Results 1 - 10 of 10
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | Is God somehow responsible? | Rom 1:20 | Morant61 | 70228 | ||
Greetings John! I was hoping you would bring up the point about 'all'! :-) There is a difference. The first has to do with context. There isn't any passage of Scripture which deals with salvation where it can be shown that 'all' can mean both 'all' or 'some'. In fact, the only passages where it can be shown that 'all' means anything other than 'all' is where it is modified by a phrase such as 'all believers' or 'all women', ect... In these cases, cleary 'all' is a subset of a bigger set. Or, sometimes 'all' can be used in hyperbole, like 'the whole world came to see Him'. However, these various uses of 'all' can never be demonstrated conclusively in any context involving salvation or the extent of the atonement. It is only assumed because of theological demands. Whereas, 'many' (as I quoted in my previous post) is found in two identical contexts, both dealing with sin and salvation. In Romans, it is clear that 'many' means all, unless you want to argue that not all have sinned! :-) So, your challenge is to demonstrate from Scripture a passage where the text clealy indicates that 'all' doesn't mean 'all' when Scripture says such things as: John 1:7 - "He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe." Romans 11:32 - "For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all." 2 Cor. 5:14 - " For Christ?s love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died." 2 Pet. 3:9 - "The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance." To take these very clear verses and turn 'all' into 'some' is to make language absolutely meaningless. Greek has a word for 'some'. If God had meant 'some', He could have simply inspired the writers to use that word, but He didn't! :-) Concerning John 3:16, I would say that the statmenet that Jesus died for the 'world' does support unlimited atonement. For whom did He die? He died for the world! Finally, concerning John 17. The priestly prayer of Jesus is clearly divided into three sections. In John 17:1-5, He prayer for Himself. In John 17:6-19, He prays for His 12 disciples. In John 17:20-26, He prays for future believers and the world. However, not one of these verses says anything about the extent of the atonement, just the extent of the prayer. In fact, if we want to make John 17 an extent of the atonement passage, then we would have to include John 17:21, where Jesus prays that the world might believe through the witness of the disciples. ;-) Are you and your family ready for Christmas? My kids can't wait! Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
2 | Is God somehow responsible? | Rom 1:20 | John Reformed | 70245 | ||
Dear Tim, Rather than take on the impossible task of proving a negative, or going refighting the battle of "all" vs "all, I think the most profitable course is to examine what Christ came to accomplish in the first place. Arminians limit atonement even more than do Calvinists! The arminian limits atonement to only those who will believe of their own free will which means that Christ's death alone secured salvation for no one. So, theoreticaly, the atonement could have been for nought. Did Jesus come for the pupose of saving people or to make salvation possible? Scripture says to save. Matt 1:21 "She will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins." Notice Matthew says "He will". He will what? Save. Save who? His people. Who are "His people"? Those that the Father has given Him? John 6:37 "All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out. How did the Father get these people that He gives to the Son? John 6:44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day. Why, if the drawing of the Father results in a people for His Son, does he not draw all men? Not all men have been destined for salvation. 2 Thess 2:13 But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth. Merry Christmas to you and to all! :-) John |
||||||
3 | Is God somehow responsible? | Rom 1:20 | Morant61 | 70263 | ||
Greetings John! Actually, it is not correct to say that Arminians limit the atonement to only those who believe. We believe, in accordance with 1 John 2:2, that Christ atoned for every sin of everyone at the cross. This is an accomplished objective fact. But, we believe that individuals only receive the benefits of the atonement when they respond in faith. My understanding of Calvinism is that Christ only atoned for the elect. Of course, the end result is pretty much the same, those who believe are saved! :-) But, the foundation of the two views consists of a very different view of God. Concerning your quote of 2 Thes. 2:13, addressing members of a group does not in any way limit the members of that group to a certain number. I could write a letter to my local congregation and address it to: "Those who have been saved by the grace of God". However, this does not mean that no one else could at some point in the future be saved. 2 Thes. 2:13 is the same way. The fact that those whom Paul is addressing have been choosen does not mean that only a limited number have been choosen. Since God is sovereign, He could choose all. p.s. - I wish you would take the challenge and produce a verse where 'all' used in a salvation context clearly means 'some'. The meaning of words are what determines the meaning of verses. If we simply make the words mean what we want, then the verses have no meaning. :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
