Posted on 08/17/2002 9:39:51 PM PDT by RnMomof7
Rather clearly prevailed?
It is laughable that there are those who think that the rest of us cannot understand the worldview of the first century while promoting a worldview that has been filtered through American individualism and Arminian self-determination and pawning it off as that which rather clearly prevailed in first century Palestine.
Give me a break!
This is very interesting in light of the fact that scripture never says that man has "free will" it is an "implied" doctrine.....a house built on sand
"On Christ the solid rock I stand all other ground is shifting sand!"
two questions dec
1) Did God foreknow BEFORE creation that Adam would indeed eat from the tree?
2) Could God have put the tree elsewhere to ASSURE that Adam would NOT eat from that tree?
foot note
12 Boyd writes "the birth and rapid growth of Christianity on Jewish soil becomes intelligible only when we free ourselves from the standard caricature of `pure monotheism' as entailing the belief that no other gods exist. That Jesus could from the start be portrayed in terms of deity and worshiped in some sense alongside God the Father demonstrates how flexible the Jewish monotheism of the time was." God at War ,
It doesn't cut it. If you want to argue that you KNOW Boyd, then you have to read Boyd. I'll bet money that Mohler and Ware have read Boyd.
Oh, phooey. What an answer.
Have you read Boyd or haven't you?
I have a principle that is do not treat heresy as if it is something of substance..no I will not put a pennie in Boyds pocket. I have an internet full of his heresy (Arminianism heavy) been there done that ..:>)
|
It may not be right, but it is serious and it is biblical. |
So all you've had is a filtered Boyd. You have not read him for yourself, and you say you never will.
It is certainly your right. And people have time for only so many books and need to be discriminating. All that's significant to me is that you recognize that you are getting a filtered Boyd.
Why is it you cannot grasp that free will must be tested?
That is why God tested Abraham in Gen.22:1.
God was giving a chance for Adam and the women to show their obedience by not eating.
These tests establish a relationship with God, since they set in our own minds what our priorties are.(Jam.1:2-4)
That is why we are not taken to heaven as soon as we believe, we still need to grow and develop a relationship with God, not just be saved.
God did not even have to put a Tree in the Garden or create Lucifer with free will.
So, what made Lucifer fall?
There were no temptations, no 'circumstances'
You and your buddies blame God for making Lucifer perfect, as was Adam.
Adam was not deceived but chose to reject God, there was nothing in that test that could not have been passed had Adam wanted to set his priorties correctly. (Deut.6:5)
The proof is that Christ, the Second Adam, passed every test, and faced far greater temptations then did the first Adam.
No more silly questions please, you clearly do not want to understand, and that is an act of will on your part.
Actually, I think it is natural for anyone to want to be sure about the relationship between God and evil.
More than anything, though, the ideas that you raise, that I raise, that Arminius raised, that Boyd raised, that Calvin raised ALL come from scripture.
I think Boyd's question arise quite naturally from scripture. For anyone. If they didn't, then why do others ADDRESS the questions in very old commentaries from long before Boyd was on the scene?
He simply disagrees with their answers.
So do the Mormons and the JW's and the Christian Scientists and the Spiritualists and the Unitarians ect...nothing new in heresy xzins
If by engineer you mean force to come about for the purpose of their death, then no.
No? Why not? God is sovereign, God is in control of everything. Which, of course really means that God is merely a God of Might Makes Right.
This quote was in the original article; I posted it once, and I will post it here again.
This is why Charles Spurgeon, the London pastor from 100 years ago said,
I believe that every particle of dust that dances in the sunbeam does not move an atom more or less than God wishes – that every particle of spray that dashes against the steamboat has its orbit, as well as the sun in the heavens – that the chaff from the hand of the winnower is steered as the stars in their courses. The creeping of an aphid over the rosebud is as much fixed as the march of the devastating pestilence – the fall of . . . leaves from a poplar is as fully ordained as the tumbling of an avalanche.
If a person believes this statement, I mean really believes what Mr. Spurgeon says, then why shouldn’t that person be intellectually honest enough about their beliefs, step up to the plate and state for the record that God murders little girls.
We may not understand it, we may not like it, we certainly can’t comprehend how God would be able to work it to His glory, but God, from the foundation of the world, planned, constructed and managed the lives of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman in such a way that, by the time they reached 10 years old, they would be murdered and dumped in a field, presumably exactly where God planned their bodies to be dumped, since He is sovereign and all.
I think I will acknowledge Boyd as Arminian-based. More importantly, I will acknowledge him as scripturally based. I haven't seen him appeal to anything in his book except scripture. Nor has he held to odd translations or visions or anything out of the ordinary.
In my opinion, he's a sincerely questioning Christian who started, I believe, from an Arminian worldview.
In reading his book, I've come to question his idea about God's knowledge of contingency because I WAS ONCE UPON A TIME a contingency based on the marriage of my parents, their union on a particular night, mom's health and safety throughout a pregnancy, etc.
That would mean that God didn't know me. That he knew only a potential group who might believe. It's something to think about, but I think that God knew ME from before time.
I would be distressed with Boyd if his ideas end up being fairly and justly shot down after a legitimate hearing, and then, he refuses to give it up because of book royalties or something like that. But we're a few years away from that point.
The ideas have to be heard first.
My Nazarene Pastor said Jesus did not know why he died ....that is Boyds dream ...and from the mouth of a Wesleyan pastor..what is the next step?
Now that sounds really weird. Any idea what he meant by that?
I wouldn't accept that statement at all; nor would I repeat it to a congregation. I'm surprised the Nazarenes didn't tie him up by his thumbs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.