ARGH!!! Calvinism makes me furious!!!
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
Originally posted by Clete Pfeiffer
Yeah, you're probably right. They probably just picked the name Calvinism because it sounds so cool and is easy to spell.
Reformed people like creeds and cathecisms. They are sola scriptura in principle, but influenced by the writings of men (as we all are to some degree).
Yes, I don't mean to imply otherwise, in fact, quite the contrary.
My intent was simply to point out how silly a statement it was for someone to suggest that they "don't believe in or study Calvin" when the whole theological system is named after the guy. It's not like anyone is claiming that Calvin was God incarnate or anything. Labels aren't perfect nor are they meant to be, but they sure do help to communicate what one believes and if the label 'Calvinism' fits you generally then you shouldn't be afraid to wear it. If you're ashamed of the label then drop the beliefs it represents; I can guarantee that there's a label somewhere that will fit you; find it, wear it, and stop playing silly little word games.
Resting in Him,
Clete
lee_merrill
New member
Hi Clete,
I just don't see how the Open View avoids this dilemma, either, that's all I'm saying. God created the world, allowing evil, even terrible sin, because he had a greater good in mind, than just a world without any evil, ever. He made that conscious decision, I think we are both saying that. Now the implications have to be worked out! But that's a different question.
Well, where is that in the Open View, though? The verses that could be mentioned have to be interpreted rather oddly, "No overall or ultimate plan of yours can be thwarted." But that's Job saying that! Maybe he was wrong, as the Open View holds Job was in error in saying God brought the trouble on him.
Well, let's discuss further…
Yes, I should have said the question was whether, in the Calvinist view, God is just.
I agree, for believers, the tests involve real decisions on our part, though God knows the outcome! That is how God could make an unconditional promise to Abraham, and yet also say "Because you have done this," in offering Isaac, I will multiply you.
How would the Open View explain these two aspects of God's promise to make Abraham a great nation, conditionally, and also unconditionally?
Here is why I said this:
Lee: Then how can God make predictions, that involve human choices, if human free will is left fully intact?
Clete: Same way you can only a lot better because He is not only smarter but has access to a lot more information.
Now I meant real predictions, where you know what will happen. If a prediction will certainly happen, then that's definite knowledge of the future. I really think the Open View tries sometimes to have it both ways, with the "invincible chess master," who can still predict, and fail. I really think if God can be invincible, then … he cannot fail when he steps out and makes a firm prediction.
Well, then "only a remnant will be saved" and "all Israel will be saved" can fail, too?
There are other ways to interpret the verses where God seems to speak of expectation and disappointment, for example, "I thought" could be "I said" in Jer. 3:7, for instance, well, that's even more literal, and can be taken as a prediction, instead of an expectation, for indeed, Israel 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.'"
I believe "all Israel" means all the Jewish people on earth, at some point in the future, they will all, some day, believe. Now how can God predict this, if free will is always to some degree unsure in outcome?
Well, what are we to call them, Clete? I'm not trying to be inflammatory, let's say "estimates" or something.
I'm not insulted if someone says I'm guessing, when I'm not sure, and I say what I think might happen. I say "Right! I'm not sure."
I agree…
Well, we can check and see which view draws the map the furthest, and fits best with the above statement, that's what I would ask here.
This doesn't work, though, Clete. If I don't have solid footing then I may not need it, but I don't have it!
Now how can I not need solid footing? I think you are saying I don't need a full explanation, and I don't, but I do need to know what I can be sure of, when God says it.
Philippians 4:19 And my God will meet all your needs according to his glorious riches in Christ Jesus.
Yes, he will! With no heeltaps.
2 Timothy 4:18 The Lord will rescue me from every evil attack and will bring me safely to his heavenly kingdom. To him be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
Amen!
Well, I must disagree. If God says "X will happen," knowing that indeed it might not, that's not telling the truth, that's (I'm sorry to say) a lie.
Yes, he does. I believe God's children can really choose, and the more obedient we are, the more real freedom we will have. A paradox! But I think it's Scriptural:
Luke 19:17 'Well done, my good servant!' his master replied. 'Because you have been trustworthy in a very small matter, take charge of ten cities.'
Well, wasn't it possible that no one would choose him?
No they are not! But they are similar-nyms…
Similar enough, that I believe you can't have one without the other.
From dictionary.com:
Sovereign:
- One that exercises supreme, permanent authority, especially in a nation or other governmental unit.
Supreme, and permanent, and authority is not just a title...
