Why do Calvinists....

[FreeInChrist2]

[quote]Originally Posted By BOXMAKER

I have seen some good arguments on this thread for predestination. I have seen or heard nothing that would lead me to seek out a church that teachs reformed theology. Why? It is the tone in which the arguments have been offered. That tone is not the tone I hear in Christ's words in the bible.[/quote]

How’s this for TONE…

John 2:15
When He had made a whip of cords, He drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen, and poured out the changers’ money and overturned the tables. 16 And He said to those who sold doves, “Take these things away! Do not make My Father’s house a house of merchandise!”

Matthew 3:7
But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to where he was baptizing, he said to them: "You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?

Matthew 12:34 You brood of vipers, how can you who are evil say anything good? For out of the overflow of the heart the mouth speaks.

Matthew 23:33 "You snakes! You brood of vipers! How will you escape being condemned to hell?

Luke 3:7John said to the crowds coming out to be baptized by him, "You brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the coming wrath?

Matthew 15:7You hypocrites! Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:

Matthew 22:18But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, "You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me?

Matthew 23:13 "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You shut the kingdom of heaven in men's faces. You yourselves do not enter, nor will you let those enter who are trying to.

Matthew 23:15 "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You travel over land and sea to win a single convert, and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as you are.

Matthew 23:23 "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You give a tenth of your spices—mint, dill and cummin. But you have neglected the more important matters of the law—justice, mercy and faithfulness. You should have practiced the latter, without neglecting the former.

Matthew 23:25 "Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence.

John 8:31 Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, “If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. 32 And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” 33 They answered Him, “We are Abraham’s descendants, and have never been in bondage to anyone. How can You say, ‘You will be made free’?” 34 Jesus answered them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin. 35 And a slave does not abide in the house forever, but a son abides forever. 36 Therefore if the Son makes you free, you shall be free indeed. (Not your will makes you free)

37 “I know that you are Abraham’s descendants, but you seek to kill Me, because My word has no place in you. 38 I speak what I have seen with My Father, and you do what you have seen with your father.” 39 They answered and said to Him, “Abraham is our father.” Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the works of Abraham. 40 But now you seek to kill Me, a Man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Abraham did not do this. 41 You do the deeds of your father.” Then they said to Him, “We were not born of fornication; we have one Father—God.” 42 Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love Me, for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of Myself, but He sent Me. 43 Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word. 44 You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. 45 But because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me. 46 Which of you convicts Me of sin? And if I tell the truth, why do you not believe Me? 47 He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.”

58 Jesus said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I AM.”
59 Then they took up stones to throw at Him;

Hey… these are Jesus’ words, not mine. So BOXMAKER , you might really want to try to read your bible very carefully. I pray the Lord will grant you understanding of all that it is teaching us and what it really means to be like Christ, and when you do see it, only then you will realize what a wretched people we really are, continually crying out with broken hearts and contrite spirits...with tears praying...LORD, I just can't do it...Thank you for Jesus who did it ALL for me.

FreeInChrist2

PS. It is my prayer one day you will be back saying...I GET IT! Then you will be my brother in Christ.

 

[bradfordl]

As for tone... Tone conveys much about what a person feels about what they believe. People were more concerned that faith come in only one way that they judge anybody who differes with that view as unsaved. Through tone I heard rules about how one must believe instead of hope in why one believes.

This is a Dicto Simpliciter argument. You have taken a few people's comments and accused us all of the same fallacies. Tom, Dick, and Harry are Calvinists. Tom, Dick, and Harry are "more concerned that faith come in only one way that they judge anybody who differes with that view as unsaved" and "rules about how one must believe instead of hope in why one believes". Therefore all Calvinists are guilty of the same. I thought you were an engineer?

I believe the more relavent question is in Whom do we believe and what do we believe about Him? What we believe about Him is pertinent to exactly who He is. There are many people named Brad in the world, but only one is me. There are many varieties of what people call Jesus in the world, but there is only one Lord, one Author and Finisher of our salvation.

B

 

[FreeInChrist2]

This is a Dicto Simpliciter argument. You have taken a few people's comments and accused us all of the same fallacies. Tom, Dick, and Harry are Calvinists. Tom, Dick, and Harry are "more concerned that faith come in only one way that they judge anybody who differes with that view as unsaved" and "rules about how one must believe instead of hope in why one believes". Therefore all Calvinists are guilty of the same. I thought you were an engineer?

