Mike asked

quote:

---

It's just that I'm not sure why you're unwilling to agree with the idea that God knows the end from the beginning like watching a rerun on TV or knowing the future as though it were history. The Bible makes it clear to me that God knows everything there is to know about us before we are conceived in the womb and our choices and their consequences before we are born. But His knowing this ahead of time does not rob us of our freedom to choose a different course.

---

Your question Mike is somewhat mixed up. It does not differentiate between God's knowledge at creation before sin existed in relation to the freewill he created, and God's knowledge of future events since the fall when freewill was lost and the will became subject to lower nature.

My answer will first deal with the nature of knowledge, it's implications upon God, and its implications on freewill of created beings. This will be first discussed in the perspective before sin; this is a vital difference. Afterwards we will discuss man's situation after the fall, when freewill was lost. The abstract part makes no difference when.

Abstract knowledge/foreknowledge under all and any circumstances and for all times.
The following are realities of an abstract foreknowledge. An abstract knowledge is knowledge based on anything other than understanding. It is found in the idea that God knows the end from the beginning like watching a crystal ball, a rerun on TV or knowing the future as though it was history. I have referenced it in my opening posts to this thread. Any abstract knowledge has to be outside of God's understanding. As such it means it is not part of him, it does not proceed from his thoughts, his reasoning, or his understanding. This means that God derives his knowledge of future events through/from some other means. Any such means would simply entail that God is subject to it, and dependent on it. In fact it tells him what will be. God is therefore a slave to this and can do nothing about it. Whether he looks to it or not is irrelevant; he is subject to it. Simply put whatever it is that determines or tells the present or future would have the ultimate control. Any such book read or movie seen makes God an impotent observer. So, while this idea tries to make God omniscient and omnipotent in a fabulous way, the truth is that it establishes him that he really does not know/understand, and makes him impotent so that he cannot do anything about it. Therefore an abstract foreknowledge is entirely unacceptable, as in such a case God is only a puppet. Needless to say in such a scenario no one, including God, has any free will. In fact nothing really exists; all is abstract, including life.

If God is to be God, he needs to know what he understands and needs to understand what he knows. God's knowledge proceeds from his understanding. Without understanding there is no thought, and as such no life. Any knowledge outside of understanding is not reasonable.

Knowledge
Knowledge is not truly knowledge until it is understood. Where there is no understanding there is no true knowledge.

Knowledge, in order to be knowledge with understanding, has to be reasonable. If it is not reasonable it cannot be understood. Hence the simple reality that for something to be reasonable there has to be a reason. When there is a reason for sin, it ceases to be sin. Hence, for God to know and understand (when he was going to create free will in man) that man will sin (as opposed to 'could sin'), is to say that in creating, he created a cause/reason for sin; that the cause was a must and there is no choice. That means that such was planned and designed to sin. That is a self-cancelling impossibility. Sin can only be committed by one who has say/choice in the matter, which means, such is empowered to do otherwise. When a computer crashes or fails to perform a command properly we do not say that it sinned. We know that there is a bug somewhere in the program or it is a hardware failure. Neither can be called sin. It is a programming/manufacturing defect.

What is it that makes sin? Whatsoever is not of faith is sin; and, the just shall live by faith. Now our heavenly Father is just and faithful. Therefore in the very definition of sin is the answer to the fact that it cannot be foreknown, because the foundation of sin or righteousness is faith. Since it is of faith; it is not of knowledge.

If it could be known what will be chosen than it would not be free will but it would be a 'bent' to whatever it is predestined to. To repeat, as Boblee said, the obvious, 'If it can be known by any manner or means whatever, what will be chosen by a free will, then there is no choice in the matter.' If there is no choice in the matter there is no free will and there can be no sin.

So to conclude, it means that foreknowledge of what will be chosen and the ability of free will in that choice is mutually exclusive. Therefore the ability of God knowing what will be chosen and such still having the ability to choose otherwise is impossible in creation.

Knowledge based on understanding - in creation.
Psalms 136:5 To him that by wisdom made the heavens: for his mercy endureth for ever.

It is important to realise that when God creates anything, he knows or understands its function, scope, etc. In fact he has thought it up and designed it. When God created the ability of free will, he knew that he cannot/does not know what will be chosen. That is the essence of free will. That is what he wanted to create, and that is what he created. In creating such a free moral agent God established the basis of relationship that is to exist between him and such person. The basis of that relationship was faith and not knowledge. It was faith on the part of God as well as on the part of creation. In creating such, God created the highest that can be created. He created a being that he could fellowship with in spirit. This he did for the wonderful purpose of them becoming sons of God, and one with him.

Freewill after the fall?
Here is perhaps the greatest confusion. There are numerous factors; those who have lost their freewill - slaves to sin; those who are in the process of being set free by God so that they may choose life; and those who have been set free and have chosen life and are faithful.

Those who have lost their freewill - slaves to sin, can be divided into two groups. One is the natural fallen man, the other is the enslaved to sin man. Both of their actions and reactions and 'what they think are choices' are known, for they think they are free, but they are slaves to sin or lower nature. God knows and understands the way of the flesh and of sin. They have no freewill. Here the scripture tells us
Psalms 139:2 Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off.
15 My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. 16 Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.
Daniel 2:22 He revealeth the deep and secret things: he knoweth what is in the darkness, and the light dwelleth with him.

Those who are in the process of being set free by God so that they may choose life. Here we have an interaction of God's spirit working upon man, as well as the power of sin. The struggles that ensue; the responses of man to God and his working; the different kinds of soil; different weather conditions and many other things are factors, which God has to work with. Here the scripture tells us
Deuteronomy 8:2 And thou shalt remember all the way which the LORD thy God led thee these forty years in the wilderness, to humble thee, and to prove thee, to know what was in thine heart, whether thou wouldest keep his commandments, or no.
Deuteronomy 8:16 Who fed thee in the wilderness with manna, which thy fathers knew not, that he might humble thee, and that he might prove thee, to do thee good at thy latter end;

Here there are God's plans and his purpose, which are known, but there are also conditions, the fulfilment of which is not known, hence it is conditional. And it is conditional upon man's choice. But it is also conditional upon God's choices in the same. Conditional means that the outcome could go either way with drastic differences, hence it is not and can not be foreknown. Here God's plans are effected, altered, re-routed, re-tried, or even aborted in the process of accomplishing his purpose.

Those who have been set free and have chosen life and are faithful. Here God's purpose and plans are fulfilled and accomplished. All is known, their choice is made and they are faithful. Here the scriptures tell us
Psalms 101:6 Mine eyes shall be upon the faithful of the land, that they may dwell with me:
Matthew 25:23 His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
Revelation 17:14 … and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and faithful.

Where there is faithfulness established, God's purpose is fulfilled. The basis of future security of heaven is established not on some abstract knowledge of the future activity, but on the reality that God understands what faithfulness is. For God is faithful and they that are with him are likewise faithful.

In summary therefore, "Omniscience" as commonly held is entirely unacceptable, because it's knowledge has to be abstract. Being abstract, by nature it denies knowledge since it is without understanding. It also denies the ability for God to do anything about it; moreover God ceases to be God. If "omniscience" were based on understanding, then there would be no such thing as sin or righteousness. In fact the life of "person" could not exist.

Therefore such a concept of "omniscience" is unscriptural for there are things that may not be known by God in order for God himself to exist as a person; in order for a person to exist; in order for faith to exist; in order for all the fruits of the spirit to exist-which is God's glory.

What shall I say to these things?
He knoweth what is in the darkness, and lives in the light. Hence he is able to bring us from darkness to light. He stands at the door and knocks, if any man will open the door, he will come in and sup with him. He is able to bring a lost soul to faithfulness, but he cannot do it without us opening the door. Who will open the door?

Shalom

[ July 01, 2003, 01:47 PM: Message edited by: John Boskovic ]

The question has been asked how the prophecy of Peter's denial could be.

Peter's denial:

Satan has sought to sift you as wheat.
Satan's request and plans are known. Peter's spiritual condition is known. Satan was given permission. The outcome therefore is known.

I have prayed that your faith fail not.
Satan would not be allowed to cause Peter to despair. Satan was permitted to sift, outwardly. He was not permitted to crush, inwardly.

Before the Rooster crows you shall deny me thrice.
The timing when Satan would be permitted his sifting was known. The number of times that Satan would be permitted to sift was known. The rooster was used of God to certify to Peter his knowledge of him, and establish Faith.

Shalom

The power of Omnipotence is enlisted in behalf of those who trust in God. {DA 352.2}

Revelation 19:6 And I heard as it were the voice of a great multitude, and as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of mighty thunderings, saying, Alleluia: for the Lord God omnipotent reigneth.

O how little man can comprehend the perfection of God, His omnipresence united with His almighty power. {UL 340.3}

He is infinite and omnipresent. No words of ours can describe His greatness and majesty. {FLB 42.3}

Nothing can happen in any part of the universe without the knowledge of Him who is omnipresent. {3BC 1141.5}

To acknowledge that we cannot fully comprehend the great truths of the Bible is only to admit that the finite mind is inadequate to grasp the infinite; that man, with his limited, human knowledge, cannot understand the purposes of Omniscience. {SC 108.1}

Men in their blindness boast of wonderful progress and enlightenment; but to the eye of Omniscience are revealed the inward guilt and depravity. {6T 14.4}

Cain had gone so far in sin that he had lost a sense of the continual presence of God and of His greatness and omniscience. {PP 77.2}

The ever watchful eye of Omniscience is upon all our works, and although He can marshal the armies of heaven to do His will, He condescends to accept the services of frail, erring mortals (ST July 14, 1881). {3BC 1153.13}

With the eye of Omniscience He saw that the city of Jerusalem had decided her own destiny. {5BC 1098.6}

The Omniscient One is above discussion. {FLB 40.6}

God is omnipotent, omniscient, immutable. {HP 146.3}

Let no one venture to explain God. Human beings cannot explain themselves, and how, then, dare they venture to explain the Omniscient One? Satan stands ready to give such ones false conceptions of God. {MM 92.1}

Hundreds of years before certain nations came upon the stage of action, the Omniscient One looked down the ages and predicted the rise and fall of the universal kingdoms. {PK 501.1}

Apparently Sister White is not afraid to use the omni words when talking about our Almighty God and Father. I too am comfortable with believing God is omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient. God can do anything He wants to - even force us to believe in Him - but He chooses to exercise His unlimited powers in a way that engenders trust and loyalty. But just because He chooses to use His powers discretely does not mean His powers are limited. I believe God's ability to predict Peter's denial was based on more than merely an educated guess - rather I believe it was based on His foreknowledge and omniscience.

Yes Mike there are many who are comfortable with using the words with omni, including myself. That is not the problem. The indiscriminate use of them is however a problem. That is purpose of my examples, to show that indiscriminate use of these thoughts is not the message in scripture. But if the thought is discriminative than it is not as omni as it could be thought.

Can God force us to believe? God can zap anything he wants into our brain; but such would never be us believing him. If a hypnotist can make one think and see things, certainly God can, but that is not what God calls believing him. Obviously, the meaning that God gives of the faith, trust and adoration from a freewill person is something where such cannot be done. Do you not not agree?

My point is Mike that we must keep in mind the reference definitions that God gives us and not to carry the 'omni' indiscriminately so that the definitions become entirely irrelevant.

