Posted on 02/17/2002 11:35:16 PM PST by fortheDeclaration
Now, anyone else want to ask a silly question? God does not choose for us. That would deny free will, that would also negate God's righteousness. Thus, Satan would be right that God is unjust. Think very carefully before responding. Are you following men, or God in what you all are saying?
(Men, a child could tell you that.) Now, what is better, God or men? And remember the Garden of Eden? Man does have free will. Making a world of humans would only be worth making if a thing has a choice to be either good or bad. The point is, we choose. God already knows what we will do, but has nothing to do with making our choice. We respond to the urging of the Holy Spirit. God cannot make us do anything that we do not choose to do. (Man also cannot thwart God. He will continue his plans without us or despite our failings.)
Now... Want to ask that again?
The Calvinist position does not argue that the turtle was not given a choice..but rather why he wanted to fly and why the others did not.
Calvinists would assert that because of the nature of the sin of Adam that man is spiritually dead. He can not "choose" Christ because he chooses evil continously like his father Adam
Romans 3 10As it is written: "There is no one righteous, not even one;
11 there is no one who understands, no one who seeks God.
So we would argue that the choice flows from the heart ,and mans heart is evil , it is not untill he is born again and has been given a heart of flesh that he will want to fly :>)
(Men, a child could tell you that.) Now, what is better, God or men? And remember the Garden of Eden? Man does have free will. Making a world of humans would only be worth making if a thing has a choice to be either good or bad. The point is, we choose. God already knows what we will do, but has nothing to do with making our choice. We respond to the urging of the Holy Spirit. God cannot make us do anything that we do not choose to do. (Man also cannot thwart God. He will continue his plans without us or despite our failings.)
Who put the tree into the garden of Eden? Why was it put there? Did God know that Adam and Eve would eat from the tree?
At the risk of repeating myself, hypocrisy and inconsistency are different. Hypocrisy is claiming something about yourself or your beliefs that your behavior betrays or denies. Here's a dictionary definition (Merriam-Webster): a feigning to be what one is not or to believe what one does not; especially : the false assumption of an appearance of virtue or religion.
Now what you are accusing others of is this: holding another person to a standard that one does not live up to themselves. That is inconsistency, but not hypocrisy, because they are not claiming that they live up to that standard. Should they make such a claim for themselves but not live up to it, then your accusation of hypocrisy would have a basis.
Whether or not you accept the wedding garment is up to you, but Christ has provided it for you. The invitation has gone out to everyone, but you will have to come on the King’s terms.
BigMack
Jesus was a man, and He was glorified.
Hank
Follow this, if indeed CC and Jerry can, God is without sin, correct? Does God make you sin? If he chose who would believe in him, then you have no choice of your own. If you have no choice of your own, then if you do not believe in him, then God has made you sin. Thus predestination is nothing more than a straw argument. The whole quote was along the lines of "predestined us to go out and preach the gospel" - by Darksheare
What you have just posted is a straw man argument. It doesn't even resemble what I believe. You did not answer my question in #53. I will now lay out our Biblical position. We shall see if you believe what the Bible says:
***Romans 3: 10-12, 23 -- As it is written, There is none righteous, not even one; there is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God; all have turned aside, together they have become useless; there is none who does good, there is not even one.... for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.
***Romans 7: 18 -- For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not.
***Romans 8: 5 - 8 -- For those who are according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who are according to the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For the mind set on the flesh is death, but the mind set on the Spirit is life and peace, because the mind set on the flesh is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so, and those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
***1 Corinthians 2: 14 -- But a natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.
IF these Scriptures are true, then a natural Man, acting by God's Permission, will:
NEVER seek God (because No Man naturally seeks God, Romans 3); NEVER do good (because the Doing of Good is not present in his native Wants, Romans 7); NEVER perform any God-pleasing action whatsoever (Because he never wants to please God, Romans 8); and NEVER even understand what he ought to do (because he cannot even understand the idea of doing anything God-pleasing, 1 Corinthians 2).
These verses SHUT THE DOOR on the idea that a natural Man will ever Will to do any God-pleasing action by God's Permission. The natural Man never, ever Wants to perform any God-pleasing action, and so if he acts by God's permission, he never, ever Will.
When natural Men act by God's PERMISSION, they ONLY PERFORM GOD-OPPOSING ACTIONS. That is all they Want to do, so that is all that they ever Will to do.
So, answer this simple question:
And remember the Garden of Eden? - by Darksheare
I do indeed. Did God lie or exaggerate?
Genesis 2:16-17 And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, "Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it. For in the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die."
So, do you believe God or men? Hmmm!
How come there was a man who thought he should be at the wedding, but did not have on a wedding garment?
The question has nothing to do with "free will," but volition, the ability to rationally choose what one does. That there are limits on what one can choose has nothing to do with volition. To choose at all, there are prerequisites, among them, the ability, physical and mental, to do what one is considering choosing, the knowledge of what choices are available, and knowledge of the consequences of the choice.
Moral responsiblity extends only to what is possible. If one is not able to choose to serve God, he is not morally responsible to do it. If one cannot choose to accept Christ as his Savior, he is not morally responsible to do it.
A God that would punish anyone for not doing what it was impossible for them to do is immoral.
This is the real point Calvinists have invented the so-called "free-will" problem to obfuscate.
Hank
Gramscian, to say the least.
A God that would tell Israel to kill all the Amorite women and children is not moral...
A God that would tell David not to number Israel and then cause him to do it is not moral...
A God that would send his only son to be crucified and then condemn the people that did it is not moral...
A God that would allow so much misery when He could stop it is not moral...
You know what Hank. You can't tell God what is moral. He's got the corner on that.
Now, as for replying to your point, Christians of most denominations believe that Man is condemned by Original Sin before he throws his first tantrum. Lack of choice ain't in it.
I want to kindly ask you about this statement:
Calvinists would assert that because of the nature of the sin of Adam that man is spiritually dead. He can not "choose" Christ because he chooses evil continously like his father Adam.
Actually two questions, if you don't mind:
What does, "spiritually dead" mean, and what is the specific difference between a person who is "spiritually dead" and one who is "spiritually alive?"
Was Adam spiritually dead, I mean before he sinned? Calvinists makes it sound as though sin were the result of the "sinful nature" or being "spiritually dead," but there was a lot of sin in this world before anyone was spiritually dead, I believe, including the sins of Satan, Eve, and Adam.
Hank
Rom. 8:5-8 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.
These verses clearly show that "they that are in the flesh" means the same as to be "carnally minded." It is obvious Paul is talking about what we would call "subjective" that is, have one's reason controlled by the whims, passions, and feelings, as opposed to the "objective" reason, devoted to what can only be known rational (spiritual) reason. It is the "eyes of our understanding" God promises to open.
Certainly the Calvinists to not teach that flesh and blood itself is sinful, since Christ partook of that so that he could redeem us form sin.
Hank
Hank
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.