I believe the more relavent question is in Whom do we believe and what do we believe about Him? What we believe about Him is pertinent to exactly who He is. There are many people named Brad in the world, but only one is me. There are many varieties of what people call Jesus in the world, but there is only one Lord, one Author and Finisher of our salvation.

Great! Perfect!

Pray for Boxmaker, I believe He really wants to know the truth. He's kind of like me in the beginning...I hated it, but I just had to keep going back for more, because I knew all I was hearing was true, even though I would deny it, if you were to ask.

 

[Boxmaker]

This is a Dicto Simpliciter argument. You have taken a few people's comments and accused us all of the same fallacies. Tom, Dick, and Harry are Calvinists. Tom, Dick, and Harry are "more concerned that faith come in only one way that they judge anybody who differes with that view as unsaved" and "rules about how one must believe instead of hope in why one believes". Therefore all Calvinists are guilty of the same. I thought you were an engineer?

I believe the more relavent question is in Whom do we believe and what do we believe about Him? What we believe about Him is pertinent to exactly who He is. There are many people named Brad in the world, but only one is me. There are many varieties of what people call Jesus in the world, but there is only one Lord, one Author and Finisher of our salvation.

B

Now you have totally ignored what I said and accuse me of saying something I never said.

I never said all Calvinists are alike. In point of fact, except for one difference in how we come to faith, I see no difference in much of what we believe.

I have said, and I believe it to be true, that all who have partcipated in this thread are brothers and sisters in Christ.

I said the tone of much of the arguments here do not lead me to look for a reformed church.

But it has made me relize one thing. I enjoy these forums. I enjoy the debate and the conversation. The help to refine and sharpen our faith like steel sharpens steel. And to a large degree they are totally useless.

Many people who participate in these threads are very solid in their theology. Calvinists, Armenians, Catholics, Baptists, Jehova Witnesses, all are very firmly rooted in their beliefs. We can all go to our favorite proof texts to support our beliefs. In the end, it means nothing.

Christianiaty is not a noun. Christianiaty is a verb. All the Bible study in the world means nothing if we do not apply it to our lives. How many of us step out of our doors and help those we see? Do we offer money to the begger at the stop light? Do we give not only money, but time to the local resuce mission? Do buy a little less car and use the remaining money to help the single mom down the street pay her bills?

There is much for us to do. Instead of arguing amoungest ourselves about which beliefe about God is the most correct, are we doing as He commanded us? Are we loving God with all our heart, mind and soul? Are loving each other a Christ loved us?

I have a ways to go in my walk with Jesus.

 

[Boxmaker]

Great! Perfect!

Pray for Boxmaker, I believe He really wants to know the truth. He's kind of like me in the beginning...I hated it, but I just had to keep going back for more, because I knew all I was hearing was true, even though I would deny it, if you were to ask.

I know the truth. Jesus is my Lord and saviour. He has saved me to eternal life in heaven with Him and God and all the saints.

How do I know the truth? Because God loved me first.

 

[Gus2009]

And the alternative, that god isn't in control. Your belief must be able to explain even the most outrageous actions, too. He's not in control; he doesn't know what will happen next (so he's lying about this prophetic ability); if he knew certainly he wouldn't have allowed it.

How can we trust such a god to set things right? How will he know what the proper punishment is? He doesn't even know what his creatures are capable of doing. His job must be like herding cats. Why would I trust him?

This is interesting.

One of the things ive seen among many of the reformed is a need for consistency and explanation. It either makes sense to me or it doesn't and if it doesn't it isnt right. Calvinism makes sense to me so it must be right. God must be in control of all things, to be truly God, ergo calvinism.

Logically this makes sense because, logically, calvinism makes sense. If an alternative view is proposed it must be just another spin on free will and anything hinting of free will tampers with the omniscience of God. Using human reason, calivinsim is the only truly viable explanation. Arguing with a calvinist, in most cases, is suicide because a debater, debates using logic(at least a good one) and logically a calvinist has already beaten you.

This is, as i see it at least, the only thing stopping me from becoming a calvinist. The basis of calvinsim is a need to make God, make sense. Pre-destination is really, the only logical conclusion if God is truly omniscient. This need for philosophical order is where i think Calvinism misses the ball. Human reason is just that, human reason, and can only go so far. Is it not logical that heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones? Its what we see, it sure makes sense. Calvinist make the accusation that people of the free will persuasion are putting their free will above Gods sovereignty. I propose that Calvinist do the same, however, not with their need for free will but with their need to make sense of God.

This issue reminds me of what Einstien said when faced with the logical conclusions of his own theories, he saw a universe based on probability and chance and did not like it. In response to his own work he made the famous quote "God does not play dice". Upon hearing this, Neils Bohr made the not so famous quote "Who is Einstien to tell God what to do?" Perhaps we should stop trying to fit God to what we think He should be like.

So in response to the question

How can we trust such a god to set things right? How will he know what the proper punishment is? He doesn't even know what his creatures are capable of doing. His job must be like herding cats. Why would I trust him?

Because He is God. If He chooses to make His universe this way, who are we to question? Even if it doesnt make sense to us

 

[kimlva]

Because He is God. If He chooses to make His universe this way, who are we to question? Even if it doesnt make sense to us

This is true. But the question is, what does the Bible say about Him? And if we don't believe the Bible, then we have nothing to base our beliefs on but our own feelings and imaginations. In other words, we each create our own god and our own religion. Of course, I realize some (most?) people are perfectly happy with that idea.

 

[bradfordl]

This issue reminds me of what Einstien said when faced with the logical conclusions of his own theories, he saw a universe based on probability and chance and did not like it. In response to his own work he made the famous quote "God does not play dice".

The actual quote is "God does not play dice with the universe", and it was not about conclusions related to his own theories, but in response to the apparent chaos that quantum theory (of which Neils Bohr was a proponent of) indicates.

Is it not logical that heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones?

Irrelavent conclusion - Ignorantio Elenchi argumentation. That only makes sense if you have an erroneous understanding of gravity.

This is, as i see it at least, the only thing stopping me from becoming a calvinist. The basis of calvinsim is a need to make God, make sense. Pre-destination is really, the only logical conclusion if God is truly omniscient. This need for philosophical order is where i think Calvinism misses the ball. Human reason is just that, human reason, and can only go so far.

It goes only as far as God ordains it to go. But that is His will also, that we seek after wisdom and pursue knowledge. And that scripture should make sense is only, well, sensible.

Could it be that those who reject logic and sensible exegesis of scripture do so because there are parts that are repugnant to their misapprehended ideas about who and what God is and what are His purposes in creation?

Mathematics and logic are not human inventions. They are part and parcel to God's creation. Sure, there is much that limited human ability cannot comprehend, but that inability does not overthrow the fact that God is a God of order, and dare I say it... logic. If we accept the premise that God is omniscient, then it necessarily follows that any inconsistency found in His Word is a result of our own faulty understanding of it, not that God is not logical.

An idea must make sense to be communicable, if that were not so then none of scripture need make sense. God could have just written down gibberish and we could all make whatever "sense" of it that we wanted to. The sad thing is that although He bothered to record ultimately logical, sensible, and consistent ideas for us, we still try to turn it into whatever "sense" we prefer, and explain away the non-sensical portions of our self-authored paradigms by attacking the need for things to make sense.

You are saying that premise A makes no sense (is not consistent), but since you are fond (emotionally) of it, it is therefore not necessary for it to make sense (be consistent). This is Argumentum Ad Misericordiam, or argument from pity, another.... logical fallacy.

SDG,

Brad

 

[Gus2009]

The actual quote is "God does not play dice with the universe", and it was not about conclusions related to his own theories, but in response to the apparent chaos that quantum theory (of which Neils Bohr was a proponent of) indicates.

Id like some documentation on this, not on the actual quote, because i believe you. But on this not relating to Einstiens' work. Its a well known fact that Einstien spent the latter part of his life trying to disprove his own earlier work. Either way, this is sort of mute. The point still stands and the idea is quite the same.

Irrelavent conclusion - Ignorantio Elenchi argumentation. That only makes sense if you have an erroneous understanding of gravity.

Exactly the point i was making. In fact youve furthered it, latin words and all.

It goes only as far as God ordains it to go. But that is His will also, that we seek after wisdom and pursue knowledge. And that scripture should make sense is only, well, sensible.

Beautifully said and 100% agreed with.

Could it be that those who reject logic and sensible exegesis of scripture do so because there are parts that are repugnant to their misapprehended ideas about who and what God is and what are His purposes in creation?

It could be so and im sure is so for many . But could it also be that after sensible exegesis of scripture some do not come to the same conclusions or find others conclusions a bit too assumptive? Surely these people shouldnt be lumped in with the former.

