God's existence

[MB]

You even admit time is a measurement tied to creation...its unbelievable you think God is bound to His own creation

But I do not think God is bound to His own creation. I believe God can move through time freely. What I do not see is that God would have a need to be out side of time. Since absolutely nothing exist there if there were such a place. Time is spoken of by God in several places and He lives in eternity through out all time. He does not ever in scripture exist out side of time. Time in it's self is like a Mobius Ban. It only has one side and goes on for eternity.
Did God create time? I don't know and neither do you. Only God Knows.
MB

 

[reformed_baptist]

Heirofsalvation,

I simply tried to explain a statement that you have obviously misunderstood and read far more into then either I, or the original author, ever intended.

I see no reason to furnish you with a more detailed response to each point you raise as most of it was provoking childish bluster and extremely dishonouring to the Lord Jesus Christ. I wonder what non-believers who saw this would think of such behaviour?

The reality is, you asked for a statement from an authority on Arminianism, I have given you one. Toplady is such an authority being wesleyan arminian for a long time before he came to understand the doctrines of grace.

You might like the statemenmt, you might agree with it - but this response is entirely uncalled for. Now should you wish to debate my soteriology with me I am more then happy to do so in the proper context and the proper place - this thread is not it.

Now it is upto you how take this post - you may want to claim the victory - so be it, I am big enough to take that. However I am not going anywhere have failed to scare me off with your rhetoric

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Heirofsalvation,

I simply tried to explain a statement that you have obviously misunderstood and read far more into then either I, or the original author, ever intended.

Laughably false...it is clear...it states what it states. Are you suggesting that there was some esoteric minutiae that we failed to grasp? Really? I have heard far better than this... I have read NOTHING into it, and I have not failed to understand it...What is it then, the Upanishads?? Oh, do tell. Who do you think you are??? I didn't "misunderstand" it...and neither did you...stop insulting the intelligence of others.

I see no reason to furnish you with a more detailed response to each point

You only "see no reason" because you can't. Cease your bluff. You are on a debate board...and you have been called...Grow up boy. Post like a man, or walk away like one...both are, in fact, honorable.

you raise as most of it was provoking childish bluster and extremely dishonouring to the Lord Jesus Christ. I wonder what non-believers who saw this would think of such behaviour?

They would think precisely what I think....that there are, in fact, those who, when called to task about a topic either are man enough to learn and accept correction...and there are also self-important willful ignoramusses...

The reality is, you asked for a statement from an authority on Arminianism,

No, Get it, little BOY.....I want you to quote ONE SINGLE ARMINIAN saying something so MORONIC as you state...I don't want you to quote a Calvinist smart-guy....quote an ARMINIAN....You have nothing. You never did, and you never will.

I have given you one.

That is a lie...You have given us one Calvinist stating such stupidity...quote an Arminian making such a retarded statement as I challenged you before...I know you can't. It is a fact that you can't. Quote a respectable Arminian...or walk away little one...and tuck your tail between your legs first..

Toplady is such an authority being wesleyan arminian for a long time before he came to understand the doctrines of grace.

Toplady is a Calvinist....Quote an Arminian...Words have no meaning to you do they????

Now it is upto you how take this post - you may want to claim the victory - so be it, I am big enough to take that.

I don't "claim" any victory...I am challenging you to quote any respected Arminian Theologian who would make a statement such as you are claiming....you have (so far) furnished only the bloviations of a Calvinist...No Arminian would suggest something so stupid as that. I also, am totally unaware of how "big" you claim you are...I can only take your word for it...and thus far your "word" is 0-10.

However I am not going anywhere have failed to scare me off with your rhetoric

Son...I decidedly do not want you to go away...trust me, I want you to stick around and continue posting as long as you see fit...It serves my purposes for you to continue posting. I leave it to you to figure out why that is.

 

[MB]

The first 3 words of the English Bible.

In the beginning...

Eternity has no beginning.

HankD

Can you prove God was speaking of time in the first place Biblically. No! you can't. Because it is obvious that God was speaking of the beginning of His creation and not the beginning of time. Time has no beginning or end. It goes on for eternity. Like God. If I were to speculate as you do even I could come up with something better than that.
MB

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Can you prove God was speaking of time in the first place Biblically. No! you can't

.

Actually, there is a "Biblical" argument that can be made...I don't claim (personally) to be capable of "proving" it (inescapably)...but there is a reasoned Biblical case that can be made.

Because it is obvious that God was speaking of the beginning of His creation and not the beginning of time. Time has no beginning or end. It goes on for eternity.

This is your assumption....the contrary is ours...both are very hard to "prove" strictly speaking...but the notion of time's having a "beginning" is probably easier to demonstrate and prove, or is, at least, a more valuable assumption than otherwise.

Like God. If I were to speculate as you do even I could come up with something better than that.

By all means........Please do so. It is not as though you have "orthodoxy" working on your behalf and He doesn't. This has ever been a Classic position adopted by the bulk of Christian (if Catholic) Theology....it is not as though you are arguing from the "confessional" position against a "heresy" or anything. There are reasons for the alternative point of view...they have yet to be divulged is all.

MB

 

[quantumfaith]

But I do not think God is bound to His own creation. I believe God can move through time freely. What I do not see is that God would have a need to be out side of time. Since absolutely nothing exist there if there were such a place. Time is spoken of by God in several places and He lives in eternity through out all time. He does not ever in scripture exist out side of time. Time in it's self is like a Mobius Ban. It only has one side and goes on for eternity.
Did God create time? I don't know and neither do you. Only God Knows.
MB

MB, here is (to me anyway) an interesting "speculation" concerning God and time. Experience with relativity indicates that time "slows down" as a particle approaches the speed of light, theoretically implying that at the speed of light t=0. We are told that "God is light", thus time is "non-existent" or meaningless. What say you?

 

[Winman]

Yes.....indeed, I have preached this one before read it again:


This verse is speaking of those who are actually "accustomed" to do evil....or do I mis-quote God here....this does not prove Original Sin....it only states that those who are "accustomed"....have/posses a nature to engage in wickedness and therefore do not easily change...granted...the leaopard and the Ethiopian are BOTH (by nature) what they are...but this verse qualifies the "nature" by what one is "accustomed" to...Please provide the Scripture which states that they were determinatively created/born this way due to a failure of Adam's....ANYONE?????

Cals's are 0-4 (by my count) of "proving" Original Sin....I have always accepted Original Sin as Bible truth....and yet, somehow...no Calvinist has yet to actually provide the Scripture which teaches it??? What is going on here? The more I am listening to Cals...the less their Theology makes sense!! Please provide an ACTUAL SCRIPTURE!!!! which says what you are claiming it says!!!

You are catching on HoS, they can't prove OS in the scriptures because it isn't there.

You are correct about Jeremiah 13:23, Calvinists ignore the word "accustomed" which by definition means learned behavior. This verse is not saying men are born sinners, but it is saying these men are so accustomed to sin that it has become their second nature, and it would be nearly impossible to change. It is hyperbole.

 

[HankD]

Can you prove God was speaking of time in the first place Biblically. No! you can't. Because it is obvious that God was speaking of the beginning of His creation and not the beginning of time.

I admit it is speculation but IMO your premise is not "obvious" as we are talking about the first instance in which time is being mentioned (6 day creation). God is eternal and does not need the passage of time.

In my view I make a distinction between time and eternity.

Eternity has no beginning (or end) - it cannot.

Time always has a beginning and an end.

Time has no beginning or end. It goes on for eternity like God.

By the same token, can you prove that?

If I were to speculate as you do even I could come up with something better than that.
MB

You have already speculated that time has no beginning or end which I would like to seen proven but nonetheless please do come up with something better


Thanks
HankD

 

[reformed_baptist]

Well HoS you are like a dog with your bone in your pursuit of an entirely needless arguement. If you do not mind creating a situation that makes you look entirely foolish then who am I to continueing to not give enough rope to hang yourself.

Now in all my years in posting on various internet forums, many of which contains numerous rabib anti-calvinists, other with highly skilled arminian apologists - never once has anyone responded to my signiture in the way uou have.

Futher more when you say things like this;

Sorry that I was harsh with my initial post, and am, indeed, harsh with this one...

It is just meaningless, if you were sorry in any sense you would tone done the abusive rhetoric of your posts - so you are not sorry, but rather an antogonist that hides behind a thin veneer of respectability. The truth is you are not worthy of a detailed response.

An accusation of lying

I might also that that when you make statements like this;

That is a lie...

You aught to remember the biblical command that to bring a charge against an Elder of a church requires two or three witness (1 Tim 5:19). Where are your witnesses?

Now lets look at that accusation in a little more detail shall we!

