Who decides our destinies? God or ourselves?

[Nang]

IMO the reason double predestination is problematic from a theological standpoint is that it runs counter to the idea of universal atonement (or objective justification).

Well, yeah, duh . . .

Calvin believed that although Christ died as a propitiation for the sins of the world, all do not receive the benefit of His death.

Calvin never taught anything of the sort.

Do you really think you can get away with this kind of misinformation and false witness?

In other words Christ’s death was sufficient for all men and efficient for the elect. What does this mean? This idea is obviously counterintuitive. Sadly, a full discussion on the scope of atonement is not found in Calvin’s writings.

What a bunch of baloney. Anyone can read Calvins' Institutes with a Google search, to discern you misrepresent Calvin's works and person and faith.

I believe there is good reason for this. Calvin probably agreed with the basic premise of universal atonement (as many Calvinist writers concede);

Wrong.

however, it seems he was unable to reconcile the idea with the rest of his views.

The body of Calvinistic thought proves contrary to your false premise above. You are WRONG.

The closest Calvin comes to reaching an analysis of atonement is his theory of common grace.

Wrong. You cannot possibly cite Calvin as teaching other than "particular" grace, for grace according to Calvin was based on "Unconditional Election" of particular souls.

Calvinists say the death of Christ secured non-redemptive benefits for all of mankind.

Less than faithful Calvinists teach common grace. They are WRONG! Such is not the teaching of Calvin or those who retain the historical Reformed teachings as held by the church confessions called the "Three Forms of Unity."

IOW's, this Calvinist has always stood against the erroneous teachings of a supposed "common" or "prevenient" grace from God. The very archives of this web site will bear me out.

I would like to hear whether any Calvinist on this board has heard God clearly tell them that they are one of His elect. I’m not talking about the feeling we all have as Christians when the Holy Spirit warms our souls. I’m talking about direct communication with God, who spoke to them (in English) and said you are elected. I doubt there’s even one.

You attempt to present an impossible scenario for the Calvinist to witness to his faith, but I tell you this. I know I am an elect child of God, according to the BIBLICAL witness applied by God to my soul:

". . .This is the witness of God which He has testified of His Son. He who believes in the Son of God has the witness in himself . . ." I John 5:9-10

In other words there can be no logical causation for even a shred of doubt as to ones current standing with God.

According to His Spirit witnessing to our spirit, you are correct.

This, I submit, is the fatal flaw with Calvinism.

The Calvinist testifies that the Spirit of God witnesses to his spirit. You are throwing out nothing but bald-faced lies about the faith and assurance of those who hold to the historical, Scriptural, and Creedal Reformed faith.

not double predestination (and my challenge remains open to anyone who would like to gym debate Rom. 9).

I am a female, but I would meet your challenge, in a blink of only one eye, to debate about the Calvinist beliefs, including the doctrine of "Double Predestination."

Are you willing to actually take me on?

Nang

[bridgeforsale]

Are you willing to actually take me on?

Nang

absolutely. Remembering your general demeanor during our past discussions I would ask you if you're ready to debate Romans 9 in a "good spirited" fashion? Or will it be a series of ad hom attacks? If you're interested in a scholarly dialog that I'm more than ready. Gym debate, Romans 9, a focused single question debate to arrive at the proper interpretation of that chapter (e.g. does it show particular grace/individual election OR are Jacob & Esau/the vessels of wrath/mercy allegories for the new and old covenants).

A debate on let's say the entire TULIP doctrine verses the Articles of the Remonstrants would be too broad and unfocused. However, we can do a series of debates taking on one question at a time, but for now I'm very interested in tackling Romans 9 with a committed Calvinist (as I know you are). BTW I took the statement I made about Calvin from Calvinist web sites .... they were not ad hom attacks against Calvin as you infer.

So then .... bring it.


