Posted on 05/13/2002 10:08:33 PM PDT by drstevej
I will not claim to speak for ShadowAce, but in my reading of his post, I think that ShadowAce may hav intended his post to be a question rahter than a statement. As a statement, it does not make much sense, but as a question, it is certainly one that deserves a considered answer.
Maybe ShadowAce will let us know it he intended it to actually be a question, rhetorical or not. I think it would be a rhetorical question, but suspect you would not.
Connect I do not have the ability to "imply" anything about God..I can hardly find my glasses in the morning :>)
I am saying that the word of God makes clear that God knew not thought **maybe kinnda** that Adam was going to break the only commandment he was given. One law and man could not even keep that..
God knew it with out a doubt..and He choose to allow it for His Glory.
God could have prevented it and chose not to..so although God did not cause the sin it only happened because it was His will to permit it. So in effect His inaction did indeed predestine it.
Personally, I don't. I have the desire to not pay taxes--but with my free will, I pay them. I desire to stay home every day to be with my family. I don't, though. I use my perfectly free will to go to work. As Christians, we don't desire to sin--yet we do.
The problem with alot of theology is relativism . Man has learned to judge his worth to God by comparing himself to other men."I am better than my neighbor Joe".I have done X Y Z so I am good and worthy.
The only problem with that is man can not do any good to a Holy God.
You actually gave me a scripture that makes my point. Jesus calls these outwardly righteous men EVIL and he then points out that what man calls good is what the father has to give? Anything that does not come from the will of God is a filthy rag..yea even your donations to the Red Cross if it proceeds from your heart
Jesus said it here
Mark 10:18 "Why do you call me good?" Jesus answered. "No one is good;except God alone.
God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass: yet so,as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.
http://www.opc.org/documents/WCF.html
Of course, the "yet so" connector is the really deep part of this!
You certainly have the choice to not send the check in -if you so desire. Probably though -your desire to stay out of jail over rules your desire to not pay taxes.
You could also, if you so desired, move to a country (if there is one) where you wouldn't pay taxes. I would say, though, that your desire to live in the good ol' U. S. of A. overrides your desire to not pay taxes.
"I desire to stay home every day to be with my family. I don't, though."
Of course, your desire to 'make a living' and thus to continue to occupy your dwelling, possess your vehicles and pay for your clothing, food and whatever else (or some other such reason) over rules your desire to 'stay at home all day. Nonetheless, you still are free to do so if your desire to do so is so great as to aleviate any concerns over those consequences. (Methinks that ultimately your desire to stay at home all day would subside once you were able to realize that objective.)
"I use my perfectly free will to go to work. As Christians, we don't desire to sin--yet we do."
I would say that every sin you did -you did because you wanted to -not because someone put a gun to your head. At least when I look at a woman lustfully, if is because I want to. Otherwise, I think your sense of sin is rather warped -ultimately why would you be blamed if your were forced beyond your will to sin?
Jean
Everything you write afterwards implys plenty about God.
I am saying that the word of God makes clear that God knew not thought **maybe kinnda** that Adam was going to break the only commandment he was given. One law and man could not even keep that.
Only because God gave Adam a free will.
God knew it with out a doubt..and He choose to allow it for His Glory.
God allowed it because a love relationship requires the possibility that the love will be rejected.To love God is to obey God. Therefore if there is no possibility to disobey, there can be no love.
God could have prevented it and chose not to..so although God did not cause the sin it only happened because it was His will to permit it. So in effect His inaction did indeed predestine it.
Yes, He could have chose to prevent it, but He gave man the choice to obey or disobey. It does not logically follow that God predestined specific sins that you or I commit. We can choose in each instance whether to obey or disobey, can't we. If we can't, society ought to open the prison doors and free the inmates.
I certainly did not imply the above.
The only problem with that is man can not do any good to a Holy God.
Man cannot be perfectly obedient to God, but that is not the same as saying that a man is incapable of any good. There are many 'good' men who are not Christians. Unfortunately for them, the standard is not based on a degree of goodness, it is based on perfection, a standard only Christ could and has met. Without Christ, none can be saved.
You actually gave me a scripture that makes my point. Jesus calls these outwardly righteous men EVIL and he then points out that what man calls good is what the father has to give? Anything that does not come from the will of God is a filthy rag..yea even your donations to the Red Cross if it proceeds from your heart
Obviously, it should have gone to the Salvation Army. LOL
.You have the choice NOT to pay your taxes under penalty of the law..so you pay them not because you freely choose to give 1/2 of your income away..you pay them so the government does not come after you...that my friend is NOT the kind of free will you claim spiritually...that is making a free choice within a set of defined borders...exactly the kind of free will God gives you.
Now the question is why?
So Christ was a liar then huh?
This is the easiest of all questions. Because God had precluded the possibility that man could be disobedient, there could not possibly be a love relationship between God and man. Just as you cannot force another person to return your love, God chose to permit man to either accept His love or reject it. It really is that simple. As I have said before, to love God is to obey Him; which implies that man must have the free will to either obey or disobey. What could be more clear?
Exactly what did I write that would lead you to ask such a question? If I recall an earlier post of yours, I think you mentioned that your knowledge of Calvinism is based on FR threads on the subject, which in turn is based on the comments of Calvinists who posted them. Maybe you ought to read Calvin's Institutes or other Calvinist literature for yourself. I did refer you to Palmer's The Five Points of Calvinism. Lest you think Palmer might be some sort of Calvinist extremist, Palmer is the man who headed up the multi-denominational effort that produced the NIV Bible. He also headed up the effort to produce the NIV Study Bible, which was dedicated to him (he passed away just prior to the completion of that effort). Here is a very short excerpt from Palmer's book: "He (a Calvinist)realizes that what he advocates is rediculous...In the face of all logic, the Calvinist says that if man does anything good, God gets all the glory; and if man does anything bad, man gets all the blame. Man can't win.
Now if a pre-eminent Calvinist like Palmer admits that Calvinism defies all logic, how is it that the Calvinist is so sure that Calvinism is true? Is God a God of Love or Hate? Is God a God of order or disorder? Is God a God of reason or unreason?
Here is another quote from Palmer:
"This means that although man is totally depraved and unable to believe, and that although faith is a gift of God produced by the irresistable work of the Holy Spirit, nevertheless, it is up to man to believe. He as a duty to obey God's command to believe."
Man is unable to believe, yet man is commanded to believe and it is a man's fault if he doesn't believe?
I am the first to agree that man connot know the complete will and mind of God, but I do not think for a second that God wishes that man simply ignore all rational thought and logic to believe something that cannot possibly be reconciled. It is as if the Calvinist is saying that a logical explanation must be inferior to an illogical explanation.
If a lack of logic is evidence of Biblical truth, it would seem to me that Mormonism must be true since it is far more illogical than Calvinism. In other words, lack of logic cannot be used as evidence for the truth.
Why God created man is a mystery for which I have no explanation. Anything I say on the subject would be mere speculation. That said, I think it would be fair to say that God greatly DESIRES that we love Him and is sadden when one of His highest creations rejects His love. Man needs to feel loved, but if a man seeks the love of another, he must also accept the possibility of rejection and be willing to face that risk. Is the risk worth the rejection that may come with the seeking of love? My answer to that question is an unqualified "YES". Rejection is temporary, and when we find one who returns our love, the rejection of others has no meaning. It is love that people seek and rejection in mans's search for love is simply part of the process. Is the same true for God? Maybe, maybe not. The wonderful thing about God is that He rejects no one who seeks His love.
It is the end which God aimed at when he made man,
Prov.16:4, "The Lord hath made all things for himself," Rom.11:36, For of him, and through him, and to him are all things." Every rational agent proposes to himself an end in working, and the most perfect the highest end. Now God is the most perfect Being, and his glory the noblest end. God is not actively glorified by all men, and therefore he surely did not design it; but he designed to have glory from them, either by them or on them; and so it will be. Happy they who glorify him by their actings, that they may not glorify him by their eternal sufferings
God did not need man..He was total and complete in Himself..Man was made to give glory to Him..read the OT and over and over you do not see God pleading with men to LOVE Him..you see Him acting for " MY name sake"..."So they will know I am God"..
This is all about Him and nothing of us connect. That is when our depravity shows the most..when we think that God needs us for anything. We exist at His good pleasure
I agree completely. In order to glorify God, one must love God, and to love God means we must obey Him. I can't possibly imagine how I can be more clear on this topic.
God did not need man..He was total and complete in Himself..Man was made to give glory to Him..read the OT and over and over you do not see God pleading with men to LOVE Him..you see Him acting for " MY name sake"..."So they will know I am God"..
God calls men to obey him and to Love God is to obey Him; so where's the problem?
This is all about Him and nothing of us connect. That is when our depravity shows the most..when we think that God needs us for anything. We exist at His good pleasure
Nothing about us? So why did God send His only Son to die on the cross if it "nothing of us"? I did not say God needs us, I said He WANTS us to love/obey Him.
Why are you so intent on spliting hairs. The relationship God wants to have with man is not a difficult thing to explain or to understand. The problem with some Calvinists is that they think that just because someone does not accept what even Calvinists admit is illogical that that person is somehow lacking in true faith or Biblical understanding.
On top of that, you ignore a few simple questions. Is God a God of order or disorder? Is God a God of reason or unreason? God gave me a mind, quite a good one I might add, which He expects me to use. Christ is my Savior, and did not Paul call for Christians to defend the Faith? Should that be done by telling people "I know this doesn't make sense and I can't explain to you why it makes no sense, but believe it anyway"? Besides, when you accepted Christ as your Savior, what did you know of Calvinism v. Arminianism. In a sense this debate does nothing to promote the Gospel. If anything, it harms the speading of the Gospel.
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.