God is in complete control.

[SavedByGrace3]

Not even a Calvinist but it's clear in scripture that GOD is Absolutely Sovereign,
He wouldn't be Almighty declaring the end from the beginning were it elsewise.

Yes.... I think we all believe that. He is absolutely sovereign and almighty. He can do absolutely anything.
But how does that translate into Him actually controlling everything?
Knowing a thing can happen does not mean He is making it happen.
I have yet to hear an answer to that question.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Yes.... I think we all believe that. He is absolutely sovereign and almighty. He can do absolutely anything.
But how does that translate into Him actually controlling everything?
Knowing a thing can happen does not mean He is making it happen.
I have yet to hear an answer to that question.

I can believe you have yet to understand the answer, but to hear it? It's right in front of our faces. Simple.

God is First Cause. That means he caused all things except himself, but so far, that sounds deistic. Deism is illogical, because "First Cause" means he is also the means by which the existence of everything (besides himself) is upheld and by which everything operates.

He made everything except himself, including time and very reality. Everything that is and everything that happens is caused except himself. God is First Cause, therefore he caused everything that is and that happens, except himself. "Everything" includes HOW everything happens —God caused that too.

How can even the person with the mind of self-determinism see that? By the simple fact that even he knows that God is omniscient. It God is Omniscient, God knows every detail of what will come to pass. If God, even deistically, 'started the ball rolling' that results in everything coming to pass that does come to pass, then God intended for it to come to pass.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

I can believe you have yet to understand the answer, but to hear it? It's right in front of our faces. Simple.

God is First Cause. That means he caused all things except himself, but so far, that sounds deistic. Deism is illogical, because "First Cause" means he is also the means by which the existence of everything (besides himself) is upheld and by which everything operates.

He made everything except himself, including time and very reality. Everything that is and everything that happens is caused except himself. God is First Cause, therefore he caused everything that is and that happens, except himself. "Everything" includes HOW everything happens —God caused that too.

How can even the person with the mind of self-determinism see that? By the simple fact that even he knows that God is omniscient. It God is Omniscient, God knows every detail of what will come to pass. If God, even deistically, 'started the ball rolling' that results in everything coming to pass that does come to pass, then God intended for it to come to pass.

I do not see how this is true.
"If God, even deistically, 'started the ball rolling' that results in everything coming to pass that does come to pass, then God intended for it to come to pass."
Again. Knowing a thing is going to happen does not make it happen.

 

[Hammster]

I do not see how this is true.
"If God, even deistically, 'started the ball rolling' that results in everything coming to pass that does come to pass, then God intended for it to come to pass."
Again. Knowing a thing is going to happen does not make it happen.

It does give approval to it, if one has the ability to stop it.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

It does give approval to it, if one has the ability to stop it.

And I think this is the point. God can intervene if He so desires. Salvation is an intervention. Healing is an intervention. Answered prayer is an intervention. Being a high tower, a shield, a deliverer are all interventions. As the poster pointed out, it is right in front of our eyes. A simple observation tells us the not everything in this world is being orchestrated by a benevolent God. He is stopping the things He does not want to happen. But there is a course in nature, and it is tooling along within His parameters. The parameters are pretty wide open. It is a creation of the possible. Many things are possible within those parameters. The fact that chance, fate, and accidents are mentioned in scripture shows the reality of possibility. Allowing for possibilities in this course of nature "mode" is not the same as controlling every event. If everything is under the direct hand of God at every moment, then there is no "course of nature." There are no accidents. There is no such thing as chance. Yet these things are mentioned over and over in scripture.
Thanks.

 

[Hammster]

And I think this is the point. God can intervene if He so desires. Salvation is an intervention. Healing is an intervention. Answered prayer is an intervention. Being a high tower, a shield, a deliverer are all interventions. As the poster pointed out, it is right in front of our eyes. A simple observation tells us the not everything in this world is being orchestrated by a benevolent God. He is stopping the things He does not want to happen. But there is a course in nature, and it is tooling along within His parameters. The parameters are pretty wide open. It is a creation of the possible. Many things are possible within those parameters. The fact that chance, fate, and accidents are mentioned in scripture shows the reality of possibility. Allowing for possibilities in this course of nature "mode" is not the same as controlling every event. If everything is under the direct hand of God at every moment, then there is no "course of nature." There are no accidents. There is no such thing as chance. Yet these things are mentioned over and over in scripture.
Thanks.

