Did God Create Evil and Sin for His Glory?

Since the Lord causes the will in man to be willing how is that force? Force would be a broken lock, He has the key.

john.

 

No corrupt communication has, YOU just say it has. You assertions are false. I love the way you shift things. Beloved said Aminians are not Christians and follow a false gospel and a false Jesus. You said that's right not all Arminians, Calvinists, Baptists, etc are Christians. Nice try! That is not what he was saying--he was questioning..well no, DENYING the salvation of ALL ARMINIANS BECAUSE THEY ARE ARMINIAN. Big difference. As a Mod, you are supposed to deal with that.

As for saying you don't follow Calvin or Arminius, you follow the Bible--PLEASE! You immediatley exalt yourself above both by that statement and imply neither one of them followed Scripture, but you do. If you had studied their works to see if they were Biblical or not, you might qualify to say that and be taken seriously, but since you admit you haven't, and I already discerned that from the way you post, you make empty claims.

Jacob Arminius followed the Scripture. The reason people call themselves Arminian is to distinguish themselves from the errors of Calvinism and help people know what they do believe.

Also, I believe calling a spade a spade is GODLY and Christlike. When men blaspheme, and when they impute evil and sin to God, I call it blasphemy. And so does the Living God.

 

That's not the way the BB saw it.

 

God ENABLES the will through His DRAWING of ALL MANKIND John 12:32 --

But as HE States "I stand at the door and KNOCK if anyone hears AND OPENS the door then I WILL COME IN".

This is not a picture of Christ opening the door from the inside - FOR you.

It is the predicted Arminian scenario.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Since JohnP claims that choice is being removed/excluded in the statement given to us in Acts 2 -- I press JohnP with "the details"

No answer from JohnP

But the text says "Christ was handed over to you" and that ALONE (according to John P is supposed to prove to us that choice was REMOVED). Yet all it shows is that Christ was handed over to the Jews -- nothing MORE.

The question remains.

Then - anticipating that JohnP might have wanted to prop up his argument by furthering it - by arguing "yes but once handed over to them the Jews had no choice but to choose to abuse Christ"

Here I point to the inconvenient detail that the Acts 2 text does not say "handed over to you to abuse" as if they had no choice but to follow God's bidding and abuse His Son. The text merely states "handed over to them" NOT "and force them to abuse the Christ" as JohnP's argument seems to imply when he says in essence "Where is the choice in that"?

But we continue to get "no answer"

Clearly the text did not support the JohnP conclusion.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Sin gets way to much credit . It isn’t the other side of the coin in relation to good. It’s almost illusionary, vapor. There is only Gods’ love and the choice to have communion with it. I know when an evil nature becomes blatantly manifest it can be very destructive to the world around us, but it has no bearing whatsoever in the eternal perspective. Sin, after all, isn’t what damns us. It’s the rejection of Christ.
Evil, or sin is the natural by-product of the gift of free will. It is an undeniable necessity for God’s divine construct. Big deal.
Did he create it for his glory? No, he created the universe for his glory. It is fallen man that pitiably needs to have an illusionary antithesis of God’s will as a reference to understand and appreciate Gods goodness.

 

I haven't seen you for ages Bob, how you going?

You are a universalist at heart old man. "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day. John 6:44.
You claim all men are saved. Those the Father draws will be raised up, it's a promise.

He is talking to Christians - REV 3:14 "To the angel of the church in Laodicea write:...
This is not an evangelical call.

You should be so lucky. Why then just the Church?

Hello pLug. RO 5:18 Consequently, just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men.
We are conceived condemned man. This is our condition at birth, dead in our sins.

john.

 

Ahhh - so you remembered!:wavey:

As you can see - I have saved your quotes from our previous exchanges. As you noted the old BB references no longer work - but I leave the links in anyway for authenticity.

Actually as it turns out I am not the author of John 12:32 "I will draw ALL MANKIND unto Me" -- God is.

And your John 6 reference when combined with John 12 (same author same book same topic same word same context) we SEE that Calvinism really "needed" to take John 6 "in the total and absolute abscence" of John 12 eh?

But I could not oblige them -- Sorry about that.

As for the sequence being that God first draws and then it is those drawn "the ALL mankid of John 12: that will be raised up if they in fact choose to ACT on the enabling of that drawing -- (the choice that is DISABLED in Depravity is ENABLED in the drawing of God -- even by Calvinist standards)

In Christ,

Bob

 

#1. He is talking to "the lost" the fact that lost people attend church is not exactly "front page news".

#2. In the case of the "lost" they are all ALONE without Christ - and Christ stands on the OUTSIDE knocking "Convicting the WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment" John 16.

For "HE is the light that coming into the WORLD enlightens EVERY MAN" John 1.

Why does He do that? Because "He is not willing for ANY to perish but for ALL to come to repentance"!

THere is no "Just the church" in God's Word for "ALL scripture is given by inspiritation from God AND is profitable for instruction" 2Tim 3:16 it is meant for ALL of us.

Your wooden structure above would attempt to confine the message to the lost "to just those people already in church at the time of the John" - how sad.

It is the SAME "ALL" -

In Christ,

Bob

 

How could I forget you?

The cut'n'paste man.

Yes? I'm sure I have never used the word 'reverence'. How can we check if it ain't there? A link to nowhere is not proof.

Did I say you were? John 6:44 "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him...
The Father draws all men you say - and Jesus says of those that are drawn - ...and I will raise him up at the last day.
You are a universalist.

Why are you not perfect yet Bob? Is it wilful sin or are you not free to use your free will in attaining perfection?

john.

 

In your lust to get yourself banned from BaptistBoard by blindly attacking a moderator, you neglected to notice that the quote from Calvin was posted by me.

I suspect you've not read the Institutes yourself, or if you have, it was from the standpoint of finding arrows for your quiver, and not for educational purposes.

My previous contentions stand. The sovereignty of God is a fact. Within that sovereignty, man has a free will. That you cannot see this as noncontradictory is not my problem.

 

This is contradiction itself tragic. If man is free to choose then God isn't Sovereign in that choice is He? If you want to make sovereign mean one that holds some power then you are not taking into account that God is The Despot. That is what Sovereign Lord means.


john.

 

That's what you say, but not what serious Reformed theology teaches.

Insisting that God must be thus-and-such, or not be God, is placing limitations on One who is unlimited, and in a way it is self-deifying -- claiming that the limited intellect of creation can understand, categorize, and quantify the Creator.

 

Well, facts do tend to hit us in the head like a ton of bricks sometimes.

 

Make sure of all things. If you accept contradiction because you have respect for men then scripture falls by the wayside. The scripture clearly states that it was God that caused our disobedience. For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all. Romans 11:32.

Insisting on a thing is wrong then? Even if scripture insists on it? Nothing can be known? I limit God to what He says not on what I perceive to be right and wrong.

You cannot prove God is Sovereign by claiming He gives it away but I do by saying He keeps Sovereignty to Himself, because He is Sovereign.

What facts tragic? Opinions are not facts and until you overcome For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all. Romans 11:32.
And:
RO 9:10 Not only that, but Rebekah's children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad--in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls--she was told, "The older will serve the younger." 13 Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."

You know the reaction my faith causes on the BB, what reaction would have met the Reformers. Matches please?

john.

 

I just love it when God's review of the HISTORY of Edom and Israel in Malachi is quoted showing how BOTH nations made choices and how God rewarded them - is spun around AS IF that proved Calvinism.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Quote:
Ahhh - so you remembered!

Actually from the way you started out posting here recently I was very doubtful that you were the same guy at all. I half expected you to say of my historic quotes of you "hey that is not me it is another JohnP".

In Christ,

Bob

 

Quote:An Arminian said
But Calvinists would have us believe that the glorious Saviour is a sadistic child abuser who made billions of souls simply to damn them so he could show us how great he is.

So when Calvinists quote Malachi speaking of the HISTORY of Edom and Israel - in a way to suggest that God STARTED OUT hating the infant Esau -- what "point" are they not making that is listed in the quote above?

In Christ,

Bob