 |
| Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > The raging debate continues here... > God's Longsuffering and the Problem of Evil | Forum Quick Jump
|
| 
borg
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 324
| Posted 4/26/2004 5:05 PM (GMT -6) |   | jf scott
Thanks for the question. Yes I believe Christ was predestined before the foundation of the world. I forget the exact verse that
says Christ was predestined before the foundation of the world, but 1 Peter 1:13 backs this claim as well. Christ was foreknown, predestined, and I take this to be His office of mediator and savior, for that is who Christ is and God is who He is; unchanging and enduring in all things. Therefore if Christ was predestined this would mean that He had to be nailed to the cross in order to save His people as prophecyed in Matt 1:21; not to mention hundreds of years earlier Isaiah foretold of the crucifixion and the only way God was going to be crucified was through sin. Does this make sense? Christ was the God-head figure that would redeem His people and I firmly believed it was willed before the foundation of the world that Christ die and redeem for Himself His bride, the church.
jo-ann, i'll get back to you on my image of the Father, i have not time to write it right now.
blessings,
borg
"So it is a more glorious work of power to uphold a soul in a state of grace and holiness, and to carry it on till it is brought to glory, when there is so much sin remaining in the heart resisting, and Satan with all his might opposing, than it would have been to have kept manfrom falling at first, when Satan had nothing in man." Edwards | | Back to Top | | |
 |
WormBowedB4TerribleGod
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2004
Total Posts : 43
| Posted 4/26/2004 5:14 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by borg
If God wants (X) to happen, (X) WILL happen; regardless.
Genesis 3:17
"17 Then to Adam He said, "Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, 'You shall not eat from it';"
God's command, disobeyed
1 Samuel 8:
6 "But the thing was displeasing in the sight of Samuel when they said, "Give us a king to judge us." And Samuel prayed to the LORD.
7 The LORD said to Samuel, "Listen to the voice of the people in regard to all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from being king over them.
8 Like all the deeds which they have done since the day that I brought them up from Egypt even to this day--in that they have forsaken Me and served other gods--so they are doing to you also."
Matthew 23:37 "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling."
Hebrews 3:
"8 DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS AS WHEN THEY PROVOKED ME,
AS IN THE DAY OF TRIAL IN THE WILDERNESS,"
10 "THEREFORE I WAS ANGRY WITH THIS GENERATION,
Why is God angry?
AND SAID, 'THEY ALWAYS GO ASTRAY IN THEIR HEART,
AND THEY DID NOT KNOW MY WAYS';"
Because they disobey Him
12 Take care, brethren, that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God.
13 But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called "Today," so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.
14 For we have become partakers of Christ, if we hold fast the beginning of our assurance firm until the end,
15 while it is said,
"TODAY IF YOU HEAR HIS VOICE,
DO NOT HARDEN YOUR HEARTS, AS WHEN THEY PROVOKED ME."
16 For who provoked Him when they had heard? Indeed, did not all those who came out of Egypt led by Moses?
17 And with whom was He angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the wilderness?
18 And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who were disobedient?
19 So we see that they were not able to enter because of unbelief.
You've been proven wrong. By scripture.
Who are you, oh worm, to question the living God? | | Back to Top | | |
|
borg
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 324
| Posted 4/26/2004 10:38 PM (GMT -6) | | God's will has not been thwarted or stopped. God WILL accomplish all His plans and WILL do all that He wants to do. The people who disobeyed Him, disobeyed His will of the law, but not the will of decree. For it is only through God that they may gain repentance cf. 2 Tim 2:24ff, Ezeikel 11, Jer 24:7ff. The people disobeyed, because repentence was not granted them.
blessings,
borg
"So it is a more glorious work of power to uphold a soul in a state of grace and holiness, and to carry it on till it is brought to glory, when there is so much sin remaining in the heart resisting, and Satan with all his might opposing, than it would have been to have kept manfrom falling at first, when Satan had nothing in man." Edwards | | Back to Top | | |
|
spenlake
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 1050
| Posted 4/27/2004 1:37 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by WormBowedB4TerribleGod
quote:
Originally posted by borg
you HAVE to concede that there are two wills.
Where does it say He has two wills?
Post the verse, it needs:
1. the plural of the noun, "will", i.e. "wills"
2. the modifier, "two", in front of it. i.e. "two wills"
Where is it?
I don't have to concede anything that you have not and can not prove.
Worm,
We both believe that God is:
- Good
- Omnipotent, and has all power to do what He wants.
We both agree that we live in an evil world.
Thus, God has the power AND the character/will, because He is good, to directly intervene and prevent the evil that we see and experience. He dosn't do this now in every psobbilbe instance.
