|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/13/2008 9:26:12 AM
|
|
|
umcbee
Posts: 1773
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
All you have to do to understand Calvinism is to believe and understand the bible.
Along with the secret Calvinist decoder ring , and the unique ability in textual gymnastics to do more tricks with it than a monkey can do on two miles of grapevine .
_____________________________
kingbee
Never let your education get in the way of your learning.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/13/2008 9:31:34 AM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 7881
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SureHope
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: SureHope
As far as this debate goes, it does not mean loving God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength.
I asked in a recent post, do you sin continuously, or occasionally? When one is NOT sinning, why can't they be loving God with every fiber? As I said, this isn't a "all or nothing" issue.
As I answered, it is with God. He created us for and demands complete undivided love, not love for God some of the time and sinful lusts the rest of the time.
This does not answer my question to you.
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
You are the only one in control of your sinning or not sinning. You can’t blame it on Adam or say, “the devil made me do it.” If you were more than willing to stop sinning you would stop sinning.
I blame my sin nature for my sin, as Paul did in Rom 6 and 7. Your last statement here indicates you do not understand the sin nature. I don't want to sin, but my sin nature does. There is a constant battle between my sin nature and my human spirit, as Paul noted.
Paul did not blame sin on sin nature in Rom 6, What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? (Rom 6:1-2 ESV)
Why did you stop at v.2? What about v.11-13? Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus. Therefore (conclusion) do NOT let sin reign in your mortal body that you should obey its lusts, and do NOT go on presenting the members of your body to sin...".
Do you see who is the "cause" of sin here? It is when we "go on presenting our bodies to sin". We are commanded to "not let sin reign" in our bodies. And we are not to continue presenting ourselves to sin.
And that is my point exactly. The cause of sin is when you present your body to sin. You are commanded to not let sin reign in your body. The question, should we continue in sin is answered concisely – “By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it?” There is no room for excusing sin to sin nature here as you have done. Paul is clear – “stop sinning because you have died to the sin nature.” Man is the one who decides to sin or not sin. The only reason man sins is because he wants to. I understand that a genuine Christian does not want to sin, but is tempted to sin. Temptation to sin only becomes sin when the person agrees that it is more desirable to sin than walk in holiness. Man is responsible for his sin and cannot blame it on sin nature.
The origin of our sins comes from our sin nature. That was my only point. Of course we ourselves are responsible for our sins.
quote:
quote:
quote:
Paul was calling on the will of Christians to stop sinning and live righteously. He is not saying that Christians have an excuse for their sin, quite the opposite. No one makes you sin but yourself. You have free will, remember?
Are you saying Paul's command cannot be obeyed by believers? He said to not "go on presenting our bodies to sin".
I am saying quite the opposite. You said, “I blame my sin nature for my sin,” to which Paul would say, “if you have died with Christ you are no longer under the power of the sin nature, so don’t sin.” My point is that you are responsible for your sin; you are the one who chooses to do so or not. If you are a genuine Christian you have died to the realm of sin and are alive unto God. You cannot blame your sin nature, but only yourself for sinning. You are responsible, you have free will.
There you go. Yes, we do. My point all along.
quote:
quote:
You've offered your opinion. Thanks. But I'm interested in what Scripture says. I find nothing that suggests that God is expecting continuous holiness. The command to be holy doesn't demand continuously. We can be holy, and God expects us to be holy. And, as we grow in grace, we WILL sin less and less. That IS God's expectation. I believe that is the point of 2 Pet 3:18, "but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ."
As the believer grows spiritually, he spends more time being holy than being sinful. That's the point.
Remember, the topic of discussion is to what purpose did God create man and does man fulfill that purpose in and of himself.
If you are staying with the topic your statement above shows you are saying that God created man to be holy on a part time basis. In other words, you are saying that God created man to sin. God demands complete holiness not part time holiness. Man in and of himself has and will never attain to the holiness of God. That is the reason Christ Jesus had to die and be raised from the dead; in order for us to be justified by faith based upon the work of Christ, not our sanctification.
No, not a "part time basis". But that is the reality of human life, which God fully knows. Part of God's gift to man includes holiness in heaven. That is what we are to be conformed to. Will we achieve it here on earth? No, but we will in heaven.
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Ah, and my point is that no believer sins continuously. So, what are believers doing when they aren't sinning? Why can't you accept that when believers aren't sinning, they are able to love God with every fiber?
Again, God created man to love Him continuously, not in starts and spurts.
For that, I need Scriptural support, not an opinion.
LOL. Give me Scripture that supports your theory that God created man to have part time love towards Him and therefore, part time sin. Show me from Scripture that God created man to love Him part of the time and sin the rest of the time.
Your argument is baseless. If man shows such love even for a time, that in itself demonstrates that man CAN do what God created him to do. So, your pov of "all or nothing" is groundless.
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Indeed, there is not a righteous man on earth who continually does good and who never sins. (Ecclesiastes 7:20 NASB95)
Exactly my point! It isn't "all or nothing". We all sin, but we don't sin continuously. What are we doing when we aren't sinning?
We can be thankful for God's grace alone. God's Law requires 100% obedience, which translates into continously loving Him.
I've never seen the phrase "100% obedience" in Scripture. Where do you find it? I think you are injecting your opinion here.
LOL!!! So, you think that man was created to obey God some of the time and sin the rest of the time? I think your opinion has taken you down a theological dead end.
Even when man obeys God "some of the time" demonstrates man's ability to do that. Seems your pov is that man is totally unable to obey God even for a short time? iow, it appears you pov is that man continuously sins (even believers) and no one ever obeys God. The FACT that man doesn't sin continuously and DOES obey God demonstrates man's ability to do so.
quote:
I agree, as Christians we grow and are changed from glory to glory. A genuine Christian will sin less and less, but the more he matures he will see the extent of his sinful attitudes that he was not aware of before. Maturity brings humility because of a more acute sense of our offensive attitudes, affections, thoughts, etc.
And when said Christian will "sin less and less", what is he doing the "the other times"? How about bing holy and obedient? That demonstates man is capable of doing that.
quote:
But back to my point, the fact that we are being transformed from glory to glory shows that we are not perfected as of yet, therefore, we do not love perfectly as God deserves and God requires. This shows us graphically that man does not fulfill God’s purpose in creating man in and of himself.
Man is perfected only through the Holy Spirit. But, unless man is willing to be "filled" and to "walk by means of the spirit, man cannot do any of these things.
quote:
The point I was making is that man was created to love God with all his heart, mind, soul and strength. He was not created to love God on a part time basis and sin the rest of the time. That is blasphemous. Man was not created to sin, but to love God continuously, to be holy continuously, to glorify Him continuously. Part time love, part time holiness and part time giving glory to God belittles God and dishonors Him.
It is your misudnerstanding of my pov that leads you to use the "part time" phrase. It's not my phrase. My point is that when man isn't sinning, he is fulfilling what God commands.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/13/2008 9:36:49 AM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 7881
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SureHope
Seeking to know someone shows that you don't know them yet. The reason that we do not know God is because of Sin. We have chosen to go our own way. God created man to live for the glory of God. Man has chosen to live for the glory of self and thus has separated himself from God. Seeking God is not the primary purpose of man; it is to live for the glory of God. Seeking only comes after being separated and thus not knowing. Loving God and glorifying Him is the reason for man being created. Seeking God comes only after the Fall.
I agree with all of this.
quote:
quote:
quote:
Our sin has separated us from God, thus we don’t know God in truth and thus the need to seek Him. It is only sinners (all of us) who have a need to seek God.
That's true. And that's why God made Himself evident to us; so we would seek Him.
That is not what Romans 1 states. Paul says there that God has made Himself evident to us, but in spite of this man has not honored Him or given thanks to Him and is therefore without excuse and deserves the wrath of God. There is no mention of seeking God in Romans 1; that is not the point at all.
There doesn't have to be "mention" of it for it to exist. We disagree but "honoring God as God and being thankful" are what those who seek God DO. Because we disagree, what is the point of further discussion?
quote:
You being convinced of this has no biblical warrant. I could twist any scripture to mean what I wanted by using your technique demonstrated in your attempt to make "honoring God and giving thanks" to mean "seeking God". That is the fundamental flaw of your whole Cornelius theory.
How do you imagine it looks like to "seek God"?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/13/2008 9:43:07 AM
|
|
|
FreeGrace
Posts: 7881
Joined: 12/30/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Carico
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
What I have found to be meaningless is the calvinistic pov in light of John 8:24.
All you have to do to understand Calvinism is to believe and understand the bible. 
Then WHY have you not been helpful in explaining WHY Jesus told a crowd of the so-called "non-elect that they would die in their sins UNLESS UNLESS UNLESS they belived in Him?
Can the so-called "non-elect" even believe?
Did Christ die for the so-called "non-elect"?
Will the so-called "non-elect" avoid dying in their sin IF they do what JesusTOLD them to do?
If they will still die in their sin, then WHY WHY WHY did Jesus tell them to believe in Him in order to avoid dying in their sins?
How come none of the calvinists have provided an answer to the WHY questions?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/13/2008 9:43:51 AM
|
|
|
umcbee
Posts: 1773
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: KingJamesBond
umcbee,
quote:
Maybe you can explain too me , why under Calvinism is the above Scripture meaningfull ? After all , it serves the devil no purpose in prowling around in seeking anyone to devour : he can't deceive the elect ; there is no need to deceive the reprobate ; God has already condemned them to hell before the foundation of the world . God filled hell with souls even before Satan entered the Garden of Eden , heck , even before the foundation of the world . And since the elect (individually elected before the foundation of the world) are guaranteed salvation , the devil can have no affect on their salvation whatsoever . Under Calvinist theology , God has already done all the devil's work for him : the reprobate don't need deceiving because there's no way they can ever be saved to begin with ; and the elect can never be deceived out of salvation .
So what can possibly be the devil's point in seeking anyone to devour ? Or maybe he just don't believe in Calvinism either ?
Like I posted;
4When he has brought out all his own, he goes on ahead of them, and his sheep follow him because they know his voice.
5But they will never follow a stranger; in fact, they will run away from him because they do not recognize a stranger's voice."
6Jesus used this figure of speech, but they did not understand what he was telling them.
and'
25Jesus answered, "I did tell you, but you do not believe.
The miracles I do in my Father's name speak for me, 26but you do not believe because you are not my sheep.
27My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me.
28I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand.
29My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand.
30I and the Father are one."
KJB
How does any of the Scripture you posted interpret 1 Peter 5:8 in light of Calvinism .
Here is the Scripture in question : Be sober , be vigilant ; because your adversary the devil , as a roaring lion , walketh about seeking whom he may devour :
Here again is the question :Maybe you can explain too me , why under Calvinism is the above Scripture meaningfull ? After all , it serves the devil no purpose in prowling around in seeking anyone to devour : he can't deceive the elect ; there is no need to deceive the reprobate ; God has already condemned them to hell before the foundation of the world . God filled hell with souls even before Satan entered the Garden of Eden , heck , even before the foundation of the world . And since the elect (individually elected before the foundation of the world) are guaranteed salvation , the devil can have no affect on their salvation whatsoever . Under Calvinist theology , God has already done all the devil's work for him : the reprobate don't need deceiving because there's no way they can ever be saved to begin with ; and the elect can never be deceived out of salvation .
So what can possibly be the devil's point in seeking anyone to devour ?
Next question : What is the point under Calvinism for this warning about the devil from Peter ?
_____________________________
kingbee
Never let your education get in the way of your learning.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/13/2008 10:01:43 AM
|
|
|
umcbee
Posts: 1773
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Carico
quote:
ORIGINAL: umcbee
SH ,
quote:
LOL!!! So, you think that man was created to obey God some of the time and sin the rest of the time? I think your opinion has taken you down a theological dead end.
Correct me if I'm wrong : but does not Calvinism teach that God created some men to do nothing but sin all the time (the reprobate) , and the elect who will only sin some of the time ?
I'm correcting you so I hope you'll listen this time. Romans 9:22, "What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath-prepared for destruction? What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of His mercy, whom he prepared in advance for his glory-even us whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?"
That's what God says. Calvinists didn't write the bible. We just believe it as written. And that's what you first have to understand so you will know that our struggle is not against flesh and blood. It's between what God says and what Satan says. Satan always disagrees with God's Word.
So I showed you what God says because it's in the bible. Now here's what Satan says who disagrees with God.
"God wouldn't prepare anyone for destruction. The god I love isn't sovereign. He let's humans decide who should go to heaven and who should go to hell because humans know better the hearts of men than God does." Sorry, that's not a sovereign god. That's the god that humans make-up, a god who'll give humans everything they want. That's called human love, not God's love, because it's self-serving.
I don't have any problem with what Scripture has to say : I do have a problem that Calvinism attempts to isolate one or two verses from a three chapter context (Romans 9-11) , that when taken in its entire three chapter context , leads directly away from Calvinism's interpretation of the self (Calvinism) serving selected verses .
And its impossible to have the correct interpretation of what God says in Romans 9 without taking Romans 10 and 11 into the context .
All you've done in answering me is give a text without the context , and that is commonly known as a pretext .
_____________________________
kingbee
Never let your education get in the way of your learning.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/13/2008 11:34:24 AM
|
|
|
SureHope
Posts: 1621
Joined: 3/11/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: umcbee
SH ,
quote:
LOL!!! So, you think that man was created to obey God some of the time and sin the rest of the time? I think your opinion has taken you down a theological dead end.
Correct me if I'm wrong : but does not Calvinism teach that God created some men to do nothing but sin all the time (the reprobate) , and the elect who will only sin some of the time ?
Not that I know of. Do you have any quotes?
_____________________________
-Fix Your Hope Completely on the Grace to be Brought to You at the Revelation of Jesus Christ (1 Pet 1:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/13/2008 12:32:08 PM
|
|
|
SureHope
Posts: 1621
Joined: 3/11/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: SureHope
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: SureHope
As far as this debate goes, it does not mean loving God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength.
I asked in a recent post, do you sin continuously, or occasionally? When one is NOT sinning, why can't they be loving God with every fiber? As I said, this isn't a "all or nothing" issue.
As I answered, it is with God. He created us for and demands complete undivided love, not love for God some of the time and sinful lusts the rest of the time.
This does not answer my question to you.
You either did not make clear your question or did not read my answer very closely.
It is an all or nothing issue with God. In the day that you sin you will die. One moment of not loving God with every fiber of your being makes you worthy of the eternal wrath of God. This in fact shows that God's expectation is "full time" obedience, not "part time." Man has not been willing and thus not able to obey this command and thus all are worthy of eternal damnation.
quote:
The origin of our sins comes from our sin nature. That was my only point. Of course we ourselves are responsible for our sins.
And my point is that all men are free to choose that which they prefer. All men have preferred sin over God and are worthy of His eternal wrath. What God has created man to fulfill, no man has been willing and thus has not been able to fulfill.
quote:
quote:
You said, “I blame my sin nature for my sin,” to which Paul would say, “if you have died with Christ you are no longer under the power of the sin nature, so don’t sin.” My point is that you are responsible for your sin; you are the one who chooses to do so or not. If you are a genuine Christian you have died to the realm of sin and are alive unto God. You cannot blame your sin nature, but only yourself for sinning. You are responsible, you have free will.
There you go. Yes, we do. My point all along.
Good! Then you agree that all men choose that which they prefer and all men have chosen sin over honoring God. For all have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of God. God has made us to be holy and has commanded us to be holy (not part time, but full time). None have done this, all have fallen away, and all have preferred sin over honoring God.
quote:
quote:
Remember, the topic of discussion is to what purpose did God create man and does man fulfill that purpose in and of himself.
If you are staying with the topic your statement above shows you are saying that God created man to be holy on a part time basis. In other words, you are saying that God created man to sin. God demands complete holiness not part time holiness. Man in and of himself has and will never attain to the holiness of God. That is the reason Christ Jesus had to die and be raised from the dead; in order for us to be justified by faith based upon the work of Christ, not our sanctification.
No, not a "part time basis". But that is the reality of human life, which God fully knows. Part of God's gift to man includes holiness in heaven. That is what we are to be conformed to. Will we achieve it here on earth? No, but we will in heaven.
Yes, we will in heaven. But God has created man to give glory to Him here on earth and all men have refused to do so. None have been willing and thus able to love God entirely, be holy before Him, and be perfect as He commands. God does not command us to be perfect some of the time, but all of the time. Thus the need for God's saving grace in Christ Jesus. All this proves that man has been unwilling, thus unable to fulfill the purpose for which God has created Him, without the grace of God. All have sinned - all have dishonored God. None have been willing in and of themselves to live up to the purpose that God has created them for - none, no, not one.
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
quote:
Ah, and my point is that no believer sins continuously. So, what are believers doing when they aren't sinning? Why can't you accept that when believers aren't sinning, they are able to love God with every fiber?
Again, God created man to love Him continuously, not in starts and spurts.
For that, I need Scriptural support, not an opinion.
LOL. Give me Scripture that supports your theory that God created man to have part time love towards Him and therefore, part time sin. Show me from Scripture that God created man to love Him part of the time and sin the rest of the time.
Your argument is baseless. If man shows such love even for a time, that in itself demonstrates that man CAN do what God created him to do. So, your pov of "all or nothing" is groundless.
My argument is not baseless at all. God did not create man with the purpose to "love even for a time," but to love Him without sin. This is not groundless, but supported by Scripture. Remember, "all have sinned." All have gone their own way. None have fulfilled God's purpose for mankind - in and of man's ability that is.
quote:
The FACT that man doesn't sin continuously and DOES obey God demonstrates man's ability to do so.
This would be true if God had created man for the purpose spurts of obedience surrounded by a life of sin. That was not God's purpose for creating man. Did God create man to sin? No. He created man for His glory - that man would love Him, delight in Him and enjoy Him forever. Man has been unwilling to fulfill this end and has shown himself unable to fulfill it. Living perfectly for 1 minute (if any has done this at all) is not living up to God's standards. Only Christ Jesus the Lord has been willing and able to obey God perfectly. Man is in need of God’s grace from beginning to end.
quote:
quote:
I agree, as Christians we grow and are changed from glory to glory. A genuine Christian will sin less and less, but the more he matures he will see the extent of his sinful attitudes that he was not aware of before. Maturity brings humility because of a more acute sense of our offensive attitudes, affections, thoughts, etc.
And when said Christian will "sin less and less", what is he doing the "the other times"? How about bing holy and obedient? That demonstates man is capable of doing that.
God is at work within Christians both to will and do of His good pleasure. That does not take away the fact that no man in and of himself has ever been willing and thus able to fulfill God's purpose for creating him.
quote:
quote:
But back to my point, the fact that we are being transformed from glory to glory shows that we are not perfected as of yet, therefore, we do not love perfectly as God deserves and God requires. This shows us graphically that man does not fulfill God’s purpose in creating man in and of himself.
Man is perfected only through the Holy Spirit. But, unless man is willing to be "filled" and to "walk by means of the spirit, man cannot do any of these things.
My point exactly. Man in and of himself will never fulfill the purpose for which God has created him - which includes seeking Him. Just as God has created man for His glory and no one has lived for His glory (all have sinned), so man should seek God, but does not, unless God grace works within the heart of man.
quote:
It is your misudnerstanding of my pov that leads you to use the "part time" phrase. It's not my phrase. My point is that when man isn't sinning, he is fulfilling what God commands.
No misunderstanding on my part. God's command is full time, not part time. Even if someone was able to love God perfectly for one minute but is sinful (as we all are) the rest of the time, this person has not fulfilled God's command or purpose. God did not create man to love Him for a portion of his life, but all of his life. If man were able to fulfill God's purpose and command there would be no need for redemption in Christ. Man has proven that even though he has free will to choose that which he prefers, he has preferred sin and thus has chosen sin over God. All have done this which proves that all men are unwilling and unable to fulfill that which God has created them for and commanded of them.
_____________________________
-Fix Your Hope Completely on the Grace to be Brought to You at the Revelation of Jesus Christ (1 Pet 1:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/13/2008 12:43:43 PM
|
|
|
SureHope
Posts: 1621
Joined: 3/11/2007
Status: offline
|
FG,
quote:
quote:
You being convinced of this has no biblical warrant. I could twist any scripture to mean what I wanted by using your technique demonstrated in your attempt to make "honoring God and giving thanks" to mean "seeking God". That is the fundamental flaw of your whole Cornelius theory.
How do you imagine it looks like to "seek God"?
How I imagine what "seeking God" looks like is not the issue. The issue is what the apostle Paul actually wrote in Romans 1. You have to fabricate “seeking” into the passage because it just is not there.
If Paul's point was seeking God he would have said that plainly. He did not say,
"For although they knew God, they did not seek him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened."
But instead, he said,
For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. (Rom 1:21 ESV)
God has revealed himself to all men through creation, but men have chosen not to honor Him as God or give thanks to Him.
This is the plain meaning of the text, which does not include a hint of seeking God. You have not proved otherwise so the plain meaning of the text should be accepted.
_____________________________
-Fix Your Hope Completely on the Grace to be Brought to You at the Revelation of Jesus Christ (1 Pet 1:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/13/2008 1:00:21 PM
|
|
|
bob97
Posts: 1960
Joined: 6/24/2006
From: Kansas
Status: offline
|
What in the world is Paul telling us here in Galatians? Could it be that God actually did call him before his birth?
But even before I was born, God chose me and called me by His marvelous grace. Then it pleased Him to reveal His Son to me so that I would proclaim the Good News about Jesus to the Gentiles. When this happened, I did not rush out to consult with any human being. (Gal 1:15-16) NLT
But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace, To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: (Gal 1:15-16) KJV
Bob
_____________________________
The LORD clears the road for me!
The LORD is my high ridge, my stronghold, my deliverer!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/13/2008 1:51:00 PM
|
|
|
shemaromans
Posts: 3877
Joined: 3/30/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: umcbee
quote:
ORIGINAL: FreeGrace
quote:
ORIGINAL: shemaromans
With all due respect, I think your claim is not only a huge generalization of many individuals, it's also false. Just because the FW camp interprets the Bible differently, it doesn't mean that they don't believe it.
We need to be careful with the words that we choose.
shemaromans, I would like to thank you for your honesty and integrity to stand up to one of your own. You have my complete admiration for what you've done here. The other calvinists have only further encouraged Carico in his/her false claims.
Again, thank you from the bottom of my heart.
Add me to that also , AMEN !
FG and bee,
Thank you for stating your appreciation, but I was just doing what we all should do. Regardless of our doctrinal stances, we're all brothers and sisters in Christ. Given the intensity of some of these discussions, it's important that we all remember our common bond.
"So if there is any encouragement in Christ, any comfort from love, any participation in the Spirit, any affection and sympathy, complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. Do nothing from rivalry or conceit, but in humility count others more significant than yourselves. Let each of you look not only to his own interests, but also to the interests of others. Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was inthe form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."
Phil 2:1-11
_____________________________
"But as for me, it is good to be near God." Psalm 73:28
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/13/2008 2:16:39 PM
|
|
|
shemaromans
Posts: 3877
Joined: 3/30/2007
Status: offline
|
FG,
quote:
How powerful would the gospel be if Jesus never uttered the words that show the path to salvation? How powerful would the words of the gospels be if they couldn’t quote Jesus? Aren’t words more powerful when they come from the source?
quote:
This statement seems to be in conflict with your own theology. Since our view is that God chose "from before the foundation of the world" certain ones (elect) to believe, and planned to regenerate them so they could believe, isn't it a guaranteed outcome that all the elect are going to believe?
