Can man posses a libertarian freewill when his creator, God, does not?

[TheDarkSideOfTheMoon]

Can man posses a libertarian freewill when his creator, God, does not?

This scripture denies that God has libertarian freewill.

"That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us" - Her 6:18 kjv

Can man posses a specific particularity which is not innate to his creator?
.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Can man posses a libertarian freewill when his creator, God, does not?

Your premise, "God is not free," is false.

Therefore your question is moot.

This scripture denies that God has libertarian freewill.

No, it doesn't.

"That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us" - Her 6:18 kjv

No, sorry, nice try, but your prooftext doesn't actually support the idea that God isn't free.

Read from verse 13:

For when God made a promise to Abraham, because He could swear by no one greater, He swore by Himself, saying, “Surely blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply you.” And so, after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promise. For men indeed swear by the greater, and an oath for confirmation is for them an end of all dispute. Thus God, determining to show more abundantly to the heirs of promise the immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an oath, that by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we might have strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before us. This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which enters the Presence behind the veil, where the forerunner has entered for us, even Jesus, having become High Priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.

Hebrews6:13:20 NKJV - - Bible Gateway

www.biblegateway.com

When you read the verse in context, it loses any meaning calvinists try to read into it.

It reads like God could have done otherwise, but chose to obligate Himself to keeping His promise to Abraham.

Can man posses a specific particularity which is not innate to his creator?

Let me ask you this:

Can God write a new song, or create a new butterfly, or even think a new thought?

If not, could He ever have done so?

If so, when did He give up that ability?

 

[TheDarkSideOfTheMoon]

I'm afraid the scripture defeats you.

The language is a strong negation in the original greek in regards the words "immutable and impossible"
Absolutely immutable.
Absolutely impossible - "impossible for God to lie".

A clear denial of contrary choice, at that point of choice.
.

 

[Right Divider]

I'm afraid the scripture defeats you.

The language is a strong negation in the original greek in regards the words "immutable and impossible"
Absolutely immutable.
Absolutely impossible - "impossible for God to lie".

A clear denial of contrary choice, at that point of choice..

God cannot lie... that does NOT make Him "immutable". It makes Him HONEST.

Your wacky beliefs have left you spiritually retarded.

 

[Clete]

I'm afraid the scripture defeats you.

He just demonstrated that it doesn't.

Why are Calvinists so universally dishonest in this same exact manner?

You cannot actually believe that this sentence is true based solely on the fact that you had the temerity to type it. You also cannot possibly believe that anyone is going to be impressed, much less convinced by it. It's just you lying to yourself!

This seemingly inherent trait of dishonesty, that I've observed among Calvinist now for decades, speaks volumes about both the doctrine and those who hold to it. Calvinists don't care about what the bible actually teaches. They only care about how they can present the bible in a manner that is consistent with the things they desire to believe about God.

The language is a strong negation in the original greek in regards the words "immutable and impossible"
Absolutely immutable.
Absolutely impossible - "impossible for God to lie".

Nonsense. You sound like a cult leader with sort of silly argument and you're showing off your ignorance of the scriptures to boot.
Here's a passage I guarantee that you've never read and that won't move you an inch off your precious doctrine (if you even bother to read it now).

I Kings 22:19 Then Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on His throne, and all the host of heaven standing by, on His right hand and on His left. 20 And the Lord said, ‘Who will persuade Ahab to go up, that he may fall at Ramoth Gilead?’ So one spoke in this manner, and another spoke in that manner. 21 Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, and said, ‘I will persuade him.’ 22 The Lord said to him, ‘In what way?’ So he said, ‘I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And the Lord said, ‘You shall persuade him, and also prevail. Go out and do so.’ 23 Therefore look! The Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these prophets of yours, and the Lord has declared disaster against you.”​

Read verses 22 and 23 again.

A clear denial of contrary choice, at that point of choice.

If Calvinism is true then God has no choice. (Your own premise!)

If God has no choice then God is amoral. (Definition of amoral.)

