Evidence for God from Science

I really can't believe that this discussion hasn't gone further than it has!

By definition, omniscience is all knowing. If He is all knowing, I have no free will because it is all pre-determined....NO QUESTIONS. Every decision we make, he knows. I may think I am actually making a decision, but I am actually fullfilling his will.

Don't even get me started on original sin because the implications are even worse.

roverdisc1 wrote:I really can't believe that this discussion hasn't gone further than it has!

By definition, omniscience is all knowing. If He is all knowing, I have no free will because it is all pre-determined....NO QUESTIONS. Every decision we make, he knows. I may think I am actually making a decision, but I am actually fullfilling his will.

Don't even get me started on original sin because the implications are even worse.

Why do we pray? If all is rigidly predetermined?

Why the great Commission? If all is rigidly predetermined?

Why the work on the cross if all is rigidly predetermined?

Why try if all is rigidly predetermined?

So we must let to prisoners free and hold them not accountable for their crimes, rape, torture, molestations, abuse, beatings, robbery because they are actually fulfilling God's will?

The works of evil men are the sovereign acts of a loving God. Why try, Why hope? Why Jesus- why?
-
-
-

roverdisc1 wrote:I really can't believe that this discussion hasn't gone further than it has!

By definition, omniscience is all knowing. If He is all knowing, I have no free will because it is all pre-determined....NO QUESTIONS. Every decision we make, he knows. I may think I am actually making a decision, but I am actually fullfilling his will.

Don't even get me started on original sin because the implications are even worse.

B. W. wrote:Why do we pray? If all is rigidly predetermined?

Why the great Commission? If all is rigidly predetermined?

Why the work on the cross if all is rigidly predetermined?

Why try if all is rigidly predetermined?

So we must let to prisoners free and hold them not accountable for their crimes, rape, torture, molestations, abuse, beatings, robbery because they are actually fulfilling God's will?

The works of evil men are the sovereign acts of a loving God. Why try, Why hope? Why Jesus- why?

Can anyone answer the above questions posed?

Ancient Greek philosophers and Romans both thought the human agent were mere instruments of fate whose lives were in the hands of the gods. How much of this concept is now entrenched in Christian Doctrine concerning determinism's predestination?
-
-
-

-
I am sorry for not being able to respond in a timelier manner but the one year anniversary date of my wife's father passing way is drawing near and I find it difficult to respond due to family issues and my own brought on by this time. But to continue…

This part is from another thread that I am placing it here for the record and future post...

Acts 2:22-24, “Ye men of Israel, hear these words; Jesus of Nazareth, a man approved of God among you by miracles and wonders and signs, which God did by him in the midst of you, as ye yourselves also know: 23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: 24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.” KJV

These passages in Acts are unfortunately used as a proof text for determinism. Doing so misses what is being truly revealed about how sovereign God really is. God had a predestined plan — that call which reveals God's salvation and also God's goal of populating the future new heavens and earth with those that will not rebel. No doubt about it.

The question comes to this: did God sovereignly act in the acts of wicked men to bring about the work of the cross? The answer would be 'Yes' but the method of how God so acts is rarely consider in determinisms doctrines. Instead, it is used to paint the wrong picture of God's sovereignty as an example of how God deals with all mankind, not just His plan and work of salvation as the text clearly states.

It is taught in a manner that turns the ones driving the nails into Jesus and hanging him on a cross as God pounding the nails - not sinners who hate God. Those who put Jesus on trial are taught they were made to do this because they were either acting on God's behalf to condemn the innocent to death or they were somehow inhabited by God himself to punish Jesus, not as sinners who hate God. Those that mocked Jesus and beat him - were they God or God's agents acting on God's behalf? Were they forced to do this?

God is all powerfully absolutely sovereign, God can and does work in such a manner that controls free minded souls by letting them remain free minded — that is all powerful. God had a predetermined plan. He works through peoples freedom, orchestrates the free minded souls to carry out his plans without violating their freedom. This can be because God foreknows everything, period.

He foreknew and placed people in that time and place knowing full well how each would behave, feed off each other, and act in the manner they would because each acted of their own accord, they would not change their course because that was not in them. So don't speculate that they would have acted differently: fact — they hated God and shown it openly as many freely do so overtly today.

God triumphs over them all and brought his plan to pass — none could stop it. God's predetermined plan remains un-coerced; yet, preplanned! Only God can pull this off and it defines what all-powerful really is about

That is all powerful my friend — not God forcing or making them act. He did not have to make them act. He knew they would act in the manners they did fulfilling his predetermined plan that cries out salvation form God - that salvation has come! Think on this if you want to speculate: Would the work of the cross have happened if Jesus, God's Word, would not have come? Without God's call — none could be saved.

God sovereignly put it all together: He, Jesus, being delivered by the determine counsel and foreknowledge of God, you have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain! It says YOU HAVE TAKEN BY WICKED HANDS! God did not take — we did. Thus God condemned sin and paid the penalty of sin, which is death, as the bible plainly teaches concerning the work of the cross.

So the question is: how sovereignly powerful is God? As the determinist state — that God forces and coerces to get things done, or instead, God working through the acts of free minded souls his plans, purpose, will in an outstandingly profound manner? Which of these two points of view line up squarely with God's nature, character and wisdom fulfilling each?

Now these statements are bound to create a stir but a stir it must if it must. You are after all free to disagree or agree in whole or part. It is difficult to realize, as A W. Tozer put it, we put Jesus on the cross, we drove the nails, we put God on trial, we mocked God, spat on him, and That Jesus died on the cross also bearing God's wrath. How can this be? Was not Jesus God manifest in the flesh, the second person of the blessed Trinity? Was he also not man — great is this mystery! Who put Christ on the Cross?

Acts 2:22-24, “Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: 24 Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.” KJV
-
-
-

-
Let's take the time to go through each determinist proof text and provide the context and see what we shall see — after all — this thread has been ordained before time began to happen

John 6:37-40

John 6:40, “And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.” KJV

A remarkable statement made by Jesus is it not? Jesus explaining the will of the Father which is that everyone that sees the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life! In this text it explains how God the Father gives and draws people to Christ Jesus. It is as Jesus said, "And this is the will of the One having sent me, that every [one] looking on the Son and believing [or, trusting] in Him shall be having eternal life, and —I-will raise him up on the last day." ALT

It is a shame that determinist are determined to use principles of 'sola scripture' to proof text the doctrine of election and predestination in such a manner that sully the Lord of Glory. Thus they avoid the issues that arise from the contextual flow of scripture tied directly to John 6:37, “Everyone whom my Father gives me will come to me…” GNB

Look at the contextual flow:

John 6:37-40, “Everyone whom my Father gives me will come to me. I will never turn away anyone who comes to me, 38 because I have come down from heaven to do not my own will but the will of him who sent me, 39 And it is the will of him who sent me that I should not lose any of all those he has given me, but that I should raise them all to life on the last day. 40 For what my Father wants is that all who see the Son and believe in him should have eternal life. And I will raise them to life on the last day." GNB

John 6:37, "All that the Father gives to Me will come to Me, and the one coming to Me I shall by no means cast out. 38 "Because I have come down out of heaven, not so that I shall be doing My will, _but_ the will of the One having sent Me. 39 "And this is the will of the Father having sent Me, that out of all which He has given to Me I will not lose [any of] it, _but_ I will raise it up {in} the last day. 40 "And this is the will of the One having sent me, that every [one] looking on the Son and believing [or, trusting] in Him shall be having eternal life, and _I_ will raise him up on the last day." ALT

"...All that the Father wills to give Jesus are every [one] looking on the Son and believing [or, trusting] in Him shall be having eternal life, and _I_ will raise him up on the last day." ALT

God knows who are His because He is God that foreknows all things. The Lord has a plan to redeem — the plan of salvation is the means God uses to elect. God calls out to all. He sorts the wheat from the chaff. To sort requires including everyone. From amongst everyone, some will hear, understand, and be justified while others will not. It is that simple. God is not the author of sin. Otherwise he is no matter what proof-texting is used to say it is God's will is to make the wicked-wicked so he can punish them eternally just to keep the elect in line and/or just to prove he is a sovereign Lord [which is the main thrust of determinisms stance to prove]

Human beings are responsible for their own actions regarding this matter: how they respond to this call or not. God's will is for everyone looking on the Son and believing [trusting] in Him shall be having eternal life, and Jesus will raise him up on the last day. To do this involves calling everyone. The bible declares much about God sorting and testing humanity.

