could not an all knowing God know what choice a man will make in a given situation although acting on his own free will? kinda like God see's, but allows
Posted on 11/18/2009 5:58:48 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
New Scientist magazine is generally regarded by the secular community as one of the top-ranked science magazines in the world. However, a published opinion by a regular columnist demonstrated how “unscientific” and anti-God some of their articles have become—something we have documented before (see Refutation of New Scientist’s Evolution: 24 myths and misconceptions).
Amanda Gefter wrote an article discussing multiverse theory, or the idea that our universe may be only one of many that currently exist. Such speculations attempt to explain away the appearance of design in the universe, because of, as we shall see, the spiritual implications. In an article called What’s God got to do with it she wrote: ...
(Excerpt) Read more at creation.com ...
Call it alternate dimensions, multiverse, whatever, and it's classified as *science*.
Call it *heaven*, *hell*, *the new heavens and the new earth* and see what kind of pejoratives it will earn you.
So many so-called *scientists* reject what is found in Scripture, then turn around and propose their own God free scenarios that have them end up in the same place. They're merely replacing the same things with one that doesn't require God and accountability.
Chapter III: Of God's Eternal Decree.
I. God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.
II. Although God knows whatsoever may or can come to pass upon all supposed conditions; yet has He not decreed anything because He foresaw it as future, or as that which would come to pass upon such conditions.
III. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life; and others foreordained to everlasting death.
IV. These angels and men, thus predestinated, and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed, and their number so certain and definite, that it cannot be either increased or diminished.
V. Those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to His eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of His will, has chosen, in Christ, unto everlasting glory, out of His mere free grace and love, without any foresight of faith, or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions, or causes moving Him thereunto; and all to the praise of His glorious grace.
VI. As God has appointed the elect unto glory, so has He, by the eternal and most free purpose of His will, foreordained all the means thereunto. Wherefore, they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ by His Spirit working in due season, are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by His power, through faith, unto salvation. Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only.
VII. The rest of mankind God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of His own will, whereby He extends or withholds mercy, as He pleases, for the glory of His sovereign power over His creatures, to pass by; and to ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praise of His glorious justice.
VIII. The doctrine of this high mystery of predestination is to be handled with special prudence and care, that men, attending the will of God revealed in His Word, and yielding obedience thereunto, may, from the certainty of their effectual vocation, be assured of their eternal election. So shall this doctrine afford matter of praise, reverence, and admiration of God; and of humility, diligence, and abundant consolation to all that sincerely obey the Gospel.
I. God has endued the will of man with that natural liberty, that is neither forced, nor, by any absolute necessity of nature, determined good, or evil.
II. Man, in his state of innocency, had freedom, and power to will and to do that which was good and well pleasing to God; but yet, mutably, so that he might fall from it.
III. Man, by his fall into a state of sin, has wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation: so as, a natural man, being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto.
IV. When God converts a sinner, and translates him into the state of grace, He frees him from his natural bondage under sin; and, by His grace alone, enables him freely to will and to do that which is spiritually good; yet so, as that by reason of his remaining corruption, he does not perfectly, or only, will that which is good, but does also will that which is evil.
V. The will of man is made perfectly and immutably free to do good alone in the state of glory only.
>>Oh really? Like the comment you made in this post alone...? Where does your anger come from?<<
MM, your posts are always angry. Your response is angry.
There is no persecution in my posts and there never has been. I merely ask to render unto science that which is physical and unto God that which is spiritual.
>>The scientific method is religion neutral. Scientists aren’t. And the evos on FR certainly aren’t what with the mockery and derision that occurs daily on anything that GGG posts.<<
When someone posts that finding a bone that doesn’t seem to fit into known structures somehow means a 200-year scientific branch of discovery is finished, what is available except a certain amount of mockery? The purposeful misunderstanding of science and the scientific method opens itself up to educated attacks, sometimes aided by a bit of linguistic spice (but I’ll try to be better).
>>If I see persecution where none exists, then tell me why I keep seeing evos browbeat everyone about relegating GGG’s threads to the Religion Forum *where they belong*, like they’re being sent to the back of the bus.<<
Not quite sure what you mean there. I personally have made no such request, since the rules on religion would mean I could not post anything at all. If you guys want the sanctuary of Religion, have at it. I shant be following (nor will most anyone who understands science).
I urge you to reread your posts and then ask yourself if they are anything less than angry. I keep hoping you will find some love (for God, for anyone) in your heart and heal whatever wound causes you to lash out so. I do pray for you nightly, but the Lord helps them what helps themselves, I suppose.
>>Call it alternate dimensions, multiverse, whatever, and it’s classified as *science*.<<
I invite you to read my posts on this thread, then reevaluate your answer.
There is only one time line, and God in his infinite knowledge and perfection he knows us and knows the universe and how to shape things to the ends he wants. He knows it all so well that he knew how it will all turn out in every detail at the very beginning.
— C / C++ with its horrid inconsistencies cannot be assumed to have been designed or [exclusive] grown.
Begging the question.
What are the design specs?
Were they agreed upon, and held to, during the course of the project?
Did the builders strictly adhere to the design specs?
Did they allow enough time for QA?
Did someone screw up the project as part of a union protest, or through incompetence?
If you're going to mention design, allow for all the regular snafus.
Cheers!
Are you saying God can only create one universe?
No, multiverse, quata, and God are all figments of mans imagination and none of really exist.
But I do like the Cat in the Box theory.
No, they aren't.
But two observations. First is that you're going to believe what you want to believe about my posts. I guess it makes you evos feel better about yourselves if you think so.
The other is that my telling you isn't going to make any difference because your next reaction is going to be that I'm lying.
You really have only two choices. You can believe me when I say that they are and I am not angry. Or you can disbelieve it.
If you believe it, then you have to admit that you're wrong.
If you continue to insist that they're angry, you are in essence, calling me a liar.
Not quite sure what you mean there. I personally have made no such request, since the rules on religion would mean I could not post anything at all. If you guys want the sanctuary of Religion, have at it. I shant be following (nor will most anyone who understands science).
What a crock. For one thing, I never said you personally made such a request. Another evo misrepresentation of what a creationist said.
You know that creationists haven't requested to put these threads in the Religion Forum. It would be a simple matter for GGG to post them there. It's the evos who have been blowing a gasket about where they think all these threads ought to be posted and complaining that that's where they belong. Even to the point of keyword spamming the threads.
And I find it extremely unlikely that you've missed it all. DC is too well connected for all that.
Your false piety and wide-eyed innocent act isn't fooling anyone. Everyone has seen you in action and if they haven't, they can simply go to your posting history.
Scientists looking for a naturalistic materialistic explanation for the existence of everything.
Then there’s no need for God anymore.
You mean there is now?
Sure. There’s always a need for God.
And likewise, your version of the universe is then a figment of your imagination and doesn't really exist. Where does that leave you?
No, while in each finite universe you have a limited number of random chances to create life. And the probabilities of it happening in a single universe are ridiculously small, (not zero.) But, if you have an infinite number of universes to try again, your probability will equal 1. It will happen given enough tries. Which is what obviously happened since we exist and God does not. /s
I’m sayhing we might be at the point of the unknowable.
You and me both.
could not an all knowing God know what choice a man will make in a given situation although acting on his own free will? kinda like God see's, but allows
Metmom, angry? Not! She is one of the most thoughtful people on these threads. It could be that you are projecting either your own emotional state, or your own heartfelt desire to make Metmom angry. Think about it.
That depends on perspective. For example, from Richard Dawkins perspective one can assess that true modern science is the search to prove that there is no God. From a Dawkins perspective, multiverse brings the concept of infinity back into the equation, and not a moment to soon!
If all there was was this one finite universe, the probabilities for the existence of life, and more importantly the information required for life, could not have possibly happened either randomly or accidentally.
Cruel!
Excellent point, Metmom! It’s ok to have faith, as long as that faith doesn’t involve God.
I’m sayhing we might be at the point of the unknowable.
Thats where all of these arguments end up, in the end
they are just words made up in a infinite number of minds.
Unknowable and unprovable.
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.