AW

[Lamb of God]

I never talked to God, but many of his angels. What really freaked me out was how John decribed me in Rev. one, two and three. I was wearing brown polished dressshoes, and his feet was like fine polished brass. My girlfriend just put gold streaks in my long brown hair, and his hair was like fine gold. I was in an axident and had both of my cheakbones broken, my eyes turned brite blood red. And his eyes were like fire. He wore fine linen, it was a Hawian shirt from K-mart made of silk. It looked as if he was slain, he could see that I was hurt in an axident. And in his left hand he had the morning star. I smoke ciggeretts and allot of smokers smoke with their left hands, you see back in those days light only comes in a few forms. The sun is the britest, bond fires the second, campfires third, candle or lamb fire is fourth, moon light is five and the morning star is briter than a regular star. If the angels can take John into the future two thosand years, then they know all about time travel. You see the milky way goes in one dirrection and they know where that planet will be at any given time in the future, I don't think that they can go in the past. Albert Enistien was right, time does change when traveling faster than the speed of light. The speed of light is; 168,000 miles per hour. Look on the internet under speed of light. In other words, God knows what you will do in this life and what your children will do, if you help him you could live a long time, if not, he might not need you. Be good and be where he needs you and you will have no problem...

[Nang]

absolutely. Remembering your general demeanor during our past discussions I would ask you if you're ready to debate Romans 9 in a "good spirited" fashion? Or will it be a series of ad hom attacks? If you're interested in a scholarly dialog that I'm more than ready. Gym debate, Romans 9, a focused single question debate to arrive at the proper interpretation of that chapter (e.g. does it show particular grace/individual election OR are Jacob & Esau/the vessels of wrath/mercy allegories for the new and old covenants).

A debate on let's say the entire TULIP doctrine verses the Articles of the Remonstrants would be too broad and unfocused. However, we can do a series of debates taking on one question at a time, but for now I'm very interested in tackling Romans 9 with a committed Calvinist (as I know you are). BTW I took the statement I made about Calvin from Calvinist web sites .... they were not ad hom attacks against Calvin as you infer.

So then .... bring it.


AW

AW,

I accept your challenge on any basis you want to present it. Romans Chapter Nine would be an excellent passage to focus on, as long as that specific Scripture can be interpreted using the entirety of Scripture.

It would be my preference we discuss questions regarding the Holy Scriptures alone, rather than Calvin commentary, but if you do intend to reference him, I suggest you read Calvin's writings first-hand rather than depending on web sites for your information. I will expect any quotes referring to Calvin to be well-documented.

Since this is your challenge, I expect you to start the debate and frame the terms of discussion.

Nang

[GoBahnsen]

GB,

Do you wish to know why I think Calvinism is potentially dangerous? Consider this: If Calvinism is true and God has indeed foreordained all things whatever that come to pass, then no more will be lost regardless of what you or I may or may not do.

Just because all things must pass through God's will in order to actually transpire in creation, does not in any way excuse men from obeying God. Think about what you're saying: if you don't actually have the ability to alter the course of events in this world, apart from God's will or involvement, then you're not motivated anymore?

I know where you are coming from, because I was once there too (though not exactly the same as you)...I used to get excited about my own power to affect God's happiness. IOW, if I was more active and got more people to accept Christ, then God would have more souls praising Him forever, and all because of little ol me. That was a very exciting thought. Very empowering indeed.

If Arminianism is true and God has granted humans a free will (anything akin to LFW), then none need be lost in the first place.

Sure, it would follow that IF people would just get busy, then more would be saved and God would have more souls. It's all about people and what they want to do. God has to live with their results.

God never, then, originally intended to damn anyone. More could be saved than really are being saved. This is an impetus for believers to diligently evangelise.

Another way to look at it is, that every time anyone is actually involved as an instrument of God in leading another to Christ, it is because God planned it that way, not because of the person with his supposed autonomous free will.

I suppose you won't be able to agree with me at this point in time, but what I see you saying is that you're not motivated unless you are convinced that you are acting autonomously. IOW, you're not up for any activity for God, unless you are convinced that your good ideas were created by you... and without you, God wouldn't get as many souls to praise Him forever.

Sure, you will want to say that God "helps" you get your good ideas, but that's it. He has to respect your own creative powers...and He has to live with what you come up with for Him. This is all very intoxicating to humans. The power to affect God's happiness. A finite creature changing the future of the Eternal One.

Also, if Arminianism is true then it is possible for those once saved to fall from grace, ceasing to persevere to the end. The question for individuals in the church to be asking is not, then, 'Am I truly one of the unconditionally predestinated elect?' (which, if true, no one would know until the judgement), but 'Am I presently in the faith?' The concern is in persevering in the faith.

That's a question for all Christians to be asking themselves. It's just plain biblical isn't it? Am I one who possesses genuine faith in Christ or am I a phony? A Calvinist, because he believes that God is the One who grants geniune faith to whom He wills, need not fret about whether God ever really chose him/her.

