ARGH!!! Calvinism makes me furious!!!

[Clete]

Add!,

Where have you been? Glad to hear from you again!

Boy this is really some thread! We've heard from Lion, Hilston's mile long posts are back! :thumb:, and now Add has shown up again!

All that along with the fact that we are going over some very rarely trodden territory with all this logic stuff. Pretty cool if you ask me!

Knight, I think you should archive this thread for sure. Don't let this one get clipped in the next databade pruning, it's a keeper for sure!

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer

Z Man,

I do not believe that God decrees evil, period.

Isaiah 45:7
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

There is a difference between stating that God decrees evil and that God commits evil....

I believe that God holds people accountable for the things that they themselves choose to do, that's called justice. He pardons those who respond to Him in faith, that's called mercy.
Even God's punishments are merciful because those punishments serve to help prevent even more evil and conversely, His mercy is also just in that Jesus paid a price sufficient to cover the sins of the whole world and that many times over. Thus God is both just and merciful.
ANY INTERPRETATION OF ANY STORY IN THE BIBLE THAT LEADS TO ANY OTHER CONCLUSION IS A WRONG INTERPRETATION!!!

Amen.

The plain and simple fact is that if Pharaoh, to take just one of your examples, was incapable of doing other than what he did then for God to punish him for it would be unjust.

The Bible tells us God hardened Pharaoh's heart, THEN told him to let His people go. God didn't want Pharaoh to let the Israelites go when Moses asked; God wanted to display His glory to Egypt through His wrath and the plagues. Thus, He hardened his heart.

That's the Biblical account, yet you state that that makes God unjust! When you read the Bible, you bring to your studies false 'conclusions' about who God is and what He can and cannot do. Thus, YOUR interpretation is faulty! If you believe that God would be unjust for 'punishing' Pharaoh for doing what God had ordained him to do in the first place, then it is obvious you are claiming that the Scriptures declare God to be unjust! Who commanded David to take the census, then punished him for it? Who ordained that Absolom should sleep with his father's wives, yet hates adultry? Who ordained Jeroboam and the ten tribes to rebel against Rehoboam, even though they forbid insubordination and rebellion against kings? Who opposes murder, yet ordained that their son be murdered in the hands of men? Who hardened Pharaoh's heart, then commanded him to let their people go?

WHO DID THESE THINGS CLETE?

We all the know the answer; it was GOD! But, it can't be, because according to your screwed up theology, it makes God unjust. Thus, your interpretation of the Scriptures is the one that views God as unjust, not me! I don't believe that if God ordains an individual to do something, yet hold them accountable for it, that He is unjust for doing so. YOU DO!!! Even though the Scriptures teach us that He does those exact things!!!

We can, therefore, KNOW for an absolute undeniable fact that Pharaoh was not forced to rebel against God! Manipulated, yes; FORCED, definitely not!

You are bringing in conclusions that you have made up in your head into your bible study to interpret what you read, which is totally messing up your theology. Instead, you need to read the text and THEN base your conclusions on what you read.

And as for several of you other examples which I will not address individually...

You kinda have to, because according to you, if God predestines an individual to do something, then holds them accountable, He is unjust. We read several passages in Scripture where God ordains that people do certain things, then He holds them accountable. So, when you read Scripture, do you see an unjust God? Why/why not? Please explain how you reconcile these passages of Scripture with your view that God would be unjust for ordaining people to do things, then hold them accountable:

- Jesus wept over Jerusalem because the things of the kingdom were "hidden from [their] eyes", yet He clearly tells us that it was God who hid these things from their eyes (Luke 19:41-42; Luke 10:21)

- Jesus felt compassion over those who were sick, yet it is God who is finally and decisivly in control of sickness (Matthew 14:14; Exodus 4:11; 1 Samuel 2:6)

- God opposes hatred toward his people, yet ordained that his people be hated in Egypt (Genesis 12:3; Psalm 105:25 "He turned their hearts to hate his people.").

- He hardens Pharaoh's heart, but commands him to let his people go (Exodus 4:21; 5:1; 8:1).

- He makes plain that it is sin for David to take a military census of his people, but he ordains that he do it (2 Samuel 24:1; 24:10).

- He opposes adultery, but ordains that Absalom should lie with his father's wives (Exodus 20:14; 2 Samuel 12:11).