Mathematics and logic are not human inventions.

This is debatable, but probably tangential as well so i wont get into it unless you insist.

They are part and parcel to God's creation. Sure, there is much that limited human ability cannot comprehend, but that inability does not overthrow the fact that God is a God of order, and dare I say it... logic. If we accept the premise that God is omniscient, then it necessarily follows that any inconsistency found in His Word is a result of our own faulty understanding of it, not that God is not logical.

Absoloutely, and amen.

An idea must make sense to be communicable, if that were not so then none of scripture need make sense. God could have just written down gibberish and we could all make whatever "sense" of it that we wanted to. The sad thing is that although He bothered to record ultimately logical, sensible, and consistent ideas for us, we still try to turn it into whatever "sense" we prefer, and explain away the non-sensical portions of our self-authored paradigms by attacking the need for things to make sense.

And heres where the differences start. Lets go back a step. You yourself said that any logical inconsistencies come from our own misunderstanding of scripture. The gravity example you made is good. Logically, without a proper understanding of science, heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones. This is a logical conclusion, at least Aristotle thought so. However, once science is understood, we see how deeply our logic has failed us.

This is why i find philosophy and logic and reason, tools to use with caution when dealing with theology. Not because God is not logical and reasonable but because our logic has its limits, we should be careful. We are the illogical ones. The sorts of pre-mature logical jumps, like the afformentioned one, are found not only in our observation of the physical universe but in our understanding of scripture. For thousands of years the sun was thought to revolve around the earth and this was scripturally based. The antebellum south of the united states thought that scripture supported slavery. The salem witch trials also come to mind. Perhaps you can think of even better examples. Surely these people thought they were being quite logical and scripturally sound. Is this Gods fault for not being clear? Or our fault for being too assumptive?

You are saying that premise A makes no sense (is not consistent), but since you are fond (emotionally) of it, it is therefore not necessary for it to make sense (be consistent). This is Argumentum Ad Misericordiam, or argument from pity, another.... logical fallacy.

SDG,

Brad

sigh......This is sort of what i expected. Reformed like to accuse the other side of emotionally based arguments, and then turn the discussion into a logic class, telling you how youve broken some arbitrary rule of logic. And not only that, they do it in latin, that means they must be smarter . I will say this much, im not very emotionally attached to either side. Im simply trying to be careful of making God fit into a conclusion based upon the philosophical ponderings of men. There is no premise A, making a premise at all is where i have problems. And youre alternative makes perfect sense to me, thats why im so suspicious.

 

[bradfordl]

And heres where the differences start. Lets go back a step. You yourself said that any logical inconsistencies come from our own misunderstanding of scripture. The gravity example you made is good. Logically, without a proper understanding of science, heavier objects fall faster than lighter ones. This is a logical conclusion, at least Aristotle thought so. However, once science is understood, we see how deeply our logic has failed us.

Heavy object - faster fall, lighter object - slower fall. Why is that a logical assumption? Why not the reverse? Aristotle was just jumping to conclusions, which is another one of them onerous fallacies of logic.

Here was your postulation:

Pre-destination is really, the only logical conclusion if God is truly omniscient.

Then:

Calvinist make the accusation that people of the free will persuasion are putting their free will above Gods sovereignty. I propose that Calvinist do the same, however, not with their need for free will but with their need to make sense of God.

I'm not sure, but do you mean that because we need to make sense of God, and that since predestination and God's sovereignty make sense, we put that sensibleness above God's sovereignty? If that's what you mean, it makes no.... sense.

sigh......This is sort of what i expected. Reformed like to accuse the other side of emotionally based arguments, and then turn the discussion into a logic class, telling you how youve broken some arbitrary rule of logic. And not only that, they do it in latin, that means they must be smarter .

Arbitrary: Uncertain; random; accidental; discretionary; outside of central relevance to the methodology, law or principle, therefore accepting of individual choice and subjectivity.

The words logic and arbitrary are antithetical to one another. That's like saying something is negatively positive, or positively negative if you prefer. The use of latin is no indication of "smartness", I've seen some real slow bikers with Latin phrases tattooed on their arms. What it is indicative of is that these arguments and techniques, used by many to drift in some inconsistent limbo of ideas because of a dislike of certain parts of the truth, are as ancient as a dead language.