You said;

please quote an authority on "Arminianism"

I presented a case that Toplady is an authority of Arminianism since he ehld to a wesleyan arminain perspective for much of his christain life - now you might disagree with that, and it is your right to despute if he is an authority on the subject - however your accusation rings extremely hollow in the ears of any who are actually interested in this tirade you have started.

style of responses

I might further add that you way you respond to posts has been labelled 'scattergun' in the past. By that, I am suggesting that you deliberately split down an oponents comments into individual phrases and respond to each one throughing in as many red hearings, blind alleys, strawmen and ad-hom attacks as you can possibly muster up. The point of this approach is that you either side track the debate away from the point, or you simply make it impossible for the person to respond effectively. My freind, such tactics are childish and pointless.

A challenge

Why not debate me on this forum on the doctrines of grace - your choice of focus? You can sit there with Hunt, Olson or Bryson in front of you all you want - I will go toe to toe with you.

Now onto the content of your posts.

The meaning of a statement

Laughably false...it is clear...it states what it states.[/quotes]

And what it states is simply this;

"A man's 'free'-will cannot cure him even of the tooth ache, or of a sore finger; and yet he madly thinks it is in its power to cure his soul."

Nowhere in that sentence is Toplady providing a citation - I don't see a footnote either. It is your baseless assumption that a calvinist cannot make any soteriological statement unless he is quoting an amyraldian arminain, semi-pelagain or pelagian - sometimes friend we are simply presenting the truth as we understand it. In this phrase Toplady is simply expounding the powerlessness of the human will in regards to salvation. he is not saying Arminains teach that one can will a cure for toothache. The very rediculous nature of such an assertion precludes that understanding

Are you suggesting that there was some esoteric minutiae that we failed to grasp? Really?

Who is the we? You are the only person I have ever come across that has taken offense at this comment.

I have heard far better than this...

Well I have never claimed to be brillaint, intelligent, scholarly or an expert so that doesn't surprise me at all. However I will say I rarelly heard worse!

I have read NOTHING into it, and I have not failed to understand it...What is it then, the Upanishads??

I could debate Hinduism with you if you wish, but I see no point. Instead I will just point out that this is another blind alley you are truly to use to distract, a little like the servertus claim, and sprong claim in your previous post to me.

Oh, do tell. Who do you think you are???

Pointless, antogonists rhetoric!

I didn't "misunderstand" it...and neither did you...stop insulting the intelligence of others.

Well I have explained it enough times now - let others decide who is insulting the intelligence of who in this thread.

Not responding or can't respond

You only "see no reason" because you can't. Cease your bluff.

Which of your statemenst do you think I am unable to respond to? You're veiled attempt at a charecetr assination of Calvin who had no power in the trial of servertus - he wa snothing more then an expert witness.

Or perhaps it is this you think I cannot respond to;

a 700-page treatise on What??????

In my previous post I had told you what the treatise was on!

also writing a 700 page treatise on calvinism being the historical position of the Church of England

My freind, it has never been that I am unable to respond, simply that I do not wish to be dragged down to this level of response which I consider childish and a very pootr witness.

You are on a debate board...and you have been called...Grow up boy. Post like a man, or walk away like one...both are, in fact, honorable.

No, you have picked a needless and entirely pointless fight and are continue to provoke me for a reason well beyong my ability to fathom. I repeat that I have explained to you the nature of the statement - your determination to see it in any other light that it was intended is your problem - not mine.

the world is watching

They would think precisely what I think....that there are, in fact, those who, when called to task about a topic either are man enough to learn and accept correction...and there are also self-important willful ignoramusses...

Ah yes - but which one of us will they think is the "self-important willful ignoramusses..." I wonder.

Now back to the point - do you really think people reading your words will say to another here are people who depsite their differences can show respect to another and love another and think better of the other person then they can themselves?

get what

No, Get it, little BOY.....I want you to quote ONE SINGLE ARMINIAN saying something so MORONIC as you state...I don't want you to quote a Calvinist smart-guy....quote an ARMINIAN....You have nothing. You never did, and you never will.

Once again you show yourself up my freind, for I repeat Toplday neither implied any ever said thses things - he is simply making an assertion regarding the powerlessness of the human will.

You're continue insistence that I should provide something that simply isn't there, and that I have already told you isn't there and explained to you - speaks more about you're antagonism towards me and my beliefs then anything else. Tell me, have we met on another forum before? Have I caused you some hurt in the past of which I am not aware? If not, why do you persue me in this way!

That is a lie...

Alreday addressed

You have given us one Calvinist stating such stupidity...quote an Arminian making such a retarded statement as I challenged you before...I know you can't.

Which do you want, "an Arminian" or "an authority on arminianism" - you're demands are not even consistant - How can I respond meaningfully when you ask for diferent things each time?

Having pointed that out I will return to the point at hand, Toplady is merely quoting on the impotence of the huamn will in regards to man's salvation. He is not saying any has ever said that a human can cure a toothache by the power of his will.

It is a fact that you can't. Quote a respectable Arminian...

I can quote many respectable arminains, what would you like me to quote them on? I am more then happy to discuss the differing views on human free will if you desire that.

or walk away little one...and tuck your tail between your legs first..

I think in a little while you will say you are not calling this a victory - really!

Toplady is a Calvinist....Quote an Arminian...Words have no meaning to you do they????

One question mark is a question, two is antogonistic, what does 4 mean! As to what words mean to me - yes they have meaning to me which is why I ask you to be consistent in what you demand of me. It is also why I ask you to tone down your rhetoric and it is also why I reject your apology as false because words have meaning - if you apologise - show it by treating me with a modicum of respect and talk to me as you're brother in Christ rather then something you have just found on the bottom of your shoe!

 

[reformed_baptist]

Claiming victory

I don't "claim" any victory...

Really! Then you haven't said things like;

I know you can't. It is a fact that you can't. Quote a respectable Arminian...or walk away little one...and tuck your tail between your legs first..

or

because you can't. Cease your bluff. You are on a debate board...and you have been called...Grow up boy. Post like a man,

I think i recall reading somewhere recently that words have meaning - now who was it that said that to me I wonder?

I am challenging you to quote any respected Arminian Theologian who would make a statement such as you are claiming....

But as yet you have told me what I am claiming an Arminian has said. No, you have taken a comment out of my signiture line and twisted it to your own ends - neither I or Toplady are claiming anybody else has said anything in that statement - I repeat (in the hope that reptition will make it sink in) that Toplday is merely commenting on the impotence of the human will in salvation - it is a positive assertion of calvinistic doctrine, not an attack on anyone else!

you have (so far) furnished only the bloviations of a Calvinist...

by definition a bloviation is "To discourse at length in a pompous or boastful manner" - the statement is less then 35 words long so it hardly fits that criteria, nor is it pompous or baostful - however there is one person in this discusion whom words I am fairly sure match every single of those defining charecteristics - I will leave others to decide who that is for themselves.

No Arminian would suggest something so stupid as that. I also, am totally unaware of how "big" you claim you are...I can only take your word for it...and thus far your "word" is 0-10.

Pointless!

Son...

Condesending!

I decidedly do not want you to go away...trust me, I want you to stick around and continue posting as long as you see fit...It serves my purposes for you to continue posting.

And what purpose might they be, you enjoy making sport of other people and insluting them.

I leave it to you to figure out why that is.

I really cannot be bothered trying to figure you out if I am truthful. I have made this last attempt to reason with you - how you deal with it is entriely your problem. However when you wish to discourse with me like a brother in Christ I will most likely still be around - the ball is in your court now.

 

[HeirofSalvation]

R.B.
I should not have posted as I did...I was in the wrong. Please accept my apology. There are other ways I might have reasonably discussed it. My initial post was rude and un-called for and not germaine to the thread.

 

[Iconoclast]

Claiming victory



Really! Then you haven't said things like;



or



I think i recall reading somewhere recently that words have meaning - now who was it that said that to me I wonder?



But as yet you have told me what I am claiming an Arminian has said. No, you have taken a comment out of my signiture line and twisted it to your own ends - neither I or Toplady are claiming anybody else has said anything in that statement - I repeat (in the hope that reptition will make it sink in) that Toplday is merely commenting on the impotence of the human will in salvation - it is a positive assertion of calvinistic doctrine, not an attack on anyone else!



by definition a bloviation is "To discourse at length in a pompous or boastful manner" - the statement is less then 35 words long so it hardly fits that criteria, nor is it pompous or baostful - however there is one person in this discusion whom words I am fairly sure match every single of those defining charecteristics - I will leave others to decide who that is for themselves.



Pointless!



Condesending!



And what purpose might they be, you enjoy making sport of other people and insluting them.



I really cannot be bothered trying to figure you out if I am truthful. I have made this last attempt to reason with you - how you deal with it is entriely your problem. However when you wish to discourse with me like a brother in Christ I will most likely still be around - the ball is in your court now.

:applause::applause::applause:

 

[reformed_baptist]

R.B.
I should not have posted as I did...I was in the wrong. Please accept my apology. There are other ways I might have reasonably discussed it. My initial post was rude and un-called for and not germaine to the thread.

Apology accepted, start a thread somewhere on any topic regarding my soteriology I will gladly discuss it with you.

PS - I apologize for my spellinh - my mind works more quickly then my fingers I am afraid

 

[MorseOp]

God grant us all a spirit that is not just willing to receive correction but that is equally willing to forgive.

 

[MB]

MB, here is (to me anyway) an interesting "speculation" concerning God and time. Experience with relativity indicates that time "slows down" as a particle approaches the speed of light, theoretically implying that at the speed of light t=0. We are told that "God is light", thus time is "non-existent" or meaningless. What say you?

I remember reading in a history book that at first men were afraid to attempt to ride a train faster than 60 MPH. They actually believed there hearts would stop. Now millions travel faster than the speed of sound with no visible effects. We are often told the speculation of scientist though more often than not there speculations are disproved eventually by themselves.

I'm not sure man will ever know there theories are true about the speed of light. If they could travel that fast man would become like a god the moment he could travel at the speed of light. There would be nothing he could not escape except for the light it's self. Even traveling at this speed men could not escape the light they would in fact have to travel faster than light to escape it. Nothing is known to travel faster. Not even light. Even though men believe that time stops at the speed of light. We still have to remember that the light has not stopped and time traveling with the light would not have stopped either except in appearance to those who might travel that fast.

God is light I agree; scripture confirms this is true. However if light somehow escaped it's self then light as we know it would cease to exist.

I really do not think that God would want to escape Him self do you?

MB

 

[AresMan]

Genesis 1:1 says "In the beginning God created..."

It does not say "At a particular point in time God created..."

"In the beginning" is clearly a reference to time, since there can be nothing temporal before "the beginning."

Therefore, "before" Creation, there could have been no time (in the sense of physics).

John 1:1 says "In the beginning was the Word."
εν αρχη ην ο λογος

The ην there is imperfect tense for the infinitive εἰμί (which has no aorist conjugation), demonstrating that the Logos "was existing" "in the beginning." So, "when" time "began," the Word "was being."

 

[MB]

Genesis 1:1 says "In the beginning God created..."

It does not say "At a particular point in time God created..."

"In the beginning" is clearly a reference to time, since there can be nothing temporal before "the beginning."

You may have forgotten this refference to time before creation.
Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

This refers to a time before creation...
MB

 

[webdog]

You may have forgotten this refference to time before creation.
Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

This refers to a time before creation...
MB

I believe that is figurative and anthropomorphic along with all linear language describing anything "before" time.

 

[Yeshua1]

The first 3 words of the English Bible.

In the beginning...

Eternity has no beginning.

HankD

In the beginning was the Word... ties into genesis... jesus,Father, Spirit were all 3 at beginning of creation, ONLY the truine Godhead is ternal, ALL other things were created by them and for them!

To have restarined/confined in time as we are would make Him subject to his own laws and thus they would be God over him!

 

[quantumfaith]

I remember reading in a history book that at first men were afraid to attempt to ride a train faster than 60 MPH. They actually believed there hearts would stop. Now millions travel faster than the speed of sound with no visible effects. We are often told the speculation of scientist though more often than not there speculations are disproved eventually by themselves.

I'm not sure man will ever know there theories are true about the speed of light. If they could travel that fast man would become like a god the moment he could travel at the speed of light. There would be nothing he could not escape except for the light it's self. Even traveling at this speed men could not escape the light they would in fact have to travel faster than light to escape it. Nothing is known to travel faster. Not even light. Even though men believe that time stops at the speed of light. We still have to remember that the light has not stopped and time traveling with the light would not have stopped either except in appearance to those who might travel that fast.

God is light I agree; scripture confirms this is true. However if light somehow escaped it's self then light as we know it would cease to exist.

I really do not think that God would want to escape Him self do you?

MB

First of all, my comment was purely interesting speculation, not an axiomatic statement. Second, it is indeed a fact that the rate of time passage slows with respect to velocity. As to whether t=0, or as some have theorized, particles at the speed of light require infinite mass and infinite energy, we may never know. I don't know what you mean by "light escaping itself", don't recall attempting to imply that, if so, I apologize.