Featured The potter and the clay.

I respectfully disagree. I would say it is the other way around. But we will not change each others view on this ... I am quite sure of that.

I agree with this statement, but most likely with a different take on how this is played out.

 

That is the problem. You are not the arbiter. It doesn't matter how God is viewed to you. God is concerned with his glory.

 

You are a joy to disagree with. You are not disagreeable.

I would simply challenge you to the following: do you ever see sovereignty in Scripture where he has authority and control but doesn't use it? Does he "can, may, and will" or is it always "will" in Scripture. Prov. 16 is a good place to start. I think you will find that Scripture is consistent... God has AND USES his absolute authority. That is the norm as I see it.

No promises, but I will look into the book you recommended.

You see the article I suggested for Rom. 9 to compare w/ Schreiner?

 

I respectfully disagree. I believe God is concerned about the welfare of his creation.

To say that 'God is concerned about his glory' makes God sound very self-centered and selfish. I do not believe God is either.

 

I agree, Calvinism makes God to appear absolutely selfish and self-centered, which everybody knows is not good. This simply goes right over Calvinists heads.
To them God is just the Big Boss, and I don't know anybody that loves a person like that.

 

I have not yet, but I do hope to look into that comparison. I have SO MANY irons in the fire, particularly professionally, which consume so much energy and time.

GT, you are sinking a cannard here. Evidences of God displaying his sovereignty and will in the lives of certain people, in redemptive history, does not serve to mean that is how he applies his sovereignty throughout us....you and me. We were not called to lead a band of complaining former slaves in the desert for 40 years.....that fell on the shoulders of Moses. (Not the norm for most believers). No one questions the complete and utter authority of God, rather we "non-cals" see God glorified through the freedom granted us. The conundrum is, omniscience vs. decree. What must also be included in the discussion is the asiety of God. Yes, we and all of creation were formed to bring glory to our creator, that avenue bears much discussion, which I don't feel to qualified to contribute much.

I love and respect you as a fellow believer.

 

You mean God should be more for us than for himself??? He should place stock in something less valuable than himself??? That would make God an idolater.

God being for himself is the greatest act of love he could bestow upon us. More on this later. I have to run.

 

Are you saying that God worships himself?

That is a total misunderstanding of love, agape. God is love and the type of love used in that verse is agape. You are saying his love is a selfish self-love. That is completely incorrect. Not only are Calvinist making God into a monster, but also a selfish monster with such beliefs.

I suggest you read C.S. Lewis' "The Four Loves".

From Wikipedia ....

 

I'll give you a biblical example: Ps 23. Why does God do all that stuff for us? "For his name sake"!!! God is motivated by his own glory. This has been understood for ages. It was best expressed like America's greatest thinker and theologian, Jonathan Edwards.

This is a good video that will help explain a lot, if you are willing to learn: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HtNCk3sJQEg

a longer version is this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qFdMCR9Sks

 

Brother GT, I expected better of you than this.

Cut n paste is fun! j/k

 

LOL... you made me double check what I wrote to be sure I wasn't a jerk. It is my inclination.

 

GT, I just want to be clear, because I am a little bit "lost" in the discussion. Are you arguing in favor of hard determinism?

 

Johathan Edwards was a great preacher for his time and place. I'd not put him in the top of the pile on theologians however.

Ps. 23 ... I see nothing in Psalm 23 where it says God does this for his own glory. In fact it supports my contention. God is doing all this for David not for Himself.

 

You didn't see the part I put into quotations marks? "For his name's sake." That phrase refers to all the phrases before it. Why is YHWH our shepherd? Why shall I not want? Why does he lay me down in green pastures? Why... for his name's sake.

Let's ask it this way: why are we created? Isa. 43:7, "Isa 43:7 Even every one that is called by my name: for I have created him for my glory, I have formed him; yea, I have made him.

I tell you what, though, this has derailed the subject of this thread. I think this would make a good thread all of its own. I may start it tomorrow.

 

I am still a compatablist. But I also have no problem saying that God has ordained everything... EVERYTHING.

 

And I am in no way saying that this "ordaining" is beyond His means to do so.

 

You do not even understand the scripture you are quoting. The reason the disciples were amazed is because people believed being wealthy was a sign that a man was in God's favor. Likewise, when a man was poor or sick like Lazarus who laid at the rich man's gate, they believed this was evidence that this person was very sinful and under God's wrath.

Mat 19:23 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
25 When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved?
26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.
27 Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore?
28 And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

As you see, the disciples were amazed because Jesus told them very few rich men would enter heaven. This was the exact opposite to what they had always been taught and believed.

So you are absolutely misusing this scripture, it does not mean what you think it means at all. Men have choice, Peter exclaimed how they had forsaken all to follow Jesus, and Jesus tells them they will sit on twelve thrones.

This scripture is not teaching Unconditional Election whatsoever, just he opposite.

 

Nailed down, chained up, and padlocked, yes you have. You insist on describing Him as a Calvinist. That's a very tight box, and utterly fails to consider His full nature and character.

Nope. Satan wanted him to, but Jesus warned him, strengthened him, and prayed for his perseverance.

Given that Satan actually entered into Judas (Luke 22:3), Judas' sin is among the worst in the Bible, as he literally opened himself up to the nature and character of God's enemy. Very few did that. None lived.

Absolutely.

Logical fallacy. Straw man. Invalid.

Nope. Never said. that. Logical fallacy. False restatement of the argument. Invalid.

But not against the will of the one He would save.

When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved? But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.[/QUOTE]