The Relationship between Theology and Philosophy

Why don't you try reading ALL my post and you will see that is exactly what I have already done. Note particular my position on INWARD compulsion in contrast to OUTWARD compulsion.

 

Inward compulsion

Jn. 3:And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

Rom. 8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

Rom. 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.

Isa. 64: 7 And there is none that calleth upon thy name, that stirreth up himself to take hold of thee: for thou hast hid thy face from us, and hast consumed us, because of our iniquities.

Jer. 13:23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.

John 10:25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father’s name, they bear witness of me.
26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.

 

I gave my interpretations in the two previous posts to the scripture one and you simply ignored them. The scriptures were given as additional support to the interpretation I have already presented.

What you need to learn is to deal with the evidence placed before you instead of simply ignoring it and acting like it was never given. I have yet to hear any intelligent response to the evidence I have given in the post where I distinguish OUTWARD versus INWARD compulsion. I have yet to hear any response to my post on Romans 9 to your "national" interpretation. In both cases, you simply ignore the evidence presented as though I never gave it and then have the audacity to claim I am not responding to your posts. If I don't respond to evidence you have given, it is because I have not seen the post.

 

I mean the same way God is compelled INWARDLY to choose to do right BECAUSE his NATURE compells him to make that choice. This is why there are certain things that God CANNOT do or CANNOT choose to do; for example, lie. It is not because there is any OUTWARD compulsion that forces him not to lie or forces him to tell the truth but because INWARDLY he is of such a NATURE that LOVES truth and it is this LOVE for truth that compells him to always choose what is true.

Likewise, FALLEN man is not compelled OUTWARDLY by God or forced to make any choices. The FALLEN nature within man COMPELLS him to choose to resist God and refuse to submit to the Law of God (Rom. 3:10-12; 8:7) because he is of such a NATURE that he LOVES darkness rather than light and will not come to the light.

John 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

His INWARD DESIRES are opposed to the light, opposed to submitting to any final authority but himself and it is this INWARD compulsion of a SELF-CENTERED nature that CONTROLS all his choices. He is a willing SERVANT of sin. He is willingly blinded by Satan and bound by Satan (2 Cor. 4:4). This is what makes him incapable of spiritual discernment, eyes to see, and hears to hear:

Deut. 5:29 O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!

Only God can give such a heart:

Deut. 29:4 Yet the LORD hath not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day.

This is why a man MUST be "born again" and this is what God does in the New Covenant:

Ezek. 36:26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

In the New birth God does not EXTERNALLY compel them to repent and trust in Christ but he works IN them both to will and to do His good pleasure by giving them ANOTHER NATURE that "delights in the law of God" and it is that new LOVE for righteousness that compels the will to obey.

 

HP, Give your best shot and prove that these verses do not prove the depravity of man.
Secondly, if they do not prove the depravity of man how do they prove your philosophy of Finneyism?

I will give you one example. You can start with it and take a jab at the rest as well.

Jeremiah 13:23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.

Let's look at the verse again:
Can the Ethiopian change his skin (Jeremiah was not referring to Michael Jackson ). No, the Ethiopian skin's remains the same color from birth to death. It never changes to white. It never changes to the color of the Jew or of the Chinese. He is black from birth to death. He cannot of his own will choose to change his skin. This is an example of man, a sinner by birth, who cannot change his nature from birth to death. The only way for him to be changed is supernaturally.

Can the leopard change his spots? To the rhetorical question being asked the obvious answer is NO. From birth to death he will always have spots, not stripes or any other pattern. By its own will it cannot change. It cannot change just as man cannot change its sinful nature that it has from birth to death.

then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.
The forceful conclusion of these three parallel statements is that you cannot change your nature. You have been doing evil from your birth up until now, and cannot change. You have a depraved nature and sin naturally. Without supernatural intervention you cannot but help but do evil. You were born depraved. You have a sin nature.
There is no verse in the Bible that is so clear as this one.

You can answer this one as well as the rest that Dr. Walter's posted.

 

I know that nobody reads and interprets the Bible in a theological/philosophical vacuum, including Augustine. What's interesting about Augustine is how studying the Bible corrected many of his Manichean philosophies. That's what happens to me almost every time I open the Bible - I get some correction to some worldly philosophies I'm holding on to. Doesn't that happen for you?

 

All men are not reasonable. That is Finneyism, your typical Oberlin Theology. All men are not basically good. They are evil and therefore not reasonable.

What can man do, when he tries to reason about God with his own philosophy?

Jeremiah 17:5 Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD.
--He is cursed.

Jeremiah 17:9 The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?
--Man's heart is too deceitful to trust in his own philosophy about God. The only authority he has is to go straight to the inspired Word of God, putting all philosophies aside.

 

You deny that God's nature dictates his moral choices but that he is free to choose contrary to his nature, so tell us DP, is your god a God of love only or is he free to choose to be a God of hate? That is the power of contrary choice! Tell us DP is your god free to choose to lie and sin as well to be free to act righteously and holy? That is the power of contrary choice!

Tell us DP, is your god capable of choosing to break his promises? That is the power of contrary choice!

If you are right about the power of contrary choice then we should never read in scripture there are things God cannot be or choose to do.

Mal 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.


NOTE: Mal. 3:6 gives the immutability of God as the basis for God not breaking his promise to Jacob - therefore this is MORAL immutablitly as well


Tit 1:2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began

NOTE: If God is free to act and choose contrary to his nature than he is free to lie and therefore we should never read "cannot"

Heb 6:18 That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us:

NOTE: If God is free to act and choose contrary to his nature than he is free to lie and therefore we should never read "impossible" in regard to lying



Jas. 1:13 ¶ Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

NOTE: If God is free to act and choose contrary to his nature than he is free to choose to be tempted and there we should never read "cannot" be tempted.


