|
|
#71
09-07-2005, 03:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Another Question For Not ready
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] How can you say this and not believe the strict Calvinistic intrepretations that say some are indeed designed for perdition? [/ QUOTE ] I take issue with the word design. It connotes that God is the author of sin which all Christians totally reject. [/ QUOTE ] As a person who affirms God's sovereignty and creative control over everything, I see no reason why we cannot also affirm that God is the author (defined as the creator) of sin. I don't believe this explicitly contradicts any passage of the Bible, or any statement that is logically derived from the Bible. I am in agreement with Vincent Cheung in what he writes in this article below, where he gives a much fuller treatment of this topic than I ever could. http://www.vincentcheung.com/2005/05...author-of-sin/ I agree with most of the rest of the post though: [ QUOTE ] Calvin talked about proximate and remote causes, for instance. I don't think this really explains anything but it emphasizes there is a difference between predestination of the saved and foreordination of the lost. In one sense, everything that happens in the universe is foreordained, everything is encompassed within God's eternal plan, God controls whatsover comes to pass. But the Bible says that "God made man upright" and God said it is all very good when He finished creation. [/ QUOTE ] Thus we have a simple conclusion: 1) God created all things 2) It was good and just for God to create what He did 3) God created evil 4) Therefore, the creation of evil was good. (from 1-3) I see no problems with this. It does not say that good is evil (which would be a logical contradiction), but simply that the creation of evil was good. [ QUOTE ] All I can say is there is mystery here which no one can explain fully. Read Romans 9. When the hypothetical questioner tries to apply this doctrine in a way that would cast blame on God, Paul doesn't go into a detailed explanation. He simply says we have no right to question God's goodness or justice, and that we have to accept. If you want to use the word design, go ahead. I'm not saying it's wrong, just be sure that you include that God does no wrong and that man is responsible. [/ QUOTE ] absolutely [ QUOTE ] And remember, what you believe about predestination is not important as far as salvatiion is concerned. [/ QUOTE ] Is this true? [ QUOTE ] Someone posted the Apostle's Creed recently. There's nothing in it about predestination. If you accept that God is just and loving and your job is to seek and do His will, predestination will take care of itself. [/ QUOTE ] Interesting idea with that. 
|
|
#72
09-07-2005, 03:09 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Another Question For Not ready
[ QUOTE ]
I'm considering switching to a Southern Baptist church because I think the opportunities for service are much greater there. [/ QUOTE ] Since you have espoused that the bible should believed fairly literally in every intstance, how can you consider that denomination when they don't have the office of bishop which is mentioned in the NT and which is clearly seen to have been in existence before the protestant date for the institutional Catholic Church of 350 A.D.? And before you ask, I can give citations talking of bishops and apostolic succession of same by Clement, pope and bishop of Rome in 90 A.D. and Irenaeus in 180 A.D.
|
|
#73
09-07-2005, 03:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Another Question For Not ready
[ QUOTE ]
then the sinful actions of such a man would have been due to God creating such a man who was given zero grace. [/ QUOTE ] There is a sense in which this is true. Again, Calvin distinguished between proximate and remote causes. Also again, everything that happens in the universe is "caused" by God in the sense of sine qua non or "cause in fact". But because someone would not have sinned if God had not created him (God is the remote cause) that doesn't make God the author of sin nor does it relieve the sinner of his guilt. Because all are guilty, God is under no obligation to save anyone. A fortiori, He is under no obligation to ensure someone hears the Gospel. And He is still a just and loving God, and man is still responsible. You can phrase it so that there is a logical contradiction so far as man's reason is capable. But I believe that is the fault of man's reason, not because there is really a logical contradiction.
|
|
#74
09-07-2005, 03:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Another Question For Not ready
[ QUOTE ]
Because all are guilty, God is under no obligation to save anyone. A fortiori, He is under no obligation to ensure someone hears the Gospel. And He is still a just and loving God, and man is still responsible. [/ QUOTE ] To say all are guilty, again implies that they were created so. So how can a man given zero grace be responsible since his guilt in which he was created and which merits damnation, cannot be washed away except by the grace of Christ's atonement given to him? [ QUOTE ] You can phrase it so that there is a logical contradiction so far as man's reason is capable. But I believe that is the fault of man's reason, not because there is really a logical contradiction. [/ QUOTE ] Again, if such a man is created guilty and thus will be damned if not given grace, how can it be a failure of that man's reason which cannot but sin since only by grace can he adhere to the moral commandments of the gospel and not sin?
|
|
#75
09-07-2005, 03:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Another Question For Not ready
[ QUOTE ]
3) God created evil [/ QUOTE ] I'll read the article later, but I strongly disagree with this statement. I know there is a verse that says that, but I think it can be easily shown it is referring to evil in the sense of injury or disaster - for instance, God created Katrina. But in Him there is no darkness and He doesn't even tempt to sin. The word author is normally associated with cause in the proximate sense, and I think most theologians reject that usage. [ QUOTE ] Is this true? [/ QUOTE ] It must be. How many Christians have exactly the right idea of predestination? Plus I don't see it as part of the Gospel.
|
|
#78
09-07-2005, 03:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Another Question For Not ready
"If God knows someone will not believe and creates him that person is foreordained to not believe. That doesn't violate free will."
Notready This does violate free will. If free will is defined as man being able to make a decision that is not 100% predictable by any other being.
|
|
#79
09-07-2005, 03:31 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Another Question For Not ready
[ QUOTE ]
God created man upright. "All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God". [/ QUOTE ] So now to restate your beliefs: 1) Man is created upright; 2) A man who never hears the gospel preached and thus is the recipient of zero grace cannot but fail to sin; 3) God doesn't have to and sometimes doesn't offer such men a chance at redemption by hearing and responding to the gospel. Is that right? If so, then it again logically implies such men were created to be damned and that God is the author of their sin since they were doomed to sin and without hearing the gospel could not receive grace and thus receive the effects of the redemption of Christ if they responded. Thus they had no possibility to avoid damnation. Again, how can such men be responsible for their sin when it requires grace to act morally and to have their sins washed away by Christ's atonement?
|
|
#80
09-07-2005, 03:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Another Question For Not ready
[ QUOTE ]
If free will is defined as man being able to make a decision that is not 100% predictable by any other being. [/ QUOTE ] I don't define free will that way. If you do, you exclude the possibility of God. However, you have touched on one of the great mysteries. The Bible doesn't explain this either. I don't fully understand the will, free or otherwise. When I say free will isn't violated I mean primarily that one is not compelled by any outside force. The direction you are moving is towards true randomness. That's a nice can of worms if you want to open it.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