Yes, but how will they know what to believe if no one ever tells them?
quote:
3a. (ignoring for a minute the dispute as to the means in which salvation comes to pass) Because scripture (Romans 10:14-17) tells us that God chose to reveal the truth about salvation through speaking and hearing.
quote:
But, what is the point of telling a so-called "non-elect" that UNLESS they believed in Him, they would die in their sins? Can you answer this?
I just did (again) above.
quote:
3b. (ignoring for a minute the dispute as to our ability to choose) Because scripture tells us that we must know the truth in order to believe. How can we (RT or FW) know the truth if it’s never stated? We wouldn’t know what the options of our choices are.
quote:
That seems a bit contradictory. The RT pov is that "we must be regenerated in order to believe", is it not? iow, the truth WILL be given to the regenerated elect so they WILL believe. Your statement here seems to contradict that.
It doesn't contradict. The truth is the truth, and the truth is given through the gospel. The elect will be given the ability to believe the truth through regeneration by the Holy Spirit. Because of this regeneration taking place first, we're able to understand the gospel and choose God.
quote:
Let's speculate a bit, since you admit you've had to do some already. Let's say one of the "non-elect" in that group did believe in Jesus. But, being "non-elect", Jesus didn't die for him. Now, he did what Jesus said to do to avoid dying in his sin. Would his belief in Christ keep him from dying in his sins, or not?
What does your theology answer to that question?
The RT pov asserts that man does not possess the moral ability to choose God prior to regeneration. Based on this assertion, your speculation cannot materialize. Assuming that it did, then the RT pov would assert that the person was a member of the elect to begin with. 
quote:
I've been totally fair, and I am not inaccurate when I say you haven't answered the WHY question. Free will theology gives a very easy and obvious answer to the WHY question, but that answer offends the reformed.
I apologize if I offended you with the fairness comment. Apparently, we just see things differently. 
quote:
Since you reject the answer from free will, answer the WHY question.
I did. You just don't agree with my answer.
Consider this passage:
"When Jesus had said these things, he departed and hid himself from them. Though he had done so many signs before them, they still did not believe in him, so that the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled:
"Lord, who has believed what he heard from us,
and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?"
Therefore they could not believe. For again Isaiah said,
"He has blinded their eyes
and hardened their heart,
lest they see with their eyes,
and understand with their heart, and turn,
and I would heal them."
Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory and spoke of him. Nevertheless, many even of the authorities believed in him, but for fear of the Pharisees they did not confess it, so that they would not be put out of the synagogue; for they loved the glory that comes from man more than the glory that comes from God.
"And Jesus cried out and said, "Whoever believes in me, believes not in me but in him who sent me. And whoever sees me sees him who sent me. I have come into the world as light, so that whoever believes in me may not remain in darkness. If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. The one who rejects me and does not receive my words has a judge; the word that I have spoken will judge him on the last day. For I have not spoken on my own authority, but the Father who sent me has himself given me a commandment—what to say and what to speak. And I know that his commandment is eternal life. What I say, therefore, I say as the Father has told me.""
Obviously, Jesus was obeying God's command and saying what God told him to say. Jesus was also fulfilling prophecy (which I spoke of earlier in answer to your question). I know that doesn't specifically answer your question point blank, but it makes sense in light of more scripture and the sovereignty of God to do as he wishes to realize his plans. This leads into my question for you below that addresses the "easy and obvious answer" to your question that you claim that the FW camp can offer.
God knows in advance who will be saved whether you are Arminian or Calvinist or Free Will or whatever. Since he already knows, since he knows the outcome from the beginning of time, what would be the reason for Jesus to preach in any of these systems?
_____________________________
"But as for me, it is good to be near God." Psalm 73:28
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/13/2008 3:23:25 PM
|
|
|
Eric B
Posts: 61
Joined: 11/22/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: kelman
quote:
ORIGINAL: EricB
quote:
ORIGINAL: kelman
You say God "wouldn't have to" but the point is He did. We see the prophesy concerning Judas in the OT(Psalm 41:9). Obviously, none of the other wicked would qualify. If a prophecy is certain to happen then it must be ordained. That actually doesn't specify the individual soul Judas. Anyone could have fallen into that place. The point is Jesus said He chose the Twelve knowing one of them was a traitor and that it was prophesied that that would be the case. That is pretty specific. quote:
I was talking about how God held Judas, et al, responsible for their sin of murder regardless of the fact that God determined the Crucifixion. quote:
Well, then you explain how God determined the Crucifixion with Judas still freely choosing the sin and held accountable by God for it? That doesn't mean he was entrapped into being a devil (God made him do it, and "withheld" something from him). He was already at that level when christ chose them. There were many Jews wou wanted the Messiah-King so much (for their own selfish reasons), that they would have betrayed Christ to try to force Him to rise up and take power (which is what Judas' betray is believed to be).
quote:
I realize God doesn't do everything exactly as He did in the OT but I don't see why you think "we would all be lost". People in the OT were saved precisely as we are. Isn't salvation something that came with Christ? I mentioned the comparison between the testaments, because sometimes we get into using the harshness of the OT to justify some "tough" doctrine we are projecting in the NT. But the NT is supposed to be "good news". It everything is the same as it was back then, what was Christ for, then?