God is GOOD! He is morally righteous in every possible way. (Foundational premise of the entire bible and of the whole of Christianity, including Calvinism.)

Calvinism is therefore self-contradictory and therefore false.



Put more succinctly.....

God is just! Therefore, Calvinism is false.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I'm afraid the scripture defeats you.

Sorry, but it doesn't, and saying it doesn't make it so.

And I just showed you how it doesn't.

Why did you ignore it?

The language is a strong negation in the original greek in regards the words "immutable and impossible"

Yawn.

Come back when you have a real argument to make.

Absolutely immutable.

His righteous character doesn't change.

It doesn't mean He isn't free.

Absolutely impossible - "impossible for God to lie".

God is honest.

It doesn't mean He isn't free.

A clear denial of contrary choice, at that point of choice.
.

Saying it doesn't make it so.

 

[ttruscott]

All FREE means is uncoerced:


IF GOD set it up so HIS new creation had no coercion or constraints upon their choices, forcing them to choose anything, they had free will.

The Elements of a True Free Will Choice:

1. Free will can't be coerced:
Nothing in their created nature could FORCE them to choose love or hate, good or evil, including all genetics...

Nothing in their experience could FORCE them to choose love or hate, good or evil, including all, cultural or familial experience...

Nothing in their understanding or knowledge of reality could FORCE them to choose good or evil, love or hate.

In other words, they had to be completely and truly ingenuously innocent
before they became a moral person by making their free will choice one way or the other.
[Ref: definition of ingenuous: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ingenuousness as:
1. Lacking in cunning, guile, worldliness; artless. 2. Openly straightforward or frank; candid.

2. Consequences must be known but not proved:
The person must understand the full consequences of their choice or it is not a true choice of what the what they want but more of a guess. “What will happen if I choose left or right, the red pill or the blue pill?” must be answered in full detail before the choice is made.

But "PROOF" of the nature of the consequence would compel or coerce the person to choose what was proven to be the best for them. If the answer “death here,” “life there,” was proven, which would you choose? The weight of knowledge would destroy the effect of a true ‘free will’ choice.

If it were proven you would die if you went left, are you truly free to choose to go right? No, you are forced by your knowledge to go right. Therefore they must know, but without proof, the nature of the consequences of their choice.

Only then are we following our desires, ourdeepest hope in the nature of reality, defining the reality we most hope to enjoy.

And since GOD is under no coercion nor compulsion from any other person, HIS will is free.

 

[TheDarkSideOfTheMoon]

God cannot lie... that does NOT make Him "immutable". It makes Him HONEST.

Your wacky beliefs have left you spiritually retarded.

Your incoherence has you baffled.
.

 

[TheDarkSideOfTheMoon]

He just demonstrated that it doesn't.

Why are Calvinists so universally dishonest in this same exact manner?

You cannot actually believe that this sentence is true based solely on the fact that you had the temerity to type it. You also cannot possibly believe that anyone is going to be impressed, much less convinced by it. It's just you lying to yourself!

This seemingly inherent trait of dishonesty, that I've observed among Calvinist now for decades, speaks volumes about both the doctrine and those who hold to it. Calvinists don't care about what the bible actually teaches. They only care about how they can present the bible in a manner that is consistent with the things they desire to believe about God.


Nonsense. You sound like a cult leader with sort of silly argument and you're showing off your ignorance of the scriptures to boot.
Here's a passage I guarantee that you've never read and that won't move you an inch off your precious doctrine (if you even bother to read it now).

I Kings 22:19 Then Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on His throne, and all the host of heaven standing by, on His right hand and on His left. 20 And the Lord said, ‘Who will persuade Ahab to go up, that he may fall at Ramoth Gilead?’ So one spoke in this manner, and another spoke in that manner. 21 Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, and said, ‘I will persuade him.’ 22 The Lord said to him, ‘In what way?’ So he said, ‘I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And the Lord said, ‘You shall persuade him, and also prevail. Go out and do so.’ 23 Therefore look! The Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these prophets of yours, and the Lord has declared disaster against you.”​

Read verses 22 and 23 again.


If Calvinism is true then God has no choice. (Your own premise!)

If God has no choice then God is amoral. (Definition of amoral.)

God is GOOD! He is morally righteous in every possible way. (Foundational premise of the entire bible and of the whole of Christianity, including Calvinism.)

Calvinism is therefore self-contradictory and therefore false.



Put more succinctly.....

God is just! Therefore, Calvinism is false.

That was an enormous elongated rant, and a complete waste of my time reading it, nevertheless.

Who is doing the actual lying? God or the lying spirit?
.

 

[Right Divider]

Your incoherence has you baffled..

More idiotic comments from you will not help you.

 

[TheDarkSideOfTheMoon]

Your premise, "God is not free," is false.

Therefore your question is moot.



No, it doesn't.



No, sorry, nice try, but your prooftext doesn't actually support the idea that God isn't free.

Read from verse 13:

For when God made a promise to Abraham, because He could swear by no one greater, He swore by Himself, saying, “Surely blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply you.” And so, after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promise. For men indeed swear by the greater, and an oath for confirmation is for them an end of all dispute. Thus God, determining to show more abundantly to the heirs of promise the immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an oath, that by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we might have strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold of the hope set before us. This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which enters the Presence behind the veil, where the forerunner has entered for us, even Jesus, having become High Priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.

Hebrews6:13:20 NKJV - - Bible Gateway

www.biblegateway.com

When you read the verse in context, it loses any meaning calvinists try to read into it.

It reads like God could have done otherwise, but chose to obligate Himself to keeping His promise to Abraham.



Let me ask you this:

Can God write a new song, or create a new butterfly, or even think a new thought?

If not, could He ever have done so?

If so, when did He give up that ability?

In your haste to defend your libertarian viewpoint you forgot to address the implication of the words "it is impossible for God to lie".

The very fact that we are to have "a strong consolation" and "lay hold of the hope set before us" and "This hope we have as an anchor of the soul
". demonstrates that it is a {the} specific character trait or attribute of God, being envisaged, not the ordinances.

That character trait or attribute is that God is truth.
Truth personified.
That is why "it is impossible for God to lie".

You are avoiding the obvious and incontrovertible meaning of the text.
.

 

[TheDarkSideOfTheMoon]

More idiotic comments from you will not help you.

Could you please reduce or eliminate the billboard that appears at the foot of all your comments.
It takes up far to much useful space and serves no purpose imo.
.

 

[Right Divider]

Could you please reduce or eliminate the billboard that appears at the foot of all your comments.
It takes up far to much useful space and serves no purpose imo.
.

No

 

[JudgeRightly]

That was an enormous elongated rant, and a complete waste of my time reading it, nevertheless.

Then why are you even here on TOL?

TOL is for dialogue. If you can't be bothered to read people's responses and respond to them, then just leave.

Who is doing the actual lying? God or the lying spirit?

Who is the One who commanded the spirit to lie?

In your haste to defend your libertarian viewpoint you forgot to address the implication of the words "it is impossible for God to lie".

The very fact that we are to have "a strong consolation" and "lay hold of the hope set before us" and "This hope we have as an anchor of the soul
". demonstrates that it is a {the} specific character trait or attribute of God, being envisaged, not the ordinances.

That character trait or attribute is that God is truth.
Truth personified.
That is why "it is impossible for God to lie".

You are avoiding the obvious and incontrovertible meaning of the text.

Saying it doesn't make it so.

In your haste to defend your Calvinistic viewpoint you forgot to address the implication of the passage in which the verse you quoted resides within, which I quoted for you to read.

The very fact that God obligated Himself to upholding His end of the deal He made with Abram, with no action taken on Abram's part, demonstrates that the specific character trait or attribute of God being envisaged is God's ability to act.

God is Truth. Therefore, when He says He will do something, He will bring His will to pass.

Yet how many times in the Bible does God declare something will happen, yet later, when the circumstances change, it never happens?

Do you even know?

You are avoiding the obvious and incontrovertible meaning of the text, in favor of your Calvinistic doctrines.

 

[TheDarkSideOfTheMoon]

Then why are you even here on TOL?

TOL is for dialogue. If you can't be bothered to read people's responses and respond to them, then just leave.



Who is the One who commanded the spirit to lie?



Saying it doesn't make it so.

In your haste to defend your Calvinistic viewpoint you forgot to address the implication of the passage in which the verse you quoted resides within, which I quoted for you to read.

The very fact that God obligated Himself to upholding His end of the deal He made with Abram, with no action taken on Abram's part, demonstrates that the specific character trait or attribute of God being envisaged is God's ability to act.

God is Truth. Therefore, when He says He will do something, He will bring His will to pass.

Yet how many times in the Bible does God declare something will happen, yet later, when the circumstances change, it never happens?

Do you even know?

You are avoiding the obvious and incontrovertible meaning of the text, in favor of your Calvinistic doctrines.

TOL is for dialogue and that is why I am here.
The wind blows where it will - the prerogative to respond remains, and rightfully so, the domain of the recipient.

God did not command the spirit to lie.
That particular individual spirit entity WAS a lying spirit.
Who's mind gave birth to the enticing lie?

"Saying it does not make it so" equally applicable to you, and in my opinion, much more suited.

You have highlighted the undeniable fact that God is rightly revered for his reliability in regards his promises and assertions to his children.
This proven record of reliability is historically attested to and also understood to be a current contemporaneous reality as these promises are equally applicable to our personal current existence.

Is it not so, that when we entrust ourselves completely to another [such as a lively faith in the Lord] we do so fully and completely; with a sense of abandonment?

Is that because we take hold of the outcome or the truth of the words spoken?
.

 

[7djengo7]

Is it not so, that when we entrust ourselves completely to another [such as a lively faith in the Lord] we do so fully and completely; with a sense of abandonment?

A noble spirit embiggens the smallest man!

 

[JudgeRightly]

TOL is for dialogue and that is why I am here.

You're not doing a very good job at it.

God did not command the spirit to lie.

Now you're just arguing with scripture:

Then Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on His throne, and all the host of heaven standing by, on His right hand and on His left. And the Lord said, ‘Who will persuade Ahab to go up, that he may fall at Ramoth Gilead?’ So one spoke in this manner, and another spoke in that manner. Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, and said, ‘I will persuade him.’ The Lord said to him, ‘In what way?’ So he said, ‘I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And the Lord said, ‘You shall persuade him, and also prevail. Go out and do so.’ Therefore look! The Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these prophets of yours, and the Lord has declared disaster against you.”

Bible Gateway passage: 1 Kings 22:19-23 - New King James Version

Then Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on His throne, and all the host of heaven standing by, on His right hand and on His left. And the Lord said, ‘Who will persuade Ahab to go up, that he may fall at Ramoth Gilead?’ So one spoke in this manner, and...

www.biblegateway.com

That particular individual spirit entity WAS a lying spirit.

Yes.

Who's mind gave birth to the enticing lie?

According to you, God did, because He created that spirit to be a lying spirit.

"Saying it does not make it so" equally applicable to you,

AMEN!

and in my opinion, much more suited.

The difference is that I didn't just merely state my position. I supported my position with scripture and reason. So far, all you've done is rip a verse out of its context in order to try to make it say something that it doesn't say.

You have highlighted the undeniable fact that God is rightly revered for his reliability in regards his promises and assertions to his children.

You haven't answered my question from before:

Can God write a new song, or create a new butterfly, or even think a new thought? If not, could He ever have done so? If so, when did He give up that ability?

This proven record of reliability is historically attested to and also understood to be a current contemporaneous reality as these promises are equally applicable to our personal current existence.

You sure do like using big words in order to sound lofty and knowledgable, don't you?

All you're doing, however, in reality, is sounding like an idiot.

"Current contemporaneous reality"?

"Personal current existence"?

The first is redundant. The second rejects objectivity.

Is it not so, that when we entrust ourselves completely to another [such as a lively faith in the Lord] we do so fully and completely; with a sense of abandonment?

No, it's not. We don't abandon our senses when we trust in God. Which, by the way, is not possible if either God nor man is not free

Is that because we take hold of the outcome or the truth of the words spoken?

What I said (in another thread):

Yet I guarantee that you live your life as though you were not a calvinist.

... has come true.

You talk as though man has free will, in order to deny that he does.

This is called a stolen concept fallacy.

 

[ttruscott]

1. GOD wanted to share true love within pure holiness with HIS creation.

2. True love and real holiness can only be created by the true free will decision of the person. Any other 'creation’ of love or holiness is not real and falls short of true love and holiness. No power can change this necessity.

3. For a choice to be a real or true choice, it must offer all options available to the choice, both pro and con, or the choice, contstrained as it is, is not a true choice but a limited choice. No power can change this necessity.

4. Given GOD’s goals and the necessity of our ability to make true free will choices, GOD could not prevent the creation of evil by the choice of some of HIS people choosing to ebel against HIM and no power can change the necessity of HIS method once HIS goals were set.

 

[Clete]

That was an enormous elongated rant, and a complete waste of my time reading it, nevertheless.

Liar.

Who is doing the actual lying? God or the lying spirit?
.

The lying spirit was following God's explicit order!

Is it wrong to lie but righteous to order someone else to do so? Does God order others to sin so that He can remain "pure"? Is there anything you say, any doctrine you believe, that isn't blasphemy?

Your pagan doctrine has blinded you to two things...

1. General statements cannot rightly be applied to every specific, which is something that most third grade children have already figured out and that has to be taught out of their brains by people like you.
2. Lying isn't always evil, which is a truth that you're not likely to ever learn if you get your doctrine from someone standing behind a pulpit rather than from actually reading the bible and taking what it says seriously.

Indeed, on the latter point, to deceive, and thereby thwart, an evil enemy is the opposite of evil. It is wisdom and righteousness and follows God's own example!

 

[TheDarkSideOfTheMoon]

You're not doing a very good job at it.



Now you're just arguing with scripture:

Then Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on His throne, and all the host of heaven standing by, on His right hand and on His left. And the Lord said, ‘Who will persuade Ahab to go up, that he may fall at Ramoth Gilead?’ So one spoke in this manner, and another spoke in that manner. Then a spirit came forward and stood before the Lord, and said, ‘I will persuade him.’ The Lord said to him, ‘In what way?’ So he said, ‘I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouth of all his prophets.’ And the Lord said, ‘You shall persuade him, and also prevail. Go out and do so.’ Therefore look! The Lord has put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these prophets of yours, and the Lord has declared disaster against you.”

Bible Gateway passage: 1 Kings 22:19-23 - New King James Version

Then Micaiah said, “Therefore hear the word of the Lord: I saw the Lord sitting on His throne, and all the host of heaven standing by, on His right hand and on His left. And the Lord said, ‘Who will persuade Ahab to go up, that he may fall at Ramoth Gilead?’ So one spoke in this manner, and...

www.biblegateway.com

Yes.



According to you, God did, because He created that spirit to be a lying spirit.



AMEN!



The difference is that I didn't just merely state my position. I supported my position with scripture and reason. So far, all you've done is rip a verse out of its context in order to try to make it say something that it doesn't say.



You haven't answered my question from before:

Can God write a new song, or create a new butterfly, or even think a new thought? If not, could He ever have done so? If so, when did He give up that ability?



You sure do like using big words in order to sound lofty and knowledgable, don't you?

All you're doing, however, in reality, is sounding like an idiot.

"Current contemporaneous reality"?

"Personal current existence"?

The first is redundant. The second rejects objectivity.



No, it's not. We don't abandon our senses when we trust in God. Which, by the way, is not possible if either God nor man is not free



What I said (in another thread):



... has come true.

You talk as though man has free will, in order to deny that he does.

This is called a stolen concept fallacy.

You have avoided the obvious stated content of the scripture you quote from.