Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Sanguine said:Wasn't this a foreseen consequence?
If so, (and I don't mean to repeat myself, but rather clarify)
Isn't this just defusing you're own bomb?
Marz Blak said:Bob Moore:
So let me respond briefly and generally to only a couple things. I can see now that if I am to seriously discuss this with you, I have a lot of studying to do.
Again, I fail to see how the view at its root fails to fall prey to the objection that if God is the omniscient Creator, and He created us, then we are exactly how He wants us to be; and so either saving or damning anyone for any reason seems arbitrary.
Again, we wouldn' t be disobedient unless God wanted us to be. And how can God create us with free will then blame us for using it? This meets no definition of fairness that I can construct; and I see no reason to worship, to give glory, to a such a being.
Speaking of glory, how does any of this bring God glory? And why does an omniscient being need glory? What is glory?
It brings Him glory because He is not in any way bound to save anyone. He does so freely, because He does so desire. If you received a magnificent gift from someone would not that person be magnified in your eyes? And with regard to those of His enemies (we all were formerly His enemies) whom He does not save, His divine justice is served. There are two sides to the coin: mercy and justice. He has mercifully redeemed some of His enemies, but is not constrained to redeem them all. So then some receive mercy, and some receive justice. No one receives injustice.
This, again, seems arbitrary to me. If God can and does change people's hearts to save them, thus depriving them of their free will, then why does He give them free will in the first place, since it can only get them in trouble as long as they have it, and they can only get out of trouble by God's taking it back away again? I really don't see the logic of this.You have misunderstood. No one is deprived of free will because of the salvation call. We still have the free will we were born with, but the ability to choose the things of God, freely and without constraint, is what is restored. This is not to say that suddenly every choice we freely make is going to be the right one. We still have remnants of our sin natures hanging around, and now and then we all do something stupid. But as a Christian grows and matures in the faith there is constantly less of that sort of thing, but we can never cease from sin until we die. Then, and only then, will we be made perfect. In other words, the will of the natural (i.e. unsaved) man is free only to sin, because everything he does is for the wrong motive. Remember, the perspective of God is what matters, not our own. So that what we see as 'good works' being done by unsaved people have only civil value, and count not at all with God. Isaiah 64:6, "But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away." But the will of the saved man can either sin or not sin by conscious choice.
Again, there are a lot of things about this entire construct that seem arbitrary to me.
Of course they do. But if you have other than mere intellectual interest it is most likely because you are being directed down that path. I will leave you with one last passage to consider.
James 1:5-8 "But if any of you lacketh wisdom, let him ask of God, who giveth to all liberally and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him. But let him ask in faith, nothing doubting: for he that doubteth is like the surge of the sea driven by the wind and tossed. For let not that man think that he shall receive anything of the Lord; a doubleminded man, unstable in all his ways."
But if you could post or PM a couple of good resources for understanding Calvinism, I'd appreciate it.
Thanks.
I'll send you several resources, but the best place to start is with the basic doctrine. And there is no better exposition of it than the Westminster Confession:
http://www.freepres.org/westminster.htm
This is the heart of Biblical Christianity, which is all that Calvinism is.
Marz Blak said:Why does Adam's choice affect me?
Marz Blak said:Or, rather, what someone claims to be the word of God, with little in the way of supporting evidence.
In other words, inquiry into the the possible existence and nature of God, unlike any other subject, cannot rationally be undertaken. Special Pleading.
And the Jesus/God thing: again, unsupported assertion.
See above.
Written by whom?
Whitehorse said:Ah, this is a good question. To determine whether or not scripture is of man or God, there are a couple of important details we need to look at.
1. Scripture cannot be a contrivance of mankind, because everything it teaches, everything that is is in it, goes against the nature of man. It flattens our pride, it pokes holes in our thoughts of self-sufficiency, it says we are sinners. It says we are not free to make our own rules, and what man wants to believe that? Certainly, no man of his own sinful spirit would write something so unpalatable to those it seeks to reach. THis is one way we know it is from God.
2. Scripture cannot be from man because it does not place man at the center of the religion. Man wants to make his own rules, determine his own reality, perceive life and the world according to what suits him. This is the lifeblood of postmodernism. Man wants to rule his destiny, and scripture places God in the center.
MATRILEB said:But both those arguments fall apart when you take into account that a man can write scripture which neither advocates man as self-sufficient nor places him in the center of all things...
MATRILEB said:You can't just generalize about human nature into black and white terms because everyone has a different mindset. There are those who genuinely desire the love of God and believe fully in the Bible, others who merely find Christianity favorable because it promotes a philosophy that accords with what they want to believe in, and still others who love God but don't see the Bible as being the only word of God.
The reasons for believing in anything are numerous and vacillate from person to person. A book isn't the word of God simply because it advocates a worldview in which man is not self-sufficient and not the center of the universe. Anyone can write such a book, and there will be people willing to believe in it even if it goes against their own self-interest.
Since there is nothing at all that can ever take God by surprise, of course He knew what Adam would do. Notice, however, that knowing what someone will do, and causing them to do it are two different things. So God is not "defusing His own bomb", but is cleaning up the mess Adam made.
Bob said:Since there is nothing at all that can ever take God by surprise, of course He knew what Adam would do. Notice, however, that knowing what someone will do, and causing them to do it are two different things. So God is not "defusing His own bomb", but is cleaning up the mess Adam made.
Sanguine said:How does that logic hold when God is the source of Adam. Couple that with omniscience and there is no way God can be absolved of responsibility.
Bob Moore,Bob Moore said:Because Adam, your grandfather, was your perfect representative. But he, being made a perfect man, deliberately chose, by his free will, to disobey God. In so doing he corrupted not just himself, but his descendants as well.
HOWEVER, there is a second time when you were perfectly represented:
1 Corinthians 15:22, "For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive."
The sense here is that the death wrought in us by Adam will be countered by Christ with eternal life. Some with Him forever, and some in eternal torment.
I don't know how else to say it. According to you, God is the fountain and source of sin, and that is, to put it as mildly as possible, heretical. If you are comfortable with it, fine. Go in peace.
Marz Blak said:As to your answers, I am sorry but I am still not satisfied. They basically seem to boil down to 'because the Bible says so,' which I don't find remotely satisfactory.
As to the 'Adam' question, you're answer there isn't really satisfactory either, for a couple of reasons. Firstly, it implies that you take a literalist reading of Genesis, believe in YEC, etc., which I find simply incredible.
If this line of religious belief requires one to believe YEC, then it's a non-starter for me.
Secondly, even assuming Adam WAS my nth-generation direct ancestor, why did I inherit his transgression?
Does this transmission of transgressions extend to other chains of ancestry too, or is it just for Adam?
If my father murdered someone, does God hold me to account for that too? If so, does that make sense to you? If not, what's different about my father and Adam, my (grand^n)-father?
Again, I find that the ethics and/or the rationality you ascribe to your God with regard to this matter to be...questionable, to say the least.
Sanguine said:Not directly, it's a progression: God creates Adam, fully aware that he will "sin" - Adam sins, man falls - God throws man a lifeline. For this to work, omniscience has to be dropped, or omnipotence (in which case god was making poor use of supreme knowledge.)
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?