ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 1

Status
Not open for further replies.

elected4ever

New member
Clete said:
This is true, however, it does not contradict what Pastor Hill is saying. You've simply changed the definition of the word 'sin'. One might could argue about which definition is more Biblical but there can be no debate over which is more commonly understood. Saying things like "we do not sin" is more confusing than it is worth. The only time saying such a thing is valid is when you take the time to make the distinctions you've made about what it means to "sin". In my view, it makes more sense to avoid that needless battle and present the Christian message in the vernacular needed to convey the message clearly to the audience at hand, all of whom are going to think the word "sin" means to do something that you shouldn't.

Resting in Him,
Clete
Sense when is it better to tell the word that that sin is just an act instead of what it is, a condition.? A condition that man can do nothing about but that Jesus addressed with His life that we may receive life and not death. To me confining sin to just an act is self serving and leads to a false humility and self gloating.
 

elected4ever

New member
Clete said:
This is true, however, it does not contradict what Pastor Hill is saying. You've simply changed the definition of the word 'sin'. One might could argue about which definition is more Biblical but there can be no debate over which is more commonly understood. Saying things like "we do not sin" is more confusing than it is worth. The only time saying such a thing is valid is when you take the time to make the distinctions you've made about what it means to "sin". In my view, it makes more sense to avoid that needless battle and present the Christian message in the vernacular needed to convey the message clearly to the audience at hand, all of whom are going to think the word "sin" means to do something that you shouldn't.

Resting in Him,
Clete
Sense when is it better to tell the word that that sin is just an act instead of what it is, a condition? A condition that man can do nothing about but that Jesus addressed with His life that we may receive life and not death. To me confining sin to just an act is self serving and leads to a false humility and self gloating.
 

lee_merrill

New member
patman said:
I feel it is useless to address and discuss your other points in great detail because you will never see my points without considering context, and without truly understanding the stories of the Bible.
But the context of Job is that God afflicted him, everyone says this, from first to last, even knowing that that Chaldeans and Sabeans took away, Job says "the Lord took away," and Scripture says "the trouble the Lord brought on him." The problem with the context is that it's all saying that--the Lord did this. So your argument proves the point.

Now "truly understanding the stories of the Bible" means Patman's view? This seems a bit much, for we must wait thousands of years until Open Theists and Patman appear to tell us we have all been misunderstanding all this time?

It would seem a substantial burden of proof is required by those who claim all the people before them have been wrong, and they are the only ones, who now see the true meaning of the Bible here.

Lee, the fact that God made Job repent about what he said should tell you that Job spoke sin. Anything Job had to say you should take with a grain of salt.
God did say "Job spoke of me what is right." You see, you really do miss important points in this account.

Elihu was the only speaker in Job God found no fault with. And It would be good for you to realize Elihu was rebuking Job for his sinful talk.
And he also clearly implied God afflicted Job. Here again you ignore plain statements, and insist that I am the one who needs to read it.

If you can't see that, you need to re-read the book. You probably need to re-read everything.
I admit that when I read "the Lord took away," I think it means the Lord took away, every time I read "the trouble the Lord brought on him," I consider it as saying the Lord brought this trouble on Job.

You never did give me a satisfactory answer as to why God had no agency in what happened to Job, when he removed the hedge. You see, this is very plain, God acted, and Job was afflicted at least partly because of this, even according to the Open View, and this is undeniable.

Yet you continually deny it, and this is grievous, this opens the path to serious error, for example, some Open Theists here are now denying that God is omnipotent.

Blessings,
Lee
 

Philetus

New member
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clete

This is true, however, it does not contradict what Pastor Hill is saying. You've simply changed the definition of the word 'sin'. One might could argue about which definition is more Biblical but there can be no debate over which is more commonly understood. Saying things like "we do not sin" is more confusing than it is worth. The only time saying such a thing is valid is when you take the time to make the distinctions you've made about what it means to "sin". In my view, it makes more sense to avoid that needless battle and present the Christian message in the vernacular needed to convey the message clearly to the audience at hand, all of whom are going to think the word "sin" means to do something that you shouldn't.

Resting in Him,
Clete


Quote:
Originally Posted by Elected4Ever

Sense when is it better to tell the word that that sin is just an act instead of what it is, a condition.? A condition that man can do nothing about but that Jesus addressed with His life that we may receive life and not death. To me confining sin to just an act is self serving and leads to a false humility and self gloating.

Low, and behold … I think you are both right!
The danger is over emphasis of either pole.
When we Christians say we don't sin, the world doesn't get it. They 'know' better.
When we say we sin but don't have to, the world doesn't get it either. It sounds like we can sin intentionally without consequences. What Bob Hill said of evangelism is true of living a holy life as well. The law and fear of God motivates, while for the believer the love of God is the best deterrent from sin. I don’t sin because I don’t want to. I don’t have to. In Christ, I'm not a sinner, I'm a 'saint'. The 'condition' has changed. But sometimes I forget that.


1 John 1 and 2 (KJV)
6If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:
7But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
8If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
9If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
10If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

1My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
2And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
 

elected4ever

New member
Philetus said:
Low, and behold … I think you are both right!
The danger is over emphasis of either pole.
When we Christians say we don't sin, the world doesn't get it. They 'know' better.
When we say we sin but don't have to, the world doesn't get it either. It sounds like we can sin intentionally without consequences. What Bob Hill said of evangelism is true of living a holy life as well. The law and fear of God motivates, while for the believer the love of God is the best deterrent from sin. I don’t sin because I don’t want to. I don’t have to. In Christ, I'm not a sinner, I'm a 'saint'. The 'condition' has changed. But sometimes I forget that.


1 John 1 and 2 (KJV)
6If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:
7But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
8If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
9If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
10If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

1My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
2And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
Tell me the name of one Christian who says that they have never sinned. A prerequisite for being saved is that you must first be lost. If we do not believe that we were sinners then we would never have been saved. We have passed from the darkness (sin & death) into Christ (Life & peace). Sin is not what you do but who you are. Righteousness is who you are not what you do.
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
elected4ever said:
It does not matter what your congregation thinks or what you and i think. God the Father says we don't. It is the testimony of Apostle John and of the Apostle Paul that says we don't. If we believe what the scripture says about us then we cannot be sinners and therefore do not sin and do not even have the capacity to sin


Will not is not the same as cannot. Paul and John also recognized our potential struggle or lapse with sin and God's provision in that case. They also gave us keys to victory, but not everyone yields to the Spirit or makes obedient choices.
 

patman

Active member
lee_merrill said:
But the context of Job is that God afflicted him, everyone says this, from first to last, even knowing that that Chaldeans and Sabeans took away, Job says "the Lord took away," and Scripture says "the trouble the Lord brought on him." The problem with the context is that it's all saying that--the Lord did this. So your argument proves the point.

Now "truly understanding the stories of the Bible" means Patman's view? This seems a bit much, for we must wait thousands of years until Open Theists and Patman appear to tell us we have all been misunderstanding all this time?

It would seem a substantial burden of proof is required by those who claim all the people before them have been wrong, and they are the only ones, who now see the true meaning of the Bible here.


God did say "Job spoke of me what is right." You see, you really do miss important points in this account.


And he also clearly implied God afflicted Job. Here again you ignore plain statements, and insist that I am the one who needs to read it.


I admit that when I read "the Lord took away," I think it means the Lord took away, every time I read "the trouble the Lord brought on him," I consider it as saying the Lord brought this trouble on Job.

You never did give me a satisfactory answer as to why God had no agency in what happened to Job, when he removed the hedge. You see, this is very plain, God acted, and Job was afflicted at least partly because of this, even according to the Open View, and this is undeniable.

Yet you continually deny it, and this is grievous, this opens the path to serious error, for example, some Open Theists here are now denying that God is omnipotent.

