Is God the creator / author of sin?

Does God make people retarded, riddle their bodies with cancer, or give them any number of terrible diseases…or is it just the result of the fall?

If God is sovereign, could he not have everyone born into a wonderfully healthy body?

Did God not know before the Earth was formed that few would be in heaven?
Yet, He created the world.

It appears to me God can, and does, what He wants…and I will not understand all of it this side of heaven.

We have a God that is bigger than us. Why should we even think we could comprehend all of His ways?

Just to let you know...I am not a Calvinist. But I have enjoyed this study as of late here on SI. I have also been reading much this last month. Spurgeon, Warfield, Sproul, etc…and though I am not fully convinced in all areas, I have discovered that as a child those who taught me about Calvinism did not know anything about it.

There are parts of reformed theology that have been dismissed by many…that I see in scripture.

Does everything have to be completely reconciled…or is there room for Godly paradox?

I believe A.W. Tozer was correct when he said," God will not hold us responsible to understand the mysteries of election, predestination, and the divine sovereignty. The best and safest way to deal with these truths is to raise our eyes to God and in deepest reverence say, "0 Lord, Thou knowest." Those things belong to the deep and mysterious profound of God's omniscience. Prying into them may make theologians, but it will never make saints."

I must take the easy road on this and agree with this quote:

The best and safest way to deal with these truths is to raise our eyes to God and in deepest reverence say, "0 Lord, Thou knowest." Those things belong to the deep and mysterious profound of God's omniscience. Prying into them may make theologians, but it will never make saints."

simply because I am unlearned in this issue. But could we not be satisfied with this quote and cease from trying to understand. I could say, "yes," but many won't.

When a woman stands up in an assembly and with trembling tells a story of her son perishing with a horrible disease and how her husband beats her...would it be enough to respond with this quote? Would it ease her pain, take away her fear?

i have to consider that the above statement is the final statement, that it is in fact the Lord our God who knows. No matter the determination we make on the issue.

So is it safe for me to remain ignorant on this issue?

All lot of people have a very narrow minded view of God. The say God would never do this because he is love, when we should say Love is not this because it is not Godly.
To answer is God the author of sin you must start from Aquinas' view of pure actuality. God posses all things from beginning and end, he is infinitely wiser than us and nothing is out of his control.
God created Satan, and in Job we see that Satan can only go as far as God will let him. Again Jesus tells peter that Satan wants to sift him like wheat but HE prays for God to prevent this.
If Sin did not come from the creator than there is an outside source creating things that is not under God's Control.
If you Say God did not create sin, than you automatically have 2 or more creating gods. The concept of Good and Evil opposing each other comes from ZorthoAstroism - the religion of the Babylonian wise men (MAGI).
Let us not forget the scriptures which tell us that "even though you meant it for evil, God meant it for Good." or "All things work together for the good of those who love God, and are called according to His Purpose (ELECT).

Just because something is from a Calvinist Doctrine does not condemn it to be false, that is a Genetic Fallacy like saying he is wrong because he is black or white.
Hope this was helpful.

Ergun Canner said, “I don’t understand election, but if the Bible says you’re elect…you’re elect. I don’t understand electricity, but I don’t sit in the dark.”

The Bible is clear that some are elect. I also see what appears to be some sort of responsibility for the believer as well. I’m not sure this is so easy to reconcile.

If I may quote John MacArthur (not endorsing all his views):

“The problem is not whether you believe those. The problem is how you harmonize them, right? You know how you harmonize them? No, you don't. You don't know how to harmonize them. Because there is no way to harmonize them. And, the way that I like to illustrate it is this, Is Jesus God or man? Both. Is He all man? 100 % man? 100 % God? How can He be 200 %? It is a paradox.”

Maybe he has a point.

Either way, I accept that what is in the Bible is true…even if I cannot fully understand it.

I don’t believe it is time to end my investigation just yet…I will continue to read.

I will get Hunt’s book. May I suggest that you get

What is Reformed Theology?: Understanding the Basics by R.C. Sproul.

This is not a book defending Reformed theology…it is a description. Don’t think you know all that is needed about reformed theology until you read this book…it is very enlightening. There are several Arminians that gave the book a good review as well. Check out the reviews at Amazon.

God bless you brother on your journey of greater understanding.

This is a really interesting topic that has been on my mind lately. I'm reading through the OT and a couple thoughts and questions that I have are:

1. Death came into the world because sin and the resultant curse-Isn't GOD the one who cursed man? Wouldn't that mean that death comes out of the curse and therefore God?

2. I have heard many say over the years that God doesn't make sickness or make people sick, that it is a result of the curse. If that's the case,
then how do you explain all of the OT verses where God says that he will make His people sick as punishment? Deuteronomy 28:27,Numbers 5:27,Deuteronomy 28:61 and many others. Also he made the Egyptians sick(plauge of boils) as punishment.

3. In response to your question Krispy, didn't God create all things? Is there something (sin) in this world that is beyond God, beyond His creation? I know that Satan can't create anything so is sin outside the realm of creation?

I don't have any kind of agenda. I am honestly interested in learning more about our Awesome God.

In order for there to be a choice there must be at least two options…
God or….what?
Good or….What?

Darkness is the absence of light. Similarly, evil is the absence of good, or better, evil is the absence of God. God did not have to create evil, but rather only allow for the absence of good.

One thought - Christ bore our sin on the cross i.e. all sin is gone as far as God is concerned. As Christ is the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world we must remember that this was an eternal sacrifice. What I mean to say is this - at no point in eternity was sin not dealt with. God sees us through His Son, His eternal Son, His sinless Son.