Thus, we have a good God that allows evil when He could stop it. You can call this 2 wills or you can call it a 2 parts of one will, tyou can label it whatever way you like. The net result is the same, the God who could immediately stop evil allows it to continue. We both agree on this, the only thing we don't agree on is WHY?
Spen Lake
| | Back to Top | | |
|
WormBowedB4TerribleGod
Registered Member
Date Joined Feb 2004
Total Posts : 43
| Posted 4/27/2004 2:04 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by spenlake
quote:
Originally posted by WormBowedB4TerribleGod
quote:
Originally posted by borg
you HAVE to concede that there are two wills.
Where does it say He has two wills?
Post the verse, it needs:
1. the plural of the noun, "will", i.e. "wills"
2. the modifier, "two", in front of it. i.e. "two wills"
Where is it?
I don't have to concede anything that you have not and can not prove.
Worm,
We both believe that God is:
- Good
- Omnipotent, and has all power to do what He wants.
We both agree that we live in an evil world.
Thus, God has the power AND the character/will, because He is good, to directly intervene and prevent the evil that we see and experience. He dosn't do this now in every psobbilbe instance.
Thus, we have a good God that allows evil when He could stop it. You can call this 2 wills or you can call it a 2 parts of one will, tyou can label it whatever way you like. The net result is the same, the God who could immediately stop evil allows it to continue. We both agree on this, the only thing we don't agree on is WHY?
Freedom is why.
No verse? I didn't think so.
Why not three wills? Or four wills? Or five wills? Or six wills?. Or seven wills?. Or eight wills?. Or nine wills? Or ten wills?
Since you've tossed the need for scriptural support, hey, GO FOR AN INFINITE NUMBER OF WILLS. 
Who are you, oh worm, to question the living God? | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 4/27/2004 8:38 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by jefscott
John Earp,
quote:
If my daughter does something that I tell her not to do, I have not "allowed" her to do it at all; she has simply disobeyed my will.
I submit that the whole "permits/allows" idea is unfounded Scripturally or logically. Thus, there is no reason to look for a secret, hidden, or permissive will of God.
Good point. I should have said "tolerated" instead of "allowed."
Hi Jeff,
Well, a good parent doesn't tolerate rebellion, he disciplines the rebellious child. 
God certainly doesn't "tolerate" sin.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
borg
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 324
| Posted 4/27/2004 11:15 AM (GMT -6) | | Worm: There aren't three wills in the Bible. Tell me where there are three and I'll tell you why I don't agree with it. The two wills is easily seen as was pointed out above Spen, it's that simple and not hard to understand. Answer me how you would explain 2 Sam 2:25 where God desired to put the sons of Eli death and yet you still maintain that in Ezeikel God doesn't "desire" the death of the wicked, AME HEBREW WORD. Not to mention in Greek there are two different words for will, one, as I have been taught seems to mean will as in decree and the other means wich, and they both seem to be translated "will". There are Scriptual texts and you have yet to explain to me how they don't resolve in two wills/ two parts. Under your presuppositions, God WANTS all to be saved, and WANTS all to have freedom. Are they conflicting view points since not all will be saved???? Answer me please.
Jef, I'm not skipping out on any homework. Christ was predestined before the foundations of the world; what does that mean to you?
jo-ann, my reply on the way I see the Father is still coming, maybe we'd want to start a completley different thread.
blessings,
borg
"So it is a more glorious work of power to uphold a soul in a state of grace and holiness, and to carry it on till it is brought to glory, when there is so much sin remaining in the heart resisting, and Satan with all his might opposing, than it would have been to have kept manfrom falling at first, when Satan had nothing in man." Edwards | | Back to Top | | |
|
Lee Merrill
booted
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 723
| Posted 4/27/2004 2:10 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Jeff,
quote:
EZE 16:63 Then, when I make atonement for you for all you have done, you will remember and be ashamed and never again open your mouth because of your humiliation, declares the Sovereign Lord.
I would say that their sin was the basis of their humiliation. The obedient are truly humble. Besides, how does that prove that God willed their sin? Do you believe that God is the author of sin?
OK, so more humble implies less sin, because of their sin, thus purer, I think. And, yes, I believe that God is the primary cause of all that happens, including sinful actions, but that he is not the author of sin:
JOB 1:15 ... and the Sabeans attacked and carried them off.
JOB 1:21 ... and the Lord has taken away.
JOB 1:22 In all this, Job did not sin by charging God with wrongdoing.
quote:
I see nothing in those verses that proves that God's primary choice was for there to be a Fall and a subsequent Redemption.