quote:
quote:
And now you've jumped back again. For "before they were born" says nothing about them going to Heaven or Hell. It is about them being chosen to bring forth the nation of God's people and the Messiah. Well, it certainly does say something about God speaking individually of two people. And, then it does go on to say something about them "going to heaven". God spoke individually of each - one he loved, one he hated; and, those God love go to heaven. Jacob was chosen individually just as Abraham and Isaac were individually chosen before him. And that's where the jump lies. "Loved"="going to Heaven". You're taking "love" out of it's context, and making it the same as it is used in contexts specifically talking about who goes to Heaven, when in this context, it is about the "choosing" of the nations that would come from them, and not about their own entry into Heaven. quote:
quote:
quote:
Still, I don't think generally God gives "false" faith. Man does a good enough job of that himself. I say generally because we do see God sends a false delusion in 2Thes 2:11. And that isn't to people who "thought" they had faith. I disagree, it is absolutely to those who thought they had faith. They perished because they believed the lies of Satan. This isn't talking about the "world" but about the church. It speaks of a falling away from the truth of the Gospel in the churches "so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God." Well, it comes down to a matter of different interpretation. "Temple" refers to Jewish worship. There are the preterist interpretations, which claim this was in AD70; the futurist intepretations which claim it is a yet future "restored temple" of the Jews, and then, the other views, which spiritualize "Temple" as "the Church". (and Reformed I see often go either with preterism of the middle view; usually a-mill and post-mill). Those apocalyptic statements, I would think are more for the Jews. So these are people who reject Christ, though they think they worship God. Not the same as whom Calvin and modern Lordship advocates say are decieved into false assurance of Christ.
quote:
quote:
the reformists might as well just end it by going on and confessing that God is in fact taunting the non-elect. Why? Then you'd have to say Christ spent His entire ministry "taunting" because that is precisely how He taught. It's all really quite silly because it proves nothing about free will - nothing whatsoever....don't even know why it was brought up to begin with. Why not? It's all about "God's Glory", and much of His glory comes from roasting vessels of wrath. Since man deserves nothing but wrath (and the Potter had the right to create them that way), Jesus comes to "justly" taunt them with that wrath in this lifetime (before they then go into eternity), and then save a few out if it. It fits perfectly with the grand view monergists have set up
quote:
quote:
Goes right along with Calvin's "God giving false faith", and now people say he was wrong on that. Perhaps not as wrong as I first thought after reading 2Thes 2.
quote:
Why do the Reformists seem to be avoiding owning up to all of this? Perhaps the same reason non-Calvinists reject the entire doctrine altogether? So far, I really don't see anything you've presented that needs to be "owned-up to". Well, it looks like on one hand, you're still kind of shying away from it by questioning the idea of Jesus spending his entire ministry taunting. Yet, it looks like you're reconsidering part of it, as you just said regarding 2 Thess.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/13/2008 3:32:03 PM
|
|
|
Diolectic
Posts: 644
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Iowa
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: SovereignIsHe
quote:
ORIGINAL: Diolectic
Read Job 1 - 2
God proved Job would not curse him to His face no matter what(Job 1:12)
You are missing the point... Satan isn't taught a lesson here, he already knows what is and isn't, he used the situation to do all the evil he could, which was what God would allow him to do... If satan knew, he wouldn't have said, "Does Job fear God for nothing?"
&
"Skin for skin, yea, all that a man has will he give for his life."
Satan actualy thought these what he said.
quote:
The insight to this is for our benefit and clearly shows that God is control of all facetts of His creation, even Satan... That is a wrather demented way to show us what we already know.
We already know that God has control of all facetts of His creation, even Satan...
Your theology/doctrine sounds as if God has absolutely no regard for the sentient beings HE created.
All creation are, but only pawns in a game of solitaire.
To you, we do not have a father-son, husband-wife, servant-master relationship. According to your theology/doctrine, it is only a relationship of God-pawn, God-tool, God-purpose God-vessel...ect...
quote:
quote:
Do you actually know that God's sovereignty only means "Ultimate authority, and all are accountable to Him?
It sounds as if you think it means ultimate control and cause of everything If He is truly the ultimate authority and all are accountable to Him that means He's in control of everything. What can be out of His control? If something it out of His control He's not ultimate authority, and something or someone isn't accountable to Him... Actually HE has everything under control, see the difference?
Under Control is when there are variables(man & his free will) which is not controled, but they can not leave the bounds which have been set when they stray from favorable positions/conditions.
Like a controled fire.
Firemen do not control every like of flame, but they have it under control so it will not leave the set boundries.
However, if God controls everything, that would mean GOD made man to sin, for HE controls even us, everything.
Is this whatnyou mean?
quote:
quote:
I said that man comes to the truth by another.
That is what "someone needed to tell you the truth" means.
Actually you said the following...
It is after one obeys & submits to the responsibilities, then He receives the spirit for assistance to keep living a holy life in sanctification.
Which I asked....
Why does one need the Spirit after they already obey and submit? I told you the reasons why one needs the Spirit after they already obey and submit.
It is for assistance to keep living a holy life in sanctification. That is what a Comforter & Helper does.
Furthermore, He teaches us & brings us into the truth, as opposed to some one else needing us to tell us when we first heard the Gosple & repented.
Also as a seal & assursnce of salvation.
Is there anything wrong with that?
Is there more? what am I missing?
quote:
If one can raise themselves from the pit of sin surely they can keep out of it and move on...
And you've avoided since... I never said that we are supposed to raise ourselves from the pit of sin.
We are commanded ask God to raise us from the pit of sin, by obediance of repentance and faith in Him.
quote:
quote:
I know it isn't happen.
I'm asking if God's power could be shown in Pharaoh yielding.
It don't matter if it happened or not, but the possibility.
Tell me How God's power couldn't be shown in Pharaoh yielding? There really isn't a point to asking "what if" How about we deal with what God did do... God judged pharaoh.
You say God created Pharaoh is a vessel of wrath, being born a vessel of wrath.
If that is true, pharaoh was doing God's will all his life by doing things worthy of wrath.
God's will for pharaoh is to disobey the verbal commands of God.
God's will for pharaoh is to have a hard heart.
Pharaoh was doing God's will all his life.
Pharaoh was doing God's will by having a hard heart.
This is the purpose in which God created Pharaoh.
This would make pharaoh's life worthy to be honored, because Pharaoh did the will of God ind did not rebel.
