confused about Calvin

Hello Me4Him.

Because it would be presumptuous of me not to and a certain way to get a flat. As it would have been presumptuous of David if he had picked up one small stone to fell a giant.

I do not hope I pray that I have a safe journey and if I get a flat I am prepared for it. I call Green Flag.

David picked up five small stones to attack Goliath with.

Why do you not answer my questions? He did it this way because there was no other. MT 26:39 Going a little farther, he fell with his face to the ground and prayed, "My Father, if it is possible, may this cup be taken from me. Yet not as I will, but as you will."

Jesus was "ordained" (to come) "BEFORE" the foundation of the world.

And that means God created people for Hell and sin was intrinsic to the plan of God? Yes or no? He has to have done this regardless of doctrine unless we say God did not know. Some do believe He is not omniscient for this very reason. This has nothing to do with doctrine but a simple logical deduction. Since God knew those who would not escape yet He still creates them then one can say they were created for Hell. Better to believe He knows what He is about and accept the overwhelming scriptural evidence presented by many.

Those in Hell will be on view forever as we will be by them I think. Lk 16:19-31. They will not be forgotten as their punishment is our rejoicing in God's justice. If we ever forget about His justice He might have to do it again.

What does? It's all quite extrodinary. The idea that God creates people who He knows are going to an Hell He created is a thing one must come to terms with because it is an undeniable fact.
He commands belief not understanding. He commands us to take Him at His word or be in rebellion.

I'm not asking Him such things ask Him yourself. If you get an answer let me know what He says I could do with a laugh.

Still twisting the lingo? No 'Total' is necessary next to Sovereignty because Sovereignty is all encompassing. Total Sovereignty would be a tautology.

Like to buy that horse?? Like to? I did. But that opinion was only from a wretched fallen sinner. I do not judge God He does as He pleases and He will whatever. I do know this, Jesus Christ suffered more than any sinner ever will.

God should have joined a motoring organisation and then He would not have had to hope would He?

Scripture please. Scriptures like: Eph 1:11 In him we were also chosen, having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will...
The world is how it is meant to be or that scripture is in error.

Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

Would it be necessary... That is not your concern but believe is your duty. He does harden. I take it you mean, 'Why does God have to harden anyones heart'? Is that right? Since a man cannot obey God anyway why harden when it is hard already. But man does as he sees fit in regard to self-interest. Common sense prevails and Pharaoh needed hardening otherwise he would have used it, under God's control.

No one has said He does have they?

RO 9:22 What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath--prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory--

The lie above says that the objects of His wrath were prepared in advance as the elect were and those going to Hell are going to Hell for our benefit. to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy He wants us to understand what we have missed. His patience is that He does not stop everything now but waits for the rest of the elect to be born and born again.

Because they were man's not God's. The passage is talking about teachers who have the wrong message. I would say that all of an Arminians teachings are straw and will be burnt up. Arminian's teach that because God causes them to believe that.

I am not a servant I'm a Child of God, a Royal Priest and a Pearl of great price. My Brother died for me. Jesus said, "If you love me you will obey me."

This is where you go wrong. What is is. There is no escape for you 'God who creates souls for no other purpose than to condemn/destroy' because He must do. Is it love to create a person that is destined to Hell? No it cannot be in love that He does such. If He does it to show us what we have missed and to reveal His wrath to us to show us what we have missed what's that to you? You talk back to Him.

"MAJOR CONTRADICTIONS" is another tautology because any contradiction would be major if in scripture.

Did Jesus command you to be perfect? Did He command Israel to obey the law or not?

Isaiah 28:13 So then, the word of the LORD to them will become: Do and do, do and do, rule on rule, rule on rule; a little here, a little there--so that they will go and fall backward, be injured and snared and captured.

john.

 

me4him wrote:
"The fact that an imperfect world exist "PROVES" God isn't excercising "Total Sovereignty", else it would be "perfect"."
I know what you are saying, I think in your posts, and am in basic agreement, as I have stated elsewhere but this statement is technically not true, not to mention Biblically lacking.
Ed

 

I correct an error in my last post.

I answered: Because they were man's not God's.
That would be a confusing message and I retract it. The rest stands.

The passage is talking about teachers who have the wrong message. I would say that all of an Arminians teachings are straw and will be burnt up. Arminian's teach that because God causes them to believe that.


john.

