Why are there so many religions?

[Winman]

Winman, this is utter blasphemy. As usual, you are accusing God of unrighteousness. Boy, if I was you, I would be fearful of falling into His hands.

So, it's blasphemy to ask why there are so many false religions?

I asked this question because some believe God controls every event. I believe God allows men a degree of freedom, and can still bring about his ultimate will.

So, do I understand everyone here agrees that God allows man a degree of freedom? That man can do things that are not the will of God and God permits it?

Or does God control every minute detail of all events?

 

[RAdam]

Everything that happens is according to His will. Some actions He permits, like the sin of man. For instance, God may permit a man to committ a particular sin. He doesn't cause it, but has chosen to allow it and not stop it. Then there are actions He is causitive in. For instance, the parting of the Red Sea, God caused that to happen. All events are according to God's will, but not everything is caused by God.

 

[pinoybaptist]

So, it's blasphemy to ask why there are so many false religions?

I asked this question because some believe God controls every event. I believe God allows men a degree of freedom, and can still bring about his ultimate will.

So, do I understand everyone here agrees that God allows man a degree of freedom? That man can do things that are not the will of God and God permits it?

Or does God control every minute detail of all events?

No, it is not blasphemy to ask why there are so many false religions.
The blasphemy is in the import of your questions, or what it implies.
It implies that God is at the root of all these confusions and all these babel of religions and falsities, that He is the problem, not man.
God was never the problem from the very beginning.
Man was.
Adam was.
Eve was.
There it is.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Attempt #2

What does "DoGs" mean.

It is his way of indirectly insulting those who hold on to the Doctrine of Grace, whether he admits it or not, and I am one of those.
Only I'm not a dog.
I'm a gorilla, and one day I'll come swinging thru the trees and crash his window and carry him off to the mountains and marry him off to one of mine.

 

[OldRegular]

It is his way of indirectly insulting those who hold on to the Doctrine of Grace, whether he admits it or not, and I am one of those.
Only I'm not a dog.
I'm a gorilla, and one day I'll come swinging thru the trees and crash his window and carry him off to the mountains and marry him off to one of mine.

Surely you would not be that cruel to one of your own!:laugh::laugh::laugh:

 

[pinoybaptist]

Surely you would not be that cruel to one of your own!:laugh::laugh::laugh:

my goodness, you're right !!
how could I even have thought of such cruelty.:laugh:

 

[Winman]

Everything that happens is according to His will. Some actions He permits, like the sin of man. For instance, God may permit a man to committ a particular sin. He doesn't cause it, but has chosen to allow it and not stop it. Then there are actions He is causitive in. For instance, the parting of the Red Sea, God caused that to happen. All events are according to God's will, but not everything is caused by God.

I agree, God does allow men to do evil, it is obvious. But this makes me ask, why does God not allow unregenerate man to do good? It doesn't make a lot of sense for God to allow men to be willingly evil, but will not allow them to be willingly good.

It is his way of indirectly insulting those who hold on to the Doctrine of Grace, whether he admits it or not, and I am one of those.

That is absolutely false, I just get tired of spelling out Doctrines of Grace. So I shortened it to DoGs, being careful to use small case for the "o" and "s". I was in no way trying to be disrespectful. I also shortened Calvinists to Cals, and call myself a non-Cal. No disrepect intended whatsoever.

 

[pinoybaptist]

I agree, God does allow men to do evil, it is obvious. But this makes me ask, why does God not allow unregenerate man to do good? It doesn't make a lot of sense for God to allow men to be willingly evil, but will not allow them to be willingly good.

What is your definition of what God calls good ? You see, that is the crux of this issue. Any good done out of Christ is not pleasing in the eyes of God. Isaiah says that himself: all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags before thee.
What is your definition of the good that God should allow the unregenerate to do ?
Even the elect can approach God with their righteousnesses only in Christ and through Christ.

That is absolutely false, I just get tired of spelling out Doctrines of Grace. So I shortened it to DoGs, being careful to use small case for the "o" and "s". I was in no way trying to be disrespectful. I also shortened Calvinists to Cals, and call myself a non-Cal. No disrepect intended whatsoever.

okay. I accept your apology and retract my desire to swing into your windows and carry you off to gorillaland.

 

[DHK]

Everything that happens is according to His will. Some actions He permits, like the sin of man. For instance, God may permit a man to committ a particular sin. He doesn't cause it, but has chosen to allow it and not stop it. Then there are actions He is causitive in. For instance, the parting of the Red Sea, God caused that to happen. All events are according to God's will, but not everything is caused by God.

If any statements would border on blasphemous (since that is what you were speaking of) it would be these.
Man does have free will (disagree with the truth if you like), but God did give choice to mankind. This is easily demonstrated in Matthew 19 when the Pharisees came to Jesus, tempting him, and said: "Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?"
Jesus answered according to what the will of God was.
Then the Pharisees pursued this line of questioning to the matter of divorce.

