Evidence for God from Science

domokunrox wrote:

RickD wrote:http://www.reformed.org/calvinism/index.html

Fine. Look at the according to Calvinism statement with my commentary in it

Salvation is accomplished by the almighty power of the triune God. (Ok so far)
The Father chose a people (How?),
the Son died for them (What is his name? Profess his name!),
the Holy Spirit makes Christ's (Who? Is his name Jesus? or just Christ?) death effective by bringing the elect to faith and repentance, thereby causing them to willingly obey the Gospel. (Connect the 2 bolded and underlined setences. You cannot MAKE ANYONE WILLING obey the gospel!!! I am not the only one who sees this, right? We need to hear the gospel, believe it, repent, confess Jesus is our savior, and be baptized!)
The entire process (Yes, the ENTIRE process!) (election, redemption, regeneration) is the work of God and is by grace alone. Thus God (Just God), not man (Yes, not you! Even if you believed the gospel and want to be saved!), determines who will be the recipients of the gift of salvation. (Wonderful! Looks like a great prospect. Where do I sign up?! There isn't a sign up sheet?!)

You call that a commentary?

Dom, did God foreknow you'd be saved?

Danny, You have homework before you even continue any dialog with me

First you need to read this
(NASB)Genesis 2:16-17
The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; [17] but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."

(NASB)2 Corinthians 9:7
Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

(NASB)Philemon 1:14
but without your consent I did not want to do anything, so that your goodness would not be, in effect, by compulsion but of your own free will.

(NASB)Revelation 22:17
The Spirit and the bride say, "Come " And let the one who hears say, "Come " And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who wishes take the water of life without cost.

(NASB)1 Peter 2:16
Act as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but use it as bondslaves of God.

(NASB)1 Corinthians 2:12
Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God,

(NASB)Exodus 13:17
Now when Pharaoh had let the people go, God did not lead them by the way of the land of the Philistines, even though it was near; for God said, "The people might change their minds when they see war, and return to Egypt."

(NASB)Jeremiah 23:21-22
"I did not send these prophets, But they ran. I did not speak to them, But they prophesied. [22] "But if they had stood in My council, Then they would have announced My words to My people, And would have turned them back from their evil way And from the evil of their deeds.

Have a response to the obvious fact that God gave us free will.

THEN

Watch Norman Geisler's presentation.

Unless you do that. Don't even bother.

Dom, did God foreknow you'd be saved?

God Foreknew he would offer me loving grace and salvation.
I however need to respond to his offer.

Its sort of like God sent me a settlement offer for my debt.

Paul,
You're probably wondering why I sent you this letter. Its because I love you and all of mankind.
This is a settlement for the payment of your sins. I sent my only begotten son Jesus Christ to earth to pay your debt.
The settlement is very simple, Paul. My word is being professed in the world through the works of Jesus Christ. I need you to follow it so that you can accept the settlement offer. Please refer to his teachings. Here is the first steps.

1. Hear the gospel
2. Believe it
3. Repent of your sins
4. Confess that Jesus is your lord and savior
5. Be baptized

After that, please continue to refer to teachings on how to live your new life.
I do accept any new debts you do occur in your lifetime. But please make sure you get that settled with me in a timely fashion before your life is over. You can contact me at any time. I'm listening.

Thank you

domokunrox wrote:Danny, You have homework before you even continue any dialog with me

First you need to read this
(NASB)Genesis 2:16-17
The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; [17] but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."

(NASB)2 Corinthians 9:7
Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

(NASB)Philemon 1:14
but without your consent I did not want to do anything, so that your goodness would not be, in effect, by compulsion but of your own free will.

(NASB)Revelation 22:17
The Spirit and the bride say, "Come " And let the one who hears say, "Come " And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who wishes take the water of life without cost.

(NASB)1 Peter 2:16
Act as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but use it as bondslaves of God.

(NASB)1 Corinthians 2:12
Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God,

(NASB)Exodus 13:17
Now when Pharaoh had let the people go, God did not lead them by the way of the land of the Philistines, even though it was near; for God said, "The people might change their minds when they see war, and return to Egypt."

(NASB)Jeremiah 23:21-22
"I did not send these prophets, But they ran. I did not speak to them, But they prophesied. [22] "But if they had stood in My council, Then they would have announced My words to My people, And would have turned them back from their evil way And from the evil of their deeds.

Have a response to the obvious fact that God gave us free will.

THEN

Watch Norman Geisler's presentation.

Unless you do that. Don't even bother.

Dom, did God foreknow you'd be saved?

God Foreknew he would offer me loving grace and salvation.
I however need to respond to his offer.

Its sort of like God sent me a settlement offer for my debt.

Paul,
You're probably wondering why I sent you this letter. Its because I love you and all of mankind.
This is a settlement for the payment of your sins. I sent my only begotten son Jesus Christ to earth to pay your debt.
The settlement is very simple, Paul. My word is being professed in the world through the works of Jesus Christ. I need you to follow it so that you can accept the settlement offer. Please refer to his teachings. Here is the first steps.

1. Hear the gospel
2. Believe it
3. Repent of your sins
4. Confess that Jesus is your lord and savior
5. Be baptized

After that, please continue to refer to teachings on how to live your new life.
I do accept any new debts you do occur in your lifetime. But please make sure you get that settled with me in a timely fashion before your life is over. You can contact me at any time. I'm listening.

Thank you

Honestly this is getting really tiresome. Dom, either interact with some measure of respect and humility like a Christian should or I can assure you your titles are not the only things that will be edited. We all can see your zeal for the faith and I bet we can all benefit from your knowledge but you are going about it all wrong brother, I hope and pray you see that.

Byblos, he said I was "full of empty rhetoric".

If I tell him to read the verses I cite and to watch the video to discuss the MAIN TOPIC here, thats FAIR.

If he refuses, I can't do anything. How else do you want me to respond? Anyone else?

If you guys want me to tone it down. Tell me how, cause I have no idea how much I can tone it down without being able to get a real point across.
Go ahead. If someone has a problem. Please send me a sample via PM on how to respond to Danny here.

domokunrox wrote:Byblos, he said I was "full of empty rhetoric".

If I tell him to read the verses I cite and to watch the video to discuss the MAIN TOPIC here, thats FAIR.

If he refuses, I can't do anything. How else do you want me to respond? Anyone else?

If you guys want me to tone it down. Tell me how, cause I have no idea how much I can tone it down without being able to get a real point across.
Go ahead. If someone has a problem. Please send me a sample via PM on how to respond to Danny here.

It's not the specifics Dom, it's the tone, the snide and sarcastic remarks, the attitude that if we don't agree that somehow we 're not apologetic, philosophical, intellectual enough to get it or we're not even trying. Neither I nor Danny or anyone else, for that matter, have an issue with you asking Danny for clarification (I will let him respond to that). The manner in which you ask or interact is the issue I am having.

Also, I do not deny any form of predestination from God, Danny. I accept it. I do not accept your definition of it.

Dom, I don't know where Danny told us his definition of "predestination". Can you quote where he said his definition?

What do you think about the bible quotes? Most importantly the fact that God told Adam and Eve that they were free to eat of ANY tree, but warned and commanded to not eat from the tree of knowledge of good and evil? And they had the CHOICE to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.

I think the bible quotes, when taken in context, allow my definition of predestination to be biblically sound. And, I'm sure Calvinists say the same. That's why there are different "isms" within the Church of Christ. The key word being, "within". Meaning, IMO, someone's view of predestination doesn't necessarily make him a heretic.

God DID NOT predestine that Adam and Eve disobey him. That would make God evil. You see that, right?

Dom, I don't hold to the same view of predestination that Calvinism holds to. I'll say it again. I believe this kind of predestination, is more like foreknowledge. When God predestines some to eternal life, I believe God knew who would accept the gospel, and be born again. While I see what you're saying about that making God evil, I honestly don't know if I would go that far.

the Son died for them (What is his name? Profess his name!),
the Holy Spirit makes Christ's (Who? Is his name Jesus? or just Christ?)

I really don't see a problem here. Many of us use Christ, and Jesus interchangeably.

You cannot MAKE ANYONE WILLING obey the gospel!!! I am not the only one who sees this, right? We need to hear the gospel, believe it, repent, confess Jesus is our savior, and be baptized!)

Dom, I believe once a person is sealed with the Holy Spirit, he is eternally secure in Christ. But, what if I don't want to follow Christ anymore? This is where the Holy Spirit "makes" me transform to the image of Christ. It is by God's power, that we are transformed. I see Calvinists saying something similar. In Calvinism, those that God predestined had the Holy Spirit inside them, to allow them to accept the gospel. So the Holy Spirit inside them, is" making" them willing to choose the gospel. I don't see such a huge divide.

1. Hear the gospel
2. Believe it
3. Repent of your sins
4. Confess that Jesus is your lord and savior
5. Be baptized

There are plenty of Christians who would call this system you posted, a religion of works. Many believe baptism by water is a symbol of the baptism believers have in Christ, when we become born-again. Not something necessary for salvation.

domokunrox wrote:Danny, You have homework before you even continue any dialog with me.

LOL. Homework, Dom? I’m afraid not, old son.

domokunrox wrote: First you need to read this
(NASB)Genesis 2:16-17
The LORD God commanded the man, saying, "From any tree of the garden you may eat freely; [17] but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."

(NASB)2 Corinthians 9:7
Each one must do just as he has purposed in his heart, not grudgingly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.

(NASB)Philemon 1:14
but without your consent I did not want to do anything, so that your goodness would not be, in effect, by compulsion but of your own free will.

(NASB)Revelation 22:17
The Spirit and the bride say, "Come " And let the one who hears say, "Come " And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who wishes take the water of life without cost.

(NASB)1 Peter 2:16
Act as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but use it as bondslaves of God.

(NASB)1 Corinthians 2:12
Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God,

(NASB)Exodus 13:17
Now when Pharaoh had let the people go, God did not lead them by the way of the land of the Philistines, even though it was near; for God said, "The people might change their minds when they see war, and return to Egypt."

(NASB)Jeremiah 23:21-22
"I did not send these prophets, But they ran. I did not speak to them, But they prophesied. [22] "But if they had stood in My council, Then they would have announced My words to My people, And would have turned them back from their evil way And from the evil of their deeds.

Have a response to the obvious fact that God gave us free will.

My response is, Lovely. So, you are quoting Scripture in support of free will. I take it you mean absolute free will, and that we can come to God of our own will? You have big problems with this, Dom.

Ps. 33:10-11

The LORD bringeth the counsel of the heathen to nought: he maketh the devices of the people of none effect.

11The counsel of the LORD standeth for ever, the thoughts of his heart to all generations.

Ecclesiastes 7:20

For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not.

John 1:12-13

But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

13Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

John 3:27

John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven.

John 6:44

No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

John 15:5

I am the vine; you are the branches. If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.

John 15:16

You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit— fruit that will last. Then the Father will give you whatever you ask in my name.

Romans 3:10-12

There is no-one righteous, not even one;

11 there is no-one who understands, no-one who seeks God.

12 All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no-one who does good, not even one.

Romans 5:6

You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly.

Romans 7:18-19

I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out.

19 For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do— this I keep on doing.

Romans 8:7

the sinful mind is hostile to God. It does not submit to God's law, nor can it do so.

Romans 8:8

Those controlled by the sinful nature cannot please God.

Looks bad, don’t it?

Romans 8:9

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.

It is by God’s eternal grace that you even have the freedom of the will to come to Christ, Dom!

Romans 9:16

It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy.

I could go on and on with the Scriptures, by the way.

THEN

Watch Norman Geisler's presentation.

Unless you do that. Don't even bother.

Why? I’ve heard it all before and even held a similar position. I don’t have the time right now to start watching presentations. Bring something new and profound to the table and we’ll kick the idea around a little.

Dom, did God foreknow you'd be saved?

domokunrox wrote:God Foreknew he would offer me loving grace and salvation.
I however need to respond to his offer.

You’re not answering the question, Dom. Did God foreknow your response? Did God foreknow you would be saved?

domokunrox wrote:Its sort of like God sent me a settlement offer for my debt.

Paul,
You're probably wondering why I sent you this letter. Its because I love you and all of mankind.
This is a settlement for the payment of your sins. I sent my only begotten son Jesus Christ to earth to pay your debt.
The settlement is very simple, Paul. My word is being professed in the world through the works of Jesus Christ. I need you to follow it so that you can accept the settlement offer. Please refer to his teachings. Here is the first steps.

1. Hear the gospel
2. Believe it
3. Repent of your sins
4. Confess that Jesus is your lord and savior
5. Be baptized

Dom, you just are not getting it. Where’s God in all this?

domokunrox wrote:After that, please continue to refer to teachings on how to live your new life.
I do accept any new debts you do occur in your lifetime. But please make sure you get that settled with me in a timely fashion before your life is over. You can contact me at any time. I'm listening.

Dom, sorry, but this is all babble. Thankfully our Lord made it a lot clearer.

domokunrox wrote:August,
Norman is an apologetic and philosopher. If he doesn't even do his job as you say, then he is just a plain hack. If this is what you are affirming then you are doing nothing but an ad hominem attack.
The philosophical face value of Calvinism is something he has thought about. He understands reformed faith. Just saying he doesn't understand does not refute his position. That's not even a rebuttal. He is a philosopher and its his job to point out truths and expose falsehood wherever it clearly is. Do you object? Go ahead and make your point.

You obviously did not bother to carefully read what I said. If you want me to copy everything that shows how Geisler misrepresents the reformed faith here, then I will do that. Did you miss the part where I said I have studied all of his theological work, in some detail, all 4 volumes of his Systematic Theology? And his book "Chosen But Free"? And the exegetical responses to it? You pride yourself on logic and philosophy, yet you see fit to fling about non-sequitors all the time.

If Geisler understands the reformed faith (your words), then he chooses to misrepresent it. That does make him dishonest...yet he refuses to debate any reformed theologian about it.

I will make my point when there is some indication that you are not being intellectually dishonest, and actually provide an argument of your own. You have provided no arguments, just a link to a video with no commentary or analysis of your own.

For example, on pg 69-70 of CBF, Geisler uses a story to describe how the "Calvinist God" is someone who "forces himself on others in violation of their integrity". His conclusion is not supported by quoting any reformed scholar or theologian, nor is it remotely consistent with what reformed theology teaches. His whole book is full of such unsupported poptheo nonsense.

Also, BASIC ELEMENTARY philosophy from NO particular person has drawn me to this conclusion of "Devine rape"

Then why do you link to Geisler, and not present your own case?

However God does not do this, correct? Otherwise, you see how Echoside slid right in and saw that you just validated naturalism?

I thought you knew "BASIC ELEMENTARY philosophy". If you did you would have been able to recognize that Echoside made a gross category error in his objection, and as such, is not even an interesting objection.

Anyhow, Norman described Calvinism. Can anyone describe 5 point Calvinism differently then he has? Feel free to do so. Just make sure you watch his presentation first

Again, did you miss the part where I told you I have seen Geisler's work in some detail? I also watched his presentation and it is more of the same. However, how do you know he is right? Where is your study and exegesis to support him? You have posted the same few prooftexts over and over without a word of exegesis, hermeneutical assumptions (which by the way is another subject Geisler seems to struggle with) or even just a commentary. Yet you want everyone else to make cases etc?

In addition, why don't you lay out your version of the ordo salutis here, along with your Scriptural defense of it?

Salvation is accomplished by the almighty power of the triune God. (Ok so far)
The Father chose a people (How?),
the Son died for them (What is his name? Profess his name!),
the Holy Spirit makes Christ's (Who? Is his name Jesus? or just Christ?) death effective by bringing the elect to faith and repentance, thereby causing them to willingly obey the Gospel. (Connect the 2 bolded and underlined setences. You cannot MAKE ANYONE WILLING obey the gospel!!! I am not the only one who sees this, right? We need to hear the gospel, believe it, repent, confess Jesus is our savior, and be baptized!)
The entire process (Yes, the ENTIRE process!) (election, redemption, regeneration) is the work of God and is by grace alone. Thus God (Just God), not man (Yes, not you! Even if you believed the gospel and want to be saved!), determines who will be the recipients of the gift of salvation. (Wonderful! Looks like a great prospect. Where do I sign up?! There isn't a sign up sheet?!)

That is your commentary? Objections to semantics?

Dom, please let me clarify. I and nobody else here wants to stifle you. But you have so far been piling on the rhetoric and given little substance. I used to do the same thing, and no doubt I can still do this. But you need to just take a breath and then formulate some kind of an argument which a. has taken into account the position it’s attacking and b. gives a coherent argument against it. Job done, Brother.

God bless

Wow, unbelievable.

I have one person here. Rick who is actually engaged in the topic.

Then I have 2 others who flat out REFUSE to watch the presentation with any kind of open mind.
One is citing that he has read Norman writings and thus doesn't need to listen because its likely not new to him
The other is just plain philosophically confused, and just seems like unwilling to have an honest intellectual workout with what Norman is presenting.

Gentlemen, I cannot do ANY dialogue that is remotely helpful in any way if YOU DO NOT listen to what the apologetic says. It simply cannot be done, guys.

In short, Norman's view on Christian exclusivity in the manner of Calvinism, is that its philosophical implications are NOT REASONABLE, LOGICAL, OR POSSIBLE when you read the bible in COMPLETE CONTEXT.

I have read a few more of Danny's posts elsewhere on this recently hot topic around here, but it still does not fix the philosophical implications it presents.

Danny, I understand that you have taken the view of what is known as "soft determinism" but that STILL does not fix the philosophical problem. You present it as what we would call "inclination". You may think it works, but it really doesn't on philosophical grounds.

As a philosopher, and my studies on the views of other Christian philosophers. I can tell you with full confidence that we all reject your view outright. God is the very basis of Logic and Reason, so any view in which you present that God has deceived us with a FAKE free will is automatically DQed. There is basically a 0% chance that you can sell this idea of FAKE free will to anyone who is philosophically equipped.

You know why? Because God will never go against LOGIC and REASON. Its impossible because we understand on a philosophical level the personal nature of God as a COMPLETE TRUTHBEARING SUPREME BEING.

So, let's go ahead and temporarily leave this thread for the time being. It seems as though I am going to have to create some other thread with more basic doctrine because this is probably TOO advanced for this board at this point in time.

Rick, you made some interesting comments. I will address those with some basic threads. You guys will all like those ones more, then we can come back to this topic.

domokunrox wrote:So, let's go ahead and temporarily leave this thread for the time being. It seems as though I am going to have to create some other thread with more basic doctrine because this is probably TOO advanced for this board at this point in time.

This is exactly what I'm talking about Dom. Seriously, how old are you really? You say you're a philosopher but you display the temperament of a teenager. All you offer is someone else's work, not your own, engage in ad homonyms, argue nothing but strawmen, then proclaim yourself simply too smart for everyone around you. If you actually have an argument to make then please state it rather than post a link to someone else's work. Otherwise I agree with you, it would be best that you stay away from this thread until such time that you grow up and actually have a sound argument to present.

domokunrox wrote:Rick, you made some interesting comments. I will address those with some basic threads. You guys will all like those ones more, then we can come back to this topic.

Dom, please do not start any other threads until such time that you decide to meaningfully engage in this one.

Byblos, relax. We're going to move on.

Dom, this is getting tiresome. Firstly, you are just flat out lying now:

Then I have 2 others who flat out REFUSE to watch the presentation with any kind of open mind.
One is citing that he has read Norman writings and thus doesn't need to listen because its likely not new to him

Again, did you miss the part where I told you I have seen Geisler's work in some detail? I also watched his presentation and it is more of the same.

Secondly, even if I did not watch the Geisler video, are you saying that in that video of 60 minutes, there are substanitally different arguments than in his 4 volumes of Systematic Theology and his book "Chosen But Free"? Does he contradict himself? Does he offer any new arguments that he did not already present in written form?

Gentlemen, I cannot do ANY dialogue that is remotely helpful in any way if YOU DO NOT listen to what the apologetic says. It simply cannot be done, guys.

No, what cannot be done is engage and move forward if you do not put forth any argument except some vague assertions, and refuse to respond to any points put forward by people who disagree with you. And then you want to talk about an "open mind"?

In short, Norman's view on Christian exclusivity in the manner of Calvinism, is that its philosophical implications are NOT REASONABLE, LOGICAL, OR POSSIBLE when you read the bible in COMPLETE CONTEXT.

And Norman is wrong because he either doesn't understand, or chooses to misrepresent Calvinism. Furthermore, Geisler starts with philosophical assumptions, and then attempts to justify and interpret those back into Scripture, as opposed to starting with Scripture.

So, let's go ahead and temporarily leave this thread for the time being. It seems as though I am going to have to create some other thread with more basic doctrine because this is probably TOO advanced for this board at this point in time.

That is laughable, to say the least. You have not presented a single argument, just assertions, you have not engaged with anything here, and now you want to just leave it? It's time to put up. You know nothing about us, yet you want to state that it is too advanced? That "As a philosopher, and my studies on the views of other Christian philosophers. I can tell you with full confidence that we all reject your view outright." That is simply false, and again you provide no source or argument, just an assertion. In addition, you are fallaciously arguing ad verecundiam, and have been since the first time you brought up Geisler.

Hi Guys

Here is my two cents. I for one do not believe in Predestination - although I appreciate the arguements put forward from scripture - although some of them can be interpretated differently - such as the expression "Apart from me you can do nothing" - is to me a figure of speech - it does not literally mean that we cannot do nothing - just anything of real significant IMHO.

This concept of Freewill ties is closely to whether you believe the universe functions under a A theory or B Theory of time. If it is A then God cannot know who will choose Christ. As the future does not exist yet - however I am sure he can predict with almost 99.9999999999999% accuracy what we would choose from his middle knowledge - but this is a prediction and not an influencing factor on our choice. If you believe in a staic B theory of time where all moments of time exist simultaneously and all that changes is our perspective on it then God will know what we will choose and will probably have more of an influence on our choices.

On a more logical front - how can you coincide an All Loving God with one who chooses from the start who to save and allow some people no option. We would have been better not to have existed in the first place - if our entire purpose is to suffer damnation for all eternity. That strikes me as down right evil and is not a God I would like to worship.

Silvertusk.