Jas 1:17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.

NOTE: If God is free to act and choose contrary to his nature than he is free to be variable or change and we should never read "NO variableness"


Heb 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

NOTE: If God is free to act and choose contrary to his nature than he is free to choose unfaithfulness and to violate His own word and thus to be and act differently from one day to another day and we should never read "the same" as Hebrews 13:8 has reference to faithfulness to His Word.

As you can clearly see, the god of HP is not the God of the Bible. The God of the Bible CANNOT choose to be or act contrary to his righteous nature as he is IMMUTABLE in his moral nature. His nature compells him to ALWAYS act within the boundaries of holiness and righteousness and he CANNOT act contrary to His nature. He is INWARDLY compelled to be and act according to His nature. That is why He can be described as "I AM that I AM".

God is NOT FREE to act unrighteously. God is NOT FREE to lie as the Bible says it is "impossible" for God to lie. God does not have the power of choice CONTRARY to His own nature. However, the god of DP does but DP's god is not the God of the Bible.

 

The god of DP is not the God of the Bible as we have shown clearly from Scripture. DP's god has the power to choose contrary to his nature and therefore it is not "impossible" for DP's god to lie as DP's god can choose to hate, be unfaithful to His word and change from day to day his moral character.

DP believes his illustration supports his position. It certainly does support his view of a mutable god. However, it does not support the Biblical view of God or man. The little boy does not act like God as God loves righteousness and that love for righteousness is the inward compulsion due to his righteous immutable nature.

Likewise, the little boy LOVES unrighteousness and that LOVE for unrighteousness is the inward compulsion due to his unrighteous immutable nature.

Rom. 8:7"For the carnal mind is enmity with God and is NOT subject to the law of God; and NEITHER indeed CAN be."

Ezek. 13:23 Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.

It is impossible for the Leopard to change his spots. That takes a miracle from God. It is impossible for the fallen nature of man to subject himself to the law of God. That takes a miracle of God - God giving a NEW HEART (new desires, new want to, new love).

DP does not believe in the God of the Bible or does he believe the Bible's clear and explicit teaching in regard to the fallen nature of man. Jesus explains that the immutable nature of fallen man is due to his INWARD COMPULSION or LOVE for darkness and hatred for light:

John 3: 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

God does not change because His LOVE for righteousness and HATRED for unrighteousness COMPEL his every choice. Fallen man does not change because his LOVE for unrighteousness and HATRED for righteousness COMPEL his every choice.

The true illustration of the little boy would be. “You don’t understand daddy. I am just like God. God does what he LIKES and so do I. I am just as free to do what I love to do as God is and I just don't LIKE what you are telling me to do. To which the father replies, “Bend over son. I am going to give you a little something to help direct your compulsion.”

 

A young boy disobeys his fathers commands to which the young son replies, “You don’t understand daddy. I act just like God, I can only act out of compulsion!” To which the father replies, “Bend over son. I am going to give you a little something to help direct your compulsion.”

Notice that DP's illustration contradicts his own view of God. The analogy is that we are like the little body and daddy is like God. The little boy admits to INWARD compulsion or a nature that is committed to doing unrighteousnesss. However, DP's solution to this INWARD problem is OUTWARD force by the father or God. So God forces us to change our will.

As I pointed out the analogy is flawed in its primary point. God ALWAYS does what he LIKES or what he WANTS to do. His LIKES and His WANTS are determined by his IMMUTABLE righteous and holy nature. That is why He CANNOT be evil or be hatred or violate his promises.

Likewise the little boy ALWAYS does what he LIKES and what he WANTS to do because his LIKES and his WANTS are determined by his IMMUTABLE unrighteous and unholy nature. This is why he is at ENMITY with God and is NOT subject himself to the Law of God and NEITHER indeed CAN be.

Now, this does not mean that external circumstances do not force him to choose and do things he does not like or want. However, it does mean that when forced to be or do such things it is ALWAYS contrary to his desires and therefore ALWAYS a choice and change due to a wrong motive. Why? Because EXTERNAL coersion cannot change an INTERNAL problem and yet that is DP's solution in his analogy.

 

A young boy disobeys his fathers commands to which the young son replies, “You don’t understand daddy. I act just like God, I can only act out of compulsion!” To which the father replies, “Bend over son. I am going to give you a little something to help direct your compulsion.” - DP


God does not change because His LOVE for righteousness and HATRED for unrighteousness COMPEL his every choice. Fallen man does not change because his LOVE for unrighteousness and HATRED for righteousness COMPEL his every choice.

The true illustration of the little boy would be. “You don’t understand daddy. I am just like God. God does what he LIKES and so do I. I am just as free to do what I love to do as God is and I just don't LIKE what you are telling me to do. To which the father replies, “Bend over son. I am going to give you a little something to help direct your compulsion.”

DP's god is free to exercise contrary choice to be a god of love one day and a god of hate the next day. DP's god is free to exercise contrary choice to be a god of truth one day and a god of lies the next day. DP's god is free to exercise contrary choice to be faithful to His word one day and unfaithful to His word another day. DP's god is free to excerise contrary choice because DP's god is not immutably righteous and holy but by free choice change from being holinesss to unholiness, righteous to unrighteous as that is what is required to have the power of contrary choice.

I will take the IMMUTABLE God that CANNOT lie because his nature of holiness makes it IMPOSSIBLE for him to lie and there He always chooses what he LOVES and WANTS as they are the same as both are compulsions of a righteous nature.

 

DW: Is it not true that often the utterances of the prophets might (should) be considered as "duble entendres" (sp?) ?