Blessings,
Lee
I just don't see how the Open View avoids this dilemma, either, that's all I'm saying. God created the world, allowing evil, even terrible sin, because he had a greater good in mind, than just a world without any evil, ever. He made that conscious decision, I think we are both saying that. Now the implications have to be worked out! But that's a different question.
Well, where is that in the Open View, though? The verses that could be mentioned have to be interpreted rather oddly, "No overall or ultimate plan of yours can be thwarted." But that's Job saying that! Maybe he was wrong, as the Open View holds Job was in error in saying God brought the trouble on him.
Well, let's discuss further…
Yes, I should have said the question was whether, in the Calvinist view, God is just.
I agree, for believers, the tests involve real decisions on our part, though God knows the outcome! That is how God could make an unconditional promise to Abraham, and yet also say "Because you have done this," in offering Isaac, I will multiply you.
How would the Open View explain these two aspects of God's promise to make Abraham a great nation, conditionally, and also unconditionally?
Here is why I said this:
Lee: Then how can God make predictions, that involve human choices, if human free will is left fully intact?
Clete: Same way you can only a lot better because He is not only smarter but has access to a lot more information.
Now I meant real predictions, where you know what will happen. If a prediction will certainly happen, then that's definite knowledge of the future. I really think the Open View tries sometimes to have it both ways, with the "invincible chess master," who can still predict, and fail. I really think if God can be invincible, then … he cannot fail when he steps out and makes a firm prediction.
Well, then "only a remnant will be saved" and "all Israel will be saved" can fail, too?
There are other ways to interpret the verses where God seems to speak of expectation and disappointment, for example, "I thought" could be "I said" in Jer. 3:7, for instance, well, that's even more literal, and can be taken as a prediction, instead of an expectation, for indeed, Israel 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.'"
I believe "all Israel" means all the Jewish people on earth, at some point in the future, they will all, some day, believe. Now how can God predict this, if free will is always to some degree unsure in outcome?
Well, what are we to call them, Clete? I'm not trying to be inflammatory, let's say "estimates" or something.
I'm not insulted if someone says I'm guessing, when I'm not sure, and I say what I think might happen. I say "Right! I'm not sure."
I agree…
Well, we can check and see which view draws the map the furthest, and fits best with the above statement, that's what I would ask here.
This doesn't work, though, Clete. If I don't have solid footing then I may not need it, but I don't have it!
Now how can I not need solid footing? I think you are saying I don't need a full explanation, and I don't, but I do need to know what I can be sure of, when God says it.
Philippians 4:19 And my God will meet all your needs according to his glorious riches in Christ Jesus.
Yes, he will! With no heeltaps.
2 Timothy 4:18 The Lord will rescue me from every evil attack and will bring me safely to his heavenly kingdom. To him be glory for ever and ever. Amen.
Amen!
Well, I must disagree. If God says "X will happen," knowing that indeed it might not, that's not telling the truth, that's (I'm sorry to say) a lie.
Yes, he does. I believe God's children can really choose, and the more obedient we are, the more real freedom we will have. A paradox! But I think it's Scriptural:
Luke 19:17 'Well done, my good servant!' his master replied. 'Because you have been trustworthy in a very small matter, take charge of ten cities.'
Well, wasn't it possible that no one would choose him?
No they are not! But they are similar-nyms…
Similar enough, that I believe you can't have one without the other.
From dictionary.com:
Sovereign:
- One that exercises supreme, permanent authority, especially in a nation or other governmental unit.
Supreme, and permanent, and authority is not just a title...
Blessings,
Lee
Last edited:
The world could very well have been "a world without any evil, ever". That's just the point. We chose to rebel against God. God cannot be held responsible for our rebellion unless He caused (i.e. predestined) it to happen. In that case it is we who cannot be justly held responsible for the rebellion which we did not willfully choose.
What exactly is it that you think the Open View teaches that is in conflict with what I've said? No OV theologian I've ever read has ever said that God might end up defeated. On the contrary the Open View presents a God who wins in spite of not knowing every detail of the future, a God who doesn't win because the game is fixed but because He is wiser, more powerful, and more skillful than His enemies.
I do not see any possibility that a Calvinist type God who punishes sin that He Himself ordained to happen could be considered just.
If God knows the outcome then it is not a test.
Because part of the promise was conditional and the other wasn't. I'm not trying to be flippant but that really is the answer. Part of God's deal with Abraham included an agreement on Abraham's part and the other was all on God and had nothing to do with what Abraham did.
