Does this indicate a choice?

[quantumfaith]

Not at all Webdog, I just understand the verse,that you dhk,and quantum do not grasp for some reason.
Your failure to understand romans 5: 19 is leading you into error
The God of the bible accomplishes all that he wills. All those spoken of in 2pet 3:9 are saved......the word is bulemoi,[decreed destined or purposed]not thelo.....wish or desire. so you have a universal salvation, or you have God saving His elect. I believe the biblical testimony. DHK.....describes a wuess god who wants something to happen,but cannot accomplish what he wants, it reminds me of Elijah mocking the prophets of baal.

Met65...for you:

Many....multitudes will be cast away,Jesus will instruct the elect angels to send them into hell....they do not send themselves..Jesus sends them.

I grasp Romans 5:19 just fine, but thanks for your concern.

 

[webdog]

Luke,

Please allow me to cut to the heart of this matter...

Before a sin like murder, molestation, torture or some other heinous crime is committed there is a temptation or a thought that comes into the mind of the criminal, right?

Now, who is the first person who thought of the heinous sin of molesting and torturing a small child? Did God originate that thought or did it originate in the mind of a sinful criminal?

1. If God, then you have to defend your position that God is not the author of evil.
2. If the criminal, then you have to defend your position that God "controls all things," because you have someone creating or originating something apart from God.

Excellent question...I look forward to his answers. I suspect a confusing answer meant to divert based on past interaction, but we'll see.

 

[quantumfaith]

And I do not care for your blatant partisanship, either Quantum.

You wear the thumbs up button out for ANYONE who has ANYTHING to say against the doctrines of grace and try to paint Calvinists as arrogant bullies.

You are a hack, Quantum- and if the truth be told, this practice of yours goes a long way toward corrupting my attitude that you don't like.[/QUOTE]

So "I" am responsible for YOUR attitude? Your'e kidding right?

 

[Luke2427]

Excellent question...I look forward to his answers. I suspect a confusing answer meant to divert based on past interaction, but we'll see.

This kind of remarks certainly helps the tone of a discussion, doesn't it?

You are right about the question. It is a good one. Which is a relief.

I have to leave now and drive to Gulfport, MS to pick up a friend of mine from the airport.

I will address this later.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

But, it does teach that people are saved regardless of what they do. It, along with other Calvinist doctrines, makes life nothing but a movie that is prearranged according to what you see as God's doing everything and making all the decisions. I think this is hogwash, as far as theology is concerned. It makes a mockery of God and all of creation. Thank God I attend a church where the pastor see the foolishness of such things!

LOL....you see it that way Robert? LOL at least thats a step up from the age old puppet argument. And again if you think its hogwash then those are your thought & not mine, so you should keep it to yourself unless your looking for a fight. Lastly I'm OK with you going to your own church & I go to mine....thats time honored. Everything is all right with that scenario until you come to me & start telling me my theologians & pastors are trash & my belief system is no good & you & your pastor are the only way......then you got a fight on your hands & one of your own making I might add. So you want free choice, you got it. Thank God for America.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

This kind of remarks certainly helps the tone of a discussion, doesn't it?

You are right about the question. It is a good one. Which is a relief.

I have to leave now and drive to Gulfport, MS to pick up a friend of mine from the airport.

I will address this later.

Passive Aggressive?

 

[WestminsterMan]

One more time.

God hates evil.

Evil is necessary for the greater good (display of grace, mercy, wrath against sin, etc..)

God hates abortion but he has decreed every abortion that will ever take place.

He means them all for good- men who participate in them mean them all for evil.

That ought to be enough but I know I must explain this in a way that makes it more palatable for those who are more emotion driven.

This is a glorious truth because it means that that baby did not die in vain. God had a purpose for it. A GLORIOUS purpose that the murder of that child will fulfill- an eternal purpose.

This was not a random act- it was planned- it had a purpose.

God will use this horrible event for two things- his glory and our good.

That ought to be enough for ANY Christian.

God did not create evil… evil is a state of being - not a part of creation and is a result of man’s free will. Satan and his demons choose to rebel against God. God created them with the ability to choose just as he created Adam and Eve with the same ability. Did he know it would happen? Yes! Did he cause it to happen? No.

Nothing unclean (in a state of sin or evil) can stand in the face God for He is complete perfection. Therefore, if one believes that He cannot abide evil, how then can one also believe that He sanctions or plans it? Now, can God, in His righteous might, bring about good from evil acts? Absolutely - for only He can see how all of the parts fall together throughout eternity.

I would posit this:
God, knowing that something is going to happen is not the same as God causing it to happen.

We are created to love God - that is what really brings Glory to Him. Without free will, there can be no love of God; without love we cannot bring glory to Him. Thus, there would have been no reason for our creation in the first place.

Peace!
WM

 

[webdog]

Passive Aggressive?

No...blunt. I was forewarning Skandelon of his "so what you mean is..." tactics of "addressing" questions.

edited to add I see he has already encountered it.

 

[mets65]

LOL....you see it that way Robert? LOL at least thats a step up from the age old puppet argument. And again if you think its hogwash then those are your thought & not mine, so you should keep it to yourself unless your looking for a fight. Lastly I'm OK with you going to your own church & I go to mine....thats time honored. Everything is all right with that scenario until you come to me & start telling me my theologians & pastors are trash & my belief system is no good & you & your pastor are the only way......then you got a fight on your hands & one of your own making I might add. So you want free choice, you got it. Thank God for America.

We should be debating together the doctrine of the Church of God. Not something that doesn't impact our salvation or really how we live our lives as baptists.

 

[webdog]

This kind of remarks certainly helps the tone of a discussion, doesn't it?

You are right about the question. It is a good one. Which is a relief.

I have to leave now and drive to Gulfport, MS to pick up a friend of mine from the airport.

I will address this later.

Does "that's just plain dumb" ring a bell?

 

[DHK]

Luke let me ask you a question, and don't be offended by a Muslim comparison.

I am a missionary. I have lived in Muslim nations. I have seen (on the news) terrorists in their own nation blow up some Americans plus some of their own "brethren." When discussing this tragedy with my next door neighbor, also a devout Muslim (but not a terrorist), he gave this explanation. "It is the will of Allah." What has happened has happened, and it happened because Allah willed it to be so. I was shocked that he would believe that the act of terrorism would be condoned by him as Allah's will. But that is a basic tenet of Islam. It is called fatalism.

How is that any different than what you believe. Whatever happens, happens because it is the will of God. God ordained it to be so. All things are God's will to be so. That is what you have said in a past post. That theology is no different than the above explanation given to me by a Muslim. It is fatalism, a doctrine that the Bible does not teach, but something that you have been advocating on this board. How do you explain that?

 

[Skandelon]

This kind of remarks certainly helps the tone of a discussion, doesn't it?

You are right about the question. It is a good one. Which is a relief.

I have to leave now and drive to Gulfport, MS to pick up a friend of mine from the airport.

I will address this later.

I look forward to your response and hopefully you can prove Webdog wrong in doing so. Drive safely.

 

[Luke2427]

Does "that's just plain dumb" ring a bell?

No- it doesn't. I have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[Luke2427]

Luke let me ask you a question, and don't be offended by a Muslim comparison.

I am a missionary. I have lived in Muslim nations. I have seen (on the news) terrorists in their own nation blow up some Americans plus some of their own "brethren." When discussing this tragedy with my next door neighbor, also a devout Muslim (but not a terrorist), he gave this explanation. "It is the will of Allah." What has happened has happened, and it happened because Allah willed it to be so. I was shocked that he would believe that the act of terrorism would be condoned by him as Allah's will. But that is a basic tenet of Islam. It is called fatalism.

How is that any different than what you believe. Whatever happens, happens because it is the will of God. God ordained it to be so. All things are God's will to be so. That is what you have said in a past post. That theology is no different than the above explanation given to me by a Muslim. It is fatalism, a doctrine that the Bible does not teach, but something that you have been advocating on this board. How do you explain that?

Let's start a thread and deal with it.

Let's perform an experiment in that thread and determine that we are not going to be smart alek or insulting and that we are ONLY going to discuss the issues, not the personalities involved.

We are not going to say things that most of us including myself sometimes say like- "that's ignorant" or "that is heresy" or "your god is a monster", etc...

Let's deal with the problem of evil and that issue ALONE.

And if anyone gets out of line on EITHER side, you and I will rebuke them and ask them to stay on topic.

Game?

 

[quantumfaith]

Let's start a thread and deal with it.

Let's perform an experiment in that thread and determine that we are not going to be smart alek or insulting and that we are ONLY going to discuss the issues, not the personalities involved.

We are not going to say things that most of us including myself sometimes say like- "that's ignorant" or "that is heresy" or "your god is a monster", etc...
Let's deal with the problem of evil and that issue ALONE.

And if anyone gets out of line on EITHER side, you and I will rebuke them and ask them to stay on topic.

Game?

I am down for that, to lurk, read and occasionally contribute.

 

[DHK]

Let's start a thread and deal with it.

Let's perform an experiment in that thread and determine that we are not going to be smart alek or insulting and that we are ONLY going to discuss the issues, not the personalities involved.

We are not going to say things that most of us including myself sometimes say like- "that's ignorant" or "that is heresy" or "your god is a monster", etc...

Let's deal with the problem of evil and that issue ALONE.

And if anyone gets out of line on EITHER side, you and I will rebuke them and ask them to stay on topic.

Game?

I am waiting.

 

[quantumfaith]

Let's start a thread and deal with it.

Let's perform an experiment in that thread and determine that we are not going to be smart alek or insulting and that we are ONLY going to discuss the issues, not the personalities involved.

We are not going to say things that most of us including myself sometimes say like- "that's ignorant" or "that is heresy" or "your god is a monster", etc...

