Results 1 - 5 of 5
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | Sir Pent | 62528 | ||
A Different View Point 2 ........................................... Now let’s look at your second point. You said, “The POSSIBILITY of imperfection would exist because the final outcome would bear the mark of imperfect creatures. “ ........................................... I am not clear on your reasoning here. You seem to be saying that allowing humans to have any impact in the universe contrary to the will of God could cause the possibility of an imperfect final outcome. Please allow me to repeat another analogy that I shared previously on this forum. It is possible for a being to allow limited freedom within a system while still being in control of the final outcome. For instance, in our town their is a store where everything costs 1 dollar. Now a parent could go to that store and lay a dollar bill on the counter and then tell their kid to go pick out any on thing in the store and the money on the counter will pay for it. The kid then actually does have freedom to choose whatever they want, but the parent’s “prophecy” will still come true when they bring it up to be paid for and the dollar bill is already there. This is an example of a time when a subject can be given both the FREEDOM and the ABILITY to make a choice while at the same time some future things will not change. ........................................... Once again, I would like to reiterate that I am not trying to convince you that Calvinism is wrong. My purpose is to show you that Arminianism COULD be correct without taking away the fact that God is in supreme control. So in the analogy, a Calvinist would say that the child would only choose something in the store that the parent DIDN”T like unless the parent changed the child’s heart (in which case they would only choose something in the store that the parent DID like). An Arminian would say that the child would be ABLE to choose EITHER one, but that the parent would give the child a hint that they would like the child to choose one specific thing. My point is that either one of these views COULD be correct, and the final outcome would still be the same. Regardless of what choice is made, or even if there is a real choice being made, the parents “prophecy” is perfectly correct. |
||||||
2 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | John Reformed | 62677 | ||
Dear Sir Pent, Í will attempt to answer your first question I said: The POSSIBILITY of imperfection would exist because the final outcome would bear the mark of imperfect creatures. Your reply was: "You seem to be saying that allowing humans to have any impact in the universe contrary to the will of God could cause the possibility of an imperfect final outcome." Yes, and I wish to retract the term "possiblity" and replace it with "inevitably". My thinking on this is as follows: Perfection can be acheived only if all things involved are under the perfect control of the one who desires to reach that goal: Perfect in conception, design execution and fulfillment. The introduction of random, unpredictable or uncontrolable elements would result in a slight imperfection at best and at worst, chaos. If my reasoning is flawed, please tell me where I have erred. The analogy that you offered as a rational proof of why my inital statement is flawed is as follows" Now a parent could go to that store and lay a dollar bill on the counter and then tell their kid to go pick out any thing in the store and the money on the counter will pay for it. The kid then actually does have freedom to choose whatever they want, but the parent’s “prophecy” will still come true when they bring it up to be paid for and the dollar bill is already there. So it is the parent's will that the child pick up any one item and it will be paid for by the parent who has placed the money on the counter. And this you say is how God may allow "limited freedom within a system" and still have control. In order for your analogy to work we must assume that allparties involved (the parent, the child and the clerk all deire the same end result). How would it work if the child did not want anything in the store? The child has the liberty to choose, just as the unregenarate sinner has liberty to choose. But the child is unable to choose an appropriate item because nothing the parent has offered him is of the slightest interest to him. He wants a real machine gun or a bad magazine etc. The same is the case of the unregenrate man. He has no desire for God's gifts.The longings of his heart are wicked continually. Your analogy also pre-supposes a loving relationship of a father and a child. This just not the case. The child in the story represents unregenerate man. A "child of wrath". By definition a self-willed and wicked creature worthy of eternal damnation. But let us look into Scripture to see how God really operates. Acts 4:26 'THE KINGS OF THE EARTH TOOK THEIR STAND, AND THE RULERS WERE GATHERED TOGETHER AGAINST THE LORD AND AGAINST HIS CHRIST.' Acts 4:27 "For truly in this city there were gathered together against Your holy servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, Acts 4:28 to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose predestined to occur." What! God predestined! How could that be? Notwithstanding herein is contained a singular doctrine, that God doth so govern and guide all things by his secret counsel, that, he doth bring to pass those things which he hath determined, even by the wicked. Not that they are ready willingly to do him such service, but because he turneth their counsels and attempts backward; so that on the one side appeareth great equity and most great righteousness; on the other appeareth nought but wickedness and iniquity. Which matter we have handled more at large in the second chapter. Let us learn here, by the way, that we must so consider the providence of God, that we know that it is the chief and only guider of all things which are done in the world, that the devil and all the wicked are kept back with God's bridle, lest they should do us any harm; that when they rage fastest, yet are they not at liberty to do what they list, but have the bridle given them, yet so far forth as is expedient to exercise us. Those men which do acknowledge the foreknowledge of God alone, and yet confess not that all things are done as it pleaseth him, are easily convict by these words, That God hath appointed before that thing to be done which was done. Yea, Luke being not contented with the word counsel, addeth also hand, improperly, yet to the end he might the more plainly declare that the events of things are not only governed by the counsel of God, but that they are also ordered by his power and hand. (John Calvin) Your thoughts brother? John |
||||||
3 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | Sir Pent | 62833 | ||
A Different View ......................................... Dear John, Thanks for clarifying your statement about why you believe that “allowing humans to have any impact in the universe contrary to the will of God would inevitably cause an imperfect final outcome”. I will try to do justice to your very thorough rationale. ......................................... You said that, “Perfection can be acheived only if all things involved are under the perfect control of the one who desires to reach that goal: Perfect in conception, design execution and fulfillment. The introduction of random, unpredictable or uncontrolable elements would result in a slight imperfection at best and at worst, chaos.” However, this is not logically correct. Have you ever played a game called NIM? It is a simple game played with 11 toothpicks. Each player alternates turns, taking away either 1, 2, or 3 toothpicks (whatever they choose). The player who takes away the last toothpick loses the game. Therefore the “perfect goal” is to not get stuck with the last toothpick. Now imagine you and I are playing a game of NIM, and I get to take the first turn. I take away 2 toothpicks, therfore 9 are left. Now you are completely FREE and ABLE to choose to remove 1, 2, or 3 toothpicks each turn until the end of the game, but the “perfect goal” is assured. Even though I am not in “perfect control” of your decisions, I will win this game no matter what you choose. ......................................... Now as for the “flaws” you found in the dollar store analogy. You said that for the analogy to work, we must assume that the parent, the child, and the clerk all desire the same end result. Thus causing problems if the child did not want to choose anything. First of all, I’ve never met a child who when given the option of having any one thing in a dollar store (loaded with toys), would decide they wanted nothing. However, this question is moot to begin with. The child has to pick something or they are not allowed to leave the store. Both Calvinists and Arminians would agree that God has set up the universe so that every person HAS to choose either to love God or reject Him. Not choosing is not an option in either viewpoint. ......................................... Then you say that the child would only be able to pick something bad like a machine gun. However, that point is also moot. Calvinist would agree, Arminians would disagree, but whether the child was only able to choose a machine gun or not, the point remains that when he checks out, it will still cost a dollar, and the parent’s final outcome will happen. ......................................... Finally, you end with a long quote from John Calvin. It seems in this quote that he is saying that God takes the decisions made by people who are enemies of God, and uses them to accomplish God’s own good purpose. Much like the verse where Joseph says to his brothers that though “you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good” (Gen 50:20). I don’t have a problem with that, and in fact, it even supports the point that I am trying to make. It shows that God could allow humans to have the ABILITY and FREEDOM to choose either way on an issue, and yet still control circumstances regardless of their choice to bring about God’s own final outcome. Thus God remains sovereign. |
||||||
4 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | John Reformed | 62842 | ||
Dear Sir pent, you stated:"Both Calvinists and Arminians would agree that God has set up the universe so that every person HAS to choose either to love God or reject Him. Not choosing is not an option in either viewpoint. ........................................." Not so. Many people die in infancy or early childhood. Others suffer grave mental or physical handicaps that also cannot choose one way or the other. And what of the millions and millions that have perished before and after the Incarnation who have never even heard the name Jesus Christ? The only way to the Father is through the Son. What of these people. Yes they like allothers have the light of nature to display the evidence of the existence of God. And they also hace the law of God writen on their hearts. The Law does not save! The mere acknowledgement of the existence of a Supreme Being does not save! It is the good news of Jesus Christ that has that power to save. The Gospel and the Gospel alone. Islam is monotheist but to no advantage regarding salvation. Gotta Go, John |
||||||
5 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | Sir Pent | 62854 | ||
You make a good point ................................................. Dear John, Part of any truly good discussion is not only sharing what you think, and listening to what the other person thinks, but also being willing to admit when you are wrong. In your last post, you pointed out an error that I had made. I had said that everyone agrees that all humans have to choose to love God or reject Him. That statement was wrong. It is an oversimplification of the situation. You are correct that there are some exceptions to the general rule (ie. babies that die before birth, tribes that never hear the gospel, the people who lived and died before Christ’s sacrifice for us). You are also correct that there are different beliefs about these abnormal situations. I was wrong on that point. ................................................. That being said, rather than getting side tracked on these unusual situations (which are talked about in other threads on this forum), I would request that we focus our discussion to talk about the vast majority of people in the world today, who have been born, have reached an age that they can make rational decisions, and have been exposed to Christianity to at least some degree. I would like to talk about people like you, me, and anyone else who would read this thread. Would it be possible for God to allow us to have the ABILITY and the FREEDOM to choose to love or reject Him, yet still remain sovereign? |
||||||