Calvinists... do you have a problem with the concept that God is the ultimate...

[HeirofSalvation]

To know the future before the future has occurred requires time travel
Otherwise the future has not happened and there is nothing to know.

Precisely the premise of yours we are rejecting....this apparently seems self-evident to you...but we reject it on it's face, as do many (if not most) Theologians and Philosophers alike.

Pretty simple really.

Only to you....not to everyone else.

Your view is science fiction,

Cute random insult...but if it is, then it also represents a far more commonly held majority view than the one you appear to hold.

If we have not made our future decisions yet, then they cannot be known.

Disagree

Unless the future exists outside of time and can be viewed by God.

That sentence is self-refuting, so it cannot be the case...perhaps you meant to say "Unless God exists outside of time" Which is what I maintain.

Did I mention a crystal ball theology?

Yes, not in this thread...but in previous ones. Usually this was coupled with explanations of it's being pagan philosophy and what-not...Where do you think I got that particular term? I had never heard of it referenced as "crystal ball Theology" until I read you call it that.

Complete fiction and I am sick of it, HOS. I have posted more than a dozen times that God can know the future by searching our hearts and causing circumstances where we would do as God foresees.

Not fiction at all....what you are describing is determinism...not free volition. You only believe that those future decisions are knowable if necessitated by the circumstances that God "knows" would sufficiently cause them to occur. That is essentially what Calvinism usually teaches. If God were not monkeying with those circumstances....then they would not (you believe) be otherwise knowable. You believe God can only know them...if they are necessitated by those circumstances. Other-wise, you think it requires time-travel.

Stop misrepresenting my views.

I am not misrepresenting them...I am un-packing them, and exposing the premises upon which they are founded as being shared by Calvinists.

That behavior marks both you and Winman as no different that the Calvinists.

Your view of fore-knowledge marks you as being substantially in agreement with Calvinists on that particular facet of foreknowledge....You are in good company with them, but, I am merely explaining that I disagree with both them, and you on these issues. This is what I was explaining here:

The error you make is ostensibly the same error as Calvinists make, and that is that God can only know things that he has predestined or ordained or caused.

Here, "predestined" or "ordained" or "caused" is understood to include any determined outcome based upon circumstances which are a sufficient guarantor of the outcome.

Strange if its so basic, that it cannot stand up to discussion but must be accepted as truth.

Engaging in discussion with you about it is precisely what I am doing. I didn't use any buzz-words like "heresy" or anything else in order to describe what I think to be shaky Theological ground: I carefully chose the phrase:

but running dangerously afoul of Scriptural truth

Apparently....that was still too harsh a way to say: "I disagree with your Theology-Proper" without causing you to immediately imagine horrific visions of thumb-screws. I will try to sissy-fy my statement more then; how about:

"I think that OT, avoids the Theological absurdity of this view by staking out an uncommon and generally minority view of fundamental Scriptural understanding of God's attribute of omniscience."

Baptists believe those that govern should not dictate doctrine, so this behavior is clearly modeled on the top down dictates that deny the priesthood of believers such as found in the RCC, Presbyterians and dare I say Calvinists.

We have dispatched the inquisitors...they are en-route, but I have instructed them to bear a written full confession and recant, and Holy mother Church will show mercy if only you sign it.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

What are you talking about?...... I have no idea why you are paranoid. Any time someone disagrees with you, you seem to suffer from martyr's complex.

It does seem so....

 

[humblethinker]

OVT merely denies exhaustive Omniscience, thus escaping logical absurdity, but running dangerously afoul of Scriptural truth about one of God's most defining and basic properties.

As I understand OVT, yours may be a poorly or incompletely worded statement. OVT upholds that God is omniscient. While he does not know that a 'married bachelor' exists, he does exhaustively know all of reality.

