Featured God is Completely Sovereign or in Control of EVERYTHING that happens.

That is the choice the Holy Spirit offers one's whole life, yes. See it is not a change of will. It is the willingness to change. A leopard is given a choice to change it's spots? No, neither can it do anything about it. The difference is that humans are given a choice, and they have free will and can do something. It is called a choice, not a work.

The result of reformed theology is you have a lot of people who think one day they will be good enough, because they are waiting for the Holy Spirit to change them, because that is what reformed theology teaches. Guess what, they are not elect by choice. They guessed God did not choose them. They had the knowledge that it needed to be done, but nothing was done. WHY? Reformed theology let them go to hell, and their excuse is the same: it was not God's will, sorry, hope hell works out for you. When simply they could have just let God know that they were sinners and there is nothing they can do about it, which is all true. They could have let God know that they were willing, because they were, they were waiting to be changed. But they never asked. They were told asking does nothing. Waiting was a better option than asking. It was based on what they heard that if it was to happen only God could do it, and that is true, but you have to let God know, because God is also waiting to be asked.

God does not will any to stay in sin. That is the natural state and will of all humans. God is not willing any should perish, He provided the Atonement. Free will is only the ability to chose God’s will of the Atonement. The Holy Spirit gets one to a point of changing one's will, but will not change a person against their will. But there is a point of acceptance. What is wrong with giving God permission to do His own will? Would you rather they just go to hell? I question some who think they are perfect in Christ, if they even let God do His will, or they are just self righteous. They think God is changing them, but He is not.

They are just changing themselves. We are not leopards, we are moral beings. God says our morals are just filthy rags. We can change our spots with filthy rags, but we do not see them as filthy rags. We do many things in the Lord's name, but in the end, it was the wrong lord, it was not God.

Eve saw the fruit as giving wisdom and making us gods. She was already in God's image, God would give her wisdom if she just asked. Eating the fruit was not the right choice. Reformed theology is the wrong fruit.

 

Changing the definition of free will is not helping. I preach repentance. How can folks here repent if they think they cannot? If you think that is activating free will, perhaps it is. Since most these days deny free will altogether, one has to start somewhere. Then for some you have to keep pointing out, they have the wrong definition.

Telling them they only have a few months to get it right seems to go against their will.

 

A rock doesn’t need a physician. A dead person doesn’t need a physician, either.

A sick person needs a physician—someone who is about to die.

But Jesus’ point there was that those who didn’t see themselves as sick were not going to seek out a physician. Now if God provides some kind of special sauce that causes the sick to recognize they are sick, and then they can seek out a physician, I guess you could call that prevenient grace. It’s not a concept I’m particularly fond of, but that’s where your cited passage leads, when the two choices are Arminianism or Calvinism. It’s definitely not leading to a Calvinistic understanding, where the special sauce actually makes one well (“regenerated”) where he know longer needs the physician’s services.

Your premise is faulty...

 

Something has changed, and changed massively. I hope it has changed in you since your birth.
'Therefore if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new' (2 Corinthians 5:17).

 

And faith is a fruit of the Holt Spirit = first saved so we can believe.

 

I agree with what you said. We need to work out some details we disagree on.

 

Here's Paul's description of our dead human spirit before the new birth.
“But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law. Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” Galatians 5:18–21 (KJV 1900)

Here's his description of our spirit brought to life in the New Birth.

“But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.” Galatians 5:22–24 (KJV 1900)

 

Ok, a Psalm of Asaph.

The first six verses start with a glorification of God. Then comes and interlude. As is usual for poetry of the Bible, transitions use a standard triplet. Triplets and couplets in the Old Testament express thoughts which are not meant to separated as you have done.

Psalm 50:7 NLT
“O my people, listen as I speak.
Here are my charges against you, O Israel:
I am God, your God!

Notice that the speaker is simply introducing himself in the third verse. It wasn't a "reminder", it was simply an identification of who was speaking. Now this is poetry and as such can have multiple meanings but I still believe you are reading the wrong thing into this passage.

The second part of the psalm discusses how God doesn't need sacrifices be instead wants thankfulness and the keeping of vows. He wants them to call on him in times of trouble. God is described as a God with personal relationships. The fourteenth and fifteenth verses introduce the second meaning to the seventh verse - God is defining himself through his relationship to his people. When you read the Bible next, look for this repeated theme throughout the Bible.

In the third part of the psalm, Asaph change the audience of the Psalm from those whom God has a relationship to the wicked.

Psalm 50:16 NLT
But God says to the wicked:
“Why bother reciting my decrees
and pretending to obey my covenant?

Notice the contrast to seventh verse! God is no longer introducing himself as "your God". God does not maintain a relationship to the wicked. This is a repeated theme throughout the Bible. God then starts to list the charges he has against them.

The NKJV, NLT and many others considers this to be two couplets while the ESV differs and considers this to be a triplet.

Psalm 50:21 NKJV
These things you have done, and I kept silent;
You thought that I was altogether like you;
But I will rebuke you,
And set them in order before your eyes.

Psalm 50:21 NLT
While you did all this, I remained silent,
and you thought I didn’t care.
But now I will rebuke you,
listing all my charges against you.

Psalm 50:21 ESV
These things you have done, and I have been silent;
you thought that I was one like yourself.
But now I rebuke you and lay the charge before you.

