Open Theism Discussion Board
  HomeLog InRegisterSearch the ForumHelp
   
Open Theism Discussion Board > Public Forums > The raging debate continues here... > wondering about Libertarian Free Will  Forum Quick Jump
 
New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
79 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page :
 1  2  3  4 
[ << Previous Thread | Next Thread >> | Show Newest Post First ]

lock
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 701
 
   Posted 9/28/2004 10:36 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
quote:
God is perfectly justified in placing conditions on salvation; the Scriptures clearly show this when unbelievers are directly exhorted to repent and believe the Gospel. Submitting to the claims of the Gospel cannot be meritorious in any way. And yes, it is a requirement, or else we hurl cavils at the very word of God which commands all men everywhere to repent.


John-
The bible also makes it perfectly clear that if a person is not lead by the spirit, they will think the message of grace is stupidity. The bible leaves no area for middle ground. You are either a slave to sin or a slave to righteousness. If your disposition is of the flesh, you will mind the things of the flesh, and will be a slave to sin. If your disposition is of spirit, you will be lead by the spirit, and will be a slave to righteousness. Where does the bible speak of this mysterious time period of LFW when a person is drawn by the spirit to understand the things of God but yet rejects them?


His achievement are we, being created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God makes ready beforehand, that we should be walking in them.

Back to Top
 

JEE
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 1466
 
   Posted 9/28/2004 11:19 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
quote:
Originally posted by lock

quote:
God is perfectly justified in placing conditions on salvation; the Scriptures clearly show this when unbelievers are directly exhorted to repent and believe the Gospel. Submitting to the claims of the Gospel cannot be meritorious in any way. And yes, it is a requirement, or else we hurl cavils at the very word of God which commands all men everywhere to repent.


John-
The bible also makes it perfectly clear that if a person is not lead by the spirit, they will think the message of grace is stupidity. The bible leaves no area for middle ground. You are either a slave to sin or a slave to righteousness. If your disposition is of the flesh, you will mind the things of the flesh, and will be a slave to sin. If your disposition is of spirit, you will be lead by the spirit, and will be a slave to righteousness. Where does the bible speak of this mysterious time period of LFW when a person is drawn by the spirit to understand the things of God but yet rejects them?



It is not my job to educate you on where the Scripture teaches that man is able to reject the leading of the Spirit, lock. If you are not aware of such passages, it is your own fault. Bandit


http://revivaltheology.net

Back to Top
 

spenlake
Registered Member


Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 1050
 
   Posted 9/28/2004 11:35 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
quote:
Originally posted by JEE

quote:
Originally posted by lock

quote:
God is perfectly justified in placing conditions on salvation; the Scriptures clearly show this when unbelievers are directly exhorted to repent and believe the Gospel. Submitting to the claims of the Gospel cannot be meritorious in any way. And yes, it is a requirement, or else we hurl cavils at the very word of God which commands all men everywhere to repent.


John-
The bible also makes it perfectly clear that if a person is not lead by the spirit, they will think the message of grace is stupidity. The bible leaves no area for middle ground. You are either a slave to sin or a slave to righteousness. If your disposition is of the flesh, you will mind the things of the flesh, and will be a slave to sin. If your disposition is of spirit, you will be lead by the spirit, and will be a slave to righteousness. Where does the bible speak of this mysterious time period of LFW when a person is drawn by the spirit to understand the things of God but yet rejects them?



It is not my job to educate you on where the Scripture teaches that man is able to reject the leading of the Spirit, lock. If you are not aware of such passages, it is your own fault. Bandit



I think that we are called to instruct people that ask us in the scriptures and that to abdicate in the face of an "honest" question would be something close to "sin."
quote:
Until I come, give attention to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation and teaching...
All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.



Here are a few passages that may deal with your issue.


Acts 28:25
25And when they did not agree with one another, they began leaving after Paul had spoken one parting word, “The Holy Spirit rightly spoke through Isaiah the prophet to your fathers, 26saying,
‘GO TO THIS PEOPLE AND SAY,
“YOU WILL KEEP ON HEARING, BUT WILL NOT UNDERSTAND;
AND YOU WILL KEEP ON SEEING, BUT WILL NOT PERCEIVE;
27 FOR THE HEART OF THIS PEOPLE HAS BECOME DULL,
AND WITH THEIR EARS THEY SCARCELY HEAR,
AND THEY HAVE CLOSED THEIR EYES;
OTHERWISE THEY MIGHT SEE WITH THEIR EYES,
AND HEAR WITH THEIR EARS,
AND UNDERSTAND WITH THEIR HEART AND RETURN,
AND I WOULD HEAL THEM.”’