 

[humblethinker]

I don't know where I'm headed. I am just trying to be honest and seek help from different viewpoints. I'm not stating what I confess or believe, but only where I see DoG taking me. However, as I've shown already, I also see a non-Cal view go the same place. I feel the tension and wrestle with it. No matter what, I will not confess a view that in my mind will stain or tarnish God's holiness. That is an unequivocal that I will not bend on. My hope to find a plausible way to understand this.

GT, I think you're asking the right questions. Why should we fear to ask questions if we're genuine? We should not be afraid of truth. I appreciate your view of God's holiness, with that I agree.

 

[OldRegular]

Folks,

If we will carefully consider the following Scripture perhaps we can understand why both the OP and ALL responses demonstrate our inability to comprehend the Sovereignty of God, the Holiness* [Separateness or Otherness] of God, or the Decrees of God.

Isaiah 40:21, 22
21. Have ye not known? have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning? have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth?
22. It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:

Consider folks; can a grasshopper comprehend you or me?

*God's Attributes: God's Holiness

God's Attributes: God's Holiness
http://www.shema.com/articles/articles-005.php

The Hebrew word for "holy" is "kadosh." The basic meaning of holiness is separation. To be holy means to be set apart for a special purpose. When holiness is applied to God, it means that He is set apart from the rest of His creation. God is infinitely separate from all His creatures, even the mightiest. Who is like You among the gods, O Lord? Majestic in holiness, awesome in praises, working wonders (Exodus 15:11) the Jewish people sang after crossing the Red Sea. The answer to this question is no one and nothing - no angel, no man, and no higher power can be compared to Him.

Holiness also implies separation from all that is evil. God is completely separate from sin and impurity of any kind. Your eyes are too pure to approve evil, and You cannot look on wickedness, the prophet Habakkuk informs us (Habakkuk 1:13). The Holy One of Israel is the essence of moral excellence. He is infinitely perfect in righteousness and purity.

God's holiness is not just the best we know infinitely multiplied. Human beings cannot grasp the holiness of God by thinking of someone or something very pure, and then raising the idea to the highest degree. We know of nothing like the divine holiness. It stands apart - unique, unapproachable, incomprehensible and unattainable. The Holy One is holy with an incomprehensible fullness of purity. Before God's holiness even the most glorious sinless angels must veil their faces. If the heavens are not pure in His sight, how much less one who is detestable and corrupt, man, who drinks iniquity like water (Job 15:15-16).

Because God is holy, everything about the Holy One is holy. All of His attributes are holy; no one else can have them in the same way. Nothing can be compared to His infinity, His eternality, His wisdom, His mercy, His power, His goodness, His omniscience, His kindness, His love, or His self-sufficiency. He is unique in all these attributes. While some Christian leaders are teaching that we are gods, if they understood the holiness of God they would know that there is an infinite difference between the Holy One of Israel and redeemed humanity. Ayn kadosh ka-Adonai: There is no one holy like the Lord (1 Samuel 2:2). To whom then will you liken Me that I should be His equal? says the Holy One (Isaiah 40:25).

Some wise men have said that because of the fundamental importance of this attribute, the holiness of God should be stressed more than any other. The angels surrounding the throne of God call out: kadosh kadosh kadosh - holy, holy, holy (Isaiah 6:3) - not love, love, love or omniscience, omniscience, omniscience, or almighty, almighty, almighty! When His disciples asked Yeshua to teach them how to pray, the first thing that Yeshua mentioned was the holiness of God: Our Father who art in Heaven, hallowed be Your Name. We should always approach the Lord our God with a holy reverence and awe (Hebrews 12:28). He is not our good buddy - He is our holy Father.

 

[TCassidy]

Once you people come to understand the distinction between the prescriptive will of God and the permissive will of God all these silly arguments will cease.

 

[Benjamin]

Originally Posted by Iconoclast
If anything existed outside of God's control (Translation: Man’s will is controlled by God – and man sins) ......He would not be God. (He would not be the god of my Deterministic view as clearly revealed to the Body member leaders of the true church as discribed in the 1689 LBC) Any who try and ascribe sin to God do not know Him. (Anyone who does not agree with my logic that God controls their will and thereby their sin yet is not responsible for their sin is lost; Icon has spoken with special revelation concerning this matter!)(If you don’t understand my prophetic teaching to be true I am here to “help you” to learn and appreciate my intellectual ways …only image bearers like me and my fellow 1689 LBC Calvinist church members can see these truths in scripture, but I can you, follow me!)


The idea that God who creates all things ....somehow cannot be in absolute control off all things at all times is not to be entertained or suggested. (Translation: Any idea that God has not determined all things, including sin, cannot be entertained or even suggested in this public forum which is my domain. I, the “image bearer of special revelation”, will be there to “help you” understand this.)

We have to work hard to understand what God has revealed for us....without trying to speak of God as anything less. (You have to try harder to see it my way or you making God to less than He is i.e. the Determiner of Evil.)

God has an exact ,perfect and Holy plan. He has not overlooked any aspect of this life....including the place evil would have. (God determining evil is His perfect plan and is Holy, again, this includes evil, it has its place in my soteriological system too and this must not be overlooked.)

(Post #21)
This {“yes, God is the author of sin, and those that say God does determine everything... but not sin, which is intellectually dishonest.’} is a denial of the truth of the christian faith. (You have spoken blasphemy!) Sin is here.It is here for a reason that is under God's control. God does not sin.God is not the "author of sin".He is Holy and sinless. To say otherwise is to blaspheme His Holy name. (By disagreeing with me you have committed blasphemy! To be intellectually honest in this matter by using your own reasoning is to blasphemy His Name. The image bearer of special revelation has spoken!)

To say anything happens that God does not have control over is serious error. (Again, God determines the will of man and his sinning, but is not responsible for the sin. You blasphemy Hi Name in your serious error of disagreeing with my reasoning!)

You cannot leave a doctrine that you do not understand to begin with. (You don’t understand my doctrine, you are blinded, if you could see, been given the prophetic gift, you would know my doctrine is true.)

(Post #56)
Men have a will.Men make choices. Scripture refers to men as self willed. (Translation: This is how it works- Men have a will, this will is pre-determined for them, so they do make choices, you must understand my philosophical concept of “self will”.)

The will is bound by the nature...it is never...."free" of the nature.IN heaven we will not be ..."free" to sin. God frees us to serve Him. (The will is bound to whatever God determined it to be, AGAIN it is never “free” of the nature God determined it to be! We won’t be sinning in heaven where only there we will be truly free under His despot deterministic sovereign rule to and be forced to serve Him there too.)

(Post #58)
GT,

God created everything.Magnetic fields, electricity, solar activity, Gravity. (Let me explain once again – God “created/determined” everything – “fore-determined all things”.)

If a person climbs up the side of a mountain, looses his grip or footing....and lands facedown on the rocks900ft down...and splashed all over the rocks... (God “created/determined” that some people will fall and smash their brains out on rocks.)

Is God the cause,because He ordained gravitational force???Or maybe the climber should have stayed on level ground???? (Now is God responsible being that there is gravity or for the climber not staying on level ground even if He “created/fore-determined all things” – “???” Are you confused about this?)

This helps me understand the issue: (These Holy kinsmen can explain how the scriptures speak to the same things I’ve been telling you as these mysteries of adverse reasoning has been revealed to them too and thereby are the final authority to my doctrine.)
http://www.sgbcsv.org/literature/ProblemOfEvil.pdf

enjoy

 

[Benjamin]

Continued:

(Post #61)
God can be both if need be; (God can be true and not true at the same time if He needs to be. I will now prophetically interpret the scriptures for you to prove it.)
Gen 20;
6 And God said unto him in a dream, Yea, I know that thou didst this in the integrity of thy heart; for I also withheld thee from sinning against me: therefore suffered I thee not to touch her.
7 Now therefore restore the man his wife; for he is a prophet, and he shall pray for thee, and thou shalt live: and if thou restore her not, know thou that thou shalt surely die, thou, and all that are thine.

8 Therefore Abimelech rose early in the morning, and called all his servants, and told all these things in their ears: and the men were sore afraid.

9 Then Abimelech called Abraham, and said unto him, What hast thou done unto us? and what have I offended thee, that thou hast brought on me and on my kingdom a great sin? thou hast done deeds unto me that ought not to be done.


I believe if someone truly understands the scriptural teaching they will embrace this doctrine.
(If someone believes my specially revealed interpretations of the scriptures they will embrace my doctrine – see yet?)


and at that point either continue believing {A. God authors sin}
(At that point – whether or not they believe my Holy revelation given to you- they will continue using their own mind or not on my reasoning adds to God authoring sin or not.)

No calvinist and no historic confession will ever believe that this is even possible,and yet , it gets brought forward as if it is a viable point of contention. Itrust God in all his Holy attributes. (No Calvinist or 1689 LBC believer will ever admit that God authors sins, yet this contrary reasoning against my specially revealed interpretations keeps being brought up as if any argument is valid against my proclamations – this is heathens being contentious!)

, or
My doctrine is found directly in the word of God...I just desire to know more of Jesus and his teaching. (My doctrine is found just as I interpreted it to you from the scriptures – the difference is “I” know Jesus and His teaching and you do not!)


I am very comfortable in the understanding of these truths as most all of the professing church has been since, the reformation....re-discovering Apostolic teaching. (I am comfortable in these truths as I, the image bearer, have revealed to you, just like my kinsmen have had it specially revealed to them when they rediscovered my “Apostolic/prophetic teaching.) No need to Get out of Dodge....but rather lenghten the cord and strengthen the stakes...Zions rule is going worldwide, the gates of hell shall not prevail against it......(Did you get that Apostolic definition of how my doctrine will sovereignly rule with God?) I am there for the long haul...all the way home ( If not, I will be here to “help you” and set you heathens straight until the day I die.)


The camp of the saints who have always believed these truths..there is plenty of room...for everyone believing the truth of God ( I am in the camp of the Apostles who teach these things which I tell you are true, there is plenty of room for you too, everyone can believe me – if these heathen will just follow my reasoning.)



Benjamin: I'm just curious, am I the only one here that sees these "translations" in Iconoclast words? :laugh: Someone please tell me I am not alone in what I see being constantly broadcasted on this board by him! :BangHead:

 

[TCassidy]

Benjamin: I'm just curious, am I the only one here that sees these "translations" in Iconoclast words?

Yes, you are the only one who is either so deluded or so dishonest that you see these "translations" in his words. If you are not certain what his words mean, the honest person would ask for a clarification and not post libelous twisting of what he said.

 

[Benjamin]

Yes, you are the only one who is either so deluded or so dishonest that you see these "translations" in his words. If you are not certain what his words mean, the honest person would ask for a clarification and not post libelous twisting of what he said.

Pal, he does man up to own the meanings of his words by the methods I have spelled out. But I don't expect any brain washed Calvinist to understand how this can be so, thereby you are exempted from my question.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Yes, you are the only one who is either so deluded or so dishonest that you see these "translations" in his words. If you are not certain what his words mean, the honest person would ask for a clarification and not post libelous twisting of what he said.

He is also the only one that bears a remarkable resemblance to Corky Romano.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQN7WPleL9o

 

[Winman]

Continued:

(Post #61)
God can be both if need be; (God can be true and not true at the same time if He needs to be. I will now prophetically interpret the scriptures for you to prove it.)
Gen 20;
6 And God said unto him in a dream, Yea, I know that thou didst this in the integrity of thy heart; for I also withheld thee from sinning against me: therefore suffered I thee not to touch her.
7 Now therefore restore the man his wife; for he is a prophet, and he shall pray for thee, and thou shalt live: and if thou restore her not, know thou that thou shalt surely die, thou, and all that are thine.

