-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The Relationship between God and Man
- Thread starter Me4Him
- Start date
Please show me where I tried to use the finite to prove the infinite. Please. Pretty please.
You are trying to fit God's sovereignty into something you can understand and cope with in your own finite human mind.
Who decided ahead of time that you, and therefore all of your choices, would come into being?
God, obviously. And those choices are real choices He gave me.
You are trying to fit God's sovereignty into something you can understand and cope with in your own finite human mind.
Who decided ahead of time that you, and therefore all of your choices, would come into being?
God, obviously. And those choices are real choices He gave me.
I cannot believe you could say such a thing. I have NEVER said that God's sovereignty is something that anyone can understand and cope with in a finite human mind. NEVER. I defy you to prove otherwise.
It is YOU who rejects the idea that a choice can be both determined and free, and YOU reject that because YOU do not see how it can be possible.
Of course they are. I never said otherwise.
Now, let's put your statements together.
1. If something is decided ahead of time for another person, then that other person has zero, nada, none, no free choice about it.
2. God, obviously, decided ahead of time that you, and therefore all of your choices, would come into being.
Therefore, if your assertions are correct, either you are logically inconsistent or you make no free choices.
I say that statement 1 is incorrect, and that God has foreordained you and all of your choices, and that your choices are still free choices.
Calvibaptist
New Member
The way we see it, Helen, we have quoted verses that describe God as absolutely sovereign and we have quoted verses that show man has a choice. We have said that these two exist and are compatible, not at odds, even though we don't understand it.
You, however, have tried to explain that God's sovereignty is not as described in Scripture because it doesn't make sense with man's free choice. It is you who are trying to "fit God's sovereignty into something you can understand and cope with in your own finite human mind."
Calvibaptist
New Member
Please show me where I've said something like that. I've maintained that we do make free choices. </font>[/QUOTE]I have often said that the definition of a truly "free" choice does not take into account the sovereignty of God. That has been misconstrued, however, to say that if we make the choices we desire then God is not sovereign. I don't know any calvinist who believes the latter.
From the standpoint of a free choice being a choice that is not forced, but is desired by the person making the choice, we all make free choices all the time every day. And all those free choices come under the sovereignty of God.
Choice implies broadly the freedom to choose from a set: The store offers a wide choice of vegetables.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/choice
If something in your nature demands you will only eat peas, then it does not matter how many vegetables are out there, there is no freedom. Peas it must be.
If you want different vegetables but there are only peas, then there is no choice.
Freedom to choose involves both the options and the freedom of being able to choose from any of the available options.
From what I have seen on this board, Calvinists are trying to claim some sort of freedom to choose is given to men but waffling back and forth denying either freedom or choice as it suits the argument. Either men are not free to choose because their nature demands only evil choices or there is no real choice because God has predestined what they will "choose."
Both deny God's character and man's position.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/choice
If something in your nature demands you will only eat peas, then it does not matter how many vegetables are out there, there is no freedom. Peas it must be.
If you want different vegetables but there are only peas, then there is no choice.
Freedom to choose involves both the options and the freedom of being able to choose from any of the available options.
From what I have seen on this board, Calvinists are trying to claim some sort of freedom to choose is given to men but waffling back and forth denying either freedom or choice as it suits the argument. Either men are not free to choose because their nature demands only evil choices or there is no real choice because God has predestined what they will "choose."
Both deny God's character and man's position.
Please show me where I've said something like that. I've maintained that we do make free choices. </font>[/QUOTE]May not have been you, but I have heard this repeatedly numerous times the last year I have been here, especially on the c/a forum. The argument has always been "if man has any choice in the matter, God is not sovereign, as man would be" or some junk to that nature.
You know, I don't think he is. It is impossible for God to sin. Some people seem to think that morality is just what God says is good. In this case God would be free to do whatever he likes since he could just decide that today it will be good to lie to people, for instance. Others say that sin is something against God's character. Then he could do whatever he liked by changing his character. Both of these run into the problem that God is supposed to be unchanging. If God is unchanging and God is completely good, then God is definitely not free in his choices.
With the way some people talk about God the standards of morality we follow don't really apply to him, which makes it difficult to understand how we can say that God is "good" if his goodness is so different from our goodness as to be completely unintelligible. I think only in this case could God be considered to be completely free. I think this is a little different from the first case I presented--whatever God does is good, and he has given us a different arbitrary standard of right and wrong that we have to follow but which is not necessarily based off his character.
Petrel, the only way God could 'sin' is if He could rebel against Himself. And no matter what He does He is choosing to do it and therefore not rebelling against Himself. So the argument that God cannot sin is moot.
He has total freedom of choice to do what He likes and sees fit to do. If He does something, He therefore sees fit to do it. Jesus told us that "only God is good" and the word Jesus used does not mean 'good appearing', but 'intrinsically good'.