1 Co 11:4
4For if one comes and preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted, you bear this beautifully.
Eph 4:30
30Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption.
1 Thes 4:8
8So, he who rejects this is not rejecting man but the God who gives His Holy Spirit to you.
1 Thess 5:19
19Do not quench the Spirit;


Spen Lake

Back to Top
 

JEE
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 1466
 
   Posted 9/28/2004 11:42 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Hi Spen,

Perhaps you haven't read some of the past interchanges Lock and I have had here. Based on those, I do not see his question as "honest."

Even if I were to do Lock's homework for him on this (which I won't), he has already clearly demonstrated in the past his own unwillingness to consider any other point of view than his own on this subject. I know precisely where he is trying to go with his line of reasoning, and no amount of Scripture or Reason is able to change his mind. (Of course he can't really help himself, for he must choose according to his strongest desire, but in any case...)

The onus is on those of you who deny man has free will to demonstrate such.

Sincerely,

John


http://revivaltheology.net

Back to Top
 

spenlake
Registered Member


Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 1050
 
   Posted 9/28/2004 11:56 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
quote:
Originally posted by JEE

Hi Spen,

Perhaps you haven't read some of the past interchanges Lock and I have had here. Based on those, I do not see his question as "honest."

Even if I were to do Lock's homework for him on this (which I won't), he has already clearly demonstrated in the past his own unwillingness to consider any other point of view than his own on this subject. I know precisely where he is trying to go with his line of reasoning, and no amount of Scripture or Reason is able to change his mind. (Of course he can't really help himself, for he must choose according to his strongest desire, but in any case...)

The onus is on those of you who deny man has free will to demonstrate such.

Sincerely,

John




I was probably responding to what was simply "frustration" with your dialogue. I hadn't read all the posts and that is exactly why I qualified with "honest." Your record with me has been both patient and respectful and I am grateful for our interchanges. I am sure that I can be frustrating at times as well.


Spen Lake

Back to Top
 

lock
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 701
 
   Posted 9/29/2004 3:34 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
quote:
Originally posted by JEE

quote:
Originally posted by lock

quote:
God is perfectly justified in placing conditions on salvation; the Scriptures clearly show this when unbelievers are directly exhorted to repent and believe the Gospel. Submitting to the claims of the Gospel cannot be meritorious in any way. And yes, it is a requirement, or else we hurl cavils at the very word of God which commands all men everywhere to repent.


John-
The bible also makes it perfectly clear that if a person is not lead by the spirit, they will think the message of grace is stupidity. The bible leaves no area for middle ground. You are either a slave to sin or a slave to righteousness. If your disposition is of the flesh, you will mind the things of the flesh, and will be a slave to sin. If your disposition is of spirit, you will be lead by the spirit, and will be a slave to righteousness. Where does the bible speak of this mysterious time period of LFW when a person is drawn by the spirit to understand the things of God but yet rejects them?



It is not my job to educate you on where the Scripture teaches that man is able to reject the leading of the Spirit, lock. If you are not aware of such passages, it is your own fault. Bandit



Taking the easy way out, John?


His achievement are we, being created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God makes ready beforehand, that we should be walking in them.

Back to Top
 

rossfadeinout
Registered Member




Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 428
 
   Posted 9/29/2004 4:52 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Perhaps John realizes that when he posts these kinds of responses in the past, his response, in a sense, falls on deaf ears.

Or perhaps he is trying to keep the thread on track.Tongue The thread was started to address the subject of the coherence of Libertarian Free Will. It seems that in the discussion of the Biblical texts, those who find the concept of LFW coherent defend the Open View interpretation, while those who see the will as determined by desires (Spen Lake and Lock) defend the compatiblistic interpretation.

I still think that there is a lot of ground to cover in the discussion of Libertarian vs. Compatibalistic freedom.

