If God does not violate man's "free will"..then...

[jcjordan]

....how did we get the scriptures? If you deny God's sovereignty over man's will, then it is inconsistent to believe in the inerrant inspiration of scripture. The biblical authors weren't free to write whatever they wanted.

 

[Tom Bryant]

I don't think any believer denies that God has sovereignty over human's will. We may disagree about when God does it and that He does it in salvation.

 

[pinoybaptist]

....how did we get the scriptures? If you deny God's sovereignty over man's will, then it is inconsistent to believe in the inerrant inspiration of scripture. The biblical authors weren't free to write whatever they wanted.

Each of these writers wrote in their own style, just that the words they put down were God-breathed, and each of them without hesitation wrote "thus saith the Lord" in this phrase's various forms and shapes.
There were at least 40 writers, in different times, some were contemporaries, some knew of the other's existence, but each wrote according to what the Holy Spirit wanted them to write.
In a sense you are right, they have no freedom to write what they wanted, they can only write according to the thought and direction the Spirit leads them.

 

[kyredneck]

Each of these writers wrote in their own style, just that the words they put down were God-breathed, and each of them without hesitation wrote "thus saith the Lord" in this phrase's various forms and shapes.
There were at least 40 writers, in different times, some were contemporaries, some knew of the other's existence, but each wrote according to what the Holy Spirit wanted them to write.
In a sense you are right, they have no freedom to write what they wanted, they can only write according to the thought and direction the Spirit leads them.

Well put brother.

 

[Skandelon]

....how did we get the scriptures? If you deny God's sovereignty over man's will, then it is inconsistent to believe in the inerrant inspiration of scripture. The biblical authors weren't free to write whatever they wanted.

Actually, the more deterministic side (Calvinism) undermines the idea of inerrant scripture and apostolic authority. Why?

Think about it. Calvinists point to Paul's conversion on the road to Damascus as proof that God effectually calls people, but if we are all effectually called then what is unique about Paul? Paul's apostolic authority rest on the uniqueness of his calling and Calvinist attempt to claim we are all called by the same effectual means, though obviously the circumstance may be different.

In the same way, if God is causally determining all things in the way many Calvinists believe he does, then his supernatural intervention in inspiring the words of scripture is nothing unique either...after all he is "controlling" every word being written everywhere, so what is unique about the Bible except that it claims to from God?

See my point? By insisting that God effectually calls every believer you undermine the uniqueness of the apostles and by claiming that God divinely ordains all things you undermine the uniqueness of the scriptures.

 

[annsni]

Actually, the more deterministic side (Calvinism) undermines the idea of inerrant scripture and apostolic authority. Why?

Think about it. Calvinists point to Paul's conversion on the road to Damascus as proof that God effectually calls people, but if we are all effectually called then what is unique about Paul? Paul's apostolic authority rest on the uniqueness of his calling and Calvinist attempt to claim we are all called by the same effectual means, though obviously the circumstance may be different.

HUH? How about God's calling on the believer? It certainly does not undermine anything.

In the same way, if God is causally determining all things in the way many Calvinists believe he does, then his supernatural intervention in inspiring the words of scripture is nothing unique either...after all he is "controlling" every word being written everywhere, so what is unique about the Bible except that it claims to from God?

I don't think one person who believes in the doctrine of grace would say that God is "casually determining all things". So in your thinking, God "controls" sin too.

See my point? By insisting that God effectually calls every believer you undermine the uniqueness of the apostles and by claiming that God divinely ordains all things you undermine the uniqueness of the scriptures.

I have no clue at all how you could POSSIBLY come to this conclusion. Your hostility towards Calvinism is obvious in your strange conclusions.

 

[Skandelon]

I don't think one person who believes in the doctrine of grace would say that God is "casually determining all things". So in your thinking, God "controls" sin too.

Then you need to get out more. Google the word "compatibilism" and study up on some of the more philosophical debates relating to Calvinism and God's "ordaining of whatsoever comes to pass....etc"

I have no clue at all how you could POSSIBLY come to this conclusion. Your hostility towards Calvinism is obvious in your strange conclusions.

