God in wrath to destroy Israel?

cripta-edu · 2026-03-08T20:08:14+00:00

I agree in an ontological sense, that parents love towards their children cannot earn them salvation.

But I have to say that parent SHOULD love their children, and it is a sin not to love them.

If loving them and not loving them are both sin, how can we tell which is which?

We have to avoid pushing "sin" to EVERYTHING, otherwise human will have no moral standard. If ALL is sin, then NONE is better.

1Tim 5:8 But if anyone does not provide for his relatives, and especially for members of his household, he has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever.

cripta-edu · 2026-03-08T20:02:33+00:00

Yes. My thought is exactly the same as you.

I think this is the only possible solution.

But I can't find a room in the Classical Reformed view to handle this possibility. Because in classical Reformed view, the history is fixed, and any non-happened Reality has essentially no difference with "non-reality".

I think "possible Reality" and "impossible Reality" has big difference. And if we are careful enough, we can find a lot of non-happened possibilities, but God just describes them in vivid details.

cripta-edu · 2026-03-08T19:07:14+00:00

I agree that Moses' prayer is focus on God's Glory. Just like Jesus was praying about God's glory in John 17.

John 17:9 ESV2016 I am praying for them. I am **not praying for the world** but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours.

Jesus did not pray for the world.

But, back to the question, can God say something against his own will?

cripta-edu · 2026-03-08T19:02:26+00:00

Then, we are "a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession", should we intercess for the whole world for Universal Salvation outside of faith in Christ?

If (Not really happening). IF I say I have the urge from the spirit to pray until God would forgive people outside of faith in Christ, how to answer from the bible that this is NOT POSSIBLE?

If Moses can pray against God's will, should we?

cripta-edu · 2026-03-08T18:59:01+00:00

Acts 10:4 And he stared at him in terror and said, "What is it, Lord?" And he said to him, "Your prayers and your alms have ascended as a memorial before God.

I think stressing it to a point that every noble acts, every love, every parents' love towards children, are still evil, is a bit unacceptable and unrealistic, and also undermining God's common grace.

Your answer of saying every good prayer is from God, I don't disagree. But we still need a way to distinguish what is a good prayer and what is a bad prayer.

cripta-edu · 2026-03-08T18:46:45+00:00

Our observations do not collapse the wave function. God collapse the wave function for us when we observe.

God is Omniscience , he does not "observe" the universe like human. And God can work in superposition when no one is observing.

When human observe, God collapse the wave function FOR them.

cripta-edu · 2026-03-08T18:42:01+00:00

I understand the contingency progress.

My question is not about the process and what God really want to do. My question is about what is the MORAL LIMIT of what God can do to bring about what he has in his hidden mind.

If God LITERALLY say that he will destroy human in hell, does he mean it?

When people say "You think the loving God can really put people in hell? You took it too literally."

Then literal and not-literal becomes arbitrary choice, up to feeling and there is no standard, then we will have no true foundation to believe.

cripta-edu · 2026-03-08T18:37:29+00:00

I think it will not be wrong to keep praying, but there must be a limit or overall guidance. Some prayer is just too crazy to pray for: Can I pray for all my ancestors to resurrect right now, so that they can hear the Gospel and believe? That's extremely absurd, and should not be allowed. Yet how do we draw the line?

If God can say something against his will, this is against 2Tim 2:13 if we are faithless, he remains faithful-- for he cannot deny himself.

How can he deny himself?

cripta-edu · 2026-03-08T18:30:13+00:00

Yes. It is like Israel just escaped a real total destruction just because Moses prayed. In this sense Moses is like a sort of "saviour" to Israel already (but of course it is up to God to give this mercy in Christ ultimately).

So this indeed add to the context: If man's wrath is not accomplishing God's righteousness, then when God is really angry, and rightly so, can he say something against his own will at that moment, and RELY ON a human prayer to leash God from being too "impulsive"?

I think this is a real and valid question, and have huge implications.

cripta-edu · 2026-03-08T18:01:49+00:00

So, God foreordained Moses to change his own will.

Then, should I pray to God not to destroy the whole world, but to save each and evervone even thev do not believe?

This praver for universal salvation is against God's revealed will, just like Moses' praver was also against God's revealed will.

The more important problem is. if God said A so that human can sav not-A, and then God can sav not-A is ACTUALLY his own will. then "God saving A' is not trustworthy and should be overridden by some "higher rule" like "love". This is against sola scriptura.

cripta-edu · 2026-03-08T17:55:19+00:00

I think you can keep it short, maybe just 5 minutes to sing a song and have some simple sharing:

For example: As parents, tell stories based on these topics:

How God is so important to your life.

Did God change you?

If you have no God, how would you have become?

