Did God Predestinate some to Hell/Wrath ?

[Free]

There is a reason Jesus said this to God's disciples who were listening to the Gospel of God that Jesus was preaching to them;

John 14
11: Believe me that I am in the Father and the Father in me; or else believe me for the sake of the works themselves.
12: "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father.
13: Whatever you ask in my name, I will do it, that the Father may be glorified in the Son;
14: if you ask anything in my name, I will do it.
15: "If you love me, you will keep my commandments.
16: And I will pray the Father, and he will give you another Counselor, to be with you for ever,
17: even the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees him nor knows him; you know him, for he dwells with you, and will be in you.

23: Jesus answered him, "If a man loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him.
24: He who does not love me does not keep my words; and the word which you hear is not mine but the Father's who sent me.
25: "These things I have spoken to you, while I am still with you.
26: But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.

Once you're anointed by the Holy Spirit sent from our Father, He will teach you all the knowledge necessary to understand all the prophecies that were written by God's prophets of the OT.

1 John 2
27: but the anointing which you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that any one should teach you; as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie, just as it has taught you, abide in him.

I have been listening to what the Holy Spirit delivers into my mind for 37 years now. He's been my teacher since then.

I will show you why your reasoning here is erroreous.

1. John 14 is addressed the to the disciples only. So when Jesus says that he will send the Holy Spirit who "will teach you all things," that is for the disciples alone, the outworking of which is the New Testament.

2. In 1 John 2, if John's statement, "you have no need that anyone should teach you," means that we always just wait to hear the Holy Spirit speak to us to give us understanding, then in saying those very words, John is writing a letter, teaching them, which contradicts what he is saying to them. So John clearly means something else, and that is most likely that they do not need anyone to teach them those things essential to salvation. Note the context in verses 21-26:

1Jn 2:21 I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and because no lie is of the truth.
1Jn 2:22 Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son.
1Jn 2:23 No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also.
1Jn 2:24 Let what you heard from the beginning abide in you. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, then you too will abide in the Son and in the Father.
1Jn 2:25 And this is the promise that he made to us—eternal life.
1Jn 2:26 I write these things to you about those who are trying to deceive you.
1Jn 2:27 But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie—just as it has taught you, abide in him. (ESV)

This strongly suggests that John is speaking of certain specific individuals who were teaching something other than what they had already been taught regarding who Jesus was.

What 1 John 2:27 most certainly is not saying, is that we don't need anyone to teach us, that all we need to do is listen to the Holy Spirit. Apart from the issues I've already pointed out with that understanding, it would also contradict what Paul says:

1Co 12:28 And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, helping, administrating, and various kinds of tongues.
1Co 12:29 Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? (ESV)

Eph 4:11 And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers,
Eph 4:12 to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ,
Eph 4:13 until we all attain to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ,
Eph 4:14 so that we may no longer be children, tossed to and fro by the waves and carried about by every wind of doctrine, by human cunning, by craftiness in deceitful schemes. (ESV)

1Co 4:16 I urge you, then, be imitators of me.
1Co 4:17 That is why I sent you Timothy, my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, to remind you of my ways in Christ, as I teach them everywhere in every church. (ESV)

1Ti 3:2 Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, (ESV)

Tit 2:1 But as for you, teach what accords with sound doctrine. (ESV)

Paul is clearly showing that we are to be taught, by those who are gifted and called to teach. This is the way that God himself has set up his church. To say that we do not need people to teach us is to go against what God himself has ordained and established; it is to go against his will.

Also:

Act 17:10 The brothers immediately sent Paul and Silas away by night to Berea, and when they arrived they went into the Jewish synagogue.
Act 17:11 Now these Jews were more noble than those in Thessalonica; they received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.
Act 17:12 Many of them therefore believed, with not a few Greek women of high standing as well as men. (ESV)

Notice that the Bereans examined "the Scriptures daily to see if" what they were being taught was true. They didn't sit and wait for some word from the Holy Spirit as to the truth of what was being said; they didn't sit and wait for the Holy Spirit to teach them--they used their God-given reason and intellect and studied.

