The Tree and Garden

[Brother Bob]

“In days to come, O Gog, I will bring you against my land so that the nations may know me when I show myself holy though you before their eyes.”

In the passage above do you feel Gog will be punished for coming down on the land?

Seems God had a reason. You seem to be saying because God punished Israel for sinning, He caused it.

Therefore, thou son of man, prophesy against Gog, and say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog,

So will I make my holy name known in the midst of my people Israel; and I will not let them pollute my holy name any more: and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, the Holy One in Israel.

BBob,

 

[Brother Bob]

if you read the post, you will find the use of the phrase to show even if this were the case, it would not make God a sinner. Sin is a path away from God, and if it is Gods will, then how it is sin.


But like most Calvinist on this board I do not see it that way. God is in full control, and yet apart from sin, even though God does use sin and counts on mens lust to bring about His will.

If this were the case, is where I don't agree.

if it is Gods will, then how it is sin.

God may punish for sins, but sin includes adultery, killing, etc and God does not will these things. You can't pick out a little sin, if there is such a thing and leave off the big sins.

BBob,

 

[youngmom4]

Exactly. And you know what? I think most nonCalvinists would agree that God could have prevented Adam's sin, but he didn't, and that he had a reason (or purpose) for not preventing it. And most Calvinist would agree that sin enters creation by way of God's permission. Which means there isn't much difference between the two systems in the purposefulness of God's allowing sin, or in the means by which sin comes into creation.

The real difference in the two systems is the reason God doesn't prevent sin. The nonCalvinist usually says that God didn't prevent sin because he wanted humankind to have free choice. The Calvinist says he didn't prevent sin because wanted to redeem humankind.

Best synopsis I've seen yet. It seems to me there are a whole lot of people who just feel a need to argue about something:BangHead:

 

[Jarthur001]

Seems God had a reason.

Therefore, thou son of man, prophesy against Gog, and say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I am against thee, O Gog,

So will I make my holy name known in the midst of my people Israel; and I will not let them pollute my holy name any more: and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD, the Holy One in Israel.

BBob,

Bob,

I agree there is good reason..and the reason can be found in the passage.

What I'm asking is this....

Many look at this verse...
And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

and say we should always be friends with Gods people.

In fact we have seen when a nation goes and attacks the Jewish people, they are judged.

I'm asking will Gog be judged for the action of coming down on the land as seen in that verse?

 

[Brother Bob]

Bob,

I agree there is good reason..and the reason can be found in the passage.

What I'm asking is this....

Many look at this verse...
And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed.

and say would should always be friends with Gods people.

In fact we have seen when a nation goes and attacks the Jewish people, they are judged.

I'm asking will Gog be judged for the action of coming down on the land as seen in that verse?

I do not know James, just to be truthful, for I don't know what Gog had done either. But Judas was a devil from the beginning and was allowed to betray the Lord. God used Judas for sure, for what he already was.
Did He use Gog for a purpose, because of what he already was or had done, I don't know.

I can agree with God allowing something to happen, for sure He has. But for God to author sin, is too far for me. I understand the struggle you are having among yourselves, for you are discussing something that there are many unknowns. So, I don't want to disrupt your discussion. I just wanted to say my little part and let you fellows continue on with your discussion.


BBob,

 

[Amy.G]

Originally Posted by russell55
Do you have another ultimate reason God decided to allow sin to enter creation? What would that be?

Originally Posted by Alex Quackenbush
Yes, it is related to the reason for man's creation in the first place as it relates to the Angelic conflict in Angelic history in eternity past. This is of course another thread topic and worth discovering elsewhere and if you wish it can be discussed in another thread.

I would like to hear more about your angel theory. This may be why we are on different planets theologically.

 

[Jarthur001]

If this were the case, is where I don't agree.


God may punish for sins, but sin includes adultery, killing, etc and God does not will these things. You can't pick out a little sin, if there is such a thing and leave off the big sins.

BBob,

The reason for that longer post was to show my view of sin. Sin is a path away from God.

If a action is in Gods will, it matters not how we view it. We may see it as sin, but if God decrees it....it is Gods will for it to take place and in no way is it sin.


and yes...all paths away from God are sin.

 

[npetreley]

I think the question is really, does God have the right to judge Gog for doing something God Himself manipulated Gog to do? Scripture says, "Yes".

Here is God manipulating Gog...

Ezekiel 38:1 Now the word of the LORD came to me, saying, 2 “Son of man, set your face against Gog, of the land of Magog, the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal, and prophesy against him, 3 and say, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD: “Behold, I am against you, O Gog, the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal. 4 I will turn you around, put hooks into your jaws, and lead you out, with all your army, horses, and horsemen, all splendidly clothed, a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords. 5 Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya are with them, all of them with shield and helmet; 6 Gomer and all its troops; the house of Togarmah from the far north and all its troops—many people are with you.

