Featured Rain on the "Just" and "Unjust" ?

Our will, the will to live, the will to eat may influence our free agency but it does not make the choice for us. I don't believe freedom can belong to the will. A free agency has to fight the will to do the will of God. To me free will is not in the equation at all.Their is other parts of the soul that makes decision.

Satan's wickedness was found in him not created in him. God had other plans to make him a guardian, thus satan went against the will of God, Rebelled.

In other words he worshiped what was created himself over the creator who is blessed forever.

When i quite smoking 17 years ago, it was not a free will decision I had to fight my will to smoke. It was a war.

When one goes on a diet you fight your will to eat what you want to eat. It is another war with your will.

Matthew 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.”

Here is the birth of sin

James 1:
13 When tempted, no one should say, “God is tempting me.” For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; 14 but each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed. 15 Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death


To God their is only His will that is life or our will that leads to death. To say God has free will to me says His will can change. We either believe in Jesus and have life or don't and continue to condemnation.

To follow Jesus is a fight against our will.

 

Your argument does not help the Calvinist view because in Calvinism, there is no "IF peradventure". This verse shows that those being instructed are those that oppose THEMSELVES which is hardly in line with the Calvinist view of total inability of someone that can not be instructed otherwise.

Furthermore, in verse 27, this person is taken captive by the devil at the devil's will. This would conflict with Calvinist theology because Calvinist theology holds that unsaved man does what he does because his nature was foreordained to do so, and he can not do otherwise, but this verse has the person being taken by Satan at HIS will.

However, this verse is not talking about JUST the unsaved. It is talking about rebellious believers. Believers are often told to repent. Rev 2:2-5. Believers can be taken captive by the devil if they do not repent and suffer physical death for consistent rebellion. 1 Cor 5:5, 1 John 5:16, Romans 8:13. That doesn't mean they lose their salvation, but they give up the right to be part of the ministry of the church and sometimes God permits the devil to orchestrate their physical demise.

And notice that the potential granting of this repentance to the acknowledging of the truth is from Timothy meek presentation of the truth of which Paul is telling Timothy to be careful. Paul not only wants unbelievers to be instructed in truth, but believers as well (see John 7:17,Eph 5:9, James 3:14, 2 Peter 1:12, 3 John 3,8) Why would Timothy need to be careful if God intended on granted a person repentance against their will? The very fact that men have free will and often reject the gospel or the truth about doctrine as a believer is often because of the sometimes harsh way in which it is presented, but that can only be a problem if the person listening is offended and has free will which is why Paul tells Timothy to do so with meekness.

 

So do you believe that God was OBLIGATED to create us? Did God create us and the universe because He HAD TO?

I would also submit that your analogies vacillate back and forth between will and desire. Will and freedom is how you make your decisions which can be influenced by desires, the desire to do right, the desire to do wrong, even apathy is a desire. Desire does not determine what you do. Your wanting to quit smoking did not control your reaction to it, that is your will. Your freedom dictates between choosing to smoke, or choosing not to smoke, desire only provides the distinction of the options that you have, and the reasoning whether such desires are good or bad, but they are not necessarily synonymous (as shown by the desire to quit and the want to quit, without actually ever quitting. There are those who are not saved that quit smoking as well). By your will you chose to obey your desire and that's where the conflict arises for the sinner and saved both (Romans 6:14-18).

 

A creator creates and what He creates has a free agency even knowing how it will end up.

James 1:
16 Don’t be deceived, my dear brothers and sisters. 17 Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of the heavenly lights, who does not change like shifting shadows. 18 He chose to give us birth through the word of truth, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of all he created.

Our will is our desires, that has to be fought beat into submission. Free agency we can believe in but free will is simply ridiculous, freedom will not belong to the will. We must say not my will but your will be done, that is what Jesus did denied His will and teaching us to do the same.

 

Actually I am. I'm hitting the point at the very core.

It has everything to do with what we are talking about.

I'm not confusing at all.

i've never said that God depends on anything. If fact I've said quite the opposite on many occasions.

no no no no. Having an offer of salvation in has nothing to do with if a man can blame God or not. the sinner cannot blame God because man is the one that sinned. Man deserves his punishment. Whether a "bonafide offer of salvation" is given or not has nothing to do with man deserving hell or not. So even if God created man for the sole purpose of sending him to hell(I don't hold this view) He would have every right to do so and man would still go because he deserves hell.

No, He would be punished because man is a sinner. That's why he would be punished. God predetermining not to offer salvation doesn't negate that man was going to hell because of his sin.

 

Calvinist do believe in repentance. To say otherwise is to be dishonest or have a severe lack of reading comprehension. Calvinist do believe that man repents. It's God that grants this ability to repent(2 Timothy 2:25) and thus man has a change of mind and turns from sin to God.

Calvinism has nothing to do with universalism. Calvinist view of repentance is biblical. Your straw man is not.

I always find it comicial when non calvinist try to tell calvinist what they really believe. Every time that happens, it's a staw man.

 

Notice the bold from the first and second quotes. They are both inconsistent statements. This is exactly what I have maintained through this thread and others that any form of deterministic theology must face a constant barrage of self-defeating and contradictory statements.

However, the last statement did not directly address the question. It addressed it indirectly which is still inconsistent with your first quote, but it did not directly answer the question as to whether God was obligated to create, and did He create because He HAD TO. Your statement would imply that God had to create out of necessity because He is A creator. But how do you differentiate between A creator? Unless you believe as many metaphysicists believe that matter and thus creation itself is eternally existent, then God has not always created which is a part of His character that only becomes apparent once something is actually created. To argue that God created out of necessity because He is a creator would make creation eternally existent and a necessary part of God which is classic PANTHEISM.

