OSASers must believe that God created human robots!

Status
Not open for further replies.

corinth77777

learner
Nov 15, 2013
3,089
441
✟99,135.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Paul's letter win his gis to the Roman (Greek) church, which had some Jews in it. Paul was reviewing some Jewish history, but 11:29 is a statement regarding God's gifts, which Paul had already defined clearly.


Paul's letter was to a church of saved members, some of whom were Greek and some of whom were Gentiles.


There is nothing in ch 11 to come to such a conclusion. Esp since Paul hadn't mentioned "gift" since 6:23. The gift of God which is eternal life (Rom 6:23) is irrevocable (11:29).


Paul's review of Israel showed that because of their unbelief, God cut them off. But that isn't about salvation. It's about being used by God. That is why Paul used the metaphor of a branch being broken off. Everyone in that agriculture economy understood that branches that aren't useful to the farmer are cut off.
I think I may disagree...I believe they are cut off....to continue In his goodness....Im thinking means in his love. ..the gospel...and the Jews were kept..by ritual sacrifices..but recall those under the law that rejected it died without mercy...while they were kept under the law until Christ....being covered until they had a chance to accepy or reject doesn't mean they were saved eternally..but saved until Christ would be revealed to them.....now if you continued in Christ..his goodness..you would be saved..and if rejected as a Jew covered first by the law..kept until salvatiin was revealed...and rejected til your end then most likely you would not be saved.
 
Upvote 0

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
The Acts 13:44 verse says exactly what you say it does. They were "assembled" to hear the Word of God.
How would one suppose that "nearly the whole city" would assemble? Wouldn't it be rather obvious that they would need to enter through the doors of the synagogue? And wouldn't that require some "lining up" or arranging themselves in order to assemble.

That's a different Greek word entirely than the one used in vs. 48. Why wouldn't He use the same word if the two concepts discussed were exactly the same thing?
Why would he need to use the same word? v.44 tells us that nearly the whole city got together to hear Paul's message. And that would require some organization in order for that very large crowd to "assemble" in the synagogue.

v.14 - But going on from Perga, they arrived at Pisidian Antioch, and on the Sabbath day they went into the synagogue and sat down. Should one suppose these were open air synagogues without walls?

One vs. clearly says they were assemble as we both agree.

The other vs. uses a different word that can be translated "ordained/ lined up". (By the way that's just how I mean the word ordain when I use it. God's ordering of things.)

Further - people were "lining up", if you will, in vs. 44 to hear the Word preached.

Vs. 48 says that they were line up (or ordained) for eternal life- not just to hear the Word of God. That’s a big difference and it’s rather arbitrary of you to try to make them say the same thing.

People don't line up for eternal life. God lines people up for eternal life.
Uh, people DO line up in order to hear preaching about eternal life.

Which is likely why the translators used the word ordained rather than saying lined up when referring to this instance where it was talking about eternal life (which is God's prerogative and a gift from Him).

Besides that, according to your theology, shouldn't it say that all those who "believed" lined up for eternal life rather than those who lined up for eternal life believed?
No, it shouldn't. I'm totally fine with how Luke wrote it.

I thought belief always came before eternal life for you.
Makes no difference. That wasn't Luke's point, obviously. If one wants to find where faith precedes regeneration, one only need go to Eph 2:5 and 8.

Your view seems to be formulated strictly by your prior theology IMO.
Well, your opinion would be wrong.

It may well be that people with the other viewpoint would be doing the same thing - I suppose.

But, IMO, the stating of the fact that they were ordained to “eternal life” rather than to “hear a sermon” makes all the difference in the world.

Salvation is of the Lord.

I don't think my post was particularly sarcastic really. Sorry if I ruffled your feathers.:)

It just seemed so obvious to me, as it does to everyone else, that you were trying so hard to make it fit that it wasn't really necessary to break it down for you.

When it comes to the use of the various Greek tools on your shelf I'll bow to you. Especially since there is nothing in them that proves your point.

The obvious facts stated in the scripture passages do show, however, that you are stretching things more than a little bit to avoid the obvious.[/QUOTE]
Interesting that you've refuted nothing of what I posted. The people most certainly had to line up or arrange themselves in order to hear Paul. That is straight forward.

Second, there is no mention of God doing anything in v.48, so it's just a huge assumption that the verse is about God ordaining anyone for anhthing.

Third, you've not even tried to deal with the FACT that the forms for both middle and passive voice are the SAME in the perfect tense, which is sthe tense for tasso in v.48. Therefore, one CANNOT just ASSUME that it is passive. I've already demonstrated that the people would be lining themselves up or arranging themselves in order to get into the synagogue in order to hear Paul's preaching about eternal life.

So far, other than disagreement with my view, it has not been refuted.
 