I don't have any kind of agenda. I am honestly interested in learning more about our Awesome God.

Amen brother, Amen!!!

I too have no agenda outside of learning more about Him. I thank God that He is in control...even when I don't understand.

Here is John Calvin's own view on this subject. I'm quoting from his "Institutes," Book I, Ch. 14, Part 16.).

(By the way, I am not a Calvinist. In some things I don't think Calvin was seeing from God's perspective. But what he says here is completely scriptural, and true.)

"But as the Devil was created by God, we must remark, that this wickedness which we attribute to his nature, is not from creation, but from corruption. For whatever evil quality he has, he has acquired by his defection and fall. And of this the Scripture apprizes us; lest, believing him to have come from God, just as he now is, we should ascribe to God Himself that which is in direct opposition to Him. For this reason Christ declares, that Satan, 'when he speaketh a lie, speaketh of his own;' and adds the reason-- 'because he abode not in the truth.' When he says that he abode not in the truth, he certainly implies that he had once been in it; and when he calls him the father of a lie, he precludes his imputing to God the depravity of his nature, which originated wholly from himself. Though these things are delivered in a brief and rather obscure manner, yet they are abundantly sufficient to vindicate the majesty of God from every calumny...."

AD

I'll play :-D

This is from the Westminster Confession, and I think it deals well with this-

[i]Our first parents, being seduced by the subtilty and temptation of Satan, sinned in eating the forbidden fruit.1 [b]This their sin God was pleased, according to his wise and holy counsel, to permit, having purposed to order it to his own glory.[/b]2

1. Gen. iii. 13; 2 Cor. xi. 3.
2. Rom. xi. 32.

By this sin they fell from their original righteousness and communion with God,1 and so became dead in sin,2 and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body.3

1. Gen. iii. 6–8; Eccles. vii. 29; Rom. iii. 23.
2. Gen. ii. 17; Eph. ii. 1; [Am. ed. Rom. v. 12].
3. Tit. i. 15; Gen. vi. 5; Jer. xvii. 9; Rom. iii. 10–19.

From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good,1 and wholly inclined to all evil,2 do proceed all actual transgressions.3

1. Rom. v. 6; vii. 18; viii. 7; Col. i. 21; [Am. ed. John iii. 6].
2. Gen. vi. 5; viii. 21; Rom. iii. 10–12.
3. James i. 14, 15; Eph. ii. 2, 3; Matt. xv. 19.[/i]

So now we need to step back and understand that NOTHING happens in this world apart from God's allowing it to happen. God knew Satan would fall when He created him, and God knew that Satan would bring sin into mankind.

However, Christ and His crucifiction were part of God's plan before the foundation of the Earth. It is as if in God's mind all of His work was accomplished before anything was created.

If we say that God did not know that Satan would rebel, and bring sin into humanity, then we have an unbiblical god, and this is generally the slippery slope that goes the way of open theism.

We do not have the right to ever judge God based upon our sinful nature. Even we as Christians have a remaining old Adam that corrupts even the most spiritual things we do. So when we come to something like this, we must tread carefully.

Here are three facts that must be reckoned with-
1)God is holy
2)God is omnipotent
3)Sin exists

Better to just accept the fact that God allowed sin to come into the human race, but He is not the cause of it at all, Satan is.

I didnt ordain that my kid will rebel, but I knew it was going to happen.

Of course, because you did not create your child, God did. He created Him for His purposes.

I agree though that God cannot be the author of Sin. He is too Holy to look upon, much less create sin. This does not mean that He cannot allow sin to take place. Whoever commits the sin if fully responsible for that sin whether God ordained it or not.

This is not to anyone in particular.

I need help with this one…not sure I grasp it…clear as mud actually.

Question:

If my dog had been bitten five times by a rattlesnakes because every time he sees one he always messes with it…and I clearly see one out the door…and I, with this knowledge, let my dog outside…

I guess it ultimately is the dog’s choice…but I knew what he was going to do.

Am I not accountable? I mean it was clearly the dogs choice, but did I not ordain it…knowing in advance what would take place?

If I have true irrefutable knowledge of a tragic event…and the ability to stop it…and don’t…I allow it. Yes?

I know this is an extremely poor example…please look past that and help me understand more clearly this fore-knowledge, fore-ordained idea.

Thank you all in advance.

Not really... foreknowledge is quite different from fore-ordain.

How so? Usually, the words used for "foreknow" are verbs not nouns, so it is something God is doing and not something God has.

God gave us a choice to obey or disobey (choose you this day whom you will serve), but understood and knew we would choose the wrong thing.

That verse you quoted though is not to unbelievers, or in its context to the nations surrounding Israel. It is to God's covenant people who had experienced His revelation and were in rebellion to Him. I know it sounds good to throw out to argue free-will, but that's not what it is describing.

God still remains completely untouched by sin though. He is not the One who is sinning.

Consider for a moment perhaps the greatest sin ever committed in the History of man, the crucifiction of Christ. But what does God say about this in His Word-

Acts 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:

This was God's plan, to use the sinful acts of men to redeem His people. Did God ordain the crucifiction?

And yes here is where the Greek word for "foreknowledge" is indeed a noun, and it is used twice in the NT, once here, and again in 1 Peter 1:2.

There is also-
Act 4:27 For of a truth against thy holy child Jesus, whom thou hast anointed, both Herod, and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles, and the people of Israel, were gathered together,
Act 4:28 For [b]to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done[/b].

So, again in the Apostles mind, there was no problem in seeing God's hand in the sinful events of men, while also understanding that God uses what men mean for evil for His glory just as int eh story of Joseph in Genesis. Did God know that Joseph's brothers would sell him into slavery(sin)? But what was the purpose of this, God's glory in fulfilling His promise.

Here is a good verse to ponder while thinking through these issues-
Psalms 115:3 But our God is in the heavens: [b]he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.[/b]

tj,

I think it is would be best to say that God is not held accountable by the same standards that we are. He created us therefore He can do with us what He wants. I think the best explanation of this mind boggling doctrine is found in Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology book. He basically says that even though God ordains things to happen, the person who does those things is still responsible.

For example, Judas Iscariot was responsbile for his betrayal of Christ, but God ordained it did he not? What about Pilot and the jews? Look at Acts 4 down around verse 23
When they were released, they went to their friends and reported what the chief priests and the elders had said to them. 24 And when they heard it, they lifted their voices ptogether to God and said, “Sovereign Lord, qwho made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them, 25 who through the mouth of our father David, your servant,3 said by the Holy Spirit,
r“ ‘Why did the Gentiles rage,
and the peoples plot in vain?
26 The kings of the earth set themselves,
and sthe rulers were gathered together,
against the Lord and against his tAnointed’4—
27 for truly in this city there were gathered together against your uholy servant Jesus, vwhom you anointed, both wHerod and xPontius Pilate, along ywith the Gentiles and zthe peoples of Israel, 28 ato do whatever your hand and byour plan had predestined to take place. 29 And now, Lord, clook upon their threats and grant to your servants5 to continue to sp
The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 (Ac 4:23-29). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

Good job roaringlamb,

you posted right before I did, I guess

To quote Mr. Spock... "Thats highly illogical, Captain".

Actually it is perfectly logical. If you create a pot then crush it, are you held to any kind of responsiblity for what you did with it? Could you not create a peice of pottery for the simple purpose of displaying your wrath?

Romans 919 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For zwho can resist his will?” 20 But who are you, O man, ato answer back to God? bWill what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 cHas the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump done vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience evessels of wrath fprepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known gthe riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he hhas prepared beforehand for glory—
The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 (Ro 9:19-23). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

That is my interpretation of this particular passage. If you have a different one that is fine.

Brother, what you said defies logic,

And God becoming a man doesn't?

Christ coming to us in the bread and wine of communion doesn't seem a bit illogical to you?

Better yet-
A holy God saving unholy people by dying for them instead of giving them what they deserve.

That is not logical at all, but thank God it is true!!!

jgraves11 wrote:
tj,

I think it is would be best to say that God is not held accountable by the same standards that we are. He created us therefore He can do with us what He wants. I think the best explanation of this mind boggling doctrine is found in Wayne Grudem's Systematic Theology book. He basically says that even though God ordains things to happen, the person who does those things is still responsible.

For example, Judas Iscariot was responsbile for his betrayal of Christ, but God ordained it did he not? What about Pilot and the jews? Look at Acts 4 down around verse 23
When they were released, they went to their friends and reported what the chief priests and the elders had said to them. 24 And when they heard it, they lifted their voices ptogether to God and said, “Sovereign Lord, qwho made the heaven and the earth and the sea and everything in them, 25 who through the mouth of our father David, your servant,3 said by the Holy Spirit,
r“ ‘Why did the Gentiles rage,
and the peoples plot in vain?
26 The kings of the earth set themselves,
and sthe rulers were gathered together,
against the Lord and against his tAnointed’4—
27 for truly in this city there were gathered together against your uholy servant Jesus, vwhom you anointed, both wHerod and xPontius Pilate, along ywith the Gentiles and zthe peoples of Israel, 28 ato do whatever your hand and byour plan had predestined to take place. 29 And now, Lord, clook upon their threats and grant to your servants5 to continue to sp
The Holy Bible : English standard version. 2001 (Ac 4:23-29). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

Thank you brother.

"it's part of the mystery of God". Thats where the conversation usually ends up with Calvinists.

I will not “name drop”, but one could easily compile a very long list of prominent Arminians who have said, and do say, this very thing.

This is definitely not a Calvinism exclusive.

It would seem that many have come to the conclusion that there are simply parts of God that are above our understanding.

Why is it not Okay to simply say…”we just don’t have it all completely figured out?”

** edit 4 spelling **

i always found this "A dialogue between a predestinarian and his friend" interesting.... also it is nice with the references so one can go do deeper study

FRIEND. -- SIR, I have heard that you make God the author of all sin, and
the destroyer of the greater part of mankind without mercy.

PREDESTINARIAN. -- I deny it; I only say, "God did from all eternity
unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass." (Assembly's Catechism,
chap. 3.)

Friend. -- Do you make no exception?

Pred. -- No, surely; for "nothing is more absurd than to think anything at
all is done but by the ordination of God." (Calvin's Institutes, book 1.,
chap. 16, sect. 3.)

Friend. -- Do you extend this to the actions of men?

Pred. -- Without doubt: "Every action and motion of every creature is so
governed by the hidden counsel of God, that nothing can come to pass, but
what was ordained by him." (Ibid., sect. 3.)

Friend. -- But what then becomes of the wills of men?

Pred. -- "The wills of men are so governed by the will of God, that they
are carried on straight to the mark which he has fore-ordained." (Ibid., sect.
8.)

Friend. -- I suppose you mean the permissive will of God?