No, those verses were to address a different point, but I seem to have misunderstood your question, though. Here is a verse I think shows that God's primary choice was for there to be a fall and redemption:
RO 11:32 For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.
quote:
Borg: There aren't three wills in the Bible.
But how about the priests breaking the Sabbath when they offer the sacrifices that were commanded for that day?
MT 12:5 ... on the Sabbath the priests in the temple desecrate the day and yet are innocent?
Thus isn't this a conflict in God's preceptive will, and thus three wills in God? They are commanded to offer the sacrifices, and commanded to keep the Sabbath, thus two different senses of God's will, here, if the preceptive will concept is adopted.
Now to work on the other side of the fence!
quote:
1 Samuel 2:12 "Now the sons of Eli were worthless men; they did not know the LORD"
God desires their repentance, they continue to rebel, eventually He punishes them. End of story.
What doesn't make sense is the calvinistic take, that
1. God determines they will rebel
2. God is angry at the rebellion He determined for them
3. God determines to punish them for the rebellion He determined for them in the first place
But God did intend to put them to death, that was his plan, as Borg pointed out, God kept them from repenting. Just as in this situation:
2CH 25:16 "I know that God has determined to destroy you, because you have done this and have not listened to my counsel."
So is God just to form people into vessels of wrath, and then punish them, too?
RO 9:19 One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?"
First we should notice what Paul *doesn't* say, he doesn't say that men freely choose to sin, and thus God is just in condemning them. Instead, Paul says "God has a right to do what he wants with us":
RO 9:21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?
And maybe what he wants to do with us is show his mercy:
RO 11:32 For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.
One will in God, here, as well, I think that is possible to maintain! I think the two wills in God view implies that God experiences some frustration, and even that he also has to compromise. But I don't think that is true:
PS 115:3 But our God is in the heavens; He does whatever he pleases.
Blessings,
Lee
==================================================
"Even now we seem to have dim glimpses into regions
from which we receive no word to bring away" (George MacDonald) | | Back to Top | | |
|
borg
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 324
| Posted 4/27/2004 2:28 PM (GMT -6) | | The LORD visited Hannah; and she conceived and gave birth to three sons and two daughters. And the boy Samuel grew before the LORD. Now Eli was very old; and he heard all that his sons were doing to all Israel, and how they lay with women who served at the doorway of the tent of meeting. He said to them, "Why do you do such things, the evil things that I hear from all these people? No, my sons; for the report is not good which I hear the LORD'S people circulating. If one man sins against another, God will mediate from him; but if a man sins agaisnt the LORD, who can intercede for him?" But they would not listen to the voice of their father, for the LORD desired to put them to death.
Now the boy Samuel was growing in stature and in favor both with the LORD and with men. Then a man of God came to Eli and said to him, "Thus says the Lord, 'Did I not indeed reveal Myself to the house of your father when they wer in Egypt in bondage to Pharaoh's house? Did I not choose them from all the tribes of Israel to be My priest, to go up to My alter, to burn incense, to carry an ephod before Me; and did I not give to the house of your father all the fire offerings of the sons of Israel? Why do you kick at My sacrafice and at My offering which I have commanded in My dwelling, and honor your sons above Me, by making yourselves fat with the choicest of every offering of My people Israel? Therefore the LORD God of Israel declares..." 1 Sam 2:21-29ff
I am the good shepherd; and I know My own and My own know Me, even as the Father knows Me... The Jews then gathered around Him, and were saying to Him, "How long will You keep us in suspense? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly." Jesus answered them, "I told you, and you do not believe; the works that I do in My Father's name, these testify of Me. But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. --John 10:14, 24-29
It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. But there are some of you who do not believe." For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him. And He was saying, "For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father." John 6:63-65
The Lord's bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will. --2 Timothy 2:24-26
Honor your father and your mother, as the LORD your God has commanded you, that your days may be prolonged and that it may go well with you on the land which the LORD your God gives you. You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not bear false witness agaisnt your neighbor. --Duet 5:16-20
"These criticisms are not new. Jonathan Edwards wrote 250 years ago, "The Arminians ridicule the distinction between the secret and revealed will of God, or, more properly expressed, the distinction between the decree and the law of God; because we say he may decree one thing, and command another. And so, they argue, we hold a contrariety in God, as if one will of his contradicted another."
