 |
| 
feelinahole
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 754
| Posted 2/19/2004 6:37 AM (GMT -6) |   | | No, conditional statements do not have to prove that we have free will. They can also prove that God is deceptive. | | Back to Top | | |
 |
borg
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 324
| Posted 2/19/2004 8:58 AM (GMT -6) | | Don, in the Joshua verse I see no indication that shows man is able to choose God. Perhaps choosing God is the perferred one, but they cannot if they are in their unregnerate state.
feelinahole, I sense a Luther Erasmus debate here. Why do you believe that conditional statements make God out to be a deciever? We do not lose the power of choice ever. We do however lose the power of the will, to will good or bad; until we have been regenerated. follow?
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 | | |
|
feelinahole
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 754
| Posted 2/19/2004 9:08 AM (GMT -6) | | Conditional statements make God a deceiver when the statement (from God) implies that we can make a choice bewteen two differing ways to go and we truly do not. Particularly when God is holding us responsible for our choice.
But I feel yawn coming on. Having made a choice (either through being preordained or by "free will" before) to discuss these before, I really am not inclined to do so again.
I really feel a lot of it is personal preference, of how one views scripture. Much of this is not cut and dry. As such, Borg, what I do see in scripture, if I were to take your view, is an unfair god who requires things of people he programmed. But thats just me.
I guess the best way to put it is this: until determinists can show me by way of an analogy how a person can be responsible for doing something when they had no choice but to do it, I will always have problems with their view.
The problem: way back when, before everything, God preordained everything. My sin. My bad choices. Show me how I am responsible for them.
BTW, redining the term "choice" does not mean we still have it. It means we have something else. | | Back to Top | | |
|
borg
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 324
| Posted 2/19/2004 9:32 AM (GMT -6) | | Conditional statements do not make God out to be a deciever. He tells us to "choose life" to walk in His path, to love one another, etc., because we can't do it. He is breaking our pride by giving us a standard we cannot live up to. But I'm not going to waste my time discussing anything with you if you are going to be responding with "yawns". If you're open to hear my side I will more than willingly work through it, but I will not if you're simply going to sit there remain stubborn like that.
"... if I were to take your view, is an unfair god who requires things of people he programmed. But thats just me." I guess it's a good thing it's not about us then is it?
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 | | |
|
feelinahole
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 754
| Posted 2/19/2004 9:45 AM (GMT -6) | | Borg: The "yawns," is not direected at you (my apologizes, bad wording) but simply a way of stating that we are at an impassee. Part of the reason I am an open theist is because of the inability of determinists to answer the questions I have put to them, either by simply dismissing them or appealing to the mystery of God. And that is really the only choice there is. Because determinists cannot answer why I should be responsible for my own sins when, from the beginning of time God ordained me to sin. Particularly when he did it, not because he looked down the corridor of time and saw I would do, but because he wanted to. I state plainly here that if you can show me, by analogy how I should be responsible for my sins when I am preordained to sin by God and through his will and not because of anything I do I will certainly give your view a second chance. That is all I ask. Show me an answer to that question please.
I would ask, also, where in the passage is all that stuff about pride, about how we cannot do what God is asking. I believe you are reading into that passage your own prior beliefs. In other words, show me why I shouldn't believe that God requires me to choice between two differing paths. | | Back to Top | | |
|
borg
Registered Member
Date Joined Apr 2003
Total Posts : 324
| Posted 2/19/2004 9:58 AM (GMT -6) | | To the rest who care to show more interest in the subject I would ask where does the Bible teach that one is only responsible for his/her actions ONLY if they have chosen, not being cohereced, persuaded, or likewise; freely? The Bible nowhere teaches that self-determination precedes responsiblity.
secondly, what of the examples of Joseph and his brothers? What of the example of Judas? Satan obviously entered into him to do his own will, 2 Tim 2:26, and yet Judas is held accountable for his actions. What of Peter? Did he have the choice after Christ told him he would deny Him 3 times? Yet Peter held himself accountable and I believe God did to. What of the times that God allowed different nations, i.e. Babylon, to come and destroy Israel for their sins, but God later punished Babylon for her disobedience?
I see this as working, because all we want to do is sin. If I wanted to rob a bank, if my desire led my will to do this; and if I likewise had a desire to burn a house down: both desires that my corrupted will have; and God merely says, "Because you are wicked and decietful, because you hate me, because all you want to do is evil; I will withold my grace from you today, and you will rob the bank, but I will give you the grace (perenial) not to burn the house down, God is still perfectly just in holding us accountable for that sin of robbing the bank. The only way He wouldn't be unjust is if we deserved grace. Grace is not something we can demand of God. The only way we could ever demand grace is if in some way we could merit it, and this we cannot do. God is not unjust in holding back HIS grace to allow us to sin according to our evil wills.
But you will say, "But our evil wills, they come from God and therefore God is being unjust." But God is not responsible for our fall, we are. Why are we? Because that is what our desires willed above our desire to follow God. Now yes ultimatley it seems as though everything falls back to God, for He did create everything and in Him everything has it's being, Acts 17. But does the free willist get out of this problem? For surely one would respond, "But we chose of our own free will to fall. God didn't make us fall." I would respond where do you think the freedom found in free will comes from? It comes from God. But you would say, "Well God took that risk by giving us free will, because it is more praiseworthy that He do that and that people make true genuine decisions to follow Him." And I would say, "How can God blame us for using our free wills? For surely we wouldn't have known what free will was if we hadn't fallen? Would we have? And how 'genuine' of a decision is it, if the only way that we can even make the decision is if God's grace is upon us? The fact that He gave us grace to help us, sure sounds like cohersion to me."