Matthew 19:7 They say unto him, Why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?
And Jesus answered:
Matthew 19:8 He saith unto them, Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

It was not God's will for them to divorce their wives. This is what Christ states. "From the beginning it was not so." However they had free will. Because of the hardness of their hearts he allowed them to divorce their wives, even though it was not God's will. God permitted that which was not according to His will.

We see plainly.
All events are not according to his will.

 

[Winman]

Great point DHK

What I want to know is this;

Why did God allow fallen man to have free will to do evil, but took away his free will to do good?

This is just the opposite of what we do as parents. If my teenager has been driving the car reckless, I take the keys away. I prevent him from doing evil, not good.

Or if they have stayed out late and let their grades slip, we ground them. We prevent them from doing wrong, but allow them to do good.

Why did God (according to your doctrine), allow unregenerate man the free will to do evil, and prevent him from having the free will to do good?

 

[RAdam]

So are you saying that things happen in this world that are not in harmony with the will of God? Wow.

Consider God before the world ever began choosing all His actions, knowing all the actions and reactions of men. After all, James said that known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the world. The only way this is possible is if God knew everything, including what I was going to do, chose what He would or would not do as a result, and thus everything is in harmony with His will. He either chose to allow me to do something or to keep me from doing something. For instance, He chose to allow Assyria to conquer the Northern Kingdom of Israel. He chose to prevent them from doing the same to Judah. He chose these actions before the world began. They were in accordance with His will. One He allowed to happen, the other He was causitive in not happening. Either way, it was not outside of His will. Nothing is.

Now, the other issue is this: you say that God isn't allowing unregenerate man to do something. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what it means to be unregenerate. It's not a case of God keeping an unregenerate from doing something, it is a case of the nature of the unregenerate keeping him from doing something. The unregenerate is not going to do good. The unregenerate is going to follow the course of this world, the prince of the power of the hour. He is going to live in the lusts of his flesh, fullfilling the desires of his flesh and his mind. He is going to be selfish, sinful, and will not seek God, love God, come to God, submit to God, etc. The scriptures are clear on unregenerate man. They that are in the flesh (unregenerate men) cannot please God.

 

[Winman]

Now, the other issue is this: you say that God isn't allowing unregenerate man to do something. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what it means to be unregenerate. It's not a case of God keeping an unregenerate from doing something, it is a case of the nature of the unregenerate keeping him from doing something. The unregenerate is not going to do good. The unregenerate is going to follow the course of this world, the prince of the power of the hour. He is going to live in the lusts of his flesh, fullfilling the desires of his flesh and his mind. He is going to be selfish, sinful, and will not seek God, love God, come to God, submit to God, etc. The scriptures are clear on unregenerate man. They that are in the flesh (unregenerate men) cannot please God.

I understand that perfectly (according to your doctrine). But you believe man had free will before the fall to do good, and afterward did not. You believe God cursed man, so God would be responsible for this change, would he not?

How could God not be 100% responsible if God himself brought about this change in man's nature?

I am not saying I agree with you, I do not. Man could clearly do good after Adam and Eve. Cain could have given an acceptable sacrifice, God himself said so.

Gen 4:6 And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?
7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

The word "if" here shows Cain could choose to do good or evil. The rich young ruler could have done good.

Mark 10:21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
22 And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions

This young man could have obeyed Jesus. He could have sold all he had and followed Jesus, but chose not to. There is nothing in this passage to show he did not have the ability to obey Jesus if he would have chosen to. Just because he did not follow Jesus does not prove he could not have.

John 6:66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
67 Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?

Here Jesus asked his disciples if they would leave him. This is a non-sensical question unless the disciples had the ability to make a choice. The disciples were not regenerated when Jesus asked this question, the Holy Spirit was not yet given to believers.

 

[pinoybaptist]

I understand that perfectly (according to your doctrine). But you believe man had free will before the fall to do good, and afterward did not. You believe God cursed man, so God would be responsible for this change, would he not?
How could God not be 100% responsible if God himself brought about this change in man's nature?

Before the fall, there was Adam and Eve, two distinct individuals, unless you are saying that there were other men around, that God did not create Adam and Eve only, and that their names are simply a generic name for all mankind.
Is this what you are saying ?
Adam and Eve had free will, all the way, and they blew it.
Their descendants do not have the freedom of the will that they have, they inherited his image, corrupted, no longer good in the sight of God, and in sin.
Their change is their fault, not God's.
I am really beginning to wonder why you really would like to see God be the culprit for everything, and why you want to exonerate man from all guilt.
Will you be so kind as to answer this question ?

I am not saying I agree with you, I do not. Man could clearly do good after Adam and Eve. Cain could have given an acceptable sacrifice, God himself said so.

God told Cain in no uncertain terms that his sacrifice was unacceptable to Him, and if he (Cain) will do good (in God's terms) there is no reason why God will not accept him and his sacrifice. The big word is IF. What God is really saying is he won't because he doesn't want to do things on God's terms. Now, that is not a Calvinistic statement.
It came from a very Arminian pastor I had before, who hated, like you, everything and everyone that had to do with the Doctrine of Grace.

 

[Johnv]

The OP falsely presumes that God creates "religions". Religions (that is, religious institutions and systems) are not created by God. They are created by men. They are fallible institutions that attempt to bolster an individual's need to engage in a relationship with his/her creator. Ultimately, they all fail to do so in and of themselves. This is no less true in Christian religions. It is not the Christian religion that saves a person or gets them connected with God. Rather, it is a relationship with God that gets him connected, and through his Son that saves a person. There is a huge difference between a Christian's religion, and a Christian's faith. One saves, the other does not. One is a human institution, the other is a personal relationship. Let's not confuse the two. Further, let's not assume that those things we create are therefore created by God.

 

[pinoybaptist]

The OP falsely presumes that God creates "religions". Religions (that is, religious institutions and systems) are not created by God. They are created by men. They are fallible institutions that attempt to bolster an individual's need to engage in a relationship with his/her creator. Ultimately, they all fail to do so in and of themselves. This is no less true in Christian religions. It is not the Christian religion that saves a person or gets them connected with God. Rather, it is a relationship with God that gets him connected, and through his Son that saves a person. There is a huge difference between a Christian's religion, and a Christian's faith. One saves, the other does not. One is a human institution, the other is a personal relationship. Let's not confuse the two. Further, let's not assume that those things we create are therefore created by God.

Thank you, Johnv.
And that is what Cain was offering to God.
His religion.
The fruit of the ground.
The fruits of his labor.
And that is what Jerusalem was offering to Jehovah.
Their religion.

 

[Winman]

The OP falsely presumes that God creates "religions". Religions (that is, religious institutions and systems) are not created by God. They are created by men. They are fallible institutions that attempt to bolster an individual's need to engage in a relationship with his/her creator. Ultimately, they all fail to do so in and of themselves. This is no less true in Christian religions. It is not the Christian religion that saves a person or gets them connected with God. Rather, it is a relationship with God that gets him connected, and through his Son that saves a person. There is a huge difference between a Christian's religion, and a Christian's faith. One saves, the other does not. One is a human institution, the other is a personal relationship. Let's not confuse the two. Further, let's not assume that those things we create are therefore created by God.

I never said God creates false religions. I was trying to approach from the hyper-Calvinist point of view. If God is controlling every minute event, then God would be the initial cause of everything, including false religions.

My question was why this would be necessary if men were already lost as they were? Simply having a nature that cannot trust in Christ would be enough to damn them, so why do they need all these false religions?

It is similar to Skandelon's question of why God would need to blind men and hide the gospel from them if they are already utterly unable to understand and believe it?

Why the overkill?

 

[Johnv]

I never said God creates false religions.

You asked the question, "If God is sovereign and controlling every event, then why did he create so many false religions". Whether God is sovereign or not, He did not create religions.

I was trying to approach from the hyper-Calvinist point of view.

Well, suffice it to say that hypercalvinism doesn't accurately reflect mainline Reformed thinking any more than hyperarmenianism reflect mainline noncalvinist thinking. But the error anti-calvinists commonly make is to confuse total depravity with man's lack of free will. However, total depravity doesn't mean man has no free will. It means that man's will is subject to his nature.

 

[Thinkingstuff]

Man's rebellion causes the many religions. Attempting to meet God or dispence with God on his own terms.

 

[Winman]

God told Cain in no uncertain terms that his sacrifice was unacceptable to Him, and if he (Cain) will do good (in God's terms) there is no reason why God will not accept him and his sacrifice. The big word is IF. What God is really saying is he won't because he doesn't want to do things on God's terms. Now, that is not a Calvinistic statement.
It came from a very Arminian pastor I had before, who hated, like you, everything and everyone that had to do with the Doctrine of Grace.

No, the word "if" proves that Cain had a choice. He could have given an acceptable sacrifice if he chose to do so. The fact that he did not does not prove he was unable to make a positive choice. You read into scripture what is not there. God said "if" twice, one for the positive, one for the negative.

Gen 4:7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Notice also that God said sin would desire Cain, but Cain would rule over sin. So unregenerate man is not utterly enslaved to sin. God said man knows both good and evil.

Gen 3:22 And the LORD God said, Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever:

Jesus said unregenerate man can do good.

Matt 7:11 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?

The word "good" used twice here is the same exact word.

And while I strongly disagree with Calvinism and the Doctines of Grace, I do not hate you or anybody else.

 

[Andy T.]

The OP is a slanderous strawman against the vast majority of those who hold to certain doctrines known as Calvinism or the Doctrines of Grace. I've noticed this Board has degenerated over the last few months in its tenor and grace, and this OP is a prime example of such rancor.