For God so loved the world

[webdog]

Arminianism has a ying yang thing going on. A good and bad force has always been out there..always fighting and pushing each other...and was there at the same time as God.

I don't think it is arminianism that teaches this, but the Bible. There IS a spiritual warfare happening today. This warfare did not start until the fall of Lucifer. I don't think you can say that it is pagan to do something God gives and enables man to do.

 

[BobRyan]

James said
In the Arminian camp, i see a need to avoid parts of the Bible. There is a need to focus on Gods Love and avoid other things about God.

What you have not dealt with or choose not to address is Gods self-existence, self-sufficiency nature which is in absolute authority over His creation. To be sovereign, God must also be all-knowing, all-powerful and absolutely free to do as He pleases. If we limit Him in any area He is not Sovereign. Sovereignty is greater than any attribute of God which the word sovereign reigns over.

For instance

You speak well of Gods love. Gods love is very great. If God is not fully in control, circumstances could disable Gods love and make it useless for us. All attributes of God hang on this. Can God be judge and we then have complete justice if God is not in complete control?

I don't see any contradiction between God "sovereignly" CHOOSING to create a free will universe and to BE "LOVE" - and God being "sovereign".

HE is the one that sovereignly CHOOSES that system.

Hence the scenario in Job 1 and 2.

Hence the judgment scene in Dan 7 at the end of time where the books are opened and "Judgment is passed in favor of the saints" for as even Paul admits "We must ALL stand before the judgment seat of Christ" - and As Paul notes in Romans 2- that judgment is one of "deeds" - out of the things written in the books - with the results that some receive eternal rewards and others go to hell (as Romans 2 explicitly points out).

The notion that if God judges that way - He is out of control or His creaion is "out of control" does not follow.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Jarthur001]

Originally posted by webdog:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Arminianism has a ying yang thing going on. A good and bad force has always been out there..always fighting and pushing each other...and was there at the same time as God.

I don't think it is arminianism that teaches this, but the Bible. There IS a spiritual warfare happening today. This warfare did not start until the fall of Lucifer. I don't think you can say that it is pagan to do something God gives and enables man to do. </font>[/QUOTE]What you just stated is not pagan. Calvinist say the sin principle was not there before time..just as God was. The sin principle was made when Satan left Gods will.

Arminianism teaches both were good and evil were around before time...and God was Good.

Or that is what i read from 2 sources or Arminianism. That does not mean you must hold to this view.

As to the war...yes...there is a war now. Calvist hold to this view too.

In Christ...James

 

[Jarthur001]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />James said
In the Arminian camp, i see a need to avoid parts of the Bible. There is a need to focus on Gods Love and avoid other things about God.

What you have not dealt with or choose not to address is Gods self-existence, self-sufficiency nature which is in absolute authority over His creation. To be sovereign, God must also be all-knowing, all-powerful and absolutely free to do as He pleases. If we limit Him in any area He is not Sovereign. Sovereignty is greater than any attribute of God which the word sovereign reigns over.

For instance

You speak well of Gods love. Gods love is very great. If God is not fully in control, circumstances could disable Gods love and make it useless for us. All attributes of God hang on this. Can God be judge and we then have complete justice if God is not in complete control?

I don't see any contradiction between God "sovereignly" CHOOSING to create a free will universe and to BE "LOVE" - and God being "sovereign".

HE is the one that sovereignly CHOOSES that system.

Hence the scenario in Job 1 and 2.

Hence the judgment scene in Dan 7 at the end of time where the books are opened and "Judgment is passed in favor of the saints" for as even Paul admits "We must ALL stand before the judgment seat of Christ" - and As Paul notes in Romans 2- that judgment is one of "deeds" - out of the things written in the books - with the results that some receive eternal rewards and others go to hell (as Romans 2 explicitly points out).

The notion that if God judges that way - He is out of control or His creaion is "out of control" does not follow.

In Christ,

Bob </font>[/QUOTE]Bob,

What Job went though was not sin. It had nothing to do with sin. And..Job was in no danger..for going though fire makes us stronger

eccle..7

"2 It is better to go to the house of mourning than to go to the house of feasting; for this is the end of all men, and the living will lay it to heart. 3 Sorrow is better than laughter, for by sadness of countenance the heart is made glad. 4 The heart of the wise is in the house of mourning; but the heart of fools is in the house of mirth. 5 It is better for a man to hear the rebuke of the wise than to hear the song of fools."

Notice too...Job did not blam satan. The only thing Job wanted was to make sure he had a good relationship with God.