And I will again mention something I have, unfortunately, had to mention many times here on these forums. There have been many who have come here and said that we don't need teachers, "we don't need men to teach us because we have the Holy Spirit to teach us" (as per the very passages you gave). And yet they all disagreed with each other as to what the Bible said. You are merely one of many who claims to hear directly from the Holy Spirit for biblical understanding, yet, quite significantly, you will not be in agreement in everything with the others. That alone proves that claim false.

Your posts show precisely why we need to be taught by those who are called to teach; why we need to study; why we need to consult with many others; why we must adhere to proper biblical hermeneutics. Without those things, and yes, the guidance of the Holy Spirit--always approaching Bible study with prayer, humbly and with an open heart--we are very likely to be led astray. Most of your posts contain Gnostic/neoplantonic/New Age/completely made-up mumbo-jumbo. I do not for one moment believe that you are hearing from the Holy Spirit but I do believe that are either hearing from deceitful spirits or simply just making things up, or both, and that makes you a false teacher and false prophet.

 

[Free]

Im very interested in this.

As I posted to smaller, do you not think it more likely that "beginning" in John 8:44 and 1 John 3:8 refers to the fall of man? We see in Gen. 1:31 that "God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good." But yet we all know at some level that things now are not at all very good. Indeed, much of what we see in the world is not good at all. We see in Gen. 3 that sin entered the world and the resulting evil has tainted everything.

There really is no way for God to have thought that "everything that he had made" was "very good," when we know just how bad evil actually is.

Rom 14:16 So do not let what you regard as good be spoken of as evil. (ESV)

Does it not stand to reason then that if we are not to let what we believe is "good be spoken of as evil," then we should also not let what we believe is evil to be spoken of as good? That being the case, how is it that anyone could say God created evil and yet called it "very good"?

 

[smaller]

This gets repeatedly claimed, but absolutely NO evidence from Scripture.

There is abundant scriptural evidence.

Romans 11:
32 For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

Was Adam and exception? Nope. Everyone is everyone other than God Himself in the flesh.

Romans 8:
20 For the creature was made subject to vanity, not willingly, but by reason of him who hath subjected the same in hope,
21 Because the creature itself also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God.
22 For we know that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now.

Was Adam exempt from the above? Nope. All of the "underlined" above is BY HIM.

Was Adam's "sin of the devil?" 1 John 3:38 addresses this directly.

Did this happen to Adam?

Mark 4:
15 And these are they by the way side, where the word is sown; but when they have heard, Satan cometh immediately, and taketh away the word that was sown in their hearts.

Was Adam an exception? Show it.

Did Adam receive LAW? Yep!

Genesis 2:17
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

Who is the law against?

1 Timothy 1:
9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

1 Cor. 15:42-46 goes in to great detail about "how" Adam, the first natural man was made. And Adam was not alone in his sin. Sin is of the devil who was "made" a lying deceiving tempting beast from the first time we see this character in the scripture, Gen. 3:1.

And no, you have addressed none of these, other than to declare none of the above applicable to Adam without a shred of scriptural proof to the contrary.

When you have the scriptural good, happy to look at them.

For purposes of this thread, God did make the serpent, that beast, Gen. 1:24. The serpent was "predestined" to be made by God. The serpent didn't "create" itself. And that serpent is equally predestined to the LoF, because it is already written that will transpire and has been for quite some time.

 

[smaller]

As I posted to smaller, do you not think it more likely that "beginning" in John 8:44 and 1 John 3:8 refers to the fall of man?

I know you've tried that angle before, that the sin being referred to is only Adam's sin (supposedly.) I don't and can't buy that story. Jesus tells us what happens where the Word is sown. Satan "steals" it from the heart. That's theft. Theft is a sin of Satan in that person, blinding them. 2 Cor. 4:4, Eph. 2:2 etc. Did Mark 4:15 happen to Adam? Why wouldn't it?

John 8:44 certainly doesn't claim Satan was a Holy Angel. It says the devil was a murderer from the beginning. That "murderer" was precisely made to destroy the dust body of man, so that the "second man," those who by faith, believe Jesus is their Savior, are joined to Him as that second man. None of this circumstance in the Garden was some sets of random acts by freewill agents. There is not one single scripture in the entire Bible that claims Satan or "Lucifer" was ever HOLY. No such claim of scripture exists about Holy Satan or Holy Lucifer. The first up close sight we have of the serpent in Gen. 3:1 and on shows the serpent to be a lying scripture twisting tempting deceiver. Doesn't sound very HOLY to me. And how many "thousands" of showings do we have of DEVILS in MAN in the Gospels? I count an entire LEGION of them in ONE MAN. The scriptures are filled to the brim, particularly in the Gospels, of this fact. So again, WHY wouldn't Adam be in the same shoes as everyone else?

