Why does God call people to repentence?

Agreed...

We would have to modify the word Kosmos by using All Scripture to do so; otherwise it means everyone...

The modifying would be Theology, not Eisegesis...

We credit the modifying to the Theology, not the Verse. I grow more convinced that some cries of Eisegeting a Verse are misplaced; the modifying belongs to Systematic Theology instead...
I'm unsure if I understand you correctly. Kosmos does not mean "everyone" anyway; it is simply not one of its definitions.

I do agree that we must interpret verses in the light of clear doctrine from other verses. They must never contradict each other.
 
Last edited:
We are to obey him, correct. Where did I say God has to obey his own commands in my reply? Why are you trying to attribute this false accusation against me, I never said that?

Again another false accusation.

He wants us to obey, he doesn't want us to obey, correct. Are you telling me this is the God you believe in?

Here we can agree. 100%

So if we do what is opposite to what is good, that is God determinative will, correct? So is this not in contradiction to what you previously said about doing right and good? Either he wants us to do that or he doesn't?

What you are saying is God wants us to obey him and do what is right and good, but secretly he doesn't want us to and even determined that we don't.

So are you saying God desired/wanted Adam and Eve to disobey him and fall into sin?
I doubt if you are going to understand, but I'll try anyway.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that God had determined Adam not to fall. In this case, since Adam did fall, someone would have had to overpower, or outwit, God, in order for Adam to fall. Not only that, but, God ordained the Cross, before he even created Adam, so Adam had to fall, otherwise the Cross would have been completely pointless.

Another proof that it was God's determinative will for Adam to fall, is that God could have prevented it, in an infinite number of ways, without doing any violence to Adam's will (e.g. he could have warned Adam about the serpent; he could have prevented the serpent from tempting Eve; he could have stepped in and reminded Eve not to eat the forbidden fruit, etc, etc.).
 
God does indeed sometimes cause people to do what they ought to do.

Ez. 36:27 (WEB) I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and you shall keep my ordinances, and do them.
Even in Psalm 23:2 "He makes me lie down in green pastures. He leads me beside still waters."

Haven't heard a sheep claim that's unfair, but they would if they were consistent in their belief of "force" and/or that God doesn't do what His word says He does, i.e. "causing."
 
Let's say, for the sake of argument, that God had determined Adam not to fall. In this case, since Adam did fall, someone would have had to overpower, or outwit, God, in order for Adam to fall. Not only that, but, God ordained the Cross, before he even created Adam, so Adam had to fall, otherwise the Cross would have been completely pointless.
Yes, which touches on a small epiphany I had during the exchange on this thread.

Gen 50/20 God meant it for good, in order to bring it as it is to this day
Isa 10/6 I will send him against an ungodly nation...But it is in his heart to destroy
Acts 4/7 whom you crucified...this is the stone which has become the chief cornerstone

To get a murder conviction (for instance), not only does "intent" have to be proven but also "motive" has to be proven.
All Calvinists will agree "God meant it for good" shows God had a different "intent" with Joseph than his brothers did, but what's often overlooked is that the "motive" or "outcome" is also completely different from the point of view of God.
Adam
Joseph
Assyria
Jesus
Are all part of a different motive by God than the "rod of my anger" intended. Assyria's ultimate motive is to acquire booty, but God's ultimate motive is His redemptive plan. Adam's ultimate motive went no further than simple sin, but God was motivated by fruition of His plan. Both the intent (to enslave Joseph) and the motive (jealousy) were different than God's in Genesis 50.

Another factor in the culpability issue.
 
God does indeed sometimes cause people to do what they ought to do.

Ez. 36:27 (WEB) I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and you shall keep my ordinances, and do them.
I didn't say God doesn't cause people to do what they ought to do. I said he doesn't make them do what they ought to do. There is a difference.

If one saw a fast moving automobile they might say I'd like to move at that speed. They choose to enter the automobile close the door and hit the accelerator. The car now causes them to be able to go at the speed they saw.

God however does not MAKE people get into the car which is the teaching of Calvinism with the irresistible method you claim.
 
God does indeed sometimes cause people to do what they ought to do.

Ez. 36:27 (WEB) I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and you shall keep my ordinances, and do them.
Also notice this. What you're reading about in Ez 36:27 was speaking of the time when men would receive the Spirit of God into their lives. The curtain of the temple when Jesus died split from top to bottom meaning God was no longer going to be in such physical places but take up is abode in the hearts of men. There is no such thing as, "I will put my Spirit when you" without men choosing to do what's said below,

“Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. This promise belongs to you and your children and to all who are far off—to all whom the Lord our God will call to Himself.” Acts 2:38

He did not force them to do these things. He did not make them do these things. They had the free will choice yah or nay as to whether they would.
 
Anyone repeatedly projecting a derogatory emotional response like "angry" or "upset" is engaging in dishonesty, and is showing their true colours that they are not any true kind of "Christian".

But since you can't defend your false theology Bibically, I understand why such worthless individuals need to engage in such dishonest tactics.
 
Well, @LeeH, I think it's very interesting that you responded in this way, for a number of reasons:

1) You responded after you CLAIMED that you were putting me on "ignore". So clearly we can't trust ANYTHING you say.

2) In the quote of mine you quoted, I didn't identify ANYONE as "worthless", I simply spoke in general. If YOU choose to identify and accept the description, that's on you, not on me.

3) In the quote of mine you quoted, that was in response to Rockson, not you, so I have to wonder if you are admitting that you are a sockpuppet for Rockson. That would truly explain a lot.

4) If you truly understood the fall and our sinful nature, you would realize that we sinners are ALL of us "worthless" (Rom. 3:10-18). That is probably one of the reasons you hold to a false theology, since you probably think that God should save us because we are "worth" it. When you finally understand our radical corruption, you realize how AMAZING God's grace is to condescending to save ANYONE at all. Having said that, it probably wasn't the best decision to use that comment in the first place.

Have a nice day, since you obviously are NOT "ignoring" me.
 
I didn't say God doesn't cause people to do what they ought to do. I said he doesn't make them do what they ought to do. There is a difference.

If one saw a fast moving automobile they might say I'd like to move at that speed. They choose to enter the automobile close the door and hit the accelerator. The car now causes them to be able to go at the speed they saw.

God however does not MAKE people get into the car which is the teaching of Calvinism with the irresistible method you claim.
"cause you to walk in my statutes" means what? Someone is in denial
 
I doubt if you are going to understand, but I'll try anyway.

Let's say, for the sake of argument, that God had determined Adam not to fall. In this case, since Adam did fall, someone would have had to overpower, or outwit, God, in order for Adam to fall.
If God had, yes that would be the case.
Not only that, but, God ordained the Cross, before he even created Adam, so Adam had to fall, otherwise the Cross would have been completely pointless.
Adam had free will, God knew he would fall, God did not have to ordain that to happen, but because that happened God had to have a plan to redeem mankind. Do you agree Adam had free will?
Another proof that it was God's determinative will for Adam to fall, is that God could have prevented it
Adam had free will, where is the proof God determined Adam to disobey his commandment? Are you saying God wants Adam to break his own commandments? He wants Adam to sin? Satan wants that, so he can murder Gods creation, cause seperation, not God.

If God gives Adam free will to choose, God sist back and has to let him,
, in an infinite number of ways, without doing any violence to Adam's will (e.g. he could have warned Adam about the serpent; he could have prevented the serpent from tempting Eve; he could have stepped in and reminded Eve not to eat the forbidden fruit, etc, etc.).
So because God did not jump in and stop it, knowing full well what would happen, he predetermined it, he allowed it to happen, is that correct?

So God issues a commandment, because he has to, but is hoping they disobey it, which they did. That is your take on the two wills, yes? You see I do understand it.

How about God gives them free will, knows they will break his commandment, but doesn't want them to and then has to deal with all the fall out, meaning the chaos that will come after. Maybe God knew it would happen, but couldn't prevent it because of God giving man free will. If you have a son or daughter, do you lock them in a room for their whole life in case they do something wrong, like take drugs? Or do you give them freedom and give them advice and hope they will listen?

Adam and Eve didn't listen.

The problem you have is once you say God has two wills and one will is opposed to the other, especially when we are dealing with sin, if God commands man to obey, but Gods other will is for him not to, if man disobeys Gods commandment, Gods will is being thwarted by his own determinsitic will. God has become divided within himself.

What does Jesus say about a divided house? Mark 3:24-25

The bible is very simple to understand, but Calvinism introduces such complexities, that things like two wills have to be introduced into scripture to make Calvinism seem plausible, but it becomes very exposed.

God cannot be divided against himself, his will was for Adam and Eve to keep his commandment, they had free will, they didn't keep it, it's that simple. God commands man to repent and believe in the gospel, some will, many won't it's that simple. No need for two wills.
 
I doubt if you are going to understand, but I'll try anyway.
And we have one thing in common. We're trying to help you understand too. Maybe we can keep the helping thing to go on.

Another proof that it was God's determinative will for Adam to fall, is that God could have prevented it,
An parent may not prevent an adult offspring to experience the consequences of their actions. Just because they had the ability to do something doesn't mean it was the logical right thing to prevent it.

(e.g. he could have warned Adam about the serpent;
He warned him about a wrong action and what would occur. That most certainly is sufficient.

he could have prevented the serpent from tempting Eve;
The very test was to demonstrate God gave man free will.

he could have stepped in and reminded Eve not to eat the forbidden fruit, etc, etc.).
They were told what LIFE and DEATH was. They choose. And you don't know anyway even if he did they might have still did the same thing. No need therefore to consider your speculation. They were told. Right?
 
Adam had free will,

Where does the Bible teach that?

Do you agree Adam had free will?

Not until you show us where the BIBLE teaches that Adam had "free will".

Adam had free will, where is the proof God determined Adam to disobey his commandment?

That's funny!
You refuse to show where Scripture teaches "Adam had free will", and you want US to show Scripture for our beliefs?
Double standards much?

Are you saying God wants Adam to break his own commandments? He wants Adam to sin? Satan wants that, so he can murder Gods creation, cause seperation, not God.

This is ratioalization, not Scripture.

If God gives Adam free will to choose, God sist back and has to let him,

So we're STILL WAITING for you to PROVE from the Bible that "God gives Adam free will to choose".

So because God did not jump in and stop it, knowing full well what would happen, he predetermined it, he allowed it to happen, is that correct?

More rationalizations.
Still no Scripture.

So God issues a commandment, because he has to, but is hoping they disobey it, which they did. That is your take on the two wills, yes? You see I do understand it.

When are you going to stop engaging in rationalization and start addressing SCRIPTURE?

How about God gives them free will,

Where does the BIBLE teach, "God gives them free will"?

Maybe God knew it would happen, but couldn't prevent it because of God giving man free will.

"Maybe"?
Sounds like worthless speculation to me.
It also sounds like you made God impotent ("couldn't prevent it").

And we're STILL waiting for you to show where the BIBLE teaches "God giving man free will".
Sounds like this "free will" idea is pretty important in your theology.
So why is it that you CAN'T demonstrate it from the Bible?

If you have a son or daughter, do you lock them in a room for their whole life in case they do something wrong, like take drugs? Or do you give them freedom and give them advice and hope they will listen?

Mockery. Good job.
God is not a man. He is our CREATOR.
And we did not "create" our children, so your rationalization is worthless.

The problem you have is

... that you refuse to accept Biblical truth, and so you invent your own private theology with your "rationalizations".

once you say God has two wills and one will is opposed to the other, especially when we are dealing with sin, if God commands man to obey, but Gods other will is for him not to,

It's Biblical.
If you don't like it, that's not our problem.

What does Jesus say about a divided house? Mark 3:24-25

It's a good thing that Calvinism is not "a divided house".
But YOUR theology is.

The bible is very simple to understand,

Yes, it is. You should try studying it instead of depending on your "rationalizations".

but Calvinism introduces such complexities, that things like two wills have to be introduced into scripture to make Calvinism seem plausible, but it becomes very exposed.

<Chuckle>
Give it up, this is a war you will NEVER win, since you are pitting yourself against God.

God cannot be divided against himself,

He's not.

his will was for Adam and Eve to keep his commandment, they had free will,

STILL WAITING for you to show where the BIBLE teaches "they had free will".

God commands man to repent and believe in the gospel, some will, many won't it's that simple. No need for two wills.

See? You're rejecting the Bible again.
If something is taught in the BIble, and YOU think we "don't need it", then you seem to think it's okay to discard it.

We don't disrespect God as you do.
 
Even in Psalm 23:2 "He makes me lie down in green pastures. He leads me beside still waters."

Haven't heard a sheep claim that's unfair, but they would if they were consistent in their belief of "force" and/or that God doesn't do what His word says He does, i.e. "causing."
It's all about pride, and them wanting to be in control of their own lives. The sheep, on the other hand, are happy to be in God's hands.
 
Yes, which touches on a small epiphany I had during the exchange on this thread.

Gen 50/20 God meant it for good, in order to bring it as it is to this day
Isa 10/6 I will send him against an ungodly nation...But it is in his heart to destroy
Acts 4/7 whom you crucified...this is the stone which has become the chief cornerstone

To get a murder conviction (for instance), not only does "intent" have to be proven but also "motive" has to be proven.
All Calvinists will agree "God meant it for good" shows God had a different "intent" with Joseph than his brothers did, but what's often overlooked is that the "motive" or "outcome" is also completely different from the point of view of God.
Adam
Joseph
Assyria
Jesus
Are all part of a different motive by God than the "rod of my anger" intended. Assyria's ultimate motive is to acquire booty, but God's ultimate motive is His redemptive plan. Adam's ultimate motive went no further than simple sin, but God was motivated by fruition of His plan. Both the intent (to enslave Joseph) and the motive (jealousy) were different than God's in Genesis 50.

Another factor in the culpability issue.
Yes indeed. These points have often been made on CARM, and they are very good ones.
 
I didn't say God doesn't cause people to do what they ought to do. I said he doesn't make them do what they ought to do. There is a difference.

If one saw a fast moving automobile they might say I'd like to move at that speed. They choose to enter the automobile close the door and hit the accelerator. The car now causes them to be able to go at the speed they saw.

God however does not MAKE people get into the car which is the teaching of Calvinism with the irresistible method you claim.
If you are implying that I meant that God uses coercion, then let me disabuse you of that notion. I am absolutely not claiming that God coerces people to do what they ought to do: causes, yes; coerces, no.
 
Back
Top