4 | Is God somehow responsible? | Rom 1:20 | John Reformed | 70285 | ||
Dear Tim, Are you attempting to stereotype me by calling me Joe? :-) Tim: "Do I agree that 'everything' happens according to God's eternal plan? No! Do I believe that everything God ordains to happen will happen? Yes!".........."There is a subtle difference. I don't believe that God plans out every decision and action of man." Sounds reasonable Tim, but what is the basis for your belief? Tim: "Back to Adam and Eve for a moment, I thought you didn't believe in human free will? Adam and Eve didn't have a sin nature prior to the fall, so what was the cause of their decision to sin. If God only permitted their sin, what was the cause of their sin? If everything happens according to God's plan, then wouldn't their very decision itself have to be ordained by God? If God only allowed the decision, then He didn't sovereignly decree it would happen". This is the very reason why it is so important to discuss our different views on doctrine. You thought that I (and mabe calvinists in general) don't believe in "free will". But we do! We believe that Adam and Eve, in their state of innocency, had free-will. The reason for their fall was their desire to be as God is, in wisdom, knowlege and power. God did ordain that they would sin but did not coerce or force their decision. This is one of the most difficult subjects to understand. But we know that God's plan is a perfect plan and therefore I, for one, will rest easy and not attempt to answer questions that the Bible has not provided answers for. I never claimed that calvinism is a man-pleasing doctrine. All I can do is point to the scriptures that prove it to be true. Enlightenment resides within the province of the Holy Spirit. Tim: "It seems to me that God allowed their decision, but that He was not the cause of it." I don't believe that we have the authority to pick and choose as we may. How it seems to one is irrelenant. Tim: "Concerning Piper, how could it be true that a sovereign God could will something, but it not come to pass?" The most compelling example of God's willing for sin to come to pass while at the same time disapproving the sin is his willing the death of his perfect, divine Son. The betrayal of Jesus by Judas was a morally evil act inspired immediately by Satan (Luke 22:3). Yet in Acts 2:23 Luke says, "This Jesus [was] delivered up according to the definite plan (boule) and foreknowledge of God." The betrayal was sin, and it involved the instrumentality of Satan; but it was part of God's ordained plan. That is, there is a sense in which God willed the delivering up of his Son, even though the act was sin. (Two Wills of God) Try to keep the Ten Commandments sometime! It was God's will that they be kept, and kept perfectly at that. Yet He also knew that it was impossible for man to obey them. John aka "Joe" |
||||||
5 | Is God somehow responsible? | Rom 1:20 | Morant61 | 70295 | ||
Greetings John! I'm so confused. I don't know who I'm talking to anymore! :-) All me to touch upon your sections in order! 1) Why do I think that God does not determine every action and thought? a) God cannot be the author of sin. b) No one can be held accountable for a forced action. c) Some things do happen that God does not will. d) Some things that God wills do not happen. So, apparently, God does not ordain every single thought and action of man. 2) Back to Adam and Eve. Actually, not all Calvinists would agree with your position here. Those who hold (or at least some) to Supralapsarianism would say that even Adam and Eve did not have free will. You said: "God did ordain that they would sin but did not coerce or force their decision." This is a logical impossibility. How can someone freely do what I predetermined that they would do? Did God know that they would sin? Yes! Did He plan for it? Yes! Did He cause it? No! You also said: "But we know that God's plan is a perfect plan and therefore I, for one, will rest easy and not attempt to answer questions that the Bible has not provided answers for." Yet, there isn't a single verse which says that man does not have free will! :-) 3) Piper: The example of the betrayal of Jesus is an excellent example. However, notice what it does and does not say. Acts 2:23 does not that the people's choices were predetermined, it says that that Jesus was delievered up to them according to the boule and foreknowledge of God. In fact, who handed Jesus over if it was not God. They couldn't take Jesus by force! So, God knew what they would do and allowed it, but He did not determine what their choices or actions would be. He did use their actions and choices for His plan, which He can do because He is sovereign. Where I differ with Piper though is simply this: a) Piper sees God as having differing wills which are in conflict with one another. He wills to save all, but He also wills something else and can't save all. b) I see God has only having one will toward us, but His will is contstrained by His sovereign choice to give us moral freedom. He can't force His will upon, or He violates His own creation. So, the source of conflict is in a sense external (even though our freedom is derived). Piper and I both agree that something God willed did not in fact come to pass. We just differ on why it didn't come to pass. My take on the difference between these two positions is this: a) Piper's view makes God guilty of not doing something that He wills and could do! This doesn't make any sense to me. It would be like me saying that I wanted to go to work today, but I didn't. Why? Was my car broke? Was I sick? Did my alarm fail? No? I wanted to stay home and watch the football game. So, did I really 'want' to go to work? Even in my limited power, I could find a way to both, but God can't? b) Mine says that God willed all to be saved, atoned for all, and offered salvation to all. He has done everything that He can to accomplish His will. Well, I've got to get to bed my friend! Have a Merry Christmas. Hopefully, I'll get your name straight eventually! :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