I know you hold to salvation and works together..and i have read you proof text. I think in doing so you show you have study and know one can not hold to both sides

However..i still think you have the wrong side. My doctrine does not pass over some verse and hold to others. My doctrine takes in account all verse


In Christ...James

 

[Timtoolman]

JArthur,


JA.......In salvation no one can say God loved me because i am good and now I'm going to heaven where I belong.


Tim

Who said that? Show me one post of someone who said that because we are good God loves us! Just one! This is AGAIN what I mean by a strawman. If you continue to fight strawmen do not be upset if some tire of talking to you if you can’t be honest.


JA
God did not have to send His son. Man was loss. Man was on his way toward hell. Man deserves hell. This could be the end of the story. But God in His love sent His son. WHY? ...


TIM

Because God SO love the world that HE GAVE….His son, man a choice, His word, His HS. He did all of this out of love for the lost in the world. WE agree it is what was within God not us that lead Him to do it. Is this another strawman?


You models are nothing but an attempt to claim Calvinism is all of God but that does not make it so. If I wrote out my model of how I see Calvinism you would not like it at all. So as far as I am concerned you can keep YOUR models to yourself. And I mean that in a respectful way. I believe God is sovereign every bit as much as you do. I just claim from your words that you wish to tell almighty God how He IS to be sovereign to fit into your Calvinistic teaching.


What is total depravity to you? Is it that man cannot respond to the word of God. That would mean that the power of the gospel is not a power at all. Is it that God does not see them, or hear them or know they exist? Nothing in biblical depravity says a man cannot respond to the work of God. To the preaching and working of the HS. What is it to you?

I know it effects and impacts every part of humanity but does it nullify the work that God has already done? Does it mean people cannot understand any spiritual truth? Scripture tells us that all men have the knowledge of God in them. Did not God speak to Adam and Eve AFTER the fall with FULL comprehension on both sides? You take you def. of depravity too far I think. But I will wait for you answer.

 

[Jarthur001]

Tim

Let me address these points..

Originally posted by Timtoolman:
JArthur,


JA.......In salvation no one can say God loved me because i am good and now I'm going to heaven where I belong.


Tim

Who said that? Show me one post of someone who said that because we are good God loves us! Just one! This is AGAIN what I mean by a strawman. If you continue to fight strawmen do not be upset if some tire of talking to you if you can’t be honest.
***********************
The post was for all to read, but was address to Bob who holds to salvation + deeds. I can post for you links where bob says this. Also, others do hold to this other than Bob. If you do not, then do not apply this to yourself. Fair?

JA
God did not have to send His son. Man was loss. Man was on his way toward hell. Man deserves hell. This could be the end of the story. But God in His love sent His son. WHY? ...


TIM

Because God SO love the world that HE GAVE….His son, man a choice, His word, His HS. He did all of this out of love for the lost in the world. WE agree it is what was within God not us that lead Him to do it. Is this another strawman?
*****************
I'm not sure your point on the strawman. Maybe you can add more light to it. Let me just restate...there is nothing in me that made God send His Son..other then GRACE. I do not attach grace i hold to grace. When i said "why"...i was thinking as it says in psalms and heb.."What is man that thou art mindful of him?"

In other words...even knowing it was for LOVE that God came...i still do not see why...for i am a poor sinner.

anyway....please add more to the strawman so i can understand


You models are nothing but an attempt to claim Calvinism is all of God but that does not make it so.
********************
They are not my models. As a matter of fact the debate did not start with calvin. Maybe i was not clear tim. After listening to Bob...i shared my views. This is the way i look at the Outline of calvinism. Tim, if you want to post your views...you can. This is what we do on this message board.


If I wrote out my model of how I see Calvinism you would not like it at all.
*****************************
maybe not. but you are free to post them if you wish


So as far as I am concerned you can keep YOUR models to yourself.
****************************
my models on my views of the models? Again...not MY models. Why are you upset that i posted my views? Are you now posting your views of my post? Chill out and post your views of the models if you wish


And I mean that in a respectful way.
*********************
huumm ok


I believe God is sovereign every bit as much as you do.
************************
Good.


I just claim from your words that you wish to tell almighty God how He IS to be sovereign to fit into your Calvinistic teaching.
***********************
Gods sovereign has nothing to do with my views or your views tim. I can only state what is in Gods Word. God is sovereign and can do as he wishes. I have often posted this..."God has so much power he could have made you one hour ago with all the thoughts in your head where you think you lived yesterday and years before." Now did He? i don't think so...but he could have. My point is...sovereign means sovereign. my views will not stop God right or wrong.