8 Therefore Abimelech rose early in the morning, and called all his servants, and told all these things in their ears: and the men were sore afraid.

9 Then Abimelech called Abraham, and said unto him, What hast thou done unto us? and what have I offended thee, that thou hast brought on me and on my kingdom a great sin? thou hast done deeds unto me that ought not to be done.


I believe if someone truly understands the scriptural teaching they will embrace this doctrine.
(If someone believes my specially revealed interpretations of the scriptures they will embrace my doctrine – see yet?)


and at that point either continue believing {A. God authors sin}
(At that point – whether or not they believe my Holy revelation given to you- they will continue using their own mind or not on my reasoning adds to God authoring sin or not.)

No calvinist and no historic confession will ever believe that this is even possible,and yet , it gets brought forward as if it is a viable point of contention. Itrust God in all his Holy attributes. (No Calvinist or 1689 LBC believer will ever admit that God authors sins, yet this contrary reasoning against my specially revealed interpretations keeps being brought up as if any argument is valid against my proclamations – this is heathens being contentious!)

, or
My doctrine is found directly in the word of God...I just desire to know more of Jesus and his teaching. (My doctrine is found just as I interpreted it to you from the scriptures – the difference is “I” know Jesus and His teaching and you do not!)


I am very comfortable in the understanding of these truths as most all of the professing church has been since, the reformation....re-discovering Apostolic teaching. (I am comfortable in these truths as I, the image bearer, have revealed to you, just like my kinsmen have had it specially revealed to them when they rediscovered my “Apostolic/prophetic teaching.) No need to Get out of Dodge....but rather lenghten the cord and strengthen the stakes...Zions rule is going worldwide, the gates of hell shall not prevail against it......(Did you get that Apostolic definition of how my doctrine will sovereignly rule with God?) I am there for the long haul...all the way home ( If not, I will be here to “help you” and set you heathens straight until the day I die.)


The camp of the saints who have always believed these truths..there is plenty of room...for everyone believing the truth of God ( I am in the camp of the Apostles who teach these things which I tell you are true, there is plenty of room for you too, everyone can believe me – if these heathen will just follow my reasoning.)



Benjamin: I'm just curious, am I the only one here that sees these "translations" in Iconoclast words? :laugh: Someone please tell me I am not alone in what I see being constantly broadcasted on this board by him! :BangHead:

I think your interpretation of Iconoclast is right on the money Benjamin! :thumbs:

Iconoclast is the keeper of the truth. Do not be troubled when his doctrine seems to contradict the word of God, the fault is yours. Iconoclast will explain, or else consign it to mystery. But be sure he is always correct, even when he seems wrong. He has centuries of Calvinists who agree with him, and we know the majority is never wrong.

Mat 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:

All those Calvinist scholars cannot possibly be wrong, the majority is never wrong.

 

[Benjamin]

I think your interpretation of Iconoclast is right on the money Benjamin! :thumbs:

Thank you.

For one, it is a common ploy of his to question the salvation of others based on the premises I have outlined and he has been called on this tactic many times by a multitude of members here. He seems to believe himself to be under the radar in the way he phrases these accusations but nonetheless the fact that many others have called him on this goes to show that at least on this issue of recognizing the meaning of his words I am also not alone.

The fact he or Cassidy, EWF, or any others do not have the integrity to own up to meanings of his words does not make not true that he uses them in the way described in my rhetorical question.

I do not understand why the board allows him to continue with these disigenuous methods of debate.

 

[TCassidy]

Pal, he does man up to own the meanings of his words by the methods I have spelled out. But I don't expect any brain washed Calvinist to understand how this can be so, thereby you are exempted from my question.

I am terribly sorry you are too stupid to understand his very clear statements. I did not realize you were developmentally challenged. If you ask him real nice he might be willing to dumb it down and use real short words to help you understand the basic truth of Christianity: I.E. God is in charge.