Here is God judging Gog for doing what God manipulated him to do...

18 “And it will come to pass at the same time, when Gog comes against the land of Israel,” says the Lord GOD, “that My fury will show in My face. 19 For in My jealousy and in the fire of My wrath I have spoken: ‘Surely in that day there shall be a great earthquake in the land of Israel, 20 so that the fish of the sea, the birds of the heavens, the beasts of the field, all creeping things that creep on the earth, and all men who are on the face of the earth shall shake at My presence. The mountains shall be thrown down, the steep places shall fall, and every wall shall fall to the ground.’ 21 I will call for a sword against Gog throughout all My mountains,” says the Lord GOD.

If anyone wants to argue against scripture, be my guest.

 

[Hopeful]

Exactly. And you know what? I think most nonCalvinists would agree that God could have prevented Adam's sin, but he didn't, and that he had a reason (or purpose) for not preventing it. And most Calvinist would agree that sin enters creation by way of God's permission. Which means there isn't much difference between the two systems in the purposefulness of God's allowing sin, or in the means by which sin comes into creation.

The real difference in the two systems is the reason God doesn't prevent sin. The nonCalvinist usually says that God didn't prevent sin because he wanted humankind to have free choice. The Calvinist says he didn't prevent sin because wanted to redeem humankind.

I'm just now reading back through this thread to catch up. Can you clarify for me?--I thought the Calvinist says that God didn't prevent sin because He wanted to redeem the ELECT.
Thanks.

 

[russell55]

"Author of sin" only has one meaning.

Really? Then you should be able to give me the definition of it, right? What would God's relationship to sin have to be in order to make him the author of it?

 

[Hopeful]

You seem to be saying that God has to learn what man will do before He can set things into motion or make a choice of His sovereign will. That makes God not all knowing, and makes men's choice sovereign over God.

No, that is exactly NOT what I said. I said, "God is completely sovereign." And then I elaborated and said, "He can also instead choose to force me to love Him, believe in Him and His precious son, and worship Him." and then continued with, "But I believe, instead, that He CHOOSES to allow ME a choice in the matter....and that He also knows exactly what my decisions will be....and then He CHOOSES to work those choices into His sovereign plan to serve HIS purposes.

And I reiterate that I do not think that LIMITS God in any way....and actually acknowledges his sovereignty and omniscience and omnipotence to a degree that my finite mind cannot fully comprehend.

I'm not much of a debater, because I don't like discord and argument (yes, I realize this is a debate thread! :thumbs: ). I enjoy--and attempt to employ--what I learn on this BB though, and the point to my post was to ask if it is possible for holders to calvinistic theology to agree with the premise that non-calvinists can believe in God's complete sovereignty and still believe that he chooses to give us a choice in the matter.......? And that when asked "how does He do that?", it's okay for US to also say, "I don't know; I'm comfortable with it though."???

But I guess your post here answers that question--because you do not believe that I mean it when I say that God is completely sovereign :tear: . I really would like to understand this calvinistic theology, and the more I am learning from the posters here, the more I want to understand. I personally think that I do not differ from calvinism in the teaching of God's sovereignty--I think the split occurs over how God chooses to apply/use/enforce His sovereignty. Thank you for your response.

 

[russell55]

Ok, now maybe you can answer my question.
1. You say that God allows sin, and I am sure you still believe He is Sovereign.

Yes. Because Adam was subject to vanity (to use your words), God's permission of Adam's sin meant that Adam would certainly sin. The only thing that would stop Adam from sinning would be God preventing it, and God chose not to prevent it.

2. Why can God not allow "repentance" and still be sovereign???

I don't think God ever prevents repentance, so I'm not sure what you are asking here.

 

[Hopeful]

I think the question is really, does God have the right to judge Gog for doing something God Himself manipulated Gog to do? Scripture says, "Yes".

Here is God manipulating Gog...

Here is God judging Gog for doing what God manipulated him to do...

If anyone wants to argue against scripture, be my guest.

npet, if I compliment you first :wavey: , will you please not hit me with your scathing humor quite so hard? :tonofbricks: I enjoy reading your posts (especially the scathingly humorous ones :laugh: ), and have found yours and Amy G's posts on this subject the easiest for me to follow and learn from.