The Calvinist, like the Arminian senses his freedom to pursue the things of God or neglect them. If the Calvinist finds himself choosing to neglect the means of grace, then let him, like the Arminian as well...be very concerned about that neglect and seek God for the power to get back on track.

There is no warrent, while working off the Calvinistic system of theology, for sitting around and wondering if God has written their name in the Book of Life. The call is to be active in pursuing after God in Christ.

Simply because the Calvinist isn't motivated by his own power to affect God, doesn't detract from the motivation of the cross. Which, of course, in all fairness, also motivates the Arminian. But like you have already implied, without the REAL ability to change God's future, you're not motivated enough, I assume...by the cross? Or...what are you implying then, by your assertions above?

The perceived motivation for those in Reformed-Calvinist churches to examine themselves to discern whether or not they are elect is absurd. What if one should discover themselves to not 'currently' be among that unconditionally predestinated number? How is one to be exhorted to such a thing?

Well, I hope I have already answered this in my remarks so far. What you're doing is: you're peering into Calvinism from outside, then guessing that Calvinists must sit around and wonder about their election. But Calvinists do not do this. At least ones with any level of maturity in the Scriptures. Calvinists are happy to know that they cannot affect God's future. That God will get His way, with or without the Calvinist and his choices.

This does not mean that the choices are worthless, it just means that God transcends man's choices and has taken all of them into account before creation, all things passing through the Divine will and God is bringing it all to pass as it pleases Him.

The truth is that God does not bestow some supposed gift of faith on some.

That's the truth, is it? Where did you get this truth from? Is it just something that resonates with your sense of fair play or did you exegete it from Scripture?

He does not predestine individuals to believe the gospel.

My Bible says that He does. But then we both know that we can explain away the other's proof texts. So I won't bother you with verses like Acts 13:48 or Ephesians 1:5 or Revelation 17:8 or Romans 8:30.

Grace is God's gift, and he sovereignly chose to require man's faith in Christ's blood as a prerequisite to receiving justification (remission of sins) and regeneration (ie, a spiritual resurrection), along with repentance and baptism for receiving such. Faith, repentance, and confession of Christ must be continual until the end of one's probation, ie, they must be persevered in. This could by no means be done apart from God's preserving power (see 1 Pet i. 5), but all the same, God does require us to persevere in faith. He does not do all of this for us. God is faithful and he requires faithfulness. There is no antinomy in all of this. If Calvinism is not true, then there remains a strong possibility that some (perhaps many) are being lost or are in danger of losing their salvation upon this deceptive doctrine that God elects some to belief and wills the rest to remain in unbelief. God does not prevent salvation from any who hears his gospel.

Well, this is all just good Arminian assertion. You say it has nothing to do with a belief in human autonomy. Answer me this then: do you believe that you have the power within you to see to it that more souls will be in heaven to praise God forever? That God is dependent upon you for your willingness or lack thereof to get busy saving souls?

You see, the Calvinist is confident that God will not lose any of His foreknown, predestined sheep. This is no license to sit on one's hands and do nothing to promote the Gospel. For the Calvinist knows that to do so, would be to end up as one who is treated like the srevant who hid his talent in a buried hole.

You have said that you consider Calvinism to be dangerous, but what about a doctrine that implies that Satan or someone else, might actually prevent God from keeping His own unto the end? Given your Arminian views, as you have expressed them (for I realize that not all Arminians can be lumped together), it seems to me that someone might come along and use their LFW to foil some great plans that God had for you. That's dangerous stuff to believe.

Your view cuts both ways. If you can actually get more people into heaven, then it follows that people can actually ruin God's plan to save someone. That even as Jesus called out the 12 (with Judas being called to fulfill the Scriptures), someone might have stepped in and ruined Jesus' attempt to save the 11 and preserve them unto the end.

[bridgeforsale]

AW,

I accept your challenge on any basis you want to present it. Romans Chapter Nine would be an excellent passage to focus on, as long as that specific Scripture can be interpreted using the entirety of Scripture.

Indeed. I would also need extrinsic passages to frame my argument.

It would be my preference we discuss questions regarding the Holy Scriptures alone, rather than Calvin commentary, but if you do intend to reference him, I suggest you read Calvin's writings first-hand rather than depending on web sites for your information. I will expect any quotes referring to Calvin to be well-documented.

Since this is your challenge, I expect you to start the debate and frame the terms of discussion.

