-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Has God determined all things?
- Thread starter Herald
- Start date
- Status
Benjamin
Agreed...but it does not make it true either....solid logic Icon!:laugh: You must give me this one Benjamin:thumbsup:
Not as far as I see it...
Sure you have..we are not fatalists at all
Benjamin,
You need to come out from that spiritual cocoon you are in,You are close to being a PT correct?
If a person is all atrophied do you let them stay that way until they can no longer regain a range of motion to fuction well? Or do you set out the way they can be restored to full function? does it hurt a bit if your therapy requires they break some adhesions? But that is how they will improve their function,through stretching. Herald answered you much clearer than I have.
In this thread is one of the best attempts to stretch a bit, before it has gotten derailed. look up the verses Herald offered.
How do you read Isa 46:9-11 and see otherwise...what do you see in those verses?
Agreed...but it does not make it true either....solid logic Icon!:laugh: You must give me this one Benjamin:thumbsup:
Not as far as I see it...
Sure you have..we are not fatalists at all
Uh-huhI fail to see you logically prove it though.
Benjamin,
You need to come out from that spiritual cocoon you are in,You are close to being a PT correct?
If a person is all atrophied do you let them stay that way until they can no longer regain a range of motion to fuction well? Or do you set out the way they can be restored to full function? does it hurt a bit if your therapy requires they break some adhesions? But that is how they will improve their function,through stretching. Herald answered you much clearer than I have.
In this thread is one of the best attempts to stretch a bit, before it has gotten derailed. look up the verses Herald offered.
How do you read Isa 46:9-11 and see otherwise...what do you see in those verses?
Icon:
NO.........Please quote where I said that or detract your lie.....I said that Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort were "little more" than Satan worshippers.............that is what I said.
Retract your false accusation.
The "Wrath" of Van perpetually abideth upon all of us......You and I alike. None can escape his wrath..........Actually, he was hacked off pages ago.....he just is re-inserting himself now. I don't think anyone cares though, these last few pages of interraction are infinitely more entertaining than any tit-for-tat with Van usually is.
NO.........Please quote where I said that or detract your lie.....I said that Brooke Foss Westcott and Fenton John Anthony Hort were "little more" than Satan worshippers.............that is what I said.
Retract your false accusation.
I have said nothing about what any "Greek teachers" (whatever the heck that means) state, or whether they "lie" or tell the truth......In fact, you have not mentioned them until now, on this post. It is literally impossible for me to have suggested that they are either truthful or dis-honest.....This statement is provably false, therefore I insist that you again detract your dis-honest and false accusation, for the second time.
I have said nothing about a "conspiracy"....That is blatant lie and false accusation #3.... I insist you recant.
What is a :laugh: Quintissential Thesaurus?:laugh:???????
Please quote me stating that "Monergism" is "of the Devil"........or.....I insist, sir, that you recant and apologize for false accusation and lie number 4.
I do, thank you.
!
The "Wrath" of Van perpetually abideth upon all of us......You and I alike. None can escape his wrath..........Actually, he was hacked off pages ago.....he just is re-inserting himself now. I don't think anyone cares though, these last few pages of interraction are infinitely more entertaining than any tit-for-tat with Van usually is.
Once was bad enough:laugh::laugh::laugh:
Last edited by a moderator:
Trust me, I am under no illusions, any person who would wrest the holy Word of God and laugh about it is hardly going to be convicted or repent. I expect you to fully continue in your error, or even to wax worse.
Like my father told me when I was a boy, bad people NEVER admit they are wrong.
Icon,
I’ve established a logical definition for Determinism and it fits your view like a second skin; doesn’t matter whether you like the term or not.
As usual you’re all over place (with common evasive tactics I have already predicted) trying to avoid the first part of this argument. The fact remains your view is that God fore determined all things and that defines the "Determinist" view adequately.
You are a Determinist, like the term or not this term has meaning as established with a simple bit of logic that even a child could understand as truth.
You're not going to get out of this "logical web" of truth which is merely a tool to support the argument by defining terms. Admit it...You're trapped again!
I’ve established a logical definition for Determinism and it fits your view like a second skin; doesn’t matter whether you like the term or not.
As usual you’re all over place (with common evasive tactics I have already predicted) trying to avoid the first part of this argument. The fact remains your view is that God fore determined all things and that defines the "Determinist" view adequately.
You are a Determinist, like the term or not this term has meaning as established with a simple bit of logic that even a child could understand as truth.
You're not going to get out of this "logical web" of truth which is merely a tool to support the argument by defining terms. Admit it...You're trapped again!
I'm not going to respond in kind. I quoted a source instead of just throwing out words. I recommend that you respond to the theological argument.
My argument will stand on it's theological merit. But in the end it reinforces my long held belief that this is all preaching to the choir. Each group is not going to be swayed by the other's argument.
Benjamin
Your take on this is shallow.You refuse to use the biblical language.
let's see.....so in your world...Judas did not want to betray Jesus for thirty pieces of silver.....but God determined that he would no matter what???
Judas really did not want to betray him but somehow he was forced.???
Acts 1 answers for us:
or Peter was wrong in Acts 2???
Peter really meant to say///God forced you by determining to make you do it,so you are really not guilty??
Or was God sure that the depraved sinners would kill him by their own self will and sin??? natural men hate God.Natural men hate His absolute sovereignty and control over them and their volitional actions...
the reason you avoid scripture is....
it does not use the terms you use
it does not use philosophy
it does not use debate fallacies
it does not use terms like determinism
it is not bound by your web..it is above and outside of it.
Men make moral choices but cannot submit voluntarily to God or His word.
As long as this is in the bible, what and who I believe are intact and we are heading to the decreed end.
63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
the flesh profits nothing///fleshly logic and philosophy..profit nothing ...
this is why I call you forth from your web Benjamin...come to scripture..it is not a "rabbit trail' according to Jesus.:thumbsup:
Your take on this is shallow.You refuse to use the biblical language.
let's see.....so in your world...Judas did not want to betray Jesus for thirty pieces of silver.....but God determined that he would no matter what???
Judas really did not want to betray him but somehow he was forced.???
Acts 1 answers for us:
or Peter was wrong in Acts 2???
Peter really meant to say///God forced you by determining to make you do it,so you are really not guilty??
Or was God sure that the depraved sinners would kill him by their own self will and sin??? natural men hate God.Natural men hate His absolute sovereignty and control over them and their volitional actions...
the reason you avoid scripture is....
it does not use the terms you use
it does not use philosophy
it does not use debate fallacies
it does not use terms like determinism
it is not bound by your web..it is above and outside of it.
Men make moral choices but cannot submit voluntarily to God or His word.
As long as this is in the bible, what and who I believe are intact and we are heading to the decreed end.
63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
the flesh profits nothing///fleshly logic and philosophy..profit nothing ...
this is why I call you forth from your web Benjamin...come to scripture..it is not a "rabbit trail' according to Jesus.:thumbsup:
Last edited by a moderator:
Icon,
"There is not a bit of logic to the Calvinist conclusion that man is responsible for his sins if his choice is not freely made. So what will they argue to support their Determinist doctrines: A. That man being responsible is a mystery. B. They will deny logic as a way to determine the truth. C. They will begin with Ad Hominem and try to change the subject. D. They may offer scripture which they interpret as supporting their view of Divine sovereignty while avoiding the second part of the argument asking how man is held responsible, or how God is just to reassign what He is responsible for onto His creatures. But they will not offer a valid argument because there is none to defend their Deterministic position."
Save the Archie Bunker interpretations, described as evasion tactic “D”, would you?
It seems you are having difficulty to even honestly approach establishing a simple definition of your view?
Do you, or do you not believe God fore determined all things? All we need here is an honest answer from you. If yes, I will describe your view as a view of Determinism, thus you as a Determinist. Get over it and let’s get on with it. Otherwise people might think you are using disingenuous debate tactics to avoid this simple issue of establishing a definition for your view. What would Jesus say about that kind of witness?-> (rhetorical question, not meant to aid you in another distraction
)OldRegular
Well-Known Member
That is false on its face and a shameful post!
All scholars? All scholars. Unmitigated and unethical nonsense Winman.
Winman;
Not a single verse you posted above shows that belief precedes regeneration. In fact ever Calvinist or believer in the Doctrines of Sovereign believes in Jesus Christ.
Furthermore you have been shown numerous times Scripture showing that regeneration precedes faith. You simply let "Big I" overrule what Scripture teaches!
Because there are constraints on the freedom of choices does not mean that choices are not made. When a heroin addict chooses to inject his drug he makes a choice, but it is not free: he is constrained and compelled by his addiction. How do you make any of your choices free from the constraints of your nature? Where do you arrive at your philosophy that you can choose purely and freely at your unrestrained uninfluenced whim any option that is laid before you?
As soon as there is a compulsion upon your will are you somehow absolved of all responsibility?
Man makes choices. Those choices are constrained by his nature and the strong compulsions of that nature upon him. Nevertheless, he STILL chooses and is indeed responsible.
you are merely asserting that man cannot be responsible if a choice is not freely made. Support that conclusion then and tell us what you mean by "freely made".
It seems to me that the freedom you suggest exists is more a mystery than man's responsibility. It is not a mystery it is the result of the (admittedly constrained) ACTUAL choices he makes.
I dont deny the usefulness of logic with a couple caveats. Logic will only help you to determine the truth if your assumed propositions are in fact true. Logic in a non mathematical sense will fail not through flawed logic per se but through ambiguity in language, shades and ranges of meaning which exist which will inevitably create loopholes and inconsistencies.
Revelation is the only sure way to determine truth. All else, including logic are only tools that are too easily and too often misused.
That Jakob Hermanszoon shore was a mindless simpleton.... That hurricane sure was big wasn't it..... oops.
I think you are misusing the term responsibility. You are using it in one sense to refer to causality (if even by secondary causation) and in another sense to refer to legal culpability. Because God determined to allow that man's sin in the eternality of his decree does not make God culpable for it, nor does it absolve man of his own culpability as the perpetrator of it. No one who believes DoG believes God's decrees are effectively God FORCING man's sins upon him against his will. God decrees sin upon man through allowance, not by coercion. God may act to restrain sin from man but he does not act to compel man to sin. He may constrain one sin understanding that an alternative sin will result and allow that. In NONE of this is God acting or compelling sin in man. When sin is involved in the decrees of God it is always through allowance. This does not negate that God decreed to allow that sin in the eternal counsel of his will.
Unless you deny God's omniscience and omnipotence you are not free of the problem you perceive Calvinists to have in this area. If you deny God's omniscience, in my opinion, you have greater problems...
How many scholars were involved in translating the many versions of scripture? Probaby hundreds, and none of them translated John 3:16 to say what Iconoclast is trying to say. None of them translates the word of God to say that whosoever has life will believe. NONE of the versions of scripture EVER says this even ONCE. You cannot show it. All scholars have translated the word of God to show the order that whosoever believes will HAVE (following) life. I can show that easily, in fact I have, but you and others will not see truth. You prefer your false doctrine over the word of God.
What? Every single version of scripture shows faith preceding regeneration. All versions say that whosoever believes will HAVE life. This life is regeneration.
It is useless to debate with Calvinists, there is no truth in you.
jonathan.borland
Active Member
Hey Iconoclast,
It says he knew, not foreordained, who would not believe and the one who would betray him. Now John 6:65 is a good verse, and if I were a Calvinist I would use it more often. But I see it as always, that God provides and offers salvation for all, even Judas that false disciple, through the convicting work of his Holy Spirit, and those who respond in belief are given to Jesus and those who don't are not given to Jesus and are damned to hell. Even those elect Israelites are damned to hell if they believe not Jesus. Judas was a self-made wicked man and he rejected Jesus in unbelief.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status