Everything is orchestrated, but not everything is being directly controlled. I think Genesis 50:20 gives strong evidence for that.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Everything is orchestrated, but not everything is being directly controlled. I think Genesis 50:20 gives strong evidence for that.

I guess our difference here is the level of orchestrated control. Is it control on a microscopic level or control on a macroscopic level? The overall goal was orchestrated just as salvation is. But millions of "course of nature" events can occur along the way without direct orchestration and non-intervention.
Right now, a thousand things can happen to you. Everything from having a rock fall on your head to winning a ten-dollar giveaway. Car accidents, the flu, stubbing your toe... on and on. All these things are "allowed" to happen by default, and that is the key in my mind. Everything can happen by default. He can intervene and prevent any of them. But it is self-evident that He does not. Even if that event results in death. But that is not the same as actively causing it to occur. The course of nature allows it to occur because, in a universe of the possible, anything can occur.
So that is the difference. God is not causing everything to happen. As Paul said, Things turn to our good if we love Him and are called according to His purpose. But what about those who do not love Him and are not called according to His purpose? The verse would be meaningless He was orchestrating everything anyways. The phrase "turn" means a change from one way to another. A change from the natural course of nature to something else. Possibilities. This may be a subtle difference, but it is significant when we want to determine the will of God and our faith,

 

[Hammster]

I guess our difference here is the level of orchestrated control. Is it control on a microscopic level or control on a macroscopic level? The overall goal was orchestrated just as salvation is. But millions of "course of nature" events can occur along the way without direct orchestration and non-intervention.
Right now, a thousand things can happen to you. Everything from having a rock fall on your head to winning a ten-dollar giveaway. Car accidents, the flu, stubbing your toe... on and on. All these things are "allowed" to happen by default, and that is the key in my mind. Everything can happen by default. He can intervene and prevent any of them. But it is self-evident that He does not. Even if that event results in death. But that is not the same as actively causing it to occur. The course of nature allows it to occur because, in a universe of the possible, anything can occur.
So that is the difference. God is not causing everything to happen. As Paul said, Things turn to our good if we love Him and are called according to His purpose. But what about those who do not love Him and are not called according to His purpose? The verse would be meaningless He was orchestrating everything anyways. The phrase "turn" means a change from one way to another. A change from the natural course of nature to something else. Possibilities. This may be a subtle difference, but it is significant when we want to determine the will of God and our faith,

Nobody that I know is arguing that God actively controls everything. As I’ve explained, God doesn’t need to actively control everything in order to be in control of everything.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

Nobody that I know is arguing that God actively controls everything. As I’ve explained, God doesn’t need to actively control everything in order to be in control of everything.

Thank you. We closer than I thought.
I have met a myriad of people who do in fact believe that God is actively controlling every single event in the universe. From every atom around every molecule to the collision of galaxies. They cloak their meaning using words like "allowed" and "permitted" which are passive, but when pressed they clarify that they mean that God orchestrates, authenticates, and is actively in control of absolutely everything.
I think their reasoning stems from theological principles such as omniscience, sovereignty, control, etc. They unwittily use these principles to not only determine the will of God (which they resolve that God does everything) to defining the very nature of God Himself. My main beef is that they use these principles to overrule image of God that Jesus showed us. Jesus came to show us the Father. Yet again and again I see people "fact checking" what Jesus said by these omni-principles (I call mere theism) and updating what He said in the light of those principles. We do not have to update what Jesus said. What He said and did is the will of God. I do not think Jesus failed in His mission to show us the Father. We can trust Him.

