predestination vs. free will

[Charis kai Dunamis]

Okay, for the last time. Everyone please read this.

Any passage in the Bible that infers that man must choose, obey, be responsible, etc. is not a proof for man's ultimate determination ("free will"). The opposing side, that God predestines our actions, is in total agreement of these verses. It's just that we say that we choose Him because we were first chosen by Him. We still choose, obey or disobey, and are responsible or irresponsible, but only because God predestined it to be in the first place. So please, stop quoting verses that (in and of themselves) say we have a choice as a way to disprove predestination. We Calvinists have a way to fit both predestination and choice together. They are both in the bible, so they both must be accounted for. But the one who believes in ultimate determination does not account for both. The belief that God's foreknowledge is dependent on our purpose is in direct conflict with Romans 9. God's foreknowledge is based on His purpose, as according to the Scriptures.

I don't know how many more times I can repeat that without getting an answer that responds with "Scriptures that say we must obey Him" as an argument. We Calvinists agree with you on this. The question at hand is, did He predestine our actions or not? And if you believe that God does know all (apparently relspace does not...) it would be contradictory to say He predestines based on who will believe. The argument makes no sense whatsoever, and directly conflicts the teachings in Romans 9 that me and Calvinist Samurai have continually pointed out without getting any substantial answer.

 

[Charis kai Dunamis]

Yes I deny that God is first and formost concerned with preserving His own power, knowledge and control over everything like a grasping control freak.

If He did not preserve these things He would no longer be God? How can God be in control if He doesn't have knowledge? How can God have power if He doesn't have control? How can God have knowledge of any situation if He doesn't have power or control? You see, we do not worship the same God, if this is what you believe. For God to strip Himself of His character for us is to put His ultimate purpose(His righteousness and glorification) underneath us (No, He did not strip His character when He came to Earth as a Human. His reason for coming was to fulfill His purpose in the beginning, His glorification.). Do you honestly think we are more important than God's need to be glorified?

THAT IS WHY WE WERE MADE.

 

[brownie3]

I don't think He stripped His character, but held back a bit on the glory/power/knowledge thing when He was born in a barn, had earthly parents, and I know there's a few times in the Gospels where He says only "my Father" knows certain things. But this gets us into the Trinity issue, which is a whole big bucket o'worms that'll have to be on another thread once I get this one figured out...

 

[brownie3]

Ok now for the rest of my responding...

1.I must say I disagree with JesusFreak when he says we are being taught "all" by the Holy Spirit because.... and now I will throw a Bible verse at you.
1 Cor. 13:12 Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known. (NIV)

2. CS, thanks for the point about "whatever He chooses to do is good." That really helped me realize that point. Hopefully that'll stick in my head, though - there's so much to remember/learn! Oh, but I don't get this comment you made: "God exists for His purpose - His glorification. If He didn't exist for that reason, He wouldn't be a very loving God, would He?" What do the 2 have to do with each other? Also, "Does it seem to you like you are a robot? Does your nature tell you that you are being controlled? No and no." Those are your own answers. I actually do feel quite controlled: by famiily, friends, society, and maybe that is all ultimately God.

3. It still doesn't make sense that if God predestined us, and shaped us so that we'd either choose or reject Him as Lord according to His plan, how can he hold us accountable to how He made us. I can't wrap my head around it for some reason. Yeah, yeah, but who am I to talk back to God, etc. I'm not talking back, I'm just trying to get answers that'll reveal more of who God is . That's the whole point of this thread, to know Him more.

4. I was taught, and content with, the idea that evil existed because of Lucifer's free will. So now if he didn't have that, and we don't either, where'd evil come from?! Didn't it ultimately have to come from the creator of everything else, i.e. God? Yikes!

Thanks again everyone! ...and by everyone I don't mean the whole world, but rather those chosen to post on this forum...

 

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

4. I was taught, and content with, the idea that evil existed because of Lucifer's free will. So now if he didn't have that, and we don't either, where'd evil come from?! Didn't it ultimately have to come from the creator of everything else, i.e. God? Yikes!

Some predestinarians, like Lutherans (I honestly can't speak for Calvinists one way or another here), affirm that Lucifer and Adam had free will before the fall, but in choosing against God made it subsequently impossible to choose for God for them and all their descendents.

 

[relspace]

If He did not preserve these things He would no longer be God?