There is also no reason, zero justifications, to "exempt" Adam from this fact:

Romans 11:
32 For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

No one in this thread has yet shown Adam exempt from these things nor have they proven Holy Satan nor have they proven "multiple creators."

We might understand that 1 Cor. 15:42-46 shows exactly and precisely the "planting conditions" of ADAM was just as Paul shows us. Planted in weakness, corruption, dishonor, and eventually the DEATH of the natural body, from which comes the SECOND MAN.

This same pattern shows up again in the scriptures in Adam's own children. The first man, Cain, a killer. The SECOND man, Abel, blessed. It's the same showing, of "first the natural, THEN the spiritual." 1 Cor. 15:46.

Even God Himself in Jesus Christ's flesh complied, by being a NATURAL MAN.

Do you think freewill put Jesus to death OR DID GOD?
You can mark me down for GOD.

We see in Gen. 1:31 that "God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good." But yet we all know at some level that things now are not at all very good.

That can only be TRUE IF Gods Own Hands are on the entirety of the events. We know for no uncertain fact that the serpent wasn't "very good." We know that Adam being 'alone' was not GOOD. I could go on at length, but there are things going on in protology that of themselves are quite provably NOT GOOD.- We can't hitch the "very good" pony to everything in the Garden because it not true. It only CAN be true IF God Is Involved, making "all things good" through His Own Power.

Romans 8:28
And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

Indeed, much of what we see in the world is not good at all. We see in Gen. 3 that sin entered the world and the resulting evil has tainted everything.

Evil didn't just pop up out of nowhere. Evil is a power. God created 'all powers' according to the scriptures. We also have a veritable super abundance of O.T. PROOFS that God worked evil against man. This notion that God can't use or do evil or make the power of evil or a wicked being is not reasonable whatsoever.

It is VERY reasonable when we see HIM, as VASTLY Superior over all things, as He DEMANDS to be seen.

There really is no way for God to have thought that "everything that he had made" was "very good," when we know just how bad evil actually is.

See the above. Jesus Himself tells us about "good" right here:

Mark 10:18
And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.

So how much "good" are we really going to spread around in the Garden, apart from Gods Own Hands? There would be neither GOOD or EVIL without God. There'd just be GOD.

Rom 14:16 So do not let what you regard as good be spoken of as evil. (ESV)

Does it not stand to reason then that if we are not to let what we believe is "good be spoken of as evil," then we should also not let what we believe is evil to be spoken of as good? That being the case, how is it that anyone could say God created evil and yet called it "very good"?

Because GOD Is So Far Above EVIL He can MAKE GOOD come from it. We just have to see A Greater Creator than our eyes our used to.

We know God can use evil for good. He did so many many times in the scriptures. Probably the most infamous is Josephs brothers selling him into slavery. What did Joseph say about it?

Genesis 50:20
But as for you, ye thought evil against me; but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive.

What few perceive is that GOD was behind that EVIL, fully intending Joseph to be sold into slavery. This event was spoken of to Abraham LONG before Joseph or his brothers were even BORN. And yes, God USED the evil in his brothers to PERFORM HIS WILL.

You don't think Adam has the identical picture? Adam, subjected to BONDAGE, CORRUPTION, VANITY. God does have Greater Purposes for these matters. Evil will do HIS Bidding.

 

[smaller]

No. God is the only ONE who knows all the symbolism that He had His prophets and saints write for Him so only He can teach us the deeper knowledge to understand what the Tree of Life is that He hid from His people all these years since Adam ate from the forbidden Tree of the knowledge of good and evil that all his offspring has been eating from.

I could write for a good long while, just on the above "tree" of eternal life. We know that NO TREE in and of itself, apart from Gods Own Power, can grant eternal life. The claim that such a tree could do such a thing of it's own would be polytheism. Christianity is NOT polytheism, by no means.

That tree has to be connected to God Himself. The tree being merely symbolic.

