2nd fallacy of "non-cals"

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

Praise God

Amen.

Thank you

 

So when James wrote, "When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone; 14 but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed."

He really meant, "When tempted, no one should say, "God is tempting me directly, but only remotely through other means." For God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does he tempt anyone directly, just remotely; but each one is tempted when, by God's ultimate decree which will thus become man's own evil desire, he is dragged and away and enticed."

Ok, crystal clear.....

 

How bizzare....then Luke, by your testimony I am NOT a Calvinist. Then Im an Arminian?!?

 

Van....Now that Quantum Faith answered your question, could you take a minute to answer mine?

 

I know I'm not Van, but I will say, Yes, God predestines to conform all believers into the image of Christ and adopt them as His very own.

 

For the sake of brevity I'll just comment on this one for now:

Explain to me why it would be necessary for God to "make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and blind their eyes" if they were born that way as a result of the fall?

Remember, that is the question you complimented me for in that one post but never did get back to answer. Could it be that Israel was being judicially hardened temporarily while the Gentiles were being grafted in? (Rom 11)

Could that explain what God meant when he spoke of Israel being unable to come to him while the Gentile would listen? (Acts 28:28)

See, this verse is describing the condition of a group of people who have rebelled for generations despite God's holding out his hands to them patiently, but who are now being "cut off." Your system doesn't leave any distinction between the condition of a hardened rebellious Jew and the natural man.

Correct, but you must still deal with the verse in question by providing a valid interpretation. You can't just bury it under a barrage of other texts and pretend that it goes away.

What was wrong with the interpretation I provided for you? Was it not an accurate description of what you believe James meant? If not, why not?

 

And for those following along please take notice that historically Arminians have also believed that God has permissively decreed evil, in that He allowed it for a purpose (not a surprise or mistake), and that God is working all things after the counsel of his own will (including evil events). Thus, we are still not sure if Luke is calling E,W&F an Arminian or not.

Stay tuned.

 

Are you saying we don't know why God would need to "make the heart of this people dull, and their ears heavy, and blind their eyes?" Because I think the scripture tells us exactly why He needs to do so:

"lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed."

And again in the other verse you quoted out of Mark 4:

"lest they should turn and be forgiven"

See, Luke, it is very simple. The Jews wouldn't have killed Jesus if a large number came to faith in Him prior to the cross, so God had to hid the gospel from them so they wouldn't turn and be healed. It is NOT a condition from birth, it is a temporary condition of the Jews during that time. There is no mystery here except the one created by a false premise in your theological system.

I'll be sure to remember that when you question how God could remain sovereign while giving man contra-causal free will.

Actually, I wish you would have provided the first part of this article when you and I first started our discussions. This is what I attempted to tell you the first month of our discussions:

:applause::applause::applause:

 

Now Im confused so I'm going to start from square one. I maintain that I believe in (1) Election tells us that God chose His people. (2) Predestination tells us that His people will be "conformed to the image of his son." In other words, someday the elect will be LIKE Christ and WITH Christ. I love that & sincerely believe that the bible teaches this. To be like Christ means to be totally sinless and completely everlasting. To be with Christ means to have the right to dwell in Paradise.

Now you would think after reading that that everyone would just love this doctrine, but after some time on BB I've learned that it is not always the case. Some people take issue for they think it turns us into mindless robots or little pawns like Tater pointed out where God is and controlling our every movement. Some feel that God should give every one a chance at this wonderful destiny, but we know this is impossible for we are totally depraved, we were dead spiritually and we would have never chosen God. We should be ever so thankful that He chose us and gave us such a great destiny.

Back to predestination.....The big P teaches us that we are totally dependent on the mercy of God. Again, we are no-good, hell deserving sinners and it took a ton of mercy for God to predestine us. And truly, it is (Mercy) in its purest form for it was extended to us before the world was created. Services rendered.