No. I deny this. This is just as ridiculous as claiming that by losing my legs, I would cease to be who I am.

How can God be in control if He doesn't have knowledge?

God has infinite knowledge and power. But I do not believe that God is ruled by His knowledge and power, but rather it is His knowledge and power that serves His will. Thus God can do whatever He wishes to do and know whatever He wishes to know. God does not need to be in control, which is why He created human beings with free will.

How can God have power if He doesn't have control?

Having power does not necessitate using it to exert absolute control.

How can God have knowledge of any situation if He doesn't have power or control?

I have knowledge about many things which I do not control or have any power over. What is your point?

You see, we do not worship the same God, if this is what you believe.

You are probably right. I do not worship power and knowledge, these are not my God. The God I worship is said to be love. Therefore the God I know is not defined by power and knowledge but by goodness and love. "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have ever lasting life."

For God to strip Himself of His character for us is to put His ultimate purpose underneath us (No, He did not strip His character when He came to Earth as a Human.

His character is not power and knowledge, but love, so of course he did not strip His character when He came to Earth.

His reason for coming was to fulfill His purpose in the beginning, His glorification.).

It is perhaps the purpose of the devil to glorify Himself, but the ultimate purpose of God is clearly not to glorify Himself but to serve. Who again was it that Jesus said was greatest in the kingdom of heaven? Is God not the greatest in the kingdom of heaven? The greatest is he who serves, so who do you think serves the most?

Do you honestly think we are more important than God's need to be glorified? THAT IS WHY WE WERE MADE.

It is absurd to think that God needs to be glorified. God is perfect and needs nothing. It is especially absurd to think that God needs anything from man. It is man who needs to glorify God for man's own sake, not for God's sake. God is the creator of life and the ultimate representative of all that is good and worthy of love. To love God is to love creation and life and goodness. If we turn away from God our every path is naturally away from life and goodness towards destruction.

 

[Rick Otto]

Isaih 45:7 explicitly states God is responsible for the creation of Evil.:o
Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

Don't judge His character without regard to His motivation.

Romans 9:22-23 explain why He chose to create evil.

Romans 9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
23: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,


I guess you could say (with a smile), "God is a glory freak. He wants all of it!"
The good, but humbling thing about that is, He deserves it.

 

[Charis kai Dunamis]

1.I must say I disagree with JesusFreak when he says we are being taught "all" by the Holy Spirit because.... and now I will throw a Bible verse at you.
1 Cor. 13:12 Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

What is the context here. Knowing in part, as well as prophecying in part? What were these men prophecying? Prophecying=preaching. Preaching the Word of God, but not in fullness. Only will we fully know when the Word fully comes to us.

As I explained earlier anyways, I did not ever say that I believe we can know everything, I said it that we can be sure of what we know. Go back and read the post again.

 

[Charis kai Dunamis]

Is. 46:9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,
Is. 46:10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure..."

As you can see, God declared the end from the beginning. HE MUST KNOW HOW IT WILL END. This is not a limiting in any sense. His foreknowledge is based on His foreordination. Also, the Lord says He will do all His pleasure, IN THE MIDST OF HIS DECLARATION. Everything happens for His glory, His pleasure.

And by the way. God is love, but love is not God. Chew on that.

Love is not God's defining quality, but righteousness is. God does not need to define every action He makes in that it is loving. Is wrath love? Yet it is one of God's characteristics. Therefore, God must be righteous first before anything else, which means His glory and pleasure is the reason for all of creation.

 

[L3g3nd]

Isaih 45:7 explicitly states God is responsible for the creation of Evil.:o
Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

Don't judge His character without regard to His motivation.

Romans 9:22-23 explain why He chose to create evil.

Romans 9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
23: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,


I guess you could say (with a smile), "God is a glory freak. He wants all of it!"
The good, but humbling thing about that is, He deserves it.

Try a different translation; evil can mean many things (disaster, misfortune, etc...).

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light and create darkness,
I make peace and create calamity;
I, the LORD, do all these things.’ (NKJ)

As for the scripture from Romans, again, its interpretation can vary wildly. Did God create vessels "fitted" to destruction for the sole purpose of "enduring" them, and then destroying them?

 

[CalvinistSamurai]

Sothron:

Here's the rest of my refutation that I started earlier, in reference to the two websites you posted.
http://www.christianforums.com/showpost.php?p=29575283&postcount=76


All passages under #3- Limited Atonement: I've already stated my position on these things. Verses speaking of choice don't prove anything unless it says specifically that our choice is above God's will, which no scripture says anywhere. Secondly, I've already mentioned that Jesus did die for all, but only that it was sufficient for all. It is only efficacious to the few, who are predestined (Rom 8:29-30), and in that it is limited.


Matt 18:14, 2 Pet 3:9- These are both saying the same thing, that he does not desire that they perish. Yet I've stated already, His heart and His desire to carry out His purpose are two different things. Peter says that He desires that all men come to Him, yet Romans says that He makes some vessels for righteousness and some for wrath. His heart and His desire to carry out His purpose are two different things.

1 Timothy 2:4, John 12:32 -All are drawn, but man can exercise his will (contrary to Calvin) and say, “NO”.

Once again, it doesn't say anywhere that God has no part in them saying 'no.' On the contrary, Rom. 9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that hath mercy.

John 1:9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world. All that “come into the world” are enlightened by God. They all “hold the truth”. Rom.1 & 2

But they hold that truth in unrighteousness. Rom. 1:21 because that, knowing God, they glorified him not as God, neither gave thanks; but became vain in their reasonings, and their senseless heart was darkened.

Matthew 23:37 - O Jerusalem, Jerusalem ... how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!- It was God’s will to “gather” them, but they “would not”. God’s will was resisted.

That's a forced interpretation. The text does not say God's will was resisted. It doesn't even use the word 'will.' On the contrary, Rom. 9:18 So then he hath mercy on whom he will, and whom he will be hardeneth.

Ezekiel 33:11 As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live

I think this verse states most excellently what I've been saying about the difference between God's heart and His purpose. This verse does not say that He has chosen them to live and that they somehow resist, only that He draws no enjoyment from condemning.

To all of the claims on that website of people resisting God's will:

Rom. 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?

It is very clear that the answer to Paul's question is NO ONE. Not one person has ever resisted God's will.

Eph 1:11-13 - These verses reveal that we are saved in TIME, not eternity past. We are saved “after we believe”. If you are trusting in a “salvation” taking place before you existed, you are probably not saved. They also teach that we are predestined, “to the praise of His glory”, not salvation.

Well duh, of course we're saved in time. We exist in time! Those verses according to the context state that we were predestined to salvation, not that we were saved ahead of time! Also, the said website is ignoring previous statements in Ephesians ('the context' that I mentioned earlier):

Eph. 1:5 having foreordained us unto adoption as sons through Jesus Christ unto himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, which he freely bestowed on us in the Beloved:

having foreordained us unto adoption... 'To ordain' means to declare. So we were declared before time that we would be adopted 'as sons.' And to be declared by God makes it a certainty that it would happen: Is. 41:22 Let them bring forth, and declare unto us what shall happen: declare ye the former things, what they are, that we may consider them, and know the latter end of them; or show us things to come. Declare the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that ye are gods: yea, do good, or do evil, that we may be dismayed, and behold it together. God Himself here states that to be God means to be able to declare beforehand what comes at the end. Is. 46:9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me; declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done; saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure; Note that He says that His 'council will stand.' That means that when He declares something, it happens 100% of the time.


And lastly;

Rom 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son,
We are predestined to be conformed to the image of Christ. What a calling we have.

Unfortunately, they only post half the sentence. Let me post the entire sentence:

Rom. 8:29 For whom he foreknew, he also foreordained to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren: and whom he foreordained, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Let me try to edit that a bit, without changing any of the meaning...
For whom he foreknew, he also foreordained to be conformed to the image of his Son...and whom he foreordained... them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Those who were foreknown (those who were justified) were also foreordained. He 'declared' who would be justified, and as stated earlier, His declarations are irrevocable.



I think that does it for refuting that entire website you posted. Now on to the next, which deals with Romans 9, my favorite chapter in Romans.

Firstly, we have to look at the context going into Rom 9. Paul just finished 8 by saying that nothing can separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. 'Us' refers to Christians. 'Love of God' is annotated by 'which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.' So this is different than the general love that He has for all creation, this is the love that He specially has for those who are saved.

Now, the question to ask is, "Why should we trust God when He seemingly bailed out on the Jews in order to save the rest of the world?" To which Romans 9 is the answer.

#1 Was Paul out of God’s will when he wrote Romans the 9th and 10th chapters? Or was his heart and God’s heart in union?

I don't know what this has to do with anything related to Calvinism. We don't believe Paul was out of God's will. If he was, we would have to debate on whether or not Rom 9 was inspired and should be canon, and then to follow, should any of Romans be canon? I don't get what they're trying to prove.

#2 The subject matter in Romans 9 & 10 is not God choosing some for salvation and rejecting others, but in keeping with the majority of the book of Romans, it teaches that God makes His choices on the basis of FAITH and not WORKS.

I agree. Rom 9 is to show that God didn't abandon Israel, but that the Israel He deems as Israel was not the nation, but the individuals who had faith in Him. Nonetheless, Paul uses the idea of God's sovereignty to prove His point.

#3 Let’s take a quick glance at the examples presented in Rom. 9 that supposedly prove God chooses certain ones for salvation and rejects others, and see if that philosophy holds water. It doesn’t!

Now here's where they get their facts wrong. We don't hold that Rom 9:6-23 are about God's choice in salvation. It is much broader than that. It is about God's choice in everything. This passage is to prove that God is ultimately sovereign. The website is trying to limit it to salvation only, but that is not what we hold. Salvation is not even mentioned within the passage. Contextually, Paul is proving why God is worthy of our trust. He is trustworty because He didn't abandon Israel, because He is sovereign in deciding who is Israel and who isn't; as v6 says, not all Israel is Israel. So, while this passage isn't constrained to speak of salvation only, it does specifically teach that God ordains all things.

#3 gets it wrong from the get go. Vs 7 and 13 have nothing to do with salvation.

Rom. 9:6 But it is not as though the word of God hath come to nought. For they are not all Israel, that are of Israel: neither, because they are Abraham’s seed, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

v6 is the topic of v7. His topic is this: God's word is trustworthy, it has not failed- for not all Israel is Israel.

And then he qualifies his topic with 2 points of evidence.

1)In Isaac shall thy seed be called. Even though the covenant for God's nation was given to Abraham, it was not extended to all Abraham's offspring; it was only extended to Isaac. Vs 8 and 9 build on that idea.

2)Even as it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated. So now the promise is restricted further. The line of Israel is constrained to begin with Abraham, then to Isaac, then to Jacob. So according to the flesh, not all Israel is Israel.

So, Paul's conclusion is verified by the evidence.
Rom. 9:8 That is, it is not the children of the flesh that are children of God; but the children of the promise are reckoned for a seed.
Paul is talking of God's sovereignty. The flesh doesn't matter; what matters is His decision.

Then Paul goes on to speak directly of God's sovereignty. The topic is brought up by the question:

Rom. 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God?

The answer: God forbid. Now tell us why, Paul.

Rom. 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that hath mercy.

Give us an example.

Rom. 9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, For this very purpose did I raise thee up, that I might show in thee my power, and that my name might be published abroad in all the earth.


And now we pick back up with your website. Why they left out all those verses inbetween is beyond me.

Rom 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.
On whom does God have mercy? Answer: all that call, all that hunger, all that believe etc.

Wrong. Just look at the verse, it tells us on whom He has mercy: whom He will....
The website is using isogesis. It is starting off with the notion that we have free will, and then reading it into the passage. The opposite of that, exogesis, is looking at the passage and drawing out of it based on what it explicitly says. And what does it explicitly say? Simply that it is God's decision in whom He gives mercy to. That is sovereingty. The passage in question says nothing of our own wills. NOTHING.

Isa 66:2
..but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word.

2 Thess 2:10-13
because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth…. God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth

We are, “chosen-through-belief ”. This teaches us how we are chosen, not who is chosen.

This has nothing to do with the passage in Romans. Stick to the topic.

Rom 9:21-22Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? (Yes, He does) What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction

The Calvinist would have us believe that God’s will is to make vessels (people) for destruction. This passage does teach that God can do whatever He wants. But His “wants” are expressed toward the lost here with “much longsuffering”. This phrase “longsuffering” proves God wanted them saved, but they chose otherwise. Cain was the first vessel fitted to (or for) destruction. Could he have been saved? Yes!

This does not make sense at all:

"This passage does teach that God can do whatever He wants."

"This phrase “longsuffering” proves God wanted them saved, but they chose otherwise."

If God can do whatever He wants, how, pray tell, do they choose otherwise? The answer is in a verse that they skipped:

Rom. 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he still find fault? For who withstandeth his will?

Who withstandeth His will? The implied answer is this: NO ONE. So the answer to my above question is this: They can't choose otherwise because no man can resist His will.

Well, that's Romans 9, and the said website botched it completely. The rest of the website is inconsequential in comparison to the overwhelming evidence for God's sovereignty that I presented in Rom 9, but since I love Romans, I'm gonna refute their take on Rom 7 as well.

 

[CalvinistSamurai]

n Rom.7:7-25 Paul gives his testimony of what it was like as an unregenerate man trying to please God.

Paul, speaking of his former life:

Rom. 7:9 And I was alive apart from the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died; and the commandment, which was unto life, this I found to be unto death: for sin, finding occasion, through the commandment beguiled me, and through it slew me.

Note that he uses the past tense.

Now, Paul, speaking of his regenerated life:

Rom. 7:15 For that which I do I know not: for not what I would, that do I practise; but what I hate, that I do.

Note that He uses the present tense. To say that Paul is speaking of his old life is to say that he is speaking in metaphor. If that is true, then this is the only place where Paul uses that style of writing. Writing style is a part of hermeneutics.

Also, in that passage:

Rom. 7:21 I find then the law, that, to me who would do good, evil is present.

Paul earlier taught that the unregenerate man cannot do good, nor has the desire:

Rom. 3:11 There is none that understandeth, There is none that seeketh after God; They have all turned aside, they are together become unprofitable; There is none that doeth good, no, not, so much as one: Their throat is an open sepulchre; With their tongues they have used deceit: The poison of asps is under their lips: Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness: Their feet are swift to shed blood; Destruction and misery are in their ways; And the way of peace have they not known: There is no fear of God before their eyes.

and:

Rom. 6:20 For when ye were servants of sin, ye were free in regard of righteousness.

When we were unregenerate, we were free from righteousness. We had no capacity to do it, and not even desire. Why? There is no fear of God before their eyes.





Well I think that about does it. Post your remarks Sothron, I would like to hear what you have to say.


Shalom.

 

[CalvinistSamurai]

Brownie:

2. CS, thanks for the point about "whatever He chooses to do is good." That really helped me realize that point. Hopefully that'll stick in my head, though - there's so much to remember/learn! Oh, but I don't get this comment you made: "God exists for His purpose - His glorification. If He didn't exist for that reason, He wouldn't be a very loving God, would He?" What do the 2 have to do with each other? Also, "Does it seem to you like you are a robot? Does your nature tell you that you are being controlled? No and no." Those are your own answers. I actually do feel quite controlled: by famiily, friends, society, and maybe that is all ultimately God.

You said three things here:

1) You're quite welcome!
2) Hmm. It seemed I confused two thoughts. I don't remember my original point, so just forget it. I'm an idiot.
3) When I said controlled, I didn't mean situationally. Family, friends, etc. control the situations you're in, they don't control your actions. When you stand up, did you feel like something inside you was forcing you to stand up, or did it seem like a concious decision based on your desire to stand up? That was what I was getting at. We're not robots, just walking around doing what we're programmed with no emotion or decision. God made us with personalities, and we make decisions based on our personality. Our personality is a constraint, but it doesn't feel like it to us because our personality is who we are. That is why free will seems like the more natural response. Its based on the fact that we're not robots. Unfortunately, its not in the bible.

3. It still doesn't make sense that if God predestined us, and shaped us so that we'd either choose or reject Him as Lord according to His plan, how can he hold us accountable to how He made us. I can't wrap my head around it for some reason. Yeah, yeah, but who am I to talk back to God, etc. I'm not talking back, I'm just trying to get answers that'll reveal more of who God is . That's the whole point of this thread, to know Him more.

Well, here's a freeing thought- Paul asked the same question- and didn't give an answer!

Rom. 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he still find fault? For who withstandeth his will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why didst thou make me thus?

Paul completely avoids the subject and only states that it is not our place to question God's decisions. For that reason, I do not answer the question of 'How does he find fault?' If 'no answer- don't talk back to God' was good enough for Paul, then its good enough for me as well.

