Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Luke, you are somewhat on the right track with cause and effect, except that there is no direct correlation to cause and effect in virtually anything we do, think, act, etc. We do observe cause and effect in action, but the process is limited in many ways, and tracing all back to a point, even if that point is God, is virtually impossible.
A true cause and effect theology would end up with Whitehead and Hartshorn's Process Theology -- a most heretical and non-biblical "theology" (how can a theology be a theology if it is not devoted to the actual revelation of God?) which is indeed "panentheism," where God's actions are seen as a long chain of cause and effect actions.
Essentially (and I am simplifying this to an extreme) God created the world and kicked into motion a series of cause and effect actions, and ultimately God is as tied to the world as the world is tied to God, with deterministic results based on this inseparable tie. History is viewed as an ever increasing "line" with "branches" born out by the actions and reactions -- cause and effect -- of the created order (and beings) with no ultimate goal or conclusion in mind (or possible).
In traditional orthodox Christian theology, God transcends the created order and created beings, and is truly capable of free will interactions with His creation, including the beings which He has created.
So, while cause and effect play a role -- we see this by observation -- we must also limit the effects of cause and effect because God will ultimately exercise His sovereign dominion to bring about His divine purpose(s) as He wills.
In a sense, to eliminate determinism (which is not an orthodox descriptor of God) we must see that God wills for His people to have certain exercise of their individual wills, but they are never given total control over the effects of that exercise. Some of this is explained by "position." We are either dead in our sin and trespasses, which limits our exercise of free will in that direction (we cannot "do" or "will" salvific acts, but are morally culpable for our sin(s) whether intentional or unintentional, committed or contemplated, commission or omission) and once indwelt by The Holy Spirit in the act of salvation, given a will to bow before our Lord and King, and again, our actions leave us culpable.
We cannot will to do what God will not allow, and if we could, we would essentially become god ourselves, but we know full well that God will not tolerate another god, and so we find that direction to be one of ultimate peril. We can will to do what it is that God wills, and so we bend our wills to His own, and agree with God that God is right, and that we are at His mercy for even thinking otherwise.
Note that I am NOT saying that you are headed toward Process Theology. Not in any way. Just that your line of reasoning ends up there if pressed forward to a conclusion.
You're preaching "Glass houses" about avatars while you have a picture of Jesus as yours? Holy Mackerel!
Yes, I posted a picture of Jesus knocking on the door of every sinner's heart.
Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
This is another verse that clearly shows Jesus is offering salvation to "any man". All any person has to do is open the door of their heart to Jesus and he will come in and save them.
What does that have to do with me?
That verse doesn't have a thing to do with salvation. It is about Christ and the Church.
You are forever abusing Scripture winman. And then you think you make a point by molesting the Bible.
GL I think this is essentially what I have attempted to say before in saying that man is free to choose within the parameters that God has set within his creation. Full libertarian free will, I think, does seem to imply that God can make decisions and choices that only God has the authority to make.
Who, exactly, is the subject of that sentence, "God" or "whosoever"? Understanding that may shed some light on what is actually being said in that passage.
If you are "scared" of Reformed Theology, then you are also "scared" of John Piper, Spurgeon, Augustine, John Calvin (and virtually every theologian before him, as Arminian theology did not exist until around AD 1600!), The Pilgrim Fathers, the Puritans, Jonathan Edwards, John MacArthur, John Gill, John Bunyan, and a host of other influential persons in the Christian world. To be "scared" of any theology makes no sense at all. Read, study, toss out if not biblical. Persons who want to make the study of any theology a "scare" factor are trying to unduly influence decisions without every really knowing what they are talking about. That is the essence of fundamentalism (not the fundamentals, which is another thing entirely).
You are correct. Way out of context here.
It's not nearly as simple as some say.
I want to see his teachable humble side, since he's blasted so many for being arrogant, proud, haughty and unteachable.
:love2: :laugh:
I am not afraid of any of these men whatsoever. I don't care if some preacher was famous, or if they had the alphabet soup after their name. I compare what they say with what the scriptures say.
All of these men taught some truth, but all of them taught much error as well.
It was Nicholas25 who said he was "almost scared to fully embrace Reformed Theology". He is not certain if it is correct or not. That is not my position whatsoever, I find Calvinism and Reformed Theology to contain great error.
If you read the verses following Rev 3:20 you will see Jesus is speaking to anyone who has an ear.
Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.
22 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.
Do you have an ear? Then Jesus was speaking to you as well.
If Jesus wanted us to understand that salvation was only offered to a few persons, he could have easily said so. You Calvinists make God to appear to be a real dummy, someone who cannot accurately express himself.
No, when Jesus said "any man" that is exactly what he meant to say. It is you Calvinists that have to write a mini novel and twist scripture to misinterpret what even a child could understand. Shameful.
If you read the verses following Rev 3:20 you will see Jesus is speaking to anyone who has an ear.
Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.
22 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches.
Do you have an ear? Then Jesus was speaking to you as well.
If Jesus wanted us to understand that salvation was only offered to a few persons, he could have easily said so. You Calvinists make God to appear to be a real dummy, someone who cannot accurately express himself.
No, when Jesus said "any man" that is exactly what he meant to say. It is you Calvinists that have to write a mini novel and twist scripture to misinterpret what even a child could understand. Shameful.
I disagree that "full libertarian" free will is restrained. The concept there is that we are indeed free, even of God's power to cause us to move or change. Limited free will would be a better choice of terms, though I can see why some would argue that limited free will is not free will at all.
We always end up in the final dilemma -- God's sovereignty -- for if God is truly in control of all things, then He is also in control of us, we being part of the set "all things."
What seems to be the breaking point for many who do not wish to give over to God this sort of utter control is simply that there comes with that a feeling of utter helplessness as we can do NOTHING to escape our sure and certain doom. It is ALL on God's mercy and grace, and if He does not act on our behalf there is no hope.
This is exactly in accord with the scriptural picture that God has revealed concerning our state before Him, and praise Him, He HAS a plan. That plan is for Christ to save. Who? God knows. How? By the substitutionary atonement and by imputed righteousness. When? In God's timing. Where? Wherever God wills, in one's bed, while in prayer, while on a walk, while crying and renting one's clothes, while in a service of worship, while hearing the Word... God knows.
At odds with the more human-involved activity is this sense that no matter if we come to God and do all sorts of religious exercises, follow all sort of religious rules, and claim all sort of religious promises; we are still doomed if God has not saved us in the way that only He can.
No reputable theologian on either side of the aisle sees it that way.
He is SPEAKING TO A PARTICULAR CHURCH.
hopeless...
That is not my issue with true free will. If man does not have true free will, then God is a liar. God says he does not tempt any man with evil. If God causes a man to reject him, then God is a liar, he is truly causing a man to do evil.
If man does not have true free will, then God is unjust, he is punishing man for being evil, when God caused man to be evil. That must be so if God controls every single event. If God caused Adam and Eve to sin, then God is responsible for them becoming sinners. How then can it be just for God to punish a man for eternity for something he himself caused?
If a person cannot see a great difficulty here, I do not know what to say.
Well, there's the problem right there, you are listening to men. But Jesus said that "He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches". So he is speaking to everyone.
And you call me hopeless? A child could understand he was speaking to everyone.
Well, there's the problem right there, you are listening to men. But Jesus said that "He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches". So he is speaking to everyone.
And you call me hopeless? A child could understand he was speaking to everyone.
That is not my issue with true free will. If man does not have true free will, then God is a liar. God says he does not tempt any man with evil. If God causes a man to reject him, then God is a liar, he is truly causing a man to do evil.
If man does not have true free will, then God is unjust, he is punishing man for being evil, when God caused man to be evil. That must be so if God controls every single event. If God caused Adam and Eve to sin, then God is responsible for them becoming sinners. How then can it be just for God to punish a man for eternity for something he himself caused?
If a person cannot see a great difficulty here, I do not know what to say.
If God causes a man to reject him
You love to accuse Calvinists of being heretics when you will not think it through as far as they have and so you don't know WHY they believe what they believe.
For example, you will not answer the question- does a choice have a cause.
Until you can answer that, your opinion doesn't matter.
It's like a person who has not and will not learn the times table calling Charles Babbage an imbecile.
I did not call anyone a heretic.
Of course a choice has a cause, and the scriptures tell us what that cause is.
James 1:14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
We sin when we are enticed or seduced by our "own" lusts.
Yep, so what?
Where did he get those lusts?
Adam.
Who made Adam?
Who put him in the Garden?
Who made the serpent?
Who made Lucifer?
Who could have made the world so that no one ever sin but didn't?
I did not call anyone a heretic.
Of course a choice has a cause, and the scriptures tell us what that cause is.
James 1:14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
We sin when we are enticed or seduced by our "own" lusts.
Adam and Eve were created sinless, but they were flesh and had desires. Look what the scriptures say when Eve looked on the forbidden fruit.
Gen 3:6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat.
At this point Eve was still sinless. Nevertheless she had desires, it is plainly shown. The tree looked good for food, that is the appetite. It was pleasant to look upon, that is the attraction of beauty. It was "desired" to make one wise, that appeals to vanity and pride.
Our desires are natural, we are born with them. It is not wrong to have an appetite, we need to eat to be healthy. But we have to control our urges and desires, eat too much and you will become obese and suffer health problems.
It is not wrong to look on your wife and enjoy her beauty. But it is wrong to allow this desire to get out of hand and look on other women.
It is not wrong to desire to be intelligent, we should study to become wise. But if your goal is simply to exalt yourself over others, to look on others with disdain and convince yourself you are superior to others, then you have let this natural desire get out of hand and become sinful.
Adam and Eve had natural desires, it cannot be denied, Gen 3:6 says this unknown fruit was "to be desired", so how could she not have had desire?
Desire in itself is not sinful in itself. It is when we allow our natural desires to entice us and seduce us to the point we disobey God that they become sinful.