Then Warfield has the brains of a doorknob. If I allow Mia (Arabian mare) to make choices about what route to take, or to end a session of riding because her heart isn't in it that day, does that make Mia my rider?
No, but it does put Mia outside of your total control. With that being the case Mia can thwart your will at any time. If it is the same with men and God, then the God of the Bible does not exist. The god who submits to man's decisions is some "other" god.
If God gives us a choice about obeying him, or about responding to his invitation to dance, that is still God's business and his sovereign will.
I suppose that theoretically such a god could exist, however, as Warfield points out, such a god could not be the one described in the Bible (there would be no such God), and indeed would be an immoral, irresponsible, and unloving god. THIS is the type of god that would grant free will as free will advocates view free will.
FK: "Further, Warfield is saying that not only CAN God control us, but that He WILL control us. For if He did not, if He gave away what He alone made, then He could no longer claim that this is HIS universe, etc."
OK, maybe Warfield doesn't even have the brains of a doorknob. If God doesn't force us to do every little thing, if God doesn't force us to commit sin, then God is not in control of the universe?
Warfield understood that there is a difference between "being in control" and "forcing all actions". Warfield even understood the mindset that jumps from the former to the latter in a knee-jerk reaction. It is man's nature to be repelled at the idea of being controlled by anything, especially God. It would not have surprised Warfield in the least to hear that you thought he had not the brains of a doorknob. He knew exactly why you think that.
Thank God! I don't want to be in control of my life. However, if I am to become a son, then I need to make some decisions - and God will decide how loose to hold the reins!
If it is good for God to be in control of your life, then why must something "bad" happen (you are back in control for decision purposes) for you to become a son of God? Wouldn't it make more sense and be a greater testimony of God's love if He was the one in control of that also?
Now - completely off topic - prayer request. My daughter-in-law recently learned she is pregnant. ......
Prayers are up for both of them to get through what is an amazing blessing and can sometimes be a difficult time. I'll pray that they always have God at the center of their marriage and for her to feel better and for all of God's blessings to be with them at delivery. Congratulations to the new grandpa and the mother and father! :)
“No, but it does put Mia outside of your total control. With that being the case Mia can thwart your will at any time.”
Calvinists seem to live in a 2 choice world. Black or white. A or B. The idea that there could be a dozen choices, with 2 bad and the rest OK seems beyond Calvin’s idea of sovereignty.
Also beyond comprehension is that God might want us to grow, and that requires making decisions and making errors. As an officer, I needed to allow my men to make some mistakes. Otherwise, they never grew. God wants us as sons, not helpless infants forever.
God doesn’t seem to desire to take total control of every decision and thought. It seems to be a part of the fundamental difference between Calvinists and Arminians - how much control does God insist on having.
God could make every decision for us. Since we all sin, it seems safe to assume he does not, unless God compels us to sin. Since God created a world in which Adam disobeyed, even knowing that he would do so, God seems to have given men the ability to make real choices - which may be a more accurate terminology than free will.
“Warfield understood that there is a difference between “being in control” and “forcing all actions”.”
Good to hear Warfield was an Arminian. I take back my comments about his stupidity. God IS in control, but God doesn’t force our decisions. Within the constraints God allows, we can make decisions - and since he commands us to repent, and believe, it seems those are decisions he gives to us.
“If it is good for God to be in control of your life, then why must something “bad” happen (you are back in control for decision purposes) for you to become a son of God? Wouldn’t it make more sense and be a greater testimony of God’s love if He was the one in control of that also?”
Not sure how Calvinists raise sons, but I valued good judgment in both my son and my subordinates. And one cannot train good judgment without allowing for errors. And some of my subordinates - one major in particular comes to mind - were lemons. No amount of training or practice would overcome their terrible judgment.
But if willing obedience from sons is God’s desire, then loose reins are required, to mix analogies. I think this is one of the fundamental differences in worldview we bring. Calvin seems to believe that ‘good-deeds’ are the ultimate good. Arminians seem to believe that sons of good judgment are the good God desires.
If the maximum number of good deeds is the goal, then Calvin-god is doing things right. If sons of good judgment is the goal, then Arminius-god is doing it right.
“Prayers are up for both of them to get through what is an amazing blessing and can sometimes be a difficult time.”
Thank you. I think they will be fine. But I laughed myself silly when I heard he was trying to limit her to ‘normal’ foods - I pity the fool who steps between a pregnant woman and a food-craving! It would be like getting between Chuckie Schumer and a camera!