Blessings,
Lee

:bang:

Lee, you cloud the issues. WHO cares, besides you, who said God brought the trouble upon Job when it is humans who are saying it? Everyone in the book of Job who said this was wrong. God called all to repent of it.

And This sums your view of scripture up:

Lee: God did say "Job spoke of me what is right." You see, you really do miss important points in this account.

Why you ask? Because again you make a really bad point without understanding or taking into consideration the context.

Job did right ONLY BECAUSE HE REPENTED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And exactly what did he repent of?

SAYING GOD BRINGS DISASTER ON THE INNOCENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You simply prove me right lee. Your problem is one of understanding context. And you equate Job's word with Gods (even when realizing Job was asked to repent).

God said Satan did it. If Job said God did it, he was simply wrong. Not sinning (YET) but wrong.
 

Bob Hill

TOL Subscriber
Why is it that God describes and cautions through Paul that Christians can sin but shouldn't?

Rom 6:1,2 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?
Rom 6:11-14 Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord. 12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. 13 And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.
Rom 7:23-25 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. 24 O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25 I thank God - through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.
1 Cor 6:17,18 But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him. 18 Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body.
1 Cor 8:10-12 For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating in an idol’s temple, will not the conscience of him who is weak be emboldened to eat those things offered to idols? 11 And because of your knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? 12 But when you thus sin against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ.
1 Cor 15:33,34 Do not be deceived: “Evil company corrupts good habits.” 34 Awake to righteousness, and do not sin; for some do not have the knowledge of God. I speak this to your shame.
Eph 4:26,27 Be angry, and do not sin”: do not let the sun go down on your wrath, 27 nor give place to the devil.

In Christ,
Bob Hill
 

elected4ever

New member
Bob Hill said:
Why is it that God describes and cautions through Paul that Christians can sin but shouldn't?

Rom 6:1,2 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?
Rom 6:11-14 Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord. 12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. 13 And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace.
Rom 7:23-25 But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. 24 O wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25 I thank God - through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.
1 Cor 6:17,18 But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him. 18 Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body.
1 Cor 8:10-12 For if anyone sees you who have knowledge eating in an idol’s temple, will not the conscience of him who is weak be emboldened to eat those things offered to idols? 11 And because of your knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? 12 But when you thus sin against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, you sin against Christ.
1 Cor 15:33,34 Do not be deceived: “Evil company corrupts good habits.” 34 Awake to righteousness, and do not sin; for some do not have the knowledge of God. I speak this to your shame.
Eph 4:26,27 Be angry, and do not sin”: do not let the sun go down on your wrath, 27 nor give place to the devil.

In Christ,
Bob Hill
Excellent question Bob Romans 6:1 is a rhetorical question. Paul is not saying that we continue in sin but in light of the truth just spoken of in chapter 5 why would anyone continue in sin when by grace that is freely given through Jesus Christ is so freely available. If one continues in sin then they have not received the grace so freely offered. If we have received that grace so freely offered then, "How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it?" it is impossible for those who have received grace to continue in sin.

The flesh nature of a man was not changed. The old flesh nature is of the first Adam. That nature is dead in sin and was never redeemed but it was robed of its power to control the body. The flesh nature, that nature of the first Adam, no longer has dominion or ruler-ship over the body and is indeed dead to the life that is now hid in Christ. Notice that Paul did not say that that the flesh nature is dead to the body but he did say that it was dead to our new life in Christ. Death has no control over the life that God has placed within us.

There has now been a battleground set up in our mind and in our body. My I remind you that the flesh nature of man is in sin even after salvation is come. The nature of the old man did not change. It still opposes God and seeks its own pleasure. That has not changed, but Paul says that is not who we are any more.

Romans 8:9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.
10 ¶And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

The righteous nature of God the father is now in us. That nature is Spiritual and not of the flesh and it is that Spirit that speaks to our hearts of the righteous will of God for our lives. That Spirit gives unction and ability for the body to do the righteous will of God.
12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.