Ah! Defining terms is always helpful.
When I say prediction, I've got the sort that the weather man makes in mind. They aren't guesses but they aren't prewritten history either. God makes predictions based upon available information and with clearly communicated principles in mind (like the one in Jer. 18). They are not prewritten history, although one might get that impression by their accuracy rate. An accuracy rate, by the way, which only God could possibly attain. In fact, every single prophecy falls into one of four categories.
- 1. It has been fulfilled.
2. It will be fulfilled.
3. It has been justly nullified because of changed circumstances as clearly described in Scripture.
4. It will be justly nullified because of changed circumstances as clearly described in Scripture.
It certainly can! Salvation is predicated on grace received THROUGH faith, if there is no faith, there will be no salvation. Thus as Jer. 18 says, if Israel does evil in God's sight then He will not fulfill the promise He has made to them.
Yeah sure you can interpret it a hundred different ways. I prefer to take it at face value and except it for what it seems to be saying. There is no reason to do otherwise.
He can't and He hasn't. You cannot seriously believe that every single individual Israelite will be saved.
God promised Israel the promise land and the whole generation which received that promise fell dead in the wilderness and that after having witness daily, undeniable, wide spread miracles.
I believe that God knows what He's talking about and that we can take these prophecies as true and believe that they will almost certainly happen. It's not that I'm trying to say that God is no better at this than Nostradamus or anything remotely like that. In fact, all I'm really driving at is simply that prophecy is not prewritten history as some believe and that there is good Biblical reasons why some prophecy have not and will not come true as stated, and that, therefore, prophecy cannot be used to support Calvinism. On the contrary, the Biblical evidence with regard to prophecy supports Open Theism.
Very well, I probably read more sarcasm into your statements than was called for. How about we call them what they are - Prophecies.
Which map would you suggest?
- I Corinthians 9 But as it is written:
"Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,
Nor have entered into the heart of man
The things which God has prepared for those who love Him."
What you can be sure of is God's righteousness and His justice, His truthfulness etc. I'm not suggesting otherwise. What I am suggesting simply is that if you require prophecy to be prewritten history in order for you to trust God, you are indeed on sandy soil. There are many prophecies that God has made in the Bible that very simply did not and will not come to pass as stated. The point is that there is a very good, very just, very righteous reason why.
I agree completely. I didn't not intend to suggest otherwise. I should have been more clear.
That simply is not the case.
- Matt. 16:28 [Jesus]Assuredly, I say to you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.[/Jesus]
Now did that come true as stated or not?
Did Jesus lie? Of course not! He said what was absolutely the truth based on what God has planned to do with Israel at the time Jesus made this prophecy. Israel, however, hated the One who was to be their King and so God repented of the good with which He intended to bless them and He did not do it. Instead, He cut off Israel and turned instead to the Gentiles through the Apostle Paul and thus Jesus' prophecy did not come to pass.
I encourage you to keep focused on the paradoxes but don't be content to have them remain paradoxes. Keep at them until you figure them out. The places where things don't make sense are usually land marks that lead to the truth. Just ask Johan Kepler
.Yep! It sure was!
But even if that had happened, God would still be God. It's not like God and Satan are in some cosmic race to see who wins the largest number of souls. If that were the case, Satan would be certain to win (Mat. 7:14). Satan and all those who rebel against God will, in the end, go to a place that they do not want to go to. They will be forced to go and to stay there against their will by the will and power of God. That means, God wins.
Yes, as I said, power and being in control (at least to some degree) is part of being sovereign. But to say God is sovereign does not mean that He totally controls every last detail of existence. It just simply does not mean that. In fact, I like the way your dictionary definitions read. God is the highest authority that exists. He is, therefore, sovereign, period.
Resting in Him,
Clete
lee_merrill
New member
Hi Clete,
I was actually responding to the objection to the effects of evil on people, though, the effects on people who are being sinned against, not to the question of whether the sinner is responsible.
Yes, I know, but I'm asking how the Open View would defend this by using Scripture, since the Scriptures I think you might turn to would have to be interpreted rather unusually: "No overall plan can be thwarted," and so on.
He can be, if people get involved in their motives. If I see a crime being committed, and I'm glad about it, then I have sinned, even though I wasn't a source at all of the actual deed.
But I am pretty sure Kobe Bryant will do well on the basketball court. And it's still a test, he's not bound by my knowledge, nor would he be, if I knew for sure Kobe would do well in a given game.