I will say this much, im not very emotionally attached to either side. Im simply trying to be careful of making God fit into a conclusion based upon the philosophical ponderings of men. There is no premise A, making a premise at all is where i have problems. And youre alternative makes perfect sense to me, thats why im so suspicious.

It's a good thing to be suspicious of our own understanding. That is why logic is so useful in the study of these matters, even with the limitations of our human understanding - to be able to locate the inconsistencies and incongruities of our beliefs and search for solutions to them.
You said something similar earlier-

The basis of calvinsim is a need to make God, make sense.

I disagree with that statement. I would counter that calvinism is a sensible description of the operation of God throughout human history as described in the scriptures. That is not trying to "make God" anything. it is only making sense of what He has told us about Himself and His work in His Word.

Using human reason, calivinsim is the only truly viable explanation.

Why is reason human? I see more unreasonable than reasonable humans. Isn't reason an objective thing? If not, please explain.

SDG,

Brad

 

[FreeInChrist2]

Here was your postulation:Then:

Originally Posted By Gus2006...
Calvinist make the accusation that people of the free will persuasion are putting their free will above Gods sovereignty. I propose that Calvinist do the same, however, not with their need for free will but with their need to make sense of God.

I'm not sure, but do you mean that because we need to make sense of God, and that since predestination and God's sovereignty make sense, we put that sensibleness above God's sovereignty? If that's what you mean, it makes no.... sense.

LOL

Another great debate within BOXMAKER's search for the truth!

 

[Gus2009]

Heavy object - faster fall, lighter object - slower fall. Why is that a logical assumption? Why not the reverse? Aristotle was just jumping to conclusions, which is another one of them onerous fallacies of logic.

Is this a question or are you agreeing with me?

I'm not sure, but do you mean that because we need to make sense of God, and that since predestination and God's sovereignty make sense, we put that sensibleness above God's sovereignty? If that's what you mean, it makes no.... sense.

Perhaps i should restate my idea. Calvinism makes sense. If God is omniscient, then man is not saved of his free will but because of God's election. Logically and reasonably this is inescapable. As our observation of the physical universe has proven however, just because something is logical and reasonable or even the most logical and reasonable doesnt mean it is true.

If philosophers like Aristotle were wrong about the physical realm. Couldnt' philsophers like Calvin, Arminius Aquinas, Augustine, Kerkiergaard(sp?) be wrong about the theological realm? Science superseded philosophy in the physical. There is no "science of theology" however. Scripture is the gold standard, not science. Only reason, logic and faith are the tools available to the reader of scripture. These tools can fail us, as has been shown. Not because they are flawed tools, but because we use them incorrectly.

Should we trust this reason and logic so much that we are certain to be right? Certain enough to make it doctrine? While many things in scriptures are quite clear, I think calvinsim takes a little bit more of a philosophical jump. Lutherans and people who take the free will side would agree with me and dont think im going out on a limb when i say so. That doesnt mean calvinism isnt right, not at all. Calvin may have been dead on. But thats just my point, he may have been. Saying youre certain would be intellectualy dishonest.

I am aware that there is more to it than just reason and logic. I know there is a faith component too. I have no qualms there. I think one becomes a christian because of faith. One becomes a calvinist because it makes good sense. Calvinism is probably the most cerebral of the group. This is a good thing. But it is also why i am discussing this point on these forums.

Arbitrary: Uncertain; random; accidental; discretionary; outside of central relevance to the methodology, law or principle, therefore accepting of individual choice and subjectivity.

The words logic and arbitrary are antithetical to one another. That's like saying something is negatively positive, or positively negative if you prefer.

Well im glad you saw the attempt at humor. The semi-oxymoron was on purpose. It needed no explanation though. Thats like explaining the joke to the person who just told it to you.

 

[bradfordl]

Well im glad you saw the attempt at humor. The semi-oxymoron was on purpose. It needed no explanation though. Thats like explaining the joke to the person who just told it to you.

Wasn't certain you saw the contradiction. My apologies.

But let me address what I understand(?) to be your premise, and correct me if I'm wrong.

Should we trust this reason and logic so much that we are certain to be right? Certain enough to make it doctrine?

Here's some pertinent definitions:

Reason - the capacity for rational thought or inference or discrimination; "we are told that man is endowed with reason and capable of distinguishing good from evil"

Logic - Broadly, the art of non-contradictory identification, using the laws of logic, which are the: 1) Law of Identity (A is A); 2) Law of Non-Contradiction (A cannot be ~A); and 3) Excluded Middle (B can be either A or not ~A).

So reason is a capacity of individuals (subjective), and logic a system of proving or disproving the consistency of reason (objective). Two very different things, and I would agree that human reason is untrustworthy, but I have to add that it is especially so when it is illogical.

Here is a great quote from someone I don't know from another forum:

In order for any proposition to mean something, it must not mean something else. If I tell you that I will be at your house at 6pm that does not mean I will be catching a plane or going to the mall at 6pm. Without the laws of logic, coherent thinking and communication would be impossible. The laws are universal and absolute. Anyone wishing to dispute the matter or disprove the three laws must use them in order to refute them. As soon as one opens his mouth he affirms that which he wishes to disprove. All such attempts are self defeating.

I love that, but here's another quote from the same post:

Logic does not prove anything. Logic only shows whether a conclusion arrived at from a set of premises is valid.

So it wasn't logic that failed your list of luminaries, it was unsound premises upon which they based their conclusions. Some of those men you name were undoubtably Christ's own, some not. For those of us that are, it is incumbent upon us to seek to know what is actually true and distinguish it from what is not. We use our consecrated reason to formulate premises from scripture, and use logic to test their coherency and consistency. Christians have always done that, from the Bereans to the Apostle's Creed and on into the present. To suspend reason and logic would make determining any truth (doctrine) incoherent and impossible.

Existential philosophies and lots of other heresies ("christian" or otherwise) call for a suspension of reason and logic to incorporate inconsistencies into their paradigms. That accounts for their inherent incoherence. Sorry, couldn't resist that one.

SDG

Brad

 

[Boxmaker]

We were discussing hell in service this morning and the following verse came up.

Acts 17:26
26From one man He made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and He determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live.

Now that is a verse that would support predestination. But is was followed by this:

Acts 17:27
27God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.

Now there is a verse that says men must reach out to Him.

Thus has gone the discussion in this thread. For each verse the supports predestination, there is another verse that supports the open view.

 

[FreeInChrist2]

Now there is a verse that says men must reach out to Him.

Thus has gone the discussion in this thread. For each verse the supports predestination, there is another verse that supports the open view.

Read the entire context of Acts 17:16 -34 NKJV

16 Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was provoked within him when he saw that the city was given over to idols. 17 Therefore he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and with the Gentile worshipers, and in the marketplace daily with those who happened to be there. 18 Then certain Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered him. And some said, “What does this babbler want to say?” Others said, “He seems to be a proclaimer of foreign gods,” because he preached to them Jesus and the resurrection.

19 And they took him and brought him to the Areopagus, saying, “May we know what this new doctrine is of which you speak? 20 For you are bringing some strange things to our ears. Therefore we want to know what these things mean.” 21 For all the Athenians and the foreigners who were there spent their time in nothing else but either to tell or to hear some new thing.

Addressing the Areopagus
22 Then Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and said, “Men of Athens, I perceive that in all things you are very religious; 23 for as I was passing through and considering the objects of your worship, I even found an altar with this inscription:

TO THE UNKNOWN GOD.

Therefore, the One whom you worship without knowing, Him I proclaim to you: 24 God, who made the world and everything in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands. 25 Nor is He worshiped with men’s hands, as though He needed anything, since He gives to all life, breath, and all things. 26 And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings, 27 so that they should seek the Lord, in the hope that they might grope for Him and find Him, though He is not far from each one of us; 28 for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are also His offspring.’ 29 Therefore, since we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, something shaped by art and man’s devising. 30 Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent, 31 because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead.”

32 And when they heard of the resurrection of the dead, some mocked, while others said, “We will hear you again on this matter.” 33 So Paul departed from among them. 34 However, some men joined him and believed, among them Dionysius the Areopagite, a woman named Damaris, and others with them.

The general call goes out to all man through general revelation to repent and believe, but God has pre-appointed each mans time (birth, death, new birth, false birth, etc…) and boundaries (yes even the house you live in, the children you have, the job you do, every part of your life, etc…), so you will plainly see at verse 32 the mockers didn’t have a choice to choose Christ while at 34 others didn’t have the choice to reject (these received the EFFECTUAL CALL). Also note Paul, like Christ, just left the unbelievers right where they were…dead with their idols. But keep in mind the Athenians (Greeks) had never heard the old testament nor the gospel of Jesus Christ, that’s what the book of Acts is about, the Apostles (being used by God to build His new testament kingdom/church on earth) proclaiming the good news of salvation in Christ, thus once he preached the gospel to them he then commanded all men everywhere to repent and believe. Before they heard the gospel they only had the choice to worship their god Zeus, noted by their own poets, ie, Epimednides, Cleanthes and Aratus. But notice what happened after the preaching of the word, then the command to repent… some could only reject (general call and general revelation), and others could not (these received the EFFECTUAL CALL and SPECIAL REVEALATION), and the rest got “left behind” (if I may use the pun).

It’s like this… you say you believe…do you have neighbors whom don’t believe? YES! Why do they not believe…because they chose not to or because they can’t? They Can't. Go around and ask some to believe and see what kind of answers you get. So...Why do you believe, because you are smarter than them? Or is it because of your choice, thus making you wiser than your neighbor, because they can’t choose, but you can? How proud of yourself you should be because of your intellegence. If it is your choice then you should have the choice to quit believing… but you can’t resist God can you? If you can, then go ahead and reject Him. Try it tonight while laying in bed…just say… God I reject you and see if that makes it true…Bet you can’t do it! So if you can’t, will you take this credit to yourself?

1 Cor. 4:7 For who makes you differ from another? And what do you have that you did not receive? Now if you did indeed receive it, why do you boast as if you had not received it?

FreeInChrist2

 

[GodsElect]

Amen, Freeinchrist2!

I hope that helps Boxmaker in his search for the TRUTH!

I thought that was a good point about why we believe and our neighbors do not. I certainly know, as my sovereign God has given me new life, that I wouldn't have chose God at all without Him first giving me new life in which the boast is in Him and not myself, for my choice in choosing.

John 5:19 Then Jesus answered and said to them, “Most assuredly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what He sees the Father do; for whatever He does, the Son also does in like manner. 20 For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself does; and He will show Him greater works than these, that you may marvel. 21 For as the Father raises the dead and gives life to them, even so the Son gives life to whom He will.

That's right God gives the new life to whom He will. Not AFTER your choice.

 

[Boxmaker]

The general call goes out to all man through general revelation to repent and believe, but God has pre-appointed each mans time (birth, death, new birth, false birth, etc…) and boundaries (yes even the house you live in, the children you have, the job you do, every part of your life, etc…), so you will plainly see at verse 32 the mockers didn’t have a choice to choose Christ while at 34 others didn’t have the choice to reject (these received the EFFECTUAL CALL). Also note Paul, like Christ, just left the unbelievers right where they were…dead with their idols. But keep in mind the Athenians (Greeks) had never heard the old testament nor the gospel of Jesus Christ, that’s what the book of Acts is about, the Apostles (being used by God to build His new testament kingdom/church on earth) proclaiming the good news of salvation in Christ, thus once he preached the gospel to them he then commanded all men everywhere to repent and believe. Before they heard the gospel they only had the choice to worship their god Zeus, noted by their own poets, ie, Epimednides, Cleanthes and Aratus. But notice what happened after the preaching of the word, then the command to repent… some could only reject (general call and general revelation), and others could not (these received the EFFECTUAL CALL and SPECIAL REVEALATION), and the rest got “left behind” (if I may use the pun).

So the hooker, the man who kills her, the adulter and the family he destroys, the child molester and the Columbine killers are all acting exactly the way God would have it. Sorry, I don't see God as apointing every evil deed that we do. Besides, saying that everything that happens is Gods will would have to mean that God and Satan are one. God sets up al the evil so Satan would be just a name for Gods dark side.

It’s like this… you say you believe…do you have neighbors whom don’t believe? YES! Why do they not believe…because they chose not to or because they can’t? They Can't. Go around and ask some to believe and see what kind of answers you get. So...Why do you believe, because you are smarter than them? Or is it because of your choice, thus making you wiser than your neighbor, because they can’t choose, but you can? How proud of yourself you should be because of your intellegence. If it is your choice then you should have the choice to quit believing… but you can’t resist God can you? If you can, then go ahead and reject Him. Try it tonight while laying in bed…just say… God I reject you and see if that makes it true…Bet you can’t do it! So if you can’t, will you take this credit to yourself?

