Featured Good versus Evil

I do not agree that God determined sin would occur. Why then would God be grieved at sin?

Gen 6:6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.
7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them.

If God desired and determined that sin would occur, then it is nonsensical he would be grieved when his own plan came to pass.

 

For sure and certain, God does not "determine(d) sin, and if you took that I was making a case that God does from the post, you would be mistaken.

God had no more "desire and determination(ed) that sin would occur in Lucifer than he did in the garden with Adam and Eve.

However, because both were CREATED with free will (no longer is humankind "created") then the God would have been remiss in not including the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. For Lucifer certainly was created before the formation of this earth.

In eternity, the "evil" (perverse) is locked away in the lake of fire which is seen and the smoke of it rises for eternity. But the heavenly has the tree of life.

Winman, folks (as this thread shows) usually do not consider evil as originating from perversion, but privation.

When Christ was in the desert, he was deprived of sustenance, but He such did not make Him evil.

When Lucifer came to tempt - did he not use perversion to persuade?

When Lucifer came to tempt Eve - did he not use perversion to persuade?

What of modern man - is not the uses of perversion of the Scriptures into "I think..." the persuasion of most folks fall into - even today? Often in the modern churches you hear "I think..." more often than "Thus saith the Lord..."

Perversion can certainly bring privation, and usually does.

God didn't have to superimpose some one time miraculous hardening of pharaohs heart, merely confirm what was already hard. Pharaoh had long perverted justice.

Ultimately, Lucifer will be deprived of all that he desired and longed for in self adulation.

Until then, "he goes about seeking whom he can devour."

It is interesting to me that in that verse the figurative language portrays Lucifer strutting as the supreme one worthy of worship (a god) to swallow up everyone. Now what is the picture we have of God? Is it not of unfathomable riches, glorious abode, with absolutely no deficiency of health? The typical US "Christian" has the perverted thinking as the last church of Revelations.

Ultimately, the perversion of the assembly (as shown in Rev.) has Christ outside the assembly. The assembly thinks that because of health and wealth they reside in the will of God - but have bought into perversion resulting in delusion and the stated deprivation.

It is the same type and kind of perversion that Lucifer offered Christ.

The same found in Lucifer in the first record of evil.

 

EVERYBODY DOES THINGS THEY DON'T WANT TO DO EVERY SINGLE DAY OF THEIR LIVES!!!!!!!


How many times do I have to clarify this for you!?!?!?!?!?

I want a double cheeseburger. I don't want to deny myself.

Also...

I don't want to eat that cheeseburger. I DO want to deny myself.

BOTH AT THE SAME TIME, WINMAN.

So if I do either I am going to do what I DON'T want to do.

Now, which one will I do?

I will do the one that I want to do THE MOST!!!


THE MOST!!!!

Can you get that???

 

If he had read the writing of Johnathan Edwards (Freedom of the Will) with any understanding...

never mind, sometime, maybe it will be read with awareness and comprehension.

 

Well, I disagree, I don't think a person always does what they want to do the most.

Mat 26:38 Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death: tarry ye here, and watch with me.
39 And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as thou wilt.
40 And he cometh unto the disciples, and findeth them asleep, and saith unto Peter, What, could ye not watch with me one hour?
41 Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation: the spirit indeed is willing, but the flesh is weak.
42 He went away again the second time, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if this cup may not pass away from me, except I drink it, thy will be done.
43 And he came and found them asleep again: for their eyes were heavy.

In the garden, Jesus asked Peter and the sons of Zebedee to watch and pray with him. But when he returned to them, they were asleep. Jesus said their spirit was indeed willing, but their flesh was weak. I believe this is exactly what Paul is describing in Romans 7.

I can relate to this, we have long meetings at work on occasion, and I always have great difficulty staying alert and awake. I am the kind of person that needs to keep moving, if I sit still for a long period of time, especially in a warm room, I tend to get drowsy and sleepy.

Now, don't tell me I want to fall asleep, because I don't. My greatest desire is to be wide awake and alert, and paying attention. But invariably I get very drowsy and must fight off sleep.

Now, the body itself does not have a desire per say, it just feels tired and drowsy, just as the scriptures say the disciples eyes were heavy. But I would bet they sincerely desired to stay awake with Jesus and pray. So, we do not always do what we most want to do.

As far as Jonathan Edwards, I prefer to read the scriptures.

I have seen his church, it is just a few miles away from where I work.

 

Apparently you align desire and will with what is most needed. Unfortunately, such alignment isn't always in step.

If you had read Edwards you would not be so confused.

I will give you a clue.

The next time you have a protracted meeting, do not attend the bathroom and start the meeting with a full bladder.

