Evidence for God from Science

truthman wrote:I guess I'm not the only one that doesn't get your point.

very good answer!
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:This section is not addressing any particular person so...

Regarding the Arminian and Calvinist ordo salutis, I think both miss the point regarding an inward call verses an outward call.

To make my point better understood - Let me pose a scenario and then a question:

Scenario: You are driving fast down a country road, road rounds a sudden curve and you come to an unexpected fork in the road, not other traffic in sight…

Question: think fast - would you turn onto the left fork or onto the right fork?

zoegirl wrote:I'll take a stab at it.

When choosing right or left, usually we are choosing ,not because of a flip of a coin, but because we prefer one or the other. We want to go either left or right. And what drives that want?

Another nice answer...
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:This section is not addressing any particular person so...

Regarding the Arminian and Calvinist ordo salutis, I think both miss the point regarding an inward call verses an outward call.

To make my point better understood - Let me pose a scenario and then a question:

Scenario: You are driving fast down a country road, road rounds a sudden curve and you come to an unexpected fork in the road, not other traffic in sight…

Question: think fast - would you turn onto the left fork or onto the right fork?

Kristoffer wrote:You mean the want to choose? I suppose for some people it must be because they want to be in control but for other people their reasons are probably different, like a strong emotion maybe. Some things can just feel like the right thing to do intuitively, like it is possible to know that a seemingly negative action can have a positive outcome.

Although I do know some people who literally gamble with their life and will pull out a coin or a dice to make decisions in their lives and it is really crazy I should know I've done it before with a 100 sided dice.(there was lots of various alternative decisions and no plainly perfect option)

Anyhow, sometimes you do have to take risks so left or right*, it probably does matter what way you go.

*War doesn't determine who is right. Only who is left.

Again, another greta answer...

Please keep the answers coming - there is a point to this exercise and I'll point this later today or this evening or next day!
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:Scenario: You are driving fast down a country road, road rounds a sudden curve and you come to an unexpected fork in the road, not other traffic in sight…

Question: think fast - would you turn onto the left fork or onto the right fork?
-

My brain tells me to leave this one alone. But, my answer would have to be one of two.
1. If I had time to slow down or stop, I would see where the roads go.
2. If I didn't have time to slow down or stop to see where I was going, it wouldn't matter which way I went.
If you don't take the time to see where your heading, does it matter which way you go?
Maybe I would ask Jesus to take the wheel (sorry carrie).

sinnerbybirth wrote:

B. W. wrote:Scenario: You are driving fast down a country road, road rounds a sudden curve and you come to an unexpected fork in the road, not other traffic in sight…

Question: think fast - would you turn onto the left fork or onto the right fork?
-

My brain tells me to leave this one alone. But, my answer would have to be one of two.
1. If I had time to slow down or stop, I would see where the roads go.
2. If I didn't have time to slow down or stop to see where I was going, it wouldn't matter which way I went.
If you don't take the time to see where your heading, does it matter which way you go?
Maybe I would ask Jesus to take the wheel (sorry carrie).

I like your answer!

Hmmm - maybe I'll wait till Monday and give a liitle more time to see who else responds to the question
-
-
-

When thinking fast it is important to have the nerve to take a decision, if the options are left and right...I would click my fingers and go, left is the right way! Anyway Even if it is the wrong way I would still have a sat nav guiding me (into ditches and lakes)

Straight ahead, smash the sign, and into oblivion!!

+
I like to thank everyone for participating as well as not participating who read the question/scenario above.

Next,

Has anyone considered the intent of the scenario/question?

What is the intent of this exercise? Can anyone think what it might be?

There are good answers — but no one so far has stated the intent…

Let me say: The intent has most definitely been carried out in the fashion for which was sent and fully accomplished its purpose too. Before this scenario/question was ever posed, everyone reading this thread was oblivious to it, that is, until it was posed. I did write elsewhere concerning predestination on this Forum and there are clues in them concerning the Call.

So what was the intent?