Upvote 0

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I think I may disagree...I believe they are cut off....to continue In his goodness....Im thinking means in his love. ..the gospel...and the Jews were kept..by ritual sacrifices..but recall those under the law that rejected it died without mercy...while they were kept under the law until Christ....being covered until they had a chance to accepy or reject doesn't mean they were saved eternally..but saved until Christ would be revealed to them.....now if you continued in Christ..his goodness..you would be saved..and if rejected as a Jew covered first by the law..kept until salvatiin was revealed...and rejected til your end then most likely you would not be saved.
By examining the 3 things that Paul clearly defined as a gift before he wrote Rom 11:29 we know that he was referring to:
1. spiritual gifts in 1:11
2. justification in 3:24 and 5:15,16,17
3. eternal life in 6:23

The very next use of "gift" occurs in 11:29. There is no reason to dismiss these 3 things as what he was referring to when he wrote that God's gifts are irrevocable in 11:20.
 
Upvote 0

corinth77777

learner
Nov 15, 2013
3,089
441
✟99,135.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
By examining the 3 things that Paul clearly in defined as a gift before he wrote Rom 11:29 we know that he was referring to:
1. spiritual gifts in 1:11
2. justification in 3:24 and 5:15,16,17
3. eternal life in 6:23

The very next use of "gift" occurs in 11:29. There is no reason to dismiss these 3 things as what he was referring to when he wrote that God's gifts are irrevocable in 11:20.
I was replying to the last part of your post...as for gifts and call I just read that somewhere and from what I read...I would think its referring to God's Covenant promise..and the gift could just be salvation.
 
Upvote 0

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I was replying to the last part of your post...as for gifts and call I just read that somewhere and from what I read...I would think its referring to God's Covenant promise..
From the context of ch 11, it seems to me that by "call" Paul was referring to the invitation to salvation, since the word kletos means "to invite".

and the gift could just be salvation.
Without a doubt, as Paul defined both justification and eternal life as gifts, and both are part of salvation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: corinth77777
Upvote 0

Aijalon

Sayin' it like it is
Jun 4, 2012
964
55
✟17,356.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
a tree can only grow in a way compatible with it's DNA, but DNA is much more complex than simple binary code. The robot analogy is crude, and a terrible straw man because robots are clunky and stupid, dead, and created by man, whereas God created man in his own image, and full of life.
 
Upvote 0

nobdysfool

The original! Accept no substitutes!
Feb 23, 2003
15,018
1,006
Home, except when I'm not....
✟21,146.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Constitution
a tree can only grow in a way compatible with it's DNA, but DNA is much more complex than simple binary code. The robot analogy is crude, and a terrible straw man because robots are clunky and stupid, dead, and created by man, whereas God created man in his own image, and full of life.


The robot analogy is meant as an insult, and is usually used in desperation when the argument can't be won by the non-Calvinist. They know full well that Calvinism teaches no such thing, but rather than admit that they have no answer, they resort to insults.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fizzygiraffe
Upvote 0

FreeGrace2

Senior Veteran
Nov 15, 2012
20,401
1,703
USA
✟184,557.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
The robot analogy is meant as an insult, and is usually used in desperation when the argument can't be won by the non-Calvinist. They know full well that Calvinism teaches no such thing, but rather than admit that they have no answer, they resort to insults.
But here's the issue: if man does not have a free will, and God is the cause of man's choices, then man can be compared to either a robot, which has been programmed a certain way, or to a puppet, whose strings are pulled by a puppetmaster.

So, either man is free, or he is not free. If not free, then come up with your own analogy of what might look like. This seems to be age old debate about Calvinism. Neither robots nor puppets choose any of their own movements or actions. They have simply been preprogrammed.

Is that how the Bible portrays people? No.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

fizzygiraffe

There's No Present Like The TIme
Aug 24, 2015
110
17
✟7,835.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The robot analogy is meant as an insult, and is usually used in desperation when the argument can't be won by the non-Calvinist. They know full well that Calvinism teaches no such thing, but rather than admit that they have no answer, they resort to insults.
It is indeed meant as an insult.
However, the insult isn't on us. It's on those who know nothing about what they seek to attack. And use the replies of those who do know as a launching point to pursue that attack.

I've browsed this thread. Has anyone else noticed that technique the adversarial spirits here have resorted to from the start?
They make a charge against the Bible, God, OSAS, whatever their penchant at the moment. Then they wait. It appears from the time stamps of replies that they're refreshing the page to read new posts and respond quickly.
Those that use scripture to argue against the false remarks may then find that their posts , and that scripture, is being taken apart by the adversarial spirit and turned around so as to deny the full text and value that was in the original writing.

For instance, as an example not in this thread but for brevity. A Christian could have posted this scripture in rebuttal to the adversarial spirits remarks:
2 Timothy 1:9
Who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began,

The adversarial spirit then turns it around and argues thusly:
But the Bible never says God calls us holy because he chooses people for whom he'll bestow his grace and have work his purpose on earth. Not now and not before even the creation of the world!

Those here who are of a good heart and hope to educate the adversarial spirits that I've also noted use the same rhetoric, as if they're the same person, are having their sincere hearts and scriptural references used against them. Those are being turned around and reworded by the adversarial spirits so as to rebut that good hearted persons own post, but in a reworked wording of their own post.

