What view of justice is "carnal" and what is not?

[preacher4truth]

Attention Cals...put on your secret decoder glasses to get the secret "cultic and freakish red colored " instructions...:laugh:

You can keep your philosophy,,,your ideas of what the gospel is, and your presentation.....I will keep the historic understanding of the faith once delivered to the saints ,as expressed in the historic confessions of the church.

it is very apparent that Icon will jump at every chance to announce that some may have no hope while proudly projecting his Hyper-Determinists (phikosophical) views on election. This specially privileged stuff seems especially prideful while being excessively contrary to the truth of scripture and the messages we should be giving. [/QUOTE]

As you seem fixated on what you perceive as my motives, I will offer an assessment of how you come across to me.
You and your excessive hubris cannot grasp the plain meaning of scripture as it is designed to leave sinners ...no hope.....outside of Christ.
Instead of being concerned about what I might be "jumping at"...you should be more concerned with scripture dealing with the righteous judgement of God...which you avoid at all cost.
Here is an example:


This is to speak against God's elective purpose as clearly revealed in scripture. This kind of statement is can only be explained by excessive hubris...as if you know more than the apostles that any teaching of the electing love of God ...has to be understood as... specially privileged stuff.

This denial of the biblical teaching has you substituting your ideas of how God saves people...then offering your puffed up opinions of what should stand in it's place.

God's election, predestination, decree, covenant , are the language of scripture.....this is not:


You rarely use the language of scripture. Do you ever use the word ELECT to describe believers, as the apostles did? or are you "Above" using that word?


maybe for you...this is not the message we should be giving
For us who believe and know the truth we take great comfort and rejoice in God's elective decree. I understand your frustration that we enjoy the salvation that God has made known to His sheep......it goes against your worldview ,evidently......to such a point that you must progress to evil speaking in many of your responses.......pal.

This address is honesty and candor and precise. Thanks. :thumbsup:

I am glad God does not bow down to mans reason of what fair is, and that He has not exercised righteous judgment upon us, but I am thankful that He extended grace, and shows us after salvation how He chose us. We are so undeserving of this favor.

Glory to God and God alone, none to man, none to choice, God alone.

 

[quantumfaith]

I am glad, yay VERY GLAD that God does not bow down to the system(s) of ANY man.

 

[JesusFan]

Exactly, the old "corporate" nonsense. You can't separate this to not meaning individuals that make up the body.

As is needed, and one more time the "unfair" needs to be addressed. it all boils down to that premise.

Great answers Iconoclast.

- Peace

based upon all of the various postings here on this OP...

Still seems that non cals have 3 big problems with the Bible regading this doctrine of Election...

They fail to see that God has to work with us as He does in individual Election, as He is the One making decision to save us, as they deny the fall "spiritually killed" us off!

they fail to see that jesus actually paid the sin debt/secured real salvation for His people, not a potential "hope so" salvation...

try to impose mans standards of goodness amd mercy/judgement, flaw i that is that is stays man centered focus, and that by sinful beings to boot!

 

[preacher4truth]

based upon all of the various postings here on this OP...

Still seems that non cals have 3 big problems with the Bible regading this doctrine of Election...

They fail to see that God has to work with us as He does in individual Election, as He is the One making decision to save us, as they deny the fall "spiritually killed" us off!

they fail to see that jesus actually paid the sin debt/secured real salvation for His people, not a potential "hope so" salvation...

try to impose mans standards of goodness amd mercy/judgement, flaw i that is that is stays man centered focus, and that by sinful beings to boot!

"It's not fair if He is the One who does the choosing!!!" replies man, no matter that they deny they do so. :tear: :wavey:

"Who are you, O man, that replies against God?"

"On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it?"

 

[JesusFan]

"It's not fair if He is the One who does the choosing!!!" replies man, no matter that they deny they do so. :tear: :wavey:

"Who are you, O man, that replies against God?"

"On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it?"

Will those elected by God complain that God chose them, would that "not be fair?" Who are they compared to someone?

 

[Aaron]

And there you go again presuming the point that is up for debate.

Presumption my foot. There is no other conclusion. If one serves peanut butter to one whom he knows has a food allergy, and knowing the consequences, there aren't many alternatives to the conclusion that it was the hosts will to harm his guest.

Foreknowledge implies will. Either that or indifference.

 

[quantumfaith]

"It's not fair if He is the One who does the choosing!!!" replies man, no matter that they deny they do so. :tear: :wavey:

"Who are you, O man, that replies against God?"

"On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it?"

This is NOT what those who hold to some semblance of free will think at all. You just love to pronounce what you THINK others think.

 

[Skandelon]

Presumption my foot.

Oh, your feet do it too?

There is no other conclusion.

Yes there is. There is the conclusion I presented, you know the one that the majority of believers have come to. Now, you can continue to deny such a conclusion even exists, because after all then you wouldn't have to debate against it...and that is much easier for you.

You know, you may be on to something. If I just deny your conclusion even exists then I won't have to debate the merits of your claims. :laugh:

If one serves peanut butter to one whom he knows has a food allergy, and knowing the consequences, there aren't many alternatives to the conclusion that it was the hosts will to harm his guest.

Huh, are you debating my premise or yours, because I don't believe God "serves peanut butter" (causally determines evil), that is your view, remember?

Foreknowledge implies will. Either that or indifference.

I foreknew my kids would deal with sin before having children. Did I will for them to sin by choosing to have them? No. Was I indifferent to what I knew? No.

So, again you are proven to be incorrect.

 

[Aaron]

So, again you are proven to be incorrect.

Not by any degree of the presentation of the Scripture, preponderance of evidence, or rational thought.

The inevitable result of true theology is "a sound mind."

If one asks, "Did the Holocaust happen?" and another answers, "Hitler killed 6 million jews, didn't he?" THAT would be "presuming the point up for debate," or "begging the question." But, if it were a given that Hitler killed 6 million jews, then the fact of the Holocaust is a logical conclusion.

The foreknowledge of God is a given, the fact of will and purpose is the inevitable conclusion. Mislabeling it as a logical fallacy only reveals the presence of incompatible elements in a fragmented and erroneous system of thought. You cannot exonerate God of the charges you assert Calvinism levels against Him, UNLESS you deny Omniscience. That is your ONLY logical escape.

Concerning your desperate appeal to procreation as a rebuttal:

God is the Creator of your children. Not you. Marriage is honorable and commanded (unless one has the gift of celibacy), and God has determined that even in your sinful state that you must yield your body to your spouse, and has assigned you the responsibility of bringing up His heritage (not yours) in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

In other words, you do not have authority nor the power to not procreate. God created your children on the Sixth Day. He simply brought them into the world through natural means in the last few years. He determined you would be their father, and the woman who bore them to be their mother. (And here you thought you were freely making all the choices.)

And, though it may have yet to be revealed, He determined before any were born whether they would be vessels of wrath or mercy.

What do you think marriage is? Is it a divine institution or not? Is it the fulfillment of God's will (though corrupted by sin), or is it simply a situation that lets lets you hallow the satisfaction of your lusts?

You need to view your children in a new light. I kind of feel for them that you would have presented them as evidence to support bad theology, and elevate yourself more highly than you ought.

 

[Skandelon]

The inevitable result of true theology is "a sound mind."

I suppose in your world the 'sound mind' is defined as the mind who agrees with the deterministic premise, right?

If one asks, "Did the Holocaust happen?" and another answers, "Hitler killed 6 million jews, didn't he?" THAT would be "presuming the point up for debate," or "begging the question."

I'm trying to follow your reasoning here. Is the question "Did the Holocaust happen?" supposed to parallel "Does God causally determine all things?"

And is the answer, "Hitler killed 6 million jews, didn't he?" supposed to be reflective of your response, "What he foreknew and created he must have determined to happen."

Really? You are equating me, and thousands of other scholarly believers, with Ahmadinejad and other holocaust deniers? As if the finite speculations about the causal results of the creative working of an all powerful infinite Being in relation to a finite universe is somehow equal to denying a undeniable historical event??? REALLY? Wow... I've read many a debate on this subject and this is a first... wow...

But, if it were a given that Hitler killed 6 million jews, then the fact of the Holocaust is a logical conclusion.

Right, and since when is determinism a given? Because that is what you are arguing here; that determinism is as sure has the Holocaust, its "a given." Aaron, that is the text book example of the Fallacy of petitio principii (Question begging: "assuming the initial point"). It's the lowest form of debate.

The foreknowledge of God is a given

It is a fact upon we both happen to affirm, but to presume, as you do, that foreknowledge equals predetermination is what I am claiming is unfounded. You have never rebutted the point I raised against such assumptions, you've only continue to claim it is a given without any support.

Concerning your desperate appeal to procreation as a rebuttal:

God is the Creator of your children. Not you.

Aaron, with all due respect, but DUH! It is an ANALOGY. In YOUR reflection of the analogy mankind in relation to God is more like 'property' (robots/dogs) and in my analogy mankind in relation to God is more like a child to a parent. Scripture bares this out by actually carrying that analogy as God is made known as a heavenly Father, not a tyrant landlord.

And, though it may have yet to be revealed, He determined before any were born whether they would be vessels of wrath or mercy.

That is a complete misrepresentation of Paul's intent in Romans 9. And I'd be happy to discuss the merits of that claim if you will stop assuming your perspective is a "given" long enough to actually engage in a debate.

You need to view your children in a new light. I kind of feel for them that you would have presented them as evidence to support bad theology, and elevate yourself more highly than you ought.

You've reach an all new low Aaron...wow... To deduce THIS from an analogy about how God has chosen to relate to mankind? Really? Come on, brother, you are better than this... :tear:

 

[Aaron]

the question "Did the Holocaust happen?" supposed to parallel "Does God causally determine all things?"

And is the answer, "Hitler killed 6 million jews, didn't he?" supposed to be reflective of your response, "What he foreknew and created he must have determined to happen."

You should step back and think before you post. It's an example of Begging the Question. You don't recognize it because you don't know what you're talking about when you indict others for it.

It could be any question: Did we evolve? We're here, so we must have. Is the Bible the inspired? Of course, the Bible says so.

Aaron, with all due respect, but DUH! It is an ANALOGY.

Your acts of procreation are analogous to God's role in Creation? You see, Charles? You understand neither.

 

[Skandelon]

You should step back and think before you post. It's an example of Begging the Question. You don't recognize it because you don't know what you're talking about when you indict others for it.

It could be any question: Did we evolve? We're here, so we must have. Is the Bible the inspired? Of course, the Bible says so.

I know what the fallacy is Aaron, I spent eight years in competitive debate and still help judge on occasion. And, as I explained, you equating divine foreknowledge with predetermination as if it is a given is the quintessential example of the question begging fallacy.

Your acts of procreation are analogous to God's role in Creation?

More so than your act of creating a robot...

It is a biblical analogy to relate God to a parent, so its not really original to me.