The five points of Calvinism and Eternal Security.

[Gorship]

I have to hand it to you. Just when I thought I have read the most stupid, inane comment on the Baptist Board, you come along and prove me wrong. Spiritual abortions? Really? You should be ashamed of yourself.

Oh and what's so wrong with it sir?

God could have saved all freely in compatibilism no? So God allows more and more people to exist that never have an opportunity to respond the gospel call?

Not only that but God doesn't just snuff em out. No. He condemns them to eternal conscious torment. Without any chance for them to respond.





Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

 

[Gorship]

Complain, complain, complain!... Now shall we see what the Bible says:

Daniel 4:34 And at the end of the days I Nebuchadnezzar lifted up mine eyes unto heaven, and mine understanding returned unto me, and I blessed the most High, and I praised and honoured him that liveth for ever, whose dominion is an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom is from generation to generation:

4:35 And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?

4:36 At the same time my reason returned unto me; and for the glory of my kingdom, mine honour and brightness returned unto me; and my counsellors and my lords sought unto me; and I was established in my kingdom, and excellent majesty was added unto me.

4:37 Now I Nebuchadnezzar praise and extol and honour the King of heaven, all whose works are truth, and his ways judgment: and those that walk in pride he is able to abase.

Gorship!... I believe God knows exactly what he's doing, even if you disagree!... Don't complain, just thank God Almighty and Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, you're not on the BURN list... Brother Glen

Yup but the rest of my family just never gets the chance. Not even a glimmer of hope.

Cool.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

 

[Gorship]

Many of us "compatiblists" also believe that the world we live in is also the best possible world for God's purposes, and that all of Creation is purposed for God's glory. That is an aspect that sometimes seems to be missed in these discussions. It appears sometimes man, rather than God, takes center stage in topics of this nature.

That sounds more like molinism.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

 

[JonC]

That sounds more like molinism.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Only if you had the music on so loud y po u couldn't hear clearly .

The idea is that everything was created and exists for God. God is Sovereign and could indeed have chosen to create robots, or chosen not to create at all. Since God is sovereign and did create the universe knowing what would occur, then the world is the best possible world by God's design.

To word it differently, the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.

If you are also suggesting that compatiblism is like molinism, then it is backwards. Molinism tries to reconcile divine providence with human free will (and is one view within compatiblism).

I do not think that we need to try and reconcile divine providence and free-will as the only reason they are incompatible is if divine providence is the work of God as if God were merely man on a larger scale.

 

[Gorship]

Only if you had the music on so loud y po u couldn't hear clearly .

The idea is that everything was created and exists for God. God is Sovereign and could indeed have chosen to create robots, or chosen not to create at all. Since God is sovereign and did create the universe knowing what would occur, then the world is the best possible world by God's design.

To word it differently, the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.

If you are also suggesting that compatiblism is like molinism, then it is backwards. Molinism tries to reconcile divine providence with human free will (and is one view within compatiblism).

I do not think that we need to try and reconcile divine providence and free-will as the only reason they are incompatible is if divine providence is the work of God as if God were merely man on a larger scale.

Appreciate the explanation. I got stuck on "best possible outcome" which from as I understand some "full" Molinists describe their position.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

 

[Squire Robertsson]

Six Hour Warning
This thread will be closed sometime after 9:30 PM Pacific.

 

[JonC]

Appreciate the explanation. I got stuck on "best possible outcome" which from as I understand some "full" Molinists describe their position.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

Sure. It really was not something I had considered (one way or another) until John Piper made the statement.

Consider the passage - "the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God." (Rom. 8:20)

I simply believe the "one" by whose will Creation was submitted to futility is God. I believe God's will is perfect and that Creation was submitted in hope
that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the freedom and glory of the children of God.

This is not Molinism (although the Molinists may come to the same conclusion on that point) but it is compatiblism.

I simply believe that God's will is not man's will "on steroids".

 

[Benjamin]

"Many of us "compatiblists" also believe that the world we live in is also the best possible world for God's purposes, and that all of Creation is purposed for God's glory."

That sounds more like molinism.

I have a couple quotes I’d like to share regarding “veiled determinism” and in relation to the differences from as I often categorize them between one’s views of: “Divine Deterministic Sovereignty” and “Divine Providential Sovereignty” and predestination.


William Lane Craig explains, "It is up to God whether we find ourselves in a world in which we are predestined, but it is up to us whether we are predestined in the world in which we find ourselves."

Keathley explains a scenario that fits in with the above using the ambulance analogy. “Imagine you wake up and discover that you are in an ambulance being transported to the emergency room. You clearly require serious medical help. If you do nothing, you will be delivered to the hospital. However, if for whatever reason you demand to be let out, the driver will comply. He may express his concern, warn you of the consequences, but he will abide by your wishes. You receive no credit for being taken to the hospital, you receive all the blame for getting out. This is a picture of the Molinist view of salvation.”

 

[JonC]

I also place relevance on the passage that claims that in Christ all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

 

[Reformed1689]

So God allows more and more people to exist that never have an opportunity to respond the gospel call?

Who says there is anyone who does not have an opportunity to respond to the Gospel call? Nobody here advocates that.

Yup but the rest of my family just never gets the chance. Not even a glimmer of hope.

Cool.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

You are letting your emotions guide your theology. That's not a good place to be.

 

[Gorship]

Who says there is anyone who does not have an opportunity to respond to the Gospel call? Nobody here advocates that.



You are letting your emotions guide your theology. That's not a good place to be.

If God calls people to come most freely and they will certainly do it. God could call everyone to Him but chooses not to. You have agreed to this prior.

Therefore I standby my statements.

More than happy to correct myself.

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

 

[Reformed1689]

If God calls people to come most freely and they will certainly do it.

This is just poor theology. There IS a general call to everyone. It's called the Gospel. Everyone has an opportunity to respond to it but nobody does without an effectual call a regeneration, a change of desire, a change of heart.

God could call everyone to Him but chooses not to. You have agreed to this prior.

God could have chosen everyone to salvation, yes, but He did not. That does not mean they do not have the opportunity to respond. They do. But they do not desire to.

 

[Gorship]

This is just poor theology. There IS a general call to everyone. It's called the Gospel. Everyone has an opportunity to respond to it but nobody does without an effectual call a regeneration, a change of desire, a change of heart.
God could have chosen everyone to salvation, yes, but He did not. That does not mean they do not have the opportunity to respond. They do. But they do not desire to.

Why do they not desire to?

Because they are not elect no?

And why are they not elect?

Because they weren't chosen.

And men are chosen due to the council of His will no?

Sent from my CLT-L04 using Tapatalk

 

[Reformed1689]

Why do they not desire to?

Because of our sin, we are slaves to sin and we are so far in our sin that we do not have any desire for God or the things of God.

 

[Squire Robertsson]

This thread is closed.

Six Hour Warning
This thread will be closed sometime after 9:30 PM Pacific.