I never said it was my intellegence. Mans wisdom is foolishness before God. I and my neighbors have heard God's message. God opened my heart to Him and showed me that there were two gates before me. I chose to follow the narrow path, not of my own foolish wisdom or preceived intellegence, but because God first loved me. Love without a choice is no love at all. I choose to love God with my whole heart, mind body and soul. Christ lives in me because I opened my heart to Him. God initiates, we respond.

God bless.

 

[GodsElect]

Hello, Boxmaker I must pray for your very confused soul. I think you have shown us this over and over again with your statements and contradictions. And I think that these two statements cleary show that you dont have a clue what you really believe. Read for yourself...

This is what YOU said, both in the same paragraph...

.God opened my heart to Him...

Christ lives in me because I opened my heart to Him.

God opened your heart????
or
You opened your heart????

Make up your mind boxmaker, I think it is clear that you dont fully understand what it is you actually believe at all. So, who opened your heart to choose??? We try to help you all day long, but you are still confused and contradicting yourself. Will you ever listen to sound doctrinal advice? Or are you still deaf and blind???

The deaf WILL NOT hear because they are deaf!

The blind WILL NOT see because they are blind!

 

[Boxmaker]

Hello, Boxmaker I must pray for your very confused soul. I think you have shown us this over and over again with your statements and contradictions. And I think that these two statements cleary show that you dont have a clue what you really believe. Read for yourself...

This is what YOU said, both in the same paragraph...





Make up your mind boxmaker, I think you dont fully understand what it is you actually believe at all. So, who opened your heart to choose??? We try to help you all day long, but you are still confused and contradicting yourself. Will you ever listen to sound doctrinal advice? Or are you still deaf and blind???

The deaf WILL NOT hear because they are deaf!

The blind WILL NOT see because they are blind!

Its a two way street. From my point of view, you are deaf and blind to what I have been saying to you.

You claim that your truth is the only way God can be. I claim that my truth is the only way God can be. We both claim, and sincerly believe, that our truth is right. You see man as apuppet that is fully controlled by God's will. I see man as a being created by God to respond to Gods will, not be dominated by it.

For what purpose was Satan created? Did satan have the ability to choose to love God and serve Him or to rebel? Why would God create Satan to rebel? Would it not have been much easier to Create Satan without that rebelious nature? If Satan had never sinned and then taken Adam and Eve with him, we would not be here having this discussion today? Why did God create Satan to rebel against Him? So that God could prove something?

I can see that God is in control. But I cannot see God as having us all as pre-programmed puppets. He created us to respode to Him and we do or we don't You cannot have a loving relationship if there is no real choice to love.

 

[GodsElect]

So the hooker, the man who kills her, the adulter and the family he destroys, the child molester and the Columbine killers are all acting exactly the way God would have it. Sorry, I don't see God as apointing every evil deed that we do. Besides, saying that everything that happens is Gods will would have to mean that God and Satan are one. God sets up al the evil so Satan would be just a name for Gods dark side.

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




Amos 3:6 If a trumpet is blown in a city, will not the people be afraid? If there is calamity in a city, will not the LORD have done it?




Matthew 10:29Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father.


Proverbs 16:32 Better a patient man than a warrior, a man who controls his temper than one who takes a city. 33 The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD.

Proverbs 21:1 The king's heart is in the hand of the LORD; he directs it like a watercourse wherever he pleases.



Exodus 4:11 The LORD said to him, "Who gave man his mouth? Who makes him deaf or mute? Who gives him sight or makes him blind? Is it not I, the LORD ?



2 Samuel 12:15 After Nathan had gone home, the LORD struck the child that Uriah's wife had borne to David, and he became ill.



Ephesians1:11 In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will,



1 Peter 4:19 So then, those who suffer according to God's will should commit themselves to their faithful Creator and continue to do good.


See, you say that We claim that God is the author of sin, But as you can see from the text that God does many things in His creation according to His own sovereign will and yet you want to question it?
God IS the creator of Good and creates calamity, but not SIN. That was MAN”S doing. Satan is the tempter, But not the author of sin. He tempts the evil actions, and WE COMMIT the ACTS! Adam, (mankind) was the author of sin. Thus, sinning against God. It is God who gives people up to their own WICKED hearts desire which produce the calamities that you have described above.

Romans 1:26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions.

God and Satan are NOT one, but God has Satan on a leash. After all, was it not God's will in which Judas committed treason against the Lord, our Savior, Jesus Christ so that His will would be fulfilled in the atonement for our sins? He brings calamity in the lives for His purposes for His Glory and our good, and you still want to question why?