Pred. -- No: I mean, "all things come to pass by the efficacious and
irresistible will of God." (Twissi Vindiciae Gratiae Potestatis &
Providentiae Dei. Editio Jensoniana, par. 3, p. 19.)

Friend. -- Why, then, all men must do just what they do?

Pred. -- True: "It is impossible that anything should ever be done, but
that to which God impels the will of man." (Ibid., p. 19.)

Friend. -- But does not this imply the necessity of all events?

Pred. -- "I will not scruple to own that the will of God lays a necessity
on all things, and that everything he wills necessarily comes to pass."
(Calvin's Inst., b. 3, c. 24, sec. 8.)

Friend. -- Does sin then necessarily come to pass?
Pred. -- Undoubtedly: For "the almighty power of God extends itself to
the first fall, and all other sins of angels and men." (Assembly's Catechism,
c. 5.)

Friend. -- I grant, God foresaw the first man would fall.

Pred. -- Nay, "God not only foresaw that Adam would fall, but also
ordained that he should." (Calvin's Inst., b. 3, c. 23, sec. 7.)

[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=20964&forum=34&2]The rest of this interesting conversation[/url]

He doesnt come to us in the bread and the wine of communion. Communion is symbolic of Him, meant to be done in remembarence of Him. There is nothing supernatural about communion. My apologies to any Catholics or Lutherans, or other "Catholic Lite" denominations... but it's true.

So when Christ says, "this is my body... this is my blood" Christ was really saying, "this is like my body, and this is like my blood."?

Yet would you have us believe that there is a literal 1000 year reign of Christ?

Now for all intents and purposes, the structure of those passages in which Christ speaks of the elements do not show "symbology", nor do the words mean other things unlike "whosoever", "all" etc.

How does it work? I do not know, but God has attached His promise to it, and it is not something I do, but something is done to me as I partake. Not salvation mind you, but Christ's promise- this is...given for you for the remission of sins.

In light of God's love and mercy, no it's not illogical at all. The best example I have is my relationship with my children. There are times I could hang them out to dry... but I dont... because of love and mercy. Makes perfect sense to me.

Ahh yes, but they are your children, not someone else's, or the children of your enemy.

Your fatherly care for them is because they are your children. Same with God.

I can't for the life of me think that Our LORD intended for us to eat a literal piece of bread and a literal cup of wine saying, "Do this in remembrance of me".

Brother consider this passage a few verses after the one you quote-
1 Corinthians 11:29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, [b]not discerning the Lord's body.[/b]

Like I said earlier, I do not know how it works, but there is more to the Lord's Supper than just a "memorial" meal.

roaringlamb wrote:

Yet would you have us believe that there is a literal 1000 year reign of Christ?

Do you believe He will reign for 1000 years?

Do you believe He will reign for 1000 years?

He is reigning right now, and the 1000 years is not a literal 1000 years. It is figurative for the Church age, and towards the end of the Church age, Satan will be given free reign to deceive many and then Christ shall return to Earth and establish His Kingdom.

This is a very, very scaled back description of
Amillennial Eschatology.

I believe He did create evil somehow and I dont understand why but I aceept that He is God, My God and I'm His little baby

However, the scripture does say and I'm surprised no one posted this unless I missed it

"I form the light,and create darkness:I make peace and create evil: I the LORD do all these things"

Isaiah 46:7

I'm trying to figure these thing out too,Yet this scripture speaks loudly and almost presents more questions than answers

roaringlamb wrote:

He is reigning right now, and the 1000 years is not a literal 1000 years. It is figurative for the Church age, and towards the end of the Church age, Satan will be given free reign to deceive many and then Christ shall return to Earth and establish His Kingdom.

This is a very, very scaled back description of
Amillennial Eschatology.

Do you have any proof to back this up?

Do you have any proof to back this up?

Revelation 20 pretty much sums it up.

So your saying that Satan has already been bound for 1000 years? You are saying that the satan is not currently deceiving the nations/people?

You are saying the mark of the beast has already come?

You are saying that the saints are currently reigning with Christ for 1000 years?

Do you have proof of any of this?

So your saying that Satan has already been bound for 1000 years? You are saying that the satan is not currently deceiving the nations/people?

Satan is bound in that he cannot do all the evil he desires. Christ Himself said that the Church would not be prevailed over by the gates of hell.

Man in his fallen state does not really need Satan to deceive him, as man in and of himself has enough trouble understanding the things of God.

But yes, Satan is bound, but his demons are still very active.

You are saying the mark of the beast has already come?

Yep, and it wasn't a bar code! ;-)

You are saying that the saints are currently reigning with Christ for 1000 years?

Yes we are reigning with Christ right this moment-

Ephesians 2:6 And (God)hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

But it is not a literal 1000 years, just like in Psalm 50:10 For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills.

Does this mean that the cattle on the 1001 hill are not God's? Of course not, It represents a totality, and in Revelation, it represents the totality of the Church age.

Satan will be let loose prior to Christ's return and evil will be as never before, but then Christ will return, and as it was in the days of Noah, those in Christ shall be saved, and those not in Christ will be lost.

No seven years for second chances, and no peace treaty, or rebuilt temple.

roaringlamb wrote:

So your saying that Satan has already been bound for 1000 years? You are saying that the satan is not currently deceiving the nations/people?

Satan is bound in that he cannot do all the evil he desires. Christ Himself said that the Church would not be prevailed over by the gates of hell.

Man in his fallen state does not really need Satan to deceive him, as man in and of himself has enough trouble understanding the things of God.