 

[Hammster]

Thank you. We closer than I thought.
I have met a myriad of people who do in fact believe that God is actively controlling every single event in the universe. From every atom around every molecule to the collision of galaxies. They cloak their meaning using words like "allowed" and "permitted" which are passive, but when pressed they clarify that they mean that God orchestrates, authenticates, and is actively in control of absolutely everything.
I think their reasoning stems from theological principles such as omniscience, sovereignty, control, etc. They unwittily use these principles to not only determine the will of God (which they resolve that God does everything) to defining the very nature of God Himself. My main beef is that they use these principles to overrule image of God that Jesus showed us. Jesus came to show us the Father. Yet again and again I see people "fact checking" what Jesus said by these omni-principles (I call mere theism) and updating what He said in the light of those principles. We do not have to update what Jesus said. What He said and did is the will of God. I do not think Jesus failed in His mission to show us the Father. We can trust Him.

God does orchestrate everything. Nothing happens that He doesn’t want to happen because He has a plan. But that’s not the same thing as saying he controls everything like he has a remote and makes everyone move in certain ways. He very much orchestrated the crucifixion without violating anyone’s free will. He didn’t make them sin even though He needed them to sin in order to accomplish what He wanted.

 

[SavedByGrace3]

God does orchestrate everything. Nothing happens that He doesn’t want to happen because He has a plan. But that’s not the same thing as saying he controls everything like he has a remote and makes everyone move in certain ways. He very much orchestrated the crucifixion without violating anyone’s free will. He didn’t make them sin even though He needed them to sin in order to accomplish what He wanted.

Thanks..
In this case I am not really talking about sin and free will. I am talking events that occur around us and in our lives. I realize most people think in terms of how "control" and "sovereignty" affect their lives. But there are billions of things that happen every day that really have no effect on our lives. Course of nature stuff. A stream washes out a culvert and rocks tumble into the water. This effects nobody and no one may even be aware of it. Wind blows down a tree deep in the woods. Is God out in the woods supervising and "allowing" the tree to fall as a special event? Is it a situation where the tree would never fall down with the direct special attention of God to make it fall? Or does the tree have "standing" permission to fall down simply by reason of it's own existence, the wind blowing, and the effect gravity has on it. Of course God notices just as He notices every sparrow. But does the tree only fall with the special and immediate attention, orchestration, and direct manipulation of God. Doesn't it just fall like trees have been falling as far as time has existed. Personally I do not see it. I think God created trees, wind, and gravity and they work in concert together without God having to pay special attention to make it fall. Course of nature stuff. And of course we acknowledge once again that He is aware of the tree and if for whatever reason He wants the tree to stand, He can intervene into the course of nature and prevent it.
So why is this important to us?
It is important so that we know what to believe, how to pray, and what to expect when we pray. If a person believes that God is directly controlling everything happening to them, then why pray for protection or intervention? If you think God is behind and wants you sick, is it possible for you to pray against it? 1 John 5 kicks in here:

1 John 5:14-15 KJV
14. And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us:
15. And if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him.

This is saying that if you are unsure of His will, then you cannot have faith that you will receive because you do not know that He even hears you. He does not hear prayers that are not mixed with faith.
So if a person is confused about the nature and the will of God, then they cannot pray and expect to be heard, much less receive what they are praying for. So, finally, if one thinks that their life and everything happening to them is a direct result of the immediate control of God, how can they pray? To them, the all controlling God is doing it to them. Like the preacher said. If, when you pray, you cannot say "I have received" and believe you have received, then don't expect anything.
Your prayer life changes from being reactionary to being preventive and in co-operation with God. You are not just sitting back waiting for the next act of God to happen to you. Rather you are in pre-emptive prayer, working with God to make sure that armor is on, those shields are up, the devil is at bay, no accidents shall befall you, no plague will come nigh your house.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I do not see how this is true.
"If God, even deistically, 'started the ball rolling' that results in everything coming to pass that does come to pass, then God intended for it to come to pass."
Again. Knowing a thing is going to happen does not make it happen.

True, unless one is Omnipotent God, First Cause, the only Creator. Then "knowing" takes on a whole different meaning from how we know something. But even ignoring that Philosophical logic for now: If God knew when he created, what would result from his creating, yet created anyway, he intended for it to happen. You can argue whether he did so reluctantly or accepting necessary pain to himself, and so on, but you can't logically show that he did not intend it all, if you agree that he knew it all.