What is total depravity to you? Is it that man cannot respond to the word of God. That would mean that the power of the gospel is not a power at all. Is it that God does not see them, or hear them or know they exist?
************************
i posted verse you read them and tell me. Tim..i have a idea. Post verse on mans freewill. Not Gods will to save all mankind..but mans freewill to come and go to God any time he wises. That would help the debate...and if you claim i have strawman...any verse showing this would slam that strawman to the floor.


Nothing in biblical depravity says a man cannot respond to the work of God. To the preaching and working of the HS. What is it to you?
**********************
What is it with me? I take you do not agree with my post. Hey...it don't take me long. You can post replies on your views if you want tim. I tried to back my views with verse. You may think i did a bad job. You are free to post your "man has freewill" verse to prove your point.

I know it effects and impacts every part of humanity but does it nullify the work that God has already done?
******************************
your read and understand. You can study on your own. I'm not here to push my views on you. I post mine..you post yours. Sorry you are upset.


Does it mean people cannot understand any spiritual truth? Scripture tells us that all men have the knowledge of God in them.
*********************
So faith comes from knowledge? Satan knows of God.


Did not God speak to Adam and Eve AFTER the fall with FULL comprehension on both sides?
*************************
after Adam was sent from the garden? yes.
Did adam have faith? yes.
Did cain have faith? no

Did cain know of God? yes

You take you def. of depravity too far I think. But I will wait for you answer.
************************
as i said tim. the best way to crash my "strawman" as you have called it...is to post verses on mans freewill. If you do...my views will fall.


In Christ...James

 

[BobRyan]

ps. 47:7-8

7 For God is the king of all the earth; sing praises with a psalm! 8 God reigns over the nations; God sits on his holy throne.

While it "is" true that God is King of all kings.

It is also true that God has allowed Satan to claim rulership of this world.

2Cor 4:4 - "The god of this world" has blinded the eyes of those who persist in unbelieving.

2Cor 4
4 in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

This is an example of causing-error causing blindness in sinful humans that "some" might think to charge God with doing.

At best God's system of government/laws/rules "allows for" satan to take that role. But God Himself is not actually doing the evil to the unbelieving that is described above and assigned to Satan.

Matt 4 - Satan offers to GIVE That back to Christ as "incentive" for Christ sinning against God.

In Job 1 and 2 God not only ALLOWS for the debate - He OPENs with it and then oversees the empirical "experiment" used to "PROVE" the case of God vs the Case of Satan to the "group".

IF THESE 3 cases are NOT God "having lost control" then - nothing you have charged about the Love of God - is "losing control"

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

James said --
“in sin did my mother conceive me.”
Therefore..”all have sinned and come short”.

Man is complete helpless..and has no knowledge of God.....

“none seek after God”.

God did not have to send His son. Man was loss. Man was on his way toward hell. Man deserves hell. This could be the end of the story. But God in His love sent His son. WHY? ...

Because HE SO LOVED the world - a world that ONLY has LOST UNBELIEVERS as you point out. AND as you point out - HE LOVES ALL not just the elect.

That is the Arminian view.

How then do you reconcile this with your holding to Calvinism?

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

James said
Paul shows God does not use His sovereignty arbitrary power as you state He would do if man had no freewill, but rather in MERCY he chooses.

"He chooses" what?

Chooses "to favor the FEW but not the MANY" of Matt 7??

Chooses to Love "some" of the World and to give His Son as the atoning sacrifice for SOME of the World?

Chooses to "propitiate" the debt owed for SOME of the World?

Is that the "Definition" of "impartial"??

An umpire calls a "strike" no matter what kind of ball is thrown and no matter what the batter does...

He says "I am not partial - BUT I favor team-A"

...

See?

Calvinism does not have a system of reasoning that works.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

JAmes said --
*****He was not say that were physically deaf, but rather spiritually dead. They could not understand what he was saying.

next look at john 14:16
And I will pray the Father, and he will give you another Counselor, to be with you for ever, 17 even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him; you know him, for he dwells with you, and will be in you.

MAtt 16 (Before the Lord's Supper event you quote in John 14) - Christ asks for a testimony about who He is.

Peter says "Thou at the Messiah the Son of the Living God".

Christ says "BLESSED are you Peter - flesh and blood has not revealed that to you but My Father in heaven has" The Holy Spirit was already working with them as Christ claimed in John 3.

IN Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

James
The bad part of this salvation plan is MAN. Man will always fell. Man will always sin.

Man WITHOUT God?? OR are you claiming that EVEN WITH GOD man can only fail?

