Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That means nothing, you keep posting Augustines words as though they are the word of Christ himself, so I posted some words of other to show that Augustines words were concidered heresy by the earlier church fathers.
God designed the consequences so God is responsible for that punishment, while the person is responsible for both jumping and the consequences, provided that they know what the consequences would be.
No the consequences were ALREADY there, sin was in the world but not imputed.
And of course Adam knew the consequences, God told him.
myQuote: While if it was THEIR sins that caused it how is God then responsible?
Quote:
A parent is responsible for the punishment they dole out even though the child is also responsible for the fact that it is to be doled out. It's seems you want to separate God from the punishment for some reason. The punishment God doles out is good so why does you want to separate God from it?
Because I don’t call evil good.
God punishments are all corrective, a child being raped and murdered are not corrective in any manner.
Man chose death and God gave them exactly what they chose, and when man gets sick and tired of what their choices do to them they will remember God and turn to him.
myQuote: What you believe is God predestined man to sin and man could not do anything about it, thus God is responsible for the evil and sin that befalls man.
Quote:
"Predestined" is a loaded word in that in most people's minds in denies that man makes a choice. When a person sins he chooses to sin. He does exactly what he wants to do at the time and no one is controlling him.
You can color it any way you want Bob but if God planned for man to sin and enter into death and man could not eat from the tree of life as God told him he could, it is predestined to be that way. Which is double predestination and was considered heresy by the early church fathers.
myQuote: No the bottom line is not that God sent evil to them.
Quote:
Scott, the scriptures show that God sends the evil, I really don't get why you are denying this. It's all over the bible.
Leviticus 26:14 But if ye will not hearken unto me, and will not do all these commandments; 15 And if ye shall despise my statutes, or if your soul abhor my judgments, so that ye will not do all my commandments, but that ye break my covenant: 16 I also will do this unto you; I will even appoint over you terror, consumption, and the burning ague, that shall consume the eyes, and cause sorrow of heart: and ye shall sow your seed in vain, for your enemies shall eat it
And your reading under a vail and calling it literal.
As I have pointed out before God told people to kill other people, many took this literally and killed in the name of God thinking to do God a service, but all God was saying was make your enemy your friend and you will kill your enemy.
No the consequences were ALREADY there, sin was in the world but not imputed.
Scott, the laws of the land of the USA are already there but the people who made the laws are responsible for those laws. In some nations you might get your hand cut off for stealing. Sure the person who steals is responsible, but so are the people who made the laws.
Quote:
Because I don’t call evil good.
I think you do, because what God says He does and calls it good, you call evil.
Quote:
God punishments are all corrective, a child being raped and murdered are not corrective in any manner.
We had returned to a very focused discussion and you keep broadening and broadeing it to once again include the whole ball of wax.
Quote:
Man chose death and God gave them exactly what they chose, and when man gets sick and tired of what their choices do to them they will remember God and turn to him.
Exactly. That's why God's judgments which include evil are good. If it's inevitable that "man gets sick and tired..." and "...will remember God and turn to him" that fits at least one definition of "fate".
Quote:
Which is double predestination and was considered heresy by the early church fathers.
I couldn't care less which church fathers said something. All that matters is the content of what they said. The salvation of all fits the definition of "fate" which is "an inevitable outcome". An ineviatable outcome does not contradict with man's ability to choose. Adam did make a choice to sin because his heart was weak, just as God makes choces to do good because his heart is righteous. If you deny Adam chose due to his nature, then you deny that God chooses as well.
Quote:
And your reading under a vail and calling it literal.
I'm open to that possibility Scott and am aware of it. Yet so many NT words line up and you agreed to e.g. God will turn them over to the tormentors. Chris'ts Word will judge him in the last day. Fear Him who has the power to destroy both body and soul in gehenna. etc.
You are attemtping to attribute God's judgments to someone other that God. Who, I don't know.
Last edited by Thy Kingdom Come; 08-27-2009 at 11:38 AM..
Originally Posted by pneuma file:///C:/Users/Scott/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image001.gif (broken link) No the consequences were ALREADY there, sin was in the world but not imputed.
Quote:
Scott, the laws of the land of the USA are already there but the people who made the laws are responsible for those laws. In some nations you might get your hand cut off for stealing. Sure the person who steals is responsible, but so are the people who made the laws.
In that sense I agree and have stated so before, if God never commanded man to not eat man never would have been disobedient. God takes responsibility for giving us freewill, but He is not responsible for what we chose to do with it.