 

[TCassidy]

He is also the only one that bears a remarkable resemblance to Corky Romano.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQN7WPleL9o

I disagree. Somebody high on cocaine would make much more sense, and probably be a lot more honest, than he.

 

[TCassidy]

The fact he or Cassidy, EWF, or any others do not have the integrity to own up to meanings of his words does not make not true that he uses them in the way described in my rhetorical question.

Once again your own ignorance forces you into an egregious lie. You obviously lack the wit to understand my prior post: "Once you people come to understand the distinction between the prescriptive will of God and the permissive will of God all these silly arguments will cease."

If that is too difficult for you I will be glad to explain it to you.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I am terribly sorry you are too stupid to understand his very clear statements. I did not realize you were developmentally challenged. If you ask him real nice he might be willing to dumb it down and use real short words to help you understand the basic truth of Christianity: I.E. God is in charge.

Tom!!! stupid is not a politically correct word. Try mentally challenged. :laugh:

 

[Winman]

Thank you.

For one, it is a common ploy of his to question the salvation of others based on the premises I have outlined and he has been called on this tactic many times by a multitude of members here. He seems to believe himself to be under the radar in the way he phrases these accusations but nonetheless the fact that many others have called him on this goes to show that at least on this issue of recognizing the meaning of his words I am also not alone.

The fact he or Cassidy, EWF, or any others do not have the integrity to own up to meanings of his words does not make not true that he uses them in the way described in my rhetorical question.

I do not understand why the board allows him to continue with these disigenuous methods of debate.

Trust me, I recognized how obnoxious he is long ago. Anybody who has seen our exchanges knows I am no fan of his.

Iconoclast is full of hot air. He doesn't even know if he is elect himself. He puts on a great show, but it is all fluff.

 

[TCassidy]

Tom!!! stupid is not a politically correct word. Try mentally challenged. :laugh:

Well, in my defense, I did use the term "developmentally challenged" in the second sentence.

 

[Iconoclast]

Pal, he does man up to own the meanings of his words by the methods I have spelled out. But I don't expect any brain washed Calvinist to understand how this can be so, thereby you are exempted from my question.

Benjamin,

Take a moment to calm down and compose yourself.You asked a question and was given an answer...no need to attack TC:
Thank you for your response. It reveals some good things and some bad things- let's take a look

In the heat of this discussion you have committed several debate fallacies-
1]Argumentum ad hominem

2]Argumentum ad ignorantiam

3]Argumentum ad logicam

4]Argumentum ad misericordiam

5]Argumentum ad nauseam

6]Argumentum ad populum

7]Circulus in demonstrando

Nevertheless....I think progress was made in this discussion and I am thankful that you tried to think through what is at issue.

I would rather see someone passionate about what they believe than have a name they live but are dead.

Some of your responses were funny , but overall I think the inner desire you have to embrace the doctrines of grace are taking root:thumbs:

I might not be the one who is used to "right the ship" for you...one plants, one waters, but God gives the increase:wavey:

As you responded in the red letters.......use your logic
....and read what you wrote.As you seek to oppose my statements ,just take a look at the obvious implications 0f what you are suggesting!

You suggest God is not as revealed in scripture.You suggest God was not aware of, or the one limiting Satan and his evil design against JOB.Your logic in trying in your zeal to oppose my posts has you suggesting things that if you were more composed and in a rational state of mind you might not want to suggest.:wavey:

You like your faithful disciple winman have to suggest that God is responsible for mans sin...and yes that is a horrible blasphemy:thumbs:

I think you are a more intelligent person than I am, but I do believe I have by God's grace a firmer grasp on the truths of God's word in that I do not despise godly teachers who are given as a gift to the church.
In trying to be critical of me you say things like this;

(My doctrine is found just as I interpreted it to you from the scriptures

Thing is...I mostly just quote the scripture to you,so My doctrine is without interpretation...I simply quoted the jn passages as Jesus spoke them.
Progress was made and when you re-read your posts you will see that you actually oppose yourself....