But in spite of these criticisms the distinction stands, not because of a logical or theological deduction, but because it is inescapable in the Scriptures. The most careful exegete writing in Pinnock's Case for Arminianism concedes the existence of two wills in God." --John Piper
"The most compelling example of God's willing for sin to come to pass while at the same time disapproving the sin is his willing the death of his perfect, divine Son. The betrayal of Jesus by Judas was a morally evil act inspired immediately by Satan (Luke 22:3). Yet in Acts 2:23 Luke says, "This Jesus [was] delivered up according to the definite plan (boule) and foreknowledge of God." The betrayal was sin, and it involved the instrumentality of Satan; but it was part of God's ordained plan. That is, there is a sense in which God willed the delivering up of his Son, even though the act was sin.
Moreover Herod's contempt for Jesus (Luke 23:11) and Pilate's spineless expediency (Luke 23:24) and the Jews' "Crucify! Crucify him!" (Luke 23:21) and the Gentile soldiers' mockery (Luke 23:36) were also sinful attitudes and deeds. Yet in Acts 4:27-28 Luke expresses his understanding of the sovereignty of God in these acts by recording the prayer of the Jerusalem saints:
Truly in this city there were gathered together against thy holy servant Jesus, whom thou didst anoint both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel to do whatever thy hand and thy plan (boule) had predestined to take place.
Herod, Pilate, the soldiers and Jewish crowds lifted their hand to rebel against the Most High only to find that their rebellion was unwitting (sinful) service in the inscrutable designs of God." --Piper
"The most well known example is the hardening of Pharaoh's heart. In Exodus 8:1 the Lord says to Moses, "Go in to Pharaoh and say to him, 'Thus says the LORD, "Let my people go, that they may serve me."'" In other words God's command, that is, his will, is that Pharaoh let the Israelites go. Nevertheless from the start he also willed that Pharaoh not let the Israelites go. In Exodus 4:21 God says to Moses, "When you go back to Egypt, see that you do all those wonders before Pharaoh, which I have put in your hand; but I will harden his heart, so that he will not let the people go." At one point Pharaoh himself acknowledges that his unwillingness to let the people go is sin: "Now therefore forgive, I pray, my sin" (Exodus 10:17). Thus what we see is that God commands that Pharaoh do a thing which God himself wills not to allow. The good thing that God commands he prevents. And the thing he brings about involves sin.
Some have tried to avoid this implication by pointing out that during the first five plagues the text does not say explicitly that God hardened Pharaoh's heart but that it "was hardened" (Exodus 7:22; 8:19; 9:7) or that Pharaoh hardened his own heart (Exodus 8:15,32), and that only in the sixth plague does it say explicitly "the Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart" (9:12; 10:20,27; 11:10; 14:4). For example R.T. Forster and V.P. Marston say that only from the sixth plague on God gave Pharaoh "supernatural strength to continue with his evil path of rebellion"
But this observation does not succeed in avoiding the evidence of two wills in God. Even if Forster and Marston were right that God was not willing for Pharaoh's heart to be hardened during the first five plagues, they concede that for the last five plagues God does will this, at least in the sense of strengthening Pharaoh to continue in the path of rebellion. Thus there is a sense in which God does will that Pharaoh go on refusing to let the people go, and there is a sense in which he does will that Pharaoh release the people. For he commands, "Let my people go." This illustrates why theologians talk about the "will of command" ("Let my people go!") and the "will of decree" ("God hardened Pharaoh's heart")." --Piper
***All Piper quotes were taken from his article "Are There Two Wills in God"
What does make sense in the Calvinistic theology; because it's in the Bible and MUST be contended with:
1. Man is not free, but in bondage to sin; Eph 2:1-9ff, Gen 6:5, Jer 17:9, 2 Tim 2:24ff.
2. God grants salvation and repentance; 2 Tim 2:24ff, Eph 2:8, 9, Jonah 2:4, Acts 13:48
3. God ordains sin; Prov 21:1, Gen 20, 1 Sam 2:22-25, Rev 17:16, 17
4. Man is responsible; Acts 2, Exodus 5ff, 1 Peter 2:15 (And a mass of other verses that commands us to turn and repent and believe; even though it is only the soveriegn work of Christ.)
Sorry this one comes to Biblical teaching, not what a mere human thinks in regard to self-determination and responsibility. I see these doctrines all throughout Scripture, so any plea for me to see elsewise, is going to have to come from the Bible, not mere human philosophy.
Praise to Him alone, who is able to do immeasurable more than we could ever ask or imagine,
Borg
"So it is a more glorious work of power to uphold a soul in a state of grace and holiness, and to carry it on till it is brought to glory, when there is so much sin remaining in the heart resisting, and Satan with all his might opposing, than it would have been to have kept manfrom falling at first, when Satan had nothing in man." Edwards | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 4/27/2004 2:53 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by jefscott
John,
quote:
Well, a good parent doesn't tolerate rebellion, he disciplines the rebellious child.
God certainly doesn't "tolerate" sin.
