Christianity and the Meaning of Life

[JM]

In your rage against Calvinism you confused the threads.

 

[Drew]

In your rage against Calvinism you confused the threads.

Nope - perfectly aware the question was in a different thread.

And I rage against faulty arguments - not Calvinism.

 

[Drew]

Now, since we have come to learn that Drew's starting point is different from Christianity, we can now properly examine his thinking on other subjects he has attacked on this thread--such as the immutability of God.

Drew earlier tried to use what he called a "literal reading" of a passage in 2 Kings 20 to claim that God changes. But in light of Drew's recent confession that a literal reading can be rejected:

I do not believe that the Earth is 10,000 years old even though a "literal" reading of the Scriptures would tend to promote such a view.

It is clear that whatever he means by "literal reading" is certainly not authoritative in any sense. Drew's interpretation of the Bible is as eclectic as his epistemology. He has produced no method of determining what literal passages can and can not be accepted as true in light of his criticism of Biblical creation and empiricism. Clearly he has forced the Bible to fit his "scientific" view of the world. This also reveals his real god and master, which is scientific empirical method.

I make no apologies re the creation account. I do use "empirical" sources to inform my decisions about which texts to take literally - spiritually improverished pagan that I am, I actually use empricial knowledge of the world to conclude that Psalm 96 is not asserting that trees actually sing when it is written that

"let all the trees of the forest sing for joy"

However, no reasonable person would jump to the conclusion that the scientific method is my "real god and master". It is only to the simple-minded that the choice between Scripture and empiricism is this kind of "either-or" that RB seems to represent it as being.

And this is the real danger and part of the reason why I suffer these interactions - I worry that pockets of evangelical Christianity have become intellectually inbred to the point where people actually believe such things.

 

[Drew]

The only argument that can go on now with Drew is whether the Bible alone is the Word of God, or whether empiricism is a source of truth.

Err...How about demonstrating that my plausiblity argument about the alternate interpretation of Eph 1:11 is incorrect. That is kind of how this whole thing got started.

 

[Jay T]

Drew,

You are wasting your time. Beetle thinks the logic of man can be used to discern scripture.

:o

Is Beetle wrong ?

After all...it is man's doctrine of Sunday worship services, Not God's.....that men follow.

 

[christian_soldier]

Is Beetle wrong ?

Calvin was wrong. Beetle is merely a follower.

 

[Guest]

Is there anyone left who believes that the Bible alone is the Word of God, and who wishes to demonstrate that man has free will?

Sola Fide
Red Beetle

 

[christian_soldier]

The Bible oozes the choices made freely by men. Your refusal to acknowledge same changes nothing. Denial is not a river in Egypt.

 

[Guest]

The Bible oozes the choices made freely by men. Your refusal to acknowledge same changes nothing. Denial is not a river in Egypt.

Why don't you post one of those nice verses that teach free will.
We've yet to see even one.

Psalm 105:25
Man, that doesn't sound like they were free at all!

Sola Scriptura
Red Beetle

 

[Drew]

Why don't you post one of those nice verses that teach free will.
We've yet to see even one.

How about verses that teach that God fully determines the will of men? We have yet to see even one. We have seen that Eph 1;11 does not do it. We have seen that Proverbs 16:1 doesn't do it, we have seen that Psalm 105:25 doesn't do it. We have seen that Matthew 10:29-31 doesn't do it.

If any one wants to know the reasons why these verses do not individually or collectively support the full determination of the will of man, I will be happy to point them to posts and / or provide more information.

Besides, the hidden implication in RB's post here appears to be that if free will exists there should be verses that teach it.

What about the Trinity? Where are the verses that teach the Trinity?

 

[Drew]

You have made no significant case at all that your view of Eph 1:11 is scriptural. Interestingly, you have yet made no comments on my rather detailed argument that indeed Eph 1:11 can be interpreted another way. If my argument does not establish the plausibility of this other interpretation, why not attack that argument rather than creating a misleading issue out of the Sola Scriptura issue?

You idea of another possibilities has been pointed out to you before as unscriptural.

Let not the reader be misled. I believe that JM is referring to my history of pointing out that a certain text "A" is consistent with two competing interpretations "X" and "Y". Guilty as charged. That this state of affairs can exist in respect to statements rendered in natural language is obvious. Consider the statement:

"You cannot put too much water on the nuclear reactor core"

If you think about it, you will see that the meaning of this text is ambiguous, with 2 polar opposite interpretations possible.

Here is the general principle that I am trying to communicate: Even though texts like A, as individuals, are ambiguous in respect to establishing either X or Y. this does not mean that the Scriptures as a whole are ambiguous in respect to whether X is true or Y is true.

My claim is that JM wants you to think that I am claiming that the Scriptures are ambiguous - that I am saying that the Scriptures only teach "possibilities".

In fact I am saying no such thing.

 

[Drew]

The request that I "define" what I mean by free will is indeed a legitimate one. I hope to post something about this reasonably soon.

 

[Jay T]

Is there anyone left who believes that the Bible alone is the Word of God, and who wishes to demonstrate that man has free will?

Sola Fide
Red Beetle

Adam & Eve had free will....they had to choose whom they would obey....God or satan.

Grace, is extended to every person on earth......
Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
2:12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;

 

[christian_soldier]

Adam & Eve had free will....they had to choose whom they would obey....God or satan.

I agree with you, Jay. But, according to beetle:

The fact that one chooses does not imply there is "free" will. Choices are determined by God.

It seems man never had a chance. The god of Calvin is apparently a game player, setting man up to fall. And, a few of them were chosen by this god to be redeemed, with no criteria, presumably, other than this god's whim, while the rest will burn in hell by this same whim.

 

[Solo]

Another "duck and run" move from Drew. I love it.

 

[Guest]

Adam & Eve had free will....they had to choose whom they would obey....God or satan.

Grace, is extended to every person on earth......
Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
2:12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;

Jay T, you are right when you state that Adam and Eve had to choose.
They were put in the garden and given commands.
What I want you to consider is if the Bible teaches that the choices they made were determined by God or apart from God.

Man has a will, but is the will free from God, or does God determine man's will.
The Bible puts forth this rhetorical question stating, "For who hath resisted His will?" Romans 9:19

The meaning is that no man's will is able to resist God's will.
If God really does have a plan for each specific person, if God really does order the steps of each man (Psalm 37:23), then does this not mean that God causes the will of man to will according to his plan (Proverbs 19:21)?
Think about it.

Sola Scriptura
Red Beetle

 

[Guest]

Jay-T

Grace, is extended to every person on earth......
Titus 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

Grace is an attribute of God. It is God's unmerited favor. If God is favorable to all men, then all will be saved. To be consistent with the Bible's teachings on hell, one must understand that God is favorable to all of His elect--those chosen to be justified, but not favorable to the reprobate-- those He has rejected.
It is true that the Son of God came to earth and merited salvation for His people, but do you think that this infers that men have free will? The first coming of Christ and all His actions were certainly determined by God, why not man's will as well? Acts 2:23-24

2:12 Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;

There is a difference between what a man should do, and what a man can do. That a man should keep God's law does not imply that his will is free to do so. The Bible says that no man does anything good before he is regenerated (Romans 3:12). This certainly implies that man's will is not free to will good works before the Holy Spirit regenerates him and gives him faith. In fact, an unregenerated person can not will to believe the Gospel, for believing the Gospel is a good act (and we know that no man does good until he is regenerated Romans 3:12). Ephesians 2:1-10 shows us a good picture of God controlling the salvation of a man dead in sin and unable to do any good. First God regenerates a man (quickening the dead to life) then gives that man faith. The new birth is the work of God, and God continues that work in conversion.

Sola Scriptura
Red Beetle

 

[Guest]

Drew wrote:

I believe that JM is referring to my history of pointing out that a certain text "A" is consistent with two competing interpretations "X" and "Y". Guilty as charged.

Contrary interpretations can both be wrong, but they can not both be correct.
***Basic logic***
Definition, context, logic, and other parts of Scripture which speak more clearly on the point decide the correct interpretation of any one verse. Your idea that a verse can have different interpretations at the same time is not just illogical, it is Roman Catholic.

Sola Scriptura
Red Beetle

 

[Drew]

I believe that JM is referring to my history of pointing out that a certain text "A" is consistent with two competing interpretations "X" and "Y". Guilty as charged.

Contrary interpretations can both be wrong, but they can not both be correct.
***Basic logic***
Definition, context, logic, and other parts of Scripture which speak more clearly on the point decide the correct interpretation of any one verse. Your idea that a verse can have different interpretations at the same time is not just illogical, but it is Roman Catholic.

I am sorry RB, but you are simply not representing me properly and I can only hope that any readers following this thread know the real history here. I have never stated or remotely implied that contrary interpretations can both be correct. I ask you to provide a specific post where I have stated or implied such a thing. You have made similar misrepresentations of my position and have not provided any posts of mine as evidence, despite my requesting them. Please stop misrepresenting me.

I am indeed saying that an individual verse can have more than one interpretation - this is not news and it is painfully obvious. In fact you yourself state in this very post:

Definition, context, logic, and other parts of Scripture which speak more clearly on the point decide the correct interpretation of any one verse

Why would we even need to bring such things to bear on the "one verse" if the interpretation of that verse were not considered ambiguous?

I heartily endorse the statement of yours immediately above. It is precisely because individual verses and texts can be ambiguous that we indeed need to invoke "definition, context, logic, etc., exactly as you say.

We are in violent agreement about one thing, at least.

 

[Jay T]

It seems man never had a chance. The god of Calvin is apparently a game player, setting man up to fall. And, a few of them were chosen by this god to be redeemed, with no criteria, presumably, other than this god's whim, while the rest will burn in hell by this same whim.

Yes, and so I REJECT this Calvinistic approach to 'predestination'.

I wrote an article on my views of Predestination once.....and here it is......

SALVATION BY MANIPULATION

Manipulation Theology is based, on the belief that man has no choice in being saved or lost.
The power of choice, is not involved in the process.

In other words, 'predestination', carried to its logical conclusion means....

'God predestinates most people on the earth, to be lost....forces them to sin....does not allow them to repent....then tortures them throughout all eternity....as punishment....for the sins, that HE forces them to commit' !



From the Book: "The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination", by Calvinist theologian, Loraine Boettner.
(all quotations hereafter are from that book.....)

God's manipulation makes all things happen:

"God from all eternity did...ordain whatsoever comes to pass", pg. 13.

"He has foreordained whatsoever comes to pass", pg. 17.

"Nothing can come to pass apart from His sovereign will", pg. 30.

"Nothing can come to pass contrary to what He expressly decrees", pg. 14.

"God has an eternal plan in which predetermined every event that comes to pass", pg. 23.

"His decree extends to every event in human history", pg. 13.

God's manuipulation includes the smallest details of life.

"History in all its details, even the most minute, is but the unfolding of the eternal purposes of God", pg 25.

God manipulates everyone's thoughts, impulses, and feelings.

"Not only the works we do outwardly, but even the thoughts we think inwardly", pg. 15.

"God is the sovereign ruler who governs even the intimate thoughts and feelings and impulses of men", pg. 34.

"It is He that manuipulates the very thoughts and intents of the heart, pg. 31.

God manipulates all evil as well as all good...

"Plainly the fall of the perfect man, Adam, were in His plan", pg.24.

"Even the fall of Adam, and through him the fall of the race, was not by choice or accident, but was so ordained in the secret counsels of God", pg. 234.

"Even the sinful acts of men are included in His plan", pg. 24.
"That the sinful acts of men have their place and a nccessary place in His plan", pg. 252.

God's manipulation gives no opportunity of repentance !

"In matters of pertaining to his salvation, the unregenerate man is not at liberty to choose between good and evil", pg 62.

"God at the same time, and by the same means withholds from them the opportunity and power of believing and being saved", pg. 91.

QUESTION: "If all sinning is done by the deliberate foreordained manipulation of God, which cannot be resisited by the sinner......are they not free....from the responsiblity, and the penalty of committing those sins ?

ANSWER: The Calvinist answers....NO !

"By the decree of God, for the manisfestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestined to everlasting life, and most are foreordained, to everlasting torture in hell", pg. 84.

The manipulation of God tortures the non-elect forever !

"God creates most people, predestines them to be lost....forces them to committ sin.....does not permit them to repent.....then, tortures them throughout all eternity...for the sins....which HE forced them to commit".

Boettner (the author) tells us: "No injustice is done to the non-elect", pg. 113.

This book was published in 1932....by the Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company.


I will say right here.....I REJECT THIS (one) THEORY OF PREDESTINATION !!

The fiendish god of Calvinism clearly delights on torture.
After his helpless victims have screamed and agonized through a million years of torture, this god of theirs, happily appoints them another million years, and another, and another.
IT WILL NEVER END !

To recap this paper:
Boettner, the Calvinist theologian tells us that although the will of man in under the control of God down to the smallest detail of life, nevertheless the will of man remains totally free.
He also insists that although God forces the non-elect to commit sin, not permitting them to repent, then tortures them throughout all eternity as punishment, for the sins that HE forced them to commit, that there is no injustice to the non-elect ?!?



I personally believe in these few Bible verses:

#1.) Acts 10:34 "Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that [God is no respecter of persons]".

#2.) Titus 2:11 "For the [grace of God] that bringeth salvation [hath appeared to all men]".