Satan's Sin

[holdon]

The only thing I'm not quite sure I can reconcile with the above is the idea that God would have preferred that Lucifer and Adam both not sin

You say:

"God would have preferred that Lucifer and Adam sin"

Momentous statement of a die-hard Calvinist....

Stuff like this makes me reject Calvinism with utter revulsion.

 

[nobdysfool]

You say:

"God would have preferred that Lucifer and Adam sin"

Momentous statement of a die-hard Calvinist....

Stuff like this makes me reject Calvinism with utter revulsion.

But, I did not actually say that. If you had followed the thought in its entirety, you would have seen that such an idea is considered in a larger context, one that is apparently beyond your grasp.

Your whole goal here is obviously to find snippets of statements that you can get all worked up about, and express outrage about, for one purpose and one purpose only: to cast Calvinism and Reformed Theology in a bad light, when you can offer NO reasonable alternative.

You demonstrate over and over again that you have zero comprehension and understanding of what Reformed Theology ACTUALLY teaches, so married are you to the lies and misrepresentations that you and others have cooked up in order to avoid actually dealing with scripture and what it teaches. You'd rather hold on to an anthrpomorphic plastic bobblehead savior than to deal with the Real Lord Jesus and His Word, and concepts and doctrines that you might actually have to expend some effort and engage a few brain cells to understand, rather than the emotional, feelings driven, reactionary baloney you keep posting.

 

[nobdysfool]

Oh, and holdon, we're still waiting for your answers to these questions, whuich are entirely appropos to the discussion:

What is the alternative? Was God caught by surprise?

Did Adam nearly destroy what God had created by disobeying Him?

Did God have to scramble to come up with a "Plan B" because of what Adam did?

Or, Did God know that if He created the world as He did, Adam would sin, and God created the world the way He did anyway, knowing that He would use the sin of Adam to show forth His glory and Mercy and Righteousness of Justice by the redemption of the Bride of Christ, and the destruction of the wicked?

Tell us, holdon, since you so obviously know so much more than we do. Tell us, O enemy of Calvinism.

 

[holdon]

You'd rather hold on to an anthrpomorphic plastic bobblehead savior than to deal with the Real Lord Jesus and His Word, and concepts and doctrines that you might actually have to expend some effort and engage a few brain cells to understand, rather than the emotional, feelings driven, reactionary baloney you keep posting.

You're so insulting! As no morality will keep you from concluding the worst about a Holy God: "that He would prefer that Lucifer and Adam sin.", it is evident that no morality will keep you from insulting others either.

 

[holdon]

Oh, and holdon, we're still waiting for your answers to these questions, whuich are entirely appropos to the discussion:

What is the alternative?

Alternative to what? To God being the author of evil? You really think there is no alternative?

Was God caught by surprise?

Of course not.

Did Adam nearly destroy what God had created by disobeying Him?

Yes, absolutely.

Did God have to scramble to come up with a "Plan B" because of what Adam did?

Yes. Absolutely! God did not plan evil. Never. He couldn't.

Or, Did God know that if He created the world as He did, Adam would sin, and God created the world the way He did anyway

God knows all things all the time. But that does not mean God wanted Adam to sin.

knowing that He would use the sin of Adam to show forth His glory and Mercy and Righteousness of Justice by the redemption of the Bride of Christ, and the destruction of the wicked?

What other choice did He have? Once Adam sinned He brought about His grace and redemption: Plan B.

Tell us, holdon, since you so obviously know so much more than we do. Tell us, O enemy of Calvinism.

You're very good at making enemies.....

 

[nobdysfool]

Alternative to what? To God being the author of evil? You really think there is no alternative?

Wel then, O wise one, tell us what that plan would be? Especially, tell us how that would have taken care of Lucifer and the fallen angels. Tell us what Plan God had that Adam ruined? And knock off the "God is the author of sin and evil" crap. That is a complete mischaracterization of the Calvinist position, and has no truth to it whatsoever. It is a lie.

Did Adam nearly destroy what God had created by disobeying Him?

Yes, absolutely.

Scripture please.

Did God have to scramble to come up with a "Plan B" because of what Adam did?

Yes. Absolutely! God did not plan evil. Never. He couldn't.