So, that was the compliment, here's the comment/question: I believe that God has the "right" to do whatever He wants--and I think that is exactly what scripture teaches. So we agree on that. And the more I wrestle with these concepts, the more it's fully crystallizing what the calvinistic position is...and I'm apparently in complete accord with this aspect of calvinism. In the sense that God created everything, including imperfect man, He also created all the circumstances that made Gog the bad guy AND allowed God to judge him for BEING the bad guy. I "get" that. He created Adam, put that tree in the garden, told him not to eat from it, KNEW he WOULD eat from it, etc....so, in the sense that God created that entire scenario, YES, God, in His magnificent sovereignty also created the "whatever" (I'm not being flippant--I don't KNOW what term to use) that allowed sin. In that sense He IS the "author" of sin. Again, I "get" it (or at least I THINK I do!).

I guess my question is this, how does my belief that God actually gave Adam a real choice--through a mechanism of His omnipotence that I cannot comprehend fully (and thus cannot explain fully)--how does that restrict God from a calvinistic viewpoint to the degree that a calvinist thinks the non-calvinist has denied God's sovereignty?

 

[Hopeful]

Yes. Because Adam was subject to vanity (to use your words), God's permission of Adam's sin meant that Adam would certainly sin. The only thing that would stop Adam from sinning would be God preventing it, and God chose not to prevent it.

Wow. That's a wonderfully helpful post. Thanks! :thumbs:

 

[Allan]

Lets take this line of reasoning to its final conclusion.

Ok.

Suppose Joseph's brothers would have freely chosen to NOT do the things to Joseph that the Bible speaks of.

They most certainly did have the option of freely choosing differently. However, God already knew what they 'would' choose when that choice was given by God to them. IOW - there isn't any choice given to man by God in which God does not already know the outcome of that choice made via the volition of man.

Man chooses himself how to respond to the choices God has set before him but that does not detract from the fact that God already knows how man will 'willingly' respond.

How about all the other factors that *caused* Joseph to come to the position he came to? Were there free choices in those instances?

You bet! Since you bring it up, what happened to Joseph is one of the great places to see man resposibility and Gods sovereignty working in divine unison as the Scripture states:

"As for you, you meant evil against me, {but} God meant it for good in order to bring about this present result, to preserve many people alive

emphasis mine

God knew what His brothers 'would willingly do' to their brother if they were given that choice and God in the fulness of His knowledge used their choice THEY intended for evil as the means to bring about the Good that GOD intended to bring through and by Joseph.

In other words.... God has to sit back and hope that men's free choices will result in His plan of action? Lucky God huh?

Even you know that was uncalled for, huh?
In any case, it is quite evident you either still do not understand the Non-Cal view, or you are willfully misrepresenting our view for a cheap remark. Please brother, show me ANYWHERE in this thread or the one closed (from which this one orginated) where ANYONE made ANY similar statement regarding your above comment.

I believe that God is intimately involved in all of His creation.

So you hold that God is intimately involved in the actions of sin and righteousness in His creation? No need to answer cause I know you don't. I was just doing what you did in your above comment :smilewinkgrin:

God can cause all things to happen for the good of those who love Him, those who are called according to His purpose. He does these things without being the direct cause of temptation or sin. How does He do that? I don't know. I'm comfortable with it though.

No non-cal disagrees here. However, as has been shown on here by various other non-cals it has been illistrated how He does just that in our view regarding His soveriegnty and man responsibility (volition).
:thumbs:

So from what I see in bringing this (my first posting) to its final conclusion is that it was not God's desire FOR sin specifically to be, but that He KNEW sin would be if a choice was permitted, and that permitting that choice is part of His purpose and plan for His good pleasure.

What are arguing against is the veiw where it was the intention of God to make His creation sin .

 

[Allan]

I think the question is really, does God have the right to judge Gog for doing something God Himself manipulated Gog to do? Scripture says, "Yes".

Here is God manipulating Gog...

Of course you make a huge mistake here by assuming God is just arbitarily judging them for something He is bringing them to do of their own choice. They are/will be ALREADY in sin and rebellion before God uses them to bring judgment to Israel. Therefore God's judgment is certainly coming to them just God will use them as judgment against Israel. God will still bringing to pass their judgment but in His timing (purpose) that fulfills His plan in accordance with His good pleasure. God can choose when and where He will judge a thing (person or nation) and the manner in which He will bring that Judgment to pass, and at whatever time He so chooses (be it now or 50 years later)

If anyone wants to argue against scripture, be my guest.

No one is arguing against scripture just your unscriptural approach the passages you proof text with. :wavey:

 

[Jarthur001]

I think the question is really, does God have the right to judge Gog for doing something God Himself manipulated Gog to do? Scripture says, "Yes".

Here is God manipulating Gog...



Here is God judging Gog for doing what God manipulated him to do...



If anyone wants to argue against scripture, be my guest.

arugue? How could they? I say case closed.

 

[Jarthur001]

Of course you make a huge mistake here by assuming God is just arbitarily judging them for something He is bringing them to do of their own choice. They are/will be ALREADY in sin and rebellion before God uses them to bring judgment to Israel. Therefore God's judgment is certainly coming to them just God will use them as judgment against Israel. God will still bringing to pass their judgment but in His timing (purpose) that fulfills His plan in accordance with His good pleasure. God can choose when and where He will judge a thing (person or nation) and the manner in which He will bring that Judgment to pass, and at whatever time He so chooses (be it now or 50 years later)

No one is arguing against scripture just your unscriptural approach the passages you proof text with. :wavey:

please show me where and when any one has said this was arbitarily judging?

wait...let me change that.

Please show me where and when any one but YOU has said this was arbitarily judging?

This is what was asked by me. Will God judge Gog for coming down on the land?

This was answered by npetreley with verses from the Bible of all things.

The answer is YES.

And npetreley went on to fill in the point.

God caused Gog to come down on the land. God pulled them down.

no one but no one said this was arbitarily judging other then YOU.


again, please show me....if not.....you know what to do.

2nd....................

this one kills me...would not believe it unless I read it myself

Please show me where npetreley says any thing....anything at all....
unscriptural approach the passages you proof text with

npetreley only said what?.....3 lines...so this should be easy.

If not...once again you step beyond and mislead

come now....lets see it

 

[Jarthur001]

I guess my question is this, how does my belief that God actually gave Adam a real choice--through a mechanism of His omnipotence that I cannot comprehend fully (and thus cannot explain fully)--how does that restrict God from a calvinistic viewpoint to the degree that a calvinist thinks the non-calvinist has denied God's sovereignty?

What you have said does not deny with Gods sovereignty in any way

In fact, what you said is what all calvinist say. Well...not all, but most.

The choice was Adams choice. But God also knows the choice and set the arena where Adam would be when he made that choice. God forces no one to sin, but made the arena that lead to the sin, and God know the end when He made the arena. This happens to Adam and pharaoh and Gog and all of us.

 

[Allan]

Hmm... I didn't realize I addressed you James. Oh wait! I didn't

please show me where and when any one has said this was arbitarily judging?

Npet gave that implicatioin if not assertion in saying:
"I think the question is really, does God have the right to judge Gog for doing something God Himself manipulated Gog to do? Scripture says, "Yes"."
By his rephrasing of the question 'does God have the right to judge' a (person, nation, or thing) for doing what He manipulates them into doing, implies they have done nothing prior for God's judgment upon them. So YES, Npet has brought that aspect to bare when saying God can decide to judge them and then bring about the means to make them sin. Other than it being an arbitrary act it also poses (IMO) at least 2 other problems (which are still grounded in that arbitrary act) in Npet view:
1. This implies they did nothing to warrent Gods judgment until God decided He just wanted to bring judgment upon them for no prior reason. So He needed to 'manipulate them' into doing something that would justify His decision to judge them.
2. God 'manipulating them' just to bring judgment upon them, makes God the both the initator of their sin AND damnation. He is ABSOLUTELY wrong that God can bring judgment against a person or thing just because or for no reason, which by the way is considered quite arbitrary.

wait...let me change that.

Figures.

Please show me where and when any one but YOU has said this was arbitarily judging?

The specific word was not used but it was the crux of his argument. To judge them for doing exactly what God manipulated them into doing but for nothing prior to. My argument was that they were ALREADY to BE judge because of their continuence in sin and Gods drawing them down as a judgment against Israel was the culmination of God about to bring their own judgment upon them. God did not just pick them for no reason but according the npet argument that is exactly what God CAN do.

This is what was asked by me. Will God judge Gog for coming down on the land?

This was answered by npetreley with verses from the Bible of all things.

The answer is YES.

And if he would have left it at that, no problems.

And npetreley went on to fill in the point.

God caused Gog to come down on the land. God pulled them down.

no one but no one said this was arbitarily judging other then YOU.

That is YOUR 2 cents, but wont by you a cup coffee nor change the implication if not his assertion that God can do it arbitrarily (for no reason but that He wants to) and did it.

again, please show me....if not.....you know what to do.

I did, so I guess you know what to do now huh?

Please show me where npetreley says any thing....anything at all....
unscriptural approach the passages you proof text with
npetreley only said what?.....3 lines...so this should be easy.

I did and it was.

If not...once again you step beyond and mislead

Much like you just tried to do, huh?