. You believe that means we are not truly free to choose as we please. I disagree. You believe I am dead wrong. I don’t.
quote:
This point is irrelevant to the discussion of the future being fixed.
I disagree. God knows who will be saved and who will be lost. He has known it for eternity. Knowing the future like a rerun is what enables God to tell us, in the prophecies, what will happen before it happens. That’s why and how God knew, before he was born, that Esau would choose to be lost.
quote:
X could be a myriad of possibilities, or just one, it wouldn't matter as far as the validity of my statement is concerned.
I believe X is what did happen, and you seem to believe X is what could happen. Again, the future, or X, is like a rerun in the mind of God, therefore, X must necessarily represent what has already happened, not what could happen. So, it does matter what you think X symbolizes in your formula.
quote:
So just to be clear, you believe the future is like a rerun, not just because God sees it that way, but because it is that way.
No. The future is like a rerun only in the mind of God because He has already watched it play out. The key phrase is – in the mind of God. From our perspective the future is still future, it hasn't happened yet. On our time and space continuum it has only happened in the mind of God.
God knows what we are going to do, before we do it, because He has already watched us do it. But we do not know what we are going to do before we do it because we do not possess the power of God to see the future like a rerun.
|
|
|
Re: Is the date of the second coming fixed or flexible?
#15138
08/11/05 03:23 PM
08/11/05 03:23 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Old MM: All along I thought you were saying God does not know which option we will choose before we choose it. Old Tom: As to which option we will pick, for God to know which one we would choose would imply the future is fixed, wouldn't it? I don't believe the future is fixed. MM: So, I guess I was right all along. It’s a bummer we don’t agree. Well, at least I’m not guessing anymore. I couldn't live my life that way, that is, believing God doesn't know exactly what is going to happen before it happens. Tom: God knows exactly what will happen, but not the way you think. "Exactly what will happen" is not a simplistic lineary thing, but a complex web of possibilities, potentialities, and certainties. I wish to make crystal clear that I do not believe is any way limited in His ability to see the future. In fact, my was of perceiving things requires vastly more intelligence on God's part than your view. The difference is not in how we perceive God's ability to see the future, which we both believe is perfect and unlimited, but in our perceptions as to what the future is really like. You think the future is fixed. I don't. Old Tom: … God did NOT know with 100% certain that Christ would succeed … MM: Finally, I straight answer. Whew! That took a long time. Tom: I wrote this: quote:
It says that God sent His Son at the risk of failure and eternal loss. "Risk" means the possibility of loss, which means God did NOT know with 100% certain that Christ would succeed, because in that case there were have been NO possibility of loss (the opposite of risk).
This is the same thing I've been saying all along. Which part of this statement do you disagree with? I'm confused. Do you have some other understanding of the word "risk" which doesn't mean the opposite of absolute certainty? ![[Confused]](images/icons/confused.gif)
|
|
|
Re: Is the date of the second coming fixed or flexible?
#15139
08/11/05 08:25 PM
08/11/05 08:25 PM
|
OP
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
quote:
It says that God sent His Son at the risk of failure and eternal loss. "Risk" means the possibility of loss, which means God did NOT know with 100% certain that Christ would succeed, because in that case there were have been NO possibility of loss (the opposite of risk).
Are you telling me that "God did NOT know with 100% certain that Christ would succeed" means God did know? Or, are you saying it was only one of many possible outcomes that God foresaw involving risk?
|
|
|
Re: Is the date of the second coming fixed or flexible?
#15140
08/11/05 10:30 PM
08/11/05 10:30 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
What I'm saying is this:
1) If God knew with 100% certainty that Christ would succeed then,
2) There would have been no risk incurred.
Do you agree?
|
|
|
Re: Is the date of the second coming fixed or flexible?
#15141
08/12/05 01:12 PM
08/12/05 01:12 PM
|
OP
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Is the date of the second coming fixed or flexible?
#15142
08/12/05 05:57 PM
08/12/05 05:57 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
This is where we disagree. I think there was a risk incurred.
|
|
|
Re: Is the date of the second coming fixed or flexible?
#15143
08/12/05 06:40 PM
08/12/05 06:40 PM
|
OP
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2019
20000+ Member
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 22,256
Southwest USA
|
|
Okay, now that I have answered your question with a simple Yes, please answer mine with a simple Yes or No.
Did God know in advance that Jesus would be successful on the cross?
I suspect your answer is No, based on the fact you believe God took the risk of losing Jesus eternally when He sent Him here to live as a human being. But I would like to hear it from you. So far you haven't been forthcoming in answering this question.
After you answer this question maybe we can address the title question of this thread?
|
|
|
Re: Is the date of the second coming fixed or flexible?
#15144
08/12/05 09:34 PM
08/12/05 09:34 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
I think I have said quite a number of times now that if God knew with 100% certainty that Christ would succeed, then there could not have been any risk. I have also stated on many occasions that I believe there was a risk. So you have had the answer to your question many times.
|
|
|
Re: Is the date of the second coming fixed or flexible?
#15145
08/12/05 09:38 PM
08/12/05 09:38 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Regarding the question of the thread, I should first point out that it makes no difference what God's view of the future is. If the date is fixed, it is so irrespecitive of God's knowledge of that fact. Similarly, if it is not fixed, it is likewise so irrespective of God's knowledge of that fact.
If the future is fixed, then the date is fixed. There's no doubt about that.
If the future is not fixed, then the date might or might not be fixed. This is because saying the future is not fixed does not mean that no future event is fixed but than not every future event is fixed. So the future could be not fixed in general, but fixed in regards to Christ's second coming. However, we know from inspiriation, both the Scriptures and the Spirit of Prophesy, that Christ's coming is not fixed because we can hasten and delay it. Both hastening and delaying alter the timing of the event, meaning that it is not fixed.
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