But what your saying is the father is responsible for all the crap the prodigal got himself into and went through because the father gave the prodigal his inheritance.
What your saying is God gave him his inheritance for the express purpose of the prodigal going through all his crap and he (the prodigal) could do nothing but go through it.
myQuote: Because I don’t call evil good.
Quote:
I think you do, because what God says He does and calls it good, you call evil.
Out of the mouth of the most high proceeded not good and evil.
myQuote: God punishments are all corrective, a child being raped and murdered are not corrective in any manner.
Quote:
We had returned to a very focused discussion and you keep broadening and broadeing it to once again include the whole ball of wax.
Because ultimately that is what your conclusion lead to that rape and murder in God’s hands is good.
myQuote: Man chose death and God gave them exactly what they chose, and when man gets sick and tired of what their choices do to them they will remember God and turn to him.
Quote:
Exactly. That's why God's judgments which include evil are good.
Evil is not Gods judgments, a child being raped and murdered has nothing to do with God.
Quote:
If it's inevitable that "man gets sick and tired..." and "...will remember God and turn to him" that fits at least one definition of "fate".
I have no problem with that understanding of fate, for predestination is always unto life.
myQuote: Which is double predestination and was considered heresy by the early church fathers.
Quote:
I couldn't care less which church fathers said something. All that matters is the content of what they said. The salvation of all fits the definition of "fate" which is "an inevitable outcome". An ineviatable outcome does not contradict with man's ability to choose. Adam did make a choice to sin because his heart was weak, just as God makes choces to do good because his heart is righteous. If you deny Adam chose due to his nature, then you deny that God chooses as well.
It’s not about predestination it’s about DOUBLE predestination, one is true the other false.
And again you limit Adam to not having Christ within him, I already provided some scripture to show you contrary to that your belief.
I am the one that believes Adam had a choice, you say Adam had a choice but could not eat from the tree of life even though God told him to eat because of his earthly nature.
And if Adam only had his earthly nature than you might have a case, but God breathed the breath of life into him which makes your case fall flat on it behind.
myQuote: And your reading under a vail and calling it literal.
Quote:
I'm open to that possibility Scott and am aware of it. Yet so many NT words line up and you agreed to e.g. God will turn them over to the tormentors. Chris'ts Word will judge him in the last day. Fear Him who has the power to destroy both body and soul in gehenna. etc.
You are attemtping to attribute God's judgments to someone other that God. Who, I don't know.
No I am not, God judgments are not what you have been making them out to be.
The rape and murder of a child is in no way Gods judgment, would you agree with this?
Do you see all of the crap in this world as part of Gods judgment?
And I don’t see how you cannot because everything you have said lead me to believe you see all this crap as Gods judgment upon man.
But if that is the case brother and a tree is known by its fruit what than can be said of God.
Would any readers out there call all the evils in this world good?
And if you cannot say it is all good than from which tree did it originate?
And if it is all good because it came from God than there is really no such thing as evil.
Myquote And your reading under a vail and calling it literal.
As I have pointed out before God told people to kill other people, many took this literally and killed in the name of God thinking to do God a service, but all God was saying was make your enemy your friend and you will kill your enemy.
Quote:
I'm open to that possibility Scott and am aware of it.
Bob then would it not also work in the reverse?
That when literal things came upon them, they attributed those literal things to God.
Well Bob, I don’t really know what we can say more to each other, and as I said earlier I will not have much time on the net shortly, today being that day.
Anyway, brother just wanted to say thanks for the conversation, and to apologies to any that, I have caused offence too, whether by what I have posted or by my manner of speaking, as it does seem some have left.
What your saying is God gave him his inheritance for the express purpose of the prodigal going through all his crap and he (the prodigal) could do nothing but go through it.
I already said what I'm saying and it's not ^^^ what you said right there. Scott, please deal with what I actually said in the context that I said it. Don't take what I said, apply it to some new situation that's vastly different than what I said, and then say that I said that too.
I was talking about disobedience and consequences and law-making. The law-maker is responsible for what are the consequences when the law is broken and whether those consequences are just and good. God giving the prodigal son his inheritance has nothing to do with law-making, disobedience or consequences.
If you want to apply what I said to the progidal son it must be in terms of:
1. disobedience - the prodigal son used his inhertance in a disobedient way
2. consequences - the prodigal son reaped the consequences that God ordained for such disobedience
God, the law-maker, is responsible for deciding what are the consequences for disobedience, what is the reaping for sowing. The prodigal son is also responsible for the consequences. The only way God is not repsonsible is if God did not make the rules regarding consequences.
Quote:
Evil is not Gods judgments, a child being raped and murdered has nothing to do with God.
I never said a child being raped has anything to do with God's judgments. But either God is able to save the child from being raped and yet chooses not to, or God is not able to save that child. I see no other option. I have never heard another option described in anything except doublespeak.
Quote:
I have no problem with that understanding of fate, for predestination is always unto life.
Then you have no problem with choosing being compatible with a definite outcome or fate. Neither do I.
Quote:
And again you limit Adam to not having Christ within him, I already provided some scripture to show you contrary to that your belief.
You showed that Adam might have been called a Son of God. Lot's of people were called Son's of God without being created or born as such. All had to be born again. So where does it say Adam was a Son of God as created, as opposed to later on.
Quote:
I am the one that believes Adam had a choice, you say Adam had a choice but could not eat from the tree of life even though God told him to eat because of his earthly nature.
The only thing keeping Adam from choosing the TOL was Adam. If you want to claim that Adam having an earthy nature would make him unable to choose, then be consistent and admit that God's righteous nature makes God unable to choose.
Quote:
And if Adam only had his earthly nature than you might have a case, but God breathed the breath of life into him which makes your case fall flat on it behind.
All mankind has the breath of life.
Quote:
No I am not, God judgments are not what you have been making them out to be.
Quote:
The rape and murder of a child is in no way Gods judgment, would you agree with this?
Yes, I agree. You are mixing two things together. I did not say that every evil is a judgment from God. I said that God's judgments for sin bring evil upon the one who sinned.
Last edited by Thy Kingdom Come; 08-27-2009 at 02:28 PM..
Out of the mouth of the most high proceeded not good and evil.Out of the mouth of the most high proceeded not good and evil.
Its funny to me how you make a statement out of a question.
Lamentations 3:37-39
"Who is he that saith, and it cometh to pass, when the Lord commandeth it not? Out of the mouth of the most High proceedeth not evil(Heb. - ra') and good? Wherefore doth a living man complain, a man for the punishment of his sins?"
The very context is that God is sovereign in this chapter. These three questions are rhetorical in the way that they are put forth. The answers should be obvious to anyone who reads the bible.
No one can make something come to pass if the lord has not commanded it. Good and evil proceed from God. And men revile God in vain for the evil visited on them for their sins.
Isaiah 45:7
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil (Heb - ra`) : I the LORD do all these things.
Isa 54:16
Behold, I have created the smith that bloweth the coals in the fire, and that bringeth forth an instrument for his work; and I have created the waster to destroy.
Isa 57:19 I(God) create the fruit of the lips; Peace, peace to him that is far off, and to him that is near, saith the LORD; and I will heal him.
Luk 6:45
A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.
Rom 8:20-21
for to vanity was the creation made subject --not of its will, but because of Him who did subject [it] -- in hope,
John 12:40
He(God) hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart, that they might not see with the eyes, and understand with the heart, and turn back (repent), and I might heal them;'
Rom 9:11
(for they being not yet born, neither having done anything good or evil, that the purpose of God, according to choice, might remain; not of works, but of Him who is calling,) it was said to her --
These are only a few specific examples where the bible puts all responsibility for the origins of evil at the feet of God. Both the general evil of death and destruction, and the specific evil of mans hard hearts and their inability to repent.
Many argue against the teaching of scripture, but that doesn't make the scriptures any less true.
I understand mans desire to believe he is free to do as he pleases, or that he has free will, is based on their desire to either condemn others for evil, or glorify themselves for Good. But it is a delusion of grandeur according to scripture ...
The funny thing is that the only other teachings that i can find more evidence of throughout the texts of scripture is the doctrine of Universal Reconciliation and the general teaching of salvation in Christ through faith. The teaching of Gods absolute sovereignty is second only to those teachings as far as scriptural evidences are concerned.
Last edited by Ironmaw1776; 08-27-2009 at 04:04 PM..
Bob then would it not also work in the reverse?That when literal things came upon them, they attributed those literal things to God.
I suppose, but that really changes the way we look at scriptures. For example, not everything like this could be explained as people wrongly attributing what came upon them to God. Some it is God telling Moses or other prophets what will happen to Israel if they disobey. And some of this kind of stuff is in the NT too, and is stated by Christ.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
