Results 1 - 13 of 13
|
|
|||||
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 | 61842 | ||
I'm still waiting for your response ...................... Dear John, What are your thoughts on the rest of this post? ............................................ Arminians, on the other hand, interpret those same verses differently. The believe that God has the ability to absolutely control the universe, but that He chooses not to excersize that ability at all times. Instead, they believe that God has created humans in such a way that they have both the FREEDOM and ABILITY to choose whether to love God or not. However, since God is simply choosing not to excersize His ability to determine every choice, they believe that God is still supremely powerful and sovereign. ............................................... The interesting thing is that both perspectives claim that God is sovereign. Arminians generally understand that the Calvinist perspective, even if they disagree with it, leads to a belief in a soverign God. However, Calvinists generally are under the impression that Arminian perspective, even if they disagree with it, DOES NOT lead to a belief in a sovereign God. I propose that this impression is wrong, and I am asking that someone to explain, using scripture and reason, why Calvinists believe that. Not why they believe Arminianism is wrong, but why they believe that it is impossible for God to be sovereign in that perspective. |
||||||
2 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | John Reformed | 62258 | ||
Dear Sir Pent, Your Preface followed by your proposition and your question is: "Arminians generally understand that the Calvinist perspective, even if they disagree with it, leads to a belief in a soverign God. However, Calvinists generally are under the impression that Arminian perspective, even if they disagree with it, DOES NOT lead to a belief in a sovereign God. I propose that this impression is wrong, and I am asking that someone to explain, using scripture and reason, why Calvinists believe that. Not why they believe Arminianism is wrong, but why they believe that it is impossible for God to be sovereign in that perspective." Permit me to rephrase your question as I understand it: Calvinists believe that the Arminian perspective cannot sustain a consistant understanding of the Biblical view of a soveriegn God. Have I got it right? John |
||||||
3 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | Sir Pent | 62291 | ||
Clarification.................................................. Dear John, I think that sounds fine, and am looking forward to your thoughts on why? |
||||||
4 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | John Reformed | 62389 | ||
Good Morning Kind Sir, Let's find out if I've had enough coffee yet, shall we. And, what better place to begin than at the Beginning.? Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. In the beginning. Hmmm......what is meant by those 3 simple words? Can we even begin to comprehend the full signifacance of them; I wonder. We have stepped on holy ground already! If He is pleased to reveal it, we may learn something about His nature. But we must not go beyond His revelation of Himself to us in His written Word. I believe that Scripture teaches that when God created time and space, and filled it with all His works, that He created and foreordained ALL that would occur. If that were not so, then one could argue that His creation was imperfect and that His eternal plan has failed. EPH 1:11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will. Please give me your exegesis of Eph 1:11 John |
||||||
5 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | Sir Pent | 62461 | ||
Is this going somewhere? ................................ Dear John, You quoted Gen 1:1, and said that God created the universe. I agree. You then said that if God did not “foreordain all that would occur” (I assume that you mean “force to happen everything that happens”) then His creation would be “imperfect”. Why do you believe that the universe would be imperfect if God allowed somethings to happen without His direct control? Why does God have to excersize direct control of absolutely everything to keep His “eternal plan from failing”? ................................ Then you asked me to give my interpretation of Eph 1:11. In the Amplified version, that verse is translated, “In Him we also were made [God's] heritage (portion) and we obtained an inheritance; for we had been foreordained (chosen and appointed beforehand) in accordance with His purpose, Who works out everything in agreement with the counsel and design of His [own] will,” ................................ It seems to be saying that through Christ’s sacrifice we (Christians) have been brought into the family of God, and thus will some day receive an inheritance (heaven). It also seems to say that God has a overall plan based solely on His own desires. It also seems to say that we (Christians) are integrated into that plan, and were chosen ahead ot time to play a part in it. ................................ Maybe my lack of drinking coffee has left my mind clouded, but I don’t see where all this is leading. How does this answer the question of why God can’t be sovereign if He chooses not to excercise complete control of every situation, but rather allows people to have the ability to make real choices? | ||||||
6 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | John Reformed | 62477 | ||
Dear Sir Pent, "Is this going somewhere?". God willing it is. Hmmmm....I wonder why we are told to preface our plans with a recognition of God's sovereign will. If I planned to go to Tarshish against God's will, would He force me to go to Nineveh? Is a 200 ton whale force. Oh yeah! Did God force Jonahs will? No. But, Jonah went unwillingly under extreme duress. You said: You quoted Gen 1:1, and said that God created the universe. I agree. You then said that if God did not “foreordain all that would occur” (I assume that you mean “force to happen everything that happens”) Foreordination does not entail force. It simply means that God willed it to occur and whatever He wills to occur does inevitably occur.(God never ever forces the will of man. He did not make us to be robots) "Why do you believe that the universe would be imperfect if God allowed somethings to happen without His direct control?" The POSSIBILITY of imperfection would exist because the final outcome would bear the mark of imperfect creatures. God's Creation is the work of an omniscient Being. Therefore, His Plan was known unto Him from all eternity. In order for it to be perfect it must by necissity be entirely His work alone. The Bible says He is the potter and we are the clay. But, we cannot take this vese too literarly. The clay is not an inanimate object but a living being. How then does God shape them if they refuse to conform to the type of vessel He foreordaned them to be? I don't know? I do know that He gives a new heart to the vessels of honor and leaves a the heart of stone in the vessels of wrath. Does this not jar our moern sensabilities? Of course it does. Paul knew it would jar his readers as well. That is why he said "who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it?". Time to go for now. John |
||||||
7 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | Sir Pent | 62527 | ||
A Different View Point 1 ........................................... OK, I begin to see your thoughts on this. Let’s look at them one at a time. You said, “Foreordination does not entail force. It simply means that God willed it to occur and whatever He wills to occur does inevitably occur.(God never ever forces the will of man. He did not make us to be robots). “ ........................................... Please allow me repeat an analogy that I shared previously on this forum, which no one responded to (except to compliment it). I would like to understand your thoughts on this issue. Imagine a parent who has twin children, Tom and Jerry. The parent, through genetic engineering, caused both of their children to be born without any legs. Then when they were both 10 years old, the parent got a set of artificial legs for Tom so that he could walk, but they did not get any legs for Jerry. Then one day the parent decides to go for a walk to the ice cream store. The parent invites both children to walk with them, but says it is their choice. Tom can’t pass up the opportunity for ice cream, and gladly accepts. Jerry however doesn’t have any legs, and so he doesn’t have the ability to go. The question is, “Does Jerry really have a choice to walk to the store if he has been born without any legs?” For that matter, “If the ice cream is truly irresistable, then does Tom have a real choice either?” |
||||||
8 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | John Reformed | 62539 | ||
Dear Sir Pent, Perhaps my reply to your analogy of the innocent tots, Tom and Jerry, was inadventantly addressed to EdB who must have enjoyed your analogy because we went around and around with it for a time. Now, this is only my honest opinion and I do not mean to hurt your feelings. OK?. But, unregenerate men cannot be likened to little, helpless babes in the hands of a parent that is a mad scientist! I tried to to come up with an alternative that would paralell your's but found it impossible. These are my reasons for rejecting your analogy. 1. Tom and Jerry (unregenerate man) are wicked rebels and not innocent children. (Rom 1:18-32) 2. God is not their father in the sense of having a familial relationship with Him. The father that Tom and Jerry serve is Satan. (John 8:44) 3. It was the sin of Adam that brought the curse of moral deformity upon our 2 rebels. It was not their legs but their hearts that have been corrupted. Nevertheless, The Father is blameless. Deut 32:4"The Rock! His work is perfect, For all His ways are just; A God of faithfulness and without injustice, Righteous and upright is He. I am certain that you are quite familiar with the twins Jacob and Esau. Now, whether you believe as I do that God was speaking of them as individuals, or even if you take the more fanciful interpretation of their being symbolic representations of nations, the fact that it is God who does the choosing remains. I could go on but I must attend to the business of earning a living. I think, however that my point has been made and I look forward to your reply. Your Brother in Christ, John |
||||||
9 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | Sir Pent | 62547 | ||