In Romans 2 -- what do you see "man doing" always failing?

In Romans 8:3-16 what do you see man doing? Always failing?

In Romans 6 (all) WHAT do you see man doing? Always failing?

In James 2 (all) What do you see man doing?
Always failing?

Whenever we man IN THE CONTEXT of the gospel transformation - we see victory over sin. (Take 1Cor 10:1-11 for example)

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

James
Some want to take both said in this debate. They want to hold to salvation forever and mans freewill. You can not mix the 2…and you will see this if you play each point out to the limit. But I will give it to you Bob. You have study his the subject and know both can not go together. You seem to hold to the full Arminian postion. This takes the Arminian side in every point and this is what you get….WORKS

Election and freewill can not both work. I use to try to mix the two, but failed. If man chooses God, Gods election is not needed.

I agree with you on both counts.

#1. Free will does not work with OSAS - as you point out.

#2. Free will is not compatible with the Calvinist idea of election as you point out.

James said -

If God chooses based on mans works, then we have works from start to finished.

That is merely a "judgement of God" made by Calvinism - not actual Bible "Fact".

And that is where your argument fails.

Calvinism fails when it tries to "be God" and then declare "God can't do this because it is too much works for my thinking".

But GOD points to MAN's decision in Romans 6 and in Romans 8:3-16 and in JAmes 2 AND in 1Cor 10:3-12 and in ...

God "sovereignly CHOOSES" FREE WILL --

EVEN you admitted that Lucifer had free will.

Was "God in control"???

Did "God love Lucifer"???

Did God WILL/MAKE/FORCE Lucifer to sin??

"IF by the Spirit YOU ARE PUTTING to death the deeds of the flesh..." Romans 8

"I buffet my body and make it MY SLAVE LEST after preaching the Gospel to OTHER I MYSELF should be disqualified" 1Cor 9

"I PRESS ON... in order that I MAY LAY HOLD of that for which I was laid hold of by Christ" Phil 3

James said
If works can save, then works can make you lost again.

Hmmm. So no OSAS for Arminian?

You are right again!

In Christ,

Bob

 

[Jarthur001]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />James said
Paul shows God does not use His sovereignty arbitrary power as you state He would do if man had no freewill, but rather in MERCY he chooses.

"He chooses" what?

Chooses "to favor the FEW but not the MANY" of Matt 7??

Chooses to Love "some" of the World and to give His Son as the atoning sacrifice for SOME of the World?

Chooses to "propitiate" the debt owed for SOME of the World?

Is that the "Definition" of "impartial"??

An umpire calls a "strike" no matter what kind of ball is thrown and no matter what the batter does...

He says "I am not partial - BUT I favor team-A"

...

See?

Calvinism does not have a system of reasoning that works.

In Christ,

Bob </font>[/QUOTE]This is why this is a problem for Arminianism. I hold to both romans 2 and all other chapters. Arminianism hates this text for they hate the word hate. and tries to hide or change the meaning of hate. in this passage God IS partial but not just arbitrary...but in LOVE and mercy he chooses.

yet in romans 2 we see he judges all men the same way.

It is so nice to see Gods word flow together...

strike...yes...strike one for the Bible

 

[BobRyan]

James
This is why this is a problem for Arminianism. I hold to both romans 2 and all other chapters. Arminianism hates this text for they hate the word hate. and tries to hide or change the meaning of hate.

Hate what text?

The one that says that we must hate our parents?

If not that one - which one? Malachi 1?

IN Christ,

bob

 

[BobRyan]

James said in this passage God IS partial but not just arbitrary...but in LOVE and mercy he chooses.

In Which text?

You say "God IS partial" -- does your text say that about SALVATION or about the birthright?

In Romans 2 the subject is salvation and Romans 2 actually DOES say "God is NOT partial" (Not just some Arminians IMAGINING that 2:11 exists).

Do you have "even one text" that says "God IS partial"???

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

James - you have claimed that Calvinists like yourself, and Pastor Larry and KJB ... etc ALL believe that God LOVES EVERYONE without exception.

Do you believe God "hated Esau"?

Do you believe that God hated all the infants born to the descendants of Esau?

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Deuteronomy 23:7
"You shall not detest an Edomite, for he is your brother; you shall not detest an Egyptian, because you were an alien in his land.

Was rebellious Israel commanded to be more loving than God?

 

[Jarthur001]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
James - you have claimed that Calvinists like yourself, and Pastor Larry and KJB ... etc ALL believe that God LOVES EVERYONE without exception.

Do you believe God "hated Esau"?

Do you believe that God hated all the infants born to the descendants of Esau?

In Christ,

Bob

This is a very good point Bob.

1st Many claim the word should read "love less". It is true the word can be translated this way and if it were me i may choose this over hate. However Context rules over words. In Context it is showing 2 sides..

Mercy...no mercy
love..no love

You place the word in there that you like best. But make sure it is on the other side of love...for this is context.

As to the seed of Esau.

Those that hold to this being a nation would have to say yes. I do not hold to this. I think this is one person...and the seed of Esau are other people.

To read God can hate moves people into a hate of their own. With both saw God in Rev coming to KILL. Kill is a ugly word too. But in Gods will He world have ALL come to Him. Yet they do not...they turn from him..and follow evil. Does god hate many? I do not know. But if its one person..one nation...or 100...it shows God can hate. As to Esau's seed...show me where he says he hates the babys and i believe it. Till then..i have no need to believe it.

The main message of the Bible is..

God is Holy..
Man is a Sinner
God loves..and came to save

This is what i preach. Election is God reaching out...because man did not come. Election is..i choose Bob..now you GO TELL....God works though the Holy Spirit...and again someone is saved.
Now 2 GO TELL....God works again..and now 4 people gos....on and on. The believe is not to elect. That is up to God. The believer is to GO TELL....we must go...because man will not come.

Now back to Esau. sometimes..God says he hates...or has mercy on some..and not on others. But there is no reason to think this happens a lot. Nor is there reason to think this is past to the kids..unless God says so.

In Christ..James

 

[Jarthur001]

I'll throw one thing out while we are on this subject.

22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. 24 And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. 25 If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit.

IF....If indeed the Bible says God can hate...


Why are we told to walk in the spirit...and also in another text we are to be more like Christ..and above is the FRUIT of the spirit that SHOULD live in each of us...why are we told not to hate our brother..but rather love?

 

[BobRyan]

The "proof for hate" comes from a very doubtful (read skimpy) rendering (read rending) of the text of Romans 9 rather than noticing the "details".

Rom 9
13 Just as it is written, “JACOB I LOVED, BUT ESAU I HATED.”

Interesting quote of Malachi 1 AFTER both Jacob and Esau were dead and the history of Rebellion was fully manifest in Esau's descendants (and referenced in that chapter). There we find Edom (descendants of Esau) called a “wicked nation” and JUST as the “Blessings and Curses” pronounced ON ISRAEL were true impartial “results” of obedience vs rebellion SO in this case – Edom chooses wickedness and calls down upon itself the curses – even from a Loving God.

Malachi 1
1 The oracle of the word of the LORD to Israel through Malachi.
2 "I have loved you," says the LORD. But you say, "How have You loved us?" "Was not Esau Jacob's brother?" declares the LORD. "Yet I have loved Jacob;
3 but I have hated Esau, and I have made his mountains a desolation and appointed his inheritance for the jackals of the wilderness."[/b]
4 Though Edom says, "We have been beaten down, but we will return and build up the ruins"; thus says the LORD of hosts, "They may build, but I will tear down; and men will call them the wicked territory, and the people toward whom the LORD is indignant forever."

The “reason:” Israel doubts God’s statement about “loving Jacob vs Esau” is that it is JACOB that is currenly held captive by the Persians at the time this statement is made through Malachi. In fact Israel REMAINS subjugated not only during the time of Persia BUT ALSO during the time of Greece and Rome – which means that “yes” EVEN in Paul’s day in the time of Romans 9 – Israel is STILL held captive by the Romans!!

“Hate” in this case refers to the “wicked nation” that chooses rebellion and invites that list of Curses. It is “hate” as “compared to something”. In the same way SAINTS are told to “HATE” their own families and their own lives as compared to their LOVE for God.

Luke 14:26
"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple.

This is said at the same time that we see in Mark 7 – Christ UPHOLDING the commandment saying that we MUST honor our parents (upheld EVEN in Eph 6:1-3 believe it or not)

In fact Christ has just affirmed the Lev 19:18 law of Moses that we must LOVE our neighbor prior to making this statement about hating our family and our own life.

Luke 10:27
He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind' ; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' "

So clearly this command to “hate” is “by comparison to something” rather than the genuine hatred of Matt 5

Notice that not ONLY is genuine hatred forbidden – but even “anger” to be “angry with your brother”.

Matthew 5:22
But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to his brother, 'Raca, ' is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, 'You fool!' will be in danger of the fire of hell.

So when taken "in context" YES the saints are to show that same "kind" of hate for family and their OWN LIVES!

In Christ,

Bob