Nang

I agree. Since this will be my first gym debate I will reach out for some guidance & get back to you later. I pretty much already have a well framed Romans 9 thesis I will use; so I can be ready to post my opening with probably a couple hours of polishing it up.

I'm looking forward to a good friendly debate on this issue.

AW

[Tanakh Keeper]

Suppose I saw a movie before anyone else did. The day before the movie is released, I tell everyone what is going to happen in the movie. My fore-knowledge does not give me control over the actions of the characters in the movie. So it is with G-d. G-d knows all the actions that people will do, He exists outside of time. But He gave us all freewill to do as we please. G-d's fore-knowledge does not equate to control.

[bridgeforsale]

Suppose I saw a movie before anyone else did. The day before the movie is released, I tell everyone what is going to happen in the movie. My fore-knowledge does not give me control over the actions of the characters in the movie. So it is with G-d. G-d knows all the actions that people will do, He exists outside of time. But He gave us all freewill to do as we please. G-d's fore-knowledge does not equate to control.

great analogy. Obviously the nature of divine omniscience is the subject of much debate within all Abrahamic religions (and perhaps in other faith systems as well). My own views of omniscience are very similar to yours ... but of course there's a huge school of though that thinks divine foreknowledge is the product of decree (as opposed to divine decree being the product of foreknowledge). I am personally a Molinist & a fan of William Lane Craig's view on divine omniscience.

[GoBahnsen]

Suppose I saw a movie before anyone else did. The day before the movie is released, I tell everyone what is going to happen in the movie. My fore-knowledge does not give me control over the actions of the characters in the movie. So it is with G-d. G-d knows all the actions that people will do, He exists outside of time. But He gave us all freewill to do as we please. G-d's fore-knowledge does not equate to control.

I see, so since God let's us "do as we please", as you say He does, then God might have something really great in store for you, but someone else comes along and "doing as they please", they ruin God's good intention toward you? I mean, if they're doing as they please, then it follows that they will do things that God didn't intend for.

I'm not trying to say that people don't violate God's expressed will in the law, but what I am trying to say is that they don't get to just do as they please. They get to do what God has planned for them to do and nothing more.

If your movie analogy was accurate, then we live in a very scary world, where the characters are in control. God is nothing more than a movie watcher.

I suppose that you, along with AW and others, might want to say that God does involve Himself in the movie, but that He didn't write the movie Himself. That so much of what takes place in the movie wasn't controlled by God or determined by God before creation, that it should indeed be in the movie?

If I haven't lost you yet, the difference between you and a Calvinistic thinker, like me, would be that you see people actually doing things that God ultimately did not really want them to do. Not "want" in the sense that God approves of sin, but "want" in the sense that it fit into God's plan and purpose in His bringing about redemptive history.

For example: Joseph's brothers greatly sinned in selling Joseph into slavery. God disapproves of their sin. Yet, before creation began, God brought each one of those brothers into the world, for one of many purposes, and one of the purposes of God was, that on the appointed day, they would betray Joseph.

They did not write the movie, when they got the evil idea to sell off Joseph. Yes, it was their evil idea, but they were also, at the same time fulfilling God's purposes and doing what God decided to take place in His movie.

Does this mean then that God author's their evil? I would answer, no. What it does mean is that God is able to write a script with evil in the script, but not be guilty of the evil Himself. Humans can write books with evil characters in it and we do not accuse the author of the evil deeds contained in it. But, then it is only a book.

With this creation we live in, the Author of the book, not only wrote the script, but makes sure that none deviate from it. The mystery of it all, is that each character actually does what they want to, just as God pleased. Not as THEY pleased.

That's the difference between you and I. You see people doing things as they please, but I doubt that you would accept the idea that all the stuff that they do, is actually according to the will and plan of God. My text for such a belief is Act 4:26-28 The kings of the earth set themselves in array, And the rulers were gathered together, Against the Lord, and against his Anointed: for of a truth in this city against thy holy Servant Jesus, whom thou didst anoint, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, were gathered together, to do whatsoever thy hand and thy council foreordained to come to pass.

[GoBahnsen]

I can see how it might be inconceivable that God's witness could be present in such apparently godless or pagan societies. I probably would not believe it possible myself, were it not for the fact that God Himself has revealed that His witness [is in fact present in all societies. As St Paul tells us, even when God was leaving all nations to walk in their own ways, "nevertheless He did not leave Himself without witness" (Acts 14:17). The problem that you perceive with modern Hindu societies and the like is surely no greater than that which St Paul was faced with with the ancient pagan societies?

