The Oppeness of God

[Gregory Matthews]

Some years ago, Dr. Richard Rice challenged the Christian world at large with his views on God.  The following URL takes you  to an article which  comments     on a more recent presentation of his at Loma Linda.

https://spectrummagazine.org/article/2018/05/03/richard-rice-discusses-“re-imagining-god-peril-or-promise”

 

 

[JoeMo]

Very interesting article.  We were discussing this same thing in our Sabbath School class a while back.  At the macro level, I think God knows the ultimate outcome of this age in great, specific detail.  Also, I believe God knows the ultimate destiny of everyone that has lived or will ever live.

There is some "chance" involved here.  For example, we can live within the will of God and still make stupid choices and decisions.  No matter how stupid we are though, God always leaves a path open for us to get back on the wagon.

No matter what God knows or doesn't know, foreknowledge is not predestination.  We still have complete free will.  We may not know the unintended consequences of  our bad choices, but God does.  If there is any aspect to predestination, it is that we are all predestined to be saved.  We have the free will to accept or reject that destiny.

[Gustave]

Isaiah 46,10

Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure.

That would seem to indicate regardless of the unpredictability of the final status of all things pertaining to the time continuum - God knows what ultimately will happen & if need be - "get's involved". 

[Ron Amnsn]

On 5/5/2018 at 8:37 PM, Gustave said:

Isaiah 46,10

Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure.

That would seem to indicate regardless of the unpredictability of the final status of all things pertaining to the time continuum - God knows what ultimately will happen & if need be - "get's involved". 

I think it only says what it actually says.  God knows the outcome of the things he has stated will happen and will work to make those things happen one way or another. 

On the other hand, there are a lot of things that God has made no statement about.  Those things will be determined by the choices of the individuals involved.

[Gustave]

13 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

I think it only says what it actually says.  God knows the outcome of the things he has stated will happen and will work to make those things happen one way or another. 

On the other hand, there are a lot of things that God has made no statement about.  Those things will be determined by the choices of the individuals involved.

Isaiah 35, 4 is explicit in that God would not fail to save His People.

Jesus quoted this very text and applied Himself as the Author and subject of that text.

If God knows the outcome of things He has stated will happen and will work to make those things happen what business did Ellen White have in repeatedly claiming that God might have failed and had that happened Lucifer would have driven Father God into some dark corner of the universe to forever sulk in gloom. 

 

 

[Ron Amnsn]

7 hours ago, Gustave said:

Isaiah 35, 4 is explicit in that God would not fail to save His People.

God will certainly do what he said in Isaiah 35:4.  But he didn't make that statement to apply universally to everyone who happens to read it.  God's statement was made in a context.  Because it was to be spoken to those  who are fearful or anxious, it may not apply to those who are confident or arrogant. I doubt it would apply to those who remain rebellious or the unholy.

7 hours ago, Gustave said:

If God knows the outcome of things He has stated will happen and will work to make those things happen what business did Ellen White have in repeatedly claiming that God might have failed and had that happened Lucifer would have driven Father God into some dark corner of the universe to forever sulk in gloom.

I'm not familiar with the passage you refer to.  Everything EGW taught must be tested by the Bible (see SDA Fundamental Belief #18, last part).  Unfortunately, few SDA's have discovered how to do that and the denomination apparently does not provide any materials to teach people how to do that.

[Gustave]

2 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

God will certainly do what he said in Isaiah 35:4.  But he didn't make that statement to apply universally to everyone who happens to read it.  God's statement was made in a context.  Because it was to be spoken to those  who are fearful or anxious, it may not apply to those who are confident or arrogant. I doubt it would apply to those who remain rebellious or the unholy.

I'm not familiar with the passage you refer to.  Everything EGW taught must be tested by the Bible (see SDA Fundamental Belief #18, last part).  Unfortunately, few SDA's have discovered how to do that and the denomination apparently does not provide any materials to teach people how to do that.

If God says unequivocally that He will come and He will save that would apply to everyone be they aware of it or not.  

Of course I would agree that a person who doesn't want to be saved or rejects God isn't going to be saved - but that doesn't negate the fact that God said He wouldn't fail.

 

[APL]

On 5/4/2018 at 11:12 AM, Gregory Matthews said:

Some years ago, Dr. Richard Rice challenged the Christian world at large with his views on God.  The following URL takes you  to an article which  comments     on a more recent presentation of his at Loma Linda.

https://spectrummagazine.org/article/2018/05/03/richard-rice-discusses-“re-imagining-god-peril-or-promise”

 

 

 

[APL]

On 5/4/2018 at 11:12 AM, Gregory Matthews said:

Some years ago, Dr. Richard Rice challenged the Christian world at large with his views on God.  The following URL takes you  to an article which  comments     on a more recent presentation of his at Loma Linda.

https://spectrummagazine.org/article/2018/05/03/richard-rice-discusses-“re-imagining-god-peril-or-promise”

 

 

The idea of the openness of God did not originate with Rick Rice, or Greg Boyd for that matter.  U. Smith wrote of it in his book, Looking Unto Jesus:

When the plan of salvation had been formed, and Christ had elected to give his life for the redemption of men, he was then, already, in the intent and purpose of that plan, the offered victim, and is spoken of as the "Lamb slain" - "slain from the foundation of the world" ( kosmos ), or from the time when the redemptive economy was established. Rev_13:8. It will be noticed that he is not said to have been slain before the foundation of the world, implying that the fall of man and redemption by the death of Christ, were events fixed and foreordained before the world was formed, and man created. This would place too powerful a weapon against the divine government, in the hands of the skeptic. {1898 UrS, LUJ 49.2}

 

But the disbeliever asks with an air of expected victory, Did not God foreknow that man would sin? Was it not therefore a settled fact that he would sin? And did not God, therefore, when he made man with that certainty before him, become responsible for the entrance of sin into this world? - So it might look from that point of view, and with that method of reasoning. But as the {1898 UrS, LUJ 49.3}

 

Scriptures do not so express it, it is not necessary to formulate it to such a conclusion. God made man, as he must make all intelligences who are to serve him, a free moral agent, that such service may not be mechanical and constrained, but voluntary and free. As such, he could obey or disobey; could maintain his rectitude or fall into sin. His course was to be determined by his own choice. God did not force him to sin, nor did he intend that he should sin. On the other hand, he made every possible inducement (short of constraining his free will) to keep him in the path of obedience. Being free, of course God knew that he might sin; but this would be a very different thing from saying that he know that he would sin. {1898 UrS, LUJ 50.1}

 

And is not this as far as it is necessary to go? To God's omniscience, every possible course that Adam might take as a free spirit, with a free choice, and every possible contingency that might arise from his uncoerced action, was open and plain. So, also, every step necessary to meet that contingency would be provided for should it occur. But, it will be asked, does not Peter (1Pe_1:20) say that Christ was foreordained to his work before the foundation of the world? - No; not "foreordained," as in the common version, but foreknown ( prognomenou ). Christ could be foreknown, in God's plan, as a redeemer, to meet a possible contingency of that nature that might arise, without being foreordained to meet a known necessity already in existence. Man chose to sin; then that One foreknown in the counsels of eternity, to meet such a contingency should it arise, entered upon his work, and in the fulness of time was, as Peter says, manifested to the world. {1898 UrS, LUJ 50.2}