Ross


"Let us remember how common the folly is of going from one faulty extreme into the opposite." -Thomas Reid

Back to Top
 

lock
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 701
 
   Posted 9/29/2004 6:53 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
quote:
Originally posted by rossfadeinout

Perhaps John realizes that when he posts these kinds of responses in the past, his response, in a sense, falls on deaf ears.

Or perhaps he is trying to keep the thread on track.Tongue The thread was started to address the subject of the coherence of Libertarian Free Will. It seems that in the discussion of the Biblical texts, those who find the concept of LFW coherent defend the Open View interpretation, while those who see the will as determined by desires (Spen Lake and Lock) defend the compatiblistic interpretation.

I still think that there is a lot of ground to cover in the discussion of Libertarian vs. Compatibalistic freedom.

Ross




Ross-

How is it "off track" to discuss the scripture that teaches LFW, especially during the period at which a person makes the decision to accept God's offer or not when drawn by the spirit?


His achievement are we, being created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God makes ready beforehand, that we should be walking in them.

Back to Top
 

rossfadeinout
Registered Member




Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 428
 
   Posted 9/29/2004 7:26 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Hey Lock,

Sorry if I came off rude by saying that the discussion was heading "off track." But what I was trying to say is that what i was hoping to discuss whether Libertarian Free Will was a concept that was coherent. It seems that from the discussion of the Biblical texts, those who find LFW coherent defend an interpretation that puts responsibility for accepting God's gracious offer in the hands of man. Those who understand Free Will in a compatibalistic sense -- that our desires cause our decisions (like Spen Lake, and most Calvinists I've read) interpret scripture through this understanding of human will.

In other words, it seems that what a person believes about the nature of the human will -- whether we have compatibalistic or libertarian free will -- has a great deal to do with how they will interpret the scripture.

I think that the discussion of scripture is important, but the reason that I started the thread is to discuss the concept of LFW.

I have almost finished Thomas Pink's book on Free Will. He clearly articulates the objections to LFW that I made at the beginning of the thread. I'm gonna try to post a summary of his articulation of the objections when I get some more time.

Ross


"Let us remember how common the folly is of going from one faulty extreme into the opposite." -Thomas Reid

Back to Top
 

spenlake
Registered Member


Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 1050
 
   Posted 9/29/2004 7:47 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Ross,

I don't consider myself an "expert" on freewill. When you say, "Those who understand Free Will in a compatibalistic sense -- that our desires cause our decisions (like Spen Lake, and most Calvinists I've read) interpret scripture through this understanding of human will." I don't think that I would say our desires cause our decisions as much as I would that we act in accordance with our desires. It is the "cause" that bothers me. We are commanded to pray "lead us not into temptation" and to me this is more like requesting not to be placed into a situation where my desires would have the opportunity to lead me into sin. My not acting more sinful that I am capable of is not due primarily to "my choices or my will" but to the gracious God who keeps me. I am grateful to Him for limiting the areas of temptation for me. I am probably explaining this concept poorly, but what I wanted to convey is that I believe that God can limit the opportunity of my desires to express themselves in sin by not leading me into temptation and this would mean that my desires do not "cause" my decisions in isolation. Even this is within the context of Father who can not lead me into temptation, and thus not have me "caused."


Spen Lake

Back to Top
 

lock
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 701
 
   Posted 9/29/2004 8:04 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Ross-

I understand what you are saying. I agree with what you are saying about LFW, because of how our choices are influenced. I also understand that a part of LFW is to take the "blame" for evil in the world away from God and place it, as you say, in the responsibility of man. Never does the bible say that God commits evil deeds, but it does show that God will use evil to meet His purposes. In the case of Job, the evil he experienced happened only because God allowed it. The instrument was Satan, but it was still of God. The judgments brought upon Israel in the Old Testament involved much evil, but it is still brought about by God. I think it is noble for us to try to keep God's hands clean, so to speak, from the evil in the world, but God must have a purpose for evil in His creation. Was there no purpose for knowing good and evil? In order to have a Savior, do we not need to be in a place in which we need to be saved? I am not saying that God finds pleasure in the evil, I do not think God finds pleasure in judging man for his evil (Rom. 9:22 says God carries with much patience, the vessels of indignation).

God has given mankind this experience of evil in order to humble them. Man will be judged for the evil he commits. This is a part of God's purpose. Through this judgment man will see his need for God and a Savior.


His achievement are we, being created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God makes ready beforehand, that we should be walking in them.

Back to Top
 

JEE
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 1466
 
   Posted 9/29/2004 10:46 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
quote:
Originally posted by lock

quote:
Originally posted by JEE

quote:
Originally posted by lock

quote:
God is perfectly justified in placing conditions on salvation; the Scriptures clearly show this when unbelievers are directly exhorted to repent and believe the Gospel. Submitting to the claims of the Gospel cannot be meritorious in any way. And yes, it is a requirement, or else we hurl cavils at the very word of God which commands all men everywhere to repent.


John-
The bible also makes it perfectly clear that if a person is not lead by the spirit, they will think the message of grace is stupidity. The bible leaves no area for middle ground. You are either a slave to sin or a slave to righteousness. If your disposition is of the flesh, you will mind the things of the flesh, and will be a slave to sin. If your disposition is of spirit, you will be lead by the spirit, and will be a slave to righteousness. Where does the bible speak of this mysterious time period of LFW when a person is drawn by the spirit to understand the things of God but yet rejects them?



It is not my job to educate you on where the Scripture teaches that man is able to reject the leading of the Spirit, lock. If you are not aware of such passages, it is your own fault. Bandit



Taking the easy way out, John?



Lock,

No, I am not taking the easy way out. The onus is on YOU to show that people DON'T ever have free will, or that people CANNOT resist the Holy Spirit's commands. It is not my responsibility to prove a first truth of reason such as free will, any more than it is my responsibility to prove your (or my) existence.

The Bible may not directly state, "mankind has free will," but then again it also never directly states "God is a trinity." These truths are directly inferred from what the Scriptures DO say about God and humanity. When God commands man to do a particular thing, we have the clearest possible evidence that it is possible for man to comply with this command, or else God is the most unimaginable BULLY possible. Every divine command to mankind virtually SHOUTS that man is able to obey.

Acts 7:51 "You men who are stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears are always resisting the Holy Spirit; you are doing just as your fathers did.


http://revivaltheology.net

Back to Top
 

JEE
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 1466
 
   Posted 9/29/2004 11:07 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
While it is against my better judgment, I will in the following show clear examples in Scripture where God's will was indeed rejected by people:

Matt. 12:25 And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house divided against itself shall not stand: 26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; how shall then his kingdom stand? 27 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges. 28 But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you. 29 Or else how can one enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then he will spoil his house. 30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad. 31 Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men. 32 And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. 33 Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.

It is not clear to me at least, how the omnicausal God depicted by Lock and other determinists is not, as Christ says, "A kingdom divided against itself."

Luke 7:29 (When they heard this all the people and the tax collectors justified God, having been baptized with the baptism of John; 30 but the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.)

Here we have clear evidence from Christ himself that there are some who are able to reject the purpose of God for themselves. How this fits with the omnicausal God that lock ascribes to is unintelligible.

John


http://revivaltheology.net

Back to Top
 

lock
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 701
 
   Posted 9/29/2004 5:49 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
quote:
The Bible may not directly state, "mankind has free will,"


But the bible does directly state...

Jer. 10:23 "O Lord, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps."

Proverbs 20:24 "Man's goings are of the Lord; How can a man understand his own way?"

Daniel 4:35 "...and none can stay His hand, or say unto Him, What doest thou?"

Proverbs 16:9 "a man's heart devises his way, but the Lord directs his steps"

quote:
Here we have clear evidence from Christ himself that there are some who are able to reject the purpose of God for themselves. How this fits with the omnicausal God that lock ascribes to is unintelligible.


How does Christ explaining how it is foolish to claim He casts out demons by Satan give evidence that man can reject the purposes of God? and Luke 7 refers to John's baptism of water which John himself distinguishes from Jesus' baptism of fire and spirit. Again, this is not evidence of man rejecting God's spirit when saved.


His achievement are we, being created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God makes ready beforehand, that we should be walking in them.

Back to Top
 

JEE
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 1466
 
   Posted 9/29/2004 8:10 PM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
quote:
Originally posted by lock

The Bible may not directly state, "mankind has free will,"

But the bible does directly state...

Jer. 10:23 "O Lord, I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps."


In context, Jeremiah is referring to God's sovereign ability to judge nations when He sees fit, which I (of course) affirm. It would be taking this verse out of context to extrapolate from it that God in all cases directs every person's choices.

quote:
Proverbs 20:24 "Man's goings are of the Lord; How can a man understand his own way?"

Proverbs 16:9 "a man's heart devises his way, but the Lord directs his steps"



If we take the Proverbs as literally and universally true at all times and in all cases, the book flatly contradicts itself in several places, not to mention the fact that it contradicts many other non-poetic and didactic portions of Scripture.

quote:
Daniel 4:35 "...and none can stay His hand, or say unto Him, What doest thou?"



Who denies that God can do as He will? I sure don't.

quote:
Here we have clear evidence from Christ himself that there are some who are able to reject the purpose of God for themselves. How this fits with the omnicausal God that lock ascribes to is unintelligible.


quote:
How does Christ explaining how it is foolish to claim He casts out demons by Satan give evidence that man can reject the purposes of God?


It's like this, lock: You claim that God causes all things, correct? If so, then God's own kingdom is divided against itself in casting out that which HE placed in the demon-possessed person, or else Christ's words can not be trusted.

quote:
and Luke 7 refers to John's baptism of water which John himself distinguishes from Jesus' baptism of fire and spirit. Again, this is not evidence of man rejecting God's spirit when saved.



Whether or not a person is saved is not the point at issue; whether or not a person can reject God's purpose for themselves is the point, lock. And in this case, the plain statement of Scripture is that these people did precisely this--they rejected the purpose of God for themselves. Is it your position that no one was saved before Calvary?


http://revivaltheology.net

Back to Top
 

lock
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 701
 
   Posted 9/30/2004 3:26 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
John-

These are direct statements of How God deals with His creation. If you wish to blow them off because you feel they are out of context, or believe that it should not be taken literally, that is your choice. As you pointed out yourself, LFW is not directly taught in the bible, yet these are direct statements contradicting LFW.

quote:
It's like this, lock: You claim that God causes all things, correct? If so, then God's own kingdom is divided against itself in casting out that which HE placed in the demon-possessed person, or else Christ's words can not be trusted.



In the absolute sense, all is of God, this is scriptural. In the relative sense, in His creation, God has two opposing forces. The one side, headed up by Satan, will be around long enough to meet God's purpose for it in His creation, and then it is taken away. Evil is temporary. The other is headed up by His Son, and this, of course, will eventually reconcile all unto God. Why have the opposing forces? God displays His kindness in contrast to Satan's and his followers' evil. God displays His righteousness in contrast with Satan's and his followers' sin.

quote:
Whether or not a person is saved is not the point at issue; whether or not a person can reject God's purpose for themselves is the point, lock. And in this case, the plain statement of Scripture is that these people did precisely this--they rejected the purpose of God for themselves. Is it your position that no one was saved before Calvary?


John's baptism falls into the evangel of the Circumsision. John's baptism was the "call" to repent. Jesus stated "many are called, but few are chosen." Rejecting the call (John's baptism) is within God's purposes. If people were not saved before calvary, then I would feel really bad for the list of faithful in Heb. 11!


His achievement are we, being created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God makes ready beforehand, that we should be walking in them.

Back to Top
 

JEE
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 1466
 
   Posted 9/30/2004 6:24 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
quote:
Originally posted by lock

John-

These are direct statements of How God deals with His creation. If you wish to blow them off because you feel they are out of context, or believe that it should not be taken literally, that is your choice. As you pointed out yourself, LFW is not directly taught in the bible, yet these are direct statements contradicting LFW.


I am not blowing them off, lock. (Even if I am, how can you blame me, seeing as I don't really have a choice). Eyebrow

Free will is the obvious corollary to the commands of God. It is directly implied every time God tells us to do something. Proverbs contradicts itself in many places, if taken as strictly literal universally true statements of fact. Deny this all you want, but it is a fact that wisdom literature is not universally true in all circumstances; e.g., the wicked do not always prosper, and the righteous do not always suffer poverty.

quote:
It's like this, lock: You claim that God causes all things, correct? If so, then God's own kingdom is divided against itself in casting out that which HE placed in the demon-possessed person, or else Christ's words can not be trusted.



quote:
Whether or not a person is saved is not the point at issue; whether or not a person can reject God's purpose for themselves is the point, lock. And in this case, the plain statement of Scripture is that these people did precisely this--they rejected the purpose of God for themselves. Is it your position that no one was saved before Calvary?


quote:
John's baptism falls into the evangel of the Circumsision. John's baptism was the "call" to repent.