So, to deny predestination, is to deny the greatest act of pure mercy ever demonstrated. It would also deny the scriptures

And if you study the scriptures very carefully you will begin to notice something that is consistant and that is that Predestination is always about people and not about events. Notice the words "we" "us" "whom" and "brethren." This is a huge point and please do not miss it. God did not predestine all things that transpire but He predestines all whom He foreknew. Some say that God predestined everything we do, even the sin that we commit. Now, that would make us mindless pawns and would make God the author of sin. So here is what I see in studying scripture telling us bottom line "Predestination is only concerned with the destiny of the elect."

 

I give you "kudos" as to HOW you present your thoughts and position on the topic. Clear, articulate and without malice and insolent tone. Blessings to you for this.

 

The proper word concerning why sin exists is NECESSITY.

Mat 18:7 Woe unto the world because of offences, for it must needs be that offences come; but woe to that man by whom the offence cometh.

God does not will sin and condemns it. But sin is necessary, Jesus said so. Why? Because God has given us free will to choose either for him or against him.

If it is God's will that man truly has choice to love him, then it is absolutely necessary that man also has the freedom to sin and reject God. You cannot have choice without real options.

God is free and can make choices. We are made in God's image and can likewise make choices. This freedom makes sin necessary. God does not will, desire, or condone sin, but it is unavoidable, even for God.

I disagree with those who say God could have made us without the ability to sin. If so, we could not love God, because love requires choice.
But choice makes the opportunity to sin necessary.

Man is 100% responsible for his sin, as Jesus said, "woe to that man by whom the offence cometh". God did not cause sin, men sin by their own choice.

 

Even what we consider to be a righteous man need to be humbled before God and to be made known before God their righteousness is dirty rags. God will do what it takes to bring us to this by our own free will. To say God did not orchestrate my salvation would be a lie or to say that God orchestrate my sin and others people sin would be a lie.

To come to a point to turn to God to cry out to Him to be healed

Here is a verse for food for thought.

 

Reply to Quantumfaith,

Why ask me to decode "engineered" - does this mean predestined? Jesus said our yes should be yes and our no should be no. I present my views with as much clarity as I can muster. My answer is no, God does not predestine everything, He predestines what He declares because no plan of God can be thwarted. Thus His predetermined plans and prophecies are predestined.

I am not sure why you added, God is not surprised. Is this more code for God knows the future exhaustively yet this does not presuppose everything is predestined?

I am a simple guy and therefore my view is simple, everything God predestines is by logical necessity known from when it was predestined. Thus in any part of the future is not predestined, God can choose not to know that part of the future, because logical necessity does not require it. On the other hand, whatever part of the future God knows, that part is predestined by logical necessity. Now having this simple view, I arrived at my understanding of the Bible, part of the future is known beforehand by God, and part of the future is not known beforehand by God because God has chosen not to know it. This view is the only view that is consistent with all scripture.

And as a footnote, I have posted exhaustively and repeatedly that God is not surprised. I will post again what I consider to be the Biblical support for that view, as all my views are specifically supported by scripture. Integrity demands it.

 

That is beside the point, Luke. We are talking about the nature of man.

You claim they are born unable to see, hear, understand and turn, but this text clearly indicates that God makes them unable to see, hear, understand lest they turn. So which is it?

Are they born that way or does God make those who are rebellious that way for a reason?

Answer the question and stop dodging by calling my question "silly." You know it's not, and even said so in the other thread. It's a question debated in theological journals and by scholars throughout history. You can't hide behind your patronizing comments and bullying techniques. Deal with the argument or don't, but stop with the immature banter.

Luke, you throw around terms like tomatoes at a food fight. From the first time we got into a discussion you started in with "God caused sin" and "God decrees sin" and "God ordains sin" without so much as a definition of any of these terms. I asked for weeks with no clear answer and even once one was provided you never drew any distinction between God's permissive and active decrees. The part of this article I quoted pointed out the importance of using the right terms and being careful as to what you are communicating. That is something you should really take to heart and work on.