The reason God cannot sin

[Luke2427]

Not to mention, "For God so LOVED the world.....

What does that prove????

Who ever said that God doesn't love men???

But to purport that God must love his neighbor like he loves himself because God must keep every command he gave to men is absolutely, unquestionably, undeniably, absurd in the highest degree.

 

[Amy.G]

If you think those passages mean that God loves humans like he loves himself you have rocks in your head.

Surely you don't think that??

John 15:13 Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.


Jesus loved us with the greatest love there is.

 

[Luke2427]

John 15:13 Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.


Jesus loved us with the greatest love there is.

He did not love us like he loved the Father, nor did the Father love us like he loved the Son.

And if you would argue further that he did, then you would say he broke the GREATEST commandment to love God above all.

The simple and plain and inarguable fact is that God never said he had to keep the commandments he gave to us.

That ought to be enough.

God does not have to keep the commandment to not seek vengeance.

God does not have to esteem each one higher than himself.

God does not have to keep innumerable commandments that he demands that we keep.

That is clear enough.

We ought to be able to come to an accord on this plain fact and move on.

 

[Allan]

He did not love us like he loved the Father, nor did the Father love us like he loved the Son.

And if you would argue further that he did, then you would say he broke the GREATEST commandment to love God above all.

The simple and plain and inarguable fact is that God never said he had to keep the commandments he gave to us.

That ought to be enough.

God does not have to keep the commandment to not seek vengeance.

God does not have to esteem each one higher than himself.

God does not have to keep innumerable commandments that he demands that we keep.

That is clear enough.

We ought to be able to come to an accord on this plain fact and move on.

The reason you can not find anyone to come to any accord is because you are throughly messed up theologically. If you knew much regarding theology proper, you would know your position is incorrect.

The commands God has given reflect who He is and as such who we are to be in the image of. Your problem is that you don't understand the issue before you but continue in a lopsided tirade refusing to listen. You are making yourself more and more a joke, than anything.

The fact that we are commanded not to seek vengance, in and of itself, postsits the proposition that we can not do so without bringing sin into it and is why we are commanded against doing so. The command is established in the nature of God, who does nothing against his nature.

If we are to be imitators of Christ/God as the scripture state, these types of commands are given so we are to abstain from bringing ourselves into a place where we will act in an ungodly manner. Note the character aspect here - ungodly verse godly manner. Thus God keeps this command based in the aspect of His nature or charactor.. not that seeking vegenance is wrong in and of itself, but it is wrong to seek it when the overwhelming temptation to sin in doing so is there. God will seek it out in righteousness and do so Justly, that Justice is carried out. Man with respect to vengenace, will not as emotion will cloud judgment and bring both into ungodliness. Making the one distributing justice just as wrong as the one to whom judgment is to be given.

Because you aren't listening, you aren't hearing that Keeping the commands is not what He does.. those commands are established in who He is and given to us to that we might walk in His image. He does in fact keep them all but not in the wooden literal way you keep trying to strawman.

The term 'Keeping' does not necessitate obeying them in your wooden literal sense (Do Not) and is your biggest hang up.. but to illustrate to us we can not do what He naturally does. Ergo He keeps the command according to Justice and Righteousness, and why we are forbidden to seek it out for ourselves.

He is the embodiment of each command as each one is give to comform us to be in the image of His dear Son, the Very God Himself. While some commands He has gives us to not do (because of sinful desires that are sure to come up and taint/mar the action), they are given to reveal who and what we are in comparison to Him. Thus these commands are given for a reason and that reason reflects the nature or charactor of God. The "Do Not's" are not that no one can, but that if 'we' (men) do them we will fail to do these things in a Just and Righteous way. Thus these commands, of themselves, are established in the fact that what He does is always Just or for the right reason, to the right measure.

In all things He keeps the heart or reason for them being given, because it is His very nature and He is conforming to His image. His 'keeping' is in fact who He is not what He is seeking to do.

