Evidence for God from Science

B. W. wrote:Regarding Acts 2:23 you must note Acts 2:31. God's predetermined counsel and foreknowledge involves Jesus Christ and the work of salvation as the gospel message proclaims. Being able to do this requires great wisdom and skill to carry out, much of which is beyond the scope of the human mind to fully comprehend this great mystery.

No so much of a mystery. It says very plainly what it means.

"Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:" (Acts 2:23) It agrees fully with Acts 4:27-28 - "For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done." Pretty clear to me.

You still haven't shown me human ability in the Scriptures, and I won't hold my breath that you will.

puritan lad wrote:

B. W. wrote:Regarding Acts 2:23 you must note Acts 2:31. God's predetermined counsel and foreknowledge involves Jesus Christ and the work of salvation as the gospel message proclaims. Being able to do this requires great wisdom and skill to carry out, much of which is beyond the scope of the human mind to fully comprehend this great mystery.

No so much of a mystery. It says very plainly what it means.

"Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:" (Acts 2:23) It agrees fully with Acts 4:27-28 - "For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together, For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done." Pretty clear to me.

You still haven't shown me human ability in the Scriptures, and I won't hold my breath that you will.

No one is asking you to hold your breath.

Job 34:11, andPsalms 33:15 state it clearly enough. It is true Psalms 33:4-5. That is how God works. God will not violate his own nature, stain his own character, nor weaken his wisdom to prove that form of Calvinist Determinism so many hold dear too.

You simply cannot hear nor see how Lord Almighty works through the acts of free minded people without violating His own principles of justice, righteousness, equity, mercy, love, compassion, etc and etc despite the scripture evidence before your very eyes.

Instead, your tone betrays utter contempt for the truth about the God and his works in exchange for a position based on philosophical hard determinism that shouts loudly — God is the prima cause of sin, he will make people sin, in order to do some great thing.

Here is something to consider about the law of God regarding this matter:

Deuteronomy 5: 9-10, “Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me, and shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments.” KJV

Question is for Calvinist hard determinist is that God declares that we are to love God. Deuteronomy 6:4-5. Jesus repeats these words in Matthew 22:37. How can we love God if this very act is an act of man or woman?

Some say that God loves himself through people by making them love him with his own love. If this were the case then God made an impossible commandment that could never be obeyed, which defies God's justice, mercy, and compassion, by telling people they must love God with a love impossible to give. Thus he made everyone, by force, to break his own law.

I like an old Rabbi's definition of Deuteronomy 5: 9-10 concerning the statement, “them that hate me, and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me.” The Bible NET brings out this point of view by translating the words hate as reject and love as choose — look this up on Bible.org — NET Bible.

The old Rabbi said it best what Deuteronomy 5: 9-10 is conveying — You love what you choose and You choose what you love, You hate what you reject and You reject what you hate. The Bible NET notes bring this point out too.

God can now show mercy and compassion on whom he wills and hardened who he wills because he showed his love, called it forth, He calls and now a choice can be made to love what you choose and choose what you love; hate what you reject and reject what you hate. If God did not — call — show — demonstrate that He loves — how can one reject it or accept it as the commandment declares? How can God hold one guilty if he did not call? Better yet hold guilty if he made the guilty hate?

When God calls — a decision is forced upon humanity. God foreseeing and foreknowing everything can now rightly and perfectly use His own principles of justice, righteousness, equity, mercy, love, compassion, etc and etc , to seek them that are lost because the lost are confronted by God's love, demonstrated, daily, seeking a just response. God foreseeing and foreknowing everything can fashion beforehand a person's very life as it is written: Job 34:11, andPsalms 33:15, and Psalms 33:4-5 because he calls — demonstrates — his great love throughout all the earth.
-
-
-

puritan lad wrote: ...You are entitled to your opinion, but please do not rewrite the Bible to support it.

I just asked a question and you did not answer it - what concert reason was there for changing the placement of the word believe in Act 13:48? Also you forgot to mention that many translators were influenced by Calvin?

There is no reason to change the word order and anyone seeking truth about Acts 13:48 should note this and ask why was it changed?

If Luther accepted the norms of his day based on — all translate and interpret the bible this way — where would justification by faith be now? We would probably all still be buying and selling indulgences on this very thread!

Let me add - I am not a Luther as I do not have enough gas - only a person who asks a simple question - why was the word -believe- moved?
-
-
-

puritan lad wrote:

B. W. wrote:Did God predestine King David break six of the Ten Commandments in order to use the wicked in the manner you described?

B.W.,

Let's try again, as you still have not answered the question. You're trying to dodge it.

Did God do Absalom's incest openly before all Israel? God says He did (2 Samuel 12:11-12). What say ye?

It is you how are dodging the question: Did God predestine King David to commit the Sin that caused and set in motion Absalom's incest openly before all Israel?

I will not answer before you do...

As a matter of fact, I did answer it but either you did not see the answer or did not read it. Maybe could not undersatnd it??
-
-
-

-
-
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 to the article PL mentioned aboved:

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

-
-

-
I posted on the other thread a longer response - here is another version:

Regarding 2 Samuel 12:9-12

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.

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? So that he could make a public display of Absalom and cause woe in David's family for no other reason than sovereign rite?

If this were so then all scriptures pertaining to God never acting unjustly, never creating iniquity/sin is false. Thus God Denies Himself being true to Himself and nothing is stable. You can argue that God can do whatever he pleases but if He does not remain true to Himself and violates His own words and promises then this says what about God?

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 as they cite and teach. All is caused by God and never permitted by permissive will.

This brand of Hard Determinism admitted by their doctrine counters the 'hard' Calvinist's own stance that they believe that humanity has a measure of freewill. If God did indeed predestine and caused King David to sin in order to make a public display of Absalom, then the 'hard' Calvinist concept and statements made by many pertaining that they believe humanity has a form of permitted 'freewill' is false as well as the notion of God's secret will.

If God caused and predestined King David's sin then He also causes every child to be molested, every incest, murder, and every crime to be committed. Makes people Love Him and Makes people hate Him. A Ruler that so does, is one who rules out of fear of loss of control and is not at all 'all powerful:' sovereign yes, all powerful, no. Therefore, how all powerful is it really to pull every string as the Calvinist Hard Determinism believes?

This is not a demonstration of being all powerful. Being all powerful is to be able to work through and around 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 demonstrates all powerfulness too. Without this self restraint, God's all powerfulness would not be all powerful. To prove all powerfulness God proves He can work through and around His own self restraint to achieve His purposes. Now that is true power!

In fact, God can even work through and around all free acts of his intelligently designed creatures, even when these oppose him. He is not bound to pulling strings but is able to work through and around all things to achieve His principles. That is why it is written that God works through all things and can turn tragedy into victory. What an enemy designed as destruction and ruin, God can turn it around for good.

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.” Also, “What a man sows that he will also reap,” the book of Galatians cites. King David sinned and God justly issued forth the consequences of David's free act of sin as the Commandment so cites that there is indeed choice.

In fact the Ten Commandments themselves speak of choice and make it abundantly clear that God made choice known: “You shall have no other God's Before me…Thou shall not commit murder, etc.” Deuteronomy 5:9-10, “Thou shalt not bow down unto them [Idols], nor serve them; for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the third and upon the fourth generation of them that hate [reject] Me, and showing mercy unto the thousandth generation of them that love [choose] Me and keep My commandments.” JPS

This choice was known by King David and he chose sin and rejected God.

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 as Hard Determinism believes — 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.

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.”

You see, there was a choice before David and David chose sin over asking God. If God would not have stated this, then God would not be God as he would violate his own word, nature, character, wisdom 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 statement in 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 what He reveals about Himself.

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.
-
-
-

Greetings eveyone! - I am bumping this post to keep it close to the other responce thread...

-- I am back and will try to catch up on the forum where I left off!

God Bless!

B. W.

B.W.,

I think we are going around in circles here. The issue here is the Sovereignty of God and His right to sit on His throne and do what He wills with His own. If something happens within the Universe that God did not predestine, then He is NOT sovereign. It is just that simple. The smallest atom, electron, etc. is in the complete and sovereign hand of God. Isaiah 46:9-11 is clear enough. God is sovereign over all things, past, present, and future, and, as I have thoroughly shown, that includes man's evil deeds.

This is also a disagreement over the purposes of God. Your side would hold that God created man to be in fellowship with him, hoping and longing for him to make a good choice and choose Jesus. My side holds that God only has one purpose, and that is to glorify Himself. He gets glory in the salvation of His people, and He gets glory in the destruction of the wicked. In all, His immutable decree cannot be altered or impeded by the workings of mere mortals.

"The LORD brings the counsel of the nations to nothing; he frustrates the plans of the peoples. The counsel of the LORD stands forever, the plans of his heart to all generations. Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD, the people whom he has chosen as his heritage!" (Psalms 33:10-12)

I would go through the five points once again if I thought it would convince you, but you are stuck on the God who loosely governs the affairs of man, and hopes he makes a good choice.

Besides, all five points have been expounded in my blog for anyone to see. Look at the first seven posts in October.

In addition to that, as I said before, the debate between Calvinism and Arminian is not merely one of "five points". It is a debate over two different worldviews, and there is no reconciliation between them, despite the efforts of many.

I would like for you to consider the following scenario. Two sinners, with the exact same "free will", hear the exact same gospel message. One accepts it while the other rejects it. Why? What made the difference?

In closing, I'll present the Lord's Other Prayer.

Most of us are familiar with the Lord's Prayer. However, our Lord said many prayers. In Luke 10, He thanked God for revealing the saving gospel to His disciples, AND for hiding it from the Pharisees.

"In that same hour he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou didst hide these things from the wise and understanding, and didst reveal them unto babes: yea, Father; for so it was well-pleasing in thy sight." (Luke 10:21)

puritan lad wrote: B.W., I think we are going around in circles here. The issue here is the Sovereignty of God and His right to sit on His throne and do what He wills with His own. If something happens within the Universe that God did not predestine, then He is NOT sovereign. It is just that simple. The smallest atom, electron, etc. is in the complete and sovereign hand of God. Isaiah 46:9-11 is clear enough. God is sovereign over all things, past, present, and future, and, as I have thoroughly shown, that includes man's evil deeds.

No problem with this as I have been stating these very fact you cite above from day one. Again, your interpretation of what I have stated is way off the mark. The point is this - how does God govern? This is precisely the venue I chose to explore in richer details than many good Calvinist can comprehend due to a mechanical minded systematic judicial procedure mindset imbedded within the 5 points.

puritan lad wrote: This is also a disagreement over the purposes of God. Your side would hold that God created man to be in fellowship with him, hoping and longing for him to make a good choice and choose Jesus. My side holds that God only has one purpose, and that is to glorify Himself. He gets glory in the salvation of His people, and He gets glory in the destruction of the wicked. In all, His immutable decree cannot be altered or impeded by the workings of mere mortals.

Again, you show that you do not understand what I wrote as your quote about 'your side' clearly shows. Everything in is a Us verses Them mentality. Let me challenge your world view: I have written at length regarding how God demonstrates His Glory and how His Glory is revealed in how God chooses to reveal his nature and character and in doing so, God glorifies Himself. If not, life would cease. Where were you when I wrote about this? There is no conflict here.

Next, God did create Humanity, all creation, and the Angels for fellowship. In doing so, God demonstrates his Glory and is true to himself. Praise God! No where did I ever state that God is passively longing and hoping humans make a right choice. Humans would not due to the sin nature of humanity. God is not slave to human choice. Instead he confronts humanity with a choice. This very choice reveals his glory as his glory will line up with his just and fair nature.

It appears to me that your brand of Calvinism his based on some form of pure human self-abasement. I say this with sorrow and not malice. According to your style of Calvinism — God saved the world only to promote his own Glory as mankind is so wicked and evil and not worth saving - which is in fact true but oft misapplied in interpretation.

However the Bible reads, “For God so LOVED the WORLD that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth on him shall not perish but have everlasting life,” John 3:16 - KJV

It does not say, “For God so Glorified Himself in the WORLD that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth on him shall not perish but have everlasting life,”

It states that God loves the world of men and women. God as to his nature is Love 1 John 4:8 states. God reveals this attribute of Glory as it is written in John 1:14, “The Word became a human being and lived here with us. We saw his true glory, the glory of the only Son of the Father. From him all the kindness and all the truth of God have come down to us.” CEV

PL, God reveals his Glory through his love toward those that will believe. God already knows who are his and they will depart from iniquity, 2 Timothy 2:19. God knows everything and this is best summed as I cited before in this statement: “Since God knows everything, then he can write about it before it ever was and bring about what is known to be best before anything ever began.”

In this God displays his Glory of justice, righteousness, fairness, and in essence true agape love in a living manner with living beings all for his own glory. You debate this? Why? To prove a sense of Calvinistic self abasement and its proscribed procedures for judicial and mechanical mortification of the flesh as the only way? I do not understand why so many fine Calvinist hate humanity so much thus negating demonstrating God light of love within? Is it because they really view fellowship with God as heresy? I do not know or understand this about your branch of Calvinism.

Fact is, we were created for fellowship with God. The bible teaches this and you deny this? In this fellowship God is glorified and we fall to our faces before him in heartfelt love and gratitude. Thus, those that believe are chosen by God because God knows everything before it ever was.

God chooses for His own glory is true but this selection is unknown to us therefore that choice is set before all humanity separating the wheat from the tares — the sheep from the goats - the wicked from the just that truly believe [trust, rely, depend on him, loyal and love] God because he first loved us. In doing so, God's Glory is cleanly displayed in all its grandeur and wisdom indescribable to the human heart unless revealed.

"The LORD brings the counsel of the nations to nothing; he frustrates the plans of the peoples. The counsel of the LORD stands forever, the plans of his heart to all generations. Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD, the people whom he has chosen as his heritage!" (Psalms 33:10-12)

puritan lad wrote: I would go through the five points once again if I thought it would convince you, but you are stuck on the God who loosely governs the affairs of man, and hopes he makes a good choice.

First off, you missed the point. I never said that God governs the universe loosely. I pointed out that God governs according to his nature and character that permits much in order to produce good which reveals his glory. This is a great mystery indeed and the current state of how things currently are prove this true.

puritan lad wrote: I would like for you to consider the following scenario. Two sinners, with the exact same "free will", hear the exact same gospel message. One accepts it while the other rejects it. Why? What made the difference?

Answers: “Since God knows everything, then he can write about it before it ever was and bring about what is known to be best before anything ever began.”

“For God so LOVED the WORLD that he gave his only begotten son that whosoever believeth on him shall not perish but have everlasting life,” John 3:16 — KJV

Deuteronomy 30:19-20, “I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live: That thou mayest love the LORD thy God, and that thou mayest obey his voice, and that thou mayest cleave unto him: for he is thy life, and the length of thy days: that thou mayest dwell in the land which the LORD sware unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, to give them.” KJV

Revelations 21:1-8, “And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God. And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away….” KJV

puritan lad wrote: In closing, I'll present the Lord's Other Prayer. Most of us are familiar with the Lord's Prayer. However, our Lord said many prayers. In Luke 10, He thanked God for revealing the saving gospel to His disciples, AND for hiding it from the Pharisees.

"In that same hour he rejoiced in the Holy Spirit, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou didst hide these things from the wise and understanding, and didst reveal them unto babes: yea, Father; for so it was well-pleasing in thy sight." (Luke 10:21)

Amen…
-
-
-

I have already dealt with much of this, but one point you make here really brings this to a head...

B. W. wrote:It appears to me that your brand of Calvinism his based on some form of pure human self-abasement.

Bingo!!!! That, my friend, is what we call Biblical Christianity. Self must be abased. Self is an idol that seeks to place itself on the throne of the God of Heaven and tell Him "My Council shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure". Self must be abased, denied, and killed. We must die, so that we can be born again. Lovers of self cannot be lovers of God. The very first Commandment points this out well.

That is the biggest problem with modern evangelicalism. It is a self-esteem, self-therapy gospel which is really no gospel at all. It isn't "good news" but rather "good advise". We are trying to give good advice to dead people, and it just doesn't work. We might as well play a Dr. Phil video in a cemetery, or tell dry bones to put flesh on themselves.

In contrast, see ADDING TO THE CHURCH—THE PURITAN APPROACH TO
PERSUADING SOULS. A must read, regardless of your position. A recovery of the true gospel. May this become the gospel we preach...

puritan lad wrote:I have already dealt with much of this, but one point you make here really brings this to a head...

B. W. wrote:It appears to me that your brand of Calvinism his based on some form of pure human self-abasement.

Bingo!!!! That, my friend, is what we call Biblical Christianity. Self must be abased. Self is an idol that seeks to place itself on the throne of the God of Heaven and tell Him "My Council shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure". Self must be abased, denied, and killed. We must die, so that we can be born again. Lovers of self cannot be lovers of God. The very first Commandment points this out well.

That is the biggest problem with modern evangelicalism. It is a self-esteem, self-therapy gospel which is really no gospel at all. It isn't "good news" but rather "good advise". We are trying to give good advice to dead people, and it just doesn't work. We might as well play a Dr. Phil video in a cemetery, or tell dry bones to put flesh on themselves.

In contrast, see ADDING TO THE CHURCH—THE PURITAN APPROACH TO
PERSUADING SOULS. A must read, regardless of your position. A recovery of the true gospel. May this become the gospel we preach...

Bingo - again you misread what I wrote. Wow!

I stated - "According to your style of Calvinism — God saved the world only to promote his own Glory as mankind is so wicked and evil and not worth saving - which is in fact true but oft misapplied in interpretation."

What you cited above about the human conduction is true and I stated this as fact that "is oft misapplied in interpretation."

Fact, God saved us due to his nature of love and nothing else. No one is saying we were worth saving. Your type of Calvinism goes way beyond this to an unhealthy extreme about who God is.

Many fine and loving Calvinist wonder and pray why doesn't it re-lead to another revival. “Where are the Edwards! The Spurgeon's and revivals!,” many plea and wonder at. If these men came back today, modern Calvinism would reject them. Why? Edwards was touched by the Love of God as well as the others and that love, God used to plead through too others.

You hit the nail on the head. Your brand of extreme self abasement has led to inclusiveness and also rejection of God's love.' The revivals died out due to this. Cold mechanical scholastic format was what was retained and the need to be right ruled supreme, thus, the nature of God became stained and he withdrew his hand in order to bring about repentance.

I do not know if you can see this or not. 'God so Loved the World' means what it says not as some Calvinist interpret. God's nature is to love and he did have a plan for humanity. He did design us for fellowship and communion with Him. Sin through the serpent entered the world of humanity or did you forget that part?

Did God create humanity with malice intent in mind — 'I hate all Adam is and will be and delight in the death of the wicked — hah- ha! Or to prove his Glory - That God so loved...?

Why did God make us in his image and likeness? Does God hate himself? You see PL; your brand of self-abasement has led to the neglect of this truth. God's character is slighted by that kind of theology. God made us in his image and likeness. 'He who does not love his brethren does not love God for God as to his nature is to love,' is what the bible teaches.

That is what brings Glory to God and how God glorifies himself.

Sadly, God's name and character has become slighted by the doctrine that much of Calvinism has now evolved into. Can anyone remain standing and answer God for doing this? Human pride is indeed a wicked thing clothed in the robes of religion so much so that the finery worn is now confused as holy righteousness instead of the blindness it has become.
-
-
-

Boy. Talk about misinterpreting a position.

B.W., If you can go back through my posts and support one idea of the nonsense you just posted, I'll eat my words and recant.

You can't win debates by putting words in people's mouths.

BTW. Edwards and Spurgeon would shutter at your idea that God could change His mind. They were as hard determinists and abasers of "self" as I am, but you should already know that.

puritan lad wrote:Boy. Talk about misinterpreting a position.

B.W., If you can go back through my posts and support one idea of the nonsense you just posted, I'll eat my words and recant.

BTW. Edwards and Spurgeon would shutter at your idea that God could change His mind. They were as hard determinists and abasers of "self" as I am, but you should already know that.

Interesting — you are a hard determinist! However review Edward's life again and look for the source of his compassion. That is what I was referring too. What motivated Edwards and the others? Were they all just pre-wired to just quote and recite or did they have compassion? How were their affections stirred?

When I read Edwards, I see a man who loved God and showed compassion in many diverse ways. I do not know what you see; maybe just, sinners in the hands of an angry God? Even that sermon was given in love with great effect! What does the historical record state when he read that sermon — what was his tone and demeanor?

It is plain bible doctrine that states that humanity is unworthy to be saved and nothing we humans can do can save ourselves. God saved because of who and what he is. One reason the old awakening revivals died out was due to the extreme it swung towards an extreme self-abasement instead of focusing on God's love which provides the balance. Until then, the glory that once belonged to Calvinism will remain but a memory.

So again I ask - Why did God make us in his image and likeness? Does God hate himself? Did God place sin in Adam or was it found? Was Adam fallen before the fall or did sin enter the world through Adam after the fall?

Is God the author of sin and evil? Does the bible lie when it tells us God is not? How can God retain his integrity if he is not true to himself? How can he be sovereign if he cannot keep his own word?

What I read from your post is this that God does not, does not, need to be true to himself. So is that your position or did I misunderstand you?

I do not think I misinterpreted you but you seem to have portrayed God as a kind of Joseph Stalin figurehead. The Good old papa Joe! - The kindly old Tyrant! Is that what I am hearing from you? Is this true or did I miss something?
-
-
-

B.W.

I've made my case for Biblical Calvinism, using the Bible. You have responded with a bunch of emotional rhetoric and , quite frankly, false accusations.

You statement about God being a "kindly old tyrant" reminds me of the following quote from Spurgeon. Taks from it what you will

"Men will allow God to be everywhere except on his throne. They will allow him to be in his workshop to fashion worlds and to make stars. They will allow him to be in his almonry to dispense his alms and bestow his bounties. They will allow him to sustain the earth and bear up the pillars thereof, or light the lamps of heaven, or rule the waves of the ever-moving ocean; but when God ascends his throne, his creatures then gnash their teeth; and when we proclaim an enthroned God, and his right to do as he wills with his own, to dispose of his creatures as he thinks well, without consulting them in the matter, then it is that we are hissed and execrated, and then it is that men turn a deaf ear to us, for God on his throne is not the God they love. They love him anywhere better than they do when he sits with his scepter in his hand and his crown upon his head. But it is God upon the throne that we love to preach. It is God upon his throne whom we trust."

BTW, You know nothing of my compassion, but I don't seek to please you, so it doesn't matter.

When you come up with an argument that actually has some substance in it, let me know. Until then, I think this debate is over.

God Bless,

PL

puritan lad wrote:B.W.

I've made my case for Biblical Calvinism, using the Bible. You have responded with a bunch of emotional rhetoric and , quite frankly, false accusations.

You statement about God being a "kindly old tyrant" reminds me of the following quote from Spurgeon. Taks from it what you will

"Men will allow God to be everywhere except on his throne. They will allow him to be in his workshop to fashion worlds and to make stars. They will allow him to be in his almonry to dispense his alms and bestow his bounties. They will allow him to sustain the earth and bear up the pillars thereof, or light the lamps of heaven, or rule the waves of the ever-moving ocean; but when God ascends his throne, his creatures then gnash their teeth; and when we proclaim an enthroned God, and his right to do as he wills with his own, to dispose of his creatures as he thinks well, without consulting them in the matter, then it is that we are hissed and execrated, and then it is that men turn a deaf ear to us, for God on his throne is not the God they love. They love him anywhere better than they do when he sits with his scepter in his hand and his crown upon his head. But it is God upon the throne that we love to preach. It is God upon his throne whom we trust."

BTW, You know nothing of my compassion, but I don't seek to please you, so it doesn't matter.

When you come up with an argument that actually has some substance in it, let me know. Until then, I think this debate is over.

God Bless, PL

Unfortunately you have never answered Jac or me regarding the Calvinist free will — you believe in free will but how can it be free? Was it determined to be free?

Nor have you answered why God created us in his image and likeness? Also note that is okay for Spurgeon and Edwards to stir the affections and emotions but no one else?

I hope others can see how hard deterministic Calvinism stains the name and character of God into something he is not. My only prayer is for the lost doctrine concerning the love of God be restored to those that hold with aspiration such hard deterministic views.

If you really believe that I was exalting man by showing and demonstrating that God is not cold, aloof, and arbitrary then you missed the import of what I was saying. I hope I misunderstood regard this — you really believe God is cold, aloof, and arbitrary and are proud in defending this? You yourself used abusive language and made false assumptions about my position that God is not cold, aloof, and arbitrary. This cause me anger and I reponded in like kind. Forgive me of this.

God remains true to himself. If you are brave, you would study more on God's nature and character and gain insight into how he operates. This would destroy the dross that cover that branch of hard deterministic Calvinism you try dearly to defend. From your writings I can see clearly that you love Calvinism more than God. I hope that this really is not the case in your spiritual walk with the Lord.

The crux of the issue has been this — is God arbitrary in his selection of the elect or does God exercise a superior kind of knowledge that in essence proves he is God and true to himself that proves his glory beyond doubt. That he selects in a manner that is consistence with how he reveals himself from the bible. I showed you all this: Proof beyond doubt.

Hard deterministic Calvinism produce doubts and contradictions which are ignored by shouting God is Sovereign and does what He wills. OF COURSE GOD IS SOVEREIGN AND DOES WHAT HE WILLS. How does he do what he does and remain True to Himself is what that branch of hard deterministic Calvinism ignores.

I remember this statement from my Philosophy class:

Hard Determinist never change.

“Hard determinism has no place for the concept of moral responsibility since, obviously, we cannot be responsible for the actions and choices that were necessitated or forced to happen by conditions beyond our control… The very direct and frank rejection of moral responsibility by hard determinist leads many philosophers to find it unsatisfactory. Even many hard determinist find it unsettling to contemplate the abandoning of moral responsibility which hard determinism ultimate leads.” Quote from Appreciation of Philosophy by Prof Patrick McKess Ph,D.

God is bigger than Hard Determinism and more sovereign, more all powerful, and more all knowing than that. You cannot simplify God and place him a deterministic box. God is not a Hard Determinist for to be so would violate the very essence of who he is: God Almighty who does as he pleases. By picking, selecting, and scholastically interpreting chosen bible proof text you'll end up ignoring the other text that explain the matter more completely. Cults do this very well as loyalty is proved to be more based on man than on God.

It has always been in your discourses repeated over and over again what the Puritan Fathers said and how they interpret scripture and never what the bible reveals about who God really is. I rest my case.
-
-
-