So HOW can God do anything 'bad'? How could God make a bad choice, since God Himself is the very definition of good?
He has total freedom of choice to do what He likes and sees fit to do. If He does something, He therefore sees fit to do it. Jesus told us that "only God is good" and the word Jesus used does not mean 'good appearing', but 'intrinsically good'.
So HOW can God do anything 'bad'? How could God make a bad choice, since God Himself is the very definition of good?
That was kind of the same thing that I just said but coming to the opposite conclusion.
It sounded like you were taking the last category, which I find the scariest. Since God is totally good, whatever he chooses to do is good, whether that would be good if a person did it or not. I don't think you really think this, though (to me it seems that more often Calvinists do). For instance, suppose a faithful Christian died and ended up getting thrown into hell because God had decided to revoke that person's salvation on a whim. Is it even possible for God to break a promise like this? If he does, would that be "good"?
If the answer is no, that would not be good, and God cannot do that because God is completely good, then it is clear that God is limited in what he can and cannot do. Indeed, more limited than humans, because we can choose to do good or evil, but God can only choose what is good.
It sounded like you were taking the last category, which I find the scariest. Since God is totally good, whatever he chooses to do is good, whether that would be good if a person did it or not. I don't think you really think this, though (to me it seems that more often Calvinists do). For instance, suppose a faithful Christian died and ended up getting thrown into hell because God had decided to revoke that person's salvation on a whim. Is it even possible for God to break a promise like this? If he does, would that be "good"?
If the answer is no, that would not be good, and God cannot do that because God is completely good, then it is clear that God is limited in what he can and cannot do. Indeed, more limited than humans, because we can choose to do good or evil, but God can only choose what is good.
Hi Petrel! Its Barry here -Helen's husband. I am answering this while she fixes up an urgent problem with our retarded son.
I would point you to an interesting passage in Numbers 14. You will recall that the spies have come back from inspecting the Promised Land for 40 days and gave a discouraging report.From verse 10 onwards we have recorded a conversation of God with Moses and Moses' response. Basically God told Moses that He would make a greater and mightier nation from him, and destroy the Children of Israel. Moses argued against that, and God chose another course of action. From verse 22 onwards God outlines His new plan of action. The Israelites from 20 years old and upwards will perish in the wilderness. The young ones will come in to the Promised Land. God had changed His mind about what He would do to that immediate generation of rebels. He actually states as much in Numbers 14:34 where we find the following words: "After the number of days in which you searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year, you will bear your iniquities, even forty years, AND YOU SHALL KNOW MY BREACH OF PROMISE." That is the KJV. The NIV translators have not been faithful to the text and translate it as "You will suffer for your sins and know what it is like to have me against you." I looked up our Hebrew interlinear and it used the words "...and you will know My alienation against you." I then went to the actual word translated "Breach of Promise" or "alienation" and while alienation is legitimate it should be noted that the word derives from the root which means to neutralize, to break, to disallow, to make of no effect. In other words, what God is saying to the Israelites is that He has disallowed, broken, and made of no effect His original promise to them. God had clearly changed His mind and has admitted to it.
Helen here now. Thanks, Honey!
He is busy with the speeches he will be giving in Australia and NZ when we leave for them on Thursday.
So it is evident that God does -- at least from our point of view and from what He says there -- change His mind.
Does that make it bad?
The interesting thing is that it is NOT ours to judge!
The following is from an email from a friend of ours a while ago. He is a pastor:
To know good and evil is an idiomatic way of saying that one is able to render judgment on a matter. To say, "I don't know good or evil" is to say it's not up to me, it's not my call.
When Abraham's servant sought a wife for Isaac among Abraham's people, God led him to Rebekah, the graddaughter of Abraham's brother Laban. With regard to that request, Laban says in Gen. 24:50, "This is from the Lord; we cannot speak to you evil or good" (lit.). He doesn't mean he is speechless, but that God has given his decision so they are no longer free to exercise their own decision.
So really you have the tree of life and the tree of defying God's right to judge, which is the tree of death. These are the roads open to mankind: trust, obedience and life; OR distrust, disobedience, and death.
So while God can do anything He chooses to do, we cannot judge Him. He is, by nature, intrinsically good and therefore only what is against Him is bad. Thus He CANNOT make any wrong or bad decision by definition. This is not a matter of limitation, but a matter of definition.
God is free to change His mind if He wants to. And we are not to judge unless we want, also, to eat from the forbidden fruit.
I would point you to an interesting passage in Numbers 14. You will recall that the spies have come back from inspecting the Promised Land for 40 days and gave a discouraging report.From verse 10 onwards we have recorded a conversation of God with Moses and Moses' response. Basically God told Moses that He would make a greater and mightier nation from him, and destroy the Children of Israel. Moses argued against that, and God chose another course of action. From verse 22 onwards God outlines His new plan of action. The Israelites from 20 years old and upwards will perish in the wilderness. The young ones will come in to the Promised Land. God had changed His mind about what He would do to that immediate generation of rebels. He actually states as much in Numbers 14:34 where we find the following words: "After the number of days in which you searched the land, even forty days, each day for a year, you will bear your iniquities, even forty years, AND YOU SHALL KNOW MY BREACH OF PROMISE." That is the KJV. The NIV translators have not been faithful to the text and translate it as "You will suffer for your sins and know what it is like to have me against you." I looked up our Hebrew interlinear and it used the words "...and you will know My alienation against you." I then went to the actual word translated "Breach of Promise" or "alienation" and while alienation is legitimate it should be noted that the word derives from the root which means to neutralize, to break, to disallow, to make of no effect. In other words, what God is saying to the Israelites is that He has disallowed, broken, and made of no effect His original promise to them. God had clearly changed His mind and has admitted to it.
Helen here now. Thanks, Honey!
He is busy with the speeches he will be giving in Australia and NZ when we leave for them on Thursday.
So it is evident that God does -- at least from our point of view and from what He says there -- change His mind.
Does that make it bad?
The interesting thing is that it is NOT ours to judge!
The following is from an email from a friend of ours a while ago. He is a pastor:
To know good and evil is an idiomatic way of saying that one is able to render judgment on a matter. To say, "I don't know good or evil" is to say it's not up to me, it's not my call.
When Abraham's servant sought a wife for Isaac among Abraham's people, God led him to Rebekah, the graddaughter of Abraham's brother Laban. With regard to that request, Laban says in Gen. 24:50, "This is from the Lord; we cannot speak to you evil or good" (lit.). He doesn't mean he is speechless, but that God has given his decision so they are no longer free to exercise their own decision.
So really you have the tree of life and the tree of defying God's right to judge, which is the tree of death. These are the roads open to mankind: trust, obedience and life; OR distrust, disobedience, and death.
So while God can do anything He chooses to do, we cannot judge Him. He is, by nature, intrinsically good and therefore only what is against Him is bad. Thus He CANNOT make any wrong or bad decision by definition. This is not a matter of limitation, but a matter of definition.
God is free to change His mind if He wants to. And we are not to judge unless we want, also, to eat from the forbidden fruit.
Calvibaptist
New Member
But Helen, this is what we say about fallen man!!! Fallen man has "total freedom of choice to do what he like and sees fit to do." So, your definition of God's freedom is exactly what we say about man and you reject it.
"If something in your nature demands you will only eat peas, then it does not matter how many vegetables are out there, there is no freedom. Peas it must be."
It is not that something in man's nature demands they will only eat peas. It is that something in their nature demands that they only like peas. You have kids. You, knowing full well that they don't like peas, ask them, "Do you want peas or corn?" You gave them a choice. They freely will always choose corn over peas. This is Calvinism.
Calvibaptist
New Member
Helen, that is precisely what "dead in sins" means. It means that even our desires are fallen. We no more desire to choose God than a dead man desires to breathe. So, the Bible DOES say that about man.
As far as what we see, I don't see how you can say that we see people actually wanting God as He has revealed Himself. Everybody want some form of a god, that is clear. They want a prosperity theology god that tells them they can have their "Best Life Now." They want a muslim god that tells them they can kill anyone that disagrees with them. They want a buddhist or hindu god that tells them they will eventually make it to some reality free from pain. They want a man-made religion god that will tell them that they can make it to heaven on their own good works. They want a god in the form of man that tells them they can believe whatever they want because they are in charge.
But, the Bible is clear that all of those desires are idolatry. They are not truly seeking God. They are seeking a god. Those that come into seeker sensitive churches that come because it is comfortable and they can drink coffee and see a nice movie or skit and hear some great music are not seeking God. They are seeking a comfortable religion.
Idolatrous seeking saves no one. So, it is clear that it is also what we see in man. Calvinism is right acccording to the Bible and Calvinism is realistic.
As far as what we see, I don't see how you can say that we see people actually wanting God as He has revealed Himself. Everybody want some form of a god, that is clear. They want a prosperity theology god that tells them they can have their "Best Life Now." They want a muslim god that tells them they can kill anyone that disagrees with them. They want a buddhist or hindu god that tells them they will eventually make it to some reality free from pain. They want a man-made religion god that will tell them that they can make it to heaven on their own good works. They want a god in the form of man that tells them they can believe whatever they want because they are in charge.
But, the Bible is clear that all of those desires are idolatry. They are not truly seeking God. They are seeking a god. Those that come into seeker sensitive churches that come because it is comfortable and they can drink coffee and see a nice movie or skit and hear some great music are not seeking God. They are seeking a comfortable religion.
Idolatrous seeking saves no one. So, it is clear that it is also what we see in man. Calvinism is right acccording to the Bible and Calvinism is realistic.