Knight's pick 11-01-2004

Status
Not open for further replies.

Nathon Detroit

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
This is the first time I have ever picked a POTD from the image gallery!

This great post was created by Shadowx....
Shadowx writes: "Hilston, let's simplify things."


Hilstone: "That's a mistake."
Shadowx: Exhaustively decreed mistake nonetheless.


Hilston: To answer your question: Of course. Most people do not do what God commands."
Shadowx: Why? What or who determines/decrees their rejection of God's ways?


Shadowx writes: "What role does God play in the thoughts/choices/actions of men?"


Hilston: "Play"? None.
"Played"? Exhaustively decreed.
Do you know the difference?
Shadowx: Yeah, there isn't one, it's a contradiction. This is the illusion of the soft determinist trying to make his position a bit more palatable, but of course the opposite will happen.
You should just go with hard determinism...I think people might respect that more...
God doesn't play, you play, he played..I already addressed this..God already chose the exact, specific choices we now make. Yes or no?


Shadowx writes: "You go on to say, 'Forces outside my control.' They determine my choices.
That would be specific choices and actions right?..Why do you say forces? Can't you just say God?"


Hilston: "Because that's not my view. If I skip dinner because of an upset stomach, that's not God forcing something.
Shadowx: Exhaustively decreed..doesn't seem very exhaustive to me..(Col 1:16,17)?
Define what you mean by exhaustively decreed, because here it seems you are saying it doesn't even cover your sick stomach..


Shadowx writes: "I will ask my question again. Hilston, in your theology, If I was a determinist would it be wrong of me to say that this response was written by God in response to God?
If so, if that is wrong, please just say so directly and then explain why..If you did, I missed it.."


Hilston: Of course it would be wrong to say that. If you couldn't tell that from what I wrote, you've got much larger pike to fry.
Shadowx: Why? DId God decree our talk here, the contents of our posts? What does God NOT exhaustively decree?
Please provide a list of all the things God has never decreed.


Shadowx writes: "Where then do the thoughts and ways of the wicked come from?"


Hilston: From the wicked themselves.
Shadowx: Not if God exhaustively decrees all things, you would be denying what you are proposing: God decreed *exhaustively*
Maybe you should use the word, "partially"


Shadowx writes: "Who is in control of your "External" forces?"


Hilston: External forces exert and exist according to God's determinate counsel, predestined by divine decree, while Christ holds all things together, down to their atomic structure (Col 1:16,17).
Shadowx: Include the specific choices we make? Thoughts of the wicked? Ways of the wicked?


Shadowx writes: "Thanks for saying so. That was sarcasm."


Hilston: Unless you intended to insult me, I doubt it was sarcasm.
Shadowx: It was sarcasim, but since you don't believe in what I was being sarcastic about, don't be insulted..
(It had to do with God arguing with Himself and apposing Himself)


Shadowx writes: "So here is one for you, As a Christian I'm not forced/controlled by God to sin. Are you?"


Hilston: No. No one is saying you are. Are you able to follow a cogent line of reasoning, or do you prefer obfuscating and throwing landmines all over the place for no coherent reason?
Shadowx: I will try, lets see..God exhaustively decrees..., but not the thoughts and ways of the wicked? Ok..yeah...I can see it now..cogent...


Shadowx writes: "We choose what God has chosen for us...Yes.. we do make a choice, ..but God chooses which one..:and we can't choose contrary to His choice that we choose."


Hilston: Do you know your colors and shapes, Shadowx? (That was sarcasm, by the way)
Shadowx: Perhaps you can correct my simplistic, uneducated, brief description of determinism? Where at it's core,in the above, is it incorrect?
God exhaustively decreed (past), which includes.the choices we make, no?


Shadowx writes: "So when Israel murderers their kids..and God says it's not his presence but absence that lead to this.., "


Hilston: And you probably think God actually left, don't you?
Shadowx: No, they left him. God tells us why this happend. He says they forsook him.(His ways...His..commands to them).
And you probably would give him a sarcastic smile and roll your eyes when he said he didn't have anything to do with it.
Perhaps this specific event and their specific actions are apart of your exhaustive decree theory?


Hilston: Try to keep up Shadowx. I'm looking for one example of a choice you made that was not constrained by forces outside your control. Whether it's God, a gun to your head, an upset stomach, or a stone in your shoe, I'm not requesting an example of a constrained choice, but an unconstrained one. Get it?
Shadowx: I will define what I believe freedom is, based on the Biblical record. I'm not concerned with the determinist's idea of freedom, unless it's Biblically provable. Satan has a measure of freedom and used it to walk away from God. Adam had the freedom to walk away from God, Israel had the freedom and used it to walk away from God. Gentiles who have the law written on their conscience and are without excuse, have freedom and used it to obey or walked away from God. Did God at every moment compel them to reject Him? Or Do we see the opposite..God made us with the ability to choose..blessings or Cursing. If we reject Him we will suffer the natural consequences. In Romans 1..God's ways are rejected and the logical consequences follow... It's the choice to reject God's love/calling even if he is actively working towards the opposite, because he generally allows us to, suffering the consequences..Christians reject God's revealed will to them all the time, even though he says it's not his will..
That is the kind of freedom I believe in. God was constantly trying to get Israel to choose rightly...to obey Him...Jesus wept over Jerusalem and said *he was willing* *often* to gather them, but *they were not willing*. Choose you Israel, you can do a or b, both come with consequences..God created us with the ability to choose or reject Him. John 10:38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, *believe the works: that ye may know, and believe*, that the Father is in me, and I in him.
This is the only issue regarding freedom I'm concerned with. If you object let your foundation be built upon scripture.


Hilston: So do you have an example, or shall I place yet another check mark under the column heading: "Open theists and quasi-Open Theists who cannot give one example of an unconstrained choice."
Shadowx: Break out your crayons.


So what have I learned so far..Gods *exhaustive* decree, does not include the thoughts and ways of the wicked, including Israel's pagan worship...or your sick stomach...
I really think you should shoot for..."partially decreed"...
:first:

[ context ]
 

philosophizer

New member
And thanks for picking it from the gallery and bringing it here. A lot of people don't really read the gallery comments. I know I would never have read this had you not posted it here.
 

1Way

+OL remote satellite affiliate
It sometimes boggles the mind when Christians become irrational to protect a dubious viewpoint.


Inconsistent ideas
In some ways it is very sad, and in other ways it's very comical. Overall, Hilston's presentation is a huge mockery. I see him mixing several ideas in a way that makes him inconsistent.
  • To the extent that he sticks with exhaustive,
    then he alters the control/decree portion of the equation into sounding more like various degrees of influence.

    To the extent that he is more consistent with control/decree,
    then the exhaustive portion of the equation becomes more like some things, not all things.
The real kicker is that if you talked to Hilston any other time with the same exact discussion, except that God is not part of the discussion, he would of course have enough sense to see these blatant inconsistencies and contradictions. He would understand that:
  • exhaustive must mean everything, not some things,

    and that a decree absolutely ensures the outcome, it is not influence which may or may not happen, it is absolute control. It either goes exactly as decreed, or if it does not go exactly as decreed, that fact is logically inescapable. "Exhaustive" means that "everything" happens ... according to God's decree. Said in a reflexive way, "nothing" happens differently from God's decree. The all inclusive nature mandates the amount of control, it is absolute because nothing is beyond the reach of God's decree. So if you believe in divine exhaustive decree, then there is no such thing as influence, everything is absolutely controlled by God.
The human element
But since Hilston has invested a lot of himself into his beliefs, instead of retaining biblically mandated personal humility (i.e. when comparing God and man, let God be true and every man a liar), he puts off as being willfully blind on a constant basis, acting like what he honestly does understand, he does not understand, just to pretend like he's right. In this regard, Hilston is one of the most fake and pretentious people I have ever met. I only say that because I know how smart he is when not defending false and contradictory nonsense.

But what do you expect from closed theists? They have a proven track record for overturning Gods word because of their manmade ideas, so they have developed a certain knack for violating and contradicting the highest source of truth in the universe, God's word. And worse, have the audacity to try to justify such a perverse thing.
  • Exhaustive = does not mean everything, it just means some things.
The level of mockery and nonsense is so pure.

I agree with philosophizer, thanks Knight for digging deep to present this post of the day. The more I get to know Hilston, the deeper my understanding, the more obvious it becomes just how destructive two particular things can be,
  • self determined pride
    and false doctrine,
be biblically consistent, drop any manmade ideas that do not jive with scripture or simple reason for that matter.
 

1Way

+OL remote satellite affiliate
I can't edit my last post. Please accept this editorial change.

"It either goes exactly as decreed, or if it does not go exactly as decreed, that fact is logically inescapable."

that should read without "if".

"It either goes exactly as decreed, or it does not go exactly as decreed, that fact is logically inescapable."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top