Well I feel like I'm rambling, and I know you don't agree with this so send me feedback that we may sharpen eachother, and all for the glory of God.
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 2/19/2004 10:13 AM (GMT -6) | | Within Calvinism there are two distinct groups that it branches off into. Supralapsarianism and infralapsarianim. The first is that the fall was preordained by God, so that Christ could fulfill His glorious purpose in redeeming the world. The second doesn't hold to that view, but, and this may be slightly off but the best that I can explain it. God foresaw the fall of man, by man's own will to fall, and therefore predestined Christ to save the world that would fall by the will of man. Which am I? I struggle between the two. Supra I can understand, but I believe this one swings more full back into the idea of the mystery of God than does Infra. It depends on what day you ask me and how "Calvinistic" I am feeling.
Those who take the Supra would tend to say that they clearly see it in the Bible that God saves whom He wills and damns those He doesn't choose, that He holds them responsible. Why? 1) Because that is what His good pleasure is, whether or not we understand it. 2) Because God has witheld His grace from them all they want to do is sin, and in the end, all they would want is to be seperated from God, for the unrighteous hate truth and surpress it, even if it comes in the clearest of terms; because their minds are clouded with the fall and grace has been witheld.
Infra I can more easily take my human mind and wrap it around and understand in more. But just because it fits with human logic more, does not make it right. For man fell by his own will, and all men are held accountable for original sin because we fell.
Does that make sense? Help me out here.
About the pride stuff, God gives us choices to do things, fully knowing that we cannot live up to them. For example we are told to "be holy as our heavenly Father is holy" 1 Peter, and yet we cannot be holy. God is not only saying, "try to be holy" or "be as holy as you possibly can" He demands perfection, and this we cannot live up to. Why does God give us this command that we cannot live up to? Because it glorifys His Son all the more and reminds all of us, saved and unsaved, that we are still in a desperate need of Jesus Christ. Not only that, but God tells us to choose life, because in our fallen sinful, depraved state, we actually believe that we can have some working of our sinful desires to choose life, but we cannot. It's like a man tied in a chair. On his right is poison and on his left is water. His left hand is tied down, and yet he believes in full measure that he can still reach the water with his tied down left hand. So a man simply says to him, "choose the water. Pick up the water and drink it." And the harder the man tries, the harder he fails, but remains in his stubborn thinking that he can still reach the water; which he cannot unless someone comes and unties his left arm. So it is with us and choosing life, choosing God; we cannot, but we are under the depraved notion that we can. Do you follow?
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 | | |
|
feelinahole
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 754
| Posted 2/19/2004 10:55 AM (GMT -6) | | Borg: I have yet to meet a calvinist who did not believe that God preordained all that would happen. If you do not believe this, then you are not a Calvinist. If God foresaw the fall of man and allowed it to happen, then God did not preordain it to happen and that is Arminism. I have no problem with that, because, while I disagree with it in other areas, I do not believe it holds God responsible for sin.
As for Joseph, is not God wise enough to see how our choices will turn and make a prediction based on that wisdom? And could not Satan have entered Judas by Judas's own free choice, when Judas's choice was the same as Satan's?
As far as Peter, do a search of topics on this site. There have been several discussions on here.
Again, the Bible does depend on fallible interpretation. Yours, mine, ours. But I would wonder at the kind of God who commands things that a person has no ability to do.
We are not held responsible for the fact that we act on our desires, but because we could have chosen not to. Besides, people act contrary to their desires all the time.
I understand your point about pride, Borg. I would question whether you can apply to every biblical verse where God commands us to do something you don't think we are capable of doing. | | Back to Top | | |
|
feelinahole
Registered Member
Date Joined Jan 2004
Total Posts : 754
| Posted 2/19/2004 12:52 PM (GMT -6) | | | Borg: I Peter 1:15 is talking to believers, not unregenerate men and, therefore, is not really relevant to the discussion. Peter is exhorting believers to strive for holiness, which we most certainly can in Christ. Why would Peter tell believers to do something that is not obtainable in their daily living? As a pastor why would he say such a thing? Just doesn't make sense. | | Back to Top | | |
|
John Earp
Registered Member
Date Joined Oct 2002
Total Posts : 1715
| Posted 2/19/2004 2:37 PM (GMT -6) | | quote:
Originally posted by feelinahole
Borg: I Peter 1:15 is talking to believers, not unregenerate men and, therefore, is not really relevant to the discussion. Peter is exhorting believers to strive for holiness, which we most certainly can in Christ. Why would Peter tell believers to do something that is not obtainable in their daily living? As a pastor why would he say such a thing? Just doesn't make sense.
Calvin's God commands man, on threat of hell, to do that which God fully knows to be impossible for man to do. Because man fails (which God all by himself foreordained would definitely happen), God will send such a person to hell. All of God's commands to man amount to the wicked taunts of a bully, if Calvin's view is true.
Calvin's view of damnation amounts to this: A father whipping and beating his mentally retarded son for not being able to do calculus.
And this is "love." And this is supposed to be "just."
Kinda gives ya a warm, tingly feeling doesn't it?
If I end up in hell I can smile knowing that it is God's perfect will that I be there, and it is all for his glory. (He needed some extra kindling, ya know). 
"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 | | |
| 38 posts in this thread.
Viewing Page : 1 2 |
| Forum Information | Currently it is Monday, November 09, 2026 1:42 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 |
|
|