Well, both Genesis 15:18 and Genesis 22:16-18 mention God giving to Abraham's descendants, though, and the first passage is unconditional, God passed through the midst of the divided calf alone, meaning he was the only one being required to uphold the covenant, yet the second passage is conditional.
So I don't think we can separate the promise into two distinct parts, in both cases, we have a common promise, yet it is both conditional and unconditional, implying, I think, that God knew the outcome of Abraham's test. Which sheds light on the statement, "Now I know," in Genesis 22:12!
Then there aren't any unconditional prophecies? I do think there are, such as when Jesus said "Surely, surely" in reference to Peter's denial, and then again in reference to the way in which Peter's death would glorify God.
Jeremiah 23:6 In his days Judah will most probably be saved and Israel will, I expect, some day, live in safety. This is the name by which he will, very possibly, be called: The Lord Our Righteousness.
No, this won't do, Clete…
Psalm 69:13 But I pray to you, O Lord, in the time of your favor; in your great love, O God, answer me with your sure salvation.
Well, there is a reason if we have other Scriptures that indicate otherwise. Why are you not also insisting on taking the face value meaning of "no plan of yours can be thwarted" in Job? So we have to make a synthesis, and discuss which meanings are best, given all the teaching of Scripture.
Oh, I seriously do believe that. Some day it will indeed be true, every Jewish person will believe in Jesus.
I do think the Open View is saying that what God is doing is similar to what other predictors, pagan, futurists, etc. are doing, though. God may be better than Nostradamus, but not essentially doing anything different. In fact, in several instances, God seems to predict wrong, and people predict right! Like when Jonah ran, because he thought the Ninevites would repent, and God, apparently, did not.
Well, we can't, because "prophecy" means different things in these different views. I say "estimates" etc. to make it plain that the sense in which I mean prophecy is different than the sense in which the Open View would use that word.
Then what about these verses, that we seem to have agreed are sure and certain?
Philippians 4:19 And my God will meet all your needs according to his glorious riches in Christ Jesus.
2 Timothy 4:18 The Lord will rescue me from every evil attack and will bring me safely to his heavenly kingdom.
Aren't these promises conditional, like all the rest?
I should have been more clear, I meant "X will happen, for sure."
Yes, it did!
1 Corinthians 15:25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.
He is reigning now! And people saw him coming into his reign, coming in his kingdom.
Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned with glory and honor…
Then I don't understand how it can be held that God is absolutely sovereign, if he could have been defeated completely like this…
Yes, I agree, I believe that God's children can really choose, that God gives them real freedom, more and more…
Blessings,
Lee
I was actually responding to the objection to the effects of evil on people, though, the effects on people who are being sinned against, not to the question of whether the sinner is responsible.
Yes, I know, but I'm asking how the Open View would defend this by using Scripture, since the Scriptures I think you might turn to would have to be interpreted rather unusually: "No overall plan can be thwarted," and so on.
He can be, if people get involved in their motives. If I see a crime being committed, and I'm glad about it, then I have sinned, even though I wasn't a source at all of the actual deed.
But I am pretty sure Kobe Bryant will do well on the basketball court. And it's still a test, he's not bound by my knowledge, nor would he be, if I knew for sure Kobe would do well in a given game.
Well, both Genesis 15:18 and Genesis 22:16-18 mention God giving to Abraham's descendants, though, and the first passage is unconditional, God passed through the midst of the divided calf alone, meaning he was the only one being required to uphold the covenant, yet the second passage is conditional.
So I don't think we can separate the promise into two distinct parts, in both cases, we have a common promise, yet it is both conditional and unconditional, implying, I think, that God knew the outcome of Abraham's test. Which sheds light on the statement, "Now I know," in Genesis 22:12!
Then there aren't any unconditional prophecies? I do think there are, such as when Jesus said "Surely, surely" in reference to Peter's denial, and then again in reference to the way in which Peter's death would glorify God.
Jeremiah 23:6 In his days Judah will most probably be saved and Israel will, I expect, some day, live in safety. This is the name by which he will, very possibly, be called: The Lord Our Righteousness.
No, this won't do, Clete…
Psalm 69:13 But I pray to you, O Lord, in the time of your favor; in your great love, O God, answer me with your sure salvation.
Well, there is a reason if we have other Scriptures that indicate otherwise. Why are you not also insisting on taking the face value meaning of "no plan of yours can be thwarted" in Job? So we have to make a synthesis, and discuss which meanings are best, given all the teaching of Scripture.