4. I was taught, and content with, the idea that evil existed because of Lucifer's free will. So now if he didn't have that, and we don't either, where'd evil come from?! Didn't it ultimately have to come from the creator of everything else, i.e. God? Yikes!

Whoa, you just nailed the big one. That is one of the hardest subjects in the Bible. The free will v predestination argument doesn't even hold a candle compared to the thoughts on this one. I'll try my hardest though.

There are two different views accoding to Calvinism, infralapsarianism and supralapsarianism. To quickly summarize, the first says that God allowed man sin, according to His purpose. The second says God ordained man to sin, according to His purpose. If you follow both arguments through to their ends though, they just end up agreeing. The main difference between the two points is how they word their ideas. Infralapsarians are wont to err on the side of Arminianism, whereas Supralapsarians tend to err on the side of making God the author of sin.
The stronger of the two arguments is the supralapsarian side though, based on the fall of Satan vs the fall of Adam. When Adam fell, the temptation came from without- from Satan, so it can be said that Adam did it apart from God, and that God merely allowed it. With Satan you have a different situation, there was nothing evil in existence that could tempt him, so the sin- arrogance- had to have come from within. The question that arises, how does a perfectly holy being, an angel (and the highest one at that) have the desire to sin stir up from within it? If Satan was holy, he shouldn't have even had the desire to sin, let alone the capacity for it. So, in the case of satan, the supralapsarian view is the one that stands, because only God could possibly have the power to ordain Satan to sin without Himself being guilty of it.

Secondly, I'll point to Rom 8:20. For the creation was subjected to futility, not by its own will, but by Him who subjected it, in hope... Only God has the capacity to subject things to futility, and do it in hope of future glory.

Here are two parts from the Westminster Confession:
http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/ch_III.html
http://www.reformed.org/documents/wcf_with_proofs/ch_VI.html

and here's some quotes from Jonathon Edwards with interjection from John Piper.

"If by 'the author of sin,' be meant the sinner, the agent, or the actor of sin, or the doer of a wicked thing . . . . it would be a reproach and blasphemy, to suppose God to be the author of sin. In this sense, I utterly deny God to be the author of sin." But, he argues, willing that sin exist in the world is not the same as sinning. God does not commit sin in willing that there be sin. God has established a world in which sin will indeed necessarily come to pass by God's permission, but not by his "positive agency." (Edwards quoted by Dr. John Piper)

[God is] "the permitter . . . of sin; and at the same time, a disposer of the state of events, in such a manner, for wise, holy and most excellent ends and purposes, that sin, if it be permitted . . . will most certainly and infallibly follow."

God may hate a thing as it is in itself, and considered simply as evil, and yet . . . it may be his will it should come to pass, considering all consequences. . . . God doesn't will sin as sin or for the sake of anything evil; though it be his pleasure so to order things, that he permitting, sin will come to pass; for the sake of the great good that by his disposal shall be the consequence. His willing to order things so that evil should come to pass, for the sake of the contrary good, is no argument that he doesn't hate evil, as evil: and if so, then it is no reason why he may not reasonably forbid evil as evil, and punish it as such.



I hope that helped! Its 4:00 am, and I'm tired and cold so I'm sorry if I didn't give the best answers...


Shalom!

 

[Rick Otto]

Originally Posted by Rick Otto
Isaih 45:7 explicitly states God is responsible for the creation of Evil
Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

Don't judge His character without regard to His motivation.

Romans 9:22-23 explain why He chose to create evil

Romans 9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:
23: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

I guess you could say (with a smile), "God is a glory freak. He wants all of it!"
The good, but humbling thing about that is, He deserves it.

"Try a different translation; evil can mean many things (disaster, misfortune, etc...).

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light and create darkness,
I make peace and create calamity;
I, the LORD, do all these things.’ (NKJ)"

>>>Calamity/Evil, tomato/tomahto...
same difference. Lucifer's deciding to rebel was an evil that resulted in calamity.

Lg wrote:
"As for the scripture from Romans, again, its interpretation can vary wildly. Did God create vessels "fitted" to destruction for the sole purpose of "enduring" them, and then destroying them?"

>>>If by "sole purpose" you include not only endurance & destruction, but additionaly the rest of the passage..."And that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had afore prepared unto glory", then yes, He did exactly that.

 

[Mayflower1]

I just saw that you posted, so this one last, quick thing, then bedtime.