 

Timtoolman said:

Dead in sins = unable to respond, dead?
Dead to sins later in Romans = unable to sin or respond to sin?

Calvinist defining of dead shot in the head.

Only if you assume that the word "dead" must have precisely the same meaning every time it is used figuratively in the Bible. In Rom. 6, where Paul speaks of being dead to sin, he means that having died, we are no longer enslaved to sin, since death sets one free from slavery (Rom. 6:6-7). It's a different metaphor (and context) from the one he uses in Eph. 2:1.

 

me4him said:

The fact that an imperfect world exist "PROVES" God isn't excercising "Total Sovereignty", else it would be "perfect".

There is no such thing as a "perfect" world. It's nonsense. God could have created any world he created, yet he could still have made it better by including one more good thing in it. The "best of all possible worlds" is the same kind of gibberish as the "largest of all possible numbers."

But the world God created is perfect in one important way: it was the world he intended and knew would come about, neither more nor less.

 

According to calvinism (or ransom) dead means dead...unable to respond, dead! That means whether spiritually dead, dead in sin, or dead to sin all means unconscious, unresponsive. I love the way calvinist's have to redefine terms to fit their theology, and then back pedal when their absolute definitions contradict Scripture.

 

I love the way calvinist's have to redefine terms to fit their theology, and then back pedal when their absolute definitions contradict Scripture.

You have a very vivid imagination, to say the least. No one has said the definition of "dead," as used figuratively in the New Testament by Paul, was "absolute."

 

God isn't "WILLING" for any to perish,
Total sovereignty excercised under the "Will of God" would prevent "ANY" from perishing.

The fact that sin exist shows that "God's Will" isn't being carried out by man, as a result of that, there are "TWO WILLS" being excercised in the world today, that of God's and that of Satan's, or of the Flesh,

that is unless you would want to state that God "IS WILLING" for some to perish.


This world of sin exist because of "MAN'S FREE WILL", (Adam/Eve) God doesn't want "robots", and the only way to sort out the believers from unbelievers is to present them with a "FREE WILL" choice, between God/Satan, while "in this world".

Their "CHOICE" then becomes their Judgement/destination, God doesn't condemn any to hell, man condemns himself, and in spite of God's will that none perish.

Here's the part that Calvin missed, the free will choice will continue on the "New Earth", we won't be "robots" serving God, our "individuality", with all our differences, our likes/dislikes, will continue "in heaven".

"LOVE" is a "FREE WILL CHOICE" we make, we're "COMMANDED" to "LOVE", not "programmed".

"Total sovereignty" eliminates any/all "commands" by it's "program", making the scriptures totally un-necessary along with all the "instructions" to obtain/maintain a Righteous life.

God doesn't "ORDER" as in "programming", but God "COMMANDS", and commandments can be broken,

"Total Sovereignty" (programming) can't be "broken".

As I said, Calvinist have a very "narrow view" of God, you can't just look at this world, but at the over all plan, the "reason/purpose" this world exist prior to the "next world", and if you can't explain "WHY" this world exist, then you really don't understand the scriptures.

God will only "CHOSE THEM" to live in the next world that "CHOSE HIM".

Ga 6:8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption;

but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.

Ga 6:7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

Man choses "WHAT HE'LL SOW".

 

"PRECISELY", God created a "perfect world" and "man" (Adam/Eve) fouled it up, God said he would then create another "perfect world" in which only those of "THIS WORLD" who chose to believe/obey God (Jesus) would live,

Man has a "CHOICE", to sow/reap the things of this world, or the next world.

Those who have the "HEART" to follow God, he'll save, those who don't, he won't, our choice becomes "God's choice".

This world is only a "Separation" of the "WHEAT/TARES".

 

It amuses me that you would use the word "precisely" as though agreeing with me, immediately before asserting the precise opposite of what I had posted.

 

Maybe your "Logic" is "one sided"???

Walk around to the "other side" and take a "look at it", only when you can "SEE" both sides, are you able to comprehend the "WHOLE".

 

Maybe your "Logic" is "one sided"???

Or "MAYBE" your arguments are "as" incoherent as "your" writ"ing" STYLE.

 

Jesus was "ordained" (to come) "BEFORE" the foundation of the world.

1Pe 1:20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world,

"IF" God created a "Perfect world", then "WHY" would he also have to create a "Redeemer"???

Was sin the results of "God's predestine "WILL" or the "FREE WILL CHOICE" given to Adam/Eve in the Garden???</font>[/QUOTE] Both. Though Adam and Eve before the fall were certainly under a different economy than we are after the fall.

God was neither surprised nor the author of the choice. However, you cannot say that it conflicted with His eternal plan because it in fact facilitated it.

Then you agree that the "WILL OF GOD" was for "Adam/Eve" to be "FREE" to make their own "CHOICE",</font>[/QUOTE] Yes they made a choice. And by that choice as representatives of all mankind, they bound themselves and their progeny in the shackles of sin. In the day they ate of the fruit... they "died"- being separated from God by a gulf that can only be spanned by God's grace and not man's decision.

Again, since the decision to send Christ pre-dated Adam's sin, the act did not thwart God's perfect will...

But of course you haven't answered that question yet... have you? What are you afraid of? You know that answering the question will undercut your position, don't you?

No. Some might like some arminians believe you can lose your salvation while others don't. But I suspect most calvinists are satisfied to let scripture speak for itself... and it does not make God responsible for sin.

Then why do you argue about God "repenting" as if His plan has changed.

Is it just a diversion? Probably so since the answer non-calvinist would probably give an answer similar to mine... an answer that neither harms nor helps either position.

Absolutely... and man being totally depraved will not exercise that free will to do anything but continue in his own, self-centered, self-worshipping sin.

It is only when freed by regeneration that the will can be employed to make a "good" choice... which is a "good work".

If that choice is based on an independent evaluation of the offer (and not regeneration) then you have just established a system that makes man's goodness and his work primary in his personal salvation.

Right. You have just demonstrated biblically that man can use his free will to make a bad choice concerning salvation and faith... now all you have to do is "unwrite" the scriptures that show he must be changed spiritually before making a good choice. [

No. With all due respect to Jack Hyles , it is sin that men are judged for. Unbelief numbers among the sins but it isn't the only one.

Two points. First, man is most certainly condemned for violating the law... even when he hasn't heard it in its biblical form.

Second, God is not respecter of persons... which He most certainly becomes if He is dependent on a "good decision" made by some people.

There are only two ways to interpret the passage you allude to- either universalism or something other than universalism.

If "willing" carries the definition you imply while arguing against calvinists then let's just close up shop because God will ultimately save everyone.

Calvinism most certainly does allow for judgment/condemnation based on any sin including unbelief.

It is really incredible how predisposed non-calvinists are to telling calvinists what they can and cannot believe rather than simply asking questions and considering the responses.

 

Oh, so it doesn't get lost Me4Him... for about the third or fourth time:

Does man have the ability to thwart the perfect will of God?

 

I echo Scott here. Several of us have aske you this question to which you fail to answer. Why ignore it?

 

I would ask you to define "perfect will".

 

(HCSB)Mat 23:37 "Jerusalem, Jerusalem! The city who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her. How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, yet you were not willing!

Is this an example of man thwarting God's will according to the following verse?

2Pe 3:9 The Lord does not delay His promise, as some understand delay, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish , but all to come to repentance.

 

"Hillbilly/Southern" is a little hard for "Yanks" to comprehend.

 

Scripture says Jesus was only sent to the Jews and the reason he failed, was because they (Jews) rejected him.

Mt 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

Joh 1:11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

Jesus said he was "WILLING" to take Jerusalem under his wing, but they "would not".

"Total Sovereignty" dictates God had no intentions of "ALLOWING" the Jews to accept Jesus as Messiah at that time.

Jesus said himself, said he only done the "WILL" of the Father.


Evidently, it was the "WILL" of the father for the Jews to receive Jesus as Messiah, and "THEM" (Jews) be the "Light" of Jesus around the world instead of the Gentiles.

Isa 49:6 And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.

So, I ask you, was the "WILL" of the father accomplished, "per the Will" of God???

 

IN romans 6:11 it is the same word as in eph. I agree we have to take context and the whole Bible acually into account. That is why I reject calvinist's defining of a peson spiritually dead. It is unbiblical and unprovable. Total inability cannot be prove by scripture. The best example being Adam and Eve after the fall. They knew who God was, they were fallen, but undertood him but the fellowship was gone.