Yes, He is greater and higher than us, and His ways are high above ours. That is why He has give to us His word that we might KNOW HIM and to know what is Good, Just, and Holy - because we have come to know Him.
Why? Because He is conforming us to be like Him.. and where we 'will' fall short in this life, we are to refrain and let Him do it.

 

[Ron Wood]

The commands God has given reflect who He is and as such who we are to be in the image of

I am afraid that this is not very good theology. Show me one place in the Scriptures where the commands of God are said to be a reflection of who He is. What I find in the Scriptures is that Christ is the express image of God not His commandments. His commandments do inform us of what righteousness is but they do not bind God. Neither do they reflect the nature of God. The commands of God always kill us because they can do nothing else. If I want to know something of the love of God I don't go to the commandments I go to the cross. If I want to know something of the justice of God I don't go to the commandments ZI go to the cross. Whatever it is that I want to know about God I find at the cross.

 

[Luke2427]

The reason you can not find anyone to come to any accord is because you are throughly messed up theologically. If you knew much regarding theology proper, you would know your position is incorrect.

Allan, Theology Proper teaches that God is apart from us, above us and not like us.

The fact that the Bible DOES not claim this silly mess about the commandments expressing the character of God ought to be enough for any Bible believer.

The only thing the commandments express about God is what he DEMANDS of US. They have NOTHING at all to do with what he himself must do.

Such a notion is utterly absurd and cannot be supported scripturally which is becoming increasingly more clear by your repeated utter lack of biblical support for this man made notion you keep purporting.

The commands God has given reflect who He is and as such who we are to be in the image of. Your problem is that you don't understand the issue before you but continue in a lopsided tirade refusing to listen. You are making yourself more and more a joke, than anything.

You are deflecting your deficiency again, Allan. The more you look like a joke in this debate the more you try to deflect that fact from you and upon your opponent. This is a terrible weakness. You ought to work on this.

The fact that we are commanded not to seek vengance, in and of itself, postsits the proposition that we can not do so without bringing sin into it and is why we are commanded against doing so. The command is established in the nature of God, who does nothing against his nature.

You're just repeating yourself now. You did not offer any more support for this ridiculous notion than you did the FIRST time you posited it.

This is nothing but conjecture until you can support it. And you CANNOT support it so you ought to abandon this silly notion.

If we are to be imitators of Christ/God as the scripture state, these types of commands are given so we are to abstain from bringing ourselves into a place where we will act in an ungodly manner. Note the character aspect here - ungodly verse godly manner. Thus God keeps this command based in the aspect of His nature or charactor.. not that seeking vegenance is wrong in and of itself, but it is wrong to seek it when the overwhelming temptation to sin in doing so is there. God will seek it out in righteousness and do so Justly, that Justice is carried out. Man with respect to vengenace, will not as emotion will cloud judgment and bring both into ungodliness. Making the one distributing justice just as wrong as the one to whom judgment is to be given.

This is more stuff you just made up and cannot support.

It is nothing but a conglomeration of senseless disjointed words. You are not making a point you are just typing a bunch of words that make no sense and phrases that cannot be supported.

Because you aren't listening, you aren't hearing that Keeping the commands is not what He does.. those commands are established in who He is and given to us to that we might walk in His image. He does in fact keep them all but not in the wooden literal way you keep trying to strawman.

More of the same. Support it or stop wasting our time.

Support it.

The term 'Keeping' does not necessitate obeying them in your wooden literal sense (Do Not) and is your biggest hang up.. but to illustrate to us we can not do what He naturally does. Ergo He keeps the command according to Justice and Righteousness, and why we are forbidden to seek it out for ourselves.

What?

He is the embodiment of each command

Says who? You??

as each one is give to comform us to be in the image of His dear Son, the Very God Himself. While some commands He has gives us to not do (because of sinful desires that are sure to come up and taint/mar the action),

Where are you getting this stuff????

they are given to reveal who and what we are in comparison to Him. Thus these commands are given for a reason and that reason reflects the nature or charactor of God.

