Does God know the future?

Episode 1535

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Daily Clips and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Does God know the future?

  1. Truth2Freedom says:

    Reblogged this on Truth2Freedom's Blog.

  2. caplawson says:

    So, there is good and bad with this video. The beginning is rough. When you describe the “sovereign view”, you’re actually describing Molinism: God either strongly actualizes (i.e. causes) or weakly actualizes (i.e. permits) everything to occur in the universe. Your quote is almost exactly what Luis Molina said himself, that not a single leaf falls from a tree except that God causes or permits it. I heard a modern Molinist once quip that if Molina were alive today, he would say that not a single quantum particle vibrates except by the causation or permission of God. The explanations were actually quite good! The only quibble that I have is the use of “universe” rather than “possible world” as these are not quite the same thing. Another quibble is that your description seems to implicitly suggest that God “picks” a world with which He can’t interact, which, of course, is quite false. I don’t think that’s what is being said, though. Lastly, I didn’t understand what the signoff was supposed to mean. Are you saying Molinism is false because you don’t find it as comforting as Calvinism? Are you saying that a person’s view on this topic can impact they way they see life? I don’t really understand. I mean, I’m a Molinist and I draw plenty of comfort in the hard times, so, I don’t get the point.

  3. EXPLAINING AWAY MARK 16:16 BY STEVE FINNELL

    Faith only believer want Mark 16:16 to just go away. It will not go away, so they try to explain it away. Over 100 translations of the Bible include Mark 16:16, however, that does deter some faith only believers from insinuating or simply stating that Mark 16:16 should not be including in the Bible because it was missing from a couple of manuscripts. If you believe God has a hand in guiding men to translate the Bible correctly, then have to believe Mark 16:16 should be included. If you do not believe the Bible has been translated accurately, then I would suggest that you burn all of your Bibles.

    EXPLAINING AWAY

    Mark 16:16 He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.

    The most popular way of explaining away Mark 16:16 is to say that it does not say, that he who has not been baptized will be condemned, therefore water baptism is not essential to be saved.

    If a secular law were written as such: He who does not commit robbery and does not murder will not go to prison; but he who commits robbery will go to jail. Would that mean you can still murder and not go to jail; because it does not state murderers will go to jail? NOT MURDERING IS ESSENTIAL TO NOT GOING TO JAIL!

    Being baptized is essential to not being condemned.

    There have been many attempts to explain water baptism away from Mark 16:16, including denying that, and, is a conjunction linking belief and baptism. Many attempts at distorting the simple meaning of words and sentence structure are used. Grammatical distortions are used in order to make Mark 16:16 fit the “faith only” narrative.

    HAS BEEN BAPTIZED SHALL BE SAVED, STILL MEANS WATER BAPTISM IS ESSENTIAL FOR SALVATION NO MATTER HOW MEN TRY TO EXPLAIN IT AWAY.

    YOU ARE INVITED TO FOLLOW MY BLOG. http://steve-finnell.blogspot.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s