Prior Book | Prior Chapter | Prior Verse | Next Verse | Next Chapter | Next Book | Viewing NASB and Amplified 2015 | |
NASB | Acts 4:24 And when they heard this, they lifted their voices to God with one accord and said, "O Lord, it is You who MADE THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH AND THE SEA, AND ALL THAT IS IN THEM, |
AMPLIFIED 2015 | Acts 4:24 And when they heard it, they raised their voices together to God and said, "O Sovereign Lord [having complete power and authority], it is You who MADE THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH AND THE SEA, AND EVERYTHING THAT IS IN THEM, [Ex 20:11; Ps 146:6] |
Subject: Is God in absolut contrl over all things |
Bible Note: 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. |