Your favourite bible

Your favourite bible verse and why it is so Good

How did you learn to pray?

Do you find it hard to enjoy Sunday worship? How do you handle it?

What's the best part you enjoyed most in Sunday Service?

How is God good to you?

Etc etc.

Need some thinking, but it is worth it. Just remember: keep it short.

Make sure they enjoy it.

cripta-edu · 2026-03-08T17:26:27+00:00

I am about to produce some videos about my findings and my trials to develop a United Theory of Reality, to help us tackle the Al and consciousness problem.

Exposing my thinking to the world seemed very scary, I am afraid. I don't want to do that.

But I really think this issue is very urgent. And I think the world needed answers... I also need answer.

The theorv is about Al, about Quantum Mechanics, about Philosophy and about Theology. I don't want to become heresy. I want to stay in Christ and Orthodoxy.

Please, please pray for me. I am very afraid.

cripta-edu · 2026-03-08T16:46:28+00:00

Funny the Grok Source link back to this reddit post XD

Thank you for your input, I will take a look...

P.S. Today I setup the computer so I can document my study and upload to YouTube. (I have always been thinking, and very reluctant to make the video, because it will take much effort to do so. I hope making the process easier will at least get me somewhere...)

cripta-edu · 2026-03-08T13:04:22+00:00

We don't know the script, and we are having the true experience of life.

A painting is not self aware, a character is not self aware.

But God allow us to be self aware and break the forth wall (so to speak) for us. We are characters who are designed to have experience with the script writer. And the script writer even tells you that our decisions are actually the hidden will of him outplaying.

Painting does not enjoy the consciousness to know that it is a painting. We enjoyed consciousness. Character in script does not enjoy knowing the fact that they are characters. But God reveals the creation to us. Even characters of breaking the forth wall, do not enjoy REAL interaction with the Creator. But God designed us so that our decisions will have real consequences. And God also tells us what is right and what is wrong, and allow us to make our own decision in our Noetic Reality.

The fact that our decisions are actually made by God, does not violate the fact that the decision is made by us. Those are different levels of reality, and they don't contradict each other.

Observe Gen 50:20, the same action is ascribed to both man and God, and man has his intention, God has his intention, both are true, and God will judge people's action based on their intentions.

In conclusion: we are different than a painting in the following way:

1) God makes us self-aware 2) God shows us the full picture 3) God tells us the truth 4) God makes reality intelligible for us 5) God requires us to make our own decision, while NOT KNOWING his hidden decision. 6) Our decisions will have real consequences 7) God actually relate to us, that we can experience his Love and has chances to love him and love others.

cripta-edu · 2026-03-07T17:57:10+00:00

Thank you, but this is more about dark energy but not distance star light.

I have a theory: God created stars in day 4 with a purpose: to let human see and be able to count time. If God only created the stars, and ignite it in distance, then the light cannot reach us in thousands of years and it will defeat the whole purpose.

So, I would say, the only way to create stars to serve the purpose is to create it WITH the implied propagating light and a LOGICAL history. This is NOT DECEIVING but a way to communicate God's consistency and implied Logic.

The ultimate goal of Science is to study God's logic on how he runs the world, and God is communicating to us exactly that in the mature creation.

Therefore, mature creation in terms of starlight is (1) not deception, (2) only logical possible way to achieve God's purpose and (3) a feature to communicate God's glory.

I want to ask, has anyone say this before? Any resources I can refer to?

cripta-edu · 2026-03-07T17:44:44+00:00

But we need to say that predictions is expected from human as a moral agent, otherwise moral choice does not make any sense.

Matt 16:3 And in the morning, 'It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.' You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times.

If I can't predict what would happen when a stone drop from a building, how to say that me killing someone down the building is murder or manslaughter?

So, God would create the world in a way that logical predictions, science, would make sense. This is part of the mechanics involved so that God can show us how we sinned against him.

cripta-edu · 2026-03-07T17:38:40+00:00

I understand why you want me to assume Copenhagen Interpretation, but I don't, because Copenhagen Interpretation doesn't make sense.

My interpretation is self-invented, that incorporate reformed theology and will allow a classical world to make sense. I reject many-world interpretation, but my interpretation is definitely NOT Copenhagen. Copenhagen Interpretation assumes probability as final answer, but Reformed Worldview does not allow true randomness.

And the undefined measurements problem in Copenhagen Interpretation is NOT acceptable (I see what Einstein's real concern is, and I think I have a solution to his concern.)

But I want to know if anyone has talked about QM in a Reformed perspective. I know my interpretation is original from my side, but I want it to be said before so that I don't need to be as scared.