 

If it has been laid out before it has started knowing the beginning to end. When you have the end result, Changes happens within the boundaries God has already laid out. God never changes His will

This is how i view me in the determination group

"The system of truth is not one straight line, but two. No man will ever get a right view of the gospel until he knows how to look at the two lines at once. I am taught in one book to believe that what I sow I shall reap: I am taught in another place, that "it is not of him that willeth nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy." I see in one place, God presiding over all in providence; and yet I see, and I cannot help seeing, that man acts as he pleases, and that God has left his actions to his own will, in a great measure. Now, if I were to declare that man was so free to act, that there was no presidence of God over his actions, I should be driven very near to Atheism; and if, on the other hand, I declare that God so overrules all things, as that man is not free enough to be responsible, I am driven at once into Antinomianism or fatalism. That God predestines, and that man is responsible, are two things that few can see. They are believed to be inconsistent and contradictory; but they are not. It is just the fault of our weak judgment. Two truths cannot be contradictory to each other. If, then, I find taught in one place that everything is fore-ordained, that is true; and if I find in another place that man is responsible for all his actions, that is true; and it is my folly that leads me to imagine that two truths can ever contradict each other. These two truths, I do not believe, can ever be welded into one upon any human anvil, but one they shall be in eternity: they are two lines that are so nearly parallel, that the mind that shall pursue them farthest, will never discover that they converge; but they do converge, and they will meet somewhere in eternity, close to the throne of God, whence all truth doth spring.:

C.H. Spurgeon

 

You fail to understand the definition of dishonesty. To be dishonest is when a person KNOWS and BELIEVES that what they are saying is not true. I do not BELIEVE that Calvinism teaches repentance as I have already defined it above because repentance is a volitional act of the will. Calvinism does not teach that man acts of his own free will in choosing Christ but that God forces man to receive Him being one of the elect and that is NOT Biblical repentance.

So for me to say that while fully believing it to be true is not dishonesty. It would be dishonest if I did not believe it were true, and then still maintain statements that implied that it was against what I believe and know to be true.

The Calvinist on the other hand KNOWS that God does not love all, and yet tells sinners this anyway. THAT is dishonest. You have no grounds to debate that issue because you admit that you are not a Calvinist (unless you are being dishonest). My argument was clearly against the CALVINIST VIEW not YOURS IN PARTICULAR. It only applies to you in particular if the shoe fits. If the shoe doesn't fit, then you have no room to argue against it.

And talk about reading comprehension. It is clear that I understand Calvinism much better than you do, because I know that Calvinists do not believe that John 3:16 applies to all, and yet you used it in an attempt to prove that Calvinists do believe that God loves all. I know that Calvinists do not believe that there is any IFS about a persons salvation, they call it IRRESISTIBLE grace, and yet 2 Timothy 2:25 says IF peradventure God will give them repentance which shows that you are misinterpreting the verse. You can not have irresistible grace and IF God grants repentance at the same time and be consistent in your assertion about the Calvinist view of repentance, not to mention I just gave a thorough explanation of 2 Timothy 2:25 , none of which you refuted.

 

I rest my case.

 

You can't rest a case that you never made

 

His 'temperament' depends on how much he's had to drink. Notice HoS hasn't posted since this post of your's.

I appreciate your attempt to be a sergeant of arms, but I think most here don't really care if who they're corresponding with is a troll (especially if he's 'on their side'), they just want to be heard.

 

I disagree that God could have made people without the ability to sin.

Jesus said sin is necessary.

Mat 18:7 Woe unto the world because of offences! for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh!

Jesus said that it "must needs be that offences come", so sin is necessary, even for God. Why? I believe God is a God of love who does not force anyone to love him, but must allow all men to either choose to love him or hate him consistent with his nature. This makes the possibility of sin unavoidable and necessary.

So I believe your view is error.

And your view does make God appear to be a liar. God repeatedly tells all men it is his desire they stop sinning, all the while knowing the non elect are born with a sin nature imposed on them without choice by God's own decree that compels them to sin, and yet God does not regenerate them to enable them to stop sinning, which God knows is the only way they CAN stop sinning in your view.

So God says he desires them to stop sinning, but God chooses not to enable them to stop sinning, proving that God does not desire that they stop sinning.

And God having two opposing wills is nonsensical. If God has one will that desires men to not sin, and another will that desires men to sin, then God is very confused and opposed to his own self. Jesus refuted this view in scripture.

Mat 12: 25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand:
26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand?
27 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges.
28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.
29 Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house.
30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad.
31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.

Jesus argued that even Satan is smart enough not to be opposed to himself. God is much smarter than Satan.

And it is a very dangerous thing to attribute evil to God.

 

You made it for me. Like I said elsewhere: at best reckless and at worst false witness.

 

....methinks this could be the overall intent with 'the big picture', not with just HoS alone, and not with just the BB alone, but with the general view of Christianity itself; to present it to be as ugly as possible. People from all over the world can observe what goes on here.

 

Wow....I like that sister! :thumbs:

 

I do recall Larry where the teachers of the LAW were accusing the Lord of being a drunk. Do we want to potentially falsely accuse?

If he is a rogue, then Im confident that he will eventually step into the cross hairs...thats inevitable. Patience brother.

 

You two realize that these are professing Christians here that have been taken captive by the devil by the will of God, right?

 

Were we not held captive since Adam's sin. If your identifying after profession of faith....well, now your confusing me.

 

Peruse the context.