Bull. It reflects the will of God for US.

God does not want us to seek vengeance because HE WANTS TO SEEK IT.

This is what the Bible says.

God is repeatedly saying- "You don't! I will!"

That clearly means that God does not have to do what he commands us to do.

To demand that he does is well nigh if not altogether BLASPHEMY.

The "Do Not's" are not that no one can, but that if 'we' (men) do them we will fail to do these things in a Just and Righteous way. Thus these commands, of themselves, are established in the fact that what He does is always Just or for the right reason, to the right measure.

More made up crud. No support.

This idea that "God doesn't want us to do these things because we might sin if we try to do them" is absolute, utter baloney. It is junk you just made up out of nothing and from nowhere.

Prove it and support it or stop wasting our time.

In all things He keeps the heart or reason for them being given, because it is His very nature and He is conforming to His image. His 'keeping' is in fact who He is not what He is seeking to do.

Do you not BELIEVE you ought to support arguments that you make????

Are we supposed to say, "YEP! Must be cause ALLAN said so!!! Who needs BIBLE???? Who needs arguments?? The commandments of God God must keep because Allan SAID SO!!!"

 

[Allan]

Allan, Theology Proper teaches that God is apart from us, above us and not like us.

The fact that the Bible DOES not claim this silly mess about the commandments expressing the character of God ought to be enough for any Bible believer.

The only thing the commandments express about God is what he DEMANDS of US. They have NOTHING at all to do with what he himself must do.

Such a notion is utterly absurd and cannot be supported scripturally which is becoming increasingly more clear by your repeated utter lack of biblical support for this man made notion you keep purporting.
...
More of the same. Support it or stop wasting our time.

...

More made up crud. No support.

This idea that "God doesn't want us to do these things because we might sin if we try to do them" is absolute, utter baloney. It is junk you just made up out of nothing and from nowhere.

Prove it and support it or stop wasting our time.



Do you not BELIEVE you ought to support arguments that you make????

Are we supposed to say, "YEP! Must be cause ALLAN said so!!! Who needs BIBLE???? Who needs arguments?? The commandments of God God must keep because Allan SAID SO!!!"

*sigh. Your childishness and arrogance are as taxing as my 6 year old. Forgive my comment but to me, you are.

Does not Leviticus 20:7-8 declar, "Be holy, for I am Jehovah your God, and you shall keep My statutes and do them"; and this is how God's people sanctify themselves — becoming holy as God is holy (I Peter 1:15-16)...
or imitating His perfection (Matt. 5:48, in the context of the law's demands).

The Old Testament teaches that the law of God is perfect (Ps. 19:7), being holy, just, and good like God (Deut. 12:28; Neh. 9:13), and the New Testament viewpoint is the same: the law is perfect (Jas. 1:25), holy, just, and good (Rom. 7:12).

It is a reflection of His character, and the means by which we know Him and His character, righteousness, just, holy, ect..


BY THE WAY.. I took that from Reformed-Theology.org.. from "Bible Ethics"
, from the subsection titled "(B) The principles of God's law are perpetual because they reflect the character of God, who is unchanging."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From ReformedAnswers.org (Is God Under His Own Law):

Is God under His Own Law?
QuestionIf Jesus is the perfect representation of God the Father, and if he never broke any of his own commandments (I can't think of instances in which he did anything contrary to what he said), then can we assume that God the Father follows his own Law (as described in the Old Testament)? In other words, does God "do unto others as he would have them do unto him?"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Answer
As far as the Law goes, yes, God does keep the Law because the Law is a reflection of his character. However, we have to be careful when we begin to apply this idea because the particular manifestations of God's character in actual laws only properly reflect his character when understood in their original contexts. To know how to apply the various laws today, we need to figure out what aspect of God's character the laws reflected, and then to figure out what a proper reflection of that aspect would be today.
... (you can read the rest of His answer here)

Answer by Ra McLaughlin

From J.I Packers Concise Theology: A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs; under section "God Revealed As Redeemer"; Subsection "Law", second paragraph -

... God's moral law is abundantly set forth in Scripture, the Decalogue (the Tem Commandments), other Mosaic statutes, sermons by the prophets, the teaching of Jesus, and the New Testament letters. It reflects His Holy Character and His purposes for created human beings...