The very first thing Adam should have done, if he had even half a brain, would be to RUN directly to that tree, and before he did anything else, he should have ate from IT. But, God didn't TELL Adam there was such a tree. That tree was HIDDEN, quite purposefully and not disclosed to Adam. Just as salvation is NOT disclosed to the 'natural man.'

1 Corinthians 2:14
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Everyone who reads the above in the 'natural' blames the man for not receiving the things of the Spirit of God. But that isn't the case. God doesn't give His Spiritual Matters, purposefully, to the natural man, just as He didn't with Adam.

For the natural man to receive, he must be GIVEN understandings. Otherwise, by Gods Own Intentions, such will remain quite purposefully and Divinely BLINDED. Just as the first natural man, Adam was. Also BLINDED. Adam was blinded precisely how Jesus told us in Mark 4:15.

 

[smaller]

Of course all verses have occurred. Why would anyone think it relates to Adam's creation?

What makes you think Mark 4:15 didn't happen to Adam. What makes you think it doesn't happen today?

Creation order is irrelevant. What is meant by 'beasts' in quotes. And the last sentence makes no sense. Please re-arrange or re-phrase.

Satan, the serpent is no "visible" beast. Did God make "invisible" beasts in Gen. 1:25? I say yes. The serpent was not seen by Adam or Eve. Nor are we told they "saw" that serpent. They didn't because Mark 4:15 SHOWS where the beast already was. In their flesh.

Irrelevant.

Your style is assertion apart from scriptural fact. Play by the rules or don't bother.

 

[smaller]

Eternal security is proven from irrefutable logic.

If A = B, and B = C, then A = C.

Now, let's put that to Scripture.

Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
A = eternal life
B = gift of God

Rom 11:29-30 for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable.
B = God's gifts
C = irrevocable

So, A = C, or eternal life is irrevocable.

Now, to prove that this logic is flawed, one must prove either:
1. eternal life is NOT a gift of God, or
2. God's gifts are NOT irrevocable.

I'd call it "mission impossible".

I've told you many many times I AGREE with your sight on the matter of eternal security. However that is NOT the only matter in the scriptures to observe.

Your one sided one trick pony is not the only thing in play in the scriptures. There is also DIVINE JUDGMENT transpiring "in and with man" of these parties. Eph. 6:12. And on that side of the ledgers, your position is BLIND.

 

[FreeGrace]

There is abundant scriptural evidence.

Romans 11:
32 For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

Was Adam and exception? Nope.

So, apparently, your view is that to "bound over" means to cause. Is that it? I suggest executing the verse to learn what that phrase means.

 

[FreeGrace]

I asked this:
"Why would anyone think it relates to Adam's creation?"

What makes you think Mark 4:15 didn't happen to Adam. What makes you think it doesn't happen today?

It would really be helpful to answer questions rather than to dismiss them and just fire away with more of your own. That's no way to have an adult conversation.

So, once again, why should anyone believe your claim that Mark 4:15 "happened to Adam"?

Satan, the serpent is no "visible" beast. Did God make "invisible" beasts in Gen. 1:25? I say yes.

This sounds rather delirious. Where do you get all these extreme views? Certainly not from the Bible.

The serpent was not seen by Adam or Eve.

I suppose you were a witness to what Adam and the woman didn't see?? Please provide Scripture that supports your claim.

Nor are we told they "saw" that serpent.

So because we aren't told, it's "fact" that they didn't? Again, without any Scriptural support, your claims are empty.

They didn't because Mark 4:15 SHOWS where the beast already was. In their flesh.

So again, my question remains. Why should anyone believe your claim that Mark 4:15 "happened to Adam"?

None of your claims are being supported by any Scripture. That should give one pause.

Your style is assertion apart from scriptural fact. Play by the rules or don't bother.

Quit breaking these rules. Provide Scriptural support that backs up your claims, or they will remain empty and be discarded.

 

[FreeGrace]

I've told you many many times I AGREE with your sight on the matter of eternal security. However that is NOT the only matter in the scriptures to observe.

Then just list all that matters. And don't use your typical non-sensical words. Spell them out clearly and plainly.

Your one sided one trick pony is not the only thing in play in the scriptures.

OK, I'll claim that your theology is a one sided one trick pony. Now, we're even.

why don't you knock off your silly word games and speak plainly. If you know how.

There is also DIVINE JUDGMENT transpiring "in and with man" of these parties.[/QUOT]
So, how does divine judgment transpire? Please explain in plain words. And explain the vague phrase 'in and with man'.

Eph. 6:12. And on that side of the ledgers, your position is BLIND.

Which 'ledger's would that be? Please use plain words. How many 'ledgers' are there?

 

[JLB]

Northman said: ↑
If God didn't invent sin do you think we would still be dealing with those problems here on earth?

I don't believe God invented sin.

God gave his creation [men and angels] to ability to choose:

• Whether to do right, or to do unrighteousness.
• To Obey the laws of His Kingdom, or to disobey them.

Sin is disobedience to God: Transgression of God's law.

Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness. 1 John 3:4


JLB

 

[JLB]

Northman said: ↑
Wasnt that version of "perfect" used to describe Job and Noah as well? Fluid prophecies about and against nations and then "WHOOP" wrench in the middle of them? Right after God says "Son of man, raise a lamentation over the king of Tyre, and say to him, thus says the Lord God:" ?

You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created,
Till iniquity was found in you. Ezekiel 28:15

Lucifer was created as perfect in his ways... until iniquity was found in him.

Perfect - Strong's H8549 - tamiym
complete, whole, entire, sound

1. complete, whole, entire
2. whole, sound, healthful
3. complete, entire (of time)
4. sound, wholesome, unimpaired, innocent, having integrity
5. what is complete or entirely in accord with truth and fact (neuter adj/subst)
   

To me this speaks of God creating Lucifer complete and innocent, until he had a desire for something more; something that was forbidden... to sit on God's throne as God; to be worshiped as God.

I don't believe God created Satan.

I believe God created Lucifer as an arch-angel, a light bearer. Then later Lucifer became corrupt and was cast out of heaven, and then became God's enemy; Satan means Enemy, or Adversary.


If this is not the answer you are looking for, or I am not understanding what you are asking, then please help to understand better the question your asking.



JLB

 

[JLB]

There is abundant scriptural evidence.

Romans 11:
32 For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

Was Adam and exception? Nope. Everyone is everyone other than God Himself in the flesh.

Adam was of course the exception, as well as everyone else to whom this scripture is not referring to.


28 Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. 29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. 30 For as you were once disobedient to God, yet have now obtained mercy through their disobedience, 31 even so these also have now been disobedient, that through the mercy shown you [ Gentiles] they [Jews] also may obtain mercy. 32 For God has committed them all to disobedience, that He might have mercy on all. Romans 11:28-32


God has concluded the Jews, during the time the Gospel was preached, until the fullness of the Gentiles come in, as "blinded" or "disobedient" to the Gospel.


This certainly doesn't include Adam, or anyone else prior to that time.



JLB

 

[Free]

I know you've tried that angle before, that the sin being referred to is only Adam's sin (supposedly.) I don't and can't buy that story.

Wow, you are not even close to understanding my point, which I twice made very clearly.

Jesus tells us what happens where the Word is sown. Satan "steals" it from the heart. That's theft. Theft is a sin of Satan in that person, blinding them. 2 Cor. 4:4, Eph. 2:2 etc. Did Mark 4:15 happen to Adam? Why wouldn't it?

No, it didn't. The parable of the sower is about sowing the word of God:

Mar 4:14 The sower sows the word.
Mar 4:15 And these are the ones along the path, where the word is sown: when they hear, Satan immediately comes and takes away the word that is sown in them.
Mar 4:16 And these are the ones sown on rocky ground: the ones who, when they hear the word, immediately receive it with joy.
Mar 4:17 And they have no root in themselves, but endure for a while; then, when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately they fall away.
Mar 4:18 And others are the ones sown among thorns. They are those who hear the word,
Mar 4:19 but the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches and the desires for other things enter in and choke the word, and it proves unfruitful.
Mar 4:20 But those that were sown on the good soil are the ones who hear the word and accept it and bear fruit, thirtyfold and sixtyfold and a hundredfold." (ESV)

When we look at the same in Matt. 13:19, "When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart. This is what was sown along the path." (ESV)

In Luke we see the following:

Luk 8:11 Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God.
Luk 8:12 The ones along the path are those who have heard; then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, so that they may not believe and be saved. (ESV)

So we are to understand then that the word being spoken of in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, is "the word of the kingdom," that which is for salvation. And indeed, that best fits the context, which is most assuredly not the context of Adam.