The reason I say that we are not sinners is because we are not of the flesh but of the Spirit. That is not to say that the flesh has ceased to operate in the same body. The body is but a dwelling place that houses two opposing forces. One is of the flesh and is sinful and actively opposes God. The other is the Spirit that is born of God and of His seed and cannot sin. It is the righteousness of God. It is who we are and if we do not have that Spirit we do not belone to God.

Does the flesh sin? Yes it does but that is not who I am and that is not who the Children of God are. I see no reason to accept the actions of another as my own. The action of others can effect my body but the action of others cannot change who I am or who you are. As Christ is so are we in this world.

1 John 4:13 Hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit.
14 ¶And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world.
15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God.
16 And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him.
17 ¶Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world.
 

Bob Hill

TOL Subscriber
elected4ever,

This is my last exchange with you. Instead of reading and listening to the Bible, you attempt to change it every time, to the point that a person would wonder what your original source was.

Why is it that God cautions through Paul that Christians can sin but shouldn't? :noway:

Rom 6:1,2 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin (Why ask if they couldn't?) that grace may abound? 2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? :noway:

Rom 6:11-14 Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord. 12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. 13 And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, (Why give a command that is not needed?) but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace. :noway:

1 Cor 6:17,18 But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him. 18 Flee sexual immorality (Why give a command if they don't do it?) Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body. :noway:

1 Cor 15:33,34 Do not be deceived: “Evil company corrupts good habits.” 34 Awake to righteousness, and do not sin; (Why tell them, "do not sin" if they don't sin?) for some do not have the knowledge of God. I speak this to your shame. :noway:

Eph 4:26,27 Be angry, and do not sin: (Again, why tell them, "do not sin" if they don't sin?) do not let the sun go down on your wrath, 27 nor give place to the devil. :noway:

Bob Hill
 

godrulz

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
elected does not understand the immediate and remote context and the historical background of the books/passages that he is proof texting for his preconceived theology. A basic course in hermeneutics/exegesis would help him and us.
 

lee_merrill

New member
patman said:
WHO cares, besides you, who said God brought the trouble upon Job when it is humans who are saying it?
But this statement is by Scripture itself, not by a person.

Job 42:11 They comforted and consoled him over all the trouble the Lord had brought upon him, and each one gave him a piece of silver and a gold ring.

Everyone in the book of Job who said this was wrong. God called all to repent of it.
That is not true, though, God does not contradict anyone who says he did it.

Lee: God did say "Job spoke of me what is right." You see, you really do miss important points in this account.

Patman: ... again you make a really bad point without understanding or taking into consideration the context.

Job did right ONLY BECAUSE HE REPENTED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
No, you see, "you did not speak of me what was right" refers to the prior speeches of Job's friends, so then "as Job did" refers to the prior speeches of Job--and this comes from the context.

And exactly what did he repent of?

SAYING GOD BRINGS DISASTER ON THE INNOCENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
But what did Job say? "I despise myself" (not my views) Job is saying he is not worthy, that he is not righteous before God, even though he was a righteous man:

Job 9:15 Though I were innocent, I could not answer him; I could only plead with my Judge for mercy.

And this he did.

Also, Job said: "I know that you can do all things; no plan of yours can be thwarted" (Job 42:2).

This would imply that God had a plan here! Thus this is the hand of God, as everyone has been saying all along, and Job said God's plan is never thwarted--this would have in view what happened to Job--and God said "That's right."

God's good purpose was accomplished, with Job, as with Paul, as with Jesus, in Job's trials which refined him and showed he did not serve God as a mercenary, in Paul's thorn which kept him humble, as in the cross which brought salvation.

God said Satan did it. If Job said God did it, he was simply wrong. Not sinning (YET) but wrong.
Yet unwitting blasphemy is a sin, Paul had to be forgiven for this.

God also said the Sabeans did some of this, so then who did took away Job's oxen and donkeys? Satan, or the Sabeans?

Blessings,
Lee

P.S. And you have not yet made clear to me how God had no agency in what happened to Job, when he took down the hedge around him.
 
Last edited:

Bob Hill

TOL Subscriber
There are a number of names that we could have as Open Theists. I remember when I first learned of this view of God and His relationship to mankind. At first, it was hard to think that the future actions of men under the law of freedom were unknowable to God.

There were a few things in the O.T. that really seemed to show that God did not know what would happen before it happened. The first eye opener for me was in Gen 22:12 And He said, “Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.

That was bad or good enough to realize that the Bible presented events about God when He thought or said something would happen, and it did not happen. For instance, God predicted something would happen according to Jer 3:7, ‘She will return to Me!’ But she did not return”.

When I asked my superiors about these passages, I got poor answers and sometimes, emotional responses. I was very surprised. But, the more I studied it in God’s Word, the more true it seemed.

It wasn’t until I got my Greek at college that I began to see the contrast between the Bible and what I had been taught about what we now call Open Theism.

When I became a pastor, I decided not to bring that subject up for a long time. But I didn’t stick to my decision, and in six months, I mentioned it in a sermon. I caught some flack, but no one had any answers that held up. That was about 35 years ago, and I’m still the pastor of that church.

The name of the church has been changed to Closer Walk Bible Fellowship. We are in the process of selling the church that was called Derby Bible Church, and we now meet at Martin Luther King Early College, 19535 E. 46th Ave, Denver Co.

In Christ,
Bob Hill
 

lee_merrill

New member
Hi Pastor Bob,

Bob Hill said:
There were a few things in the O.T. that really seemed to show that God did not know what would happen before it happened. The first eye opener for me was in Gen 22:12 And He said, “Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.
But then how can God predict what people will do based on their character if he didn't even know that Abraham feared God?

But as there are different senses of the word "know", another sense than factual knowledge may be what is meant here, as is I know factually the water is cold, I jump in, now I know the water is cold.

God predicted something would happen according to Jer 3:7, ‘She will return to Me!’ But she did not return”.
Or "I said [the usual meaning of the word 'amar'] she will return, and she did not return," and she will!

Jeremiah 31:8 See, I will bring them from the land of the north and gather them from the ends of the earth. Among them will be the blind and the lame, expectant mothers and women in labor; a great throng will return.

Jeremiah 31:18 I have surely heard Ephraim's moaning: 'You disciplined me like an unruly calf, and I have been disciplined. Restore me, and I will return, because you are the Lord my God.

Why, may I ask, should we trust God's counsel, if he can be mistaken about people's hearts, and about what they will or will not do?

Blessings,
Lee
 

Bob Hill

TOL Subscriber
lee_merrill

The important thing is God's changing of His mind!

It's amazing how much He changed His mind because of Israel.

Psa 78:41 shows that God was tempted a lot by Israel. For some reason, God has limited His action in what He can do, and how He will bless mankind, and what He will not do when man disobeys His commands. Yes, again and again they tempted God, and limited the Holy One of Israel.

Even promises that appear to be unconditional may be broken by God when Israel disobeys. Ex 23:27-31 I will send My fear before you, I will cause confusion among all the people to whom you come, and will make all your enemies turn their backs to you. 28 And I will send hornets before you, which shall drive out the Hivite, the Canaanite, and the Hittite from before you. 29 I will not drive them out from before you in one year, lest the land become desolate and the beast of the field become too numerous for you. 30 Little by little I will drive them out from before you, until you have increased, and you inherit the land. 31 And I will set your bounds from the Red Sea to the sea, Philistia, and from the desert to the River. For I will deliver the inhabitants of the land into your hand, and you shall drive them out before you.

Ex 33:1,2 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Depart and go up from here, you and the people whom you have brought out of the land of Egypt, to the land of which I swore to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, saying, ‘To your descendants I will give it.’ 2 And I will send My Angel before you, and I will drive out the Canaanite and the Amorite and the Hittite and the Perizzite and the Hivite and the Jebusite.”

Joshua 3:9,10 So Joshua said to the children of Israel, “Come here, and hear the words of the LORD your God.” 10 And Joshua said, “By this you shall know that the living God is among you, and that He will without fail drive out from before you the Canaanites and the Hittites and the Hivites and the Perizzites and the Girgashites and the Amorites and the Jebusites.