Oh, I seriously do believe that. Some day it will indeed be true, every Jewish person will believe in Jesus.
I do think the Open View is saying that what God is doing is similar to what other predictors, pagan, futurists, etc. are doing, though. God may be better than Nostradamus, but not essentially doing anything different. In fact, in several instances, God seems to predict wrong, and people predict right! Like when Jonah ran, because he thought the Ninevites would repent, and God, apparently, did not.
Well, we can't, because "prophecy" means different things in these different views. I say "estimates" etc. to make it plain that the sense in which I mean prophecy is different than the sense in which the Open View would use that word.
Then what about these verses, that we seem to have agreed are sure and certain?
Philippians 4:19 And my God will meet all your needs according to his glorious riches in Christ Jesus.
2 Timothy 4:18 The Lord will rescue me from every evil attack and will bring me safely to his heavenly kingdom.
Aren't these promises conditional, like all the rest?
I should have been more clear, I meant "X will happen, for sure."
Yes, it did!
1 Corinthians 15:25 For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet.
He is reigning now! And people saw him coming into his reign, coming in his kingdom.
Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned with glory and honor…
Then I don't understand how it can be held that God is absolutely sovereign, if he could have been defeated completely like this…
Yes, I agree, I believe that God's children can really choose, that God gives them real freedom, more and more…
Blessings,
Lee
Rolf Ernst
New member
Clete--rather than condemn other people, why don't YOU find yourself a system of doctrine you can defend from scripture, rather than falling back on your "reasoning"? Too many times I have seen you reject the words of scripture even though you were not able to show from scripture itself why the interpretation you condemn is wrong. Any time you DO make an effort on the basis of scripture, you just throw up some fanciful misinterpretation that CONTRADICTS the other scripture. It seems that arminians and open viewers think thast if they can find a verse that they THINK contradicts another verse, then the verse they like is the one that is correct. You will get nowhere as long as you rely on verses that SEEM to contradict because seeming contradictions are only so because of the IGNORANCE of those who resort to them.
Rolf Ernst
New member
You can condemn the Reformed faith ONLY by refusing to acknowledge that God's motivations are always holy and pure in all His decrees and following providences--even those which involve the evil deeds of those whom He uses as instruments.
You people have a real blasphemous practice of ascribing to God the same evil intent that drives the wicked as God uses them as instruments in the fulfilling of His ever holy decrees and providences.
It is never acceptable to YOU to confess that God is holy and just in all His decrees. Instead, just because He fulfills His holy purpose by men whose intent is only evil, YOU INSIST IN SMEARING GOD WITH THE SAME EVIL WHICH RESIDES IN THE HEART OF THE WICKED AS hE USES THEM FOR HIS JUST PURPOSES.
Your Arminian heresy will not allow you to confess the truth, because you must hang onto your fantasy that God is not sovereign.
When someone says that they don't believe in or study Calvin, it is not your place to contradict them. Your ignorance of the terms they use does not justify you. We don't study Calvin in the sense that we don't look to him for the meaning of scripture. There is NO man whose ideas are accepted as authority against the word of God, NO man whose doctrinal statements are not weighed by the Word of God itself. In that sense, we believe in NO man, we STUDY NO man. Continue with your screeds. Condemn and rifdicule the statements of men before you even have the courtesy to ask for a clarification. We don't expect anything else from you.
You people have a real blasphemous practice of ascribing to God the same evil intent that drives the wicked as God uses them as instruments in the fulfilling of His ever holy decrees and providences.
It is never acceptable to YOU to confess that God is holy and just in all His decrees. Instead, just because He fulfills His holy purpose by men whose intent is only evil, YOU INSIST IN SMEARING GOD WITH THE SAME EVIL WHICH RESIDES IN THE HEART OF THE WICKED AS hE USES THEM FOR HIS JUST PURPOSES.
Your Arminian heresy will not allow you to confess the truth, because you must hang onto your fantasy that God is not sovereign.
When someone says that they don't believe in or study Calvin, it is not your place to contradict them. Your ignorance of the terms they use does not justify you. We don't study Calvin in the sense that we don't look to him for the meaning of scripture. There is NO man whose ideas are accepted as authority against the word of God, NO man whose doctrinal statements are not weighed by the Word of God itself. In that sense, we believe in NO man, we STUDY NO man. Continue with your screeds. Condemn and rifdicule the statements of men before you even have the courtesy to ask for a clarification. We don't expect anything else from you.
