AIC,
Okay....posting scripture:applause: now we are getting somewhere.....and yet...what do we see here????
When Joshua challenged the people to "choose you this day whom you will serve,"5 he was addressing individuals who were free to make a moral decision.
No one denies that men make choices. They are responsible to choose.
Man Possesses Free Will
This is no place made clearer than in Matthew 23:37, but you were not willing!" The Bible teaches conclusively and emphatically that man has free will.
The bible teaches than man has a will. Self will.It is not free,but bound.
Those Jesus spoke of here are described as those who were not willing
That does not prove mans will is free....but bound. Jesus was willing, they were not.
God's Will Can Be Rejected
As the passages cited above teach, not only does man possess free will, but he can actually exercise this free will in a way that defies God's will. In other words,
although God is Sovereign Ruler, He does not always get everything He wants.
This is an unscriptural and evil statement.
To the Calvinists, such a statement is totally unthinkable and completely contrary to their concept of God's sovereignty.
Ironically he has this correct.
39
See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither is there any that can deliver out of my hand.
3 But our God is in the heavens:
he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.
9 Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me,
10 Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying,
My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure:
11 Calling a ravenous bird from the east, the man that executeth my counsel from a far country:
yea, I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed it, I will also do it.
Again, in 2 Peter 3:9,
it is plainly stated that God is "not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance."
It actually plainly does not say that
These verses do not teach it. Once again 2 pet 3:9 completely misquoted out of context is always a disaster.
If, as the Calvinists claim, God decrees everything that happens,
Scripture proclaims this..cals just believe it
and if, as the apostle Peter claims, God is not willing that any should perish, then all mankind will ultimately be saved. But even Calvinists reject the idea of Universalism.
Yes....because they understand the covenant of grace correctly.They do not abuse this verse.
What, then, is their solution? Simply this: They must come to understand that Calvinism is not just anti-scriptural, which is certainly bad enough, but is anti-God as well.
This writers lack of ability to understand scripture leads him to make this sad claim against the brethren:tear:
Calvin's god (with a little 'g') is not the God (with a big 'G') who has revealed Himself in the Bible. Calvin's god, apart from anything the creature may or may not do, predestines some to eternal life and others to eternal damnation. However, the God who has revealed Himself in the Bible actually pleads with His creatures to obey His preceptive will so they can be saved. This God, as opposed to Calvin's god, "desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth."6
Now he denies the biblical God in no uncertein terms.he draws the battlelines
How sad to come to this tragic error.
When men begin to say that God can force a man to freely do His will, they are talking meaningless nonsense
.
His folly continues,,,God makes men willing...and then we have this also;
24 This is the interpretation, O king, and this is the decree of the most High, which is come upon my lord the king:
25 That they shall drive thee from men, and thy dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field, and they shall make thee to eat grass as oxen, and they shall wet thee with the dew of heaven, and seven times shall pass over thee, till thou know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will.
[/.
28 All this came upon the king Nebuchadnezzar.
This King had to learn about the doctrines of grace...he had to learn who was in absolute control...some here need to eat grass
Finally, even God could not make man free and not free at the same time in the same way. In order for man to be free, God had to give him the opportunity to rebel.
This is his own idea,and carnal philosophy.Scripture does not say this
God did not want his servants to serve Him because they are forced to do so. He wants those who will serve Him to do so freely, willingly accepting His instructions and counsel. He wants a relationship with His creatures based on mutual affection and love, and not because of some kind of force. The Almighty God, if He so desired, certainly had the power to bridle His creatures, forcefully manipulating their minds and hearts and turning them into robots (or mules), so that they are forced to do His will. But if He did this, He would not be able to achieve His purpose of developing free relationships, like the one He desired with David, with His creatures. He wants all men to repent and enter a free love-relationship with Himself. If He forced them to do this, as Calvinists allege, their allegiance could not be freely given, that is, they would no longer be men but mules. God, who made man in His own image, wants him to be conformed to the image of His Son.9 Unless man is a free moral agent, this simply cannot be done!
he has a needy god...when he denied the biblical God earlier, thats all that is left
Man's free moral agency is a unique gift from God Almighty.
Moral agency is not the same as the will being free
But for many, and this includes Calvinists, the opposite is true. As the secular philosopher J. L. Mackie says, "There is a fundamental difficulty in the notion of an omnipotent God creating men with free will, for if men's wills are really free this must mean that even God cannot control them, that is, that God is no longer omnipotent."10 In his book, The Inexhaustible God, Royce Gruenler says that man's free will, which necessitates a future that is open and indefinite, is "logically incompatible with the doctrine of a sovereign God."[/QUOTE]
This is wickedness and an abomonation.A direct statement of rebellion against the biblical God
11 In other words, Calvinists believe that if man has free will, then God is actually impotent. . At this point, suffice it to say that it is God's foreknowledge which permits Him to maintain complete control of His world in spite of man's free will, because foreknowledge gives God the option of either permitting or preventing man's planned, free will choices,.
His little god has to look and see what will happen and adjust to man.Horrendous!!
Therefore, man's free will does not render God impotent. Nevertheless, it does, in fact, limit Him.
Again....sorry to hear about his god and his problems...maybe he can get some therapy?lol.Sounds like the God who Elijah mocked??
27 And it came to pass at noon, that Elijah mocked them, and said, Cry aloud: for he is a god; either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or he is in a journey, or peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked.
But if God is really limited, then how can He continue to be omnipotent? Are not these two concepts mutually exclusive? Only in the mind of the determinists! . Therefore, if God, of His own free will, chooses to create creatures with free moral agency, and in order to do so, He must limit Himself, such self-limitations are not a denigration of His omnipotence, as the determinists think, but are, instead, a powerful demonstration of it, which is exactly the point I made at the beginning of this subsection.
In order to insure man's autonomy, God, of His own free will, was willing to pay a tremendous price. Although He did not have to do so, the Almighty God was willing to limit Himself in relation to His creation.
Is there no end to this madness?..... I hope you did not read this AIC!
Quickly...edit and delete this link before anyone sees it:thumbsup: