Does God have an inner conflict?

Says the dodger.
yes his god is the author of sin and sin originates from his god since he holds his god accountable for everything that comes to pass coming from his gods perfect will. as I'm sure he beleives the other passage ripped from the biblical narrative- his god created evil/sin which is another twisted passage by some in Isaiah 45.

yikes- hyper is right.
 
yes his god is the author of sin and sin originates from his god since he holds his god accountable for everything that comes to pass coming from his gods perfect will. as I'm sure he beleives the other passage ripped from the biblical narrative- his god created evil/sin which is another twisted passage by some in Isaiah 45.

yikes- hyper is right.
Which is of course contrary to scripture

James 1:13–17 (KJV 1900)
13 Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: 14 But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. 15 Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. 16 Do not err, my beloved brethren. 17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.

1 Corinthians 10:13 (KJV 1900)
13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.

1 John 2:16 (KJV 1900)
16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.

Jeremiah 19:5 (ESV)
5 and have built the high places of Baal to burn their sons in the fire as burnt offerings to Baal, which I did not command or decree, nor did it come into my mind—
 
It's trying to solve am problem that doesn't exist. The simplest solution is to take many passages at face value that say God desires good for all men including their salvation, but desires something else even more, so that not everyone is saved.
That's a problem that does exist because whatever it is that God desires more than their salvation necessarily negates the former claim that God desires their salvation.

What could be more important than saving human beings from eternal damnation?
 
That's a problem that does exist because whatever it is that God desires more than their salvation necessarily negates the former claim that God desires their salvation.

What could be more important than saving human beings from eternal damnation?
And yet some don't get saved in your view I assume?
Explain
 
The more "high" calvinist view is that God does not desire the salvation of all men.

They say this would create inner conflict with God which can't be the case.

However, they are still left with passages they mush admit describe a will of God that is in conflict than another will of God.

They call this God's descriptive and prescriptive wills.

One of many examples:
1 thessalonians 4:3 For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you should abstain from sexual immorality;

God wills, and yet doesn't will, that we not sin.

I don't see how this is any less of an inner conflict with God than the idea of competing desires. Just giving these wills different adjectives (prescriptive\descriptive)doesn't poof the conflict away.

It's trying to solve am problem that doesn't exist. The simplest solution is to take many passages at face value that say God desires good for all men including their salvation, but desires something else even more, so that not everyone is saved.
You raise the issue with regard to high Calvinists; however, the non-Calvinist is often guilty on the other side. Often the Calvinist is accused of contradiction when it is rather normal to have different conflicting motives or considerations in one person. I think that your critique is spot on for the high Calvinist, but it is also spot on for the non-C who ignores the issue and distinction of internal conflict and accuses Calvinists of contradiction.

I think that Piper's idea of 2 wills is confusing. I agree with the idea of internal conflict, but I just see his wording as potentially confusing. However, while I disagree with his wording, I substantively agree with nearly the whole of his online article and book appendix where he explains the issue.
 
You raise the issue with regard to high Calvinists; however, the non-Calvinist is often guilty on the other side. Often the Calvinist is accused of contradiction when it is rather normal to have different conflicting motives or considerations in one person. I think that your critique is spot on for the high Calvinist, but it is also spot on for the non-C who ignores the issue and distinction of internal conflict and accuses Calvinists of contradiction.

I think that Piper's idea of 2 wills is confusing. I agree with the idea of internal conflict, but I just see his wording as potentially confusing. However, while I disagree with his wording, I substantively agree with nearly the whole of his online article and book appendix where he explains the issue.
Yep, the A's can't get around the fact God wants something more than He wants to save everyone.
 
You raise the issue with regard to high Calvinists; however, the non-Calvinist is often guilty on the other side. Often the Calvinist is accused of contradiction when it is rather normal to have different conflicting motives or considerations in one person. I think that your critique is spot on for the high Calvinist, but it is also spot on for the non-C who ignores the issue and distinction of internal conflict and accuses Calvinists of contradiction.

I think that Piper's idea of 2 wills is confusing. I agree with the idea of internal conflict, but I just see his wording as potentially confusing. However, while I disagree with his wording, I substantively agree with nearly the whole of his online article and book appendix where he explains the issue.
I side with the 2 wills in Christ having both a human and Divine will . The will is part of the nature , Christ having 2 natures .
 
do you think all are saved?
I suppose it depends on what you mean by "all". Jesus points out that apart from him, nobody can do anything. Paul affirms this by pointing out that it isn't he who does the will of God, but Christ in him. Therefore, all who are in Christ must necessarily be saved, and there cannot be anyone outside of Christ.
if not there mush be something more important
There cannot be anything more important to humanity.
 
I suppose it depends on what you mean by "all". Jesus points out that apart from him, nobody can do anything. Paul affirms this by pointing out that it isn't he who does the will of God, but Christ in him. Therefore, all who are in Christ must necessarily be saved, and there cannot be anyone outside of Christ.

There cannot be anything more important to humanity.
Do you believe there will be a hell/ lake of fire where the wicked who reject Christ will spend an eternity in torment ?
 
yes his god is the author of sin and sin originates from his god since he holds his god accountable for everything that comes to pass coming from his gods perfect will. as I'm sure he beleives the other passage ripped from the biblical narrative- his god created evil/sin which is another twisted passage by some in Isaiah 45.

yikes- hyper is right.
Junior continues to prove that when he's frustrated by questions that challenge him to think, he fails, because he doesn't know what he's talking about ... 🤔

@civic
 
I’ve already raised my 4 children who became teenagers and are now grown adults .

I’m not interested in dealing with juvenile behavior from a teenager.

I’m interested in adult conversations and dialogue.

hope this helps !!!
 
I’ve already raised my 4 children who became teenagers and are now grown adults .

I’m not interested in dealing with juvenile behavior from a teenager.

I’m interested in adult conversations and dialogue.

hope this helps !!!
Junior continues to prove that when he's frustrated by questions that challenge him to think, he fails, because he doesn't know what he's talking about ... 🤔

@civic
 
I suppose it depends on what you mean by "all". Jesus points out that apart from him, nobody can do anything. Paul affirms this by pointing out that it isn't he who does the will of God, but Christ in him. Therefore, all who are in Christ must necessarily be saved, and there cannot be anyone outside of Christ.

There cannot be anything more important to humanity.
There can be something more important to humanity: namely God. But the issue isn't about what humans value, is it? The question is about what God Himself values more.
 
I side with the 2 wills in Christ having both a human and Divine will . The will is part of the nature , Christ having 2 natures .
I'm not going to debate over the hypostatic union. I'll simply sidestep that discussion with the following point. The issue that simpletruther raises is typically with respect to God's eternal decree. As such, it predates the incarnation, so an appeal to Christ's human nature is out of bounds.

But, my main issue with the two wills in God is the issue of clarity.
 
Back
Top