There is no difference.
You are a liar. This statement is proof.
This is also a lie, and I believe an intentional one.
On the contrary. We simply find a way to interpret all of Scripture in such a way that God is not made the author and perfector of our sin.
Hypocrite.
On the contrary. You do not even understand what Open Theism teaches and thus make yourself look foolish.
Open Theism not only acknowledges but teaches openly that God manipulates His enemies to accomplish His own goals. The difference is that you teach that He decrees sin, which He does not do.
I have never ascribed evil intent to God, never, not even one single time. It is you who do that, not me (although, perhaps in ignorance).
On the contrary, I confess exactly that! It's just that I do not confess that God decreed evil. If He did, then He is evil. Evil is as evil does.
No, you do that not me. God does not decree evil. Never has, never will. You say that He does and if that is true then God is evil. God is not the Father of lies, Satan is. Evil was not God's idea, but He definitely does use the evil intent of men's hearts against them to accomplish His own goals. It is a good thing to manipulate one's enemies and God is a master at doing it. He constantly frustrates the intentions of evil men and causes them to use there own resources to thwart their own plans. Sun Tzu would be proud.
On the contrary, I openly and boldly confess with no hesitation whatsoever that God is totally sovereign.
Your lies are stacking up!
If you do not study Calvin then you should not call yourself a Calvinist and should renounce the beliefs associated with it. If you are not prepared to do that then don't be ashamed to wear the label, it won't kill you, I promise.
There is probably nothing you could tell me about Calvinism that I haven't been told a hundred times. I was a Calvinist for a very long time before I ever heard of Open Theism.
If this is true, then you would have dropped Calvinism like a hot rock the first time you heard it. It is unbiblical, illogical, and untrue. I don't know how many times I've proven this but I suppose I could do it again if you'd like.
Give me a break. You made a rash statement and I called you on it with a bit of mild sarcasm and you fall to pieces of it. Give me a break. If you think I was harsh with you, you should have a talk with Z Man, or Freak. I've handled you with kid gloves compared to them. Grow up.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Rolf Ernst
New member
Your use of Mt.16:28 is not valid. It is NOT that what Jesus said did not come to pass. Not at all. If your mind cancomprehend the possibility that you might be mistaken in what He was speaking of rather than Jesus making a mistake, this post is to inform you that what Jesus was speaking of took place between His ascension and the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70.
Don't be so lazy!! Study a little bit before you have the gall to pontificate concerning scripture.; especially concerning those things Jesus said that YOU, IN YOUR IGNORANCE, THINK DID NOT QUITE COME OUT RIGHT!! The arrogance of the ignorant can be
unbelievably outrageous!!
Don't be so lazy!! Study a little bit before you have the gall to pontificate concerning scripture.; especially concerning those things Jesus said that YOU, IN YOUR IGNORANCE, THINK DID NOT QUITE COME OUT RIGHT!! The arrogance of the ignorant can be
unbelievably outrageous!!
Rolf Ernst
New member
Clete--It was only about a month ago that we agreed to hash out your claims to have refuted the reformed faith, and it was not long before youwere excusing yourself, saying you were too busy at work to deal woith the issue. Do you have some time now??
Tell me, Clete--did god decree what Joseph's brothers did to him??
Did God decree the rejection of Christ by the Jews? Did God decree the atonement of Christ? Did God decree Absolam's adultry with David's concubines in the sight of Israel?? Don't give me any of your rationalizations. They have no standing before the word of God. I(f you can't respond with scripture, it means your storehouse of Bible knowledge is exhausted.
Tell me, Clete--did god decree what Joseph's brothers did to him??
Did God decree the rejection of Christ by the Jews? Did God decree the atonement of Christ? Did God decree Absolam's adultry with David's concubines in the sight of Israel?? Don't give me any of your rationalizations. They have no standing before the word of God. I(f you can't respond with scripture, it means your storehouse of Bible knowledge is exhausted.
Matt. 16:28 [Jesus]Assuredly, I say to you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.[/Jesus] So your saying there were some standing there that have not yet tasted death?
M't:16:27: For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.
M't:16:28: Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
Looks like a Millennium prophecy to me. Looks like the "death" Jesus speaks of is not the physical one.
M't:16:28: Verily I say unto you, There be some standing here, which shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.
Looks like a Millennium prophecy to me. Looks like the "death" Jesus speaks of is not the physical one.
