| Poster | Thread | rookie
Member
Joined: 2003/6/3
Posts: 4821
Savannah TN
| | Re: | | Brother Patrick
Brother Ben asked this specific question of you...
Quote:
Now I want you to explain why God would come to cain and say these things if they were not true?
As I also asked, does God lie to Cain when He personally exhorts him and warns him of the choice before him?
In Christ
Jeff
_________________
Jeff Marshalek
|
|  2007/10/23 7:19 | Profile | BenWilliams
Member
Joined: 2006/12/11
Posts: 351
El Paso, Texas
| | Re: | | [b][color=FF0000]Psa 78:31 The wrath of God came upon them, and slew the fattest of them, and smote down the chosen men of Israel.[/color][/b]
I find it interesting, that God's wrath fell on the "CHOSEN" men of Israel.
Just seems a little odd, that God would choose them, and then pour out His wrath on them, I thought the elect were immune to that kind of judgement, and only received chastening from the Lord to mak them better.
Oh well, I would, as rookie said like to see the explanation to my question, but alas any time there is too hard a question, everyone runs for cover. Against a wall with a question, and no one will answer it. The only answers that are given, are typical mantras. It is sad.
_________________
Benjamin Williams
|
| | 2007/10/23 10:53 | Profile | hmmhmm
Member
Joined: 2006/1/31
Posts: 4994
Sweden
| | Re: | | Rev 2:16 Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth.
i think this verse is strange too,why would God "threaten" them with "or else" when he know no one can do it unless they are chosen? maybe because we have a [i]choice[/i]?
_________________
CHRISTIAN
|
| | 2007/10/23 11:02 | Profile | roaringlamb
Member
Joined: 2003/6/11
Posts: 1519
Santa Cruz California
| | Re: | | Quote:
Now I want you to explain why God would come to cain and say these things if they were not true?
I thought I already had explained it.
Genesis 4:4 And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And [b]the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:[/b]
Genesis 4:5 [b]But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.[/b]
Cain is upset because God did not accept his offering, which was based upon his own way of worshiping God, but not according to God's design.
This leads us to the verses in question-
Genesis 4:6 And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?
Genesis 4:7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.
God is pointing out the obvious, if Cain would, then God would. But Cain could not, therefore God did not.
If anything, this shows the utter depth of Cain's depravity. To have God speak to you, and to simply ignore it? Hmm sound like Romans 1, where nature testifies of God's existence, and His creation of all things, yet men will not worship Him.
I think you guys are trying to read into this passage something that is not there as a means to defend a supposed free-will.
So in your view this passage says something like this, " if you from your free will do good Cain, I will accept you. However if you from your own free will choose to do evil, sin lies at the door. But if you choose good from your own free will, you will be saved,so choose out of your free will to do good Cain."
The fact of the matter is that Abel's sacrifice was accepted because it was one of blood, and without the shedding of blood there can be no remission of sin. Cain's was a self effort to gain acceptance with God without blood. One of them believed that sacrifice and blood of another would cleanse them, the other believed his own works would save him. This is why John brings these two up in his epistle-
1Jn 3:12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. [b]And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous.[/b]
There is nothing here that hints at what you are trying to make it say, and again I ask you, was Christ tempting or lying to the man with the withered hand when He told him to stretch it forth? Or in any of the miracles that Christ performed in which He commands someone to do something they obviously could not do in their natural strength?
Of course we know He was not lying, but rather demonstrating the very principle we are discussing, that God must enable men to obey His commands.
The Pharisees thought that they had kept all the commands of God, and yet they were not righteous before God, and Christ makes sure to point that out to them. The ones who were justified before God were those who believed the promise of the One to come. That is why "the just shall live by faith" is not only prominent in the NT, but also in OT as well.
_________________
patrick heaviside
|
| | 2007/10/23 11:20 | Profile | BenWilliams
Member
Joined: 2006/12/11
Posts: 351
El Paso, Texas
| | Re: | | roaringlamb wrote:
Quote:
Brother, God would never keep a man out of Heaven if he wanted to be there.
Yes, but according to your own belief, no man wants God, they only want sin, and until God changes their desires they are "all" opposed to him.
Therefore, that was a false statement.
All men desire sin and not God, or heaven, therefore, if God is granting repentance and a change of desire to some, and not all, it is unjust.
Secondly, I would like you to wal around and ask 10,000 people if they want to go to heaven, and see the response you get. you are likely to get an affirmative response from about 99.99% of them.
That statement is absolutely opposite of what you believe.
------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
You again are using emotional arguments that seem unfair when looked at through man's goodness,but strip away that goodness, and you will see rightly.
Um...no, I have not used any emotional arguments, only arguments of context, and logical conclusion.
Calvinism relieves the believer of accountability before God concerning lost men's souls. This is why I believe it is false, among other reasons.
------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
I do not wish to go round and round on this, because if you do not believe in original sin and its implications, we will continue to arrive at differing conclusions.
Neither do I, I hate the debate game of chasing wild goose tails, or feathers.
Yet I will say to you, I believe fully in original sin, and all of the implications it has that are outlined by scripture, in context, and clearly defined as the implications of original sin.
So, going to the place that talks about original sin most clearly, let's open Genisis, and see what it says:
[b][color=FF0000]Genisis 2:17
17but from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat from it you will surely die."[/color][/b]
"You shall surely die"
[b][color=FF0000]Genisis 3:16-19 16To the woman He said,[/color][/b]
Here we have all the physical effects of original sin for both man and woman.
"You shall surely die speaks of both a physical death, and of damnation to hell, it is not speaking of a spiritual death where the person now becomes an incapable of choice. If it did, God would not be concerned about the man eating from the tree of life as He was.
You will say to me, oh, but romans 1 shows what happened to man after the fall.
And I say to you, perhaps it does, but it does not say that it does, so if you believe that, then you are assuming that it does, and you have no backing scripturally to do so. While I may agree that it shows what happened, it is because Romans one shows the pattern of any man who refuses God, and the result of it.
But where we differ is on the meaning of Romans 1, you believe that Romans one shows how man is incapable of choosing God.
While believing that means that you have not read what it says verse by verse, and examined it fully, if you did, you would find that it very plainly shows the lengths that God has gone to to reveal himself to these people that choose to refuse Him.
Romans 1 even speaks of relational foreknowledge, with these people who refuse Him, if you didn't know that, it is because, as I said, you have not taken the time to read it and examine it.
I was shocked to find out that it is the main passage that calvinists use to prove their point, because it does more damage to their position than almost any other main passage that they use.
Explain to me, how God could know these people relationally, intimately, and then say to them "I never knew you".
You can't, because you do not understand Jewish culture, or the nature of God concerning relationship.
_________________
Benjamin Williams
|
| | 2007/10/23 11:24 | Profile | BenWilliams
Member
Joined: 2006/12/11
Posts: 351
El Paso, Texas
| | Re: | | roaringlamb wrote:
Quote:
God is pointing out the obvious, if Cain would, then God would. But Cain could not, therefore God did not.
Logical falacy, if cain could not, then God cannot say that he can, or God is a liar.
There is no way out of this, no other understanding. Bring this before a board of a thousand logicians, and not one will excuse the logical falacy that this expresses.
Quote:
If anything, this shows the utter depth of Cain's depravity. To have God speak to you, and to simply ignore it? Hmm sound like Romans 1, where nature testifies of God's existence, and His creation of all things, yet men will not worship Him.
Um, let's start with this:
God himself comes to cain, and tells him that "if he does well, he will be accepted by God".
1. God says "if".
A. That means that God is giving cain a choice.
B. Cain must choose either to do well, or not to do well.
C. If cain could not choose, then God lied to him by offering the choice.
D. God tells cain that he can rule over the desire of sin.
E. If cain could not rule over the desire of sin, God is lying by telling him he can.
F. God gave him the choice to rule over sin.
G. Cain's choice to do evil proves nothing, except that he did evil.
------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
I think you guys are trying to read into this passage something that is not there as a means to defend a supposed free-will.
I am sorry to say this, but what we are doing, is not reading into it, it is called "rightly dividing the word of truth". It means we are reading what is there, and examining it's meaning, first by what it says, second by what it implies, and thirdly by context.
_________________
Benjamin Williams
|
| | 2007/10/23 11:45 | Profile | Logic
Member
Joined: 2005/7/17
Posts: 1791
| | Re: | | Quote:
roaringlamb wrote:
God is pointing out the obvious, if Cain would, then God would. But Cain could not, therefore God did not.
That is rediculous, that would be like the LORD saying to Cain, "If you do well(but I know you can't), shalt thou not be accepted?(but I will not accept you because I hate you) and if thou doest not well(when you can't in the first place)...
Cain, I am just teasing you, I made you sin because you have no free will any way. I order everything that happens, I wanted sin in this world to show my glory.
I do all things for my good plesure, therefore, I create people just to damn them to hell and that is My pleasure."
Quote:
I think you guys are trying to read into this passage something that is not there as a means to defend a supposed free-will.
So in your view this passage says something like this, " if you from your free will do good Cain, I will accept you. However if you from your own free will choose to do evil, sin lies at the door. But if you choose good from your own free will, you will be saved,so choose out of your free will to do good Cain."
That is the way one MUST read it.
Quote:
There is nothing here that hints at what you are trying to make it say, and again I ask you, was Christ tempting or lying to the man with the withered hand when He told him to stretch it forth? Or in any of the miracles that Christ performed in which He commands someone to do something they obviously could not do in their natural strength?
Since, Jesus told the withered hand to stretch it forth, then he coud stretch it forth.
roaringlamb,
According to your theology, you have men in hell for no other reason but Gods choice to put them there and not by their own choice of rejecting Him; while they had no other choice but to sin.
You have men being condemned for that which is unavoidable.
According to your theology, man woud have this to say in the Lake of Fire:
"I am inocent for this is the purpose for wich I was created(was created with no will of my own), therefore, I did God's will and am being condemnd for it."
Also, According to your theology, man with no free will woud have this to say in the Lake of Fire:
"I had no free will to eather obey or to sin, all was preordaind from the foundation of the world. I was created as a pupett do to HIS bidding and I lived as I was willed to do by God. I am in hell for no other reason but His will."
This is a tyranical devilish god as you describe. |
| | 2007/10/23 12:01 | Profile | roaringlamb
Member
Joined: 2003/6/11
Posts: 1519
Santa Cruz California
| | Re: | | Here's a question for both logic, and ben.
If there was a single verse that said that men were slaves to sin, and loved sin rather than God, how can you reason that man is free.
If man is enslaved, he is not free. That is a logical fallacy.
You cry, "unfair, unfair" But the bottom line is that if God does not change a man's heart, he will not desire the things of God. Men may wish to go to Heaven, but they, like Cain, will develop their own way of getting there rather than submit to Christ and His salvation.
Men are not walking around worried about their offence to God, but instead the vast majority are planning out how they can sin more, and they drink down their iniquity like water. It is this way until their heart is renewed, and then they hunger and thirst for righteousness.
_________________
patrick heaviside
|
| | 2007/10/23 12:19 | Profile | BenWilliams
Member
Joined: 2006/12/11
Posts: 351
El Paso, Texas
| | Re: | | roaringlamb, first you did not answer my questions, but nevertheless, I will answer yours.
roaringlamb wrote:
Quote:
If there was a single verse that said that men were slaves to sin, and loved sin rather than God, how can you reason that man is free.
I agree that men are slaves to sin, the scripture plainly teaches that.
What it does not teach is that they are so depraved that they are incapable of making a choice to go free when offered it.
That is a doctrine of calvin, and not the scripture.
------------------------------------------------------
We cannot base an entire theology off of one scripture, you should know that as well as any of us:
"Judas went out and hanged himself"
What we must do is examine the whole of scripture, and understand what it says.
You said, "man is a slave to sin."
I agree fully, now let's see what it says that Jesus came to do:
[b][color=FF0000]Ephesians 4:8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.[/color][/b]
He took the captivity of sin captive, and gave gifts unto men, the primary gift being salvation.
[b][color=FF0000]Isaiah 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to "proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;"[/color][/b]
This is a prophecy about Jesus, undisputedly.
Who are the captives and the bound?
The answer is simple, anyone who is a slave to sin.
Christ's purpose was to set the captive free from the bondage of sin, and to give them liberty if they would take it.
You cannot deny this, and Ephesians 4:8 says He accomplished his mission of taking the captivity of sin captive.
[b]Therefore, salvation is for all men, because the bondage of sin has been taken captive so that they might have liberty.[/b]
Christ took "CAPTIVITY" captive, He took the very thing, and made it captive to Him.
This is truth roaringlamb, do not let what you have learned stand in the way of truth. God is speaking these words to you right now, and your spirit bears witness they are true.
_________________
Benjamin Williams
|
| | 2007/10/23 12:36 | Profile | roaringlamb
Member
Joined: 2003/6/11
Posts: 1519
Santa Cruz California
| | Re: | | Quote:
This is truth roaringlamb, do not let what you have learned stand in the way of truth. God is speaking these words to you right now, and your spirit bears witness they are true.
God is speaking something, but it's not what you're making these verses say.
Christ did in fact set captives free brother as He died for the sins of His people(Matthew 1:21). Notice His people, not all people.
In a sense the work of salvation was accomplished in eternity, and is now being worked out in time, that is how Paul can write things like, "while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."
When did this happen? On Calvary of course, He full purchased all those who will be saved. No man knows the number, and no man can say who will and who will not be saved. It is simply our duty to proclaim the Gospel of Christ, and then let God birth whom He will through the word preached by the Spirit.
_________________
patrick heaviside
|
| | 2007/10/23 13:21 | Profile |
|