Christ Died and was risen from the Dead for all, not a few. Why? So Justice is proved — God's justice. God judges with righteous judgment. To damn without informing why or justifying without explanation is not God's way. To just select on a sovereign whim is not just. God has a reason and purpose for everything under heaven and he declared he will tell people of what He intends before it comes to pass. Isaiah 42:9, Ecclesiastes 3:1, Ecclesiastes 3:11, Isaiah 14:24-27, Isaiah 53:1-7.

God proves his awesome justice, displays' his righteousness, and demonstrates his profound grace, establishes his call-test, proving in the process that he sovereignly works through all the works of free minded beings leading them to make an eternal choice. Otherwise, he cannot hold accountable the wicked if he made them to be wicked.

Without God calling — no one could choose — nobody could be the elect. This is not based on human works but solely on the Lord as scriptures plainly attest.
-
-
-

I'll first give a small warning to readers of this post:

1. I have not read this thread to its entirety.
2. I am attempting to learn so forgive me for rehashing anything or being ignorant on a particular viewpoint.
3. I know very little on any particular topic.

With that said, I was reading B.W.'s series of posts and would like to question a few things in order as I read them thus I may be asking questions that are answered in following posts...I'll try to do that as little as possible. Also, I may make a few posts as I don't have time to read and respond all in one sitting. And one more thing, I began reading B.W.'s posts at the point where he begins a discourse on God's nature (p.5)

1.

God doesn't need angels, creation, or humanity. He is completely self sufficient and needs no one. But yet He created! Why? We may, in this mortal life, never fully understand why God chose to create but thank God He did or we would not be.

My response to this would be why is this so? Why is it better that we are than are not? Perhaps a quick background to my beliefs (oddball as they may be) will be necessary to see why I would ask this question. First off I am not unhappy with being, rather just the opposite, however it is my belief that when we die or before we are we are nothing ie. without a conscience, without a mind, without the capability to consider anything.
Thus, if when we do not exist we are without these things, it would not be possible to regret the fact that we were not existing either because we had died or had not ever existed in the first place. Therefore I reject the assumption that it is better to be than to not be. (queue Hamlet's Soliloquy)
A statement I hear occasionally is: Well, if you weren't alive you wouldn't have been able to do such and such, experience such and such, or you wouldn't have the prospect of doing such and such.
I counter this by repeating my previous belief that: If I die tomorrow I'm not going to regret not having done something because I won't exist to regret or, if I had not existed then I would never regret not having the opportunity to do something I have done because I wouldn't have the capability to have regret. And while this belief may seem empty to some it is fulfilling to me as it makes each moment I am existing all the more important to me personally. This belief also does not allow me to fear the prospect of death as I know I will not have regret of things I didn't do or accomplish when I'm dead.

2.

Summed up, God created to simply be true to Himself, true to be who He is, be true to His nature, and character which reveals His will, plans, purposes.

First I read the verses in Timothy which, in my uneducated opinion, didn't do much to explain why the nature of God would be the determinant factor for our creation. The verse seems to serve the purpose of providing security to Christian believers while offering the realization that non-believers will not be reigning with God in eternity. However I think that is beside the point. My argument concerning our creation as God being true to his nature would be this:

If God is an all powerful being God is fully in control of his will. Thus God can will to create and to not create. So the Christian presumption (I believe) is that God willed that man be created and it was so. In a nutshell, we are the product of God's will.

Now, if the creation of man was the product of God's "nature of being" then we would have been created upon God's being rather than upon his "willing us to be". This would mean that we were created outside of God's will. If we were created outside of God's will then God could not truly be the omnipotent figure that the Christian religion would have him to be.

Anyway this is my idea on the first few parts of B.W.'s writings. Please respond as you see fit, I wrote this when I should have been sleeping so any errors are unintentional!

non-affiliated wrote:...First I read the verses in Timothy which, in my uneducated opinion, didn't do much to explain why the nature of God would be the determinant factor for our creation. The verse seems to serve the purpose of providing security to Christian believers while offering the realization that non-believers will not be reigning with God in eternity. However I think that is beside the point. My argument concerning our creation as God being true to his nature would be this:

If God is an all powerful being God is fully in control of his will. Thus God can will to create and to not create. So the Christian presumption (I believe) is that God willed that man be created and it was so. In a nutshell, we are the product of God's will.

Now, if the creation of man was the product of God's "nature of being" then we would have been created upon God's being rather than upon his "willing us to be". This would mean that we were created outside of God's will. If we were created outside of God's will then God could not truly be the omnipotent figure that the Christian religion would have him to be.

Anyway this is my idea on the first few parts of B.W.'s writings. Please respond as you see fit, I wrote this when I should have been sleeping so any errors are unintentional!

Welcome to the thread! Please feel free to write and ask questions as you so feel.

All I can say in answer to this second part of your statement is with several statements and end with three related questions: we exist, we are here: are we not? What are we to do with this gift of life thrust upon us? What is our purpose for being?
-
-
-

All I can say in answer to this second part of your statement is with several statements and end with three related questions: we exist, we are here: are we not? What are we to do with this gift of life thrust upon us? What is our purpose for being?

In answer to all questions now that I have time:

1. We are here, we exist, I do not deny that.

2. Again the idea that life is a gift is based on the idea that God, in the Christian sense, exists. If the question is not based on that then it is impossible to say that life is, in fact, a gift.

and 3 which I wrote this morning slightly modified.

Honestly I don't believe that we specifically need a purpose for being. The fact that I exist allows me freedom to choose what I do with that existence and I choose to do that which I feel improves my state of being.

non-affiliated wrote:

All I can say in answer to this second part of your statement is with several statements and end with three related questions: we exist, we are here: are we not? What are we to do with this gift of life thrust upon us? What is our purpose for being?

In answer to all questions now that I have time:

1. We are here, we exist, I do not deny that.

2. Again the idea that life is a gift is based on the idea that God, in the Christian sense, exists. If the question is not based on that then it is impossible to say that life is, in fact, a gift.

and 3 which I wrote this morning slightly modified.

Honestly I don't believe that we specifically need a purpose for being. The fact that I exist allows me freedom to choose what I do with that existence and I choose to do that which I feel improves my state of being.

Excellent answers!

If life is not a gift - then in your opinion what is it?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Now on to another matter and an FYI for readers below:

I will add more to post. Right now, I am in the middle of editing it. Some of it consist of expanded answers posted on the PL Response thread.
-
-
-

Thoughts on Acts 2:23

My position on Acts 2:23 is aptly expressed by Robert A. Peterson discourse in the book, Hell under Fire, page 160 HB - Concerning Acts 2:23.

Quote, “At one and the same time Jesus' crucifixion filled God's plan and was the greatest crime ever perpetrated! The tension between God's sovereignty and human freedom displayed in the Cross is in indeed mysterious. To tamper with either aspect produces terrible results. To deny human responsibility transforms the perpetrators into God's servants who do good when they crucify the Son of God. To minimize divine sovereignty transforms the cross into an emergency measure of God. Such transformations are wrong in the extreme. Inscrutably the Cross is both God's will, without tarnishing Him with evil and culpable deed of evil doers, without making them puppets whose strings are pulled by God.” End quote.

Again Peterson writes on page 161 regarding comment on Revelations 20:10-15, quote, “…it would be incorrect to conclude from this that scripture chiefly assigns the reason people perish to God's sovereign will. Instead the accent is on misused human freedom, as both the Old and New Testament consistently proclaim that God will judge sinners according to their deeds.” End quote.

The following scripture references are given, Psalms 62:12, Ezekiel 7:27, Hosea 4:9, Zechariah 1:6, Matthew 16:27, Romans 2:8-9, Galatians 6:7-8, Revelations 20:13.

Again Peterson states on page 162 after the above scripture quotes, “Passage after passage points to a holy and just God who gives sinners what they deserve. Judgment is according to deeds, or more precisely, according thoughts — I Corinthians 4:5, words — Matthew 12:36 — and deeds - Revelations 20:13. Those whose lives are characterized by evil thoughts, words, and deeds reap God's wrath. When one inquires of the judgment passages why sinners end up in hell, Scripture repeatedly shouts the answer: corrupted human freedom and evil deeds.” End quote.

As I understand Calvinistic Hard Determinism, it denies human responsibility and transforms the perpetrators of the crucifixion into God's servants who do good when they crucify the Son of God as well as assigns the full weight of God's election on God specifically selecting and making sinners sin and not on a holy and just God who gives sinners what they deserve. This produces great theological error.

God's predetermined counsel and foreknowledge was that Jesus would be that offering for sin. God worked through people by placing them at that specific time foreknowing more about them than we can humanly comprehend, Psalms 33:15, Job 34:11 and set things and events in motion by simply mixing people together.

The best I can say is for the readers to explore the methods God uses to carry out his sovereign plans. It is much like chemistry. You mix chemicals together you get a reaction. The same chemicals mixed will always produce the same reaction. The reactions itself is a chain of events leading to a conclusive result.

In the criminal justice system in the United States there is documented proof of criminal acts committed by two or more people. If these people remained apart, never have met, they would have never committed any horrible crime. However, put these people together, they feed off each other and they jointly commit a crime of their own free volition as what was truly inside their hearts and minds becomes known by the act they committed.

Add in another element into the mix, say someone innocent coming along, you'll get a specific reaction, a string of events occurring like a chemical chain reaction, and the crime is committed. This leaves the guilt of the sin, or crime, as the individuals own.

God's method at the Cross was to draw sinners together to perform God's predetermined counsel and foreknowledge that Jesus would be the sin offering, the Lamb of God slain before the foundation of the world to forgive sins and reconcile believing humanity back to God as God said would happen. Jesus was the agent that would stop the chain reaction of sin from producing its predicable results.

Thus you can rightly say that human responsibility and God's sovereignty met at the cross and were reconciled. As Peterson quoted - “Inscrutably the Cross is both God's will, without tarnishing Him with evil and culpable deed of evil doers, without making them puppets whose strings are pulled by God.” End quote from, Hell under Fire, page 160 HB, Zondervan.
-
-
-

-
-
Note - this was posted on another thread and I am copying it here so we can continue...

B. W. wrote:No hard feelings here! Can't wait to meet you someday so we can laugh about this together! You are a true Christian Man and I respect that.

puritan lad wrote:I don't know. According to the article, I am a heretic (not that I care what he says.)

B. W. wrote:Just hope someday you can shed your hard determinism as many good Calvinist have and re-explore the Glorious Nature, Character, and Wisdom of God.

puritan lad wrote:The issue is hard determinism (which is supported by many scriptures, of which I have already relayed), vs. "free-will", which is totally absent in the Scriptures. It is a question of whether we will fix any flaws in the Sovereignty of God in order to maintain "free will" (in any libertarian sense.) It is a question of whether man maintains any goodness in himself apart from the imputation of the Holy Spirit. It is an issue between a God-Centered or a Man-Centered theology.

For More Ramifications of this debate, check out The Ramifications of Bad Soteriology

B. W. wrote:Well, PL — did God predetermine, cause, King David to Sin so that God could cause Absalom's crimes and woes that befell King David's family? I am still waiting for your answer. Which by the way was my answer to your question regarding 2 Samuel 12:9-12 was with another question so stated above.

puritan lad wrote:I says "yes". This was the secret will and work of God. Surprised? God doesn't need me to defend His honor. He has no shame in this. He openly declares that He would do this thing openly before all Israel and before the Sun. That's fine by me. He's God and I'm not.

David had no objections either.

Thank you for your answer now I'll prepare mine

For the Readers - here is a Link to a good site on this topic but not the one PL mentioned above:

http://www.biblehelp.org/selsalv.htm

-
-

Introduction

puritan lad wrote:The issue is hard determinism (which is supported by many scriptures, of which I have already relayed), vs. "free-will", which is totally absent in the Scriptures. It is a question of whether we will fix any flaws in the Sovereignty of God in order to maintain "free will" (in any libertarian sense.) It is a question of whether man maintains any goodness in himself apart from the imputation of the Holy Spirit. It is an issue between a God-Centered or a Man-Centered theology. For More Ramifications of this debate, check out The Ramifications of Bad Soteriology

B. W. wrote:Well, PL — did God predetermine, cause, King David to Sin so that God could cause Absalom's crimes and woes that befell King David's family? I am still waiting for your answer. Which by the way was my answer to your question regarding 2 Samuel 12:9-12 was with another question so stated above.

puritan lad wrote:I says "yes". This was the secret will and work of God. Surprised? God doesn't need me to defend His honor. He has no shame in this. He openly declares that He would do this thing openly before all Israel and before the Sun. That's fine by me. He's God and I'm not. David had no objections either.

Regarding 2 Samuel 12:9-12

Did God cause Absalom's incest, preordained it from the foundation of the world, to be openly displayed to all Israel and all posterity? Did this come about to prove that God makes certain people wicked so He can punish them as some interpret Proverbs 16:4 to mean?

Is this true? Can 2 Samuel 12:1-12 be applied to all aspects of human experience or is 2 Samuel 12:12 a specific response that applies to a specific event in the annuals of history governed by a just and holy God? Did God cause Absalom's crimes as well as all those other crimes committed in King David's Family leading up to Absalom's provocation made public?

If this is so, under the guise as PL stated - "This was the secret will and work of God. Surprised? God doesn't need me to defend His honor. He has no shame in this…”

Was King David's sin involving Bathsheba and Uriah predetermined by God to happen so that God could cause Absalom crimes and create woe to King David's family? Did God predestined King David's sin to happen just to prove that God sovereignly controls people just to prove Calvinist Hard determinism to be true above all else?

The Issue

The issue is not Absalom's incest but rather the real cause which was King David's sin involving Bathsheba and Uriah. That is the real issue. 2 Samuel 12:12 tells that it is a specific response to a specific event in history governed by a just and holy God in response to David breaking the Commandments of God of his own free volition.

If it is as PL stated, "This was the secret will and work of God. Surprised? God doesn't need me to defend His honor. He has no shame in this. He openly declares that He would do this thing openly before all Israel and before the Sun. That's fine by me. He's God and I'm not. David had no objections either.”

Would this not make God the author of Sin and thus commit evil? Then Deuteronomy 32:4, “He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he” KJV is false.

Likewise Job 34:10-12, “Therefore hearken unto me, ye men of understanding: far be it from God that he should do wickedness; and from the Almighty, that he should commit iniquity. For the work of a man shall he render unto him, and cause every man to find according to his ways. Yea, surely God will not do wickedly; neither will the Almighty pervert judgment.” KJV is false.

King David Broke 6 of the 10 commandments as I mentioned before: King David broke four obvious commandments and two not so obvious. The obvious are as follows: 6 - You must not murder. 7 - You must not commit adultery. 8 - You must not steal. 10- You must not desire another man's wife. The not so obvious Commandments are 1-You must not have any other gods besides me, 2-You must not make for yourself an image of anything in heaven above, on earth below, or in the waters beneath. You must not worship or serve them.

King David broke number One: You must not have any other gods besides me. David broke this command by placing his own self will above God and served the God of his lustful desires. King David broke number Two: You must not make for yourself an image of anything in heaven above, on earth below, or in the waters beneath. You must not worship or serve them. David made an image within his heart about Bathsheba and justified his lust for her and to attain her at any cost. By his actions He worshiped her above the Lord God.

There is an objective lesson to be learned from this: Do not Sin That Grace May Abound — there are consequences for such behavior as it is written: “I punish the sons, grandsons, and great-grandsons for the sin of the fathers who reject [hate] me, but I show covenant faithfulness to the thousands who choose [love] me and keep my commandments.” NET

This is line with Job 34:11, “For the work of a man shall he render unto him, and cause every man to find according to his ways.” KJV

It does not say for the work of God shall God render unto man and cause every man to find according to God's ways. If Hard Determinism is correct this scripture was would read like so stated.

Did God Predestine The King To Sin?

What happened to King David's family and happened later was a consequence of David's actions with Bathsheba and her husband Uriah. Did God predestine King David's behavior, sin, deeds to violate six of the Ten Commandments — God's own words?

If this were so then all scriptures pertaining to God's never acting unjustly, never creating iniquity and sin is false. God then Denies Himself being true to Himself and nothing is stable.

Next, how all powerful is it really to pull every string and cause every child to be molested, every incest, and every crime to be committed? If Calvinist Hard Determinism is true, then their own view of free will, or free moral agency, is also false as human beings have no free will or free moral agency. All is caused by God and never permitted by permissive will.

This is not a demonstration of being all powerful. Being all powerful is to be able to work through all things in accordance to the nature, character and wisdom of God. God imposes on himself self restraint. He does not have too, but he does as that shows what all powerful is too. Without this, all powerful would not be all powerful as he can work through his own self restraint to achieve his purposes. In fact, God can work through all free acts, even when these oppose him. He is not bound to pulling strings but is able to work through all things to arrive at his goal.

God works all powerfully through all circumstances. This is line with Job 34:11, “For the work of a man shall he render unto him, and cause every man to find according to his ways.” KJV

“What a man sows that he will also reap” the book of Galatians also cites. King David sinned and God justly issued the consequences of David's free act of sin.

King David Had a Choice - 2 Samuel 12:8

Note that in 2 Samuel 12:8 God said to King David, “And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.”

The Lord would have given King David Bathsheba if he but asked. This denotes a choice David had. David chose sin and God rendered to him according to his ways: fairly in the sight of all. I hope you can see that God did not make David sin — there was a choice set before him and he sinned as it so says in verse eight.

Next, if all had been predetermined to happen — what purpose does God have to test humanity? As it is written in Psalms 11:4-5, “The LORD is in his holy temple, the LORD'S throne is in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men. The LORD trieth the righteous: but the wicked and him that loveth violence his soul hateth.” KJV

If God made King David to Sin and break the commandments of God then Psalms 9:15, “The heathen are sunk down in the pit that they made: in the net which they hid is their own foot taken. The LORD is known by the judgment which he executeth: the wicked is snared in the work of his own hands. Higgaion. Selah.” KJV — is in error and God is a liar.

Conclusion:

2 Samuel 12:12 speaks of a specific response to a specific event in history governed by a just and holy God in response to David breaking the Commandments of God by David's own free volition as he had a choice as God so spoke to David in verse 8, “And I gave thee thy master's house, and thy master's wives into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.”

If not — God is not God as he would violate his own word about himself in making David Sin just to cause Absalom's folly and Daivid's family woes. God punished as he said he would do according to the commandments. If David would not have sinned, things would have been much different. God is not a slave to human choice — no- he is all powerful enough to work around it, and through it, all the while remaining true to his word about himself and never violating it.

How did God work through and around all this and still remain not the author of sin: simple, he placed people where each will feed off each other and prompt each other to commit the desires of their twisted sin filled hearts. Truly Psalms 11:4 is true, “The LORD is in his holy temple, the LORD'S throne is in heaven: his eyes behold, his eyelids try, the children of men.” KJV

Don't believe me? Read 2 Samuel 16:16-23 and 2 Samuel 17:1-29.
-
-
-

B.W.,

Your arguments here have already been dealt with, numerous times. I'll await something new instead of going around in circles, accomplishing nothing.

The best place for you to start is to show from Scripture that man, in the own "wisdom, intelligence, and splendor" that he was created with, can choose whether or not to believe the gospel. Your entire theology hinges on this point, yet you have yet to show any proof of this from Scripture. You just stated it as fact, and moved on, building the rest of your argument on this assumption.

I have also shown several scriptural proofs that God sovereignly works in the sinful acts of wicked men (Joseph's Brothers, Pharoah, Absalom, Job's enemies, and those who crucified Christ). I have yet to see where "free will" fits in. Unless libertarian free will and human ability can be clearly established to counteract the clear scriptures regarding God's absolute sovereignty, I will not be moved from the only rock of my salvation (and it isn't my free will).

God Bless,

PL

puritan lad wrote:The best place for you to start is to show from Scripture that man, in the own "wisdom, intelligence, and splendor" that he was created with, can choose whether or not to believe the gospel. Your entire theology hinges on this point, yet you have yet to show any proof of this from Scripture. You just stated it as fact, and moved on, building the rest of your argument on this assumption.

That's not a fair assessment PL. Many scriptures have been provided but were dismissed as either non-indicative or out of context (such as 'all' doesn't mean all, and 'the world' doesn't mean the world).

In any case, I do not wish to revive the same argument but merely to respond to your claim.

The following link (a subset of the link provided by B.W. above) contains a pretty long list of verses that clearly show God expecting man to 'turn', 'repent', 'believe', 'seek', and that salvation is offered to 'all', 'whoever', 'anyone', the 'world', 'every' person, 'all nations' and much more. There are over 200 scriptural references that clearly indicate man's acceptance of God's offer as a condition for salvation, and man's rejection of such as his damnation.

So to say none has been offered is not entirely accurate.

God bless,

John.

-

Please read the response on PL's thread - the one I cited here is for this thread.

The real answer to PL is on his thread. "Puritan Lad's Response" Page 18 - Oct 19, 2006 section.
-
-
-
-