I agree in full. Our difference is in the extent to which we are taking the word 'choice.' You say that our choice is ultimately determinate, that God can do nothing because He is powerless against our will- we decide, end of story. I say, we choose because God calls us, which is irresistable. This is why I've been asking you to refute my scripture, because I only use scripture to refute you, so if you don't refute mine, then I guess I win, right? (lol) The passages on choice, as I've said over and over, say not a single thing about our wills being stronger than God's will. Those passages only state that we will be held responsible if we don't choose. Rom 9 (which is what I keep asking you to refute, its soooo pivotal) says that we are held responisble, God finds fault, yet it is still His will that hardens or has mercy, not ours; and we are not to ask 'why.'

In all, passages saying that we will be held responsible for our choices, or even ones that say we have choice at all, say nothing of our wills being above God's will. That alone is why I ask you to refute scripture that I post, because all of it directly states that God is sovereign.


Shalom (for the last time tonight! I swear!)

Yes, that is exactly what I believe! If you are not drawn, then you won't accept Christ! And who draws us but God Himself!!!! There is nothing inside our nature that is drawn to God. There is none righteous, there is none who does good, there is none who understands!!! LIMITED WILL! We are limited to what is in our nature!

 

[Mayflower1]

brownie3

Don't get caught up in trying to figure out stuff that's been tossed around for ages and nobody really knows for sure what the deal is. I personally think that it's a waste of time.

The real question you should ask yourself is: why does it even matter to figure out how predestination coincides or not coincides with free will, and vice-versa?

How does knowing that God knows everything ahead of time help you in your spiritual journey? Or who cares if you don't have free will or can't define it? Are you able to make decisions on your own and ready to face whatever consequences of those decisions? That's the only thing that matters.

Between predestination and free will is just a futile attempt to put oneself in God's shoes (if he even wears shoes) and try think that we mortals can think what God thinks.

Focus on how you can be a more loving Christian. That's where it boils down to and that's the only thing that matters.

I agree to an extent. Knowing whether or not if we are here from predestination or free will is not really as important as our salvation. If you believe in Jesus Christ as your personal saviour, believe that He died on the cross for your sins and rose again the third day... then you are saved. Your sins are washed away no matter how confused you get on how to interpret the Bible.

At the same time, I would still encourage you to keep looking up the scripture and praying to God for answers, for if you don't challenge your faith, then it will never grow. I stayed "drinking the milk" way too long before I started to actually walk closer to God and ask Him what was right and everything. It isn't a waste up time to desire the truth, and if you study fervently God will give you your answer!

 

[Charis kai Dunamis]

The real question you should ask yourself is: why does it even matter to figure out how predestination coincides or not coincides with free will, and vice-versa?

How does knowing that God knows everything ahead of time help you in your spiritual journey? Or who cares if you don't have free will or can't define it?

I highly, highly, highly disagree with this statement. If that was the case, then why should we even study who Jesus was as a person? None of can know everything about Him, so what is the point, right?

First of all, we have the Scriptures. True, we have the ability to interpret them different ways, but that doesn't mean they are pointless??? We can know based on scriptural evidence, because Spriture is completely perfect and true.

Second, the reason why it is important in your spiritual walk is because, we all must seek after more knowledge of who God is. If we did not know who God was at all, then we would not be able to worship Him. Likewise, the more we know about Him, the more we have the ability to worship Him. We should be correct in all that we say. We should not be Christians who only drink "spiritual milk", but ones who eat of solid truth.

To suggest that dwelling on deep theological issues is a waste of time is a complete misunderstanding of what it means to be a Christian. Do the desires of of hearts not cry out, "I want to know You more?"

Between predestination and free will is just a futile attempt to put oneself in God's shoes (if he even wears shoes) and try think that we mortals can think what God thinks.

We can know how God decides and acts based on the Scriptures. They are the only authority which is fully true that we have today. We do not necessarily have to understand it; but we can know what the Word says, and incorporate it into our understanding of God's character. In this way, our prayers to God will be more concise and direct, and our worship will be one of what His purpose for us was. In this way, we can have a continual growth in our relationship with Him.

Focus on how you can be a more loving Christian. That's where it boils down to and that's the only thing that matters.