These adversarial spirits could be stymied in their pursuit if the good hearted Christians here stopped sharing scripture as a rebuttal point. That would stop those who know nothing of scripture from having the word of God they are attacking readily available for the next assault.

Just my observations of these many pages. Hope it helps.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aijalon
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
These adversarial spirits could be stymied in their pursuit if the good hearted Christians here stopped sharing scripture as a rebuttal point. That would stop those who know nothing of scripture from having the word of God they are attacking readily available for the next assault.

Just my observations of these many pages. Hope it helps.
Which is exactly why I've started threads in the past that used logic as an avenue to reason with these spirits (Christian based logic of course).

Two problems occur.

Either the adversary is simply unable to follow logic to it's unavoidable conclusion (or at least pretends that He can't).

Or we start hearing the oft repeated request for "just one clear cut scripture that says "X" or "Y".

If you don't respond with a bunch of scriptures (even though you do have them available) because you know just how they will twist them and that they will not accept them anyway - you are taken to task for not basing your views on the Word of God.

I've tried scripture base arguments and I've tried logic based arguments and I've tried a combination of both. All to no avail.

Many people are just afraid that they might have been wrong and will do anything to not have to admit it.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

FredVB

Regular Member
Mar 11, 2010
4,507
921
America
Visit site
✟265,191.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
But here's the issue: if man does not have a free will, and God is the cause of man's choices, then man can be compared to either a robot, which has been programmed a certain way, or to a puppet, whose strings are pulled by a puppetmaster.
So, either man is free, or he is not free. If not free, then come up with your own analogy of what might look like. This seems to be age old debate about Calvinism. Neither robots nor puppets choose any of their own movements or actions. They have simply been preprogrammed.

There is the case of understanding the foreknowledge and election from God of his people by faith in Christ to be conformed to the image of the Son of God meaning that all choices we have are being determined by God. This is what is not shown from what is said in the Bible. We are led to faith in Christ with repentance to our life of sin that separated us from relationship with God, with response to this being ours, so we are accountable in that, the election, with God's foreknowledge, is based on that.
 
Upvote 0
Apr 21, 2015
1,919
1,045
✟25,183.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Countless times these exact same threads pop up, and not once have I seen either side reach an agreement on the truth.

More each day I see the pointlessness of it; better to let God convict each believer than continue the circle.

Humans having free-will or not takes nothing away from Gods goodness. Be content in knowing we don't understand, and patient in waiting for the answers.
 
Upvote 0

FredVB

Regular Member
Mar 11, 2010
4,507
921
America
Visit site
✟265,191.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I have not seen nor heard of any non Calvinist of any kind claim they can save themselves. Do they have free will to not save themselves ? Or ... God predestines their sin then God is the author of sin and man is NOT responsible.

Posts seem to diverge with "Oh so you think you can save yourself then ..." Bypassing the real issue ( I suspect deliberately ). If man is responsible for his sin then he must have some frees will to hold the charge of being responsible for what he has done.

I think Calvinists and Arminians are mistaken in some things. We have accountability, we cannot save ourselves at all, and don't have works that will be basis for salvation, and don't have sins that make salvation impossible, other than that of rejecting Jesus Christ as he is, coming from God as the Son. Salvation is only possible from Yahweh God's grace, with his work through Christ, and through his Spirit drawing any to repentance for them to come to faith for Christ to be their savior. The response is theirs, as they will be accountable, otherwise they wouldn't be, which isn't said in what is shown in the Bible. But the salvation is still God's work, and remains so, with everlasting life given to them with a new nature for them, which is from God's work, and such will grow spiritually, sooner or even much later for some with whom it takes more time, but it will show as evidence of the reality of their faith, and their security.
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,453
✟84,588.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
I think Calvinists and Arminians are mistaken in some things. We have accountability, we cannot save ourselves at all, and don't have works that will be basis for salvation, and don't have sins that make salvation impossible, other than that of rejecting Jesus Christ as he is, coming from God as the Son. Salvation is only possible from Yahweh God's grace, with his work through Christ, and through his Spirit drawing any to repentance for them to come to faith for Christ to be their savior. The response is theirs, as they will be accountable, otherwise they wouldn't be, which isn't said in what is shown in the Bible. But the salvation is still God's work, and remains so, with everlasting life given to them with a new nature for them, which is from God's work, and such will grow spiritually, sooner or even much later for some with whom it takes more time, but it will show as evidence of the reality of their faith, and their security.
That's pretty close to the Calvinist's position as I understand it.

I prefer "Reformed" as a title for me if I must take one.

But - I agree with this position also.

I can't speak for any Arminians.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

EmSw

White Horse Rider
Apr 26, 2014
6,434
718
✟66,544.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
"I have not come to call the righteous but sinners to repentance."

Just imagine, Jesus spent His ministry years 'undoing' what God had supposedly 'predestined'. Makes you wonder!

We also see that 'predestination' isn't permanent.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.