Right again. God forebears sin until he judges it. Am I getting closer? 
I think so, Jeff.  If my point has not been made thus far, it is because I like to ask questions to get people to really think about their answers before they just regurgitate what they've always been taught. My point is that the entire "permissive will of God" idea is fundamentally flawed, in that it assumes, with literally zero Scriptural or Logical support, that God "allows/permits" evil.
My understanding is that evil simply is a violation of God's will, and thus is NOT permitted or allowed by Him (unless one presupposes a deterministic idea of God, in which case it is a matter of course that one would have to say there were two wills in God or that God wills evil).
quote:
BTW, have you addressed what my main point of this thread is? That Boyd's parent love/risk model doesn't completely explain God's enduring evil and it's consequences for such a long time? I argued many posts back that doxological purposes must be part of the explanation in addition to the simplistic notion that God values "free-will" that much. I'd be interested in your take on this.
I honestly don't know why God doesn't simply end history right now, except to cite the oft-cited 2 Peter 3:8-9. He's interested in getting as many into His Kingdom as possible, and is giving them time to repent.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 4/27/2004 3:59 PM (GMT -6) | | Hey Lee,
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EZE 16:63 Then, when I make atonement for you for all you have done, you will remember and be ashamed and never again open your mouth because of your humiliation, declares the Sovereign Lord.
I would say that their sin was the basis of their humiliation. The obedient are truly humble. Besides, how does that prove that God willed their sin? Do you believe that God is the author of sin?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
OK, so more humble implies less sin, because of their sin, thus purer, I think.
I'm still confused. Ezekiel 16:61 says, "Then thou shalt remember thy ways, and be ashamed, ..." Compare this to Ezekiel 36:31, which says, "Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall lothe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations."
The idea seems to be that after the prophecied conversion, the converts, with their new perspective will be ashamed of their past ways. How does this prove that their past ways/sins CAUSED their self loathing? Why is it not the new regenerated heart that CAUSES the self loathing?
quote:
And, yes, I believe that God is the primary cause of all that happens, including sinful actions, but that he is not the author of sin:
JOB 1:15 ... and the Sabeans attacked and carried them off.
JOB 1:21 ... and the Lord has taken away.
JOB 1:22 In all this, Job did not sin by charging God with wrongdoing.
God removed the "hedge" that protected Job. That is not sin. That may be completely consistent with the verse that says God will not allow us to be tempted above what we are able. Perhaps God knew Job was "able" to resist sinning and just "allowed" the "taking away" as a kind of trial/temptation. What, on the other hand, did God do (as primary cause) to cause Satan to want to usurp the rightful place of the Most High??
quote:
Here is a verse I think shows that God's primary choice was for there to be a fall and redemption:
RO 11:32 For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.
The greek work translated "bound" means something like "shut up" or "inclose." The KJV translates it "conclude," perhaps suggesting the idea of an open and "shut" case, or a case where the evidence completely "incloses" or makes inescapable the verdict of unbelief. Regardless, to rule out OV, one must demonstrate that the verse indicates a decree of God BEFORE THE CREATION OF THE WORLD.
I've tried to distinguish my OV views from Boyd. To me, the fundamental idea of OV is that God did not purpose, desire, or foreknow the Fall. Thus, when you use verses against my view, please indicate how you think they disprove THAT particular idea.
wjs | | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 4/27/2004 4:14 PM (GMT -6) | | Borg,
quote:
Jef, I'm not skipping out on any homework. Christ was predestined before the foundations of the world; what does that mean to you?
If I remember correctly, the verse you referred to was 1 Peter 1:20, which says,
"Having, indeed, been foreknown before the down-casting of the world, but manifested in these last times for you."
The greek word for "know" frequently refers to a kind of intimate knowing of a person. Thus, the verse simply suggests that God "knew" Christ this way, before the down-casting of the world. I don't see how that proves your point that God foreknew, desired, and purposed the Fall.
wjs | | Back to Top | | |
|
Lee Merrill
booted
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 723
| Posted 4/28/2004 2:58 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi John and Jeff,
quote:
John: My point is that the entire "permissive will of God" idea is fundamentally flawed, in that it assumes, with literally zero Scriptural or Logical support, that God "allows/permits" evil.
I agree!
quote:
John: My understanding is that evil simply is a violation of God's will, and thus is NOT permitted or allowed by Him (unless one presupposes a deterministic idea of God, in which case it is a matter of course that one would have to say there were two wills in God or that God wills evil).
Here I have to disagree, though. I don't believe that evil is a violation of God's will, though he does hate evil, he also includes even sinful actions as part of his plan:
GE 50:20 You intended to harm me, but God intended it for good.
Now I don't believe in two wills in God, and I wouldn't say "wills evil," but I believe that God does will even evil actions, though not the evil per se:
AC 4:28 They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen.
And this is referring to the cross, a very sinful act of men.
quote:
Jeff: Ezekiel 16:61 says, "Then thou shalt remember thy ways, and be ashamed, ..." Compare this to Ezekiel 36:31, which says, "Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations."
The idea seems to be that after the prophesied conversion, the converts, with their new perspective will be ashamed of their past ways. How does this prove that their past ways/sins CAUSED their self loathing? Why is it not the new regenerated heart that CAUSES the self loathing?
Certainly the heart is involved, I would also say that "loathe yourselves for your sins" can be restated reasonably as "loathe yourselves because of your sins," i.e. that their humility can be said to be the (good) result of their sin.
quote:
JOB 1:15 ... and the Sabeans attacked and carried them off.
JOB 1:21 ... and the Lord has taken away.
JOB 1:22 In all this, Job did not sin by charging God with wrongdoing.
Jeff: Perhaps God knew Job was "able" to resist sinning and just "allowed" the "taking away" as a kind of trial/temptation. What, on the other hand, did God do (as primary cause) to cause Satan to want to usurp the rightful place of the Most High??
But I don't believe that you can say God only allowed the "taking away." Here are some more verses:
JOB 2:3 [God said] "... you incited me against him to ruin him."
JOB 2:10 [Job said] "Shall we accept good from God, and not trouble?"
JOB 42:11 They comforted and consoled him over all the trouble the Lord had brought upon him...
God was the primary cause of this, I think. Now about the devil's fall, I cannot say how God may have acted as the primary cause of this (I believe this was in his plan, though). Here are two verses that I think refer to the devil, and speak of why the devil sinned:
EZE 28:16 Through your widespread trade you were filled with violence, and you sinned.
EZE 28:17 Your heart became proud on account of your beauty, and you corrupted your wisdom because of your splendor.
But I still can't explain exactly why the devil took that initial step! I guess I have to plead "the mystery of evil", here (2 Th 2:7).
quote:
Lee: Here is a verse I think shows that God's primary choice was for there to be a fall and redemption:
RO 11:32 For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.
Jeff: The greek work translated "bound" means something like "shut up" or "inclose." The KJV translates it "conclude," perhaps suggesting the idea of an open and "shut" case, or a case where the evidence completely "incloses" or makes inescapable the verdict of unbelief. Regardless, to rule out OV, one must demonstrate that the verse indicates a decree of God BEFORE THE CREATION OF THE WORLD.
If "bound" means "pronounced" here, then that makes my point a weak one, I agree. I think "conclude" is the old English sense of this word, dictionary.com says there is an obsolete meaning of "to confine; enclose" here, and thus "shut up" or "enclose" is the proper meaning of this word.
So I think this is more than just "pronounced", it implies a definite plan on God's part, and definite action to carry out that plan. Thus, I think, Adam's disobedience was also planned by God. Now this may not have been his plan before creation (I believe it was). But I think my point can stand, either way, since you are stating that the OV says that "God did not purpose, desire, or foreknow the Fall." If God planned Adam's disobedience, he planned it before it happened, and thus this view is, I think, mistaken.
I'm not sure exactly how your view is different from this, though, if this quote is about this area:
"Jeff: It seems that the 'fall'-out (pun partially intended) of the history of the creation has modified the mode whereby God's self-oriented purposes and God's purposes for Christ are being actualized."
Could you explain a little more, if you don't mind?
Blessings,
Lee
==================================================
"Even now we seem to have dim glimpses into regions
from which we receive no word to bring away" (George MacDonald) | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 4/28/2004 3:41 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Lee Merrill
Hi John and Jeff,
quote:
John: My point is that the entire "permissive will of God" idea is fundamentally flawed, in that it assumes, with literally zero Scriptural or Logical support, that God "allows/permits" evil.
I agree!
quote:
John: My understanding is that evil simply is a violation of God's will, and thus is NOT permitted or allowed by Him (unless one presupposes a deterministic idea of God, in which case it is a matter of course that one would have to say there were two wills in God or that God wills evil).