You will have no problem overcoming sleep, for your "desire" will certainly be on what you really desire.

Your brain will overcome the natural desire that impacts every human who sits or lays back for an longer period of time.

There is a nerve ending that senses when the body is at rest (either sitting or laying) and cues up the brain to start shutting down. Attention is the first area impacted - usually this happens between the 15 and 30 minute mark.

I have long expressed to pastors to either cut their sermons to 15 minutes, or plan to have the folks stand occasionally during a longer time.

 

Who on earth does not think the will is limited?

What are you trying to prove with all of this?

Do you think that we haven't already thought of this? Do you think you are informing us of something?

Of COURSE you can't always do what you want to do. I want to fly to the moon like Superman. That's what I most want to do sometimes. But I can not WILL myself to do that and I cannot WILL myself to stay awake when I am tired.

But when I have two wills and I am able to do either of them I will always do the one I want to do the most.

OBVIOUSLY Winman, if I am too tired to do it I CAN'T!

I don't know what you think you are adding to the conversation by pointing out something so ridiculously obvious!!!

 

You didn't provide the quote for his "free will" comments. If you did, you did not cite it so that we could tell it was a quote.

It looked like you just SAYING it and putting up some link claiming that is was in that article somewhere.

Yes it is. Your turn.

God CAN originate things. He is the unmoved mover.

We can't. We are made of stuff. We are finite. Just because God can do something doesn't mean WE can for heaven's sake!

I don't have a problem with that. I think you are oversimplifying but I TOTALLY agree that in an ultimate sense in really was up to God whether you would choose a hamburger or a hotdog and your choice was PRECISELY what he has always intended for you to choose.

No problem at all here.

There are several premises here that you have not proven and I reject.
One example is that all animals have to choose by is instinct.

What does that even MEAN? THEY are the cause of their own choices?

Its nonsense. In what WAY are they the "cause" of their own choices?

Are they the cause of their own desires whereby they CAUSE those choices?

No that's bull.

It is not my OPINION that Skandelon is not Almighty. That is a fact. Almightyness is an attribute that can only belong to God.

The same with being a first cause. Only God can be the first cause, the prime mover. All other creatures and there actions are contingent.

It is not my opinion that Skandelon cannot make something of nothing.

now you can say all of this crap about "I was made in God's image so that means I can do stuff that God does," but its just crap. Its just words that are utterly meaningless and illogical.

You can no more BE a first cause of anything than you can create ANYTHING from NOTHING.

 

Folks,

Ultimately the will is not "free" in any sense.

Humankind respond to the needs and desires (lusts) which motivate.

For instance, in the physical sense, if my bladder is full, I desire to find a place for relief. My will is not "free," but focused upon a solution.

One may say, "But you have freedom to choose among available options (wet pants, bushes and yard, public or private bathrooms...)" but ultimately such freedom is not an expression of "free will" but seeking available options and which criteria with the corresponding levels of hierarchy of appropriateness in the social/societal setting would be acceptable.

The newborn is directed strictly by bodily function. A change takes place when that baby conforms, brings the body under control, and is structured by what is socially acceptable reinforced by the gathering of pleasing response from other human units. There is no "freedom of will" but a conforming to a hierarchy of need and lusts.

One does not choose a hamburger over a hotdog because of "free will." Rather, it is the need expressed in the desire to eat, and what is the greatest craving superimposed upon the list of available options that conforms the "will" to decision.

Continuing with the hamburger/hotdog illustration, there is also the consideration of the physical. The will is conformed not only to desires, but the desires are often conforming to actual nutrient demands made by body's physical deficits.

The nutrient need structure for minerals (salt, zinc, potassium...) and other such cause the cravings to be modified that the "hierarchy of need" is impacted. Often the nutrient need structure is depraved in that the cravings for more than necessary salt, sugar, potassium... is imposed and the cravings then must be over ridden, not by "freedom of the will" but bringing the body under subjection.

One can say, but is that decision then not an expression of the "freedom to choose?"

Not really, for such decision making may on the surface seem free, but ultimately it is structured again by a hierarchy conformed by motive conforming desires. One desires to be physically enhanced, or fit, or in some other manner changed not out of "freedom of the will" but motivated cravings out of the lust of the flesh, or perhaps the pride of life. Perhaps there is a certain "need" for acceptance by peer and family. Such is no longer a "freedom to choose or freedom of the will" but a conforming out of lust.

Does not the Scriptures warn of the "lust's" and what person does not struggle to conform at least one into what is socially, personally, or some other hierarchy of acceptance?

The presence of "choices" does not translate to a "freedom to choose" or a "freedom of the will." That would be like a person who is destitute passing a field of horses can by some impulse acquire a horse. No right thinking person would not see that the acquiring has a huge number of aspects many of which would be derived from motive, need, desire, lust, ... - none of them "free."

Christ addressed this thinking when stating such items as: can a person add one cubit of height to their body or a hair on their head by thought alone or some craving, or who can add minutes to their life?

There is no "freedom of the will" as some modern thinking would suppose.

The Scriptures clearly state that the body is not "free;" that the believer is to be no slave to the body and the lusts thereof, but to bring the body under subjection.

The Scriptures clearly state that the mind is not "free" but to be transformed.

The Scriptures clearly state that the natural spirit is not "free" but the believer is to be filled with the Holy Spirit...

Humankind want to state they have "freedom of the will" when in all practical and biblical sense, that is a mere deception of the enemy of the believer. The same deception presented to Eve in Eden.

For every expression of "freedom of the will" there is the hierarchy of needs and lusts that frame every aspect of life. Eve's lust - to be like God. Lucifer's lust - to be God.


Consider - does God have "freedom of the will?"

The answer is obviously, no.

For God can do nothing contrary to His nature.

His nature conforms His will and desires.

If God does not have freedom of the will, then what makes man greater than God?


(the more I "edited" the longer the post became - I finally just stopped writing)

 

Yep.

______

 

God cannot do a LOT of things, as you well know.

One of the many, many, many things he cannot do BECAUSE he is God (Like sin or lie for example) is create a being that can create things ex nihilo.

God can no more make a creature who can cause something without anything to work with than God can make a creature that has no beginning or that has all power.

 

I really don't care either. I just think you're full of crap. I know Augustine uses the term "free will" a lot.

I just don't think you know what he means by it and can't provide it in its context.

No. You are conflating what an uncreated, unmoved mover can do with what created MOVED beings can do.

That's a very silly thing to do!

Everything is not mysterious. This is not at all mysterious.

god can create things from nothing.

No other being in the unvoierse can do that.

That's not a mystery, Bud. It really isn't. It's not even hard to ponder. It is OBVIOUS and self-evident.

Creatures that are themselves the result of a series of caused events cannot CAUSE something FROM NOTHING.

I am the CAUSE of my own decisions. It's weird, illogical mess.

Why can't I be the CAUSE of my own beating heart?

Why can't I be the CAUSE of my own BEING?

I can no more be the CAUSE of any one of these things than I can be the cause of any other of them.

Saying God CAN'T is not saying God is weak. You ought to know that.

In fact it is USUALLY saying that he is too strong.

For example, God is too STRONG to make a being with all power.

It is the very fact that he is so strong (ALL POWER is His) that he CANNOT do this.

I should not have to tell you this.

If I write a character in a book and have him choosing to marry someon- he is, in the book CHOOSING. It is still choice- it is just that I, the writer am in COMPLETE, ABSOLUTE, UNMITIGATED, UNADULTERATED CONTROL of the choice he makes.

Now, you may not like that, but it does not change the fact that it is still choice.

God does not CAUSE his own choice because the mind of God has always eternally been made up about everything.

Yes, yes, yes... the Bible SAYS he choose and I just believe the BIBLE BLAH, BLAH, BLAH.

I told you this is where this was going, didn't I?

You believe God learns stuff. That stuff OCCURS to God that he had not thought of before.

In other words, quite frankly, you don't believe in God. You believe in god. Your god is learning stuff, right? Am I not being fair? I'll take it back if you say that God does not learn things. But if your God learns things, he's no more than Zeus.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

DAhmer!!!

I told you this is where you'd go.

this is absolutely hilarious. Even when I TELL you your arguments in advance, you can't HELP but use them. You have nothing else, I suppose.

Dahmer, Dahmer, Dahmer. I've never seen anyone so interested in Jeffry Dahmer!

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

You're so full of crap and ANYBODY who reads this can see it.

So because I say that there are SOME qualities about God that he CANNOT make man have, I am saying that there are NO qualities about God that he can make man have????

Hilarious.

This is what you are reduced to. It's pitiful. It really is.

No, because I have never in my life said that man does not make choices so we can't be arguing about that.

Yep.

God CANNOT make creatures that can make things ex nihilo. No God absolutely cannot do that. Creatures are contingent beings. There are reasons they exist, reasons they want what they want and choose what they choose and those reasons have made them what they are.

 

Here is someone who was as interested in meat as he was, LOL...............

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOyQfd7OqIY

 

I think my signature goes a long way in answering this op.

 

Amen.

Thanks for drawing my attention to that lovely little poem.