- He forbids rebellion and insubordination against the king, but ordained that Jeroboam and the ten tribes should rebel against Rehoboam (Romans 13:1; 1 Samuel 15:23; 1 Kings 12:15-16).

- He opposes murder, but ordains the murder of his Son (Exodus 20:13; Acts 4:28).

- He desires all men to be saved, but effectually calls only some (1 Timothy 2:4; 1 Corinthians 1:26-30; 2 Timothy 2:26)


(BTW, this has got to be at least the millionth time I've posted these scriptures, and yet, no OV'er has the guts to take a 'stab' at them; to show us all how they do not see an unjust God in these verses.)

we can know that God did not command any wrong doing.

Who commanded David to take that census? Who commanded/ordained that David's son, Absolom, would commit adultry? Who commanded that Job suffer, even though he was a rightous man in the eye's of God? Who commanded/ordained that Joseph's brothers sell Joseph into slavery? Who commanded a bear to devour several children simply for picking on a bald man? Who creates light and darkness; peace and evil?

Who Clete? Who?

 

[Big Finn]

That's the Biblical account, yet you state that that makes God unjust! When you read the Bible, you bring to your studies false 'conclusions' about who God is and what He can and cannot do.

Well, Zman, I'm not Clete, but I do have something to say about this.

Your statement is rather bold. God chose which concepts He would use in describing Himself to mankind. He used concepts that He knew we would understand. He describes Himself as just to us. He describes Himself as merciful to us. He describes Himself as righteous to us. If the Biblical usage of these concepts is not a false description of who God is, and the Bible is God's word, then the only conclusion we can come to is that the Bible is a failure for it fails to accurately describe God in words we can understand.

If you would contest the above you must show that the terms of justice, mercy, and righteousness are not accurate descriptions and that they can be redefined and still be justice, mercy, and righteousness. I think that this is a pretty tall order. I don't believe it is possible.

This subject really boils down to the separate assumptions that each side is starting with when reading the Bible.

First Assumption: God knew what He was doing when He used the concepts of justice, mercy, and righteousness in describing Himself to human beings, and He used those concepts because He knew that we could easily, innately understand them. Thus the way we read the Bible and see the actions of God in the Bible are done is such a way as to always honor God's own description of Himself.

Second Assumption: When the Bible says that God ordains men to sin, that He is the actual cause of men's sins it must be taken at face value, and if that happens to violate what we know of God's character and nature so be it. God is just beyond our understanding and He isn't bound by His own usage of concepts that we understand.

The choice is clear as we all start with some kind of basic assumption. This discussion really is about which assumption you are going to use in reading the Bible. As for myself, the first assumption is the only logical one to use, for it's the only assumption under which God fits His own description of Himself.

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by Big Finn

Your statement is rather bold. God chose which concepts He would use in describing Himself to mankind. He used concepts that He knew we would understand. He describes Himself as just to us. He describes Himself as merciful to us. He describes Himself as righteous to us. If the Biblical usage of these concepts is not a false description of who God is, and the Bible is God's word, then the only conclusion we can come to is that the Bible is a failure for it fails to accurately describe God in words we can understand.

If you would contest the above you must show that the terms of justice, mercy, and righteousness are not accurate descriptions and that they can be redefined and still be justice, mercy, and righteousness. I think that this is a pretty tall order. I don't believe it is possible.

I'm not going to redefine the terms of justice, mercy, and righteousness; there is no need to. I believe God is all those things, as He said He was.

The problem with your way of thinking is that God owes us those things. It's as if your mindset is that God cannot and will not do anything to you unless you do wrong, because you believe that would make Him unjust. In my mind's eye, I see you standing in this world, proclaiming to God,

"Watch it God. You can't mess with me because I haven't done anything wrong. And if you ordain that I do something, you better not judge me for it. After all, it was you who did it through me; I'm not responsible. So You better grant me mercy and justice, because I'm a righteous man."

God is Just, Righteous, Holy, Merciful, Glorious, etc. We agree on that part. However, I believe that we do not deserve any of those things; and even if somehow we were perferct and deserving of them, who are we to say that God is obligated to grant us those things? Must He answer to us?

This subject really boils down to the separate assumptions that each side is starting with when reading the Bible.