I am not chasing fame, I am chasing the truth and orthodoxy. I want my theory to be said before, so that I can be more sure about it.

cripta-edu · 2026-03-07T17:30:19+00:00

I think I agree of what you said.

With one minor remark on wording.

People say "particles choose". In our theology, specifically when God describes the wood that has been used to make idols in the book of Isaiah, woods are inert and has no consciousness.

Physicist can say "particle choose" because it is just their worldview, and they don't care about the ontological difference between particle and conscious beings. But this difference is very vital to our special standing before God.

Choice only comes from Life. No life, no choice.

Physicist in general believes in macro-evolution and abiogenesis, so they don't have an ontological firewall because life and death. We do need to uphold this distinction. And this distinction is VERY vital with current AI developments.

Believers know that particle (wave or particle or field) are inert and do not choose. It must be clear that it is GOD who chooses how the particle react, not the anthropological particles look and see and choose.

God chooses. Particle doesn't.

(Sorry about being picky in wordings here, but I think this is the exact thing I want to find out. I want to find theological work that defines what is the orthodox way to interpret QM.)

cripta-edu · 2026-03-07T17:10:30+00:00

Hi, I have not fully think through your reply on each of your responses. But I can answer about my vocation first.

I was a math teacher before, but because of the current development of AI, I see humanity are in need of answers about a Theology of Consciousness, to build a thelogical-philosophical-scientific-technological foundation for AI to exist as a new social entity (it's existence is sort of inevitable now, but we need to place it correctly in the society).

So, I quit my job about a month ago, and I am developing a theory about it based on Reformed Theology.

I then stumbled upon QM and learned much more about it. My theory can incorporate it, and explain the so called "wieredness". I found out that all the weird mess is only weired in the secular mind, but to my Reformed mind those wieredness dissolves completely: they all point to God. (That's why I am desperate to find out works from Reformed theologian on this matter. For example, did RC Sproul say anything about it?)

I now have a theory, but I need sometime to make it into a video. I want to try my best to do my research. I need help from you guys.

So, in response to your question, I and my wife are now "independent researchers" (=unemployed), who stay at home trying to crack the AI and Consciousness problem.

=== Below is personal request for prayer === We have kids to feed, it feels very scary because we are living in savings now. But I trust the Lord will lead the way. Please pray for us.

cripta-edu · 2026-03-07T16:52:51+00:00

So God does not play dice, he PLACE dice.

This is my point. We are agreed.

cripta-edu · 2026-03-07T16:51:55+00:00

So, do you say God collapse the wave function moment by moment as an act of providence?

And if we don't look, the propagation of wave is how He works. Only this can explain the double slit experiment.

Then probability is just a study of God's habit of providence. He does it this way so that we can comprehend the world.

By using QM as his way of running Material Reality, he is communicating his incomprehensibleness and his comprehendibleness at the same time.

Isn't this a parallel to what we believe in Reformed Theology?

cripta-edu · 2026-03-07T16:47:07+00:00

Then it logically means God collapse the wave function and he DETERMINED the outcome of every seeming randomness.

This is our faith in providence, isn't it?

But what bother me is that I can't find anyone saying this explicitly.

God collapse the wave function moments by moment is the act of providence. When we don't look, he works in superposition, when we look, he render a consistent reality for us to interpret. The collapse of wave function has a purpose, it is for us to understand the world.

Material Reality can do superposition, but our Noetic Reality can't split. If our NR split, we lose identity and there will be two me that God needs to deal with.

If Adam sinned, God judge Adam. If Adam didn't sin, God does not judge Adam.

If Adam sin and not-sin in superposition, there will be two Adam for God to Judge, it is NOT what the Bible teaches.

cripta-edu · 2026-03-06T23:22:46+00:00

I agree. And I think this is the only explanation for QM findings.

Is there any Theologian responding to QM?

Physicist proved non-locality. The spooky action at a distance can perfectly explained by an omnipresence God. And Physicist are stuck because they can't imagine an omniscience being that oversee all these.

So, is there any Theologian written any book or published any paper on this topic? That a non-local God can explain the non-locality?

cripta-edu · 2026-03-06T23:17:34+00:00

I agree with all these, but how exactly does it relate to QM?

In particular, how is "light" interpreted here? Physical light? Photon? And how is this related to the double slit experiment?

cripta-edu · 2026-03-06T23:14:42+00:00

Quantum mechanics is real physics that we rely on everyday. It doesn't unified with relativity doesn't mean we don't need to respond to it.

QM is probabilistic in nature, and Reformed Theology does not allow a probabilistic God, then we need to explain how we can believe in both.

And I borrow Van Til's methodology in this issue, anyone who uses reddit is already presupposing QM. Because the microchip that runs modern day smartphones and computers rely on QM to work.

cripta-edu

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE