 |
| 
borg
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 324
| Posted 2/13/2004 8:11 AM (GMT -6) |   | I was wondering if you OVists could help me think through this. Perhaps it's an easy one to think about and answer, but I'm having problems trying to defend it from an OV point of view. If God is most glorified in giving us free will, (most glorified in limiting Himself by making His plans contingent on human actions), does it follow then that not all of God's characteristics are equally glorious and that we should praise some higher than others?
For i don't know of anyone who would say that God couldn't have created the world in the manner that Classical Theology holds to, but you're saying that He is most glorifed in not doing that, but rather placing restrictions on Himself. Does this make sense? Any help would be appreciated.
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 | | |
 |
borg
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 324
| Posted 2/13/2004 8:28 AM (GMT -6) | | Thanks for the quick response, and I would have to say that #2 would probably speak more "glorious" of my work. However, can that analogy be likened to God? I'm not too sure it can be. For God is not merely the best in the world, He is infinitly better than all others to the billionth power. Now to say that #2 is the best answer, woudl also be saying that we in a way can make a better reputation out of God than God can do for Himself, does that sound prideful? You must understand that I am also going under the presupposition that we are totally depraved, therefore the only way in which we could play the violin is if God puts the violin in our hands and holds us while moving our figers to the right frets. To me this is the most glorious outlook of God.
But perhaps I didn't grasp exactly what you were getting at, and it's very possible I misunderstood your analogy. Any more imput?
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 | | |
|
borg
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 324
| Posted 2/13/2004 8:32 AM (GMT -6) | | Thanks John. But I'm not saying that we put the limitations on God, sorry if that's what it came off sounding like. Even if God put limitations on Himself, does that mean that He believes not all His attributes are equally glorious? By God limiting Himself to not being able to lie, no one would hold that lying is a good attribute to have, and in truth this contradicts God's "good" character.
Can you expound on the physical and moral attributes of God a bit?
Thanks,
For Christ's Crown and His glory,
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 | | |
|
borg
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 324
| Posted 2/13/2004 9:29 AM (GMT -6) | | But is God going to destroy Satan by power or love? I wouldn't say that I love God because of His power, but because He first loved me, 1 Jn 4:4. I guess I'm a bit perplexed as to the end of this argument, or what you were attempting to show. How is God going to destroy Satan through free moral agents? I guess I've always thought that Satan was destroyed through Christ's work on the cross. Sorry, my mind is really muddied here and it's my ignorance but I'm interested in what you have to say.
Thanks,
Grace Alone,
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 | | |
|
Laika
Registered Member
Date Joined Mar 2003
Total Posts : 2433
| Posted 2/13/2004 5:52 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by borg
But is God going to destroy Satan by power or love?
He's already thrown Satan out of heaven. Why not just dispose of him once for all back then? God demonstrated His forceful power but did not invalidate Satan's thesis that God's rule is based on forceful power.
quote:
I wouldn't say that I love God because of His power, but because He first loved me, 1 Jn 4:4.
Exactly, love drew you in, He didn't force Himself on you. He didn't bribe you or twist your arm.
quote:
I guess I'm a bit perplexed as to the end of this argument, or what you were attempting to show. How is God going to destroy Satan through free moral agents? I guess I've always thought that Satan was destroyed through Christ's work on the cross.
Right, the supreme act of power through love. Satan is destroyed by what appears as weakness, not forceful power.
Don't you think Satan was confused then? He thinks God's rule is based on the other kind of power, force (pushing) verses drawing (pulling).
John 12:32 "And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself."
inside you the time moves and she don't fade
the ghost in you she don't fade | | Back to Top | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 2/13/2004 7:46 PM (GMT -6) | | Borg: If God is most glorified in giving us free will...
Tom: I'd stop right there. Maybe this is just me, but I think it's important. It's not the gift of libertarian free will that is most glorifying to God, it's the freely chosen love and worship of God that such freedom alone makes possible that is most glorifying to God. The difference is important. It's our glorifying God that God is glorified in. Libertarian free will is just what we need to be able to glorify and love God. It's not our freedom that God is interested in. It's our loving and glorifying him that he's interested in.
Tom
| | Back to Top | | |
|
borg
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 324
| Posted 2/13/2004 9:28 PM (GMT -6) | | Lakia, thanks for your response. The reason that God does not destroy Satan now or back then, is because He has chosen to do it through His Son, and if He would have destroyed Him back then, it would have been sheer power that defeated Satan, whereas now God is preparing His Son to come and squash the head of the serpent. We seem to get along with what is being said, and it strikes me that I'm a Calvinist and you're an OVist and yet we can agree on this. Funny how Calvinsim believes in the same "non-arm-twisting God" huh?
You cited John 12 I posted something about my thoughts on that under another thread, basic argument: what follows that verse talks about the coming judgment when Christ WILL draw all men unto Himself. If you want more, it may help to check out the thread, I think it's under "If God is Love".
Tom: "it's the freely chosen love and worship of God that such freedom alone makes possible"
-and what if there was another way?
Grace Alone,
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 2/14/2004 9:47 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by borg
Can you expound on the physical and moral attributes of God a bit?
GOD'S PHYSICAL ATTRIBUTES:
God is:
A Spirit Being.
Omnipresent.
Omniscient.
Omnipotent.
GOD'S MORAL ATTRIBUTES:
God is:
Love
Good
Gracious
Merciful
Faithful
Patient
Kind
Truthful
While of course God is to be praised for both categories, the distinction does seem to need to be made between God's Self and God's Character, which these two categories speak to, in my understanding.
How this applies to your original question is that God's physical attributes should never be defined in such a way as to call into question His character.
The following quote by Finney is pertinent:
(Begin Quote)
Some people seem greatly horrified at the idea of setting limits to God's power. Yet they make assumptions which inevitably impeach his wisdom and his goodness. Such persons need to consider that if we must choose between limiting his power on the one hand, or his wisdom and his love on the other, it is infinitely more honorable to him to adopt the former alternative than the latter. To strike a blow at his moral attributes is to annihilate his throne. And further, let it be also considered, as we have already suggested, that you do not in any offensive sense limit his power when you assume that He cannot do things naturally impossible, and cannot act unwisely.
(End Quote)
http://www.gospeltruth.net/1854OE/540802_where_sin_occurs.htm
Hope this helps.
John
"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 | | |
|
Tom
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 10353
| Posted 2/15/2004 12:45 AM (GMT -6) | | Tom: "it's the freely chosen love and worship of God that such freedom alone makes possible"
Borg: And what if there was another way?
Tom: Then I assume God would have taken it and gotten the same freely chosen love and worship he deserves without our filling the earth with sin by virtue of having this pointless ability to determine ourselves.
| | Back to Top | | |
|
Newcomb
Registered Member
Date Joined Jul 2001
Total Posts : 116
| Posted 4/18/2004 6:35 AM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by borg
. . .If God is most glorified in giving us free will, (most glorified in limiting Himself by making His plans contingent on human actions), does it follow then that not all of God's characteristics are equally glorious and that we should praise some higher than others?
For i don't know of anyone who would say that God couldn't have created the world in the manner that Classical Theology holds to, but you're saying that He is most glorifed in not doing that, but rather placing restrictions on Himself. . .
Borg
Later on borg states:
quote:
I'm a Calvinist
Borg, much of the verbiage and theology itself that you follow was developed in the period of Kings in Europe. A lot of the assumptions of why God does things were based on why a King might do something, that is for self glory.
Note above the verbiage about glory. I am not saying this is wrong, rather, it may carry the wrong focus. While God is concerned with his glory, it isn’t the case that this is his only concern, possibly not even his primary concern?
He is already at the top, there are no real challengers, as Satan found out (it would be like me stepping into the ring with Evander Hollyfield, one punch and it’s lights out), so I am not sure God is as concerned with his glory as Calvinists seem to think.
I do think he is concerned with relationships. Of course, the trinity has a perfect one, lasting through eternity, but much of what I see is that he wanted other free will agents to love him in return. This involves risk that they will not return it, as indeed has been the case in much of humanity. So he seemed willing to take that risk in order to have relationship with other free will beings who could choose to reject him, or to love him.
How do free will beings glorify God? By recognizing his glory, majesty, honor, love, kindness, the beauty he created, etc. In other words by appraising his work and giving him appraisals of it in song and prayer. The root word for appraisal and praise are the same. They both come from the Latin pretium, or “price,” meaning ‘value.’
I can verbally record a list of accomplishments I have done on the computer, duplicate it, and play it in the background through hundreds of devices while I work and hear all the things I have done over and over again from something that had no choice. Would this lift me up? No, it is just a created thing doing what I made it to do.
I can hire people to do the same and read a script back, again, by the hundreds or thousands and I can predict what they will do because I am coercing the praise (via money), is this something that lifts me up? No, it is something I arranged for myself, it is hollow and really meaningless.
On the other hand, when someone comes to me and tells me what a good job I have done in some endeavor, unexpected and unrehearsed, that has true meaning and really lifts me up.
This is what God wants, free will beings that can choose whether or not to love him come to him and say, “Wow! What a sunset! What beauty God has created in his creation!” “Oh, Lord, my God, what have you done in redeeming us, who deserve death for our sins? How glorious is your name!”
This is praise, to have the choice and appraise his work and glorify him for what he has, in his free will, chosen to do.
I see no glory in a God who arranges for everything to be just so and then sits back and watches it happen, especially when it involves girls being raped, abortions, divorce, unfaithfulness, theft, dishonesty, and that’s just my family. Now talk about the holocaust.
However, if, as I believe, God set up the system with free will beings who are able to make moral choices and God responding in time trying to establish relationship, as he did in the garden, then with Israel, at the cross, etc., this works with scripture and explains the world as it really is.
The problem I had growing up Independent Baptist in what I would call a “soft” Calvinism, and before that as a Presbyterian was the inconsistency between the doctrines I was taught and what was written in the Bible. Believe it or not, I developed my “OV” view for 17 years without knowing another person who believed it or what it was called until Boyd came and spoke at our church (CABC in San Diego).
I only had what the Word of God told me, and that was sufficient to develop the entire doctrine extremely close to what I now know as OV. I would hold to the Bible over all other authorities at all times and survived just fine holding it up at the final word on any subject. All you need to do is use common sense and the simple understanding of the Bible without all the twisted explanations trying to cram God into the doctrine as opposed to merely reading what it tells you and taking it at face value. (Yes, Revelation has some allegories that need interpretation. P.S. Tim LaHaye was my pastor for 16 years.)
When the common sense of scripture conflicts with a doctrine, scripture wins.
We actually has a girl in our Sunday School class (“girl”=mom, wife, 40 something) say, “Why should I pray about anything? God already knows what is going to happen so nothing can change it.” She is always sad and very fatalistic in her Christianity, nice family, husband, etc. but her outlook is fatalistic because of her doctrine. She is, at least, honest about what her doctrine implies.
"Neuk'em" | | Back to Top | | |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 11:35 AM (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 |
|
|