Was Jonah a false prophet?

[Guest]

However, no one can know in advance what a free will agent will choose ---not even God.

Is this what is kown as Open Theology?

However, no one can know in advance what a free will agent will choose ---not even God

So Paidion, how did Jesus know Peter would deny him three times before the cock crowed?

Perhaps one would argue that it was not guaranteed that Peter would deny Him? over to you senor Paidon

[Guest]

Yes, I think you have that right, Ely.

Jesus made a prediction and the prediction came true. That fact alone, does not prove that Jesus knew that Peter would deny Him.

Peter had a free will. He could have chosen not to deny Him. But, as is written in another passage, "Jesus knew what was in man".
By knowing Peter's mind and heart, by knowing Peter's tendency to impulsive action, Jesus was is a much better position to correctly predict Peter's actions than any of His contemporaries.

[Guest]

Paidion,

It would be my position that Jesus was infallibly able to predict Peter"s actions. Make sense?

[Guest]

Jesus made a prediction and the prediction came true. That fact alone, does not prove that Jesus knew that Peter would deny Him

Paidion, Statistical probability is really the issue. It's one thing to say "Peter will deny me" although even for that Jesus would have to know that someone would accuse him. But then to know he would deny Jesus THREE times. What are the chances? And then to know that after the third denial the cock would crow, what could the statistical probability of predicting that right be, about one in a million?

[Guest]

Hi Paidion,

Well, I thought there might be more Open Theists at this forum to come to your defense. I am not an Open Theist, but I do not consider it an extreme view. It is actually quite sensible. I just think it fails to answer all the scriptural data. The case of Peter's denials, in particular, has always struck me as the nemesis to this view, and I have never been satisfied with the arguments of Openness on this case.

However, I just wanted to step in and comment on something else that you said, namely, that there is no scripture that suggests that Jonah's prophecy was conditional. In my judgment, Jeremiah 18:7-10 (quoted by Sean, above) clearly declares that Jonah's prophecy, as well as all such prophecies, had conditions implied, though not always stated.

[Guest]

Maybe God already knew that Nineva would repent, but only after God sent Jonah which was part of Gods plan all along. Also couldn't God give someone a prophecy, knowing others would hear it and pray for intervention, which was Gods plan to justify not to bring the prophecy to pass? Doesn't make the person a false prophet just a tool to bring about other parts of Gods plan I would think.

As far as false prophets, wouldn't they be by definitions gaining knowledge from sources e.g. themselves, demons, politics etc. which are not from God.
For example: joseph smith.

Jim

[Guest]

Well, I thought there might be more Open Theists at this forum to come to your defense. I am not an Open Theist, but I do not consider it an extreme view.

Steve, I have no idea what an "Open Theist" is. I would be grateful if you, or someone else should enlighten me.

Paidion, Statistical probability is really the issue. It's one thing to say "Peter will deny me" although even for that Jesus would have to know that someone would accuse him. But then to know he would deny Jesus THREE times. What are the chances? And then to know that after the third denial the cock would crow, what could the statistical probability of predicting that right be, about one in a million?

Steve 7150, I'm not sure of what Jesus actually said. Let's look at a couple of passages:

Mark 14:72 And immediately the cock crowed a second time. And Peter remembered how Jesus had said to him, "Before the cock crows twice, you will deny me three times." And he broke down and wept.

Luke 22:61 And the Lord turned and looked at Peter. And Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how he had said to him, "Before the cock crows today, you will deny me three times."

So which did Jesus say? "Before the cock crows today" or "Before the cock crows twice"? In my opinion, the two accounts are inconsistent and cannot be meaningfully harmonized. These accounts were written long after the events occurred, and so possibly the actual words of Jesus were remembered in different ways.

Is it possible that Jesus said, "Before the cock crows today, you will deny me"? Then Peter actually denied Him three times. And when these events were being remembered by the apostles and related to Mark and Luke, they had thought He had said, "... you will deny me three times"?

Maybe God already knew that Nineva would repent, but only after God sent Jonah which was part of Gods plan all along. Also couldn't God give someone a prophecy, knowing others would hear it and pray for intervention, which was Gods plan to justify not to bring the prophecy to pass? Doesn't make the person a false prophet just a tool to bring about other parts of Gods plan I would think.

Jim, after the fact, one can affirm that "it was all part of God's plan". Some do that for every event that occurs. Thinking in that way helps some people to feel that God is in complete control (He is, but not in that way). It also makes them think that this is the solution to the problem of evil (including extreme pain) in the world. However, this ides, if true, would indicate that God is the author of evil.

[Guest]

I respect the fact that not all agree that prophecy is conditional. If I did believe that, then is it also likely that all, or some part of, communication with God, including covenants and prayers, are conditional in my view?

Thanks,

livingink

[Guest]

Well, I thought there might be more Open Theists at this forum to come to your defense. I am not an Open Theist, but I do not consider it an extreme view.

Steve, I have no idea what an "Open Theist" is. I would be grateful if you, or someone else should enlighten me.

Paidion, here is a website: opentheism.info

I tried to summarize it, but it's a little complicated. This quote actually does a pretty good job...

However, no one can know in advance what a free will agent will choose ---not even God. A statement about the choices of free will agents, such as, "The Ninevites will repent" has no truth value NOW. If it were true now, then the Ninevites would have had no choice. They would have of necessity repented. On the other hand, if it were false now, then the Ninevites would have had no choice. They could not have repented. So this statement (and all other statements) about what free will agents will choose, is neither true nor false NOW. It becomes true or false after the choice is made.

And this is from the article:

What people do and whether they come to trust God makes a difference concerning what God does—God does not fake the story of human history.

[Guest]

Michelle, thank you for pointing me to the openness theology website.
I read about the topic there, and also went to a link which described the books available.

Much of what is taught is exactly my position. I am amazed. I have never encountered anyone with these views. I have developed mine independently.

I see I have much to learn in this area; I will probably purchase some of the books.

Thanks again.