First Assumption: God knew what He was doing when He used the concepts of justice, mercy, and righteousness in describing Himself to human beings, and He used those concepts because He knew that we could easily, innately understand them. Thus the way we read the Bible and see the actions of God in the Bible are done is such a way as to always honor God's own description of Himself.

Second Assumption: When the Bible says that God ordains men to sin, that He is the actual cause of men's sins it must be taken at face value, and if that happens to violate what we know of God's character and nature so be it. God is just beyond our understanding and He isn't bound by His own usage of concepts that we understand.

The choice is clear as we all start with some kind of basic assumption. This discussion really is about which assumption you are going to use in reading the Bible. As for myself, the first assumption is the only logical one to use, for it's the only assumption under which God fits His own description of Himself.

The Bible wasn't given to us by God so that we could totally understand who He is; it was granted to us so that we could know that He is - period.

Isaiah 55:8
"For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My ways," says the Lord.

Again, your first assumption assumes that God cannot do anything to us unless we do something wrong. What wrong did Job ever do? Who ordained that Christ suffer and die? Who decreed that Joseph be sold into slavery and spend countless years in prison? Who called Saul of Tarsus to be a missionary, who spent most of his latter life in prison? Does not the Bible state:

1 Peter 3:17
For it is better, if it is the will of God, to suffer for doing good than for doing evil.

The first assumption is just that; an assumption. The second one is not an assumption, but clearly an observation. When the Scriptures are read, we read stories of God ordaining men to do things that He opposes (Abosolom to commit adultry, David to take a census, turning the hearts of the Egyptians to hate His own people, etc.). Are the Scriptures proclaiming to us an unjust God? According to your view, it is. According to my view, it proclaims to us a God who is absolutly Sovereign and does according to His purposes and perfect will.

Daniel 4:35
All the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing; He does according to His will in the army of heaven And among the inhabitants of the earth. No one can restrain His hand Or say to Him, "What have You done?"



*I'd like to correct you on the statement that "[God] is the actual cause of men's sins". He is not the cause of our sins; we are at fault on our own.*

 

[Big Finn]

The problem with your way of thinking is that God owes us those things. It's as if your mindset is that God cannot and will not do anything to you unless you do wrong, because you believe that would make Him unjust. In my mind's eye, I see you standing in this world, proclaiming to God,

"Watch it God. You can't mess with me because I haven't done anything wrong. And if you ordain that I do something, you better not judge me for it. After all, it was you who did it through me; I'm not responsible. So You better grant me mercy and justice, because I'm a righteous man."

Zman,

I'm sorry to say it, but what a crock. I never even implied anything close to that. Do you just get some perverse pleasure from creating straw men to destroy?

Here, I'll create one about you.

You know, Zman, you just take a perverse pleasure in making God look bad. You love to trumpet how He is the cause of sin, how He breaks faith with His own created beings by being their destroyer, etc.... You just love to smear God's character, otherwise you wouldn't keep insisting that God ordains men to do evil acts and then punishes them for doing just what he wants them to do.

Was that a good enough straw man for you? It certainly was easy to destroy your line of thinking that way.

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by Big Finn

Zman,

I'm sorry to say it, but what a crock. I never even implied anything close to that.

Yeah you did. You may not of meant it to sound like what I had defined it as, but that's literally what you are saying when you posted this:

He used concepts that He knew we would understand. He describes Himself as just to us. He describes Himself as merciful to us. He describes Himself as righteous to us.

And just this post alone is not the only thing I based my 'conclusion' on. Given the overall take you have on this subject, it is obvious that you feel God is obligated to be 'merciful, rightous, and just' to every man. According to you, God cannot do anything to us unless we've done wrong. God cannot hold us accountable if He predestined it...

In your view, you don't think God should hold men accountable, but rather, you hold God accountable...

Here, I'll create one about you.

You know, Zman, you just take a perverse pleasure in making God look bad. You love to trumpet how He is the cause of sin, how He breaks faith with His own created beings by being their destroyer, etc.... You just love to smear God's character, otherwise you wouldn't keep insisting that God ordains men to do evil acts and then punishes them for doing just what he wants them to do.

Was that a good enough straw man for you? It certainly was easy to destroy your line of thinking that way.

:chuckle:

No need to get all frustrated buddy. I have presented Scripture to support my claims, and you feel that I'm trying to make God look bad? :chuckle:

It's not my view, or the Scriptures that make God 'look' bad; it's the way you view God. Do you believe that if God ordains a person to do something, then hold them accountable, that He would be unjust? If so, how do you interpret these passages of Scripture:

- Jesus wept over Jerusalem because the things of the kingdom were "hidden from [their] eyes", yet He clearly tells us that it was God who hid these things from their eyes (Luke 19:41-42; Luke 10:21)

- Jesus felt compassion over those who were sick, yet it is God who is finally and decisivly in control of sickness (Matthew 14:14; Exodus 4:11; 1 Samuel 2:6)

- God opposes hatred toward his people, yet ordained that his people be hated in Egypt (Genesis 12:3; Psalm 105:25 "He turned their hearts to hate his people.").

- He hardens Pharaoh's heart, but commands him to let his people go (Exodus 4:21; 5:1; 8:1).

- He makes plain that it is sin for David to take a military census of his people, but he ordains that he do it (2 Samuel 24:1; 24:10).

- He opposes adultery, but ordains that Absalom should lie with his father's wives (Exodus 20:14; 2 Samuel 12:11).

- He forbids rebellion and insubordination against the king, but ordained that Jeroboam and the ten tribes should rebel against Rehoboam (Romans 13:1; 1 Samuel 15:23; 1 Kings 12:15-16).

- He opposes murder, but ordains the murder of his Son (Exodus 20:13; Acts 4:28).

- He desires all men to be saved, but effectually calls only some (1 Timothy 2:4; 1 Corinthians 1:26-30; 2 Timothy 2:26)

 

[God_Is_Truth]

Z Man,

does God ever contradict his own character?

 

[Clete]

Z Man,

It is not the Scripture that makes God look bad but your interpretation of it that does.
Until you find an interpretation that does not make God look bad you will not have found the correct interpretation.
Indeed, your interpretation of Scripture does more than make God LOOK bad. If your interpretation is correct then God IS bad, I don't care how many times you insist that you have no problem with these passages and that they do not cause you to see God as unjust. The plain and simple fact is, as I said before, if Pharaoh could not have done differently then for God to have punished him for what he was forced to do would be, by your own definition, unjust. No other conclusion is possible without redefining the terms.
The only preconceived notion that one has to bring to the story in order to understand this is simply the definition of the word justice. You don't have to understand Open Theism or any thing else, just the English language!

The Bible tells us God hardened Pharaoh's heart, THEN told him to let His people go. God didn't want Pharaoh to let the Israelites go when Moses asked; God wanted to display His glory to Egypt through His wrath and the plagues. Thus, He hardened his heart.

Why do you assume that God hardening Pharaoh's heart is the equivalent of forcing him to disobey? It is not! Pharaoh could have repented at any point but CHOSE not to. Was God intentionally egging him on? You bet He was, and rightly so, but that is not the same as forcing him.
You see, there is simply nothing here in this or any other story which requires one to conclude that God forces anyone to do evil. If you read a story, any story in the Bible and come away from it thinking that God forced someone do something evil then it is an incontrovertible fact that you have misunderstood the story. God does not tempt us or anyone with evil.

Jam 1:13 Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am tempted by God"; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone. 14 But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. 15 Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.


I Cor. 10:12 Therefore let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall. 13 No temptation has overtaken you except such as is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of escape, that you may be able to bear it.

Therefore God did not FORCE Pharaoh to do evil, Pharaoh did it on his own and God's punishment was not unjust.

Do you see how nicely that last sentence flows logically? No qualifiers have to thrown in or anything. All you do is read it with all the normal definitions of the words intact and it makes perfect sense.
Now let's try it your way...

God did FORCE pharaoh to do evil, Pharaoh did not do it on his own and God's punishment was not unjust.

HUH???

How many words do you have to redefine in order for this sentence to make any sense whatsoever?
Either the word 'force' or the phrase 'on his own' or the word 'justice' must be redefined or a combination thereof in order for this sentence to make any sense at all.

Which word or set of words do you wish to redefine?
Which Z Man? Which?