Under the next subsection "Law In Action"; subtitled "God's Moral Law Has 3 Purposes"; second paragraph..
Its first function [the Law] is to be a mirror reflecting to us both the perfect righteousness of God and our own sinfulness and shortcomings...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Even R.C. Sproul attest to my statement in his piece; "The Goodness of the Law" as seen here

“Oh how I love your law!” (Ps. 119:97). What a strange statement of affection. Why would anyone direct his love toward the law of God? The law limits our choices, restricts our freedom, torments our consciences, and pushes us down with a mighty weight that cannot be overcome, and yet the psalmist declares his affection for the law in passionate terms. He calls the law sweeter than honey to his mouth (Ps. 119:3).

What is it about the law of God that can provoke such affection? In the first place, the law is not an abstract set of rules and regulations. The law reflects the will of the Lawgiver, and in that regard it is intensely personal. The law reflects to the creature the perfect will of the Creator and at the same time reveals the character of that being whose law it is. The law of God proceeds from God’s being and reflects His character. When the psalmist speaks of his affection for the law, he makes no division between the law of God and the Word of God. Just as the Christian loves the Word of God, so we ought to love the law of God, for the Word of God is indeed the law of God.

The second reason why the psalmist has such a positive view of the law is that the law, by revealing God’s character, exposes our fallenness. It is the mirror that reflects our own images — warts and all — and becomes the pedagogue, the schoolmaster that drives us to Christ. The law does not drive us out of the kingdom but it ushers us into the kingdom by directing us to the One who alone is able to fulfill its demands.

Funny enough.. all these and MANY MANY more are Reformed in their theology, and are quite well schooled in theology proper and ALL agree with what I was saying.

 

[quantumfaith]

What does that prove????

Who ever said that God doesn't love men???

But to purport that God must love his neighbor like he loves himself because God must keep every command he gave to men is absolutely, unquestionably, undeniably, absurd in the highest degree.

See there, Luke I thought you had become a little more "kind and gentle", but "there you go again" going off on a rant.

 

[quantumfaith]

Allan,

I am with you, it is perfectly reasonable, logical etc. to assert that the commands of God give us some picture of who He is and thus His expectations of us as His image bearers. Just brush off the "overly critical" commentary.

 

[webdog]

Show me one place in the Scriptures where the commands of God are said to be a reflection of who He is.

You can't be serious! Does Leviticus 11:44, Matthew 5:44, 48 not apply?

 

[webdog]

Allan, Theology Proper teaches that God is apart from us, above us and not like us.

The fact that the Bible DOES not claim this silly mess about the commandments expressing the character of God ought to be enough for any Bible believer.

The only thing the commandments express about God is what he DEMANDS of US. They have NOTHING at all to do with what he himself must do.

Such a notion is utterly absurd and cannot be supported scripturally which is becoming increasingly more clear by your repeated utter lack of biblical support for this man made notion you keep purporting.



You are deflecting your deficiency again, Allan. The more you look like a joke in this debate the more you try to deflect that fact from you and upon your opponent. This is a terrible weakness. You ought to work on this.



You're just repeating yourself now. You did not offer any more support for this ridiculous notion than you did the FIRST time you posited it.

This is nothing but conjecture until you can support it. And you CANNOT support it so you ought to abandon this silly notion.



This is more stuff you just made up and cannot support.

It is nothing but a conglomeration of senseless disjointed words. You are not making a point you are just typing a bunch of words that make no sense and phrases that cannot be supported.



More of the same. Support it or stop wasting our time.

Support it.



What?




Says who? You??




Where are you getting this stuff????



Bull. It reflects the will of God for US.

