Posted on 07/22/2007 7:40:38 PM PDT by xzins
In a sense, our ignorance of the greater aspects of the universe allows for our freedom to choose ... in over-simplified form, if we knew the result of every act we may commit, it would direct our editing of what we would commit. When scriptures says that EVERY knee shall bow and EVERY tongue confess, will freedom to choose to do so or not be in effect?... And would the outcome of choosing wrongly be absolutely knowable for us to know prior to bowing and therefore we would choose not to do that which would/will cause our certain destruction/torment? Or will there be only those knees and tongues left which will choose to bow?
If "all that happens" is "by His will," then even those decisions which men freely make "happen by His will."
Dr. E to Kosta: Yours does
But 1000 implied that she only goes to churches that follow the scriptures. The Reformed have made it very clear on these forums that my Church doesn't...so what does it matter if my Church allows it or not?
The point is: Protestant assemblies don't follow the scripture either, when it comes to divorce...and Apostle James (2:10) reminds us that "whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles in one point, he has become guilty of all."
So, I suppose, 1000 has no church to go to.
No, the decisions are made by our will. His will is to allow us to exercise our free will. The decisions we made are ours and not His. When we place our will in the service of God, then our will ceases to be our will and we become slaves of righteousness, as St. Paul would say it.
Final Judgment is the term that brings visual images through which one can explain why every knee will bow and every tongue confess: those who believe will kneel and confess in faith, overwhelmed in the presence of God (as we Orthodox do at epiclesis); those who hate God will kneel from fear and confess in hopes of being spared the judgment.
FK to D-fendr: Oh, OK, that's very different. ......... Nevermind. :) However, that wouldn't work for us either because there are some false believers. There are those who will claim "Lord, Lord", etc. So, it can't constitute proof
It doesn't constitute "proof" because it's solipsism. Problem is, in and of itself, such "knowledge" of being "saved" is itself suspect and without proof internally. It could be God, a demon, or insanity.
The wickedness we are born with in our nature is removed when we receive our new nature. We are a new creation. However, a REMNANT of our old nature does remain, so we still sin from time to time. We can be justified with a remnant, but we cannot be justified if wickedness is still an actual part of our nature.
King David repented of his wickedness. He did not continue to covet other peoples' wives or arrange to kill their husbands. He gave up his wickedness in repentance. One is either wicked or just. You can't be both.
David was already a man of God when he committed these sins, but he did not "once and for all" give up wickedness after committing adultery and murder. Is that what you think? :) He sinned. We all sin. He sinned again after he committed these, just as he sinned before he committed these. Why would you think these were his only sins?
Plus, notice David did NOT use his so called "free will" to decide to repent! It took a very special face to face, God-inspired smack-down from Nathan to get that done. From the text, it appears that David would have just gone along like nothing happened without God's special intervention here. Repentance comes from God, not our inner goodness. :)
And you are welcome to believe whatever you want to believe.
Likewise, there will always be some who insist that Euclidean geometry is representative of God’s Creation, i.e. space/time. And the mathematicians and physicists will continue to cringe.
kosta50: That is the only way that he can make a claim that parallel lines intersect at infinity. They must have an infinitissimal angle of convergence in order to meet at infinity. If he didn't make that claim then he is wrong.
Einstein wasn’t even born until 1904.
Since you have no source for it, I shall dismiss your claim at 8447 that Einstein had postulated there is “a common center to the universe towards all object will eventually fall.”
That said, if Lurkers are interested in the relationship between Einstein’s relativity and Poncelet’s math vis-à-vis infinity (quantum theory and space/time) – they might want to check out Penrose’s Twistor Theory.
Repentance is not a satisfying of a debt. That is your legal idea of your relationship with God coming to the forefront again. Our relationship with God is familial, thus, there is not a "debt satisfaction" when we repent.
Regards
Why did God ordain it? Was He bound by some outside force, like the Bible? The incarnation did not have to happen. God CHOSE to save man in that manner.
Regards
From Plato through the likes of Gödel, Wigner, Barrow, Penrose, Tegmark and Vafa - mathematicians and physicists have noticed the mysteriousness of math and stood in awe of it though oftentimes unable to convince others who could not see what they were seeing. But Nicholas of Cusa’s understanding was much deeper than theirs because his was spiritual.
Nicholas of Cusa also saw what so many of us on this thread see and have commented on using different terms but the point is the same – that man cannot perceive God through sensory perception (“learned ignorance”.) He probably wouldn’t have used the metaphor I used earlier but the point is the same, i.e. that a maggot has a better chance of describing a human in terms sensible to a maggot than man has in describing God in terms sensible to a man.
