What is Skans position on God's sovereignty? Did I miss something. He has never shown it to be any less than absolute as far as I can tell. Self-limiting when it comes to man perhaps,but as sovereign as He wants to be.:love2:
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Do you think God bluffs?
- Thread starter Skandelon
- Start date
- Status
What is Skans position on God's sovereignty? Did I miss something. He has never shown it to be any less than absolute as far as I can tell. Self-limiting when it comes to man perhaps,but as sovereign as He wants to be.:love2:
There is a verse or two in the book of Exodus where Moses is conversing with God and Moses brings up the issue of blotting his name out of the book of life if Isreal fails to repent---------I'll see if I can find it and get back to this thread ASAP
glfredrick
New Member
Creating a position whereby God "self-limits" His utter sovereignty is the same as replacing that Kingship with human sovereignty.
Skandelon has been very public about his support for Libertarian Free Will and had a multiple page thread where he defended that until the thread was closed. Even in the face of overwhelming biblical evidence to the contrary he did not back off. That, to me at least, means that he is somewhat more human-centered than he would like to be known as in his self-labeled Arminianism.
Also note that I am not attacking Skandelon. He has been very public in this position and I believe that I am representing his views as accurately as I can. I appreciate the fact that he argues for what he believes without holding to some nebulous "no position" status as do some here on the board.
Old Union Brother
New Member
Is this the verses that you are looking for:
Didn't mean to step on toes by hunting this.
Peace and prayers
Jeff
I'm surprised you would say something like that. Why not just answer the questions posed and leave the ad hom out?
God doesn't bluff. It was to show that in the sovereignty of God, God answers prayer. He brought Hezekiah to the place where God knew that Hezekiah would turn to Him in prayer (as we all should). God was glorified in answering the prayers of Hezekiah (as He did more than once).
However, having said this, let's examine this situation a little further. When Isaiah came to him he said to Hezekiah: "Get your house in order for tomorrow you shall die." Perhaps that was God's PERFECT will for Hezekiah's life and he should have accepted it as such and obeyed, and joyfully submitted to it. Instead he acted childishly as one that didn't want to face death at that time. God answered his prayer. It was not His PERFECT will but His PERMISSIVE will. The consequence of God answering Hezekiah's prayer outside of the PERFECT will of God, was the birth of Mannesseh, one of the most wicked kings that Judah ever had, bringing a reign of terror on the nation for 15 years. If Hezekiah had succumbed to the Perfect Will of God for his life that never would have occurred.
Limited Absolute Sovereignty is like dry liquid water.
It does not make sense.
"Absolute" and "limited" cannot describe the same thing.
If God limits his own sovereignty then he has transformed it from absolute to not absolute.
The Arminian and those with this nameless theology need to be honest and admit that, to them, God is not ABSOLUTELY sovereign.
Amen to that.
So something needs to make sense in order to be true?
Saying absolute limited is like saying square circle.
We don't have to understand something for it to be true but what we can understand about it must make sense.
If ANYTHING can be true without having to meet ANY laws of logic then NOTHING can be known for sure.
Can there be a God and not be a god at the same time?
Can you have a dollar bill in your wallet and NOT have a dollar bill in your wallet at the same time?
NO.
Can God make a rock so big he cannot lift it?
NO.
Can something be in complete control and not in control at the same time?
NO.
Now to keep arguing against this, webdog, is going to make you look bad in the eyes of ANYONE who has taken Philosophy 101 or Epistemology or Theology.
Freshmen come to understand these basic elementary principles.
glfredrick
New Member
Not always, but generally. Of course, you have argued against the plain teaching found in Scripture because it does not make sense to you, so which side of this are you on?
So it makes sense that Christ is 100% God and 100% man? It makes sense God is 3 distinct persons, yet one? It makes sense that the Creator of all would give His life for us? It makes sense that NOW were are seated with Christ in Heaven?
What we "can understand must make sense"?!? Did you really say that...and then default to speaking about education? :laugh:
What we "can understand must make sense"?!? Did you really say that...and then default to speaking about education? :laugh:
I've argued YOUR interpretation on the plain teaching found in Scripture, yet it doesn't "make sense" to understand that simple principle.
I love how some people will ignore the plain teaching of CLEAR passages just to hold on to their flawed theologies while abusing ambiguous passages to support them.
Exactly, so when is it you are going to cease?
Congratulations! You are the only human being in the world who can understand such things! We don't need further education, we just need to dissect your brain to see how another human besides Christ could understand things only divinity can.
freeatlast
New Member
To bluff one has to deceive another by deception. Basically lying. God does not bluff. :thumbsup:
Thanks.
But once again, it is your lack of understanding that leads you to this conclusion as well.
Laymen can get all they need and much more from their devotional study of the Scripture.
The problem is when laymen like yourself do not have the humility to admit that there are many things that are too much for them with their current level of training.
An 18 year old who aspires to be a brain surgeon must admit that such a subject is FAR beyond his current intellectual capabilities and he must study many hours worth of more intelligent men than himself who have gone on before him- and he must realize that he must subject himself to a long history on the matter. He must do this and more before he ever carves open the skull of any human being or he is deadly dangerous.
You, like Winman and Snow, lack the humility to admit these things but you do not hesitate to carve open the skulls of people who think you know what you are talking about- people who LIKE what you say so they, in their ignorance, are more willing to turn their brains over to you than to those who are truly qualified to help them; and the damnable thing about it is that you do not hesitate to hack away at their brains.
People like you, who think the Holy Spirit reveals truths via osmosis to people who lack the humility to be trained, are very dangerous to the simple.
But you are also not smart enough to KNOW how dangerous you are. You are, imo, ignorant and arrogant enough to hack away at the brains of people without a second thought.
- Status