God's knowledge debate

cannot take the Incarnation though as the "proof" that God limits His all knowing attribute thoguh!
basically, once one understands that that second person of trinity chose to humble and :limit: use of His divine attributes while here on earth, but father/HS still had them in full usuage

ALL claims to have God limited in Hi9s Omscience blows away in the wind!

 

ALL of that of the Kenosis of Jesus Christ, by choosing to limit Himself to not using His divine attributes while in the form of a man , and that he chose to live by fully relying on the father and power of the HS...

ALWAYS was/is God, but also a man!

 

Much of the references in OT especially to God is a type of applying human manners ways understands to God, in order to have us be able to relate at all to Him!

God does NOT have eyes as a man, nor wings, nor hands stretched forth as a man!

 

Perhaps the hang up is when I hear the word limited it sounds like they were present all the time while He was in the flesh and He simply chose not to use them. I don't hold that view. Perhaps set aside is a better way for me to understand what happened. He set aside his powers and relied on the Father through the Spirit to carry out His ministry, not that He had all His power while in the flesh and did not use it. And yes He was God and man but relied fully on the Father. I would raise another question here. I said, and we agree that He was God and man. Is he still God and man with His powers restored or just God and no longer God/man?

 

I just read back through these posts as well and personally I have no problem with what JBH28 has argued. Like I said, "in the same way we might argue that God is 3 but 1, we may also argue He limits his ability while remaining unlimited in ability." I think we should all be in agreement on that point.

If Cliff Lee (major league pitcher) is playing ball with his 5 year old, he certainly has the ability to pitch a 98mph fast ball, but he may choose to lob an under-handed soft pitch to give his son a chance to engage. I believe God can and does the same with us. But, to in any way suggest there is a lack of God's ability is equal to suggesting that Cliff Lee didn't have the ability to pitch a major league fast ball simply because of all the examples of his choosing not to do so.

I hope that helps explain what I mean.

 

IF He set them aside though, during His stay on earth no longer was God, and could not be Saviour fo mankind, as ONLY death of God in person of Jesus could atone for Sins of mankind!

 

The Calvinist: God knows all from beginning to end. He is too big not to know.

The Noncalvinist: God can't know all things. He's too small to know.

 

That is a complete misrepresentation and clearly only intended to inflame. :tear:

 

You do understand that we are now way over both our heads in this discussion? That being said, I don't think His power made Him God. satan has power even though of not his own making. I think God's power is what allows Him to exercise who He is and He set that aside to be man yet God, while He relied on the Father to keep Him and His eternal relationship with the Father is why He is God.

 

I keep asking this and everyone shies away from it with flimsy excuse.
How does God know? Does he look down through history to see or does He ordain (causes) every single event including your hiccups.

 

Yes to both, but there's more.

Time is a part of Creation, part of this physical universe. We experience a moment-by-moment existence. It is not like that in Heaven. Christ is the Alpha and Omega at the "same time." We are seated with Him in heavenly places (Eph. 2:6). We are there "now", though in time we are still waiting for the manifestation of the sons of God.

God sees the future, because He is in the future. He IS the future. And He is in control in the future just as much as He is in control now. Noncalvinists don't believe God is in control now, how can they believe God is in control of the future, or even know it?

 

Your pitching analogy is sort of how I see it. If Cliff Lee threw a 98 MPH pitch to his 5 year old, he could possibly kill the little fella. And this is what I see in Exodus 33. God spoke to Moses face to face, but he limited his glory, otherwise Moses would have dropped dead.

And Moses seemed to know God had limited his glory, as he asked to see it.

Exo 33:18 And he said, I beseech thee, shew me thy glory.

In the next verse we see God speak of his glory, he calls it "all my goodness"

Exo 33:19 And he said, I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the LORD before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will shew mercy on whom I will shew mercy.

So, we see God can sort of turn his glory on or off at will. He said he would "make" all his goodness pass before Moses. But he could not allow Moses to see his face in his glory, or else Moses would die.

Exo 33:20 And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live.

And so, when we read numerous accounts of God appearing to men in the OT, I believe he limited his glory so that those men would not be killed, he limits his power for a purpose.

And this is speculation on my part, but it might also be possible that God limits his knowledge at times for a purpose.

 

Again, a complete and total misrepresentation. Aaron has studied enough to know better.

Jacobus Arminius, another NON-CALVINISTIC SCHOLAR, wrote: "I consider Divine Providence to be "that solicitous, continued, and universally present inspection and oversight of God, according to which he exercises a general care over the whole world, but evinces a particular concern for all his [intelligent] creatures without any exception, with the design of preserving and governing them in their own essence, qualities, actions, and passions, in a manner that is at once worthy of himself and suitable to them, to the praise of his name and the salvation of believers. In this definition of Divine Providence, I by no means deprive it of any particle of those properties which agree with it or belong to it; but I declare that it preserves, regulates, governs and directs all things and that nothing in the world happens fortuitously or by chance. Beside this, I place in subjection to Divine Providence both the free-will and even the actions of a rational creature, so that nothing can be done without the will of God, not even any of those things which are done in opposition to it; only we must observe a distinction between good actions and evil ones, by saying, that "God both wills and performs good acts," but that "He only freely permits those which are evil." Still farther than this, I very readily grant, that even all actions whatever, concerning evil, that can possibly be devised or invented, may be attributed to Divine Providence Employing solely one caution, "not to conclude from this concession that God is the cause of sin." This I have testified with sufficient clearness, in a certain disputation concerning the Righteousness and Efficacy of Divine Providence concerning things that are evil, which was discussed at Leyden on two different occasions, as a divinity-act, at which I presided. In that disputation, I endeavoured to ascribe to God whatever actions concerning sin I could possibly conclude from the scriptures to belong to him; and I proceeded to such a length in my attempt, that some persons thought proper on that account to charge me with having made God the author of sin. The same serious allegation has likewise been often produced against me, from the pulpit, in the city of Amsterdam, on account of those very theses; but with what show of justice such a charge was made, may be evident to any one, from the contents of my written answer to those Thirty-one Articles formerly mentioned, which have been falsely imputed to me, and of which this was one."

Hopefully now Aaron can address what we actually believe rather than attacking straw men that he has erected in order to inflame and undermine brethren who disagree with him regarding his Calvinistic soteriology.

 

So you do not think that jesus was God, the Second person in the Trinity?
That he was always God, but somehow became God will on earth? that he was 'adopted" by God, and made his Son?

 

No. Jesus is and was always God. I believe He just set aside His powers while here as a man. Not adopted just God.