Well, on this we agree, and that was my initial point to Dr. Eckleburg. I also enjoyed the way he discussed minimum and maximum within eternity, as it helped to understand the concept a bit. I do agree that mathematics help us to understand ever so slightly the concept that is beyond the physical.
I do not see the point in continuing to argue about "eternity" and "time without end". It is more than theological, since we KNOW that time must have had a beginning. It is logically impossible to consider an infinite regression of time and ever reach today. Thus, time began at some point. Eternity does not have a beginning because there must be an uncaused cause to begin the process. Nor can there be a "starting point" when all points are indistinct. There is no maximum or minimum, no beginning or end point.
Naturally, then, since time is a creation, then God is not subject to it AND God is transcendent and beyond time, unless He chooses to enter into time. As such, as I have tried to explain, eternity is thus timelessness, without BEGINNING or end. It is one moment of changeless NOW. ALL points in time are like geometric points in infinity. They are indistinct and unity. Thus, if we consider this and apply it to time, we can say that all points in time are the same, changeless and immediately accessible to One who is transcendent.
Thanks for your discussions on the subject. No doubt, neither of us has really touched even the tip of the iceberg on the subject. My point was that the human wisdom has reached its pinnacle when we realize that we are ignorant about God.
Regards
From God's POV, we are His (main) instruments for the carrying out of His plan on earth. He has already ordained all the good we will ever do and taken steps to make sure it will happen.
From our POV, after salvation, we are free to do good in God's eyes. For example, next Saturday I might feel up for giving a couple hours toward one of our church's many community service projects. Let's say that two that sound OK to me are leaf raking for elderly church members, and picking up canned goods door to door for a food drive. I feel totally free to choose either and know that I'm doing God's will. Neither holds any more particular interest to me than the other, so whichever one I pick I know was God's choice for me in the first place. :) Of course, in real life, I don't think about the theology behind it when it happens, I just pick something and go do it.
But isn’t bearing fruit deeds? I thought that deeds were of no effect or importance under Reformed theology. I am not trying to belabour the point, but rather to understand it. I’d appreciate your further thoughts on this.
Yes, bearing fruits are deeds. Deeds are part of perseverance, and perseverance is required to enter Heaven. For us, though, we say that perseverance is a God-guaranteed process that will necessarily take place in all of the elect. We say God promises this to us in scripture. It is included in the "package" of salvation. So, it's not that deeds are not important, it's just that they are not in question. I have likened perseverance to physically running around the bases after hitting a home run. It's necessary for the run to count so it's important, however, it's not something anyone ever worries about in terms of WHETHER it happens. (I actually looked it up and from what I could find in the history of MLB, no one have ever failed to complete the trip.)
Perseverance a one-off event - the thief’s dying testimony? I’ve never heard it put that way. It’s hardly perseverance if the span of time is in seconds.
Why not? Don't we both say it is never too late to believe? :) I'm sure that if either of us had a dying friend or relative, whom we had strong reason to think was lost, we would both minister to that person in hopes of his salvation. On deathbeds around the world, I actually think the thief's story happens every day. Some of them might be fake, but I'll bet that a lot of them "count". :)
***Was He bound by some outside force, like the Bible?***
You concider the Bible, God’s word, as an OUTSIDE FORCE? Strange.
if protestants interpret this as forbidding Christ from performing another sacrifice or renacting the one he did then you’ve all decided to put Calvin over God in terms of authority...
As faithful as they may have been how do you know if they were good students and got it right?
As opposed to a person who had to learn the language of the apostles as a second language a thousand years latter and several nations away?
I think I’ll take my chances with the folks trained by the apostles...
You and me both Brother.
Don't misunderstand, I can see how terribly flawed their theology is, but for some reason there are members in those churches who have placed their Faith Alone in Jesus and that makes them our Brothers and Sisters in Christ. I think that in and of itself places them in opposition to their churches doctrines.
Why they stay where they are I can only theorize as to why.
Here is the fundamental difference that is irreconcilable. You will trust those who came later. I will trust the source they all should have measured everything by, SCRIPTURE.
Calvin, Luther, et al came latter. The church fathers were there.
Further the only reason protestants knew which books to traanslate (which the accomplished poorly) is because of these same church fathers. Without those church fathers protestants wouldn’t know that the Gospel of Judas was gnostic. They’d have to accept the Protevangelion of James as scripture.
The irreconcilable difference is trusting a 15th century man over the Holy Spirit.
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.