But yes, Satan is bound, but his demons are still very active.

You are saying the mark of the beast has already come?

Yep, and it wasn't a bar code! ;-)

You are saying that the saints are currently reigning with Christ for 1000 years?

Yes we are reigning with Christ right this moment-

Ephesians 2:6 And (God)hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

But it is not a literal 1000 years, just like in Psalm 50:10 For every beast of the forest is mine, and the cattle upon a thousand hills.

Does this mean that the cattle on the 1001 hill are not God's? Of course not, It represents a totality, and in Revelation, it represents the totality of the Church age.

Satan will be let loose prior to Christ's return and evil will be as never before, but then Christ will return, and as it was in the days of Noah, those in Christ shall be saved, and those not in Christ will be lost.

No seven years for second chances, and no peace treaty, or rebuilt temple.

Very interesting. But... do you have any proof of what you are claiming? I am interested in hearing your idea of the mark of the beast. When and how was Satan bound? Who witnessed this? Was this earthly or in the spirit?

How do you exlplain Rev 19:19-21?

[u][b]Revelation 19:19-21[/b][/u]

[size=small]"And I saw the beast, the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against Him who sat on the horse and against His army. Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone. And the rest were killed with the sword which proceeded from the mouth of Him who sat on the horse. And all the birds were filled with their flesh."[/size]

When did this take place? Who witnessed.

Thanks

How do you exlplain Rev 19:19-21

Brother this is the judgment upon all those who rejected Christ. The mark of the beast is the counterfeit to the seal placed upon God's people in Revelation 7:2-8; 14:1. You may cross reference this in Ezekiel 9, and Deuteronomy 6:8.

The beast owns those who take his mark and they are enslaved to him(14:9; 19:20; 20:4) The mark denotes spiritual allegiance and ownership, and is not visible, but more spiritual.

When does this happen? Prior to Christ's return, and the angel in 19:17 calls forth the birds of the air to eat the flesh of those who are not Christ's. Compare this to Ezekiel 39:4, 17-20)This is God's curse upon the rebels.

Here is a link to some great messages that will help you much more than I can-
[url=http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com/downloadable-sermons-on-the-bo/]Riddleblog[/url]

roaringlamb wrote:

How do you exlplain Rev 19:19-21

Brother this is the judgment upon all those who rejected Christ. The mark of the beast is the counterfeit to the seal placed upon God's people in Revelation 7:2-8; 14:1. You may cross reference this in Ezekiel 9, and Deuteronomy 6:8.

The beast owns those who take his mark and they are enslaved to him(14:9; 19:20; 20:4) The mark denotes spiritual allegiance and ownership, and is not visible, but more spiritual.

When does this happen? Prior to Christ's return, and the angel in 19:17 calls forth the birds of the air to eat the flesh of those who are not Christ's. Compare this to Ezekiel 39:4, 17-20)This is God's curse upon the rebels.

Here is a link to some great messages that will help you much more than I can-
[url=http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com/downloadable-sermons-on-the-bo/]Riddleblog[/url]

Thanks for your replies. But I truly would like to hear what you have to say on this. When did Christ return? What year? If we are reigning with Him, where is He?

Don't mean to be too pushy, but what claim needs to be backed up. Something as grand as saying that Satan has already been bound, the mark of the beast has already been given, no 7 year tribulation period is something that needs backing, even more so demands backing.

Thanks for the time explaining your thoughts.

Who are the Elect? Those whom He did Foreknow would choose Him, to remain in Him, faithful unto the end as a Bride.

These are His two Commandments. Commandment keeping is through-out the N.T. and conditional - and His "Commandments" are encapsulated in just those two. "Love".

phil

roaringlamb wrote:
I'll play :-D

This is from the Westminster Confession, and I think it deals well with this-

[i]Our first parents, being seduced by the subtilty and temptation of Satan, sinned in eating the forbidden fruit.1 [b]This [size=large]their sin God was pleased[/size], according to his wise and holy counsel, to permit, having purposed to order it to his own glory.[/b]

This disqualifies the rest of the reading to be not trusted since they start off with a perverted view of God, they must also have a perverted interp of HIS Word.

Logic wrote:

roaringlamb wrote:
I'll play :-D

This is from the Westminster Confession, and I think it deals well with this-

[i]Our first parents, being seduced by the subtilty and temptation of Satan, sinned in eating the forbidden fruit.1 [b]This [size=large]their sin God was pleased[/size], according to his wise and holy counsel, to permit, having purposed to order it to his own glory.[/b]

To say that God is pleased with sin is rediculous and absurd.
Furthermore to say that God has a purpose with sin is equaly rediculous and absurd.

You are actualy saying that God wants sin and made sin to be in this world, but still condems them for doing that wich HE wants and what HE is pleased with.

This disqualifies the rest of the reading to be not trusted since they start off with a perverted view of God, they must also have a perverted interp of HIS Word.

Did I miss something?

Amen Tj, almost replied something similar.

My question is, if God does not have a purpose in Sin, then is He truly in control? The idea that he doesnt have any control over sin, or at least the constraining of it leads to open theism, or process theology.

To say that God is pleased with sin is rediculous and absurd.

Hey, easy there fella. Take a moment to read the whole paragraph.

"This their sin God [b]was pleased[/b], according to his wise and holy counsel, [b]to permit[/b]"

The bold portions are what go together, God was pleased to "permit" their sin. He could have struck them dead before they even ate, but even the desire to go against God's way was sin.

Furthermore to say that God has a purpose with sin is equaly rediculous and absurd.

