Rasha

[agedman]

Saying it yet again doesn't make it so, nor will repeating it another 200 times. This particular segment of the Proverbs is a paragraph, regardless of your denial.

Actually, yeah it does. As I showed in the previous post, the bulk of which you largely ignored to focus on one small item within it.

And as Rev pointed out, you have to grossly misinterpret that commentary by Gill, or totally ignore the central part, to leap to such a false conclusion. Gill obviously refutes your point. You're incorrect here, A/M. Sorry.

You have yet to show were I have stated anything in disagreement.

You have taken the OP and following posts and made conclusions that I did not make.

In fact in the first post (the op) I tried to dissuade such a discussion by following the first statement with a following reinforcing statement for emphasis:

"This thread is definitely NOT to be a Calvin/Arminian debate, but to consider a single verse in which the Scriptures clearly state that God makes all for His own purpose."

​

To this point, not a single commentary nor any post has been made to dispute the OP.

I have not been allusive, vague or hard to nail down as RevM would assign, but clear in my posts (accept the second in which I made appology and correction).

To equate this thread with some support of Calvinism over some other view, is from the OP NOT a consideration - which is also consistent with the commentary list provided.

Perhaps some are uncomfortable with statements that a person doesn't just do wickedness but are innately good are actually false.

But, if I recall the posts of this thread correctly, no one has taken issue with the statement:

"Often in this modern times, a person hears it said that we are to 'love the sinner but hate the sin' or 'everyone has some good in them.'

But this verse would indicate that from God's perspective, such thinking is incorrect - perhaps even deceitful in attempting to soften the evil of wickedness.

Some people are wicked, not just do wicked."
​

 

[thisnumbersdisconnected]

You have yet to show were I have stated anything in disagreement.

You have taken the OP and following posts and made conclusions that I did not make.

That's because I reasoned it out rather than set out to use a single verse to attempt to prove a biblical doctrine.

In fact in the first post (the op) I tried to dissuade such a discussion by following the first statement with a following reinforcing statement for emphasis:

"This thread is definitely NOT to be a Calvin/Arminian debate, but to consider a single verse in which the Scriptures clearly state that God makes all for His own purpose."

​

Which is usually what people do to avoid having discussions they do not wish to have, in order to protect their foregone conclusions from being assailed.

To this point, not a single commentary nor any post has been made to dispute the OP.

On the contrary, you claimed John Gill agree with you. Rev posted what John Gill actually wrote, and it refutes what you claim.

I have not been allusive, vague or hard to nail down as RevM would assign ...

Really? Then what would you call claiming Gill said something he clearly did not say? Honesty? Clarity? What label would you give it?

... but clear in my posts (accept the second in which I made appology and correction).

One, I see no apology or correction in your second post. And you furthered your disingenuousness by then stating as though it was fact that Rev agreed with you, when clearly his post of Gill's commentary proved you wrong, and you still won't admit that to be the absolute truth.

To equate this thread with some support of Calvinism over some other view ...

... is to clarify your attempted obfuscation. Done hear. Your denials just make you more disingenuous by the post.

But, if I recall the posts of this thread correctly, no one has taken issue with the statement:

"Often in this modern times, a person hears it said that we are to 'love the sinner but hate the sin' or 'everyone has some good in them.'

But this verse would indicate that from God's perspective, such thinking is incorrect - perhaps even deceitful in attempting to soften the evil of wickedness.​

No, that verse does not, because you are misinterpreting the verse and now attempt to incorrectly apply your misinterpretation.

Some people are wicked, not just do wicked."

All people are wicked. Until they are brought into faith in Jesus Christ.​

 

[Van]

Total Spiritual Inability

Over the course of the BB's discussions, often it is read that God makes a person with a natural volition in which to self determine their own eternity.

This thread is definitely NOT to be a Calvin/Arminian debate, but to consider a single verse in which the Scriptures clearly state that God makes all for His own purpose.

The Hebrew word that is key in this verse is "rasha." It basically means one who is not only bad, but condemned. A word that signifies that a person not only has no redeeming features (bad to the bone), but is "condemned already" as John records in John 3.

The word not only means what the person does is bad, but that the wicked is from the root of the person. That person does bad because they are bad.

The Scriptures state:

"The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil." Proverbs 16:4

​

Often in this modern times, a person hears it said that we are to "love the sinner but hate the sin" or "everyone has some good in them."

But this verse would indicate that from God's perspective, such thinking is incorrect - perhaps even deceitful in attempting to soften the evil of wickedness.

Some people are wicked, not just do wicked.

I see we have yet another thread asserting Calvinism that has not been moved. Here we have "Double Predestination" in view, with God supposedly creating "the wicked" for the purpose of damnation. Pure fiction, but that is the Calvinist claim.

1) Are we all "made sinners" conceived in iniquity, and condemned for unbelief? You bet. Does that mean God made us unable to seek God and trust in Christ? Nope.

2) The verse that says no one seeks after God does not say no one ever seeks God at any time, the Calvinist addition.

3) What is God's purpose for the wicked on the day of evil? First, please tell us about of the verses that mention day of evil, besides Proverbs 16:4.

 

[agedman]

I was hoping that the discussion would be centered upon these items.

1) That God created all things.

2) That God made those who are wicked.

3) That God uses all to His purpose and design.

4) That God is completely involved and not benign or uninterested.

5) That God uses His discretion to preserve the wicked even to the evil day.

6) That if in fact God is keeping tabs on the wicked, how much more does He involve himself in the believer's everyday life.

7) That wickedness has no layer or level, but is, as any sin should be considered by the believer, exceedingly sinful - wicked.

​

In the OP it says: "The word not only means what the person does is bad, but that the wicked is from the root of the person. That person does bad because they are bad."

Obviously, there are some who read into that statement that it was suggested the wicked are made that way by God.

The NIV states that: "Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me."

Is that verse not clear enough?

God didn't have to "MAKE" people sinful/wicked.

A person born by water is a natural person, estranged from God, and obligated to sin - for they have no other nature. That person IS sinful because that is the nature.

A wicked person is completely wicked. The unbeliever just doesn't do wickedly but ARE wicked.

Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

​

God made all things.

God made even Lucifer.

God didn't make Lucifer evil - for God is not the author of evil.

But some have decided that this old man is stating that God made people evil for his purpose.

God didn't have to "make" pharaoh evil. Pharaoh was already evil. He had long neglected the pain and suffering of the Jews. His heart was already hardened. The "hardening of the heart" that God speaks to Moses in Exodus 4 isn't some supernatural event, but the natural condition found in every non-believer. It is the program of the nature to "stiffen the neck," "blind the eyes," and such. The "hardening of the heart" was what pharaoh's nature obliged and was confirmed and used by God for His purpose.

Perhaps, this post is not so ambivalent, obfuscating, vague, allusive, hard to nail down, ...

But then, perhaps some are so biased, their mindset so fixed, as to consider every thread must certainly be a Cal/Arm debate.

The very problem I warned about in the opening of the OP:

Over the course of the BB's discussions, often it is read that God makes a person with a natural volition in which to self determine their own eternity.

This thread is definitely NOT to be a Calvin/Arminian debate, but to consider a single verse in which the Scriptures clearly state that God makes all for His own purpose.
​

Why then did the issue of God being the author of evil even come as an area of contention?

Because, the bias of the readers obliged them to read into this old man's OP and make an issue where there was none.

Such is the contentiousness of the BB.

 

[Revmitchell]

Because you cannot have a discussion about God creating men for a purpose without also discussing what that purpose is. I doubt there is one single person on this board who does not believe that God creates all men for a purpose. So if that is the only point you are trying to glean from scripture in this thread then you are preaching to the choir.

But if you are trying to suggest that God creates some to solely be wicked and never be offered grace for His glory then this is a cal/non call debate and it is in the wrong forum.

I believe it is the latter however veiled it may be.

 

[agedman]

Because you cannot have a discussion about God creating men for a purpose without also discussing what that purpose is. I doubt there is one single person on this board who does not believe that God creates all men for a purpose. So if that is the only point you are trying to glean from scripture in this thread then you are preaching to the choir.

But if you are trying to suggest that God creates some to solely be wicked and never be offered grace for His glory then this is a cal/non call debate and it is in the wrong forum.

I believe it is the latter however veiled it may be.

Because your last sentence was what I thought some would "believe," I attempted to dissuade such thinking at the first two sentences of the OP.

Unfortunately, some will see what they want to see no matter what is clearly laid out as NOT what is shown.

 

[Revmitchell]

Because your last sentence was what I thought some would "believe," I attempted to dissuade such thinking at the first two sentences of the OP.

Unfortunately, some will see what they want to see no matter what is clearly laid out as NOT what is shown.

OK let's say I am wrong. What is the point. Post 24 is as vague as every other post.

 

[agedman]

OK let's say I am wrong. What is the point. Post 24 is as vague as every other post.

In this thread, it has reached the point of questioning my honesty.

There was no intent to make this thread anymore than an exploration of that stated in post 24.

Caution was given to those who might assume some other agenda and it was not only ignored, but bold inaccurate refutations were made not against the OP but a misreading of the OP. When stated that there was no disagreement with the commentaries (other than that indicated in the post), further entrenchment in inaccurate the reading of the OP took place.

By some assuming the OP had some hidden agenda and the opening statements were part of that hidden scheme, the posts then raised the question of personal deceit.

Perhaps you are using "vague" to mean something other than unclear, uncertain, undetermined meaning.

Because you still contend that "every other post" is vague including post 24, tell me how would you word post 24 to your liking?

 

[Revmitchell]

Because you still contend that "every other post" is vague including post 24, tell me how would you word post 24 to your liking?

I don't have a liking. I want to know what it is you want discussed.


God makes people for His own purposes.

Is that it, is that your whole point?

 

[agedman]

I don't have a liking. I want to know what it is you want discussed.


God makes people for His own purposes.

Is that it, is that your whole point?

I was hoping that the discussion would be centered upon these items.1) That God created all things.

2) That God made those who are wicked.

3) That God uses all to His purpose and design.

4) That God is completely involved and not benign or uninterested.

5) That God uses His discretion to preserve the wicked even to the evil day.

6) That if in fact God is keeping tabs on the wicked, how much more does He involve himself in the believer's everyday life.

7) That wickedness has no layer or level, but is, as any sin should be considered by the believer, exceedingly sinful - wicked.

 

[Van]

More shuck and jive, Calvinism's double predestination is the topic of the thread. Why did God make "the many" sinners? All mankind has been made sinners.

1) If God made all mankind sinners, all mankind is condemned.

2) If God made sinners unable to seek God and trust in Christ, then everyone not chosen for salvation and altered by Irresistible Grace, is unable not to sin and unable to obtain mercy. Thus, Calvinism teaches God is the author of sin, yet punishes those He caused to be sinners and unable to obtain mercy.

3) Did God create all things? Yes, and everyone agrees so a distraction from the purpose of the thread.

4) Did God make all men as part of all things? Of course and everyone agrees so a distraction from the purpose of the thread.

5) Is all mankind wicked? Yes, our hearts are deceitful and incurably bad, Jeremiah 17:9. (KJV says wicked) See Mark 7:21-23.

6) Can we find a basis for considering some sinful act of men wickedness, over and against all the other acts of wickedness of all men? Perhaps, several verses suggest those that do not acknowledge God are wicked fools. But the end of all unforgiven folks is the lake of fire, whether religious or not.

 

[agedman]

Perhaps Van is a closet Calvinist who dances with Calvinistic thinking at every opportunity and is attempting to restate the purpose of this thread into his own scheme.

More shuck and jive, Calvinism's double predestination is the topic of the thread. Why did God make "the many" sinners? All mankind has been made sinners.

Is there any post in this thread to indicate that it is either about "double predestination" or upon Calvinism other that what Van has posted?

Perhaps his own preoccupation with the topic obliges him to seek it out even when it is not a matter of discussion.

1) If God made all mankind sinners, all mankind is condemned.

One can see in this statement the attempt to place God at fault.

All have sinned because it is obliged by the fallen nature to sin. God didn't make the fallen nature. God made man "upright," but Adam sinned; as a result, all have sinned because that is the natural man - the nature of humankind.

Van is attempting to "bait and switch" - or in his terms "shuck and jive."

2) If God made sinners unable to seek God and trust in Christ, then everyone not chosen for salvation and altered by Irresistible Grace, is unable not to sin and unable to obtain mercy. Thus, Calvinism teaches God is the author of sin, yet punishes those He caused to be sinners and unable to obtain mercy.

Again, this is an attempt to blame God. His conclusions are based upon his erroneous desire to show a view as God making sinners unable to seek God.

Yet, who sought whom in the garden when Adam was hiding?

Through out the Scriptures, who is constantly seeking whom?

God.

Using bait and switch - shuck and jive - dancing around, trying to convince the reader that some theological view is in error when it is his own determined shuck and jive tune that he dances and not what is the truth.

It isn't God that made sinners "unable" to seek God.

It is the sinner sinning that hides (Adam) from God's call, seeks to blame others or events (Adam) for their sin, and is estranged (Adam) from God. What person has NOT done what Adam did. Who is it that seeks God? Who must be found by God offering repentance and redemption?

Do not the Scriptures clearly state that no person seeks God that all persons have sinned? Is it not documented throughout Scriptures that it is God's hand involved in redemption - both physical and spiritual - not human effort?

The dance is over, why do you keep shuck and jiving?

Why do you make attempts of baiting the reader and then switch to using what is not consistent with a view you desire to oppose?

3) Did God create all things? Yes, and everyone agrees so a distraction from the purpose of the thread.

Really?

Then why do you seek to distract by having point one and two above? Just to make the post read as if you are being factual?

Isn't that "shuck and jive" in it's very blatant form?

But, more to the point, is there not (even currently running on the BB) thread(s) that discuss evolutionary schemes as the origin of humankind?

NOT EVERYONE agrees.

This thread was NOT offered as distraction.

4) Did God make all men as part of all things? Of course and everyone agrees so a distraction from the purpose of the thread.

See above for a response to this part.

Just more of the same moves on the dance floor after the band has packed up and left.

5) Is all mankind wicked? Yes, our hearts are deceitful and incurably bad, Jeremiah 17:9. (KJV says wicked) See Mark 7:21-23.

This reads more like a closet Calvinist or at least a wannabee!

Desire that this thread become a Cal/Arm debate so badly that actual "baits" of the hook are prepared so to "switch" the OP from it's purpose.

6) Can we find a basis for considering some sinful act of men wickedness, over and against all the other acts of wickedness of all men? Perhaps, several verses suggest those that do not acknowledge God are wicked fools. But the end of all unforgiven folks is the lake of fire, whether religious or not.

Can you consider "some" sinfulness as wickedness? The OP in part is seeking to address that issue.

The OP suggested that ALL sin is exceedingly sinful. That wickedness just isn't doing wickedly, but is. A person is wicked - therefore they do wicked.

Van your dance time is over.

Come clean and admit that the whole purpose of your post was an attempt to show this thread as something that was never intended to be - labeled as part of a Cal/Arm discussion.

Bait and switch moves dancing the shuck and jive after the band has gone home and the lights are turned out.

If you are truthfully interested in the OP and not in your own scheme of distraction, why not try discussing these NON cal/arm things that the OP attempted to incite the BB thinking:

1) That God created all things.

2) That God made those who are wicked.

3) That God uses all to His purpose and design.

4) That God is completely involved and not benign or uninterested.

5) That God uses His discretion to preserve the wicked even to the evil day.

6) That if in fact God is keeping tabs on the wicked, how much more does He involve himself in the believer's everyday life.

7) That wickedness has no layer or level, but is, as any sin should be considered by the believer, exceedingly sinful - wicked.

​

 

[Van]

We start out with scripture, God made everything, then the Calvinist claims God did not make the many sinners as a consequence of Adam's sin.

Double predestination, God creating the wicked for damnation is mistaken doctrine. We were made sinners from conception with an incurable heart, but Christ provided the propitiation for us such that we can obtain mercy through faith in Christ. No one was saved or damned before the foundation of the world. As long as our heart is not hardened such that we cannot understand the gospel, we have the opportunity to obtain mercy through faith. All of us lived without mercy before God chose us based on crediting our faith as righteousness.

 

[agedman]

We start out with scripture, God made everything, then the Calvinist claims God did not make the many sinners as a consequence of Adam's sin.

Double predestination, God creating the wicked for damnation is mistaken doctrine.

Bait and switch, again.

The OP makes no claim that God "CREATED" the wicked, wicked.

Statements of such are an assumption pressed inappropriately upon a view that you seem to desire to refute and don't want to admit you actually embrace in part.

We were made sinners from conception with an incurable heart, but Christ provided the propitiation for us such that we can obtain mercy through faith in Christ.

The above quote shows you actually do adopt the view you desire to refute, at least in part.

Moving along.

No one was saved or damned before the foundation of the world.

Your opinion and not germane to the OP.

As long as our heart is not hardened such that we cannot understand the gospel, we have the opportunity to obtain mercy through faith.

Your opinion and not germane to the OP.

All of us lived without mercy before God chose us based on crediting our faith as righteousness.

In all that, you still didn't address the true issues of the OP.