God does not want us to seek vengeance because HE WANTS TO SEEK IT.

This is what the Bible says.

God is repeatedly saying- "You don't! I will!"

That clearly means that God does not have to do what he commands us to do.

To demand that he does is well nigh if not altogether BLASPHEMY.



More made up crud. No support.

This idea that "God doesn't want us to do these things because we might sin if we try to do them" is absolute, utter baloney. It is junk you just made up out of nothing and from nowhere.

Prove it and support it or stop wasting our time.



Do you not BELIEVE you ought to support arguments that you make????

Are we supposed to say, "YEP! Must be cause ALLAN said so!!! Who needs BIBLE???? Who needs arguments?? The commandments of God God must keep because Allan SAID SO!!!"

Luke, where is all of the Scripture to support your position? In all honesty, to quote you "You are not making a point you are just typing a bunch of words that make no sense and phrases that cannot be supported."

You have been thoroughly schooled using the very words of reformers nonetheless...yet you continue to react like someone half your age while refusing to swallow their pride. Amazing...

 

[Skandelon]

Allan, I'm sorry to interrupt. I know you are more than capable of addressing this, but this is getting ridiculous.

Luke, I'm sorry brother, but having been Reformed for a decade of my life I know very well you are not representing what even most of your own scholars believe about these matters.

What happens is that you make a claim you haven't fully vetted; and someone calls you on it (even one of your own Reformed buddies) and due to pride, or some kind of competitive stubbornness, you feel like you have to defend it even when it becomes obvious that your position in untenable. You did this with your claims about motive, you did this with your position on the origin of evil and you are doing it now.

The fact that the Bible DOES not claim this silly mess about the commandments expressing the character of God ought to be enough for any Bible believer.

Paul taught in Rom 7: 12 But still, the law itself is holy and right and good

Now if that which is "HOLY, RIGHT and GOOD" is not a reflection of God's character, what is????

You have gone off the rail my friend. You are in uncharted waters. Even Calvinists (who are more concerned about theology than about winning a debate and making the "other side" look bad) are going to bail on you as you keep making such absurd claims.

I'm not trying to be mean, but you don't tend to listen to people unless they are very blunt with you. Maybe you can't hear this from me due to our differences, so I challenge you to go to a theologian you really respect and throw out a few of these claims to him and see his reactions.

 

[Skandelon]

If you think those passages mean that God loves humans like he loves himself you have rocks in your head. Surely you don't think that??

Does anyone really love others exactly like they love themselves? The love or affection or even acts of kindness that we do for others is just DIFFERENT than it is for ourselves. They are not alike. The command to love your neighbor as yourself, means to treat others as you would want to be treated....or do unto others as you would have them do unto you. It doesn't mean, as you seemed to imply in this question, that we are to love others exactly LIKE we love ourselves. And obviously God's love for himself (how he feels about, communicates with and treats himself) is DIFFERENT than how he loves (feels about, communicates and treats) us.

I say this because its not about ranking who you love more: 1. God, 2. Others 3. Myself as if love is even measurable in that way. It is about how we express loving kindness toward each other.

Jesus (God in Flesh) was a pretty darn good example of someone who did treat others as greater than himself throughout his life. He became their servant. And since he is the ultimate revelation of God I would say this example was a great reflection of God's character of love for others.

And I just got an MRI and I do not have rocks in my head. One really small one in my kidney that I'm not looking forward to passing, but not one in my head.

 

[Luke2427]

Luke, where is all of the Scripture to support your position? In all honesty, to quote you "You are not making a point you are just typing a bunch of words that make no sense and phrases that cannot be supported."

You have been thoroughly schooled using the very words of reformers nonetheless...yet you continue to react like someone half your age while refusing to swallow their pride. Amazing...

That's bull.

Prove it.

 

[Luke2427]

*sigh. Your childishness and arrogance are as taxing as my 6 year old. Forgive my comment but to me, you are.

Does not Leviticus 20:7-8 declar, "Be holy, for I am Jehovah your God, and you shall keep My statutes and do them"; and this is how God's people sanctify themselves — becoming holy as God is holy (I Peter 1:15-16)...
or imitating His perfection (Matt. 5:48, in the context of the law's demands).

The Old Testament teaches that the law of God is perfect (Ps. 19:7), being holy, just, and good like God (Deut. 12:28; Neh. 9:13), and the New Testament viewpoint is the same: the law is perfect (Jas. 1:25), holy, just, and good (Rom. 7:12).

It is a reflection of His character, and the means by which we know Him and His character, righteousness, just, holy, ect..


BY THE WAY.. I took that from Reformed-Theology.org.. from "Bible Ethics"
, from the subsection titled "(B) The principles of God's law are perpetual because they reflect the character of God, who is unchanging."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From ReformedAnswers.org (Is God Under His Own Law):


From J.I Packers Concise Theology: A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs; under section "God Revealed As Redeemer"; Subsection "Law", second paragraph -

... God's moral law is abundantly set forth in Scripture, the Decalogue (the Tem Commandments), other Mosaic statutes, sermons by the prophets, the teaching of Jesus, and the New Testament letters. It reflects His Holy Character and His purposes for created human beings...

Under the next subsection "Law In Action"; subtitled "God's Moral Law Has 3 Purposes"; second paragraph..
Its first function [the Law] is to be a mirror reflecting to us both the perfect righteousness of God and our own sinfulness and shortcomings...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Even R.C. Sproul attest to my statement in his piece; "The Goodness of the Law" as seen here



Funny enough.. all these and MANY MANY more are Reformed in their theology, and are quite well schooled in theology proper and ALL agree with what I was saying.

Yes Allan, some of the law does reflect his character TO SOME DEGREE. It does so, as I have already said, by showing his will for his creatures; not by showing what he himself must do. The point that you are arguing is that God abides by what he commands men to abide by.

This is ludicrous.

And it is God debasing.

It would be like my child saying to me after I said to him, "It's bedtime- go to bed," "OK, POP, right after you do!"

 

[webdog]

That's bull.

Prove it.

Prove what, the immaturity? Your lack of Scripture? Here you go...

You're just repeating yourself now. You did not offer any more support for this ridiculous notion than you did the FIRST time you posited it.

This is nothing but conjecture until you can support it. And you CANNOT support it so you ought to abandon this silly notion.



This is more stuff you just made up and cannot support.

It is nothing but a conglomeration of senseless disjointed words. You are not making a point you are just typing a bunch of words that make no sense and phrases that cannot be supported.



More of the same. Support it or stop wasting our time.

Support it.



What?




Says who? You??




Where are you getting this stuff????

 

[Luke2427]

Prove what, the immaturity? Your lack of Scripture? Here you go...

You have only proven that you have learned how to copy and paste. Congratulations.

You do know what it takes to prove something, don't you?

 

[Skandelon]

Yes Allan, some of the law does reflect his character TO SOME DEGREE. It does so, as I have already said, by showing his will for his creatures; not by showing what he himself must do. The point that you are arguing is that God abides by what he commands men to abide by.

This is ludicrous.

And it is God debasing.

It would be like my child saying to me after I said to him, "It's bedtime- go to bed," "OK, POP, right after you do!"

Luke, I think you are missing the point. This is less about whether or not God abides by rules set exclusively for us (as would be the case with a parent setting a bedtime) and more about what God has said is morally right or wrong. For example, we are told how to select elders in a church and given indication on how to govern a church body, but are we suggesting God must abide by the rules of church government in heaven? Clearly those are specific precepts given for man to know how to live life on earth, something not really applicable to a divine being governing the world.

However, when we are discussing what is morally right or wrong we are enter into a whole different realm of scenarios. Lying for example is morally wrong. If a parent tells a child, do not lie and then goes off and lies there is a hypocrisy in that. This is clearly different from the parent setting a bedtime. Surely you can see that distinction. Especially since the Bible is so clear about the holiness of God and specifically teaches that He does not lie nor does he even tempt others to sin.

Again, I point you to the definition of "decree" I provided from the theological dictionary. Can you please respond to that?

 

[Luke2427]

Allan, I'm sorry to interrupt. I know you are more than capable of addressing this, but this is getting ridiculous.

Luke, I'm sorry brother, but having been Reformed for a decade of my life I know very well you are not representing what even most of your own scholars believe about these matters.

What happens is that you make a claim you haven't fully vetted; and someone calls you on it (even one of your own Reformed buddies) and due to pride, or some kind of competitive stubbornness, you feel like you have to defend it even when it becomes obvious that your position in untenable. You did this with your claims about motive, you did this with your position on the origin of evil and you are doing it now.

Paul taught in Rom 7: 12 But still, the law itself is holy and right and good

Now if that which is "HOLY, RIGHT and GOOD" is not a reflection of God's character, what is????

You have gone off the rail my friend. You are in uncharted waters. Even Calvinists (who are more concerned about theology than about winning a debate and making the "other side" look bad) are going to bail on you as you keep making such absurd claims.

I'm not trying to be mean, but you don't tend to listen to people unless they are very blunt with you. Maybe you can't hear this from me due to our differences, so I challenge you to go to a theologian you really respect and throw out a few of these claims to him and see his reactions.

You were wrong about the origin of sin because you lack the capacity to get Edwards and you are wrong about this because you are not reading this discussion thoroughly.

The law does reflect the character of God to this degree- it shows his will for his creatures. It does not reflect it in the sense that it indicates that God must abide by it Himself.

That is what Allan is purporting and it is utterly ludicrous.

We have proven to you very clearly that you do not get Edwards and Calvin.

I proved to you in no uncertain terms that they DO most certainly believe that God is the "ultimate" or "remote" cause of evil.

For you to say otherwise is for you to be blatantly dishonest.

 

[Luke2427]

Luke, I think you are missing the point. This is less about whether or not God abides by rules set exclusively for us (as would be the case with a parent setting a bedtime) and more about what God has said is morally right or wrong. For example, we are told how to select elders in a church and given indication on how to govern a church body, but are we suggesting God must abide by the rules of church government in heaven? Clearly those are specific precepts given for man to know how to live life on earth, something not really applicable to a divine being governing the world.

However, when we are discussing what is morally right or wrong we are enter into a whole different realm of scenarios. Lying for example is morally wrong. If a parent tells a child, do not lie and then goes off and lies there is a hypocrisy in that. This is clearly different from the parent setting a bedtime. Surely you can see that distinction. Especially since the Bible is so clear about the holiness of God and specifically teaches that He does not lie nor does he even tempt others to sin.

Again, I point you to the definition of "decree" I provided from the theological dictionary. Can you please respond to that?

No you are wrong.

This discussion between Allan and I began this way:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luke2427 View Post
He gives commands to men- not to himself. He does not have to abide by the commands he gives to men.

Allan
Apparently this is not the case.
Scripture tells us the God is not man that He 'should' lie.. not that He Can Not lie.

God does not say one thing and contradict it Himself.
God is a law unto Himself. He can not go against Himself anymore than He can cease to be.

He is the very image of all that He has commanded us and declared what is righteous and just to us. Thus He can not do contrary to His commands/decrees anymore than you can become God yourself.

Allan has been from the beginning saying that God must abide by what he commands us to do.

He never even uses the terms "what is morally right and wrong". That is not at all what he has been addressing.

You are diverting the conversation to make it something more manageable for yourself.

But the FACT is that Allan has been purporting from the beginning that God must abide by his laws to men because they reflect his nature.

They DO reflect his nature but only in the sense that they show us he is good based upon what he DESIRES of US. I said this early in the conversation. But that has NOTHING, absolutely NOTHING to do with this silly notion that God must abide by what he demands that man abides by.