Subject:
|
Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 5 Dec 2002 18:20:20 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1909 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> Nice can of worms. Actually, if you *really* want to get into it...
>
> God is omniscient (by definition). So God *knows* whether we will choose to
> acknowledge Him or not, and thus it is predetermined (Predestination).
The way I see it, there's two schools of thought on the subject. Either God
KNOWS what's going to happen or he doesn't.
If he DOES know, then it's not really "free will". And as such, God CREATED
me such that I'll never accept him. Punishing me for such a thing hardly
seems fair. Yet another reason I'd choose not to accept such a God. But then
again, I'm not really "choosing". God forced my hand.
If he DOESN'T know, then he's capable of being an IMPERFECT God, and hence
is subject to my variable assesment. And on that note, I'd be a lot more
open to accept an imperfect God if:
#1 - He admitted his imperfections
#2 - Made choices I could understand and/or agree with (one of which would
be his admitting his imperfections)
If he fails on these counts, I again discount him, and I won't worship him.
> > Because we have the "God-given" right to free-will, I deem that God is
> > DEFINITELY deserving of our judgement. That's what we're here to do! Judge
> > God! Decide whether we want to worship him or not; decide whether to love
> > him or not; to accept him or not. How else are we to do this save to judge
> > God himself?
>
> It is clear from biblical teaching that God is perfect and is *worthy* of
> praise and worship as well as acting as Judge, so you can perish the "judge
> God" tack.
But wait, you just judged God! You said (implied) that it is clear *to you*
from biblical teaching that God is perfect and worthy of praise and worship.
That's quite clearly a judgement because I quite clearly judge otherwise.
It's clear *to me* that the biblical God is NOT perfect and NOT worthy of my
praise and worship. That's the judgement I'm making.
> As for Todd's characterization of God; it is easy to slip into
> anthropomorphic mode when describing Him (see?...masculine pronoun;-)
Honestly, I quite like Nathan's implication on the "in his own image" bit. I
had thought of that before: that "in his own image" isn't a reference to
*physical* image, but a reference to *mental* image, aka "free
will"/judgement ability. IE that we were akin to God in that we could
choose. And the ultimate *test* to see if we could choose would be for God
to make a choice ('do not eat the fruit of this tree'), and for his creation
to choose differently ('I will eat the fruit of that tree').
> You are correct. The Bible is also clear that God is the same yesterday,
> today, and tomorrow. Our perceptions of Him change or are faulty, but that
> is all.
That I can buy. I *won't* buy it, cuz it's too pricey for my tastes, but
it's an acceptable answer :)
DaveE
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: The Brick Testament parts the Red Sea
|
| (...) Nice can of worms. Actually, if you *really* want to get into it... God is omniscient (by definition). So God *knows* whether we will choose to acknowledge Him or not, and thus it is predetermined (Predestination). It seems to me to be of (...) (22 years ago, 5-Dec-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
205 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
