God: The Micromanager

[Earth Wind and Fire]

No one's implying that He does. But if you take Winman's post at face value, it only addresses God's love towards His creation, and speaks nothing of the alternative to His grace.

Ahhhh now you have hit on something Don Gods love for his creation or is the correct love for His Elect? The alternative of His elect is the non-elect. Are you asking what happens to them? What do you think happens to them?

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I was originally intending to be petty, and was examining several different angles to argue this from: those that hear and reject the Gospel, those that believe everyone has already heard the Gospel in some form (reference to "Written in the Stars" and those sort of teachings), the fact that I used a present/future tense verb, etc., etc. But in the end, the *only* way to justify my original response (use of "rejection") is to argue from the point of someone hearing the Gospel. Those that hear the Gospel, and continue on the path, have rejected Christ; but, as you point out, they haven't changed their original destination.

Not sure why that should open some eyes. Fits fully with the "if you died today, where would you go?" door-knockin' philosophy.

Don....is it hearing the gospel that saves you? Actually only by the direct operation of the Holy Spirit can eternal life be brought to the dead sinner (John 3 : 6-8) .The gospel brings life and immortality to light, but doesn't produce life (2 Tim.1: 10).

 

[Don]

Ahhhh now you have hit on something Don Gods love for his creation or is the correct love for His Elect? The alternative of His elect is the non-elect. Are you asking what happens to them? What do you think happens to them?

And THIS has always been the real question between calvinism and arminianism: understanding election.

I'm not asking what happens to the non-elect; scripture is quite clear. I'm pointing out that Winman's post addresses love for *all* of His creation (which is true)...but doesn't address the difference between the saved and unsaved.

 

[Don]

Don....is it hearing the gospel that saves you? Actually only by the direct operation of the Holy Spirit can eternal life be brought to the dead sinner (John 3 : 6-8) .The gospel brings life and immortality to light, but doesn't produce life (2 Tim.1: 10).

Yes, it's hearing. Yes, an argument can be made for the Spirit quickening us; but as stated in Ephesians 2:8, we are saved by faith; and Romans 10:10 is quite clear that man believes unto righteousness, and further goes on to say in 10:17 that faith comes by hearing.

Since you bring up Jesus' conversation with Nicodemus, don't forget that just a few verses down, Jesus also tells Nicodemus that "whosoever believeth on Him should have everlasting life."

We could nitpick this to pieces, but the final word for me comes in John:
6:29 This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent;
6:35 he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst;
6:37 him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out;
6:40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day

So of course, that discussion then evolves into whether belief is caused by God, or is a function of man; and can also be discussed as "belief in God, or saving belief/faith"; but I'm not sure if that would be completely off the opening post or not.

 

[convicted1]

Yes, it's hearing. Yes, an argument can be made for the Spirit quickening us; but as stated in Ephesians 2:8, we are saved by faith; and Romans 10:10 is quite clear that man believes unto righteousness, and further goes on to say in 10:17 that faith comes by hearing.

Uh, Bro. Don, we are saved by grace, and not faith. Faith is what justifies us, but grace is what saves us. You can have all the faith in the world(theorhetically), and without grace, die and torment forever. Now, faith is the channel by which grace travels. It is by grace through faith that we are saved, and not faith through grace.

Not nitpicking on you Brother, but this is how I see it. May God bless.

 

[Don]

And folks, before this turns into yet another mere "calvinism vice arminianism" thread, please let us remember the conversation between that noted calvinist Simeon and the noted arminian Wesley. I would hope that we can all affirm what both Simeon and Wesley said here, and be able to celebrate together in commonality toward Christ, whatever else remains in disagreement.

In this regard, here is the famous conversation between Calvinist Charles Simeon (1759-1836) and Arminian John Wesley (1703-1791) concerning that which they could affirm together.

[Simeon] Sir, I understand that you are called an Arminian; and I have been sometimes called a Calvinist; and therefore I suppose we are to draw daggers. But before I consent to begin the combat, with your permission I will ask you a few questions. Pray, Sir, do you feel yourself a depraved creature, so depraved that you would never have thought of turning to God, if God had not first put it into your heart?
[Wesley] Yes, I do indeed.
[Simeon] And do you utterly despair of recommending yourself to God by anything you can do; and look for salvation solely through the blood and righteousness of Christ?
[Wesley] Yes, solely through Christ.
[Simeon] But, Sir, supposing you were at first saved by Christ, are you not somehow or other to save yourself afterwards by your own works?
[Wesley] No, I must be saved by Christ from first to last.
[Simeon] Allowing, then, that you were first turned by the grace of God, are you not in some way or other to keep yourself by your own power?
[Wesley] No.
[Simeon] What then, are you to be upheld every hour and every moment by God, as much as an infant in its mother’s arms?
[Wesley] Yes, altogether.
[Simeon] And is all your hope in the grace and mercy of God to preserve you unto His heavenly kingdom?
[Wesley] Yes, I have no hope but in Him.
[Simeon] Then, Sir, with your leave I will put up my dagger again; for this is all my Calvinism; this is my election my justification by faith, my final perseverance: it is in substance all that I hold, and as I hold it; and therefore, if you please, instead of searching out terms and phrases to be a ground of contention between us, we will cordially unite in those things where in we agree.
​

 

[Don]

Uh, Bro. Don, we are saved by grace, and not faith. Faith is what justifies us, but grace is what saves us. You can have all the faith in the world(theorhetically), and without grace, die and torment forever. Now, faith is the channel by which grace travels. It is by grace through faith that we are saved, and not faith through grace.

Not nitpicking on you Brother, but this is how I see it. May God bless.

You're absolutely correct. Misquote on my part, as I was thinking through other portions of my response. Thanks for pointing out the clarification.

 

[convicted1]

And folks, before this turns into yet another mere "calvinism vice arminianism" thread, please let us remember the conversation between that noted calvinist Simeon and the noted arminian Wesley. I would hope that we can all affirm what both Simeon and Wesley said here, and be able to celebrate together in commonality toward Christ, whatever else remains in disagreement.

In this regard, here is the famous conversation between Calvinist Charles Simeon (1759-1836) and Arminian John Wesley (1703-1791) concerning that which they could affirm together.

[Simeon] Sir, I understand that you are called an Arminian; and I have been sometimes called a Calvinist; and therefore I suppose we are to draw daggers. But before I consent to begin the combat, with your permission I will ask you a few questions. Pray, Sir, do you feel yourself a depraved creature, so depraved that you would never have thought of turning to God, if God had not first put it into your heart?
[Wesley] Yes, I do indeed.
[Simeon] And do you utterly despair of recommending yourself to God by anything you can do; and look for salvation solely through the blood and righteousness of Christ?
[Wesley] Yes, solely through Christ.
[Simeon] But, Sir, supposing you were at first saved by Christ, are you not somehow or other to save yourself afterwards by your own works?
[Wesley] No, I must be saved by Christ from first to last.
[Simeon] Allowing, then, that you were first turned by the grace of God, are you not in some way or other to keep yourself by your own power?
[Wesley] No.
[Simeon] What then, are you to be upheld every hour and every moment by God, as much as an infant in its mother’s arms?
[Wesley] Yes, altogether.
[Simeon] And is all your hope in the grace and mercy of God to preserve you unto His heavenly kingdom?
[Wesley] Yes, I have no hope but in Him.
[Simeon] Then, Sir, with your leave I will put up my dagger again; for this is all my Calvinism; this is my election my justification by faith, my final perseverance: it is in substance all that I hold, and as I hold it; and therefore, if you please, instead of searching out terms and phrases to be a ground of contention between us, we will cordially unite in those things where in we agree.
​

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs: and for good measure .....:thumbsup:

 

[convicted1]

You're absolutely correct. Misquote on my part, as I was thinking through other portions of my response. Thanks for pointing out the clarification.

You're welcome Brother. We all have Freudian slips from time to time, I reckon.

 

[preacher4truth]

And folks, before this turns into yet another mere "calvinism vice arminianism" thread, please let us remember the conversation between that noted calvinist Simeon and the noted arminian Wesley. I would hope that we can all affirm what both Simeon and Wesley said here, and be able to celebrate together in commonality toward Christ, whatever else remains in disagreement.

In this regard, here is the famous conversation between Calvinist Charles Simeon (1759-1836) and Arminian John Wesley (1703-1791) concerning that which they could affirm together.

[Simeon] Sir, I understand that you are called an Arminian; and I have been sometimes called a Calvinist; and therefore I suppose we are to draw daggers. But before I consent to begin the combat, with your permission I will ask you a few questions. Pray, Sir, do you feel yourself a depraved creature, so depraved that you would never have thought of turning to God, if God had not first put it into your heart?
[Wesley] Yes, I do indeed.
[Simeon] And do you utterly despair of recommending yourself to God by anything you can do; and look for salvation solely through the blood and righteousness of Christ?
[Wesley] Yes, solely through Christ.
[Simeon] But, Sir, supposing you were at first saved by Christ, are you not somehow or other to save yourself afterwards by your own works?
[Wesley] No, I must be saved by Christ from first to last.
[Simeon] Allowing, then, that you were first turned by the grace of God, are you not in some way or other to keep yourself by your own power?
[Wesley] No.
[Simeon] What then, are you to be upheld every hour and every moment by God, as much as an infant in its mother’s arms?
[Wesley] Yes, altogether.
[Simeon] And is all your hope in the grace and mercy of God to preserve you unto His heavenly kingdom?
[Wesley] Yes, I have no hope but in Him.
[Simeon] Then, Sir, with your leave I will put up my dagger again; for this is all my Calvinism; this is my election my justification by faith, my final perseverance: it is in substance all that I hold, and as I hold it; and therefore, if you please, instead of searching out terms and phrases to be a ground of contention between us, we will cordially unite in those things where in we agree.
​

Then they were unified by the work of Christ.

That's very good, thanks for that.

If only today we were all in such agreement, but we are not all, and I fear that those posed questions by the one would be dismantled by others, calling into question true biblical soteriology.

- Peace

 

[preacher4truth]

You're absolutely correct. Misquote on my part, as I was thinking through other portions of my response. Thanks for pointing out the clarification.

I am glad to see another brother agree that we are saved by grace.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Uh, Bro. Don, we are saved by grace, and not faith. Faith is what justifies us, but grace is what saves us. You can have all the faith in the world(theorhetically), and without grace, die and torment forever. Now, faith is the channel by which grace travels. It is by grace through faith that we are saved, and not faith through grace.

Not nitpicking on you Brother, but this is how I see it. May God bless.

Amen....:thumbs:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I am glad to see another brother agree that we are saved by grace.

On this we can all agree.... Amen:1_grouphug:

 

[quantumfaith]

On this we can all agree.... Amen:1_grouphug:

Agree, if we "stop" right there, "for by grace"..... No one here in BB land disagrees.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Agree, if we "stop" right there, "for by grace"..... No one here in BB land disagrees.

Wow agreement....building bridges :laugh:

 

[JesusFan]

I think we have setted the fact that "non-cals" do not believe in the exhaustive sovereignty of God.

It is clear that they only believe that God is going to work things out in the end- that God does not control the means other than that he knows they are going to happen and lets them- that, of course is not "control" by any definition.

It is clear that they believe that God did not purpose EVERYTHING- that he only PERMITS everything. That, of course is not control by any definition.

But this is not the God of the Bible. The God of the Bible is a micromanager. He controls atomic particles and subatomic particles and they move- not just how he permits- but how he has PURPOSED they should move from eternity past.

And not one of them moves the width of an electron that God did not purpose from all eternity for it to move.

That is the only true God. Elohim cannot be a manager who delegates. He must, by very definition, be the author and sustainer and Lord of- not just everything that IS- but everything that HAPPENS. And not just in general but so specifically that no electron can make a single orbit around the nucleus of a single atom apart from his eternal purpose.

That alone can be the self-existent, Jehovah, I AM. He alone is non-contingent. EVERYTHING else that is or happens is ultimately contingent upon Him.

