John Calvin's Nazi God.

[Crucible]

There is no scripture that says God knows who will believe on his Son Jesus Christ and who won't.

There is a myriad of scripture that indicates God's foreknowledge- you simply deny them their correct meaning.

In fact, the only way one can even be sure of God's purpose to man is by acknowledging that He foresees all things. If He cannot, then by definition He cannot ordain anything according to an eternal will- you just end up with a sincere, yet fallible god.

That is what your demand of 'free will' does to Christianity- it completely skews God's sovereignty.

[freelight]

TULIP wilted...............

Please consider visiting the link in my signature for historical, biblical information regarding the Holy Trinity. Thank you.

There is just as many if not more proof texts and logics to support a Biblical Unitarianism - also other forms of Christology that may be just as tenable as a strictly Unitarian or Trinitarian view,...many sub-catagories and conceptual frameworks. - I also enjoy exploring Gnostic, Arian, New Age, Spiritualist and Essene/Ebionite/Nazareine forms of 'Christ' (and more), - what really matters are the essential teachings of Jesus and his role as prophet, teacher, messiah, way-shower, Son of Man/Son of God archetype, Last Adam prototype, king, priest, savior....all these roles/functions reveal how 'God' is working with-in Man, to effect his salvation, enlightenment, transformation, ascension, immorality, etc. - we behold the image, likeness,...then substance and essence of Deity in us, and allow those divine processes and potentials to unfold themselves in the right conditions, inter-acting with God synergistically. Yes, of course all is given by grace, but we have genuine freedom and responsibility in the engagement, or else there is no real enterprise, risk, creative potential, real love, promise or reward involved in the interaction. God made us response-able, so we could have free intercourse with him and all creation. Life is a co-creative venture.

If 'God' is just a cosmic chess master who moves all the pawns with total absolute control on a micro level, with them having no ability/capacity of genuine freedom of choice in any manner whatsoever, its not a co-creative venture, but just God's game, all for his own EGO, and in Calvinism it is, since 'sovereignty' is so distorted as to blow it up beyond all proportions, whereby other aspects of God's character are diminished or distorted (like love), to present a disfigured god. - in this man's freedom is also abrogated to quench and extinguish the real enterprise of life, making real love and responsibility obsolete.

See my former posts on Calvinism here and in the respective threads for my analysis on Reformed doctrine and TULIP, plus video lectures. Any are free to do their research on the values, meanings and principles espoused in Calvinism, and accept or reject them based on PRINCIPLE. You begin there, and if its in consistent, immoral, incoherent, untenable....you deal accordingly. RP's reference to a 'Nazi god' is fairly accurate, but the mysterious fashion in which Calvin's god exterminates some, and saves others is even more mysterious than Hitler's motives and express decrees. - that makes for an ominous god.

You cannot espouse a doctrine of TULIP and claim or profess that God loves all souls. In this 'formula' He certainly does NOT.

[Ask Mr. Religion]

There Is No Randomness In All of God's Creation

There is much randomness in nature as well.

Even the lot cast is in the hands of God, Robert (Prov. 16:3). What appears random to our feeble minds is but part of the ordaining of God. No sense could be made of our existence and lives if metaphysical chance or randomness were true.

The regularity in the universe's operation are the result of God's personal action accords that all that happens are meaningful events, via the contingent, free, and necessary second causes God has ordained. To assume that there are actually events that happen outside the sovereign control of God would mean that there is something else greater than God operating in the universe. If God has to wait for something to happen to learn, then the God of Abraham knew less than the God of Moses, and the God we worship now knows less than He will tomorrow. God is not accreting new knowledge as each moment passes.

God declares the end from the beginning, the things that have not yet happened, for God's own will always stands. God will do all all that He is pleased to do, for He planned it all and sees to it that all He has planned is made so. If you do not believe this, Robert, your issue is with God's own words (e.g., Isaiah 46:10-11; Numbers 24:23; 2 Samuel 17:14; Psalm 8:3; Psalm 111:9; Psalm 119:4; Psalm 139:16; Proverbs 20:24; Isaiah 45:12; Dan. 4:34-35).

Nothing comes about simply because it is decreed, rather what comes about is by a process of secondary causation which is both complex and diverse. There is definitely nothing random in God's universe, not even from the human perspective, because we are always taught by Scripture to think in terms of God ruling over all things. Therefore, chance is not random; it is causal. Chance happens to us as a result of other causes and forces which we do not control. But those very causes and forces are governed by God, and therefore their actions are never random.

We may not see the whole picture, but God does, after all, He painted it.

AMR

[freelight]

What's the difference between God creating a soul predestined to Hell and God creating a soul He foresees will go to Hell?

The philosophical quandary you are left with is considering if 'foreknowledge' abrogates genuine freedom of choice. 'God' knows all potentials, possibilities and probabilities. His foreknowledge of knowing such does not necessarily abrogate free will, neither does it necessarily absolutely predestine him to any one given destiny or final condition, since if any degree or measure of real freedom is present, a soul may choose another alternative thereby effecting a different result.

[freelight]

There is a myriad of scripture that indicates God's foreknowledge- you simply deny them their correct meaning.