Right, God has no purpose to use the sinful desires of men for His own means. I mean the treatment of Israel by the Egyptians was sin, yet it made them cry out for a deliverer.

Moses' murder of the Egyptian and its being found out, caused Moses to flee into the wilderness where Moses was commissioned by God and given great revelation into the calling God had for him.

Or Joseph whose brothers sinned against him by selling him into slavery, only to have God raise Joseph up so that a people named Israel could be established.

God never used the sinful desires of the Babylonians for his purpose? I suppose God never used the sinful desires of Assyria to murder and destroy Israel either.

Yet God time and again declares that He is the One doing these things through them. Perhaps you should take some time and read the prophets to see just how God works with even wicked men to fulfill His purpose.

Lastly, the Cross was the highest extent of sinful desire by those who sought to kill Christ, yet God used this to redeem His people.

How can you then say that God has no purpose with sin?

Sorry brother, the Bible states otherwise.

You are actualy saying that God wants sin and made sin to be in this world

Well, if God did not want sin to exist, it would be gone in a second. But we are not in glory yet.

Why does sin exist? Because man is evil, and hates God.

Here is a book you might wish to read-
[url=http://www.monergismbooks.com/God-Evil-The-Problem-Solved-p-17265.html]God And Evil-Problem Solved[/url]

When did Christ return? What year? If we are reigning with Him, where is He?

He has not returned, and I do not think I said He did.

Christ is in Heaven, and in His Church by His Spirit. Satan has no power over the Church, or over God's people. His demons may torment, and harass God's children, but God will not allow them to be destroyed by Satan.

roaringlamb... I believe the flavor of Calvinism you are espousing is called "hyper-Calvinism".

Could you be a little more specific?

Hyper-Calvinists do not believe that the lost should hear the Gospel, I am completely against this because it is not Scriptural at all.

That is the key point that separates Biblical Calvinists from Hyper-Calvinists.

I'd like to hear your reasons for your accusation brother.

Aorist Infinitive refers to punctiliar action and not continuous action (as with the Present Infinitive). Furthermore, it does not signify the time of action.

Do you understand what this is saying?

The aorist tense is an action that was completed in the past, yet has ongoing effects into the present.

Who are the Elect? Those whom He did Foreknow would choose Him, to remain in Him, faithful unto the end as a Bride.

This is impossible simply based on the language usage.

You are describing God's foreknowledge in a "noun" form i.e. something God possesses. But even what you posted declares that God's foreknowledge is something He has done, and its effects are going on now.

So if God foresaw me, all He would see is a fallen sinner in need of regeneration.

Your idea does not fit either, because-
Romans 8:30 Moreover [b]whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.[/b]

Now you're stuck. If you say that God has predestined all to be saved, then this passage is wrong.

Those whom He did Foreknow would choose Him

Left to their own devices, man would not choose Christ. The natural heart left unchanged only hates God, and seeks any other way to be saved than Christ.

God's foreknowledge is of individuals whom He elected out of a fallen mass of humanity.

I cannot see GOD knowingly creating humans to purposely send them to Hell, with them having no choice to choose Him or not. That is a hate-god, not the God Who is Love.

Man had a choice in the Garden. When Adam fell, he brought forth children that were sinners just as he was.

On the other side of your argument, why would God create people who He knew would not choose Him?

But the problem is that you are viewing man as good and deserving a chance. Men are not deserving anything but eternal damnation.

Therefore, if God chooses to save a portion out of this mass of humanity, that is amazing in and of itself.

It's His Love. He wants ours freely. He created us to love us - we choose to benefit from that love or not.

This sounds nice, but is not Scriptural.

All we would do apart from a new heart is hate God, and hate His Christ.

Men are not neutral towards God as you propose, and Scripture is clear that all men outside of Christ hate God and are His enemies, they are dead in sin, and of their father the devil.

Ephesians 2 is clear about this-
Eph 2:1 And you hath he quickened, [b]who were dead in trespasses and sins[/b];
Eph 2:2 Wherein [b]in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience[/b]:
Eph 2:3 [b]Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others[/b].

His Sheep. He leads, they follow.

But only the sheep will be given the ability to believe-
John 10:26 But [b]ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep[/b], as I said unto you.
John 10:27 [b]My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me[/b]

Just seems to me that HE created ALL because HE IS LOVE and for Love and to love.

Well tell that to Judas Iscariot. Love is not the only characteristic of God, and it is not unloving of Him to only deal with certain people. The whole OT is the testimony of God dealing solely with His covenant people Israel, but not all the nations of the world.

They whom He did Foreknow he did "predestinate" to be conformed to the Image of His Son.

Yes, but what we must look at is the word "foreknow", or in Greek "proginosko".

Here is what Thayer's Greek lexicon has for its definition-
προγινώσκω
proginōskō
Thayer Definition:
1) to have knowledge before hand
2) to foreknow
2a) of those whom God elected to salvation
3) to predestinate

Now what is important is to look at the verb "ginosko" by itself first.

γινώσκω
ginōskō
Thayer Definition:
1) to learn to know, come to know, get a knowledge of perceive, feel
1a) to become known
2) to know, understand, perceive, have knowledge of
2a) to understand
2b) to know
3) Jewish idiom for sexual intercourse between a man and a woman
4) to become acquainted with, to know

This seems to me to indicate a "relational" meaning for this word, and intimate relationship actually.

Why is this important? Because there is another Greek word for the point many try to make about God's foreknowledge, or taking note of a foreseen faith, and it is -
ἐπίσταμαι
epistamai
Thayer Definition:
1) to put one’s attention on, fix one’s thoughts on, to turn one’s self or one’s mind to, put one’s thought upon a thing
1a) to be acquainted with, to understand
1b) to know

Yet this word is not used in any of the passages describing God's foreknowledge. The knowing before is one of a relational way, not of a seeing of a yet to come faith.

And if you would consider the meaning of the word "predestinate" or "proorizo", we come up with this-
προορίζω
proorizō
Thayer Definition:
1) to predetermine, decide beforehand
2) in the NT of God decreeing from eternity
3) to foreordain, appoint beforehand

This is because it is a compound of "pro" or "before" and "horizo" which means-
ὁρίζω
horizō
Thayer Definition:
1) to define
1a) to mark out the boundaries or limits (of any place or thing)
1b1) that which has been determined, acc. to appointment, decree
1b2) to ordain, determine, appoint

So those who God marked out, because He foreknew them, He called, and marked them out to be conformed to Christ's image.

There is nothing in there about a foreseen faith, that is simply read into the text because of tradition, or human misunderstanding.

"Choose ye this day whom you will serve"

Just as I pointed out to krispy, this is spoken to God's people, and not to the unbelieving nations around them. Thus to apply this to all unsaved people as a means of a so called "free will" is not good Biblical stewardship.

Joh 6:43 Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves.Joh 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
Joh 6:45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that 'hath' heard, and 'hath' learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

I don't see how this negates anything, in verse 44, Jesus plainly states that no man can come to Him. The word translated "come" is the word "dunamis" which means "power". This is literally saying that no man has the power, or ability to come to Christ unless the Father "draws" him.

Then your underlined passage only reemphasizes this fact that God must be the One bringing men to Christ and not themselves.

He creates - and as seen in Job's life - it is not His hedge that kept Job - but Job's choice - that though He slay me - YET will I trust Him.

What choice did Job have in the tragedy the befell him? Job's faith has very little to do with the story, and if you look at the end, God says, "gird your loins and answer me."

I don't see that. I see "whosoever will come".

Yes, whoever will may come, but natural man does not want to come by God's way-through Christ, he wants to develop his own way of coming to God.

And also, only those made willing will come, or those who were foreknown, predestined and called by God.

I must stop now. I'm female and get teary with this talk. I'm not a whimp - but I feel stuff.

As do I, and I sympathize with you sister.

God's grace to you.

And Thank you Brother for your understanding in your closing line.

Sister if love cannot reign over these discussions, then there is no need to have them.

I do agree that there are differing Greek lexicons, however I believe Thayer's is one of the best as he looked also at how the words were used in the time the NT was written, and the Koine Greek used.

May our God and Savior Jesus Christ comfort you in His wondrous love and mercy!

Choose ye this day whom you will serve"

Just as I pointed out to krispy, this is spoken to God's people, and not to the unbelieving nations around them. Thus to apply this to all unsaved people as a means of a so called "free will" is not good Biblical stewardship.

the basic difference between us (NT believers) and them (OT believers) is that we have the Spirit of God dwelling within us right? yet to these men (OT believers), God commands them to repent, choose Him, forsake their sin and idols, follow hard after Him.

you object and say "yea but that was to israel or to the believing jews", but that has absolutely no bearing on the scripture brother. did God create the jews differently than the other people? if so, then why did some gentile people become jews and become part of israel (ruth comes to mind). (remember that some foreigners [gentiles] became jews as well). so the statement that only jews could follow His commands is wrong.

the problem you have when reading the old testament is that you have to justify and try to excuse why God commanded them to do so many things (like repent, choose, forsake, etc) that he still commands all men today.

all i know is that your statement about the OT and it being to God's people so they can do it is not scriptural and is found wanting.

sorry to interject, it's just been on my mind for a couple of weeks now.

phil

roaringlamb wrote:

And Thank you Brother for your understanding in your closing line.

Sister if love cannot reign over these discussions, then there is no need to have them.

I do agree that there are differing Greek lexicons, however I believe Thayer's is one of the best as he looked also at how the words were used in the time the NT was written, and the Koine Greek used.

May our God and Savior Jesus Christ comfort you in His wondrous love and mercy!

some side info; Thayer did not believe in the trinity and some of his work reflects that. Can be a "good to know" thing.

the basic difference between us (NT believers) and them (OT believers) is that we have the Spirit of God dwelling within us right? yet to these men (OT believers), God commands them to repent, choose Him, forsake their sin and idols, follow hard after Him.

Yet the Scriptures state clearly that there is none righteous, none that seek God etc.

So, the command does not indicate ability to do.

Were there people filled with the Spirit in the OT? Let's look-

Gen 41:38 And Pharaoh said unto his servants, [b]Can we find such a one as this is, a man in whom the Spirit of God is?[/b]
Gen 41:39 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, Forasmuch as God hath shewed thee all this, there is none so discreet and wise as thou art:

Exo 28:3 And [b]thou shalt speak unto all that are wise hearted, whom I have filled with the spirit of wisdom[/b], that they may make Aaron's garments to consecrate him, that he may minister unto me in the priest's office.

Exo 31:2 See, I have called by name Bezaleel the son of Uri, the son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah:
Exo 31:3 And [b]I have filled him with the spirit of God[/b], in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship

Exo 35:21 And they came, [b]every one whose heart stirred him up, and every one whom his spirit made willing[/b], and they brought the LORD'S offering to the work of the tabernacle of the congregation, and for all his service, and for the holy garments.