I think the ESV got it right in this instance. This ends the theme in the third part of the psalm. Notice that at the start of this portion, in verse 16, the wicked are introduced as people acting as if they are holy and doing everything that God wants them to. At the end of the of this third part, God says that they weren't like him at all. Asaph isn't describing God's metaphysics here. He is comparing behavior.

The clincher to the psalm is that God gives the wicked the choice to repent.

Humans are made in God's image.

Genesis 1:26-27 NLT
Then God said, “Let us make human beings in our image, to be like us. They will reign over the fish in the sea, the birds in the sky, the livestock, all the wild animals on the earth, and the small animals that scurry along the ground.”

[27] So God created human beings in his own image.
In the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

Literally translated, humans are the idols of God. Yes, it would be wrong to say that we are the God is our image but to say that there is not relation between God and humans would require one to ignore a theme of the Bible which is introduces in the first chapter.

That being said to save time and space, I'll just reference an explanation of this verse.

Verse Quick Reference

At this point, you should heed the advice of the OP, even if he doesn't

One should read the Bible to know who God is and not pigeon-hole God into what one thinks God should be.

 

Job 1:12 NLT
“All right, you may test him,” the LORD said to Satan. “Do whatever you want with everything he possesses, but don’t harm him physically.” So Satan left the LORD’s presence.

Job 1:16 NLT
While he was still speaking, another messenger arrived with this news: “The fire of God has fallen from heaven and burned up your sheep and all the shepherds. I am the only one who escaped to tell you.”

Who knows more about what is going on? God or the human messenger? You seem to think the human messenger knows more than God.

Yes, the accuser did urge God to harm him, but it doesn't say that God did this directly. It repeatedly says that he delegates this to Satan.

A better translation of what is going on here -

Job 32:1 NLT
Job’s three friends refused to reply further to him because he kept insisting on his innocence.

Job's friends give up because Job keeps on insisting that he is innocent. The narrator of Job as well as God agree and repeated state that Job is in fact innocent.

At this point, you're adding something to the text which is not there. Elihu is not really upset with the logic. He is upset that the other three are being so polite. Job 32:18-22

Job 33:9,12 NLT
You said, ‘I am pure; I am without sin; I am innocent; I have no guilt. [12] “But you are wrong, and I will show you why. For God is greater than any human being.

Once again Elihu repeats the argument that the other three have made - Job is not really innocent. Notice verses 23-28. Elihu is saying that if Job were upright bad things would not be happening to him. In verse 32, Elihu is telling Job to repent.

In chapter 34, he continues along with the refrain that Job had to have sinned against God and then ends with the statement that because Job refuses to acknowledge his sin, he is adding rebellion to the set of sins Job has commited.

Job 34:37 ESV
For he adds rebellion to his sin; he claps his hands among us and multiplies his words against God.”

Once again, the narrator and God both repeatedly state that Job is innocent.

As Elihu said from the beginning, he was upset that Job's friends were so "nice". However, Elihu is not making any new arguments. Elihu is still saying

Job 35:14 NLT
You say you can’t see him,
but he will bring justice if you will only wait.

and

Job 36:6-10 NLT
He does not let the wicked live
but gives justice to the afflicted.
[7] He never takes his eyes off the innocent,
but he sets them on thrones with kings and exalts them forever.
[8] If they are bound in chains
and caught up in a web of trouble,
[9] he shows them the reason.
He shows them their sins of pride.
[10] He gets their attention
and commands that they turn from evil.

Once again, Elihu is repeating the same false claims of the other three - that Job must be sinned to deserve this "punishment".

Not even remotely. In fact, God points out that the arguments of Elihu and the other three are wrong. He doesn't specify Elihu, but Elihu's arguments are based on the others and at no point does God state that Elihu was accurate. In fact, God specifically states that Job spoke truthfully of him. So if you want to know who God is, you need to be reading what Job says - not Elihu.

The purpose of God's response was not to agree with Elihu. God was responding to Job - not the others. Job was God's servant. Pay attention to what Job was asking. Go back. Read his questions. Job wants God to explain himself. God responds by pointing out that the world is more complicated than he can understand and even asks Job if he wants to handle justice in the world. God's point is that Job is not in a position to understand why suffering occurs.

Job is not about your metaphysics. Job actually refutes your metaphysics and states that God is more complicated than your understanding of him.

You need to re-read the story understanding that God was not upset with Job or what he said.

 

This is the problem . Folks start with a philosophy on ' freewill ' or ' no freewill ' or they start with ' who moves first ' . Rather than simply reading what the bible says .

 

There it is Adam had freewill and so do we. We inherited it from Him. Scripture never says we inherited his sin nor does it ever say we lost our freewill. Therefore God is not in complete control of man's sinning . He also is not in complete control of man's will to choose which path to take in life. This is not to say that He couldn't take control if it were His will.

His will is that men seek Him by there own will. It is God's will that we surrender our wills to Him.
MB

 

No where in scripture does it ever say I must bow to God's Sovereignty, but it does say all men will bow to God. The problem is you are seeing things in scripture that Just are not there. The word Sovereign is not in scripture.
MB

 

And your conclusion from that premise is that God is sovereign, and that He controls everything? Because a rock is dead?

And I guess Death is “very good”, since rocks were part of God’s creation before sin.