In fact, the only way one can even be sure of God's purpose to man is by acknowledging that He foresees all things. If He cannot, then by definition He cannot ordain anything according to an eternal will- you just end up with a sincere, yet fallible god.

That is what your demand of 'free will' does to Christianity- it completely skews God's sovereignty.

Again, 'foreknowledge' and 'predestination' does not necessarily abrogate free will. The concept of God's omniscience in an absolute sense is also questionable given the phenomena of space and time, and variables of free will choice. I know this perspective denies the classic assumption of 'omniscience',...but might be worth considering.

[Ask Mr. Religion]

God's Simple Knowledge is Because He Has Ordained

There is a myriad of scripture that indicates God's foreknowledge- you simply deny them their correct meaning.

In fact, the only way one can even be sure of God's purpose to man is by acknowledging that He foresees all things. If He cannot, then by definition He cannot ordain anything according to an eternal will- you just end up with a sincere, yet fallible god.

That is what your demand of 'free will' does to Christianity- it completely skews God's sovereignty.

God ordains all that is to come to pass. As a necessary consequence, God foreknows because He as ordained. God does not foresee and then ordain. God ordains and as a consequent, necessarily foresees what He has ordained.

God knows all contingent events, but God’s knowledge is not itself contingent on those events, else, any notions of prophecy would be meaningless. Events occur because God decreed them, and in that sense God knew them.

God’s knowledge and our knowledge are different—not just in the amount of knowledge (unlimited/limited) but in the very manner of the acquisition of knowledge. God’s creatures accumulate knowledge discursively—through investigation and learning; but God knows everything equally vividly. God knows all possible objects of knowledge because He is God; He knows all actual objects of knowledge because He is their cause.

From this it can be said that divine omniscience is divine foreknowledge—not in the Arminian sense implying God’s peering down the corridors of the future, observing the actions of man, such that God's “decisions” are contingent upon man’s decisions. Instead when we say divine foreknowledge we are to mean that God knows the decisions of man before they occur from the express fact that God decreed these decisions. This does not rob man of his self-determination—to choose according to his inclinations—for God has decreed this very form of self-determination, too.

Foreknowledge is beforehand only to God’s creatures; to God it is simply knowledge (God's simple knowledge in theological terminology). This, orthodoxy insists, is what Scripture teaches.

AMR

[Lon]

There is just as many if not more proof texts and logics to support a Biblical Unitarianism .

This is just ignorant of theology and scripture. The tri-UNE position is both Unitarian AND Tri-

But you are off topic and this is not that thread. I will, in grace, continue to point out your poor thinking however. You need to lose your pride. You aren't nearly as intelligent as you think you are. You are a prognosticator of immature thought. You are the one needing to pay attention and learn on TOL, NOT try and teach your ignorance. Ignorance should be silent and keep learning.

[freelight]

This is just ignorant of theology and scripture. The tri-UNE position is both Unitarian AND Tri-

My statements and commentary stands. If you'd like to intelligently consider them and engage them, you're welcome to. A Unitarian view is supported and quite retional/logical, relationally speaking, and practically considered. You are apparently ignorant of my commentary and presentations, since I'm not advocating a particular or stringently defined Unitarianism, since there are different sub-catagories therein, as well as within Trinitarianism, broadly speaking, and many views in between. However, if one chooses a traditionally monotheistic Unitarian Christology,...there is nothing wrong with that despite the protests.

But you are off topic and this is not that thread.

I'm addressing a person who imposed an off topic recommendation, so I respectfully responded to it. My addressing of Unitarian/Trinitarian debate is amply expressed elsewhere and round about.

I will, in grace, continue to point out your poor thinking however. You need to lose your pride. You aren't nearly as intelligent as you think you are. You are a prognosticator of immature thought. You are the one needing to pay attention and learn on TOL, NOT try and teach your ignorance. Ignorance should be silent and keep learning.

Your poor opinion, mistaken perception and pretense of humility is noted.

[TulipBee]

God knew men wouldn't choose Him

[Lon]

If you'd like to intelligently consider them and engage them, you're welcome to.

I did. "Tri- -une" remember? You do't realize thus don't understand your own ignorance. Your ramblings stand as ignorance. I don't disdain you or your ignorance, I disdain your pride about it. It must be shown as the spectacle it is. I went to college and have a college and hundreds of thousands of men behind the truth. You? You and your ad hoc theology stand alone.

A Unitarian view is supported and quite retional/logical, relationally speaking, and practically considered. You are apparently ignorant of my commentary and presentations, since I'm not advocating a particular or stringently defined Unitarianism, since there are different sub-catagories therein, as well as within Trinitarianism, broadly speaking, and many views in between. However, if one chooses a traditionally monotheistic Unitarian Christology,...there is nothing wrong with that despite the protests.

You don't read your bible enough and never have. You haven't a clue what you are talking about.

I'm addressing a person who imposed an off topic recommendation, so I respectfully responded to it. My addressing of Unitarian/Trinitarian debate is amply expressed elsewhere and round about.

Incorrect. You don't respect scriptures, councils, or others with education where you lack.

Your poor opinion

...see the lack of respect? Unlike you, this isn't just my informed opinion. You really have a lot of disdain for Christ and His Church.

mistaken perception

It is you who is very much mistaken and so audaciously ignorant and arrogant as to purport your private interpretations and thoughts as if they 'stand on their own.' Paper cutouts don't stand on their own. Your ideas are worth less than the paper and electric signatures they are printed on. It actually costs us to listen your nonsense.

and pretense of humility is noted.

Humility ISN'T laying down for ridiculousness. I haven't called you out very often on your repeated derogatory comments on Calvinism. Rather, Proverbs says to try and correct a fool and to leave him to his/her own devices if he/she will not listen. It does try, whether words convey it or not, to correct what is blatantly wrong and horrible. You, frankly, don't know what is right. Remember the pharisees who said they did? Jesus held them accountable for that ignorant arrogance. You will not see graciousness where you don't look for it. You would have and do disdain the Lord Jesus Christ in the exact same manner whether your ignorance perceives it or not. Proverbs 15:27

[freelight]

God knew men wouldn't choose Him

My previous points that foreknowledge or predestination does not necessarily abrograte or diminish free will, stands. Obviously were real freedom of choice exists, actual free exercise of volition, one is free to choose within that given sphere of space, while 'God' knows all potentials, possibilities and probabilities in every moment of existence, so his omniscience in this sense is all-encompassing, all-inclusive.

[freelight]

The adaucity.......

I did. "Tri- -une" remember? You do't realize thus don't understand your own ignorance. Your ramblings stand as ignorance. I don't disdain you or your ignorance, I disdain your pride about it. It must be shown as the spectacle it is. I went to college and have a college and hundreds of thousands of men behind the truth. You? You and your ad hoc theology stand alone.

You don't read your bible enough and never have. You haven't a clue what you are talking about.


Incorrect. You don't respect scriptures, councils, or others with education where you lack.

...see the lack of respect? Unlike you, this isn't just my informed opinion. You really have a lot of disdain for Christ and His Church.
It is you who is very much mistaken and so audaciously ignorant and arrogant as to purport your private interpretations and thoughts as if they 'stand on their own.' Paper cutouts don't stand on their own. Your ideas are worth less than the paper and electric signatures they are printed on. It actually costs us to listen your nonsense.
Humility ISN'T laying down for ridiculousness. I haven't called you out very often on your repeated derogatory comments on Calvinism. Rather, Proverbs says to try and correct a fool and to leave him to his/her own devices if he/she will not listen. It does try, whether words convey it or not, to correct what is blatantly wrong and horrible. You, frankly, don't know what is right. Remember the pharisees who said they did? Jesus held them accountable for that ignorant arrogance. You will not see graciousness where you don't look for it. You would have and do disdain the Lord Jesus Christ in the exact same manner whether your ignorance perceives it or not. Proverbs 15:27

Sorry, you were the one butting in with the demeaning, condescending words, and put downs. Not me. - rather rude and arrogant. Look at your attitude and words, with all the pretense of piety and smug superiority of religiousity. - and then to say I'm not being respectful for calling you out on your pompous judgments? - I find that comical. If you want to challenge my commentary on Calvinism, 'free will', 'predestination', etc....which I've amply addressed...do so, but do so respectfully...or move along.

[Tambora]

I did. "Tri- -une" remember? You do't realize thus don't understand your own ignorance. Your ramblings stand as ignorance. I don't disdain you or your ignorance, I disdain your pride about it. It must be shown as the spectacle it is. I went to college and have a college and hundreds of thousands of men behind the truth. You? You and your ad hoc theology stand alone.

You don't read your bible enough and never have. You haven't a clue what you are talking about.


Incorrect. You don't respect scriptures, councils, or others with education where you lack.

...see the lack of respect? Unlike you, this isn't just my informed opinion. You really have a lot of disdain for Christ and His Church.
It is you who is very much mistaken and so audaciously ignorant and arrogant as to purport your private interpretations and thoughts as if they 'stand on their own.' Paper cutouts don't stand on their own. Your ideas are worth less than the paper and electric signatures they are printed on. It actually costs us to listen your nonsense.
Humility ISN'T laying down for ridiculousness. I haven't called you out very often on your repeated derogatory comments on Calvinism. Rather, Proverbs says to try and correct a fool and to leave him to his/her own devices if he/she will not listen. It does try, whether words convey it or not, to correct what is blatantly wrong and horrible. You, frankly, don't know what is right. Remember the pharisees who said they did? Jesus held them accountable for that ignorant arrogance. You will not see graciousness where you don't look for it. You would have and do disdain the Lord Jesus Christ in the exact same manner whether your ignorance perceives it or not. Proverbs 15:27

Atta boy, Lon!

[freelight]

Atta boy, Lon!

Seriously? You approve of his pompous attitude and condescension? Its hardly commendable dear. Far from it.

[Tambora]

Seriously? You approve of his pompous attitude and condescension? Its hardly commendable dear. Far from it.

Yes.
I sure do.
Yes it is.
Nope, it's spot on.