B. W. wrote:Regarding the Arminian and Calvinist ordo salutis, I think both miss the point regarding an inward call verses an outward call.

To make my point better understood - Let me pose a scenario and then a question:

Scenario: You are driving fast down a country road, road rounds a sudden curve and you come to an unexpected fork in the road, not other traffic in sight…

Question: think fast - would you turn onto the left fork or onto the right fork?

-
-
-

jlay wrote:Straight ahead, smash the sign, and into oblivion!!

Rather oblivion than hell. But rather heaven than oblivion.

Kristoffer wrote:

jlay wrote:Straight ahead, smash the sign, and into oblivion!!

Rather oblivion than hell. But rather heaven than oblivion.

Now you're thinking.

I am always thinking, or atleast my muscles are doing the thinking for me.

From the scenario/question, it is certain that every person reading this little exercise example answered.

The intent of the driving scenario exercise was to demonstrate the true intent and purpose of the author. My intent was to force upon the readers a choice. The purpose was to make every reader respond to either answering the question or answer by not answering. From this, the function of this was to demonstrate how people have a tendency to ignore the intent/purpose of God being the author of own Call to all humanity.

His call has an intent and purpose which is not limited to only produce one thing - it will either open one's eyes to hear, their eyes to see, or cause one to remain deaf, blind, their heart hardened or circumcised. In fact, the bible proves this about God but both Calvinisms / Arminians interpretation of the Call from the bible is like people debating which way one should go during the driving scenario example. I am not condemning anyone for how they answered in this exercise — you all have great answers! But all I ask, is to begin to look at the Author and Finisher of our Faith and seek His intent, will, purpose of his own call. Without, which, none could be saved. His intent, will, purpose of his own call will not violate one iota of His character and nature revealed in the bible either.

So if anyone would like to begin and keep this thread going - please chime in and let's explore together as brothers and sisters in Christ!
-
-
-

Hebrews weren't talking about believers but people looking to be saved

Hebrews Passages:

Hebrews 6:4-6 "It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace."
This section describes a person who has been enlightened to understand the gospel. But just understanding the gospel doesn't make one saved. They have had a taste of the heavenly gift, possibly referring to the Holy Spirit which Peter calls a gift in Acts 2:38. In which case, "tasted" and "shared in" both refer to their experience with the Holy Spirit. Does this mean that such people were born of God? Romans 8:9 says "You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ." But do such people have the Spirit of God living IN them? The greek word for "shared in" (metochos) is literally "became partners with". It is first used in the New Testament in Lu 5:7 "And they beckoned unto their partners, which were in the other ship, that they should come and help them." This is the type of relationship that the Holy Spirit has with those He is helping to come to Christ in which he comes along side the person as a partner much as the people of Israel were led through the desert by the cloud and by the pillar of fire.
They also experienced how good the Word of God is, although had yet to really put their faith in it. They also experience miracles, which made them even more accountable in God's sight just as Jesus had said: "Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you." Matt 11:21,22 Were such people born of God just because they had such experiences? No!

A person who has such knowledge and experience, and rejects Christ will be permanently lost. Having reject what the Holy Spirit had been revealing to him, he has sinned against the Holy Spirit, and as Jesus says, "whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin." Mr 3:29 Having led the person to the point of salvation, having given him sufficient evidence to make a decision, and having been rejected, the Holy Spirit breaks His partnership with the unbelieving nominal Christian and never returns. For "land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned." Heb 6:8

See also Wuest (Translator of the NASB) commentary on Heb 6:4

Hebrews 10:26-27 "If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God."
Just "receiving the knowledge of the truth" does make one to be born of God. Knowledge itself doesn't save. And in particular, the "knowlege" here is epignosis, which is knowing about something. (As opposed to gnosis, which is relationship knowledge. So again he is referring to nominal Christians, as John says, "No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him." 1John 3:6 So if a "Christian" has such a behavior it is indicative that he has never been born of God.

Hebrews 10:38-39 "'But my righteous one will live by faith. And if he shrinks back, I will not be pleased with him.' But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who believe and are saved."

vs 38 is a quote taken from Hab 2:4 from the Septuagint "If he should draw back my soul will have no pleasure in him: but the just shall live by my faith." Was "my righteous one" born of God? No one was born of God until Pentacost. So what is true of those born of God (like 1John 3:6,9), was not necessarily true of those "righteous ones" in the Old Testament as in Heb 10:38. They could have shrunk back and been lost. But Hebrews makes clear this is not true of New Testament Christians who have been born of God as Heb 10:39 declares "we are not of those who shrink back." How could he make such a statement if it were not inevitable for true believers? The ones who "shrink back" are those in Heb 10:26,27 he had just mentioned above who were merely nominal Christians.


http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/etsec.html

UsagiTsukino wrote:Hebrews weren't talking about believers but people looking to be saved

Hebrews Passages:

Hebrews 6:4-6 "It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace."
This section describes a person who has been enlightened to understand the gospel. But just understanding the gospel doesn't make one saved. They have had a taste of the heavenly gift, possibly referring to the Holy Spirit which Peter calls a gift in Acts 2:38. In which case, "tasted" and "shared in" both refer to their experience with the Holy Spirit. Does this mean that such people were born of God? Romans 8:9 says "You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ." But do such people have the Spirit of God living IN them? The greek word for "shared in" (metochos) is literally "became partners with". It is first used in the New Testament in Lu 5:7 "And they beckoned unto their partners, which were in the other ship, that they should come and help them." This is the type of relationship that the Holy Spirit has with those He is helping to come to Christ in which he comes along side the person as a partner much as the people of Israel were led through the desert by the cloud and by the pillar of fire.
They also experienced how good the Word of God is, although had yet to really put their faith in it. They also experience miracles, which made them even more accountable in God's sight just as Jesus had said: "Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I tell you, it will be more bearable for Tyre and Sidon on the day of judgment than for you." Matt 11:21,22 Were such people born of God just because they had such experiences? No!

A person who has such knowledge and experience, and rejects Christ will be permanently lost. Having reject what the Holy Spirit had been revealing to him, he has sinned against the Holy Spirit, and as Jesus says, "whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin." Mr 3:29 Having led the person to the point of salvation, having given him sufficient evidence to make a decision, and having been rejected, the Holy Spirit breaks His partnership with the unbelieving nominal Christian and never returns. For "land that produces thorns and thistles is worthless and is in danger of being cursed. In the end it will be burned." Heb 6:8

See also Wuest (Translator of the NASB) commentary on Heb 6:4

Hebrews 10:26-27 "If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God."
Just "receiving the knowledge of the truth" does make one to be born of God. Knowledge itself doesn't save. And in particular, the "knowlege" here is epignosis, which is knowing about something. (As opposed to gnosis, which is relationship knowledge. So again he is referring to nominal Christians, as John says, "No one who lives in him keeps on sinning. No one who continues to sin has either seen him or known him." 1John 3:6 So if a "Christian" has such a behavior it is indicative that he has never been born of God.

Hebrews 10:38-39 "'But my righteous one will live by faith. And if he shrinks back, I will not be pleased with him.' But we are not of those who shrink back and are destroyed, but of those who believe and are saved."

vs 38 is a quote taken from Hab 2:4 from the Septuagint "If he should draw back my soul will have no pleasure in him: but the just shall live by my faith." Was "my righteous one" born of God? No one was born of God until Pentacost. So what is true of those born of God (like 1John 3:6,9), was not necessarily true of those "righteous ones" in the Old Testament as in Heb 10:38. They could have shrunk back and been lost. But Hebrews makes clear this is not true of New Testament Christians who have been born of God as Heb 10:39 declares "we are not of those who shrink back." How could he make such a statement if it were not inevitable for true believers? The ones who "shrink back" are those in Heb 10:26,27 he had just mentioned above who were merely nominal Christians.


http://www.bcbsr.com/topics/etsec.html

Just so you know...the last time someone posted in this thread was in 2010.

Sorry about that it's just that I was reading the thread because of the link they posted. My bad