Num 11:24 And Moses went out, and told the people the words of the LORD, and gathered the seventy men of the elders of the people, and set them round about the tabernacle.
Num 11:25 And the LORD came down in a cloud, and spake unto him, [b]and took of the spirit that was upon him, and gave it unto the seventy elders: and it came to pass, that, when the spirit rested upon them, they prophesied, and did not cease.[/b]

Num 24:2 And Balaam lifted up his eyes, and he saw Israel abiding in his tents according to their tribes; [b]and the spirit of God came upon him.[/b]

Num 27:18 And the LORD said unto Moses, Take thee Joshua the son of Nun, [b]a man in whom is the spirit[/b], and lay thine hand upon him;

Jdg 3:9 And when the children of Israel cried unto the LORD, the LORD raised up a deliverer to the children of Israel, who delivered them, even Othniel the son of Kenaz, Caleb's younger brother.
Jdg 3:10 [b]And the Spirit of the LORD came upon him[/b], and he judged Israel, and went out to war: and the LORD delivered

Jdg 6:34 But [b]the Spirit of the LORD came upon Gideon[/b], and he blew a trumpet; and Abiezer was gathered after him.

Jdg 11:29 Then [b]the Spirit of the LORD came upon Jephthah, and he passed over Gilead, and Manasseh, and passed over Mizpeh of Gilead, and from Mizpeh of Gilead he passed over unto the children of Ammon.

Jdg 13:24 And the woman bare a son, and called his name Samson: and the child grew, and the LORD blessed him.
Jdg 13:25 [b]And the Spirit of the LORD began to move him[/b] at times in the camp of Dan between Zorah and Eshtaol.

Jdg 14:5 Then went Samson down, and his father and his mother, to Timnath, and came to the vineyards of Timnath: and, behold, a young lion roared against him.
Jdg 14:6 [b]And the Spirit of the LORD came mightily upon him[/b], and he rent him as he would have rent a kid, and he had nothing in his hand: but he told not his father or his mother what he had done.

To Saul-
1Sa 10:6 And [b]the Spirit of the LORD will come upon thee[/b], and thou shalt prophesy with them, and shalt be turned into another man.

1Sa 10:10 And when they came thither to the hill, behold, a company of prophets met him; and [b]the Spirit of God came upon him[/b], and he prophesied among them.

1Sa 11:6 And [b]the Spirit of God came upon Saul[/b] when he heard those tidings, and his anger was kindled greatly.

1Sa 16:13 Then Samuel took the horn of oil, and anointed him in the midst of his brethren: and [b]the Spirit of the LORD came upon David[/b] from that day forward. So Samuel rose up, and went to Ramah.

Brother I could go on, but I think this proves that there were indeed people who had the Spirit in the OT, and He was given to them to work for God.

Now of course, the Spirit is not limited to only Israel the nation, but to Israel the Church.

And again, we must learn to interpret the OT through the NT, so if Paul writes that all are dead, than that also includes those that we read of in the OT. We cannot disprove the NT and its teachings of man's inability by going back to the types and shadows of the OT.

(remember that some foreigners [gentiles] became jews as well)

And these had to follow God's rules for His covenant people, but this does not prove ability or free will to come to God. It does show the greatness of God's mercy though.

all i know is that your statement about the OT and it being to God's people so they can do it is not scriptural and is found wanting.

There is nothing "wanting" brother, again, we are victims of tradition, and bad teaching, and sadly this causes us to come to Scripture with a preconceived idea about what it must mean. Like the idea that the Holy Spirit was not in people in the OT ;-)

some side info; Thayer did not believe in the trinity and some of his work reflects that. Can be a "good to know" thing.

Yes, but his command of Greek is worthy of admiration. I'd also like to see some proof(not that I don't trust you, but alot of times people say things that are unfounded only because they dislike the person or their theology)

See, most of us would disagree with Erasmus, but his Greek NT was one of the main sources for the KJV, Tyndale, and Geneva Bibles.

A man doesn't have to be a Christian to interpret words. He should be one if interpreting Scripture, but who knows?

roaringlamb wrote:

some side info; Thayer did not believe in the trinity and some of his work reflects that. Can be a "good to know" thing.

Yes, but his command of Greek is worthy of admiration. I'd also like to see some proof(not that I don't trust you, but alot of times people say things that are unfounded only because they dislike the person or their theology)

See, most of us would disagree with Erasmus, but his Greek NT was one of the main sources for the KJV, Tyndale, and Geneva Bibles.

A man doesn't have to be a Christian to interpret words. He should be one if interpreting Scripture, but who knows?

well you are right brother, i do own Thayers myself and use it often, its just one of those things that can be good to know, that Thayer if i remember correctly, i will try look and see if i find some source for you. But if i remember correctly Thayer saw the Holy Spirit as a "force/power" rather then the traditional view, But i dont want to discredit his whole work, absolutely not. As for his theology i dont know that much what and where he stands. I do find his work very useful. And i would recomend it to anyone any day.

but as i said and have read, its a good thing to know :-)

Brother I could go on, but I think this proves that there were indeed people who had the Spirit in the OT, and He was given to them to work for God.

And these had to follow God's rules for His covenant people, but this does not prove ability or free will to come to God. It does show the greatness of God's mercy though.

Really? Were the dietary and ceremonial laws given to the Philistines? or the Amalekites? to the Americans?

The OT is predominantly about God's promises to His people Israel to bring a Messiah that would be a "light to the Gentiles", and One who would bear the iniquities of His people.

love talking to you man.:-)
phil