New to you doesn't equal "strange." Tell, me something Ann, what did Paul list as reasons for his authority as an apostle and how are they unique to him?

 

[annsni]

Then you need to get out more. Google the word "compatibilism" and study up on some of the more philosophical debates relating to Calvinism and God's "ordaining of whatsoever comes to pass....etc"

Just because some argue something doesn't mean that it's a true belief of Calvinism. I have read both sides of the C&A argument and I've not ever heard one Calvinist say that God is a great puppetmaster in the sky. If that is so, then God orchestrates man to sin and that is heresy.

New to you doesn't equal "strange." Tell, me something Ann, what did Paul list as reasons for his authority as an apostle and how are they unique to him?

Paul was called by Jesus to be an apostle to bring the Gospel to the Gentiles. I'm not sure what you're wanting here but it could be that I should have been in bed 2 hours ago.

 

[Skandelon]

Just because some argue something doesn't mean that it's a true belief of Calvinism. I have read both sides of the C&A argument and I've not ever heard one Calvinist say that God is a great puppetmaster in the sky. If that is so, then God orchestrates man to sin and that is heresy.

The Westminster Confession of faith (used often by Calvinists) states:

I. God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass;[1] yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin,[2] nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.[3]

Ask a Calvinist who is knowledgeable on this subject about "second causes" and how God can "unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass" while still not being "the author of sin." There are plenty of them out there who have dealt with these matters and would know what I mean when I say "causally determined." It's a long discussion, and like you said, its past our bedtime. Good night. :wavey:

 

[AresMan]

Then you need to get out more. Google the word "compatibilism" and study up on some of the more philosophical debates relating to Calvinism and God's "ordaining of whatsoever comes to pass....etc

Compatibilism is not "causal determinism." It is more often called "soft determinism" to distinguish it from "hard determinism."

Here are examples of compatibilism in the Bible:

Joseph and his brothers--Genesis 45:4-8; 50:15-20
The Canaanites--Joshua 11:18-20
The Assyrians--Isaiah 10:5-15
The Crucifixion of Jesus--Isaiah 53:10; Acts 2:22-23; Acts 4:24-28

These are accounts of people doing exactly as they willed and desired, with God behind it all bringing it to pass to accomplish His purpose.

 

[Skandelon]

Compatibilism is not "causal determinism." It is more often called "soft determinism" to distinguish it from "hard determinism."

Here are examples of compatibilism in the Bible:

Joseph and his brothers--Genesis 45:4-8; 50:15-20
The Canaanites--Joshua 11:18-20
The Assyrians--Isaiah 10:5-15
The Crucifixion of Jesus--Isaiah 53:10; Acts 2:22-23; Acts 4:24-28

These are accounts of people doing exactly as they willed and desired, with God behind it all bringing it to pass to accomplish His purpose.

I wasn't attempting to equate compatibilism with causal determinism. I was meaning to indicate that compatibists (soft determinists, who are often Calvinistic) believe and argue that God causally determines, in that he uses "second causes" in order to bring about that which he has "ordained" to come to pass. I'm sure different people use different terminology, but those I have studied and read have used this particular verbiage.

 

[OldRegular]

I believe Skandelon problem is that he is hung up on philosophy rather than Scripture!

 

[Skandelon]

I believe Skandelon problem is that he is hung up on philosophy rather than Scripture!

Translation: I don't understand the more philosophical aspect of this debate so I'll undermine the person bringing it up by accusing him of not being scriptural ignoring the fact that he has quoted and exegeted dozens of scriptures in his other posts.:tongue3:

 

[OldRegular]

Translation: I don't understand the more philosophical aspect of this debate so I'll undermine the person bringing it up by accusing him of not being scriptural ignoring the fact that he has quoted and exegeted dozens of scriptures in his other posts.:tongue3:

I am sure that everyone on this Forum, except me, hangs on to your every word!:tonofbricks:

 

[Skandelon]

I am sure that everyone on this Forum, except me, hangs on to your every word!

Translation: I can't reply to his actual arguments so I'll undermine him by insinuating that he is pretentious.