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Big Finn]

And just this post alone is not the only thing I based my 'conclusion' on. Given the overall take you have on this subject, it is obvious that you feel God is obligated to be 'merciful, rightous, and just' to every man. According to you, God cannot do anything to us unless we've done wrong. God cannot hold us accountable if He predestined it...

God is obligated to tell the truth. It's His opponent that is the father of lies, or do you not understand the concept? God is obligated to be just who He said He is. His own nature and character demand it of Him. If He isn't who He says He is then His character isn't what He says it is and He is a liar. As we know God isn't a liar then we are left with the inescapable conclusion that He must do what He says He will, not because He owes it to anyone else, but because He owes it to Himself. Haven't you ever heard of the saying, "to thine own self be true"? No one can have personal integrity and claim to be one thing while doing another. It's a real basic principle.

However, it's very obvious which assumption you have chosen to read the Bible under and that you have no intention of ever changing your mind, so I'd say that any further contact between us on this subject is rather fruitless.

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by God_Is_Truth

Z Man,

does God ever contradict his own character?

You tell me? Do these passages of Scripture seem to suggest to you that God 'contradicts' Himself?

- Jesus wept over Jerusalem because the things of the kingdom were "hidden from [their] eyes", yet He clearly tells us that it was God who hid these things from their eyes (Luke 19:41-42; Luke 10:21)

- Jesus felt compassion over those who were sick, yet it is God who is finally and decisivly in control of sickness (Matthew 14:14; Exodus 4:11; 1 Samuel 2:6)

- God opposes hatred toward his people, yet ordained that his people be hated in Egypt (Genesis 12:3; Psalm 105:25 "He turned their hearts to hate his people.").

- He hardens Pharaoh's heart, but commands him to let his people go (Exodus 4:21; 5:1; 8:1).

- He makes plain that it is sin for David to take a military census of his people, but he ordains that he do it (2 Samuel 24:1; 24:10).

- He opposes adultery, but ordains that Absalom should lie with his father's wives (Exodus 20:14; 2 Samuel 12:11).

- He forbids rebellion and insubordination against the king, but ordained that Jeroboam and the ten tribes should rebel against Rehoboam (Romans 13:1; 1 Samuel 15:23; 1 Kings 12:15-16).

- He opposes murder, but ordains the murder of his Son (Exodus 20:13; Acts 4:28).

- He desires all men to be saved, but effectually calls only some (1 Timothy 2:4; 1 Corinthians 1:26-30; 2 Timothy 2:26)


BTW, my answer to your question would be no. My view 'accepts' and understands the above passages; we get along just fine. However, I hardly think that you could say the same thing, considering you believe God would contridict Himself and would be unjust if He did such things as what is told to us in the above passages...

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer

Z Man,

It is not the Scripture that makes God look bad but your interpretation of it that does.
Until you find an interpretation that does not make God look bad you will not have found the correct interpretation.
Indeed, your interpretation of Scripture does more than make God LOOK bad. If your interpretation is correct then God IS bad, I don't care how many times you insist that you have no problem with these passages and that they do not cause you to see God as unjust.

So you agree then, that the passages of Scripture that I keep posting, if taken in 'context', without bringing in any 'pre-concieved' doctrines or theology or illusions about who God is, that yes, they tell us God does ordain 'evil'?

My question to you; why do you feel that YOU have to redefine the terms and the interpretation of these passages to create a God who DOES NOT ordain evil?

The plain and simple fact is, as I said before, if Pharaoh could not have done differently then for God to have punished him for what he was forced to do would be, by your own definition, unjust. No other conclusion is possible without redefining the terms.

Pharaoh sinned of his own will, because God hardened his heart. You make it sound like God 'bound' Pharaoh against his will and FORCED him to sin; as if Pharaoh was an innocent person, just minding his own business when suddenly God came along and tied him up, as Pharaoh screamed in the inside of his heart to be set 'free'. God hardened Pharaoh's heart, and he willingly refused to let the Israelites go.

The only preconceived notion that one has to bring to the story in order to understand this is simply the definition of the word justice. You don't have to understand Open Theism or any thing else, just the English language!

Your assumption about justice, however, is that we are not subject to God for *ANYTHING*, UNLESS we've somehow done wrong on our own. You assume that men are innocent, and God cannot do anything to innocent men. He is not free to sovereignly create, destroy, bring peace upon or to bring evil upon, unless there are conditions that that person has met.