Here I have to disagree, though. I don't believe that evil is a violation of God's will, though he does hate evil, he also includes even sinful actions as part of his plan:
Lee,
It is not clear how you can affirm the former and deny the latter. Please explain. Thanks. | | Back to Top | | |
|
Similitude
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2004
Total Posts : 4968
| Posted 4/28/2004 3:59 PM (GMT -6) | | Lee,
I think we are closer in perspective than I had previously thought.
quote:
Now I don't believe in two wills in God, and I wouldn't say "wills evil," but I believe that God does will even evil actions, though not the evil per se:
That's pretty much what I believe. God wishes that humans would live as benevolently as possible. But since they don't, He does indeed USE human evil to fulfill doxological and other purposes. Moreover, God does indeed, per Romans, wish to show his wrath - but only because his wrath has been provoked. I, too, have wanted to show my wrath, but I don't go around desiring to show wrath without my wrath being provoked - that would be pathological. Hence, I conclude that God has all kinds of plans and purposes that involve the sinful behavior of man. But He preferred that the Fall had never occurred - it "repented God that He had made man."
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff: Ezekiel 16:61 says, "Then thou shalt remember thy ways, and be ashamed, ..." Compare this to Ezekiel 36:31, which says, "Then shall ye remember your own evil ways, and your doings that were not good, and shall loathe yourselves in your own sight for your iniquities and for your abominations."
The idea seems to be that after the prophesied conversion, the converts, with their new perspective will be ashamed of their past ways. How does this prove that their past ways/sins CAUSED their self loathing? Why is it not the new regenerated heart that CAUSES the self loathing?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certainly the heart is involved, I would also say that "loathe yourselves for your sins" can be restated reasonably as "loathe yourselves because of your sins," i.e. that their humility can be said to be the (good) result of their sin.
What I'm saying is that the humility is the good result of conversion, not their past sin. For unrepented sin does NOT lead to humility.
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JOB 1:15 ... and the Sabeans attacked and carried them off.
JOB 1:21 ... and the Lord has taken away.
JOB 1:22 In all this, Job did not sin by charging God with wrongdoing.
Jeff: Perhaps God knew Job was "able" to resist sinning and just "allowed" the "taking away" as a kind of trial/temptation. What, on the other hand, did God do (as primary cause) to cause Satan to want to usurp the rightful place of the Most High??
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But I don't believe that you can say God only allowed the "taking away." Here are some more verses:
JOB 2:3 [God said] "... you incited me against him to ruin him."
JOB 2:10 [Job said] "Shall we accept good from God, and not trouble?"
JOB 42:11 They comforted and consoled him over all the trouble the Lord had brought upon him...
God was the primary cause of this, I think.
To me, the verses you quote from Job are idiomatic expressions that are to be understood in light of the beginning of the book of Job. God dropped the "hedge," and by doing so was instrumental in what came to pass. But the dropping of the "hedge" is not intrinsically evil.
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lee: Here is a verse I think shows that God's primary choice was for there to be a fall and redemption:
RO 11:32 For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...it implies a definite plan on God's part, and definite action to carry out that plan. Thus, I think, Adam's disobedience was also planned by God. Now this may not have been his plan before creation (I believe it was). But I think my point can stand, either way, since you are stating that the OV says that "God did not purpose, desire, or foreknow the Fall." If God planned Adam's disobedience, he planned it before it happened, and thus this view is, I think, mistaken.
I think the context makes clear that the timing of God's "concluding" all (Jews and Gentiles) in disobedience coincides with the proclamation of the gospel to all (both Jew and Gentile). I.e., the word of God went to the Gentiles because even the Jews had been "concluded" in unbelief. Thus, it is contextually related to a point in history and has nothing to do with a pre-Fall "plan" in my view.
quote:
I'm not sure exactly how your view is different from this, though, if this quote is about this area:
"Jeff: It seems that the 'fall'-out (pun partially intended) of the history of the creation has modified the mode whereby God's self-oriented purposes and God's purposes for Christ are being actualized."
Could you explain a little more, if you don't mind?
God had intentions for the creation before the Fall. There were also inentions for Christ's role in the creation. When the Fall occurred, God's glory had to be obtained differently because of the new conditions and Christ had to suffer to redeem what, otherwise, would have needed no redemption. I don't believe that God's glory intrinisically requires Him to be malevolent - but that seems to be implied by the anti-OV view.
wjs | | Back to Top | | |
|
Lee Merrill
booted
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 723
| Posted 4/29/2004 1:48 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi John,
quote:
Lee: I don't believe that evil is a violation of God's will, though he does hate evil, he also includes even sinful actions as part of his plan...
John: It is not clear how you can affirm the former and deny the latter. Please explain. Thanks.
How about this analogy? If someone needs surgery, then cutting them up is bad, per se, but still it's part of a good plan. Now let's say that the surgeon had to be hauled out of prison, because he was the only one who could do this surgery. And let's say also that the surgeon did it for a bad purpose, that he actually tried to harm the patient, but ended up helping them instead...
GE 50:20 And as for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good...