Yes, that is a good thing to keep in mind, but is definitely not the only thing. If once you became a Christian, you never moved on to learn more about God and what the absolute truth of His Word is, then you would be denying an entire portion of Christianity. It is very important to be loving in all things, but the thing that matters the most is that we glorify God in all we do. That being said, learn more about God and who He is, so that you may worship Him even more fully.

It isn't a waste up time to desire the truth, and if you study fervently God will give you your answer!

I strongly agree!!! Please, remember this for the rest of your life. It is quite sad seeing people in their old age who still are not desiring more truth. Always seek to know more of God, as this is why we have the Scriptures!!!

 

[L3g3nd]

>>>Calamity/Evil, tomato/tomahto...
same difference. Lucifer's deciding to rebel was an evil that resulted in calamity.

Lg wrote:
"As for the scripture from Romans, again, its interpretation can vary wildly. Did God create vessels "fitted" to destruction for the sole purpose of "enduring" them, and then destroying them?"

>>>If by "sole purpose" you include not only endurance & destruction, but additionaly the rest of the passage..."And that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had afore prepared unto glory", then yes, He did exactly that.

Calamity and evil (evil in the sense of sin, or the opposite of "good") are not at all the same thing. If they were, then God Himself would be the source of evil, and thus evil would be a part of His nature, which is clearly not the case.

As for the second half of the verse, take a look at this: http://www.gty.org/resources.php?section=issues&aid=231287 (this is just one example of a number of interpretations)

The English translation of these verses (just as with the translation of evil as meaning sin or the opposite of good) cannot be trusted alone to show us their context.

 

[relspace]

And by the way. God is love, but love is not God. Chew on that.

I have no need to chew on it. I know it very well. Love can be twisted towards evil. That is why, although I refered to the saying that God is love, I did not say that God is defined by love. I modified it by saying that God is defined by goodness and love.

Love is not God's defining quality, but righteousness is.

Incorrect. Righteousness without love has no mercy and is just as big a lie as love without goodness. Therefore God is defined by the union of the two: love and goodness. God epitomizes (trumps) anything we can possibly imagine as worthy of love, service and sacrifice. Any other god is false. I would defy a god merely of power and knowldege, who demanded my obedience with promises of rewards and threats of punishment. Such a being, I must respond to as I would to Satan. Some things are worth defending no matter what the consequences. But the true God represents everything worth defending and therefore no righteous cause would or could ever stand against Him.

God does not need to define every action He makes in that it is loving. Is wrath love? Yet it is one of God's characteristics.

Yes, a parent's wrath is quite often love. God is the ultimate parent.

But God has no need at all. He is perfect. And being perfect, having everything, He can only desire to give and to serve. God might demand that we worship and praise Him, but He has no need of such things. It is we who have the need to turn from self destruction to worship love and goodness and to praise life and creation.

Therefore, God must be righteous first before anything else, which means His glory and pleasure is the reason for all of creation.

No, He does not! God is perfect. He does not need to be righteous or have to be righteous. God is righteous. That is the difference between Jesus and the Pharisees. The Pharisees had the need to be righteous, seeking it constantly, even though they were doomed to failure. Jesus being perfectly righteous had no such need, and therefore sought the company of sinners in order to serve them. Not having to strive for righteousness, God can concern Himself only with love.

It is we who must put righteousness before love, or even better love God first before loving anyone or anything else, for otherwise love will easily lead us into sin. It is we who must put the glory of God and His pleasure before everything else, NOT GOD! God has no such need, therefore the glory of God and His pleasure CANNOT be the reason why He created us. On the contrary, He created us, not for us to serve and glorify Him, but in order for Him to love and serve us. He is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven for He exists to love and serve others. And the first service that we can give to God is to receive His love. But His love is pure and serves us, which means that it seeks our increase and refuses to accept our willful habits of self-destruction. Thus God has the wrath of a parent as against a child who disobediently plays in the street or plays with matches.

 

[Zeena]

We still choose, obey or disobey, and are responsible or irresponsible, but only because God predestined it to be in the first place.

In line with your arguement here you state that God is the author of sin!

Corinthians 14:33
For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.

Job 34:10
Therefore hearken unto me ye men of understanding: far be it from God, that he should do wickedness; and from the Almighty, that he should commit iniquity.

In my experience;

I was unregenerate until the day the Holy Spirit came to minister to me. God knew my heart! And He knew when I would be willing to bow before Him in reverant fear..

God knows those who are His.