Scripture please? Certainly you can prove to us conclusively what you so strongly assert?

God knows all things all the time. But that does not mean God wanted Adam to sin.

Your ability to think abstractly is non-existent. You cannot provide one scripture that categorically states this.

What other choice did He have? Once Adam sinned He brought about His grace and redemption: Plan B.

You've GOT to be kidding! Please show us scripture for this ridiculous claim!

You're very good at making enemies.....

I am not your enemy, holdon. You however, have made me your enemy. Do you understand the important difference? Yours is the hatred expressed here. Yours is the accusations and irrational thinking.

 

[nobdysfool]

You're so insulting! As no morality will keep you from concluding the worst about a Holy God: "that He would prefer that Lucifer and Adam sin.", it is evident that no morality will keep you from insulting others either.

And that gives you the permission to insult others? It's perfectly alruight for you to insult what I believe, but no one should hold you accountable for the insulting things you say to others, and to me?

I am not "concluding the worst about a Holy God." That is your over-emotional reaction to someone challenging you to think and to learn from the scriptures. You ask, and then play "gotcha" with answerrs you don't like. If you want to continue in ignorance, I cannot stop you, but I have a duty to call you to account for your poor handling of the Word. Your posts are rife with emotionalism, and horrendous twisting of logic and reason. Your hatred of Calvinists has blinded you to reason.

 

[IronFire]

Yes, I see the difference, and it is a distinction that is lost on many who try to weigh in with opinions. As I said, and I believe you agree, God ordained both Lucifer's and Adam's sins for a greater purpose, and not just to have them happen. God's Purpose was larger than just the state of Lucifer's standing, or just Adam's. In ordaining the larger purpose, things like Lucifer's and Adam's sins were ordained to serve the larger purpose. Therefore, God was not "blind-sided" he was not taken by surprise and forced to adjust His Plan and Purpose to account for an unforeseen event.

Cool

The only thing I'm not quite sure I can reconcile with the above is the idea that God would have preferred that Lucifer and Adam both not sin, because if God had the larger purpose already in mind (which I believe He did), then the so-called "d'ruthers" don't really apply.

hmmm...I do believe God had a larger purpose in mind the whole time, but I think this is where we differ.

Yes it does, and I think you're feeling the strain of trying to walk the fine line that is always brought up in these discussions. Some people just can't conceive of a God who would ordain events that they see as bad, disaters, injurious, and eternally fateful. But when one really stops and thinks clearly about it, the alternative to God ordaining all that is, is chaos to one degree or another, and either a God who is really not in control or the existence of an inimicable force or being who is apart from God, and not subject to His control. Neither of those alternatives is viable, or even possible. Nor should any one event be seen as divorced from the context of all things, and the working of the larger purpose of God.

 

[nobdysfool]

Cool

Thank you for a reasonable and calm discussion of views. For some reason, some people get really worked up about this subject. I appreciate the rational approach, and the thoughtful responses.

hmmm...I do believe God had a larger purpose in mind the whole time, but I think this is where we differ.

Consider that in the light of a larger purpose, certain things might have to happen that of themselves would not be the preferred course of events, taken alone, and considered alone, but become necessary to accomplish the larger purpose. Obviously, we are not privy to what the full scope of that Purpose was or is, and why it had to be this way, but I am content with knowing that it is the way it is because God thought it the best way to bring about the full fruition of that larger Purpose...And we know that whatsoever He doeth, it is Right.



A Blessed Resurrection Day to you, Bro!

 

[IronFire]

I can see the arguments for God intending Adam to sin, but I'm not convinced it is right or necessary.

God not wanting man to sin...

Firstly, I would claim (maybe unfoundedly) that love is not possible without "free-will", love cannot be forced or caused by another.

Secondly, I would claim that God would rather man love Him than not. To say otherwise seems ludicrus.

Therefore, God gave man a "free-will", the ability to cause decisions, so that man might be capable of loving God.

God knew that man would rebel, yes. But it is more important that man have the ability to love (and indeed through Jesus are able use that ability) than it is that there is never any sin.


So God wanted Adam to love Him, but for that to be possible Adam had to have the ability to sin. God would rather have Adam rebel, then have him reconciled through Jesus, and finally love Him - than for Adam to not sin (or love) at all.