And Scripture states that many DID repent under John's preaching, while some rejected the purpose of God for themselves by refusing John's message.


http://revivaltheology.net

Back to Top
 

rossfadeinout
Registered Member




Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 428
 
   Posted 9/30/2004 7:37 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
This is a post by Lock from another thread, but I thought that it was very relevant to this discussion of LFW.

Lock said
quote:
If your belief is that God sends people to hell to be tormented for eternity, you have no other choice but a person has to be responsible for it. It would be crazy to say God sends people to hell when He Himself made them that way (sorry Calvinist, no insult intended). Eternal torment and LFW go hand and hand, they justify each other.


So Lock says that if we God punishes a person eternally, then we HAVE to say that a person is responsible for their actions. He further implies that it has to be Libertarian Free Will that establishes this responsibility.

Am I understanding you correctly Lock?

Ross


"Let us remember how common the folly is of going from one faulty extreme into the opposite." -Thomas Reid

Back to Top
 

lock
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 701
 
   Posted 9/30/2004 8:22 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Ross-

If God is "responsible" for creating man, whom the bible states is unable to please God due to the weakness of the flesh, then turns around and sends man to hell for the sins he commits due to this weakness, this would creates a fiendish god (once again, no offense meant towards any Calvinists). The reason I say LFW goes hand and hand with the theology of eternal torment is that if you take the "responsibility" out of God's hands and place it totally on the shoulders of man, then people find it justifiable sending someone to hell for eternity due to the sins they commit. I do not believe God's judgment are purely punitive. God had a purpose for sin entering creation. God has a purpose for judging man according to his acts. The purpose is to display His righteousness in contrast with man's unrighteousness. His judgment is corrective with the good of person being corrected in mind. Evil and sin are temporary and will be around only long enough to suit God's purpose in His creation.


His achievement are we, being created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God makes ready beforehand, that we should be walking in them.

Back to Top
 

lock
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 701
 
   Posted 9/30/2004 8:24 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
quote:
And Scripture states that many DID repent under John's preaching, while some rejected the purpose of God for themselves by refusing John's message.


And where were they when Jesus was crucified? They were not chosen, so they fell away, again this is within God's purposes when involving the Circumsision.


His achievement are we, being created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God makes ready beforehand, that we should be walking in them.

Back to Top
 

rossfadeinout
Registered Member




Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 428
 
   Posted 9/30/2004 9:25 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
Lock,

Allright, I am starting to track your thought here. By saying "If God is "responsible" for creating man, whom the bible states is unable to please God due to the weakness of the flesh, then turns around and sends man to hell for the sins he commits due to this weakness, this would creates a fiendish god" you seem to be saying that if someone cannot help what they do, then they should not be punished "punitively."

Here is my attempt to sum up what i see of your position... God created man fleshly (weak) and introduced sin into the world. Man was unable NOT to sin; God wanted man to sin so he would know what seperation from God was like. By knowing this he would have a better realization of God's goodness. God has chosen (at random, or at least not based on anything in the particular person) to elect SOME to salvation in this life. Then there is a judjment where those who were not elected are sentenced to "the second death" (or something like that). Then at the end of the "eons of eons" God will save those who weren't elected the first time around.

I have a whole lot of questions regarding the coherence of this view, but before I write more I want to make sure that I am understanding you correctly. Let me know how far off I am with that last summary.

Ross

BTW, do you believe that Satan will be saved eventually?


"Let us remember how common the folly is of going from one faulty extreme into the opposite." -Thomas Reid

Back to Top
 

JEE
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 1466
 
   Posted 9/30/2004 9:47 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
quote:
John's baptism falls into the evangel of the Circumsision. John's baptism was the "call" to repent.


