Featured Do Calvinists believe man has free will after salvation?

This was an excerpt from the previous link...

Sent from my BNTV400 using Tapatalk

 

I was being civil towards you and I got this? What did I say for you to post in this manner? I could understand if I had been a jerk towards you, but this was uncalled for. Oh well...

Sent from my BNTV400 using Tapatalk

 

That's rather dumb inspector. It reminds me of the Jack Benny radio skit. A hold-up guy says to the tightwad Benny:"Your money or your life." After an interminal silence the criminal repeats his demand and asks why Benny didn't respond. Benny says "I'm thinking about it."

What's in your wallet, nat'l secrity secrets?

Then you are worse than a criminal and a quite a heartless "Christian".

You don't believe in original sin, yet you claim to read your Bible. The two thoughts are mutually exclusive.

Why would you even suggest such a wicked thought "Even if there were no God'?

Your theology doesn't reflect Jesus.

How positively revolting.

Now THAT is sending red flags up all over the place...especially since you brag a bunch about your military background.

 

Of course you were. Are you that blind to your condition?

Calvinists aren't as dumb as a box of rocks either.

We don't fear death. But in common sense situations you go for the extremities.

Don't try to deny the obvious.

And it was pretty much a stupid explanation. Are you holed-up in a mountain cabin by any chance?

Dah Nile ain't just a river in Egypt.

 

And your post gets worse from that point on.

Man, you are as obsessed as Rebel is. Humble yourself and get thee to a library.

Sunday is coming. Do you present a different attitude in church?

What accounts for your rage and lies or raging lies?

There is no "what if' so it's best not to sound like an anti-theist.

You're really turning on the charm now.

What is wrong with you? You have serious issues. You are unhinged.

With that attitude I hope you don't manage people.

I picture you with a cigar clenched between your teeth, your temples pulsating, nostrils flaring. Check your blood pressure Inspector Clouseau.

 

Brother Benjamin,

In your reply above, you said my premise is false, but again did not answer my question. Therefore, as you stated that my premise that God is the first cause of all causes to be false, please answer my question that I now pose a third time. If God is not the first cause of all causes, who is? Is it Satan, man, something else, or do you believe in effects that have no causes? If the latter, please give an example. Please do not evade the question. I posed my question first, thus in the interest of debate, please answer my question, then as I previously stated, I will be happy to answer your questions with no evasion. Thanks.

 

But it is about love......

Mt 22:36-39 “Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?” And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.”

I also was not referring to the job, but your cold attitude towards the situation. Especially the individual you replied to.

 

You measure your walk with Christ by how much Rippon disagrees with you? If you truly believe Rippon to be in error....

2 Timothy 2:25
"correcting his opponents with gentleness. God may perhaps grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth"

Ephesians 4:2
"with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace."

What does this accomplish other than attempt to provoke a brother to anger?

 

Yes you was.

I have a desire to go and be with the Lord, yes. That is with my soul. In my flesh, I desire to live as long as the good Lord sees fit to allow me.

Good for you.

Yes you was.

You have every right to. But not in the manner in which you did. If I had been nasty towards you at first, then yes. But I digress...

This is a scary thought...

[quote[You do.
That's not my problem.[/quote]

I am not scared of death, but I am in no means in a hurry to find it either...

Yes you did, in a rude manner...

Again, you have every right to disagree with me or anyone else, but not the right in being rude in doing so...

Done answered it...

You stated 'I actually BELIEVE the bible...'like I don't?

Yes you did, in a rude manner...

He knows more about the bible than you'll ever know....

Go down to your local courthouse and tell all around you don't care if all five of your children die tomorrow, in fact, you'd prefer it....& you love your children enough not to want them here... and see how quick CPS is busting down your doors.

My wife and I can't have kids, and we own a pug that we love to pieces. And I do not welcome her death. I hope I can keep her until she's 30 healthy years old...

 

Hmm...Well, according to the remarks of some reviewers Mr. Rives got some things wrong. He said that Calvin wrote no Christian commentary before he published the Institutes. Wrong. He published "Psychopannychia" in 1534.
Rives claimed that Calvin left no inkling of what led him to Christ. Wrong again. He left two accounts. If you are ignorant of that then how may other uninformed thoughts do you have about his life? If I was in the States I'd get that book through an inter-library loan and check out all the false statements contained therein.

Meanwhile, there are many honest Church historians who differ quite markedly with Mr. Rives, among them:
Bruce Gordon, Alister McGrath, J.I. Packer, Joel Beeke, J.T. McNeil, T.H.L. Parker, Robert Godfrey, C.H. Irwin, Otto Scott, R.C. Red, Bernard Cottret, Jean Cadier, Williston Walker, Sinclair Ferguson, B.B. Warfield, Basil Hall, Jean-Daniel Benoit, Francois Wendel, Philip Vollmer, Philip Schaff and Paul Henry.

There are many more

If you can't say anything nice...
Well maybe your mom never taught you that one.

May I suggest that you acquire some Christian friends?

SNIP

 

Inspector J. : After you're banned don't even think about coming back on the BB with a new identity.

 

Brother Benjamin,

God's will is the first cause of all causes. This is scriptural and also logical. This is because God is the only thing that does not have a cause as He alone is eternal and created all things. "All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made." (John 1:3)
Ephesians 1:11 tells us, "him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:", therefore His will is the first cause of all causes.

Sin is carried out as a result of secondary causes. The secondary causes of sin are two different created creatures. # 1 is Satan, as it is written, "...the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:" (Ephesians 2:2). The other secondary cause of sin is man's evil flesh, "For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing" (Romans 7:18). Any good that is carried out by a regenerated child of God per scripture is a result solely of God working directly through his children by God's will, "For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure" (Philippians 2:13)

God willing that sin come into existence does not make God the author of sin. Please permit me to explain. An act alone does not constitute sin, but the righteousness or unrighteousness of an act is determined by the motive prompting the act. If a physician causes his fellowman great pain and suffering and even death by the amputation of a limb in an effort to do him good, no one would condemn that physician of wrong doing; but if he causes him pain or suffering or death by amputating a limb in malice and with an intention of doing him harm, that physician is guilty of wrong. God has a holy and sinless motive in all that He does, in all that He causes to be done and in all that He allows to be done, and intends that each thing done shall redound to the praise of that holy and exalted purpose, and so it matters not how sinful and vile the act may be when performed by man with a corrupt motive, God’s motive and purpose in the act being most holy He is not and can not be chargeable with sin; and yet the very same act which He has appointed to issue in His praise and redound to His glory is a vile transgression on the part of the one who performed it, as his design was evil.

To illustrate, when God sent the king of Assyria against Israel with the charge God declares “I dispatch him against a people who anger me, to seize loot and snatch plunder, and to trample them down like mud in the streets.” (Isaiah 10:6), God continues, “But this is not what he (the king of Assyria) intends,
this is not what he has in mind; his purpose is to destroy, to put an end to many nations”. (Isaiah 10:7) The wickedness was not put in the heart of the king by God’s decree, but it was already there. But God then states, “Wherefore it shall come to pass, that when the Lord hath performed His whole work upon mount Zion and on Jerusalem, I will punish the fruit of the stout heart of the king of Assyria, and the glory of his high looks. For he saith, by the strength of my hand I have done it, and by my wisdom...” (Isaiah 10:12-13) Read the entire 10th chapter of Isaiah. This wicked king did the very thing God determined, but he was not moved in the least to do it by God’s decree; he was entirely ignorant of that, but was actuated by an evil motive to cut off and destroy, thus God punished him for this! Thus we see that an act does not determine if something is sin, but the motive prompting the act, thus God can will that sin exist, but not be the author of sin.

God directly predetermined to do all acts of good on this earth and he predetermined that others would do all the acts of evil on this earth, but he has uses these evil acts to produce a greater good- Take for example, the crucifixion of Christ, the most evil act of mankind ever-was of God's predetermined plan according to scripture. "And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed!" (Luke 22:22) Also, "26 The kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers were gathered together against the Lord, and against his Christ. 27 For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,28 For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done. (Acts 4:26-28) and finally, "Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain" (Acts 2:23). He used these acts to bruise his Son, make him Sin, thus redeeming his people so they can live with and in him for all of eternity. This is the greatest act of love this world has or ever will see. Yet we also see those who did these acts are declared to be done by "wicked hands", therefore they are not excused by God in their actions even though it was used to fulfill God's purpose (these wicked men acted from their evil motives and were ignorant of God's Holy purposes He had in the whole matter).

Thus, through the crucifixion we see how God can predestinate the most evil act history has ever see, but at the same time have it about to His glory by accomplishing mercy, redemption, forgiveness, grace, justification, etc. Therefore, if He can do this with the most wicked act man has ever known, He can, and certainly does so for all lessor acts of evil, yet cannot be charged with being the "author of sin" as His motives behind his predestination/predetermination of events are always holy and just. I hope this long rambling reply has answered your questions and that you will now answer my question of, "Is God's will the first cause of all causes, if not, what is?"