Whacha think?

 

[IronFire]

Thank you for a reasonable and calm discussion of views. For some reason, some people get really worked up about this subject. I appreciate the rational approach, and the thoughtful responses.

Yeah, you too.

Consider that in the light of a larger purpose, certain things might have to happen that of themselves would not be the preferred course of events, taken alone, and considered alone, but become necessary to accomplish the larger purpose. Obviously, we are not privy to what the full scope of that Purpose was or is, and why it had to be this way, but I am content with knowing that it is the way it is because God thought it the best way to bring about the full fruition of that larger Purpose...And we know that whatsoever He doeth, it is Right.

Dude...I think I agree with you. I think it's just the way people phrase ideas that makes them sound so bad.

Where do we disagree then?

To summarize my position:

I think people are able to decide/cause decisions of their own volition and that God ordains that people to cause certain decisions in accordance with the persons unaffected choice.

A Blessed Resurrection Day to you, Bro!

Go resurection!

 

[holdon]

Wel then, O wise one, tell us what that plan would be?

That's the plan that God is intrinsically and eternally good, that in Him there is no darkness at all. That He created moral beings capable of free choice.

Especially, tell us how that would have taken care of Lucifer and the fallen angels. Tell us what Plan God had that Adam ruined?

"because by him were created all things, the things in the heavens and the things upon the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones, or lordships, or principalities, or authorities: all things have been created by him and for him."

"even as by one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death; and thus death passed upon all men"

And knock off the "God is the author of sin and evil" crap. That is a complete mischaracterization of the Calvinist position, and has no truth to it whatsoever. It is a lie.

Well it was said earlier this thread I believe. Why are so opposed to that term by the way? Because your religion doesn't allow you to say that? But it teaches it....
And here is what Moonbeam said to my objection:

Quote

Originally Posted by: holdon

Your god is the author of sin and evil. That's what you're saying. It's a pagan idea.

Just to be clear: that is not the God of the Bible.

God.....IS.....the "author"....of everything......Do you know of another ?

Where Moonbeam at least is so much consistent in acknowledging that God is that author of evil, whereas we cannot detect the same consistency in you.

Scripture please? Certainly you can prove to us conclusively what you so strongly assert?

Hab. 1:13 for instance.

Your ability to think abstractly is non-existent. You cannot provide one scripture that categorically states this.

Do you know what the term: "Adam sinned", or "Adam transgressed" means???

You've GOT to be kidding! Please show us scripture for this ridiculous claim!

"For if by the offence of one the many have died, much rather has the grace of God, and the free gift in grace, which is by the one man Jesus Christ, abounded unto the many."

 

[holdon]

I am not "concluding the worst about a Holy God."

Yes, you do. See post #80

 

[nobdysfool]

That's the plan that God is intrinsically and eternally good, that in Him there is no darkness at all. That He created moral beings capable of free choice.
"because by him were created all things, the things in the heavens and the things upon the earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones, or lordships, or principalities, or authorities: all things have been created by him and for him."

"even as by one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death; and thus death passed upon all men"

Well it was said earlier this thread I believe. Why are so opposed to that term by the way? Because your religion doesn't allow you to say that? But it teaches it....
And here is what Moonbeam said to my objection:

Where Moonbeam at least is so much consistent in acknowledging that God is that author of evil, whereas we cannot detect the same consistency in you. Hab. 1:13 for instance. Do you know what the term: "Adam sinned", or "Adam transgressed" means??? "For if by the offence of one the many have died, much rather has the grace of God, and the free gift in grace, which is by the one man Jesus Christ, abounded unto the many."

you're not even trying to answer what I ask, you're just throwing out anything. Your hatred is palpable. I do not hate you holdon, but it's obvious you hate me. I will leave you to your hatred.

 

[holdon]

you're not even trying to answer what I ask, you're just throwing out anything. Your hatred is palpable. I do not hate you holdon, but it's obvious you hate me. I will leave you to your hatred.

I sure did give you answers.... I am not throwing out anything, just what is wrong.

"but prove all things, hold fast the right;
hold aloof from every form of wickedness (evil)"

If you have the need to play the hate game, go ahead....