Pharaoh did not disobey his purpose in life.
Furthermore, you have Pharaoh being condemned for doing God's will.
Go figure.
The fact is, God created Pharaoh as a vesselnof honor, to obey all the commands of God.
Pharaoh wad created to not to sin.
However, through out Pharaoh's life, he became proude in his position, and when a Moses(a mere shephard) came in, making demands, Pharaoh's pride caused his heart to be hard(God knew this would happen).
God's commands & plagues were to break Pharaoh's hard heart, but Pharaoh rebeled and was judged for it(God knew this would happen).
"The clay was mared in the Potters hands", so the Potter reformed the vessle into one for the purpose of wrath out of judgment for refusing to do that which he was able to do
quote:
quote:
Because that was the judgment. God had Pharaoh to bring more condemnation on himself by a continued hard heart. God was judging Pharaoh by hardening his heart after Pharaoh did it first You need to get past the fact that God changed Pharaoh's mind to NOT LET THEM GO... Why, that was pharaoh's judgment.
Paraoh's judgment was to be given over to his sin.(Rom 1:24,26,28) because He first heardend his own heart.
quote:
quote:
Don't you think that 911 was a judgment of God?
Howbout Hurricane Katrina? How about telling me about the connection between those outside the ark(not Christians) and the Christians who died on 9/11? Or about God's mercy towards those outside the ark which you don't seem to want to talk about... Will you please change your attitude?
The connection between those outside the ark(not Christians) and the Christians who died on 911is that in God's judgment, inocent children along with His own are not excluded.
Even Israel was plagued with frogs, lice, & flies in the judgments if Egypt.
About God's mercy towards those outside the ark;
God's mercy in judgment is that He judges according to the light which they have.
Mathew 10:15.
quote:
quote:
Given God's knowledge of Pharaoh and those exact circumstances of his life in this created world, God knows that in this situation Pharaoh would have the greatest possible chance of repenting. God placed Pharaoh into those "circumstances" to show the world His great power... No mention of doing so in regarding to Pharaoh repenting... Why wouldn't God want everyone to repent, even Pharaoh?
Isn't it a command that all mankind repent?
Wouldn't that inclued Pharaoh?
Furthermore, why would God condemn pharaoh for doing His will as not letting HIS people go?
Do you think there is people that God does not want repenting?
quote:
quote:
Pharaoh's choice might very well be to repent in a different situation that a different "alternative possible world" would cause; However, Pharaoh's repentance would effects other's repentance &/or un-repentance as well as theirs effecting the future which would have caused less to repent. More X-Files what if(ing) If is valid. What if the mighty works, which have been done in Sodom?
Matthew 11:23 And you, Capernaum, which is exalted unto heaven, shall be brought down to Hades: for if the mighty works, which have been done in you, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day.
quote:
If Pharaoh were in another position,
Pharaoh wasn't in another position... He was right were God placed him for a very specific purpose... In this world, but If Pharaoh were in another position in another alternate posible created world...ect...
quote:
quote:
God knew exactly what would happen and what we would freely choose in this world as he does in other possible created words. God created this world out of a seemingly infinite possible number other worlds; and with this world in which we are in, the most possible souls repent with the least amount of judgment and accountability for those who do not. So, God created this world out of all of his possibilities. God created all that would happen in the sense that God created a world in which all possible choices were known by him in advance. In this way, the one could claim to have the best of all possible created worlds by combining several very important theological themes that often seem to contradict one another I will call this the Las Vegas doctrine since there a great deal of chance involved... It's called Molinism, look it up.
I have a name for your theology/doctrine also.
quote:
quote:
That was never said nor implied.
When it said, "But God grieved over the sin that man's free will created."
It means that man created the sin. Just as Lucifer created sin in his own heart. You said it again! What do you mean?
Man never creates anything?
God created sin?
quote:
quote:
How is the grammar that says, "But I will harden his heart" not meaning that God knows He will harden his heart? Talk about t me not being able to read...
It's not simply knowing but the ACTION itself... And that action was that when Pharaoh said I will let the people go God changed Pharaoh's mind so that he wouldn't... It was Pharaoh hardnening his own heart when he saw that the frogs, lice & flies gone, he though that he got away with it so he hardened his heart again.
when Pharaoh saw that there was a respite, he hardened his heart,(Exod 8:18)
God knew this.
Then God knew that He would judge Pharaoh by giving him over to his own sin of hardening his heart.
quote:
quote:
How do you know that Pharaoh wouldn't have gone after them? If you believe that is in question what was the point in God moving Pharaoh to do so? For Judgment of pharaoh.
But you don't think pharaoh was being judged. You think he was only being used.
He was only a pawn in God's game of Solitaire.
In your theology/doctrine, Pharaoh was not a loved creation, but "non'elect" hated before he was born.(Rom 9:11&13)
He was created/born a vessel of wrath(Rom 9:20-22)
quote:
quote:
If it ain't you who says them. It is other calv.s who do. I don't speak for other "calv.s" and I cannot blindly accept that what you say they say is actually what they say... How many forms of Calvinism is there?
What sect do you belong to?
quote:
quote:
Tell me how what I said is not true in your theology/doctrines? I already did... The husband like everyone is in the hand of God... That is what I know already, But, don't you say that all men who end up in hell were ordained to go there from the foundation of Earth?
All men who end up in hell were created/born a vessels of wrath?(Rom 9:20-22)
All men who end up in hell were not elect, even before they are born having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand?(Rom 9:11)
All men who end up in hell were hated(Rom 9:13)
If not, when did God start hating them?
All men who end up in hell are there for God's glorious purpose?
Where is this not in the Calvs/Refs/ theology?
quote:
quote:
What? I did it to day already.
First I wanted pancakes then I changed my mind to french toast. That's not changing the state of the mind... Man cannot change himself from evil to good... Man is able to choose to obey God to repent & put his faih in Christ.
Then God will change he man.
quote:
quote:
My Dad turned away from speaking harshly to his wife toward speaking softly.
He changed his mind of how he will act. The bible says the tender mercies of the wicked are an abomination... BTW, Totally wrong context(don't surprise me)
Prov. 12:10 is as when a doctor would abort a child out of mercy to the parents.
The mercy is an actual abomination.
The mercy which my dad shown was a true mercy, not an abomination.
quote:
quote:
Wheres the answer?
If I missed it, please post a link. Scroll back... Sinse the mess in the changing of threads and the mess of 32922 Posts & 1317 pages.
Could you pleas tell me again:
By what non-arbitrary criteria does God use in His Election & of giving Repentance & faith?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Calvinism/Arminianism - One Stop Thread - 8/13/2008 5:35:12 PM
|
|
|
Diolectic
Posts: 644
Joined: 3/14/2006
From: Iowa
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL kelman
quote:
ORIGINAL: Diolectic
What I said is true.
You just gave the reasons why God is worthy.
God must have reasons to be worthy, and you gave them.
However, God is not holy and rightous just because He is God.
God must act and be holy and rightous We don't get to decide if the actions of God are holy and righteous - He gets to decide - and He says they are. I know this.
He has given us the definition & Standard to that which is holy and righteous.
All I'm saying is that He prooves Himselfe to be such by what He does.
If He never did(verb) or thought(verb) anything holy and righteous, how could He BE(verb) holy and righteous.
Fact is, He wouldn't be.
If so, How is there any merit of holyness & righteousness in not doing such?
It couldn't be just because He said that He is.
Example:
GOD: "Even though I've never done & will never do anything worthy to be holy and righteous full of honor & praise, even though I will never proove it, I say that I am, just because I'm God."
This is rediculous.
quote:
So when He destroyed every man, woman and child in the flood - He was acting holy and righteous. When he killed every Egyptian soldier in the Red Sea, He was acting holy and righteous. It was the fact that He was upholding juctice & righteousness in judgment.
quote:
Where do you get the idea that you are permitted to judge the actions of God?...no, He judges you. I am not judging God incorrectly.
You may complaine if I am or was judging God incorrectly.
I have only judged the actions of God by the standard to which juctice & righteousness & holyness are messured.
I only acknowledged what God has done to be holy and righteous based on what they truly are, as He has defined them.
quote:
quote:
My whole point is that one must be proven worthy in order to be worthy. It's hard to reply to you because it's impossible to believe that a Christian would speak this way about God. In what world do you think you are able to judge God?....to prove Him worthy? Do you dudge God to be holy and righteous?
You'd better not, because you don't want to judge God.
BTW, tell me HOW God is righteous other than His position as God?
quote:
quote:
quote:
My question is HOW IS HE WORTHY of worship.
It can't be just because He is God.
God need's to be worthy other than because He is God.Not true. This doesn't depend on the thoughts of men. It doesn't depend on whatever man may think.
No, it doesn't. You are correct.
It all depends on the fact of proofe for the worthyness. No, Dio, you misunderstand. You do not think I am correct because I insist that man cannot judge God worthy. How do you not judge that He is worthy?
Has He not prooven Himself to be?
quote:
God does not prove Himself to us. Sure He does...
He's prooven Himself all through history.
quote:
God does many things in the OT that we would find hard to call holy and righteous; but, the very fact that it is God who does it makes it holy and righteous. I would disagree to this 100%
God has done nothing to find hard to call holy and righteous.
I see all He does eazy to call just, holy and righteous.
Or, are you telling me that IF God would condemn some one who has Faith in Christ, God would still remain to be be holy & righteous just because He is God?
If God does opposite of holyness & righteousness, He would remain to be holyness & righteousness just because He is God?
Are you saying that no matter what God does, He remains holy & righteous, just gecause He is God.
God has no law against Him?
Can God come against that which is good & right & remain to be worthy of righteousnees?
quote:
quote:
quote:
Christ is worthy of honor simply because of who He is God. No, Christ is worthy of honor simply because He has proven Himself to be by living a Holy life and fullfilling the whole will of God.
The Father is worthy of honor simply because He himself has done(proofe) graet and marvelous things.
I agree God has done wondrous things and we praise Him for them. But, God is worthy of all praise and honor because He is God - not because you approve of what He has done. I'm not saying that it's because I or anybody approves of what He has done.
It's the fact that he has done which prooves He is holy & righteous
IOW, If God is not doing rightousness, He can not be righeous.
Your saying God can do nothing and remaine righteous.
Your saying God can do evil and remaine righteous.
Just because He is God.
quote:
Psalm 47:7 For God is the King of all the earth: sing ye praises with understanding.
Of all the scripture which declares God is worthy, I think God sums it up rather handily when He says : "I AM THAT I AM".
Of all the scripture which declares God is worthy because it prooves the geart and marvelous things that God has done to be worthy. Thats what I'm saying, but you seem to say that even if He ain't
doing righteousness He still is.
Or that He is holy & righteous just because He says so &/or just because He is God.
That is contrary to reason.
quote:
quote:
All your telling me is that God is worthy because He has said so.
That is circular reasoning if you don't know. Are you actually saying that God's declaration He is worthy because He is God is NOT good enough for you?
IOW, God has said something about himself and you refuse to accept it? How would I tell the diference between God & the devil if God has never proven Himself?
The devil may say He is worthy just because he sais so.
Your telling me to trust someone, just because he says so.
Unless God prooves Himself to us, how will we know?
In contrast:
Some one is only evil, unjust, untightouss...ect... Only if the've provven to be so.
How is it not so with God?
quote:
BTW, it's not my "circular" reasoning - it is God's. No, it ain't "God's, it's yours.
Your saying that God is righteous just because He says He is.
That is circular.
God gave us the standard of righteousness, not by the mere fact of telling us what it is.
Not by the mere fact of His position, Not by the mere fact saying He is, but by showing to us the standard by proving Himself to be.
He does it by upholding justice & righteousness & holyness.
If God never upheld thos | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