According to your view, instead of God controlling us with His will, we control Him with ours. You have forgotton what it takes for the Creator to be the Creator...

Why do you assume that God hardening Pharaoh's heart is the equivalent of forcing him to disobey? It is not! Pharaoh could have repented at any point but CHOSE not to.

Wrong. The reason God hardened Pharaoh's heart was so that he would be stubborn and NOT heed Moses plea to let the Israelites go. There was no chance for Pharaoh to repent; he never wanted to, and God made sure of that. God wasn't primarily concerned about Pharaoh's 'well-being', but rather, in the ultimate display of His awesome and wonderous glory to the Egyptians. If hardening a person's heart was what it took to do that, then so be it. God will always seek to display His glory and nothing else, for that is His primary and ultimate priority in anything that He does.

Our happiness, and satisfaction, or 'well-being' is not God's primary concern. You have to understand that. God's 'universe' is not centered around man; it's centered around Himself.

You see, there is simply nothing here in this or any other story which requires one to conclude that God forces anyone to do evil. If you read a story, any story in the Bible and come away from it thinking that God forced someone do something evil then it is an incontrovertible fact that you have misunderstood the story. God does not tempt us or anyone with evil.

I agree. I do not believe that God literally 'forces' anyone to commit a sin, or crime, or some 'evil' persay. He never 'forces' anyone to do something against that persons will. Whatever God ordains/decrees a person to do, they do it because they want to.

God ordained that David take that census, and yet, David knew he had sinned. And because of it, God punished David - for doing exactly what God had told him to do.

How do YOU explain that, according to your view?

Therefore God did not FORCE Pharaoh to do evil, Pharaoh did it on his own and God's punishment was not unjust.

I agree.

Do you see how nicely that last sentence flows logically? No qualifiers have to thrown in or anything. All you do is read it with all the normal definitions of the words intact and it makes perfect sense.
Now let's try it your way...

God did FORCE pharaoh to do evil, Pharaoh did not do it on his own and God's punishment was not unjust.

HUH???

Yeah, I'm confused too. What makes you think that I believe God 'forced' Pharaoh against his will? What makes you think I believe Pharaoh 'did not do it on his own'?



Clete,

You have yet explained to us how you interpret these passages of Scripture, since you believe God would be unjust for doing these things:

- Jesus wept over Jerusalem because the things of the kingdom were "hidden from [their] eyes", yet He clearly tells us that it was God who hid these things from their eyes (Luke 19:41-42; Luke 10:21)

- Jesus felt compassion over those who were sick, yet it is God who is finally and decisivly in control of sickness (Matthew 14:14; Exodus 4:11; 1 Samuel 2:6)

- God opposes hatred toward his people, yet ordained that his people be hated in Egypt (Genesis 12:3; Psalm 105:25 "He turned their hearts to hate his people.").

- He hardens Pharaoh's heart, but commands him to let his people go (Exodus 4:21; 5:1; 8:1).

- He makes plain that it is sin for David to take a military census of his people, but he ordains that he do it (2 Samuel 24:1; 24:10).

- He opposes adultery, but ordains that Absalom should lie with his father's wives (Exodus 20:14; 2 Samuel 12:11).

- He forbids rebellion and insubordination against the king, but ordained that Jeroboam and the ten tribes should rebel against Rehoboam (Romans 13:1; 1 Samuel 15:23; 1 Kings 12:15-16).

- He opposes murder, but ordains the murder of his Son (Exodus 20:13; Acts 4:28).

- He desires all men to be saved, but effectually calls only some (1 Timothy 2:4; 1 Corinthians 1:26-30; 2 Timothy 2:26)

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by Big Finn

God is obligated to tell the truth. It's His opponent that is the father of lies, or do you not understand the concept? God is obligated to be just who He said He is. His own nature and character demand it of Him. If He isn't who He says He is then His character isn't what He says it is and He is a liar. As we know God isn't a liar then we are left with the inescapable conclusion that He must do what He says He will, not because He owes it to anyone else, but because He owes it to Himself. Haven't you ever heard of the saying, "to thine own self be true"? No one can have personal integrity and claim to be one thing while doing another. It's a real basic principle.