God does hate evil per se, but it's part of his plan, too:
AC 4:28 They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen.
Blessings,
Lee
==================================================
"Even now we seem to have dim glimpses into regions
from which we receive no word to bring away" (George MacDonald) | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 4/29/2004 2:01 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by Lee Merrill
Hi John,
quote:
Lee: I don't believe that evil is a violation of God's will, though he does hate evil, he also includes even sinful actions as part of his plan...
John: It is not clear how you can affirm the former and deny the latter. Please explain. Thanks.
How about this analogy? If someone needs surgery, then cutting them up is bad, per se, but still it's part of a good plan.
If I have a cancerous tumor in my body, I would never think of surgery as "bad." When I broke my ankle in three places as a teenager, I definitely thought of the surgery and the surgeon as a blessing. Without the surgery, I would have had virtually no use of my right leg to this day, and would likely have died of infection eventually.
quote:
Now let's say that the surgeon had to be hauled out of prison, because he was the only one who could do this surgery. And let's say also that the surgeon did it for a bad purpose, that he actually tried to harm the patient, but ended up helping them instead...
I don't see how it follows that God fits your analogy of a surgeon "hauled out of prison."
quote:
GE 50:20 And as for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good...
This shows there were at least TWO wills involved: That of Joseph's (evil) brothers, and that of God's (good).
quote:
God does hate evil per se, but it's part of his plan, too:
AC 4:28 They did what your power and will had decided beforehand should happen.
The crucifixion of Christ was for the highest good--the atonement for the sins of the whole world. Therefore it is not evident to me how God is to blame for sacrificing his Son (who volunteered for the role), in order to save the world from sin.
"The Discovery of new truth will modify old views and opinions, and there is perhaps no end to this process with finite minds in any world." Charles G. Finney, Systematic Theology.
revivaltheology.net
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Lee Merrill
booted
Date Joined Jun 2001
Total Posts : 723
| Posted 4/29/2004 2:04 PM (GMT -6) | | Hi Jeff,
quote:
JOB 2:3 [God said] "... you incited me against him to ruin him."
JOB 2:10 [Job said] "Shall we accept good from God, and not trouble?"
JOB 42:11 They comforted and consoled him over all the trouble the Lord had brought upon him...
Jeff: To me, the verses you quote from Job are idiomatic expressions that are to be understood in light of the beginning of the book of Job. God dropped the "hedge," and by doing so was instrumental in what came to pass. But the dropping of the "hedge" is not intrinsically evil.
But I think more than this is implied, though:
JOB 1:21 ... and the Lord has taken away.
God did drop the hedge, but "accept trouble from God", "taken away" implies more than just allowing these events. Could the devil have decided not to bother Job, in your opinion? If not, then I think we must insist that God was the primary cause of these events. Also, there is this verse:
JOB 42:12 The Lord blessed the latter part of Job's life more than the first.
Surely this is not idiomatic, and I think the verses that say God acted "to ruin him" previously are not idioms, either.
quote:
RO 11:32 For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.
Lee: ...it implies a definite plan on God's part, and definite action to carry out that plan. Thus, I think, Adam's disobedience was also planned by God.
Jeff: I think the context makes clear that the timing of God's "concluding" all (Jews and Gentiles) in disobedience coincides with the proclamation of the gospel to all (both Jew and Gentile).
But how can this refer to "all men," though? I think literally "all men" is meant here:
RO 11:7-8 The others were hardened, as it is written: "God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes so that they could not see and ears so that they could not hear, to this very day."
And this is a quote from Isaiah, referring not only to the Israelites of Paul's day, but also to those of Isaiah's day, or even all the way back to Moses, in Deut. 29:4, if Paul had that verse in mind as well.
quote:
God had intentions for the creation before the Fall. There were also inentions for Christ's role in the creation. When the Fall occurred, God's glory had to be obtained differently because of the new conditions and Christ had to suffer to redeem what, otherwise, would have needed no redemption. I don't believe that God's glory intrinisically requires Him to be malevolent - but that seems to be implied by the anti-OV view.
Certainly God is not malevolent! And I believe we are allowed to hope that all men may be saved, so how does this non-OV view imply malevolence?
Blessings,
Lee
==================================================
"Even now we seem to have dim glimpses into regions
from which we receive no word to bring away" (George MacDonald) | | Back to Top | | |
| 82 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 3 4 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 9:31 PM (GMT -6)
There are a total of 97,718 posts in 6,040 threads.
In the last 3 days there were 0 new threads and 0 reply posts. View Active Threads
|
Forum powered by dotNetBB v2.42EC SP3
dotNetBB © 2000-2026 |
|
|