Judges 2:19-3:5 And it came to pass, when the judge was dead, that they reverted and behaved more corruptly than their fathers, by following other gods, to serve them and bow down to them. They did not cease from their own doings nor from their stubborn way. 20 Then the anger of the Lord was hot against Israel; and He said, “Because this nation has transgressed My covenant which I commanded their fathers, and has not heeded My voice, 21 “I also will no longer drive out before them any of the nations which Joshua left when he died, 22 “so that through them I may test Israel, whether they will keep the ways of the Lord, to walk in them as their fathers kept them, or not.” 23 Therefore the Lord left those nations, without driving them out immediately; nor did He deliver them into the hand of Joshua. Chapter 3 1 Now these are the nations which the Lord left, that He might test Israel by them, that is, all who had not known any of the wars in Canaan 2 (this was only so that the generations of the children of Israel might be taught to know war, at least those who had not formerly known it), 3 namely, five lords of the Philistines, all the Canaanites, the Sidonians, and the Hivites who dwelt in Mount Lebanon, from Mount Baal Hermon to the entrance of Hamath. 4 And they were left, that He might test Israel by them, to know whether they would obey the commandments of the Lord, which He had commanded their fathers by the hand of Moses. 5 Thus the children of Israel dwelt among the Canaanites, the Hittites, the Amorites, the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites.

Bob Hill
 

patman

Active member
lee_merrill said:
But this statement is by Scripture itself, not by a person.

Job 42:11 They comforted and consoled him over all the trouble the Lord had brought upon him, and each one gave him a piece of silver and a gold ring.


That is not true, though, God does not contradict anyone who says he did it.


No, you see, "you did not speak of me what was right" refers to the prior speeches of Job's friends, so then "as Job did" refers to the prior speeches of Job--and this comes from the context.


But what did Job say? "I despise myself" (not my views) Job is saying he is not worthy, that he is not righteous before God, even though he was a righteous man:

Job 9:15 Though I were innocent, I could not answer him; I could only plead with my Judge for mercy.

And this he did.

Also, Job said: "I know that you can do all things; no plan of yours can be thwarted" (Job 42:2).

This would imply that God had a plan here! Thus this is the hand of God, as everyone has been saying all along, and Job said God's plan is never thwarted--this would have in view what happened to Job--and God said "That's right."

God's good purpose was accomplished, with Job, as with Paul, as with Jesus, in Job's trials which refined him and showed he did not serve God as a mercenary, in Paul's thorn which kept him humble, as in the cross which brought salvation.


Yet unwitting blasphemy is a sin, Paul had to be forgiven for this.

God also said the Sabeans did some of this, so then who did took away Job's oxen and donkeys? Satan, or the Sabeans?

Blessings,
Lee

P.S. And you have not yet made clear to me how God had no agency in what happened to Job, when he took down the hedge around him.

You will not understand my answer for anything until you see things in context. At least you seem to be trying to see more context, but you are confusing it still because you "WANT" to see it your way, you do, just like Clete said.

I have an advantage here because I once was like you, believing as you do. It was not my bias that changed me over to the OV, but a recognition that the way my theology caused me to view God as the author of Evil. I rejected it after careful consideration.

So to say it is "MY" interruption of scripture is wrong. I once had your view and know the path that changed me. I once tired to show you how you were blaspheming In hopes it would break your heart, as mine was, once you saw that you were verbally degrading Our Lord.

I showed you scripture, where Job was told he was doing the same thing, yet you do not wish to see how you are mistaken. For every answer you give me, your answer has consistently been a plea for you to review the context.

Now you tried here. But you use your preconceived view to form an opinion based on what little review you have done.

You should not rely on Job's word because he was forced to repent. You should not rely on anyone's idea of what happened because you should know they do not see the bigger picture. Had Job truly known what he was talking about, he would not have been grieved. He would have simply trusted God with no complaint.

It is a mistake to go on an implication of a plan based on a flawed grieving humans ignorant understanding of the almighty, especially one who confesses he spoke of things to wonderful to understand. And you should realize this if you consider the entire context.

Lets look at your latest proof text...

Job 9
15 For though I were righteous, I could not answer Him;
I would beg mercy of my Judge.

16 If I called and He answered me,
I would not believe that He was listening to my voice.

17 For He crushes me with a tempest,
And multiplies my wounds without cause.

18 He will not allow me to catch my breath,
But fills me with bitterness.

19 If it is a matter of strength, indeed He is strong;
And if of justice, who will appoint my day in court?

20 Though I were righteous, my own mouth would condemn me;
Though I were blameless, it would prove me perverse.

21 “I am blameless, yet I do not know myself;
I despise my life.

22 It is all one thing;
Therefore I say, ‘He destroys the blameless and the wicked.’

Job is saying that Even though he is righteous, God destroys him, and there is nothing he can do. He cannot plea for justice because God would strike him down for it. Job is painting the perfect picture of the way you believe God is.

You are again painting a wrong picture. In fact, Job is proclaiming his own righteous. Look at the whole chapter.

You said:
'No, you see, "you did not speak of me what was right" refers to the prior speeches of Job's friends, so then "as Job did" refers to the prior speeches of Job--and this comes from the context.'

I know Job refers to prior speech,,, because just PRIOR to that HE REPENTED. Just think about it Lee, why would God come down and question Job if Job already knew it all? It is silly to think Job had all the answers when you consider context.

When we know that everyone in Job was made to repent because they said "God brings judgement on the innocent" you should know they were wrong. But now to wrap up the story, scripture makes a very simple statement intended to show why everyone was comforting Job.

You point out: But this statement is by Scripture itself, not by a person. Job 42:11 They comforted and consoled him over all the trouble the Lord had brought upon him, and each one gave him a piece of silver and a gold ring.

So in light of the understanding, we can see that it is a figure of speech. The true point of the context is "Job was blessed," we already know God doesn't bring disaster on the innocent. That was established already.
 

elected4ever

New member
Bob Hill said:
elected4ever,

This is my last exchange with you. Instead of reading and listening to the Bible, you attempt to change it every time, to the point that a person would wonder what your original source was.

Why is it that God cautions through Paul that Christians can sin but shouldn't? :noway:

Rom 6:1,2 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin (Why ask if they couldn't?) that grace may abound? 2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? :noway:

Rom 6:11-14 Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord. 12 Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. 13 And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, (Why give a command that is not needed?) but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under law but under grace. :noway:

1 Cor 6:17,18 But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him. 18 Flee sexual immorality (Why give a command if they don't do it?) Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body. :noway:

1 Cor 15:33,34 Do not be deceived: “Evil company corrupts good habits.” 34 Awake to righteousness, and do not sin; (Why tell them, "do not sin" if they don't sin?) for some do not have the knowledge of God. I speak this to your shame. :noway:

Eph 4:26,27 Be angry, and do not sin: (Again, why tell them, "do not sin" if they don't sin?) do not let the sun go down on your wrath, 27 nor give place to the devil. :noway:

Bob Hill

Looks like after 74 years you would know the truth by now. It is just as well sense you believe that righteousness has fellowship with unrighteousness. harmaritano need not mean sin as being in a state of sin. That is what the unreverent do. We are not to act as they do or be as they are. We are capable of acting as they do in the flesh and we receive the vexation of Spirit. but that is still not who we are so we should not act like it. The flesh still is in sin, Bob. We are not to follow the will of the flesh. We have been sealed by the Holy spirit of God and if we act according to the flesh God will allow our flesh to be destroyed but not us. We are not of the flesh but of the Spirit if so be the Spirit of God dwells in you. If you can and do sin you are not of God. Are you of the flesh or of the Spirit. What is your real identity?
 

elected4ever

New member
Romans 7:14 ¶For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.
15 For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
16 If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.
17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top