Open Theism Discussion Board

Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > Theological Q&A > (No Subject)

Forum Quick Jump

[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

Surrender
Registered Member

Date Joined Feb 2010
Total Posts : 41

Posted 4/6/2010 2:19 PM (GMT -6)

Doesn't this verse show that God knew before He created man that man would eventually sin? If so, how could man have had the real option of not sinning?

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 4/6/2010 5:07 PM (GMT -6)

Hi Surrender,

It MAY just show that God had come to terms fully with the possibility of suffering for the world in the event sin arose. To create knowing that possibility entails a very real willingness to suffer, and that's no small thing. So Peter's point would be that Christ's suffering was not a last minute choice of an unprepared God who hadn't thought things through from the beginning.

OR one could argue that if evil was a foregone conclusion entailed in the choice to create, it's simply because it is statistically inevitable that given the freedom to do so and enough time and an ever increasing population, sin would inevitably arise at some point. No particular individual's choice is foreknown as certain in its specificity, only THAT sin would arise somehow, somewhere at some time.

Tom

KIXYTΘEMTA

Surrender
Registered Member

Date Joined Feb 2010
Total Posts : 41

Posted 4/6/2010 11:41 PM (GMT -6)

Thanks Tom!

Similitude
Registered Member

Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968

Posted 4/7/2010 6:47 AM (GMT -6)

Some argue that the phrase "katabole kosmon" in the more specifically-timed verse means the Fall. If so, the foreknowledge of Christ's death may only go back that far. In that case, it doesn't imply that God foreknew the Fall or sin.

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 4/7/2010 7:20 AM (GMT -6)

Good point Jeff. There are a few verses that express this idea with “apo” ('from' or 'since') the foundation, like Rev. 13.8 “…whose names were not written in the Lamb’s book of life ‘apo’ (since) the foundation of the world.” But Peter uses “pro” ('before'). So I’m not sure how to avoid thinking Peter’s point is that the foreordaining precedes whatever the ‘foundation’ of the world is. But true, the word ‘katabole’ (used for foundation) can (and I think does) refer to ‘the throwing down’ or ‘disrupting’ of the cosmos, and so the Fall and not the creation, but the “pro” here in Peter would still place the foreordaining prior to that Fall I think.

Tom

KIXYTΘEMTA

Similitude
Registered Member

Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968

Posted 4/7/2010 9:27 PM (GMT -6)

Does the verse imply fore KNOW in the sense of Adam knew his wife? Or fore KNOW in the sense of knowing what will occur in the future? If the former, it may not even be relevant to open theism.

Tom
Registered Member

Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353

Posted 4/7/2010 9:29 PM (GMT -6)

Jeff: Does the verse imply fore KNOW in the sense of Adam knew his wife?

Tom: Can't get sex off your mind can you? Dang.

;o)

KIXYTΘEMTA

Similitude
Registered Member

Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968

Posted 4/7/2010 9:37 PM (GMT -6)

LOL!

Surface Patrol
Registered Member

Date Joined Apr 2007
Total Posts : 13

Posted 5/14/2010 7:19 PM (GMT -6)

Tom,

What do you think of Howard Elseth’s suggestion in Did God Know? that I Peter 1:20 should be translated :

“Who having been previously known (proginosko) in plain view of the disintegration (katabole-chaotic ) of the inhabitants (kosmos), He was manifested in these last times for you. Previously known may refer to the public crucifixion and resurrection, see verse 19, and manifested or revealed may refer to personal salvation, much more work needs to be invested to find the treasure that this verse contains)”

Elseth argues pro can mean in plain view citing Acts “… standing without before (pro) the doors”

and Acts 12:24 “…and told how Peter stood before (pro) the gate”

Tom L.

Similitude
Registered Member

Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968

Posted 5/15/2010 11:21 AM (GMT -6)

“Who having been previously known (proginosko) in plain view of the disintegration (katabole-chaotic ) of the inhabitants (kosmos), He was manifested in these last times for you."

I think it can be even simpler. "Previously known" seems to be contrasted with "manifested in these LAST times." The idea could be that EVEN though he was only recently manifested to them, he had long since been KNOWN by God--and, furthermore, known by God to have been the one that WOULD be manifested FOR them. In other words, God knew ALL ALONG that all was under His benevolent control because of His redemptive plan. What seemed (by superficial appearances), to them, to be nothing but disintegration was known by God, ALL ALONG, to be redeemable. And this is why He could truthfully prophecy that a seed would crush the Serpent's head before the "disintegration," caused by their exile from the garden, even occurred. For He was never counting on mortal humans for the ultimate solution in the first place.

Post Edited (Similtude) : 5/15/2010 11:35:51 AM (GMT-5)

Surrender
Registered Member

Date Joined Feb 2010
Total Posts : 41

Posted 6/26/2010 3:04 PM (GMT -6)

Similitude:
Does the verse imply fore KNOW in the sense of Adam knew his wife? Or fore KNOW in the sense of knowing what will occur in the future? If the former, it may not even be relevant to open theism.

Surrender:
I was thinkin’…this seems reasonable.

Peter writes, “If you address as Father the One who impartially judges according to each one’s work, conduct yourselves in fear during the time of your stay on earth; knowing that you were not redeemed with perishable things like silver or gold from your futile way of life inherited from your forefathers, but with the precious blood, as of a lamb unblemished and spotless, the blood of Christ. For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you.”

In your other post you point out that “previously known” and “manifested in these last times” are contrasted. That even though He was only recently manifested to them, He had long since been known by God. The question is, was He foreknown by God as a sacrifice (i.e. the sacrifice was foreknown) or was He foreknown by God as in fore-loved by God?

I see a contrast in “you were not redeemed with perishable things” with “but with the precious blood.” He is imperishable and foreknown (or fore-loved) before the foundation of the world. He is precious and “has appeared in these last times for the sake of you” (i.e. the imperishable, foreloved One humbled Himself and became a man for the sake of mankind). The focus doesn’t seem so much on the sacrifice (as if the sacrifice was foreknown) but on the imperishable, precious One that humbled Himself in order to manifest Himself for the sake of mankind. Knowing this should generate in us a desire to conduct ourselves with fear during our stay on earth.

Similitude
Registered Member

Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968

Posted 6/27/2010 1:18 PM (GMT -6)

I think you're right, Surrender. Indeed, I implied as much in my earlier post. But we can still see that scripture ties the fact that that Lamb IS the Lamb with "precious blood" precisely because he is the KIND of being that rendered him FORE-LOVED by the Father such that all things were created FOR him. IOW, it is his nature, as deity, that renders his blood PRECIOUS and his character LOVEABLE in the affectionate sense of that word. We are loved in action because God is competent and desirous to RENDER us LOVEABLE in that sense (IOW, God can love us precisely BECAUSE of the Son and his redemptive work--though we know that redemptive work is also inevitable given the Father's nature; the two are dependent, logically). The Son is loveable in the affectionate sense of the term BY NATURE. Thus, he was the only one that could redeem by his blood.

Post Edited (Similitude) : 6/27/2010 1:21:08 PM (GMT-5)

Forum Information

Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 2:58 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads

Need Support? | Forum Help Manual