The Transfiguration.
Rolf Ernst
New member
DEARDELMAR: apparently you did not even read my post, or else you would have had better sense than to ask that. As long as you are so disconnected from what others are saaying, there is no point in responding to you because it apparently will not even register in your mind.
I quote Scripture verbatim and you insist that it doesn't mean what it clearly says but instead that it is somehow referring to the destruction of Israel is 70 A.D., and then you say that I don't use Scripture!
You are delusional.
Are you seriously suggesting that Israel being destroyed by the Roman Empire is Christ coming in power? Is that really what you are saying?
This is funny! Really! It is funny!
You are reading more into what I say than I've actually said.
I never said that things “did not quite come out right”, or that Jesus made a mistake. In fact, I said the reverse. I said that God responded righteously to Israel's unbelief and rejection of their King. He reacted exactly as He said He would in Jer. 18. It's not like Israel wasn't given ample opportunity and warning to repent but they didn't and so God responded accordingly.
Sure. Things have slowed sufficiently to justify my taking the time to watch yet another Calvinist bite the debating dust.
No
No
Yes
No
All that is rational has standing before the Word of God. God is rational and logical, and so is the Bible, as is all truth. If you cannot defeat my logic then just say so. I will not accept anything you present that is illogical, whether it is from the pages of the Bible or not, the fact that it is illogical is proof that the Bible does not teach it.
Again, I use scripture as much or more than you do! It's just that I take God at His Word and you continually explain how it can't mean what it clearly and plainly states.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Last edited:
What? Evil is evil, at least in part, because of its effect on the people who were sinned against. I don't understand your point.
God is invincible because He is sovereign. All power and authority has been delegated by Him and He retains the absolute right, and ability to recall that authority at any time. His ultimate defeat is not possible.
God allows people the luxury of a free will so that it might be possible for Him to have a genuine loving relationship with them. That allowance comes at the price of possible rebellion, that however does not mean that God has let the dog so far off the leash that He has lost control of the situation. No one I know of has even suggested otherwise.
You don't get it. Calvinism teaches that your motives were predestined too.
That isn't the sort of knowledge that Calvinism claims that God has. Their claim is that God knows precisely how well Kobe will do, how many points he will score, when he will score them, how he will score them and how many time the ball with hit the floor in between each point. And yes he would be bound by God's knowledge or else God wouldn't know it. If God or anyone else for that matter knows absolutely what he will do then he is not able to do otherwise.
It's not a common promise. There are two different sets of descendants talked about. One was the nation of Israel, the other the Body of Christ, one of law (conditional) the other of promise (grace).
This must be the case for two reasons, first of all because the apostle Paul said so, and second, because otherwise God would be two faced and self contradictory. A covenant cannot be both conditional and unconditional, that would be incoherent.
Unconditional prophecies would fall into category number 2.
And Peter was not destined to deny Jesus, He could have repented and if He had then there would be yet another prophecy in the Bible that did not come to pass. Had this been the case, God would have been amazed and elated at Peter's faith. He would not have been upset and worried about how Peter had just ruined the whole Bible and destroyed Jesus' credibility.
Couch it in whatever terms you like but Jeremiah chapter 18 makes it super clear and God is specifically referring to the nation of Israel in this chapter. Here, I'll just quote the whole thing so you can see it for yourself….
Jeremiah 18 (NKJV)
- The Potter and the Clay1 The word which came to Jeremiah from the Lord, saying: 2 "Arise and go down to the potter's house, and there I will cause you to hear My words." 3 Then I went down to the potter's house, and there he was, making something at the wheel. 4 And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter; so he made it again into another vessel, as it seemed good to the potter to make.
5 Then the word of the Lord came to me, saying: 6 "O house of Israel, can I not do with you as this potter?" says the Lord. "Look, as the clay is in the potter's hand, so are you in My hand, O house of Israel! 7 The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it, 8 if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it. 9 And the instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it, 10 if it does evil in My sight so that it does not obey My voice, then I will relent concerning the good with which I said I would benefit it.
11 "Now therefore, speak to the men of Judah and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, saying, 'Thus says the Lord: "Behold, I am fashioning a disaster and devising a plan against you. Return now every one from his evil way, and make your ways and your doings good."'"
God's Warning Rejected12 And they said, "That is hopeless! So we will walk according to our own plans, and we will every one obey the dictates of his evil heart."
