Posted on 02/18/2002 8:54:15 PM PST by rwfromkansas
First thing you need to do for me, since you responded to my post #556 which is about the desires of Jesus in 1 Tim. 2:4, is explain what this desire means. I have already claimed:
Is the weakness in the "desire" of the Lord (verse 4) that "all men" should be saved? No, for this is an effective desire, both to Wish and to Will; indeed, this same Greek word, for "desire", is found in Romans 9: 18 -- So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.; and this is a powerful Desire indeed, by which He has raised up pharoahs and ruled the affairs of men and nations!!Therefore, if you wish to misuse the desires of God by asking me if it is God's desire that we have an holocaust, then you must define this word. Plus, you must also then if you wish to maintain that anything happens outside of the Will of God, then you must show Scriptural support for such an argument.
The hypocracy may be yours for misrepresenting our position. However, we cannot know until you begin to define God's will and desires.
You'd better talk with some of the other Calvinists around--they've been claiming that man does have free will.
The very definition of sin--something that happens outside of His will. God cannot (does not) will sin--that would be inconsistant with the very nature of God, since He is the basis (and definition) of Good, and sin is the exact opposite of Good.
I see that you are still grossly misrepresentating our position.
Why should I ever doubt; I've met the Lord. The Spirit bears witness to my spirit that I am a son of God and not illegitamite.
The problem is not with the Calvinist, who maintains that God has elected him specifically without any merit on his part (i.e. grace), but with people like you who believe that you have it within yourself the power to grab hold of God contrary to scripture which does say: And there is no one who calls on Your name, who strs himself up to take hold of You.
Have you figured out how your reading of 1 Tim. 2:4 has you praying for the very overthrow of the PROPHECIES OF GOD?
Man is free to do as he pleases (in the case of natural man, sin...in the case of the saved, this desire conflicts with a desire to do pure things) BUT in the overall scheme of things, somehow nothing ever falls out of God's will.....everything falls in his will. Does this mean he ordained every act, including the introduction of sin into the world? Well, that is tough....I would lean toward the idea he "allows" such acts if they fall within his overall will because that avoids the author of sin problem.
Actually, we believe the same thing. RW is simply saying that the natural Adamic free will does not want to choose life until he is regenerated so that he wants to choose life. He is saying that man does not have what you call free will. You would maintain that man, who is dead in sin somehow has a kind of free will that will chose life. Man is free, but man is not free indeed.
"Your doctrine remains false and contrary to scripture, as it always was, even back in the 1550's when Calvin proposed it. Wrong then, wrong now. John Calvin has a lot to answer for."
First, it wasn't Calvin who proposed it, it was the Lord Jesus Christ and the Apostle Paul, among others.
"The old truth that Calvin preached, that Augustine preached, that Paul preached, is the truth that I must preach to-day, or else be false to my conscience and my God. I cannot shape the truth; I know of no such thing as paring off the rough edges of a doctrine. John Knox's gospel is my gospel. That which thundered through Scotland must thunder through England again... I have my own Private opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel, if we do not preach justification by faith, without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing, unchangeable, eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel, unless we base it upon the special and particular redemption of His elect and chosen people which Christ wrought out upon the cross; nor can I comprehend a gospel which lets saints fall away after they are called, and suffers the children of God to be burned in the fires of damnation after having once believed in Jesus. Such a gospel I abhor." - C.H Spurgeon, A Defense of Calvinism
(You ought to read the whole sermon, thus the link. You don't show that you have the faintest idea of what we believe, maybe this would help you to be more careful in your criticism. I don't mind someone asking honest questions about what we believe, but honestly, you have done a very poor job due to the fact that you don't even know what it is that you are attacking.)
God is perfectly pleased to permissively Will it. Thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven. Would you suggest that anything is outside of the will of God in Heaven? Would you want to maintain that man who sins is beyond God's will?
Is God so weak that He cannot eliminate sin from His universe?
No, God permits sin to occur. Everything that happens in this universe, good and bad, happens because God permits it. If He did not have the power to prevent it, then He would not be God. God actually uses sin to accomplish His purposes as well. Joseph understood this clearly when he told his brothers:
But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it for good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive. (Genesis 50:20)
I saw the 160th Commander on TV this morning making some obviously grief-filled statements about our guys that got lost. I do appreciate your prayers. I will remember the situation in your church and pray for you and them to have divine guidance and for the malefactor to come to repentance.
However, I "pinged" you due to the fact that I wanted you to be aware that the Calvinists aren't the only "abusers". In fact, I found 500 to be downright abusive and accusatory.
You and Mom have a decision to make...actually Mom does, primarily. Do you confront it or not? You have a background in the chaplaincy and you know what I would recommend. One difficulty is that Scott says he's quitting the thread anyway.
Other than that, I wonder why he kept calling someone with Mom in her name, "brother????"
I had noticed Woody and Jim(?) arguing earlier in this thread, but I was more involved on the TULIP thread. Both of US should be working at keeping the discourse civil.
That was your approach to doc, but I don't think that it is one that I would take.
(Or, is Jim's situation different because he is on your side of this discussion?)
Another issue, of course, is that you have know the_doc and had him at your home. For all I know, you've partnered on these threads for months or years with doc. So if anyone had a responsibility to send a private freepmail to doc, because he was a friend, then it was your side. In my case, I have no idea who Jim is. I know only about his post to Mom because of your recent ping.
It is possible to deny that I was attacked as "being under undue influence from Satan." But it would be what we Family Life Chaplains would call "denial."
It's time to put it behind.
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.