God bless,

Brother Joe

 

Stop insulting me in responding to others. You are seriously disturbed. Anyone can see who has the problem. With all your exaltation of Calvin, I wonder if you can even see Jesus. While pretending to be a Baptist, maybe you should ponder what would have happened to you had you lived in Calvin's Geneva while holding Baptist views: You would have ended up looking like a strip of bacon.

 

Perhaps you have not read my reply very carefully because I not only answered your question but I broke down your “argument” (BTW, that is what your question is, an attempt to prove a claim by providing reason for accepting it. The claim that is supported is called the conclusion to the argument and claims providing the support are called the premises. Those issues are what I focus on in a debate. It seems that you are ignoring that I have addressed them but that won't make them go away. ) into its premises while clearly addressing the first premise – “God is the first cause of all causes” - Again, to begin with the first premise I explained:

“My questions are posed in order to draw out the truth in your argument by directing you to examine the substance of your claim, or IOWs the reasoning behind your claim by which you draw your conclusion. In this case you must first deal with the origin of sin and the “Problem Of Evil” for your premise of God being the “first cause of all causes” to stand as true.”

You apparently are countering with the reasoning in the post below that God is the cause of all evil but somehow cannot be responsible for the evil because He is Holy. Let’s examine your reasoning further which I contend unavoidably equates into Hard Determinism and logically presents God as the author of (responsible for) sin:

1) Necessarily God has fore determined (is the first cause of) everything that will happen
2) God has determined (caused) X
3) Therefore it is necessary that X will happen

X = man’s choices
X = evil

The above is a simple logical truth and clearly demonstrates your first premise (and counter argument) to be false. Why? Because your reasoning unavoidably concludes that God is responsible for evil happening.

If you are truly interested in debate then you will have to at least acknowledge that I have been addressing your arguments and stop with the suggestions that I have evaded them.

I even explained that I began “answering your question” by breaking your argument down:

“So IOWs as for answering your question it must first be broken down, which the first premise poses (supposedly supported by the scripture you gave) that God is the first causes of all causes, which by any rational critical thinking skills must include evil and thereby carry down to the last details of the sins of man (by which I countered your interpretation by comparing scripture to scripture) is where I began.”

God cannot be responsible for evil, (unless you would like to go down the road of Theological Fatalism), so as for the first premise of your argument which concludes that “God is the first cause of all causes” I contend that such cannot be true because it would logically make God the author of evil. Therefore, after a previous explanation that you would have to include evil within those causes I gave you this answer:

“In consideration of the Nature of God I can without a doubt tell you that your first premise is false.”

Just in case, to make it perfectly clear that I have answered your “question” – Premise #1: NO, God is NOT the first cause of all causes. He logically cannot be any more than He can make a rock bigger than He can lift.

Now, for the second part of your “question” – Premise #2: What/who is the cause? Simply put man is held responsible in truth for being the cause of evil. But, again, I already clearly answered this in length also:

“As to your second premise, which you should probably understand is already doomed to come to a false conclusion considering your first premise, the first cause of evil was man with the help of Satan, which was made possible through the divine design of God’s creatures to have the free will/human volition to disobey God – by which each and every one will “genuinely be held responsible” for being the “cause” of except for the grace of our Loving Creator who provided the Way of salvation for ALL who love and believe the truth with that precious gift of a mind to all mankind to have the ability to reason through human volition/free will.”

BTW, it appears that below you are attempting to proclaim a compatibilist view as if the responsibility for the cause of an action can be both true and not true. My friend, Determinism and Human Volition are logically mutually exclusive and God’s judgment in the matter of the responsibility for the cause will be in truth. From the beginning God’s creation was “very good” and He had designed men with free will/human volition, the nature of God is without evil OF ANY KIND, all His ways are judgment and you should rest assured that this judgment over the responsibility for the cause of evil is done in truth:

(Deu 32:4) He is the Rock, his work is perfect: for all his ways are judgment: a God of truth and without iniquity, just and right is he.

 

You and IJ are cut from the same cloth. Tell me now, if you think a comparison between you two is warranted or not. I have a little test for you. It will make you feel a bit awkward. But give it a go. Do you endorse everything IJ said about me? If the answer is a resounding YES, then the comparison between you two is certainly warranted. If, on the other hand, you think he went too far --then openly admit it. The choice is yours.

Yeah, that about settles the matter. You an IJ are two peas from the same ole' pod.

There is no pretense that you are a rebel to the Protestant Faith.