13 Therefore thus says the Lord:
"Ask now among the Gentiles,
Who has heard such things?
The virgin of Israel has done a very horrible thing.
14 Will a man leave the snow water of Lebanon,
Which comes from the rock of the field?
Will the cold flowing waters be forsaken for strange waters?
15 "Because My people have forgotten Me,
They have burned incense to worthless idols.
And they have caused themselves to stumble in their ways,
From the ancient paths,
To walk in pathways and not on a highway,
16 To make their land desolate and a perpetual hissing;
Everyone who passes by it will be astonished
And shake his head.
17 I will scatter them as with an east wind before the enemy;
I will *show them the back and not the face
In the day of their calamity."
Jeremiah Persecuted
18 Then they said, "Come and let us devise plans against Jeremiah; for the law shall not perish from the priest, nor counsel from the wise, nor the word from the prophet. Come and let us attack him with the tongue, and let us not give heed to any of his words."
19 Give heed to me, O Lord,
And listen to the voice of those who contend with me!
20 Shall evil be repaid for good?
For they have dug a pit for my life.
Remember that I stood before You
To speak good for them,
To turn away Your wrath from them.
21 Therefore deliver up their children to the famine,
And pour out their blood
By the force of the sword;
Let their wives become widows
And bereaved of their children.
Let their men be put to death,
Their young men be slain
By the sword in battle.
22 Let a cry be heard from their houses,
When You bring a troop suddenly upon them;
For they have dug a pit to take me,
And hidden snares for my feet.
23 Yet, Lord, You know all their counsel
Which is against me, to slay me.
Provide no atonement for their iniquity,
Nor blot out their sin from Your sight;
But let them be overthrown before You.
Deal thus with them
In the time of Your anger.
Well yes, of course, the Scripture must be taken in context which includes other passages in the whole of the Bible. The way you know that the particular passage you mentioned from Job is a figure of speech is that there is story after story in the Bible where it is clear that God wanted one thing and got another. Further, if one insists on interpreting the Bible in such a way as to preserve the Calvinistic idea of what it means to be sovereign then you sacrifice the possibility of anyone truly loving God, because as I have said many times now, you cannot love God if you do not have a free will.
No offense but, you are delusional. The only way this might even possibly be the case is if God goes in and kills all the unbelievers which doesn't make it that impressive of a prophecy, does it.
God is totally doing something different! Nostradamus and others like him are con artists, liars. They weren't even guessing or even trying to make educated guesses! There is a book you should read. It was written in the 1800's by a Christian guy named Charles Mackey. It's called, Extraordinary Popular Delusions and the Madness of Crowds. It spends a whole chapter on futurists and how they could say anything at all and turn it into a prophecy that practically everyone would believe. What Nostradamus was doing has nothing whatsoever to do with a God who demonstrates His superior power, authority, intelligence and skill by declaring the end from the beginning without having to force people to do what they don't choose to do of their own free will and without peeking into the future to see what happens.
My use of the word 'prophecy' is Biblical and so I will continue to use it. You call it what you like.
These promises are conditioned upon the righteousness of Jesus Christ, for we are in Him, and so they are quite certain indeed.
I knew what you meant, that's why I used the quotation that I did.
Matt. 16:28 [Jesus], I say to you, there are some standing here who shall not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.[/Jesus]
Come on Lee! Give me a break will ya? Do you really consider this to be proper exegesis? Jesus was plainly speaking of a kingdom for the NATION OF ISRAEL with Him as its King. That's what the entire Old Testament prophesied, that's what Jesus was talking about here and that's what the apostles taught after the giving of the Holy Spirit and so they weren't confused.
It didn't happen Lee, it didn't happen at all, period. Not physically, not spiritually, not figuratively. It just flat out didn't happen, and for good reason. How can God give a nation a kingdom when they hate the One who is to be their King? He can't! (See above quotation of Jer. 18.)
Because it would not have been a complete defeat, that's how! Even if every last single soul that God ever created went to burn forever in Hell, that doesn't change the fact that God is God. He is supreme, holy, just, and good. All the demons in Hell and a million times more could never change that in a billion eternities.
Indeed, the fact that not all will burn forever in Hell is a great triumph for God, even the salvation of a single soul is of infinite and immeasurable value. You need to change you understanding of what a victory is.
While I'm happy to hear that you concede at least this much, it seems to me a bit like saying a woman can be more and more pregnant. We are either free or we are not. If we are not free, then God, who punishes the wicked, is unjust.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Last edited: