The 'Greater Good' Philosophical Notion

.

HP: My position is that God has the power of contrary choice, the 'possibility' exits He could choose other than He does, but simply never exercises such power nor does He, or will He ever, choose to act in a manner contrary to holiness. Your position has God creating powers for sentient beings that He Himself does not have, an absurd deduction IMHO.

HP: OK, once again you have a God creating powers for others He Himself does not possess. Simply absurd. Some Omnipotent God that would be. He is Omnipotent…..except for certain powers man possesses.

HP: A will DW???? A mind necessitated to compulsion has no will or makes any choices. Compulsion is god and compulsion alone decides if any between what it will coerce and what it will not. You trample on the clear meaning of every morla term imaginable. Take righteousness for instance. Righteousness denote a choice between two alternatives, the right and good being chose over the evil. Righteousness cannot be driven by compulsion any more than a rock can be moral in nature. If morality is to be predicated of anything, including but not limited to the righteous nature of God, contrary choice must exist as a possibility.

HP: That was indeed the case with Christ, for he was indeed tempted in ALL POINTS AS WE ARE (and how are we tempted?? When we are drawn away of our own lusts and enticed) yet He did not yield to those proclivities of the flesh and as such never sinned. Sinful desires do not constitute sin in and of themselves. Desires must be yielded to in order for sin to be conceived. Sin does not lie in the constitution of the flesh but rather in the will as we voluntarily yield to it. Listen to James once more and do not err.

Jas 1:14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.
16 Do not err, my beloved brethren.

HP: If that was true from the moment of election forward, as logic would demand if I were to accept what you have stated so far as the truth, it would be absurd to punish man for something absolutely unavoidable, and wickedly absurd to punish man in an eternal literal hell for an unavoidable fate such as you describe.

 

Here we have the logic of DW concerning a man before the throne of God in judgment. As he looks at God he exclaims: And you are going to sentence me to an eternal hell for something I have never been able to avoid due to my limitations as a man born sinful from birth, driven by the compulsion of my nature that was impossible to overcome. Here I am, a sinner from before ever doing evil or good, not being one of those elected to salvation. You God, have withheld from me, from before I ever did evil or good, the very election without which salvation was an impossibility even to conceive of, from the moment election to salvation was conceived forward. You say you are a God of justice, but how can justice punish one in an eternal hell for a fate that was absolutely impossible to overcome in light of your election of only some to salvation, I of one must not have been?? God, you are punishing me for doing something you yourself could not do, i.e., overcome necessitated fate, and again that before I ever in reality existed as a human, before I ever even had the possibility of my first choice and long before I ever did evil or good! Even you God cannot overcome necessitated fate and certainly know that it is an absolute impossibility for one driven by a compulsive nature to act contrary to it. You should know that being driven by your own compulsion, at least according to DW.

Oh yes DW, we do and we will look carefully at the Word of God and how you are twisting it to fit your philosophical notions as have been duly noted, all in good time. :thumbs:

 

HP: To twist this verse into concluding that if one sins that is going to work for the ultimate good of God, such a one is simply deceived. This verse does NOT state or imply that sin is working for the good of God period. If sin was working for the ultimate good of God, God would be defeating His own Good by stopping sin, something absurd to consider.

HP: Sin is not something God is the first cause of neither is sin the results of His righteous and Holy counsel. One would have to stand this verse on it’s head in order to conclude sin is working for the good of God. Sin works against God and His will, not in accordance to it.

HP: Certainly God can and does even now restrain evil for His ultimate good. This does not add one bit of credence to the ideas DW has set forth. Why he would bring up this verse for the topic at hand is beyond me.

 

HP: You are about the picture of impatience DW.

HP: You set forth so many philosophical notions unfounded in the Word of God it takes some time to get to all of them. Be patient.
:thumbs:

HP: No one has set forth more philosophy and philosophical notions than yourself DW. You have said so many contradictory things, like I agree with Steaver but I really disagreed with him etc. etc. that God knows full well why one has a hard time trying to keep the 'impossible to keep straight,' straight. Your theology and comments are a maelstrom of confusion. The rest of your paragraph is not only untrue, but a lie. Sorry, but that is the only way I can describe what you said in your personal attacks. I have responded and will continue to respond to your Scriptures and ideas as I feel lead an am able. You are not God by the way. He will be the final judge as to who is in accordance to His Word in the end. Your false judgments as to my thoughts not being God’s thoughts are duly noted.

You know something DW, I believe I am beginning to understand you by your personal attacks very well.

 

Thanks QF. I am not trying to be clever, but I am interested in the truth. The absurdity of a God creating man in His own image, but creating him with powers that even God Himself does not possess (nor could he driven by compulsion which in reality eliminates any possibility of choosing between two or more alternatives for anything) is simply a failure to exercise reason and wisdom in ones conclusions, philosophically or theologically thinking. When one eliminates the very ‘possibility’ of contrary choice, morality, for God, man, or any other sentient being, becomes an absolute chimera. All becomes merely necessitated or coerced. Compulsion becomes god and all responsibility centers in it.

 

HP: By faith in God's Word I believe that is in fact true. He is faithful and will always choose to do the Just, Righteous and Holy things. Yet if we eliminate the ‘possibility' of contrary choice from our thinking, all again becomes necessitated, the determined results of mere compulsion. Love is not driven by compulsion, with God or with man. God is love, not compulsion.

 

Concerning the notion of the word 'impossible' in Scripture dealing with issues involving moral beings or dealing with morality, it means totally and completely unwilling, and does not indicate or eliminate the 'possibility of contrary choice. The same goes for the word 'cannot.' 'Cannot' does not mean (again in the realm of morality) it is outside of the realm of possibilities, but rather it lies outside of the realm of ones will in relationship to it's chosen intents.

 

HP: You are acting in an arrogant and childish fashion DW, adding precious little to meaningful debate. One can certainly tell when you are running low on meaningful input. :thumbs:

 

HP: Here is a passage for DW to wax eloquent concerning. :thumbs: 1Jo 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

By the way, have you been considering the blind man, and it being 'imposssible' for such a one to see?????

 

HP: Possibly, in your own blinded eyes that is.

HP; Now let the reader follow the maelstrom of Calvinism demonstrated by DW as he responds to my next questions. Here he says one born again cannot sin because they are ‘created in true holiness and righteousness.’ Now for my question: DW, are you saying that Chrsitians never sin????? Are you saying you as a believer have never sinned??? Are you saying that it is impossible for you to sin???? Go ahead and tell us that one can be, and not be, a sinner at one and the same time.
(Here goes the false unfounded Calvinisitc notion that if a believer sins he does not in the spirit, but only in the flesh. )

Here are two Scriptures that debunk and refute such unscriptural false assertions.

1Jo 3:7 Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.
1Jo 3:10 In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother.