How do we define what is good and evil?

[preacher4truth]

glfredrick, jbh28, I don't know why you two go round and round with skans theological comedy of errors. Both of you have nailed him over and over. You know he's not going to admit he's wrong. Then it goes down this same old tired road with him where the smokescreens and diversions are brought in.

Many have told him about his false premised thread titles, question begging OP's and more.

Then it happens again, and again, the journey down the same old road of exposing his fallacies, to smokescreens &c.

:wavey:

 

[jbh28]

When someone says something like, "Your view is just wrong..." Or "Scripture supports our view..." Or "My view is truth..." they are begging the question. They are presuming that the point up for debate has been settled and it is the lowest form of debate. It is like children on the play ground who continue to say "uh-huh" and "nuh-huh" endlessly. Interestingly enough, when someone attempts to point this out the response is typically for one to put their fingers in their ears and run off....i.e. 'end of story.'

Is anyone here seriously saying that the Bible gives man an excuse? No. No one says that man has an excuse.

 

[Skandelon]

That's not John Wesley but Justin martyr. Maybe he forgot to cite him but that's Justin all right.

Maybe Wesley quoted him and didn't give him credit, because I see that quote attributed to Wesley all over the web???

 

[jbh28]

Which is tantamount to the claiming the boy of the analogy I presented earlier has an excuse for not sitting and eating his meal because the father didn't force him to sit down. It's ridiculous because it assumes God hasn't given the men the contra-casual freedom to respond and thus can't bare full responsibility for their choice.

Of course "its ridiculous." That's my point. Man has no excuse.

 

[Skandelon]

Is anyone here seriously saying that the Bible gives man an excuse? No. No one says that man has an excuse.

I know you don't believe that your view gives men an excuse. And I know you don't believe the bible teaches that, but my argument is that your view DOES indeed give men an excuse and I've clearly laid out the argument as to why that is:

Question: "Why didn't you have faith?"
Answer: "You never granted me faith."

That is an excuse that ONLY your view affords.

I have also had personal experience with this as I have counseled troubled teens who have been exposed to Calvinism who think they couldn't be the elect of God due to their pasts and even present struggles. When they come from a broken home where parents have rejected them they often assume God has rejected them too. I had one kid who had been at the Village church (reformed) who told me that he can't believe and follow Christ because He doesn't think God elected him. What better excuse is there for someone in rebellion than, "God hasn't chosen me?" Even if they are wrong about that feeling the very fact that they think this shows the error of such dogma.

 

[Skandelon]

Of course "its ridiculous." That's my point. Man has no excuse.

No excuse for what? His choice? Or for being condemned? Or both?

 

[jbh28]

I know you don't believe that your view gives men an excuse. And I know you don't believe the bible teaches that, but my argument is that your view DOES indeed give men an excuse and I've clearly laid out the argument as to why that is:

Question: "Why didn't you have faith?"
Answer: "You never granted me faith."

That is an excuse that ONLY your view affords.

In your view, does God grant him faith? Exactly...

You might want to put the shovel down. You hole is getting really deep.

no one has an excuse. Stick to the bible.

I have also had personal experience with this as I have counseled troubled teens who have been exposed to Calvinism who think they couldn't be the elect of God due to their pasts and even present struggles. When they come from a broken home where parents have rejected them they often assume God has rejected them too. I had one kid who had been at the Village church (reformed) who told me that he can't believe and follow Christ because He doesn't think God elected him. What better excuse is there for someone in rebellion than, "God hasn't chosen me?" Even if they are wrong about that feeling the very fact that they think this shows the error of such dogma.

That's hyper calvinsm and not anywhere close to our beliefs here.

Anyway, your argument is moot. I've showed you over and over again, but you willfully pretend you still have it. God could save anyone he wants, but doesn't. He has offered salvation to all that believe. Some don't because they have no desire to do so. Stick to the Bible. The Bible clearly teaches of man's inability to come to Christ. You choose to believe it or not, but don't attempt to make my view look like an excuse.

 

[Iconoclast]

Originally Posted by jonathan.borland
God enables all men to be saved. What else does it mean when it says that salvific grace has enlightened all men? (Titus 2:12)

Of course not all receive him, but as many as do

In the chapter it identifies all kinds of persons;look at the highlighted parts.

1But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine:

2That the aged men be sober, grave, temperate, sound in faith, in charity, in patience.

3The aged women likewise, that they be in behaviour as becometh holiness, not false accusers, not given to much wine, teachers of good things;

4That they may teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children,
5To be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.

6Young men likewise exhort to be sober minded.

7In all things shewing thyself a pattern of good works: in doctrine shewing uncorruptness, gravity, sincerity,

8Sound speech, that cannot be condemned; that he that is of the contrary part may be ashamed, having no evil thing to say of you.

9Exhort servants to be obedient unto their own masters, and to please them well in all things; not answering again;

10Not purloining, but shewing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.

11For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

12Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;

13Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ;

14Who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.

15These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee

All kinds of men.young, old, servants, masters,married, but you see in verse 14...particular redemption is in view!

JB.....all men......the world.... many times are used to show that the salvation of God is not restricted primarily to the nation od Israel only....but God has His elect scattered worldwide.....we find them by preaching the gospel to all men everywhere.:thumbsup:

When you read any of those verses ask yourself....do all men get saved? NO.
If God intends ALL men to be saved....why does Titus write that he intends to redeem a particular group of people zealous of good works? vs11-14?

 

[jonathan.borland]

Brother iconoclast,

Titus 2:11 used to be one of my favorite verses till you posted that.

Not! It still is!

But I do hear you and thanks for posting that anyway.

 

[Skandelon]

You added this after I responded...

So, will you refute this:

Rom 1:20 (ESV) For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse.

What is there to refute? It supports exactly what I've been saying. Look at why these people are 'without excuse.' They have 'clearly perceived' God's revelation according to this verse, some translations say they have "clearly seen" and "understood." Yet, Calvinism teaches that men are born dead, like a corpse, and can't really see, hear or understand God's revelations. Can the lost CLEARLY PERCEIVE the revelation of God or not? If they can then they are without excuse, if they can't (which is the heart of Calvinism's Total Depravity) then they have a perfect excuse.

Act 14:15-17 "Men, why are you doing these things? We also are men, of like nature with you, and we bring you good news, that you should turn from these vain things to a living God, who made the heaven and the earth and the sea and all that is in them. 16 In past generations he allowed all the nations to walk in their own ways. 17 Yet he did not leave himself without witness, for he did good by giving you rains from heaven and fruitful seasons, satisfying your hearts with food and gladness."

The persons to whom Paul shared the Acts 14 passage knew EXACTLY what he said to them. They stoned Paul and left him for dead outside the city gates for saying it.

I agree, but do Calvinists really believe they 'knew EXACTLY what he said to them' because I thought you believe such things had to be 'spiritually discerned' first (ref. 1 Cor 2:14)??? Which is it?

 

[Skandelon]

In your view, does God grant him faith? Exactly...

Whoa, there is a difference. I believe faith cometh by hearing. So, the gospel is the means by which faith comes, thus EVERYONE who hears the appeal of God to be reconciled to Him has been granted the ability to respond. I don't believe God has preselected a relatively few people who are granted faith irresistibly to the neglect of all the rest, as your view does.

That's hyper calvinsm and not anywhere close to our beliefs here.

What's hyper? Its a response of a kid who was exposed to normal mainstream Calvinism. He may not be responding correctly, but that is not the point. The point is that the concept that God hasn't chosen to save most of mankind IS used as an excuse for rebellion by some.

Some don't because they have no desire to do so.

Why don't they desire to do so? Answer that one question and this discussion will be over and you know it.

I'm waiting.

 

[glfredrick]

No excuse...

 

[Skandelon]

You added this after I responded...
What is there to refute? It supports exactly what I've been saying. Look at why these people are 'without excuse.' They have 'clearly perceived' God's revelation according to this verse, some translations say they have "clearly seen" and "understood." Yet, Calvinism teaches that men are born dead, like a corpse, and can't really see, hear or understand God's revelations. Can the lost CLEARLY PERCEIVE the revelation of God or not? If they can then they are without excuse, if they can't (which is the heart of Calvinism's Total Depravity) then they have a perfect excuse.

I agree, but do Calvinists really believe they 'knew EXACTLY what he said to them' because I thought you believe such things had to be 'spiritually discerned' first (ref. 1 Cor 2:14)??? Which is it?

An excuse for not answering this???

 

[jbh28]

Whoa, there is a difference. I believe faith cometh by hearing. So, the gospel is the means by which faith comes, thus EVERYONE who hears the appeal of God to be reconciled to Him has been granted the ability to respond. I don't believe God has preselected a relatively few people who are granted faith irresistibly to the neglect of all the rest, as your view does.

Again, not a relatively few people, but you still want to say it. Its only "few" in compared to those that reject. "relatively" few is taking it too far. My point though still is that God didn't give them faith. You seem to not want to understand my point. That's ok. I understand why.

What's hyper? Its a response of a kid who was exposed to normal mainstream Calvinism. He may not be responding correctly, but that is not the point. The point is that the concept that God hasn't chosen to save most of mankind IS used as an excuse for rebellion by some.

Again, God not choosing isn't an excuse because they have no desire to come. No Calvinist here believes that one would want to come but can't because he wasn't chosen. So not being chosen is not an excuse.

Why don't they desire to do so? Answer that one question and this discussion will be over and you know it.

I'm waiting.

Because they would rather stay in their sin. They cannot understand the spiritual truth of the gospel.

"And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. 4 In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God."
"

I'm done playing your games. I defeated your argument about "excuse." If you want to discuss a passage over total depravity, that will be fine. Let me know that passage and we can look at it.

 

[Iconoclast]

Brother iconoclast,

Titus 2:11 used to be one of my favorite verses till you posted that.

Not! It still is!

But I do hear you and thanks for posting that anyway.

:applause: JB.....take your time and enjoy working through the passages.

remember...even if two brothers do not agree at one point in time....the time comes when they do.

Even when you do not agree with a brother...take time to understand what he sees in the text, and accurately be able to explain it.

There are many times when the little light bulb goes on....and it's like...oh..I never thought of it that way before.

I know many a godly presbyterian brother who makes my head explode sometimes with some of their understandings:thumbsup:

Truth should always be the goal!!

this chapter in Titus is a massive chapter on a godly worldview.....great verses.good food for thought and meditation:thumbsup:

 

[Aaron]

I'm done playing your [Scandal's] games. I defeated your argument about "excuse."

Welcome to the club. :wavey:

 

[Skandelon]

Again, not a relatively few people, but you still want to say it.

"Narrow is the road and few are those who find it..." Relative to the number lost, a "FEW" are saved, period. No one should object to that...

Its only "few" in compared to those that reject.

Right, relative to those lost, there are a few saved. Just so you know, "Relative" is another word for "compared to"

My point though still is that God didn't give them faith. You seem to not want to understand my point. That's ok. I understand why.

I understand that you believe that God hasn't granted most of humanity faith. That is the point.

Question: "Why didn't you believe?"
Answer: "Because you didn't grant me faith."

Again, God not choosing isn't an excuse because they have no desire to come.

Why don't they have a desire to come? If I were to drug my child from the first day he was born with a medication that made him not able to willingly obey me, and then punished him for not being willing to obey me...How is that not my fault? And how could you claim that my child wouldn't have a perfect excuse for his disobedience?

Even if the child deserved the drug (i.e. through the sin of a representative who fell) that doesn't answer the problem regarding an appeal to reconciled from that fall.

No Calvinist here believes that one would want to come but can't because he wasn't chosen. So not being chosen is not an excuse.

You aren't understanding my argument. I'm not saying you believe people want to be saved but can't. I'm arguing against your belief that people CAN'T WANT TO due to an inborn nature given to them by God. You have tried to suggest it wasn't 'from God' by blaming it on Adam, but you continue to avoid the obvious fact that God is the one who decided the punishment for the fall.

Because they would rather stay in their sin. They cannot understand the spiritual truth of the gospel.

And there is the perfect excuse. They didn't (couldn't) really understand. I say they 'clearly saw and understood' but still freely chose to rebel thus making them all the more guilty and deserving of their punishment...they are 'without excuse' because they DID understand.

"And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. 4 In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God."

Context brother. Read the verses surrounding this one:

13 We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to keep the Israelites from gazing at it while the radiance was fading away. 14 But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. 15 Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. 16 But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away. 17 Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is freedom. 18 And we, who with unveiled faces all reflect the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from the Lord, who is the Spirit.

He is clearly speaking of the Israelites being hardened to the revelation of God and the need for them to turn to Christ and find freedom.

I'm done playing your games.

It's called "debate," and this is a debate forum. If you don't want to have a cordial exchange of views (debate), then I suggest you not post your opinions on a debate forum. You are typically very fair and cordial so please don't let some of the others rub off on you. We may have some misunderstandings in our discussions and of course I'm going to press you on issues I think are incorrect (that is the point after all), but it doesn't need to become personal or nasty.

 

[Skandelon]

An excuse for not answering this???

Guy, do you have an excuse for not answering the last post and the question posed to you?

 

[Skandelon]

Oh, and jhb, you still haven't told us why a lost person doesn't desire to come to Christ. More specifically, why can't he become willing? What is preventing him from being willing?

 

[jbh28]

It's called "debate," and this is a debate forum. If you don't want to have a cordial exchange of views (debate), then I suggest you not post your opinions on a debate forum. You are typically very fair and cordial so please don't let some of the others rub off on you. We may have some misunderstandings in our discussions and of course I'm going to press you on issues I think are incorrect (that is the point after all), but it doesn't need to become personal or nasty.

I'm speaking of stuff like "excuses." If you want to discuss a particular passage, let's do it. When we try to look at stuff like man has an excuse, we don't get anywhere. Man can always come up with an excuse. You attempted to put an "excuse" to my view and I showed you that it wasn't valid.