6 | Is God somehow responsible? | Rom 1:20 | John Reformed | 70302 | ||
Dear Tim, You wrote: 1) Why do I think that God does determine every action and thought? a) God cannot be the author of sin but it is His will to permit it to occur. (God's Permissive will) b) It is true that no one may be held accountable for a forced action, therefore the Sin of Adam and Eve were of their own free will. c) Nothing can occur apart from His eternal plan and without His permitting it to take place. d) Some things that God wills do not happen such as the breaking of His commanments (Which He decreed men to keep, but He permitted to occur, therefore, since He is Almighty God, it was in accordance with His will that men should break them. So, apparently, God does ordain every single thought and action of man. "Known unto God are all his works, from the beginning of the world."–Acts 15:18. The decrees of God are eternal. This our Confession explicitly affirms:–"God, from all eternity, did ordain whatsoever comes to pass." ... what saith the Scripture? It expressly declares, that everything which has happened, and everything which is to happen, was known to God from everlasting. "Known unto God are all his works, from the beginning of the world."–Acts xv. 18. To suppose any of the divine decrees to be made in time, is to suppose the knowledge of the Deity to be limited. If from eternity he knew all things that come to pass, then from eternity he must have ordained them; for if they had not been determined upon, they could not have been foreknown as certain. (Shaw) God is omniscient and all powerful. He is the Creator not the Spectator. He does not stand by helplessly watching His creation malfunction and fall apart. Everything that He has done is perfect. Maybe this fact is not always apparent to our limited abilities, but Scripture affirms it. "It is granted, that some of the decrees of God are conditional, in this sense, that something is supposed to go before the event which is the object of the decree, and that, this order being established, the one will not take place without the other. He decreed, for example, to save Paul and the companions of his voyage to Italy; but he decreed to save them only on condition that the sailors should remain in the ship.–Acts xxvii. He has decreed to save many from the wrath to come; but he has decreed to save them only if they believe in Christ, and turn by him from the error of their ways. But these decrees are conditional only in appearance. They merely state the order in which the events should be accomplished; they establish a connection between the means and the end, but do not leave the means uncertain. When God decreed to save Paul and his companions, he decreed that the sailors should be prevented from leaving the ship; and accordingly gave Paul previous notice of the preservation of every person on board. When he decreed to save those who should believe, he decreed to give them faith; and, accordingly, we are informed, that those whom he predestinated he also calls into the fellowship of his Son.–Rom. viii. 30. That any decree is conditional in the sense" of Arminians, "that it depends upon the will of man, of which he is sovereign master, so that he may will or not will as he pleases, - we deny. "My counsel', says God, "shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure.'–Isa. xlvi. 10. But he could not speak so, if his counsel depended upon a condition which might not be performed." Conditional decrees are inconsistent with the infinite wisdom of God, and are in men the effects of weakness. They are also inconsistent with the independence of God, making them to depend upon the free will or agency of his creatures. The accomplishment of them, too, would be altogether uncertain; but the Scripture assures us, that "the counsel of the Lord standeth for ever, and the thoughts of his heart to all generations."–Ps. xxiii. 11. All his purposes are unalterably determined, and their execution infallibly certain. "There are many devices in a man's heart," which he is unable to accomplish, "nevertheless the counsel of the Lord, that shall stand."–Prov. xix. 21. (Shaw) John |
||||||
7 | Is God somehow responsible? | Rom 1:20 | Morant61 | 70313 | ||
Greetings John! Good Morning my friend! I think that sometimes we are saying almost the same things but using different terms! :-) By 'determined', I don't mean 'allowed'. If I say that God 'determined' my every thought and action, then I'm saying that God said on Dec. 21, 2002, Tim will tell a lie! This is the kind of thing that I don't believe that God did. You seem to be saying the same thing since you say that He only permitted sin. To me, that is different, that would be like saying, "If I create Tim as a free moral agent, then on Dec. 21, 2002, he will tell a lie, but it is in my plan to create him so I'll allow it." Concerning Acts 15:18, I do notice that it says that His works are known from the beginning of the world. It does not say that our thoughts and actions are predetermined, since the reference is to God's works, not our choices. Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