Let's deal with the problem of evil and that issue ALONE.

And if anyone gets out of line on EITHER side, you and I will rebuke them and ask them to stay on topic.

Game?

Who will rebuke you, if you get out of line?

 

[Luke2427]

I am down for that, to lurk, read and occasionally contribute.

We need a brief set of rules for the thread if the experiment is to be meaningful.

Things that will hamper the following:

1. Ad hominem - Attacking the individual instead of the argument.
1. Example: You are so stupid your argument couldn't possibly be true.
2. Example: I figured that you couldn't possibly get it right, so I ignored your comment.
2. Appeal to force - Telling the hearer that something bad will happen to him if he does not accept the argument.
1. Example: If you don't want to get beaten up, you will agree with what I say.
2. Example: Convert or die.
3. Appeal to pity - Urging the hearer to accept the argument based upon an appeal to emotions, sympathy, etc.
1. Example: You owe me big time because I really stuck my neck out for you.
2. Example: Oh come on, I've been sick. That's why I missed the deadline.
4. Appeal to the popular - Urging the hearer to accept a position because a majority of people hold to it.
1. Example: The majority of people like soda. Therefore, soda is good.
2. Example: Everyone else is doing it. Why shouldn't you?
5. Appeal to tradition - Trying to get someone to accept something because it has been done or believed for a long time.
1. Example: This is the way we've always done it. Therefore, it is the right way.
2. Example: The Catholic church's tradition demonstrates that this doctrine is true.
6. Begging the Question - Assuming the thing to be true that you are trying to prove. It is circular.
1. Example: God exists because the Bible says so. The Bible is inspired. Therefore, we know that God exists.
2. Example: I am a good worker because Frank says so. How can we trust Frank? Simple: I will vouch for him.
7. Cause and Effect - Assuming that the effect is related to a cause because the events occur together.
1. Example: When the rooster crows, the sun rises. Therefore, the rooster causes the sun to rise.
2. Example: When the fuel light goes on in my car, I soon run out of gas. Therefore, the fuel light causes my car to run out of gas.
8. Circular Argument - See Begging the Question
9. Division - Assuming that what is true of the whole is true for the parts.
1. Example: That car is blue. Therefore, its engine is blue.
2. Example: Your family is weird. That means that you are weird too.
10. Equivocation - Using the same term in an argument in different places but the word has different meanings.
1. Example: A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Therefore, a bird is worth more than President Bush.
2. Example: Evolution states that one species can change into another. We see that cars have evolved into different styles. Therefore, since evolution is a fact in cars, it is true in species.
11. False Dilemma - Giving two choices when in actuality there could be more choices possible.
1. Example: You either did knock the glass over or you did not. Which is it?
2. Example: Do you still beat your wife?
12. Genetic Fallacy - Attempting to endorse or disqualify a claim because of the origin or irrelevant history of the claim.
1. Example: The Nazi regime developed the Volkswagen Beetle. Therefore, you should not buy a VW Beetle because of who started it.
2. Example: Frank just got out of jail last year; since it was his idea to start the hardware store, I can't trust him.
13. Guilt by Association - Rejecting an argument or claim because the person proposing it likes someone whom is disliked by another.
1. Example: Hitler liked dogs. Therefore dogs are bad.
2. Example: Your friend is a thief. Therefore, I cannot trust you.
14. Non Sequitur - Comments or information that do not logically follow from a premise or the conclusion.
1. Example: We know why it rained today: because I washed my car.
2. Example: I don't care what you say. We don't need any more bookshelves. As long as the carpet is clean, we are fine.
15. Poisoning the Well - Presenting negative information about a person before he/she speaks so as to discredit the person's argument.
1. Example: Frank is pompous, arrogant, and thinks he knows everything. So, let's hear what Frank has to say about the subject.
2. Example: Don't listen to him because he is a loser.
16. Red Herring - Introducing a topic not related to the subject at hand.
1. Example: I know your car isn't working right. But, if you had gone to the store one day earlier, you'd not be having problems.
2. Example: I know I forgot to deposit the check into the bank yesterday. But, nothing I do pleases you.
17. Special Pleading (double standard) - Applying a standard to another that is different from a standard applied to oneself.
1. Example: You can't possibly understand menopause because you are a man.
2. Example: Those rules don't apply to me since I am older than you.
18. Straw Man Argument - Producing an argument about a weaker representation of the truth and attacking it.
1. Example: The government doesn't take care of the poor because it doesn't have a tax specifically to support the poor.
2. Example: We know that evolution is false because we did not evolve from monkeys.
19. Category Mistake - Attributing a property to something that could not possibly have that property.
1. Example: Blue sleeps faster than Wednesday.
2. Example: Saying logic is transcendental is like saying cars would exist if matter didn't.

 

[mets65]

I am waiting.

Grab a snickers

 

[Luke2427]

Who will rebuke you, if you get out of line?

Anyone can point out to anyone else if they think he is getting personal or inflammatory.