Where does Scripture state "John's baptism falls into the evangel of the Circumcision? If so, why did John say of Jesus, "Behold the lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world?"


http://revivaltheology.net

Back to Top
 

JEE
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 1466
 
   Posted 9/30/2004 9:56 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
quote:
Originally posted by lock

Ross-

If God is "responsible" for creating man, whom the bible states is unable to please God due to the weakness of the flesh, then turns around and sends man to hell for the sins he commits due to this weakness, this would creates a fiendish god (once again, no offense meant towards any Calvinists). The reason I say LFW goes hand and hand with the theology of eternal torment is that if you take the "responsibility" out of God's hands and place it totally on the shoulders of man, then people find it justifiable sending someone to hell for eternity due to the sins they commit. I do not believe God's judgment are purely punitive. God had a purpose for sin entering creation. God has a purpose for judging man according to his acts. The purpose is to display His righteousness in contrast with man's unrighteousness. His judgment is corrective with the good of person being corrected in mind. Evil and sin are temporary and will be around only long enough to suit God's purpose in His creation.



Even if one subscribes to the view that Hell is not eternal but limited in duration and ultimately "corrective" (somewhat like purgatory), with such a view one still is required to think of God in Calvinistic terms--all the (corrective) suffering of all the ages by people who simply couldn't help themselves for being evil, and all the suffering of those upon whom the evil is inflicted is in the end pointless and unnecessary. In the universalistic view, we've all been set up by an unbelievably fiendish God who would create moral agents for no other purpose than to make them suffer unimaginably in this age and in the age to come, all to suit His purposes.

While I can certainly understand why a determinist would want to embrace universalism, in order to avoid the thought that most people will spend eternity in Hell simply because God chose not to save them, there still is the very real problem posed in this theory, that God's kingdom is divided against itself. Additionally, on this view one could not wholeheartedly trust in God's goodness or mercy, for, just as in Calvinism, God could simply be deceiving you into believing you are of the elect and will escape the wrath of God (even if not eternal).

Finally, universalism makes a mockery of God's moral law, just as Calvinism does, for in this deterministic view God commands man, on pain of Hell, to avoid that which God fully knows man CANNOT by any means avoid (sin). Also, universalism, like its close sister, Calvinism, makes a mockery of sin, for if all that happens is God's will, then sin is God's will (which the Bible expressly denies), sin is not really sin but is in fact holy, and GOD HIMSELF IS THE ORIGINAL SINNER, being the ultimate Cause of all things.


http://revivaltheology.net

Back to Top
 

JEE
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 1466
 
   Posted 9/30/2004 9:59 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
quote:
Originally posted by lock

quote:
And Scripture states that many DID repent under John's preaching, while some rejected the purpose of God for themselves by refusing John's message.


And where were they when Jesus was crucified? They were not chosen, so they fell away, again this is within God's purposes when involving the Circumsision.



The book of Acts reveals that many of the scribes, Pharisees, and chief priests believed in Christ, and were added to the church. Additionally, John's Gospel reveals that Nicodemus and some other Pharisees believed on Christ during his ministry.


http://revivaltheology.net

Back to Top
 

lock
Registered Member


Date Joined Jul 2004
Total Posts : 701
 
   Posted 10/1/2004 3:47 AM (GMT -6)    Quote This PostAlert An Admin About This Post.
quote:
Here is my attempt to sum up what i see of your position... God created man fleshly (weak) and introduced sin into the world. Man was unable NOT to sin; God wanted man to sin so he would know what seperation from God was like. By knowing this he would have a better realization of God's goodness. God has chosen (at random, or at least not based on anything in the particular person) to elect SOME to salvation in this life. Then there is a judjment where those who were not elected are sentenced to "the second death" (or something like that). Then at the end of the "eons of eons" God will save those who weren't elected the first time around.


Ross-
I think this is close to what I am saying. But, I do not see the lake of fire and brimstone as the sentence. God will judge the rest of the dead according to their acts, the sentence will suit the crime, the sentence will be carried out before the throne. The lake of fire and brimstone, which is the second death, is where they will be, while in the state of death, during the new heavens and new earth time period. I do not see the lake of fire and brimstone as a purgatory. I see it as the bible describes; death. The bible equates death with sleeping; an unconscious state.


His achievement are we, being created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God makes ready beforehand, that we should be walking in them.

Back to Top
 
New Topic Post Reply Printable Version
79 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page :
 1  2  3  4 
   
Forum Information
Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 2:27 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