God does love everybody

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

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

[/ QUOTE ]

So far as it goes, this is correct. But it is incomplete. You have arrived at Romans 9 but left out the first 8 chapters. I reject your logical implication because it denies what the Bible teaches. The above points are also taught by the Bible. As I said, I can't reconcile some concepts in the Bible to satisfy human reason. So you may choose your ultimate standard. Your ability to reason or the Bible. If you go with reason, you will eventually run into other logical contradictions. We are finite and sinful. We cannot rationalize all of reality. The attempt to do so always results in contradiction, Christian or non-Christian. But I believe God is Absolute Rationality and there are no real contradictions in Him or His word. The fault is ours, not His.

"I don't define free will that way. If you do, you exclude the possibility of God."
Notready

I do not exclude the possibility of God. I don't believe God is omnipotent.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
I can't reconcile some concepts in the Bible to satisfy human reason. So you may choose your ultimate standard. Your ability to reason or the Bible. If you go with reason, you will eventually run into other logical contradictions.

[/ QUOTE ]

In what I am about to say, I am not referring to various Christian doctrines that have mystical or supernatural implications that cannot be fully apprehended by human reason because it is too limited in its understanding.

By your statements above you imply that various Christian doctrines can be logically inconsistent with each other or with the human reason that God has given us. Since God is truth and cannot be the author of error, how can this be? The rational explanation is that either Christianity is false, or that your understanding of it is in error. I cannot see how anyone but a cult member can believe that although some things might not be fully explained by God, that it is possible that sound doctrine is in conflict with itself internally or with its core axioms, or with human reason once those axioms are accepted, even if those axioms could not be proved to a virtual certainty to non-believers. Note that in all this I am talking about logical implications when I speak of reason, and not about whether certain beliefs appear "reasonable" on their face apart from the whole.

Thus, the only logical explanation for two conflicting passages in the bible (assuming one is not an OT one supersed by the NT), is an explanation that is a synthesis of two taken in the context of the entire bible and consonant with core axiomatic beliefs and logic, or that one of the two has to be understood in a more limited sense.

I have had to word this extremely carefully and might have to ammend it, because you-know-who will examine it minutely.

[udontknowmickey]

[ 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 ]

The fact that God created evil stems from the fact that nothing exists that was not created by God. Rephrasing the syllogism

1) Everything that has a beginning was created by God (John 1:3)
2) All that God does is good and just (definition)
3) Evil exists (do I need to prove this?)
4) Either: (from 3)
4a) Evil had no begining, and we're left with two forces in the universe, God and Evil. I think I can muster up sufficient Scripture to disprove that, but I don't think I need to
OR
4b) Evil had a begining
Continuing from 4b)
5) Evil was created by God (1 and 4b)
6) The creation of evil by God was good and just (5 and 2)

The article addresses the verses you cite as well.

[ 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.


[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you that it is true in the sense that no one can have a perfect understanding of predestination, but to reclarify:

Is it true that one can know all the Scripture's testimonies and explicit teachings regarding predestination, reject it, and still be saved?

IE) I know that the Bible teaches that God foreordains all things, even my salvation, but I don't believe it and I think it is false.

On another note:Can we have a person who says in his heart: God, I chose you. You gave me life, you gave me breath, but you didn't give me faith. This faith was my own, it is not of your doing. Now save me, because I chose you. I believed that you died for me and you washed my sins away. Would God honor his request?

I have answers of my own, I'm curious to how you would answer these.

[udontknowmickey]

Bluff, I agree with almost all of what you wrote. One exception:

[ QUOTE ]

Since God is truth and cannot be the author of error, how can this be?


[/ QUOTE ]
God being truth doesn't mean He cannot be the author of error. Did He not send a lying spirit in 1 Kings 22:23)

"Now therefore behold, the LORD has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these your prophets; the LORD has declared disaster for you."

But everything else you've said is pretty much spot on. It is an accurate criticism of much of mainline Calvinism. But you'll notice that my worldview (which I will say is the biblical one until proven otherwise) is completely intact. I have affirmed all the logical implications that the sovereignty of God leads to. I have given a (as clear as I was able) explanation for how human responsibility isn't contradictory to divine sovereignty.

The Bible is infallible, and it's words are clear. It is merely we as fallible human beings that insert false presuppositions where they do not exist. We, (including me) are all guilty of that.

[David Sklansky]

"The Word never explains in detail what predestination means, it never uses the phrase "free will", and it never uses the word design with respect to those who are lost. That's why I stick to Scripture which says that God is sovereign and man is responsible. Calvin did the same and he never discussed predestination without severe warnings against undue speculation."

Then why not assume an interpretation that doesn't get you into difficulties with so many other Christians? I feel like the gunslinger in the movies who throws his unarmed opponent a gun before a duel. Don't you realize that all your deep thinking about Christianity and evolution will not be taken seriously if you insist on believing in stuff that even you say is not necessary to believe in?

[David Sklansky]

3) God doesn't have to and sometimes doesn't offer such men a chance at redemption by hearing and responding to the gospel.

All you have to do to make this sound not so terrible is say that people like that are similar to animals, are sometimes useful to people who will be saved, and have will have no afterlife at all. I'm trying to help you Protestants out here. Otherwise it's BluffTHIS in a walk.

Man has free will, therefore God is not omnipotent.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
3) God doesn't have to and sometimes doesn't offer such men a chance at redemption by hearing and responding to the gospel.

All you have to do to make this sound not so terrible is say that people like that are similar to animals, are sometimes useful to people who will be saved, and have will have no afterlife at all. I'm trying to help you Protestants out here. Otherwise it's BluffTHIS in a walk.

[/ QUOTE ]

This won't work because we Christians believe that God created us in His own image, which is not true of the animals over whom He gave us dominion, and thus all men in fact have eternal souls, whether their eternal fate is salvation or damnation.

[NotReady]

[ QUOTE ]

I don't believe God is omnipotent.


[/ QUOTE ]

We define God differently.