| Poster | Thread | crsschk
Member
Joined: 2003/6/11
Posts: 9192
Santa Clara, CA
| | Open Questions for John MacArthur | | Ah .... oops.
A brother pointed out my mistake here, apparently hadn't gone far enough back through all this;
From Philologo's;
Quote:
STOP: MAJOR REVIEW!!
WHAT A DUMMY I AM? but why did no-one challenge me on this? I have perpetrated a major mixup!! I have just relistened to the podcast and of course it isn't John Piper!!! It is John Macarthur!!!
My apologies to both John's and to anyone else that I may have confused.
In fact here is the transcript and again my apologies to all.
I am incredibly sorry everyone, Ron, with your permission I can change it back ... again.
[i]edit: Switched it back again ... sigh[/i]
_________________
Mike Balog
|
|  2006/10/29 8:34 | Profile | InTheLight
Member
Joined: 2003/7/31
Posts: 2850
Phoenix, Arizona USA
| | Re: | | Quote:
So 'knowing' and 'doing' (acting on it) may not be quite so far apart scripurally.
I agree that they go together, sort of like two wings of a bird, both are necessary for any progress to be made. There needs to be constant cooperation between the mind and the will.
But this really doesn't answer which is our biggest problem.
In Christ,
Ron
_________________
Ron Halverson
|
| | 2006/10/29 10:23 | Profile | roadsign
Member
Joined: 2005/5/2
Posts: 3777
| | Re: | | Quote:
when they knew God, they glorified him not as God
they refused to have God in their knowledge..."
Just wondering: When did they (the sinners) know God
. and what would that knowledge entail?
When did they refuse God?
Was this conscious or unconscious?
Is the verse talking about individuals or about societies?
Quote:
where the image is of someone rejecting silver which had passed the test.
This would imply a rather pure KNOWING of God, more than merely a fuzzy sense of some force out there . Who are these sinners who knew God surely not the gentiles
yet that is the context of Rom. 1.
I'm knowing less and less by the minute....
Diane
_________________
Diane
|
| | 2006/10/29 17:46 | Profile | beenblake
Member
Joined: 2005/7/26
Posts: 524
Tennessee, USA
| | Re: | | Quote:
This leads to an interesting question, what is our biggest problem, is it knowing or is it doing the will of God?
It is neither, for both of these fail to address the heart of the matter. Truly, our biggest problem is that our will is not God's will and this is what needs to be changed.
God created us for work, and that is obvious for we are judged by our fruit. However, doing God's will is not really the problem because if our will was God's will then we would do God's will. And knowledge, in terms of the way we define knowledge in the English language, is not our problem either. For truly, possessing information does not change or shape our will.
The problem is unity with God. When we are united as one with God in love, forming a union of love, our will is then aligned with God's will. When we are born again, a new spirit enters into us and we are united as one with God.
When this happens, our desire and purpose is the same as God's desire and purpose. As such, we produce fruit from this vine. We produce good works that are of God for we are united as one with Him.
This is the short explanation, anyway.
In love,
Blake
_________________
Blake Kidney
|
| | 2006/10/29 21:09 | Profile |
| | Re: | | Hi brothers and sisters,
This is an interesting topic. I have become extreme in both calvanism and arminianism and been effected by both of them at one time or another. The Lord has really shown me alot over the past few years. I have a tendancy to become extreme and passionate about doctines and philosophies as the Lord is revealing them to me and putting me through the fire about them.
The most important thing that I've learned in studying these doctrines and philosophies is "balance". The bible says we "know in part". There are elements of truth in each doctrine.
I would probably say I am a four point calavanist. I agree (though not to the extreme) in all the points except limited atonement.
You can take total depravity to the point that little children are lost and going to hell unless they are baptised. You can take perserverence of the saints to the point that if someone falls off the wagon, than they were never really saved and their not one of the elect.
I heard one preacher say, and I agree, "extreme calavanism robs man of free will and extreme arminianism robs God of his glory". personally, I hope to have the backbone of a calvanist and the heart of an arminian.
I think the key is BALANCE.
J-bird |
| | 2006/10/29 21:53 | | InTheLight
Member
Joined: 2003/7/31
Posts: 2850
Phoenix, Arizona USA
| | Re: | | Quote:
The problem is unity with God. When we are united as one with God in love, forming a union of love, our will is then aligned with God's will. When we are born again, a new spirit enters into us and we are united as one with God.
Yes, seperation from God because of our sin is the problem. Unity through Christ is the answer. But, is there a requirement on our part for this reconciliation? When an ambassador for Christ says, "be ye reconciled to God" is he revealing the will of God and are the hearers expected to do so? Has God required repentance and faith as a condition of reconciliation? If so, which is our biggest problem, knowing that that is God's will for us or doing his will?
I believe there may be an answer to this question in Scripture when Jesus said to the Jewish leaders, "If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself."(Joh 7:17)
I think Jesus was always showing the leaders, who thought they had a head problem with Jesus (breaking laws and traditions) that they really had a heart problem,one of doing. Perhaps Ron B. might not be willing to grant that there is an actual faculty called "the will" but perhaps we can agree that there is a governing seat in man's nature that needs to be set right and the rest of his nature will come into line. There must be some kind of deliberate choice that yields obedience to God's will and then the mind will begin to lose its bias. It wasn't a matter of the Holy Spirit being unwilling to reveal truth to the Pharisees. They had a mental block because their consciences condemned them and they needed to repent first.
In Christ,
Ron
_________________
Ron Halverson
|
| | 2006/10/29 23:31 | Profile | philologos
Member
Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK
| | Re: | | Quote:
I'm knowing less and less by the minute....
Would you like to join my Agnostics Anonymous hour? (an agnostic, literally is someone 'without knowledge')
Perhaps we ought to call it Agnostics-in-part Anonimous? :-)
_________________
Ron Bailey
|
| | 2006/10/30 4:29 | Profile | philologos
Member
Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK
| | Re: | | Quote:
Perhaps Ron B. might not be willing to grant that there is an actual faculty called "the will" but perhaps we can agree that there is a governing seat in man's nature that needs to be set right and the rest of his nature will come into line. There must be some kind of deliberate choice that yields obedience to God's will and then the mind will begin to lose its bias.
Yes, indeed, and this is why I think it is relevant to raise the issue here at the juncture of 'total depravity' and the statement that the 'only freedom we have is to choose our poison'.
That 'governing seat' is the Sin that entered our race in Adam (Rom 5:12) It begins to link with the statement of Paul...
[color=0000ff]Rom. 7:17 Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.
Rom. 7:20 Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. [/color]
I don't see these verses as absolving the individual from the responsibility but rather of explaining the mechanisms of evil. The thing called 'The Sin' has a biblical provenance but the idea called 'the will' has none... as far as I can see.
and the verse... Quote:
"If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself."(Joh 7:17)
is a perfect example of what I am trying to put my finger on. It is interesting how Darby has chosen to translate this verse...[color=0000ff]If any one desire to practise his will, he shall know concerning the doctrine, whether it is of God, or [that] I speak from myself. (John 7:17 DRBY)[/color] ...where he has chosen to emphasize the 'desire' element of 'thelO'. This verse has both verb and noun. The verb is man's and the noun is God's but it is not referring to a faculty of God called 'the will' but the 'declared intention of God'.
The only reason I persist with this notion is that I think so much of 'will theology' has led us into a cul-de-sac and thus prevents us delving into what the mechanism of sin really is and how God has chosen to deal with it. ie I know what God's biblical solution to The Sin is, but I don't know what God's biblical solution to 'the will' is. :-o
_________________
Ron Bailey
|
| | 2006/10/30 4:46 | Profile | JaySaved
Member
Joined: 2005/7/11
Posts: 1132
Missouri
| | Re: | | Quote:
"The only reason I persist with this notion is that I think so much of 'will theology' has led us into a cul-de-sac and thus prevents us delving into what the mechanism of sin really is and how God has chosen to deal with it. ie I know what God's biblical solution to The Sin is, but I don't know what God's biblical solution to 'the will' is.
Please explain this more when you have time. I am curious to see where this leads. |
| | 2006/10/30 11:27 | Profile | philologos
Member
Joined: 2003/7/18
Posts: 6566
Reading, UK
| | Re: | | Quote:
Please explain this more when you have time. I am curious to see where this leads.
Just my way of saying that because the Bible does not express our condition in terms of 'the will' there is no 'biblical' remedy. We then get pushed into the language of psychology with 'the self' or 'the ego'. I am not completely dismissive of psychology but I deeply distrust its description of the human condition and consequently its prescriptions.
The biblical remedy for the problem of the 'Old Man' is to have it replaced with a 'New Man'; this to me is the essence of regeneration. It's also the reason for my annoyance with modern translations which persist in switching to the psychological model by referring to 'our old self' rather than Paul's clear 'old man' of Rom 6:6.
To use the kind of language that Ron (the other one) used the 'seat of power' is Sin not some phantom called 'the will'. Mike B referred to a much older post of mine when he referred to my saying 'there is just you'. Perhaps this needs an explanation too. When Nathan exposed David's sin he said 'thou art the man'. I get uncomfortable too with ideas of 'weak wills' and 'strong wills'; there is just 'you' (or better 'thou' ;-) ) I don't understand what authority I may have over this thing called 'the will' but I do understand that God holds me responsible for who I am and what I do. Consequently he commands repentance and I am culpable if I don't repent.
In short, I can't see the model of 'the will' in the scripture but I can see other models which make my condition and responsibility crystal clear. Still curious? :-D
_________________
Ron Bailey
|
| | 2006/10/30 13:54 | Profile |
|