With Adam, we clearly see that he was tempted, which is what caused him to question what God told him, falling into sin with evil in the world as a result.

John 8:44 certainly doesn't claim Satan was a Holy Angel. It says the devil was a murderer from the beginning.

So now we come back to my point, which you somehow missed, despite its clarity--to what does "beginning" refer to? The best understanding is that it refers to the devil's causing man to sin and thereby the death of all men, not the devil's creation.

The first up close sight we have of the serpent in Gen. 3:1 and on shows the serpent to be a lying scripture twisting tempting deceiver. Doesn't sound very HOLY to me.

Who said the serpent was holy?

And how many "thousands" of showings do we have of DEVILS in MAN in the Gospels? I count an entire LEGION of them in ONE MAN. The scriptures are filled to the brim, particularly in the Gospels, of this fact. So again, WHY wouldn't Adam be in the same shoes as everyone else?

It's hard to believe that someone claiming to be a Christian, a mature Christian, is asking such a question. At the fall of man, man gave Satan authority. That changed everything for man. To appeal to the Gospels in arguing that it was the same for Adam is to completely ignore the Fall.

There is also no reason, zero justifications, to "exempt" Adam from this fact:

Romans 11:
32 For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.

No one in this thread has yet shown Adam exempt from these things nor have they proven Holy Satan nor have they proven "multiple creators."

Adam was tempted and then sinned, so why would he be exempt?

As to claiming that no one has "proven Holy Satan nor have they proven 'multiple creators,'" no one is making those claims, so why would they try to prove something they are not claiming?

We might understand that 1 Cor. 15:42-46 shows exactly and precisely the "planting conditions" of ADAM was just as Paul shows us. Planted in weakness, corruption, dishonor, and eventually the DEATH of the natural body, from which comes the SECOND MAN.

"Planting" or being "sown" as the ESV puts it, is referring to being buried at death. Please don't tell me you believe this is referring to Adam's creation...

Ah, that is all the patience I have, especially for once again answering to a post of yours which was a response to a post to someone else.

 

[Northman]

As I posted to smaller, do you not think it more likely that "beginning" in John 8:44 and 1 John 3:8 refers to the fall of man? We see in Gen. 1:31 that "God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good." But yet we all know at some level that things now are not at all very good. Indeed, much of what we see in the world is not good at all. We see in Gen. 3 that sin entered the world and the resulting evil has tainted everything.

I do see what you are talking about. When I read that though and check the word definition itself it seems to be describing whatever its talking about, plainly meaning I think a better case can be made for it meaning the beginning of murder or sin itself rather than the event of the fall. Who knows how far back exactly that was, or if time even matters. Jesus said though that one can murder in the heart, and just because of the way the conversation played out between Eve and the serpent in the garden, Id think the devil had been doing this stuff already.

Does it not stand to reason then that if we are not to let what we believe is "good be spoken of as evil," then we should also not let what we believe is evil to be spoken of as good? That being the case, how is it that anyone could say God created evil and yet called it "very good"?

I honestly dont know how it all functions. All I know is that there are concepts. Not everyone is on the same page in these understandings. Ive had to alter the course of my mind on some things as not to judge God himself. When I learned that God employed deception, or prepared a place of torment, or left prison guards to die at the hands of the executioner for losing their charge that they had no hope of keeping. These are just a few examples. To people these things are not good, exactly the opposite. Jesus said only God was good, and I believe him. God said His creation was good, I believe him on that too.

The main deal is that regardless of what anyone anywhere thinks, there is what actually is. Satan is the only character in all creation with the sole capability, desire, and power to enthrall a third of heaven and countless mortal beings to go against God. And although we can probably agree that very many are fooled into this way of being, the enemy is doing it all on purpose and wants nothing more than to vex God every second he can. God created this being, knowing exactly what he could do. It does have a pre-destiny odor to it. Its not actually important to me one way or the other. From my end its just all possibility and I am more than ok with that.

 

[Northman]

I don't believe God invented sin.

God gave his creation to ability to choose:

• Whether to do right, or to do unrighteousness.
• To Obey the laws of His Kingdom, or to disobey them.

Sin is disobedience to God: Transgression of God's law.

Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness. 1 John 3:4


JLB

I concur with you on 1 John 3:4, and what sin is. Where we will come apart is on the inventing. God would know his likes and dislikes. The only other way it can be presented is if God somehow learned to dislike things. That cant be possible. Is there another way Im not seeing?

 

[JLB]

I concur with you on 1 John 3:4, and what sin is. Where we will come apart is on the inventing. God would know his likes and dislikes. The only other way it can be presented is if God somehow learned to dislike things. That cant be possible. Is there another way Im not seeing?

I agree that God dislikes sin: disobedience.

I agree that God dislikes for His creation to disagree, disobey, rebel against His will.


God created men and angels as good.
Good created them with the ability to choose.

Some have chosen to disagree, disobey, and rebel against His will.


JLB

 

[Northman]

You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created,
Till iniquity was found in you. Ezekiel 28:15

Lucifer was created as perfect in his ways... until iniquity was found in him.

Perfect - Strong's H8549 - tamiym
complete, whole, entire, sound

1. 
   
   
   • complete, whole, entire
   • whole, sound, healthful
   • complete, entire (of time)
   • sound, wholesome, unimpaired, innocent, having integrity
   • what is complete or entirely in accord with truth and fact (neuter adj/subst)

To me this speaks of God creating Lucifer complete and innocent, until he had a desire for something more; something that was forbidden... to sit on God's throne as God; to be worshiped as God.

I don't believe God created Satan.

I believe God created Lucifer as an arch-angel, a light bearer. Then later Lucifer became corrupt and was cast out of heaven, and then became God's enemy; Satan means Enemy, or Adversary.


If this is not the answer you are looking for, or I am not understanding what you are asking, then please help to understand better the question your asking.



JLB

Thanks for that definition from strongs, I wasnt sure but I do see it was attributed to Noah and apparently David.

I just cant get on board with the idea that Ezekiel was talking about Satan. Thats what the questions were about. How do you see this attributed to the enemy when its addressed to a specific person not named such? All I see is a whole bunch of figurative language describing the nations in the the ancient near east as parts of Eden, with Tyre paralleled to the gatekeeper.

 

[JLB]

I just cant get on board with the idea that Ezekiel was talking about Satan. Thats what the questions were about.

Ok thanks. I understand now.

Very poetic language.


I believe the "prince of Tyre" to be an earthly ruler who was influenced by the "king of Tyre" [Satan], which both will be brought to destruction in their own respected time.

11 Moreover the word of the Lord came to me, saying, 12 “Son of man, take up a lamentation for the king of Tyre, and say to him, ‘Thus says the Lord God:

“You were the seal of perfection,
Full of wisdom and perfect in beauty.
13 You were in Eden, the garden of God;
Every precious stone was your covering:
The sardius, topaz, and diamond,
Beryl, onyx, and jasper,
Sapphire, turquoise, and emerald with gold.
The workmanship of your timbrels and pipes
Was prepared for you on the day you were created.

14 “You were the anointed cherub who covers;
I established you;
You were on the holy mountain of God;
You walked back and forth in the midst of fiery stones.
15 You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created,
Till iniquity was found in you.
Ezekiel 28:11-15


You and I may not agree that this verse is referring to Lucifer, but I think we can agree it refers to an angel, and so we will apply the same principle of understanding to "this angel" that Ezekiel refers to.

The angel was created as perfect in his ways, until iniquity was found in his heart.

The angel who was created by God, was created perfect in his ways, was in the garden of Eden, but later was cast from the mountain of God.

This to me denotes the ability to choose: what is right or what is unrighteous.




JLB

 

[smaller]

Wow, you are not even close to understanding my point, which I twice made very clearly.

I know exactly what you're attempting to establish. That the "action" of sin by man is the starting point of a wayward creation. And you're ignoring the scriptural counterpoints, that wickedness existed prior to the fall, that wickedness was made by God and the law, inserted into the equations by God Himself, lit the match.

No, it didn't. The parable of the sower is about sowing the word of God:

God sowed His Word on the body of Adam, giving him life. There is no reason to discount the reality of Mark 4:15, BECAUSE Satan was in Garden. There is all kinds of scriptural evidence of the reality of the parables and of sin's working. Which case I've laid out prior. The scriptural evidence that sin was already in the flesh of Adam, and was so the moment Gods Word was sown, as Mark 4:15 states.

In light of the fact of Mark 4:15 I've requested your position to show why/how Mark 4:15 doesn't apply to the equation of Adam and Gods Word being sown in Adam.

So we are to understand then that the word being spoken of in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, is "the word of the kingdom," that which is for salvation. And indeed, that best fits the context, which is most assuredly not the context of Adam.

That is very much a stretch of conclusion on your part. You've taken a clear statement of Mark 4:15's THEFT of Gods Words and turned that statement to mean that Gods Words are ONLY Gods Words of "the kingdom." This isn't and can not be true.

I've already put Jesus' other statements of fact on the table, that man will live by Every Word of God, not just Gods Words we happen to like or discard or portion out, but Every Word of God. Matt. 4:4, Luke 4:4.

When we have evidence that all the unbelievers on the entire planet are blinded by the "god of this world, the prince of the power of the air, the spirit of disobedience" who is SATAN (and his minions) the scriptural evidence of Satan's working in man is overwhelming.

Your position might do itself well to understand that there is a dynamic in play here between Gods Words and Satan.

With Adam, we clearly see that he was tempted, which is what caused him to question what God told him, falling into sin with evil in the world as a result.

What you are not seeing in that is Satan's involvement IN the flesh of Adam.

I've also put many other scripture references on the table regarding how God made not only Adam, but creation itself. Binding everyone to disobedience including Adam from Romans 11:32. Subjecting all of creation to vanity, corruption and pain from Romans 8:20-23. And very specifically how Adam, the first/natural man was made from 1 Cor. 15:42-46.

But, ultimately, this question will come down to only one sight, that being did God create "all things" including all powers and all invisible agencies/agents including adverse spiritual agents. If we say no to this question, we have a Creator who didn't create. And that's really the issue.

Jesus Himself said of His opposers, that they would have no power over Him unless it was given to them from above. Think about this for a moment, that the opposition movement's power over and against Gods Own Son was given to them from above.

John 19:11
Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.

So now we come back to my point, which you somehow missed, despite its clarity--to what does "beginning" refer to? The best understanding is that it refers to the devil's causing man to sin and thereby the death of all men, not the devil's creation.

I don't disagree with that conclusion. What I disagree with is your conclusion that the devil's beginning is the bold underlined.

Our very first specific look at Satan in the scriptures in Gen. 3:1 shows him to already be a lying thieving scripture twisting law breaking tempter. This means Satan was made that way by God, already. There is no way to reasonably avoid this conclusion, that Satan was a murderer from the beginning, meaning his beginning. Because in our first look at this evil beast, we are exposed to his wicked ways.

My observation above is this: God created "all things." By Him all things consist, and continue to consist to this moment. Even resistance to this fact is in fact OF GOD. Col. 1:16-17, Rev. 4:11, John 1:1-3.

Who said the serpent was holy?

Many posters at this board make this claim. JLB being the chief proponent. And most in the freewill camp suffer from this christian fairy tale promoted by freewillers. I didn't know where you stood on the subject.

It's hard to believe that someone claiming to be a Christian, a mature Christian, is asking such a question. At the fall of man, man gave Satan authority.

Uh, no. That is not the case whatsoever. The only authority over creation is God Himself. The fact that man had to replenish and subdue the earth was a statement by God that the adversarial components were already put in play by God Himself. Gen. 1:28.

That changed everything for man. To appeal to the Gospels in arguing that it was the same for Adam is to completely ignore the Fall.

Your claim is that dominion was lost by man. My claim is that the existence of adversarial components were already in play, Divinely Made So. Satan was already made and given his domain by God.

Adam was tempted and then sinned, so why would he be exempt?

Sin and disobedience are not questions of only Adam. God and Satan are both assuredly involved. It is pointless to look at only Adam and Eve.

As to claiming that no one has "proven Holy Satan nor have they proven 'multiple creators,'" no one is making those claims,

Then I would suggest you're not paying attentions to a lot of claims flying around at this site.