Clarification ....................................... Dear John, I guess I missed your discussion with EdB about my analogy (although I saw your discussion of his analogy). I’d like to read what you wrote there; could you give me a post number to go to. Anyway, on to what you wrote here. It seems that you feel like my analogy is an inaccurate representation of the Calvinist perspective. Feel free to give more reasons why (my feelings won’t be hurt in the slightest), but I disagree with the reasons you gave. ....................................... You said that “Tom and Jerry (unregenerate man) are wicked rebels and not innocent children.” However, I never said in the analogy that Tom and Jerry were innocent children. All I said was that they were born with a condition (missing legs) that they could not change themselves. This goes right along with the definition you and I already agreed to, of the Calvinist viewpoint. That definition began, “God unchangeably ordains everything that comes to pass.” ....................................... Your second reason was that “God is not their father in the sense of having a familial relationship with Him. The father that Tom and Jerry serve is Satan.” However, the analogy does not go into whether the interpersonal relationships between the parent and Tom and Jerry are familial or not. All I said was that the parent created Tom and Jerry a certain way (without any legs). This is true according to Calvinist perspective. As you said in an earlier post, God created everything. ....................................... Your also said that “It was not their legs but their hearts that have been corrupted.” Obviously the problem is with not with the legs, the heart, or any other specific part of the body, but rather with the attitude which one has towards God. Let’s not quibble over body parts :) ....................................... Your third reason was that “It was the sin of Adam that brought the curse of moral deformity upon our 2 rebels. Nevertheless, The Father is blameless.” However, once again going to our definition of Calvinism that we both agreed to: “God unchangeably ordains everything that comes to pass.” And in a previous post we also agreed that God is omniscient. Therefore, according to the Calvinist viewpoint, God knew before He created Adam that if He created him the way He intended, then Adam WOULD sin. Thus, when God chose to create Adam that way anyway, He was in effect creating a universe that WOULD be full of people who were unable to choose to love God (unless God changed their hearts). This is accurately represented in the analogy by the parent who knows ahead of time that the genetic engineering they do WILL cause children in the future to be born without legs or the ability to walk (unless the parent gives them artificial ones). ....................................... I have tried to clarify why I still believe this analogy is an accurate one. Please let me know if you have any other reasons why you believe it is not. Otherwise, I’d like to know what your answers to the questions at the end of the analogy are. I also look forward to hearing your responses to my other posts (Different View 2 and 3). |
||||||
10 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | John Reformed | 62564 | ||
Dear Sir Pent, “Tom and Jerry (unregenerate man) are wicked rebels and not innocent children.” However, I never said in the analogy that Tom and Jerry were innocent children." Please, any one reading your analogy can see that they are portrayed as innocent. It did'nt need to be spelled out for goodness sake! "All I said was that they were born with a condition (missing legs) that they could not change themselves." Neither twin wants nor desires new legs (heart) biblicaly speaking. They hate the idea of new legs and think this talk of ice cream is all hogwash anyway. "All I said was that the parent created Tom and Jerry a certain way (without any legs)." Yes but you failed to mention WHY they were created without legs (hearts of stone). It portrays the parent's decision as arbitrary, when, as we know (for the bible tell us so), that they were cursed by God because in Adam all (Tom and Jerry included) fell. " Let’s not quibble over body parts". OK "Your third reason was that “It was the sin of Adam that brought the curse of moral deformity upon our 2 rebels. Nevertheless, The Father is blameless.” You do agree so far, do you not? "we both agreed to: God unchangeably ordains everything that comes to pass. And in a previous post we also agreed that God is omniscient" Yes indeed, we did agree. " God knew before He created Adam that if He created him the way He intended, then Adam WOULD sin. Thus, when God chose to create Adam that way anyway, He was in effect creating a universe that WOULD be full of people who were unable to choose to love God (unless God changed their hearts)." Yes, so far so good. I assume you find nothing unsrciptural thus far. "I have tried to clarify why I still believe this analogy is an accurate one. Please let me know if you have any other reasons why you believe it is not." It may be accurate in a technical sense, but is too misleading to be of any real value in portraying God as He really is: JUST, MERCIFULL, HOLY, ALL KNOWING, ALLPOWERFUL ,LOVE PERSONIFIED and PERFECT IN ALL HIS WAYS. Please forgive me for saying so, but the parent in your analogy comes across as a monster. This is a common error of those who believe that if fallen man is unable (even if his inability is due to his own rebellious heart and it's wicked desires)then God would have to have been unjust. They then rush to defend against what they percieve as an attack against God by portaying the opposite view as a monstrosity. Please Sir Pent, I do not accuse you or anyone else of deliberately attempting to subvert the Bible or defame God in any way. God Forbid. It is merely a natural reaction to a percieved evil. And it is commendable to fight for GOD'S HONOR! What I hope to do is to show that God has done what He has done as taught in the Scripture and the view that says He has foreordained all things is not inconsistant with a Just and Holy God. Your Brother in Christ, John |
||||||
11 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | Sir Pent | 62622 | ||
Continued Clarification ........................................... Dear John, You said that it was implied (although not stated) in my analogy that the children were innocent. Feel free to change the first sentance of the analogy to: “Imagine a parent who has twin children, Tom and Jerry, who were consistently disobedient.” I did not intend for the children to be seen as perfect and apologise for any confusion on that point. ........................................... You said that neither child wants legs or ice cream. However, in the Calvinist perspective, the reason for this lack of desire is due to the way that God set up the universe. After all, you agreed that God created “a universe that WOULD be full of people who were unable to choose to love God (unless God changed their hearts)." That once again fits with the analogy that the parent genetically engineered Tom and Jerry’s condition. ........................................... You complained that the parent’s decision to make them without legs was arbitrary, when it was Adam’s fall that caused it. However, according to Calvinist perspective God’s choosing to create the universe in the way that He did (which led to Adam’s fall, and Tom and Jerry’s leglessness) WAS arbitrary. There are many posts on this forum where people defending Calvinism, state that God’s actions are arbitrary (defined: depending on individual descretion) and completely independent from any exterior influence. You, yourself have previously stated that God’s actions were just “founded on His good pleasure”. I think this part of the analogy very accurately describes the Calvinist perspective. ........................................... OK, so once again I have pointed out why the analogy is an accurate reflection of the Calvinist view of scripture. in fact, you have even admited that it is “accurate in a technical sense”. Then you complain that it makes God appear to be different from what we both know that He is: “JUST, MERCIFULL, HOLY, ALL KNOWING, ALLPOWERFUL ,LOVE PERSONIFIED and PERFECT IN ALL HIS WAYS”. You say that it makes him “come across as a monster.” I agree that this would be the first conclusion that someone would come to when examining the Calvinist perspective. However, in fairness to what you believe, let’s just assume that there is some explanation for why this first conclusion is wrong. I am fine with that. Once again, I don’t have a problem with you believing that the perspective is right. I am just asking with this analogy if the choices that Tom and Jerry make are REALLY MADE FREELY. Do they REALLY have the ABILITY to CHOOSE? ........................................... Finally, I just wanted to remind you that there are two other points that I made a yesturday, that I am still looking forward to reading your thoughts on. After all, my original question was not about whether Calvinist perspective really believes in free choice, but rather, whether Arminian perspective really believes in a sovereign God. As far as I’m concerned, this free choice part of the thread is more of a side issue. ........................................... Also, I noticed that the Lockman Foundation is discouraging divisive posts based on denominational differences. I want to thank you for your continued participation in this thread which I still think has the potential to eventually lead to at least some consensus on one of these issues, and bring unity instead of divisiveness. I find that very exciting, and am glad to be able to discuss this with another person who can very rationally look at the issue from as much of an objective viewpoint as possible. Keep up the good work. |
||||||
12 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | John Reformed | 62628 | ||
Dear Sir Pent, I'm off to grand parents day at the kid's school so must rush. I will respond more fully and hopefully more clearly as well, God willing. I think that our conversation is an attempt to foster understanding rather than discord. I pray it will continue with that goal in mind. Mere arguement is impotent without God's Spirit. He must intervene before the truth is percieved. John |
||||||
13 | Is God in absolut contrl over all things | Acts 4:24 | Sir Pent | 62633 | ||
Personal Note ............................................. Dear John, I hope you had fun at grandparent’s day. It is a great blessing to have both kids and grandkids. I hope that someday, I’ll be able to join you in that club. I also see our conversation as an attempt for both of us (and potentially many others who read this) to gain understanding. Hopefully, out of it will come not only a clearer picture of what each of us believe differently, but more importantly what things we can both believe in agreement regardless of our respective viewpoints. I also agree with you in my hope that God will help us both to remain open to learn from this conversation. God bless! |
||||||