LOL! I have never claimed that God is 'out of character' in any passages of Scripture that I have presented! On the contrary, He couldn't be more 'in character'!

You said God must be true to His own self, and indeed He is. In everything He does, God seeks not to 'comfort men' or make thier lives all happy and pleasant; God's ultimate purpose for anything that He does is to display His glory! And hardening people's heart, ordaining that men commit adultry, killing thousands upon thousands of people while wiping out whole cities, ordaining that a bear mawl young children for harassing a bald man, having His own Son be murdered - IN ALL THESE THINGS HE IS DOING EXACTLY AS HE SAID HE WOULD! HE COULDN"T BE MORE TRUE TO HIMSELF IN DISPLAYING HIS GLORY TO THE WORLD!!!

However, it's very obvious which assumption you have chosen to read the Bible under and that you have no intention of ever changing your mind, so I'd say that any further contact between us on this subject is rather fruitless.

Oh, don't leave now! It's just getting exciting! How come when I bring up Scripture, all you OV'ers scatter?

Big Finn,
Just as I have asked Clete, GIT, and Knight, would you please tell everyone here who is reading how it is that you do not see an unjust God from Scriptures, since you believe that if God were to do these exact things listed below, that He would be most unjust:

- Jesus wept over Jerusalem because the things of the kingdom were "hidden from [their] eyes", yet He clearly tells us that it was God who hid these things from their eyes (Luke 19:41-42; Luke 10:21)

- Jesus felt compassion over those who were sick, yet it is God who is finally and decisivly in control of sickness (Matthew 14:14; Exodus 4:11; 1 Samuel 2:6)

- God opposes hatred toward his people, yet ordained that his people be hated in Egypt (Genesis 12:3; Psalm 105:25 "He turned their hearts to hate his people.").

- He hardens Pharaoh's heart, but commands him to let his people go (Exodus 4:21; 5:1; 8:1).

- He makes plain that it is sin for David to take a military census of his people, but he ordains that he do it (2 Samuel 24:1; 24:10).

- He opposes adultery, but ordains that Absalom should lie with his father's wives (Exodus 20:14; 2 Samuel 12:11).

- He forbids rebellion and insubordination against the king, but ordained that Jeroboam and the ten tribes should rebel against Rehoboam (Romans 13:1; 1 Samuel 15:23; 1 Kings 12:15-16).

- He opposes murder, but ordains the murder of his Son (Exodus 20:13; Acts 4:28).

- He desires all men to be saved, but effectually calls only some (1 Timothy 2:4; 1 Corinthians 1:26-30; 2 Timothy 2:26)

 

[Clete]

Z Man,

Your post is ridiculous. Are you even trying to have an honest discourse here or are just stringing us along like this is some sort of game?

I will not repeat myself a hundred times while you ask inane questions that you already know the answers to. If you can't respond to the points that I actually make and instead insist upon making up crap that no one has said and then responding to that, then I'll leave you to have a conversation with yourself.

My posts are made in the context of this entire conversation and yet you respond as if neither of us has said anything at all that leading up to this point in the conversation. You completely ignore everything that has already been established in the preceding 950 some posts and try to make the exact same points that you made 400 posts ago!
Well, I for one will not start over with you Z Man. If you want to reread my post and delete the nonsense you just responded with and try again then please do so but I will not respond as if the last two weeks of pulverizing Calvinism into dust never happened.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Z Man]

Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer

Z Man,

Your post is ridiculous. Are you even trying to have an honest discourse here or are just stringing us along like this is some sort of game?

I will not repeat myself a hundred times while you ask inane questions that you already know the answers to. If you can't respond to the points that I actually make and instead insist upon making up crap that no one has said and then responding to that, then I'll leave you to have a conversation with yourself.

My posts are made in the context of this entire conversation and yet you respond as if neither of us has said anything at all that leading up to this point in the conversation. You completely ignore everything that has already been established in the preceding 950 some posts and try to make the exact same points that you made 400 posts ago!
Well, I for one will not start over with you Z Man. If you want to reread my post and delete the nonsense you just responded with and try again then please do so but I will not respond as if the last two weeks of pulverizing Calvinism into dust never happened.

Resting in Him,
Clete

Instead of complaining about how I'm wrong, why don't you correct me?

Funny, everytime I post Scripture, you get frustrated...

 

[Clete]

Originally posted by Z Man



Instead of complaining about how I'm wrong, why don't you correct me?

Funny, everytime I post Scripture, you get frustrated...

That's a bunch of crap Z Man and you know it!
If you can't figure it out then forget it.

 

[add yasaf]

cheese grater

cheese grater

Rolf you didn't answer this post - http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=544206#post544206


Clete! A lot of these threads are repeats from a couple years ago, and also, this place is limited by its format to help one grow beyond a certain point. After a while it can grate on one's nerves. People can say whatever they want here, and don't have to face any consequences. Not a good recipe for great debates to happen, except maybe for the Battle Royales. One of the reasons I left also was because there were a few people who thought my view was not coherent enough to be part of a debate, which is never good when the reasons for thinking it is not coherent enough are not given.

 

[Clete]

Re: cheese grater

Re: cheese grater

Originally posted by add yasaf
Clete! A lot of these threads are repeats from a couple years ago, and also, this place is limited by its format to help one grow beyond a certain point. After a while it can grate on one's nerves. People can say whatever they want here, and don't have to face any consequences. Not a good recipe for great debates to happen, except maybe for the Battle Royales. One of the reasons I left also was because there were a few people who thought my view was not coherent enough to be part of a debate, which is never good when the reasons for thinking it is not coherent enough are not given.

I agree with you. It's very frustrating when you feel like you're just beating your own head in for nothing.
I can remember one issue that you were harping on for a very long time before I ever understood what the heck you were getting at! When I finally got it, everybody just started acting like I was as goofy as they thought you were and I didn't even agree that it was as big an issue as you did! Go figure!

Anyway, when I first started posting here I was actually trying to convince people that I was right. I stopped that after that frustrating debate that Jim Hilston and I had about predestination and freewill with his card trick analogy. After that I just decided that I would focus my efforts on making an argument for the arguments sake and if people got convinced along the way I would consider it icing on the cake. It's a lot less stressful when you are here simply to present the truth and expose error rather than actually trying to get someone to change their minds about something.

At any rate, I for one am glad to see you're back. TOL needs as many non-Calvinists as we can get!

God bless!

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Z Man]

Clete,

I don't know what you want, or what your problem is. I responded to your posts, and the best you can come up with is "Your post is ridiculous"? Please...

The bottom line, you said that God would be unjust if He ordained someone to do something, then hold them accountable. In that case, you must believe that the Scriptures represent an unjust God, because they tell us that that is exactly what He does!

Why won't you tell us how you reconcile these passages of Scripture with your view?

- Jesus wept over Jerusalem because the things of the kingdom were "hidden from [their] eyes", yet He clearly tells us that it was God who hid these things from their eyes (Luke 19:41-42; Luke 10:21)

- Jesus felt compassion over those who were sick, yet it is God who is finally and decisivly in control of sickness (Matthew 14:14; Exodus 4:11; 1 Samuel 2:6)

- God opposes hatred toward his people, yet ordained that his people be hated in Egypt (Genesis 12:3; Psalm 105:25 "He turned their hearts to hate his people.").

- He hardens Pharaoh's heart, but commands him to let his people go (Exodus 4:21; 5:1; 8:1).

- He makes plain that it is sin for David to take a military census of his people, but he ordains that he do it (2 Samuel 24:1; 24:10).

- He opposes adultery, but ordains that Absalom should lie with his father's wives (Exodus 20:14; 2 Samuel 12:11).

- He forbids rebellion and insubordination against the king, but ordained that Jeroboam and the ten tribes should rebel against Rehoboam (Romans 13:1; 1 Samuel 15:23; 1 Kings 12:15-16).

- He opposes murder, but ordains the murder of his Son (Exodus 20:13; Acts 4:28).

- He desires all men to be saved, but effectually calls only some (1 Timothy 2:4; 1 Corinthians 1:26-30; 2 Timothy 2:26)

 

[Clete]

Asked and answered Z Man.

Would anyone like to help Z Man out here. It seems to me that I've answered more than sufficiently but he's just not getting it. If I repeat myself again I'm libal to break something with an axe or something! :bang:

 

[Z Man]

If you have responded directly to those passages of Scripture, could you please direct me to the post #? I must've missed it...