Speaking as the resident Amyralsist on the BB...

I would have to say that the God of the Bible is NOT the God portarted by Hyper calvinism though!

God fully reamins in control at all times in all situations, in thast he can choose to "step in" at any time BUT

He also has chosen to work through BOTH His deterned ordaining directly Will, and His allowing others to make their decisions, but in the end, ALl things work together according to His divine plans and purposes!

 

[freeatlast]

Speaking as the resident Amyralsist on the BB...

I would have to say that the God of the Bible is NOT the God portarted by Hyper calvinism though!

God fully reamins in control at all times in all situations, in thast he can choose to "step in" at any time BUT

He also has chosen to work through BOTH His deterned ordaining directly Will, and His allowing others to make their decisions, but in the end, ALl things work together according to His divine plans and purposes!

YES! :thumbs:

 

[Luke2427]

Speaking as the resident Amyralsist on the BB...

I would have to say that the God of the Bible is NOT the God portarted by Hyper calvinism though!

God fully reamins in control at all times in all situations, in thast he can choose to "step in" at any time BUT

He also has chosen to work through BOTH His deterned ordaining directly Will, and His allowing others to make their decisions, but in the end, ALl things work together according to His divine plans and purposes!

No one in this discussion is a hypercalvinist. You seem to get hyper calvinism and real of historical or mainstream calvinism confused.

And you are, imo, confused on the issue of Sovereignty.

You seem to want to espouse some kind of sovereignty that is overarching but not specific. It says God can intervene in any situation but that God is not ruling every situation.

His ability to intervene may speak of his power and his omniscience but it does not speak of his sovereignty.

Either God purposed everything to happen just as it has or he did not. Which is it?

Either God is TRULY sovereign over this present age- or he is not. If he has to intervene in situations which are not happening according to his eternal purposes then he is not sovereign in this present world. In that scheme he is simply powerful enough to intrude and knowledgeable enough to predict and know what is happening.

That is not sovereignty. Sovereignty means he is ruling over and in and through and by every situation.

A HUMAN king can be a generic sovereign- but he is only sovereign over the general kingdom. He is not sovereign over everything that happens in his kingdom.

But a DIVINE, almighty, omnipresent, omniscient eternal King who is EXHAUSTIVELY sovereign is NOT sovereign over just the ends. He is as throughly sovereign as he is thoroughly powerful, omniscient and eternal.

 

[preacher4truth]

No one in this discussion is a hypercalvinist. You seem to get hyper calvinism and real of historical or mainstream calvinism confused.

And you are, imo, confused on the issue of Sovereignty.

You seem to want to espouse some kind of sovereignty that is overarching but not specific. It says God can intervene in any situation but that God is not ruling every situation.

His ability to intervene may speak of his power and his omniscience but it does not speak of his sovereignty.

Either God purposed everything to happen just as it has or he did not. Which is it?

Either God is TRULY sovereign over this present age- or he is not. If he has to intervene in situations which are not happening according to his eternal purposes then he is not sovereign in this present world. In that scheme he is simply powerful enough to intrude and knowledgeable enough to predict and know what is happening.

That is not sovereignty. Sovereignty means he is ruling over and in and through and by every situation.

A HUMAN king can be a generic sovereign- but he is only sovereign over the general kingdom. He is not sovereign over everything that happens in his kingdom.

But a DIVINE, almighty, omnipresent, omniscient eternal King who is EXHAUSTIVELY sovereign is NOT sovereign over just the ends. He is as throughly sovereign as he is thoroughly powerful, omniscient and eternal.

We should've taken an offering before your message! :thumbsup:

 

[quantumfaith]

Speaking as the resident Amyralsist on the BB...

I would have to say that the God of the Bible is NOT the God portarted by Hyper calvinism though!

God fully reamins in control at all times in all situations, in thast he can choose to "step in" at any time BUT

He also has chosen to work through BOTH His deterned ordaining directly Will, and His allowing others to make their decisions, but in the end, ALl things work together according to His divine plans and purposes!

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs::thumbs: