Excelente!Seraphim said:
ARGH!!! Calvinism makes me furious!!!
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
Saying doesn't make it so Z Man.Z Man said:
There is no presumption that you are correct.
Argumentum ad Ignorantiam - Occurs when a lack of evidence for side A is taken to be evidence for side B in cases in which the burden of proof actually rests on side B. A common name for this is an Appeal to Ignorance.
In any debate (generally speaking) the burden of proof is place on the side making the affirmative case. Guess what, Z Man? That's you!
This statement is simply ridiculous. You've done nothing but proof-text us all to death. At best you've established the undisputed point that God has directly caused SOME weather and SOME illnesses and SOME calamities, etc.
You act as if I've posted nothing on this thread! There is no need for me to present a Biblical case against your position Z Man because I've shown on rational grounds that your argument is fallacious. You've not proven your case and now you're attempting to declare victory because I (we) aren't stupid enough to justify your ridiculous argument by picking up the burden of proof for ourselves. Unfortunately for you, that is yet another fallacy of logic committed on your part.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Freak said:
Weather patterns are complex and reflect the wisdom and knowledge of God. He created a physical world with physical parameters. A car engine propels the car without direct involvement of God. Man, not God, drives the car that man made (some synthetic materials were not made by God at creation, though the atoms ultimately are from Him...we have genuine creativity, self-determination, self-locomotion, ability to procreate, etc...these are not fiat acts of God).
God can and does intervene supernaturally in natural creation, but it is a mistake to think that He always intervenes. Some things are purely physical and scientific. A watchmaker is not a puppet being manipulated by God. The guy at McDonald's building your Big Mac is not being micromanaged by God.
If wind, water, heat, etc. come together in certain conditions, varying weather patterns will result. God initiated creation, but He does not micromanage it. He is also not an aloof Deist God. You do not have to swing the pendulum to one extreme to avoid the other extreme! 'Some vs all' is the biblical, balanced view.
Knight said:
Herein, was Job a type of Christ? (Job 16:6-16)
. . . being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God . . . taken . . . by wicked hands . . . crucified and slain . . . (Acts 2:23)
God hath delivered me to the ungodly, and turned me over into the hands of the wicked. (Job 16:11)
Was Job being just plain sick, stupid? I have a reason why I think the way I do, correctly or not :kookoo: !!!
mtims540 said:
Unless the NT, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, applies Job to Jesus, we should be slow to make it a type. There may be parallels, but this does not mean details are types.
The coming of the Messiah to die was determined by God to redeem man. This does not mean that every position of every animal and human on earth was determined (nor is it necessary). The exact soldier, angle of the spear, number of times the hammer hit the nail, etc. do not need to be predetermined to bring about His death. Just because God determines some major things in redemptive history does not mean that He controls, coerces, determines, knows every mundane and moral choice in all of history.
Quit lying about what I said, and quit pretending that since you didn't like the term "pretty much" you were unable to read the rest of the post? If you had bothered to read it you would know that what I believe bears no resemblence to what you said!Freak said:
I believe that when God controls the weather it is the execption rather than the rule. I believe that God set the physical universe in motion and let it run on the power he put into the system when he created it except for when he intervines for some special reason.
Why is it so hard to believe that God is powerful enough and smart enough to design and create system that can run on it's own steam?
seekinganswers
New member
godrulz said:
I'm still trying to understand where the scriptures: "For out of God, and through God, and unto God are all things," or "In God we live and move and have our being" in your cosmology. I do not agree with a closed view which would turn God into the mighty all-controlling dictator (because such a model of God is imaged from our leaders, who only are "all-controlling" because they really have no control at all; God must have sovereignty over the descisions of men, because otherwise men would have power over God, like our leaders are threatened by people who rebel). Yet I do not agree with your view either, Godrulz, for according to you there are events that are in a sense "out of control." Though God may not be the dictator, that does not mean God is not glorified in all things. As the closed theists point out very rightly, God is glorified through the disobedience of Pharaoh at least as much as God is glorified if Pharaoh were to have obeyed. In this sense I find that evil has no ontology. There is no reality that is "out of control". The Chaos of the precreation has been subdued by God. There is no ontologically self-subsistent "evil" in the world. The problem with Open Theism is that it gives a real ontology to evil where I do not think we should give evil such power in the Creation.
If God is truly in control, than God cannot possibly be threatened by things "out of control" for nothing is outside of God's rule. And in this much there is nothing that is "out of control." Even the cross is a demonstration of this, for God's desire was not for the death of God's Son, but that the Son would obey the Father (even unto death). The threat seems real, for those who do not obey God put Christ to death on the cross (i.e. the rule of men imaged in Rome rejects the humble servant leadership demonstrated in Christ by putting him on the cross). What is amazing about this, however, is that the disobedience of men meant for bringing shame upon God (or at least upon the man Jesus) serves to glorify God all the more, for God raises Christ from the dead. The Shame of men becomes God's glory, thus making disobedient men a part of God's ultimate purpose in the Creation (at least in the telos or culmination of it). Could God have used the obedience of humanity? There is no reason for us not to believe that it could be so, however, whether humanity is obedient or not, God is glorified (for God will bring about God's own purposes whether through obedience or through disobedience); the ultimate movement of Creation remains unchanged by human designs on it. Salvation has nothing to say about God's "openness" or "closedness". Weather humanity is saved or not does not tell us about God's control over the Creation. Weather we are disobedient or whether we are obedient, God will be glorified through us, just as Israel will glorify God whether they are faithful or not; they will be a testimony to the nations in their obedience or in their disobedience. In this much God is closed, for the purposes of the Creation from the beginning will be driven by God and not by humanity. God will bring the Creation from chaos to worship, and God will do that in God's own way (which is through humanity, i.e. Christ).
Salvation demonstrates to us that election has nothing to do with us. God does not elect those who are saved, nor does God elect those who will be condemned. "God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him." Election is about God's faithfulness to the covenant of Creation, to the covenant with humanity. God will be faithful, that is all that we are assured of in election. When God gives a promise, God will keep that promise to the end. And the promise will not be driven by human action, but rather it will come through God's action of Creation in the world. God will turn the barreness of our sin into a fertile land once again (whether we are going to help God or not). The Creation continues to its culmination in worship (i.e. rest). The first chapter of Genesis is not a past story, but is the summation of the entire scriptures. God will move us from chaos to rest.
Thus, the open question is not concerning God. God is who God is, and we have no right to say otherwise. But the open question concerns humanity, for the God who has enclosed us in Godself has allowed us to be open; God has given us the gift of life, to be our own as a gift from him. And though we cannot sustain this gift, if we are willing to give it back to God, it will continue into eternity. If we grab for life, however, we will only find out what we really are in and of ourselves, i.e. dust. We can only be open because God has enclosed us in God's own will for the Creation. We cannot be something other than what God has created us to be. Either we are, or we do not have substance at all. Even the most sinful of humans is a creation of God, and in that much, the life of even the unrighteous is God's.
God does not view events as we view them. We see cause and effect, an endless sequence of events that have an ontology and purpose of their own. God sees the Creation, that which has been sourced in his Word (Christ is the true embodiment of the Creation), and a sourced Creation that is brought to rest in him through both the Son and the Spirit. The Creation is not an external thing (that is how sinful humanity has approached it). The Creation is held entirely within God, from the head to the telos.
Peace,
Michael
Z Man
New member
To all who take interest in this thread:
I just wanted to sum things up, since it seems everyone is getting out of hand and off subject. Knight started this thread stating that he was disgusted about a story of a woman who gave God credit for her cancer. Since then, it has been my position to prove Knight wrong; not because I feel like playing 'devils advocate' or to prove something about myself, but simply because the Scriptures prove him wrong.
My opinion, based upon what I've read in the Scriptures, is that God is the primary cause behind all diseases, calamities, and catastrophes. I come to that conclusion because of every catastropic, weather related event, or disease I have read about in the Bible, credit is always given to God in some form or fashion. In fact, the strongest evidence to suggest that God creates calamity is the fact that He says so Himself in Isaiah 45:7! Anyways, using inductive reasoning, I have concluded that since God is the primary cause of calamities in the Bible, whether due to judgement of people or not, He therefore must be the primary cause of calamities in our lives.
Now I have made a valid case, and I have even backed up what I believe with proof from Scriptures. However, there are many on this site who oppose my view. Their reasons vary, but the majority do not believe that it is possible to make a final conclusion based upon what we read in Scriptures! In other words, no matter how many Scripture passages I post verifying my claim, those who oppose me say it doesn't prove anything! Now, as a Christian, that frustrates me and leaves me to ponder what other source is there to base our conclusions and ideas upon about God? Without the Bible, how is one to know about God's character? (Many say nature, and to that I agree, and in doing so, it only validates my opinion that God is the primary cause of such things as weather.)
Now, just to make things clear, I see no error in my opinions. Scriptures validate the fact that God is the primary cause behind calamity. If He is not, as so many here claim, then all I ask is that proof be given of calamity/disease/weather/catastrophes in which it is stated that someone or something else other than God was the primary cause of. I do not find it a valid enough reason for people to come up here and just call me 'stupid', or say I'm wrong, without even showing any Scriptures that state God is NOT the primary cause behind calamity.
An analogy of how I perceive this thread's current situation:
Joe came to planet Earth oneday and was given a book entitled, "All About Stop Signs". In the book, Joe reads about what a stop sign is and what it does. There are also several pictures in the book of stop signs at different streets at different times of the day. In each picture, Joe observes that all the stop signs are red. In the text, it is even sometimes stated that the stop signs color is red, such as "The red stop sign....", etc. After reading the book, Joe concludes, with inductive reasoning, that ALL stop signs must be red. All throughout the remainder of his time on Earth, all the stop signs he sees in life are, sure enough, red.
In the same sense, when I read the Bible, it states quite clearly that God is the primary cause behind calamity (God says so Himself!). Therefore, it is only reasonable to conclude that He is also the primary cause of my calamities, and everyone else's for that matter. Unless the book about stop signs actually stated that there are stop signs of a different color in other places, Joe would never assume otherwise. And thus, unless someone can show me in the Bible where God was not the primary cause of calamity, I will continue to believe otherwise.
God bless.
I just wanted to sum things up, since it seems everyone is getting out of hand and off subject. Knight started this thread stating that he was disgusted about a story of a woman who gave God credit for her cancer. Since then, it has been my position to prove Knight wrong; not because I feel like playing 'devils advocate' or to prove something about myself, but simply because the Scriptures prove him wrong.
My opinion, based upon what I've read in the Scriptures, is that God is the primary cause behind all diseases, calamities, and catastrophes. I come to that conclusion because of every catastropic, weather related event, or disease I have read about in the Bible, credit is always given to God in some form or fashion. In fact, the strongest evidence to suggest that God creates calamity is the fact that He says so Himself in Isaiah 45:7! Anyways, using inductive reasoning, I have concluded that since God is the primary cause of calamities in the Bible, whether due to judgement of people or not, He therefore must be the primary cause of calamities in our lives.
Now I have made a valid case, and I have even backed up what I believe with proof from Scriptures. However, there are many on this site who oppose my view. Their reasons vary, but the majority do not believe that it is possible to make a final conclusion based upon what we read in Scriptures! In other words, no matter how many Scripture passages I post verifying my claim, those who oppose me say it doesn't prove anything! Now, as a Christian, that frustrates me and leaves me to ponder what other source is there to base our conclusions and ideas upon about God? Without the Bible, how is one to know about God's character? (Many say nature, and to that I agree, and in doing so, it only validates my opinion that God is the primary cause of such things as weather.)
Now, just to make things clear, I see no error in my opinions. Scriptures validate the fact that God is the primary cause behind calamity. If He is not, as so many here claim, then all I ask is that proof be given of calamity/disease/weather/catastrophes in which it is stated that someone or something else other than God was the primary cause of. I do not find it a valid enough reason for people to come up here and just call me 'stupid', or say I'm wrong, without even showing any Scriptures that state God is NOT the primary cause behind calamity.
An analogy of how I perceive this thread's current situation:
Joe came to planet Earth oneday and was given a book entitled, "All About Stop Signs". In the book, Joe reads about what a stop sign is and what it does. There are also several pictures in the book of stop signs at different streets at different times of the day. In each picture, Joe observes that all the stop signs are red. In the text, it is even sometimes stated that the stop signs color is red, such as "The red stop sign....", etc. After reading the book, Joe concludes, with inductive reasoning, that ALL stop signs must be red. All throughout the remainder of his time on Earth, all the stop signs he sees in life are, sure enough, red.
In the same sense, when I read the Bible, it states quite clearly that God is the primary cause behind calamity (God says so Himself!). Therefore, it is only reasonable to conclude that He is also the primary cause of my calamities, and everyone else's for that matter. Unless the book about stop signs actually stated that there are stop signs of a different color in other places, Joe would never assume otherwise. And thus, unless someone can show me in the Bible where God was not the primary cause of calamity, I will continue to believe otherwise.
God bless.
sentientsynth
New member
ZMan,
Simply for the sake of completeness, would you give us your take on this selection from scripture?
1Kings 9 ~ 11 And he said, Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the LORD. And, behold, the LORD passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the LORD; but the LORD was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the LORD was not in the earthquake: 12 And after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice.
What is meant, and what are the ramifications, of Jehovah not being in the phenomena? I apologize if this has already been addressed in this thread.
Peace,
SS
Simply for the sake of completeness, would you give us your take on this selection from scripture?
1Kings 9 ~ 11 And he said, Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the LORD. And, behold, the LORD passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the LORD; but the LORD was not in the wind: and after the wind an earthquake; but the LORD was not in the earthquake: 12 And after the earthquake a fire; but the LORD was not in the fire: and after the fire a still small voice.
What is meant, and what are the ramifications, of Jehovah not being in the phenomena? I apologize if this has already been addressed in this thread.
Peace,
SS
Not to speak for SS but I would answer YES.Letsargue said:
But just ONE event would kill Z Man's "all events" theory.
seekinganswers
New member
Z Man said:
I would love to hear this message proclaimed to the millions of Jews who were being exterminated in Germany during WWII, or to the victims of the aparthide of South Africa, or even the victims of the proclamation of nations for their "Manifest Destiny." A good example of things that are not going as God had commanded are with Abel, when his brother slaughters him, or how about when the "Sons of God" had sexual relations with the daughters of men in the early chapters of Gensis, or even the building of the tower of Babel. The will in opposition to God is not God's desire and that is demonstrated in the consequences of the actions taken. If God had been responsible for such things there is no way in which God could place responsibility for those actions on us.
The ultimate demonstration of opposing wills comes in the Exodus, where the Pharaoh who declares himself god has come in opposition to YHWH. His word is going out to contrast God's own command for his people (be fruitful and multipy). Pharaoh is killing babies, and this is by no means a mandate of God (killing babies is wrong is wrong is wrong). To say that Pharaoh is doing such things by God's own will is just sick. God's desire is for the prosperity of God's own people, not for their demise (for his promise to Abraham is being remembered in Israel). God does not act before this because God only shows up when the oppressed have no voice. God gives charge to humanity to care for those in need, and if this is not done (or if it is actively brought about on others) God will show up on the scene.
To say that God has power over evil by controlling evil is to commit the same error as the Open Theists do, by giving evil an ontology. You have established that evil is a reality that is upheld by God just as much as the good, so that evil and good are equality real in this world. This is a horror, for you make God out to be the author of both good and evil.
Evil has no ontology. There is no substance that is grounded in "evilness." What has substance is grounded in the good (for anything with life is sustained in God). Evil can only be defined as a lacking. When one is declared to be evil one has become less than what God made that one to be. Evil is not a reality in itself but is a parasite to the good, thus being utterly contingent on what is for survival. If there is no good, you don't see evil, anymore than you can be aware of the darkness without first having seen the light. Darkness is not a reality unto itself; darkness is the absence of light. In the same way evil is the absence of good.
So rather than giving evil an ontology you might start with the good and declaring that good to be the reality of this world. Evil is not a reality, but is only a distortion, a play off of the good. And because evil is utterly contingent upon the good, evil can never be a threat to God or even to God's Creation, for evil will be nothing more than a distortion of what God has created, and can never thwart God's Creation on those grounds (it only ends up destroying itself). God does not demonstrate God's power over evil by controlling evil; God demonstrates power over evil by being true power in good, which, like light in the darkness, shows the evil to be the empty reality that it is (death which equals utter destruction and chaos).
God does not have power over evil through control (whether by micromanagement or by the final judgment). God's power over evil is that God is true power where evil only has power in as much as it participates in true power. Evil uses the power of God (life) for its own end only to find that when it has exercised that power it has only accomplished the will of God.
A person who is blind is no less a person; a person whose body is distorted by sin is no less the person that God has made that person to be. God's will is accomplished in all things (for out of God, and through God and unto God are all things). Even the blind man can be blind for the glory of God, as Jesus so eloquently states it in the gospel of John. A funeral can be one of the best evangelical tools of the church, for we have a body sitting in front of us, and it can be made quite clear that this is where we are headed in sin. But God who holds our life will not fail to raise the dead. Our life is commended to God in the funeral even as our body is committed to the grave for decay and rot. It is only in as much as our life is held in God that we have any hope, for we are creatures of the dust, and in our sin to that dust we return.
Both views are just horrifying to me, for the closed theists will turn evil into a reality so that God becomes the author of what is evil; the opened theists will declare that evil is a reality that threatens God and drives God's actions; God only comes in judgment once evil is out of hand (as if evil could drive God's judgment). For the closed theist genocide gloifies God, while for the Open Theist the distortions of sin destroy God's will for a person (those who are sick and deformed are less than people). Either way, I am disgusted by the trends presented by those representing the two views. God is glorified in the cancer of the woman; God is glorified despite the horrors of WWII, not through them (for they are a distortion of the good). So we had better come up with a better source for our views of God, and maybe that ought to be Christ, who neither speaks of God as open or closed, but speaks of God as the loving Father, the Creator of the Heavens and the Earth, and as the one to whom all the Creation is oriented, and from whom we are invited to sup.
Peace,
Michael
Z Man
New member
I've never implied, nor meant to imply that God is literally 'in' a phenomena - God caused Katrina, but I don't believe He was literally 'in' Katrina. I simply believe the Scriptures claim God to be the 'primary cause' of such events. 1 Kings 19:11, in my opinion, supports my belief:sentientsynth said:
And behold, the Lord passed by, and a great and strong wind tore into the mountains and broke the rocks in pieces...
After God 'passed by', the phenomenal events began. I believe He caused the wind, earthquake, and fire, yet, as the Scriptures state, I do not believe God was 'in' them.
In context, Elijah is upset because the Israelites have turned against God and are seeking to kill him, who happens to be a prophet of God himself. God asks Elijah to stand on the mountain, which after passing by, is stressed by wind, an earthquake, and fire (possible volcano?). Later, God assures Elijah, "I have reserved seven thousand in Israel, all whose knees have not bowed to Baal, and every mouth that has not kissed him". In other words, despite what we may see in the physical realm, God is behind the scenes working everything out according to His will.
Therefore, I interpret the incident on the mountain to be a lesson from God to Elijah, that despite what seems like turmoil and certain doom in Israel (as was the scenario on the mountain), God also works behind the scenes protecting Elijah from harm (despite Israel's hostility, God has reserved those who have not turned).
God causes calamities, but we shouldn't look at the events to find God. I believe God caused Katrina, but I'm not going to expect or tell people to 'look for God' in the storm's havoc. Instead, we should look for God in the aftermath - see Him working through people's lives as they sacrifice their homes for refugees, or give their money to those in need. God was telling Elijah to not look for Him in the calamity, but instead, in the quiteness. I do not believe this passage of Scripture is saying that God does not cause calamities.
seekinganswers
New member
Clete said:
The problem I have with an open future is that it assumes that there is a posibility for evil (as if, once again, evil had a place in this world). The posibility of evil is an affirmation of its reality. Evil is not a thing; evil doesn't take up space (or time). Evil is attatched to the good, feeding off of what is in order to bring about its own reality. But in the end, the reality brought about by evil is either nothing at all (that is a lack of future) or is simply the accomplishment of God's own will (as can be seen in the exhiles of Israel, and in the cross of Christ). The future is not open in the regard.
What is open is the present, i.e. us. We are given choice only because we are grounded in the reality that is God (we have life). And it is only in our present life enclosed within a beginning and telos that is God's that we are open. God has enclosed us within God's own will (life) so that we might be able to choose life or death. The future is not open, for God's will is the future of Creation. We will be moved from chaos to rest along with the rest of Creation, whether we come willingly or not. God's will is driving this world (for the good is grounded in God; and the good is reality).
What is open is now, and the now becomes a reflection of eternity. We can either participate in the good that is God's, or we can choose not to and find that we are unable to sustain it.
Peace,
Michael
seekinganswers
New member
Evee said:
There is nothing in this world that is,
that truly is,
that is not also grounded in the Creator.
A God who must stop something is a God in whom that something is not grounded. God need not stop things, for God is the grounding of all things, and evil is nothing more than a distortion of what God has made.
God's will comes about not be fighting what is against God. God's will comes about because it is the only reality.
Peace,
Michael
seekinganswers
New member
I hope everyone realizes that what I am saying is entirely grounded in a very Platonic view of the good, and comes directly from Augustine and Aquinas.
Peace,
Michael
Peace,
Michael