God's Part and Man's Part in Salvation

John G. Reisinger ^ | John G. Reisinger

[ponyespresso]

I am currently reading through the Book of Numbers as a personal study (all this time being a Christian and I haven’t been in an Bible study of this book, imagine that, lol!). I am interested in relating my observations from Numbers, specifically chapters 13 and 14 to this discussion of God’s foreknowledge as it relates to man’s will. If anyone would like me to post the chapters for the discussion, just let me know.

As you may know, chapters 13 and 14 relate the story of the twelve spies being sent out to scout the land of Canaan, the Promised Land that was promised to the descendents of Abraham (Gen. 12:1-9), Isaac (Gen 26:2,3) and Jacob (Gen 28:13), the land that the LORD told Moses he was going to give for His people (Ex. 3:8). Moses was confident in promise that the LORD has made (Num. 10:29). However, when the spies came back from their mission, they gave a negative report saying that “we are not able to go up against the [inhabitants of Canaan], for they are too strong for us.” (Num. 13:31). Two men of the twelve believed God’s promise Joshua and Caleb (13:30, 14:6-9) but the rest did not. Thus, as a result of lack of belief in God (Num. 14:11) they incurred the LORD’s anger and punishment.

Now, my questions are:

1) Did the LORD fully intend for THAT generation to enter into Canaan or did the LORD have knowledge that that generation was not going to enter Canaan?
2) If the LORD did NOT fully intend for that generation to enter into Canaan, because of His foreknowledge of what would happen, why would His anger be kindled at something He Himself knew would happen anyway?
3) After the Israelites decided not to enter Canaan, did the LORD fully intend to “dispossess them” and make the descendents of Moses a “nation greater and mightier than they” as he told Moses He would do? (Num. 14:12)
4) Did Moses’ intercession on behalf of the Israelites do anything to change the mind (and actions) of the LORD, or was the LORD merely being declamatory in Num. 14:12? (Note: please take into account the LORD's response in 14:20 before you respond).

I eagerly await everybody’s input.

[Frumanchu]

why would His anger be kindled at something He Himself knew would happen anyway?

You are clearly not a Cleveland Browns fan:)

All these years and still no Super Bowl.....

[Jean Chauvin]

"No, the Arminian is saying that in this present state of things, the definition of free agency must necessarily allow unnecessitated choice for OR against something (i.e., sin)."

I don't know that I've seen you post on this specific issue before, but I have seen it posted on FR by FRAminians that sin exists ~BECAUSE~ God created man with Free-Will. This is a bit different than saying "in this present state of things" the possiblity of sin exists because of Free-Will.

What it comes down to is this: Could God have created man with Free-Will (or 'Free-Agency') ~WITHOUT~ the possiblity that he would "choose against" God? (or "could God have created a 'different state of things' where Free-Will or Free-Agency existed WITHOUT the possiblity that man would "choose against" God?)

The Calvinist would heartily answer, "Yes!"

As far as I can tell, the Arminian would answer, "no."

Jean

[ponyespresso]

why would His anger be kindled at something He Himself knew would happen anyway?

You are clearly not a Cleveland Browns fan:)

Yea, but I grew up a California Angels fan and the first year I move overseas to England to live, they win the World Series. I wonder what that says about me though, lol

Remeber, faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen, even in things like the Super Bowl, so hang in there.

[Jean Chauvin]

"Well, in a sense, it is an eternal reality co-existing alongside God. As long as the concept exists in God, it co-exists, correct?"

An eternal reality co-existing alongside of God is not the same thing as a concept existing in (the mind of) God.

If you admit that sin exists co-eternally alongside of God, then you deny God's ultimate sovereignty. He is not "all powerfull" for he must necessarily co-exist along side of Sin. The God and the Anti-God must naturally be in relationship together. Yin-Yang!

"So in an outside-of-time picture, God's knowledge is essentially what we would call simultaneous; thus, it would be eternally co-existant. It would still be subject to God, and is not independent of him, while he is of it, but it would be co-existant."

But that is far different to say that it eternally co-exists "alongside" of God. The alternate reality of Tyre and Sidon, had God done things differently, exists "in the mind of" God, but that is not to say that Tyre and Sidon co-exist eternally "alongside" of God.

Jean

[CCWoody]

The answer is No God could not create a rock He could not lift.... ~ RnMomof7

FWIW, I am with you and Sproul on this.

lift ~ An amount of a weight raised or capable of being raised at one time; a load.
weight ~ The force with which a body is attracted to Earth or another celestial body, equal to the product of the object's mass and the acceleration of gravity.


1. The question itself assumes that God is bound to and limited by the very Law of gravity that He defined. The idea of "lifting" only has definition within the confines of a gravitational field. Such an idea is absurd and we can dismiss the question on this reason alone.
2. But, even granting that God is somehow limited by the Law of gravitiy, which in and of itself, destroys the nature of God, it would still be impossible for the same reason that God cannot lie. He cannot act contrary to His nature by lying and He cannot act contrary to His nature by creating something beyond His ability to control.

Woody.

Give me a fulcrum big enough, and I can move the universe.

[lockeliberty]

In an earlier post you said that the "condition of Justification" can change.

Justification is the imputation of Christ's righteousness.

You believe that Justification is contigent on an individuals faith.

Every individual lacks perfect faith.

God accepts this less than perfect faith.

In the old covenant God required perfect obedience to the Law.

Therefore, the new covenant is in effect a new law in which God accepts less than perfect faith.

Does this reflect your view?

[fortheDeclaration]

Aw come on now! You know you are not supposed to believe what you read in the Bible!

They were all predestinated to do what they did even though God reproved them for it.

God doesn't really tell us what His will is in the Bible (1Tim.2:4, 2Pet.3:9, John.3:16)

Now, just put down that Bible and read Calvin, Sproul, Piper, Pink, Spurgeon etc to find out what God really thinks.

By the way, because the cut-off age was 20 years or older that died before entering the Land, I am thinking that that may be the age of accountability.

What do you think?

[CCWoody]

Or perhaps God is time? Not to say that Time is god, but rather that our sense of time is the order or sequence of God's thoughts and the outworkings of that thought. ~ The Grammarian

I need to think about this a while. In your defense, time, as most people think about it, really doesn't exist. For instance, many people state that time is the "4th dimension". Well, this is absurd. We live in a "just so" inverse cubed universe, not an inverse quad universe. Without getting into all the equations to support my claim, I'll just have to insist that you take my word for it. ;-)

Woody.

[lockeliberty]

Your considering God's anger and actions within time. Yet, consider that before God set in motion history that all these events went through his mind and his anger was kindled and his actions known even before time began.

[ponyespresso]

Now, just put down that Bible and read Calvin, Sproul, Piper, Pink, Spurgeon etc to find out what God really thinks.

You get that feeling on FR sometimes. I'm convinced that too many Christians (not just here but everywhere) spend way too much time reading about the Bible and not enought actually reading the Blessed Book itself. As Protestants, aren't we supposed to be pretty keen on the idea of Scripture alone?

What do you think?

When man who was born blind (John 9) was being grilled by the most prominent and knowledgable scholars of the Scriptures, he said, "I don't know what you say about Him, all I know is that I was blind but now I see." That is pretty much all I know too.

[ponyespresso]

Your considering God's anger and actions within time. Yet, consider that before God set in motion history that all these events went through his mind and his anger was kindled and his actions known even before time began.

Fair enough. But, I guess what I am trying to figure out is that, even though God set in motion the events of history, it seems (again, just what I read in Scripture) that He is relating to His creation within time. So then, is God being disingenuous with his creation by saying he will dispossess Israel (Num 14:12; or for another quick example, the LORD's declaration that Hezekiah is going to die in 2 Kings 20:1) since He knows fully well He will not dispossess Israel?

[Jean Chauvin]

"They were all predestinated to do what they did even though God reproved them for it."

Acts 2
23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:

Your ignorance is absolutely ASTOUNDING!

Jean

[fortheDeclaration]

They were all predestinated to do what they did even though God reproved them for it." Acts 2 23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:

Now, what does that have to do with Numbers?

I also see the word foreknowledge of God, gee, do you think God foreknew what their free will decisions would be in rejecting their Messiah?

Your ignorance is absolutely ASTOUNDING

Yours, sad to say, isn't.

[fortheDeclaration]

Now, just put down that Bible and read Calvin, Sproul, Piper, Pink, Spurgeon etc to find out what God really thinks. You get that feeling on FR sometimes. I'm convinced that too many Christians (not just here but everywhere) spend way too much time reading about the Bible and not enought actually reading the Blessed Book itself. As Protestants, aren't we supposed to be pretty keen on the idea of Scripture alone?

Amen!

What do you think? When man who was born blind (John 9) was being grilled by the most prominent and knowledgable scholars of the Scriptures, he said, "I don't know what you say about Him, all I know is that I was blind but now I see." That is pretty much all I know too.

Amen!

[Jean Chauvin]

"I also see the word foreknowledge of God, gee, do you think God foreknew what their free will decisions would be in rejecting their Messiah? "

No, the text does not say anything about "free will decisions". You're, once again, adding that into the text because you don't like what it says.

1 Peter 1
20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

The Scriptures are CLEAR that Jesus Christ's work was pre-determined by the will of God and the hands that carried out the murder of the Christ were "wicked".

(aside to ponnyespresso: The Greek word for "foreknow" is proginosko. It is precisely the same word the KJV translates "foreordained" in 1 Peter 1)

"Yours, sad to say, isn't."

Oooooooooh! Goooooood come back! LOL!

Jean

[lockeliberty]

So then, is God being disingenuous with his creation by saying he will dispossess Israel (Num 14:12; or for another quick example, the LORD's declaration that Hezekiah is going to die in 2 Kings 20:1) since He knows fully well He will not dispossess Israel?

I don't think so. God's wrath was just and would have been carried out if not for Moses prayer. Without Moses prayer surely God would have dispossed Israel. Considering that God is a person with emotions and that circumstances warrant an emotional reaction then some additional circumstances may warrant a different reaction. So, circumstance A (C1) warrants action A (A1) but then circumstance B in relation to circumstance A(C2A) warrants a different action (A2). Without circumstance (C2A) {Moses prayer} then God would have most certainly carried out action A1 (disposses Israel).

[The Grammarian]

We live in a "just so" inverse cubed universe, not an inverse quad universe. Without getting into all the equations to support my claim, I'll just have to insist that you take my word for it. ;-)

I'm totally lost as to what you mean by a "just so" inverse cubed universe as opposed to an inverse quad(rilateral?) universe. Most of the equations would be over my head anyway, I'm sure, so I'll take your word for it. That said, I'm not necessarily saying that even I believe the position I've been espousing. I'm just indisposed to the "outside-of-time" assumption.

[The Grammarian]

Essentially, yes. God accepts less-than-perfect faith as the condition upon which he justifies, which is to say that he removes the penalties for individuals' sins. At the same time, Jesus Christ's death is what makes it possible for God to justly remove the penalties for sin.

[RnMomof7]

I am no Pastor..but I will say to you that I do not think that God is ever taken by surprise nor does He change His mind. God foreknew all the circumstances and ordered them for our teaching and instruction and to act in complete accord with His plan laid down before the foundation of the Earth

Do you believe God is immutible?