8 | Is God somehow responsible? | Rom 1:20 | John Reformed | 70328 | ||
Dear Tim, If God has (and we know He has: acts 4) prededestined some things, then, if we wish to say that " He has predestined some but not all", we must show from Scripture that He has not predestined all things. My interpretation of God's Word prevents me from seeing Him as a reactionery being. If all His works are known beforehand, it must be because He foreordained all the means by which His works would produce the fruit He intended they produce. The Great Question is "Why did God create man"? (this is not an attempt to escape, but to shed addditional light on our topic) Rev 4:11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for THY PLEASURE they are and were created. God is pleased, or recieves pleasure when men give Him all the glory due Him as their Lord and King. I fail to see how God is glorified when He is seen as failing to accomplish that which He has planned. Is He helpless in the face of a stubborn creature who refuses to bow before Him, and, is there nothing He can do to persuade this rebel? Then God is not Almighty, for He has failed to accomplish His desire. There is no glory in failure! I know you will say that God merely permitted man to exercise his free-will and that the failure lies with the man and not with God. But even as an a believer in free-will, I could not understand why I believed and why anyone else would not. Faith is a gift. Gifts (in human terms) are given at the will of the giver. Gifts may be refused. On what basis may gifts be refused? A person may dislike or be offended by a inappropriate gift,or, they may not wish to be obliged to the giver. But in the case of the gift of faith, we are speaking of an entirely different kind of gift altogether! Let's say that you present the gospel to an unregenerate person. They listen carefully, but when asked to place their trust in Christ, they politely say that they do not believe what you have told them. In other words they do not believe because they have not recieved the gift of faith! If they had recieved the gift of faith they would have believed. If you have sight you will see, If you have hearing you will hear (these are gifts that God has graciously bestowed on those who posess them). What is true of these two gifts is also true of faith. If you have been given the gift of faith, you will believe. It is impossible to refuse God's physical gifts! Sight, hearing, smelling, taste and touch etc. and yet we do not accuse Him of violating our "free will" by causng us to have them. God is not obliged to give these physical gifts to everyone because if He were they would not be "gifts". How then can anyone say: Man may refuse the gift of faith. How is it possible for man to refuse something, that he is not even aware of, until he expeiences the effect of it upon his being? And then it is too late, for the effect has changed him into a new creature in Christ. It was not his will that determined this miraculous rebirth but the will of God. God Bless You, John |
||||||
9 | Is God somehow responsible? | Rom 1:20 | Morant61 | 70358 | ||
Greetins John! Everytime I think I just about have your position figured out, you confuse me again! :-) Two posts ago, you said that God only permitted the fall. I responded by saying that I agreed, that I make a distinction between ordaining something and permitting something. So, which do you believe? Did God will sin to happen in the sense that He scripted it out and made it happen? Or, did God will sin to happen in the sense that He permitted it to occur? Finally, based on Eph. 2:8-9, is 'faith' the gift of God, or is it the whole process? I ask becase, as you probably have heard before, the pronoun 'it' cannot have as its antecedents either 'faith' or 'grace'. They are both feminine nouns, while the pronoun 'it' is neuter. Thus, the common claim that one cannot repspond in faith unless God gives faith is not supported by the text. (This may be a whole new thread) :-) Your Brother in Christ, Tim Moran |
||||||
10 | Is God somehow responsible? | Rom 1:20 | John Reformed | 70363 | ||
So, which do you believe? Did God will sin to happen in the sense that He scripted it out and made it happen? Or, did God will sin to happen in the sense that He permitted it to occur? I don't think that He has made us privy to that information. At least I have'nt found the answer in the Bible yet. It may not be a question of "either or". His ways are past finding out, you know. We do know that He created all things and that all He sets out to do He accomplishes. We know He commands knowing His commands will be broken.We also know He operates using a plan, and a perfect plan at that! So He must have planned that Adam and Eve sin but His plan also allowed for their freedom to not sin. Of course there was no doubt in God's omniscient mind. He knew they would sin. Hey! It's His creation afterall. He has mercy on whoever He wants etc. Our time would more profitably spent discovering what He has done and what He wants us to do rather than speculating on why He has done what He has done. Especially when we lack scriptural proof. I'm not a genious ya know!(do not feel compelled to answer that last remark) :-) Ihave Bible Study tonight. Must dash off! John |
||||||