Shalom

However, believing God is able to predict the future choices of people and the tailored made consequences does not violate free will. Nor does it invalidate His divinty. On the contrary, it demonstrates His omnipotent and omniscient powers. Which is also the only way He can guarantee the universe that sin shall not arise a second time.

Mike you asked me why I was unwilling to agree with you on that type of a view of omniscience. I answered you in my post of July 01, 2003 07:14 AM.

What do you hear?

I'm sorry I didn't respond more fully to your post. In theory I agree with the concept that anytime we explain God in abstract terms we do Him a disservice. Sometimes it's better to discuss things using definitions rather than assuming everyone understands our choice of words.

However, I do not believe that saying God is omniscient is abstract - truly, God is all knowing. Knowing the future choices of created beings is not abstract. The only way God can predict the future is if He knows our choices ahead of time. I do not believe it is an abuse of the word "omniscience" to say God knows our choices before we make them. Indeed, only God can know the future.

Mike, you seem to have a mental block. You do not seem be able to compute the information that I put forth, and you do not seem to be able to answer and deal with the content. Instead all we get is reiteration of an assertion without content.

In my post of July 01, 2003 07:14 AM. I have given very specific information that I would like your thoughts on.

I believe that you should be able to see that the only issues that are at stake are: God's foreknowledge that man at creation will (imperative) sin, and then since the fall, that of his foreknowledge of who will (imperative) be saved. I am not aware of any scripture teaching such, but I know of many scriptures that tell us the contrary.

I have given meaningful information what such knowledge entails. Please do not just give assertions. Please give at least equivalent content to what I have given.

Shalom

John, sorry for the mental block. Thank you for keeping me on task. Did God know before hand that Adam would sin? Apparently, yes. The Bible teaches that Jesus was slain from the foundation of the world. Rev 13:8. When the Father and Son met to discuss man's demise it wasn't to hammer out a plan, but rather to implement the existing plan. Note this quote from Sister White:

"Sorrow filled heaven as it was realized that man was lost and that the world which God had created was to be filled with mortals doomed to misery, sickness, and death, and that there was no way of escape for the offender. The whole family of Adam must die. I then saw the lovely Jesus and beheld an expression of sympathy and sorrow upon His countenance. Soon I saw Him approach the exceeding bright light which enshrouded the Father. Said my accompanying angel, "He is in close converse with His Father." The anxiety of the angels seemed to be intense while Jesus was communing with His Father. Three times He was shut in by the glorious light about the Father, and the third time He came from the Father we could see His person. His countenance was calm, free from all perplexity and trouble, and shone with a loveliness which words cannot describe. He then made known to the angelic choir that a way of escape had been made for lost man; that He had been pleading with His Father, and had obtained permission to give His own life as a ransom for the race, to bear their sins, and take the sentence of death upon Himself, thus opening a way whereby they might, through the merits of His blood, find pardon for past transgressions, and by obedience be brought back to the garden from which they were driven. Then they could again have access to the glorious, immortal fruit of the tree of life to which they had now forfeited all right. {EW 126.1}

"Then joy, inexpressible joy, filled heaven, and the heavenly choir sang a song of praise and adoration. They touched their harps and sang a note higher than they had done before, because of the great mercy and condescension of God in yielding up His dearly Beloved to die for a race of rebels. Then praise and adoration was poured forth for the self-denial and sacrifice of Jesus, in consenting to leave the bosom of His Father, and choosing a life of suffering and anguish, and an ignominious death, that He might give life to others. {EW 126.2}

"Said the angel, "Think ye that the Father yielded up His dearly beloved Son without a struggle? No, no." It was even a struggle with the God of heaven, whether to let guilty man perish, or to give His darling Son to die for them. Angels were so interested for man's salvation that there could be found among them those who would yield their glory and give their life for perishing man. "But," said my accompanying angel, "that would avail nothing." The transgression was so great that an angel's life would not pay the debt. Nothing but the death and intercession of God's Son would pay the debt and save lost man from hopeless sorrow and misery. {EW 127.1}