I think that part of the problem is that you are thinking of God as the "Christian God" - that He is only present where there is a Christian Bible and a Christian Church preaching the Christian Gospel (as your next sentence demonstrates). But God is not the God of Christians only - He is the God of the entire universe! There is only one God!

Jezz, you must know that you're creating a straw man here. You're far too intelligent to actually argue that a Calvinist would think that God is only present if a Bible or a Church is there.

Of course God is omni-present and He is able to do the extra-ordinary, when it suits His purpose. He can give a dream, send a teacher (Philip with the Ethiopian), whatever He wants.

My point is: that it is obvious that God is pleased (not in the happy sense of it), to shut up entire nations to more darkness than light. Not that they lack "creation light", for none lack that witness, even as you have brought out.

I was countering your position, which seemed to be that everyone gets the opportunity to decide for themselves if they'd like to be Christians or not. Obviously that is going to look very different here in America, as opposed to those who live in Iran or India.

Again, not that God can't or does not save people in those Countries, for indeed He has and will. But it's according to His mercy and compassion, not according to PEOPLE and whether they will move God to compassion, by their efforts to seek Him out.

For none seeks after God, they all go their own ways. Gladly... for fallen humans, God decides that not all shall continue to go their own way. His sheep hear His voice. You and I will differ on who it was that made them to be His sheep. I say that God sovereignly did it. I think that you will say that THEY made themselves to be His sheep, by their own free willingness (not by God making them willing), thus they then hear His voice?

[Tanakh Keeper]

I see, so since God let's us "do as we please", as you say He does, then God might have something really great in store for you, but someone else comes along and "doing as they please", they ruin God's good intention toward you? I mean, if they're doing as they please, then it follows that they will do things that God didn't intend for.

No. G-d is aware of what’s in store for each person. Each person that does an action that affects that your life is known by G-d, but not controlled by G-d. If G-d wanted to reward someone, then no person can negate G-d’s reward. For example, G-d told us that the world will be at peace once the messiah comes. Although there are many people causing war, this doesn’t negate G-d’s promise that all will be at peace at some time in the future.

I'm not trying to say that people don't violate God's expressed will in the law, but what I am trying to say is that they don't get to just as they please. They get to do what God has planned for them to do and nothing more.

This is the foreknowledge versus control concept. You believe that G-d controls people’s actions. I believe that G-d is aware of people’s actions and choices, even before they themselves make them.

If your movie analogy was accurate, then we live in a very scary world, where the characters are in control. God is nothing more than a movie watcher.

I find it to be a very comforting world. Though we have problems and disorder now, G-d told us that we will have Heaven on Earth in the future. G-d gives us hope for the future.

I suppose that you, along with AW and others, might want to say that God does involve Himself in the movie, but that He didn't write the movie Himself. That so much of what takes place in the movie wasn't controlled by God or determined by God before creation, that it should indeed be in the movie?

Again, foreknowledge versus control concept. Within my analogy, did G-d write the script?... I’m less sure, maybe part of it.

you see people actually doing things that God ultimately did not really want them to do.

Not at all. G-d created evil. He knows some people will choose evil despite His saying that we should put forth the effort to choose good.

Does this mean then that God author's their evil? I would answer, no.

G-d is aware that people will choose to do evil, yes. Foreknowledge versus control, G-d doesn’t make people select evil choices. He is aware that we humans have a predilection for evil, after all, He created us this way.

With this creation we live in, the Author of the book, not only wrote the script, but makes sure that none deviate from it. The mystery of it all, is that each character actually does what they want to, just as God pleased. Not as THEY pleased.

Foreknowledge versus control.

That's the difference between you and I. You see people doing things as they please, but I doubt that you would accept the idea that all the stuff that they do, is actually according to the will and plan of God.

We have lots of differences starting with the fact that we belong to two completely different religions.

G-d gave us freewill to make our own choices. All the stuff that people do is known to G-d. A true G-d can not be surprised by the actions of His creations.

[GoBahnsen]

No. G-d is aware of what’s in store for each person. Each person that does an action that affects that your life is known by G-d, but not controlled by G-d. If G-d wanted to reward someone, then no person can negate G-d’s reward. For example, G-d told us that the world will be at peace once the messiah comes. Although there are many people causing war, this doesn’t negate G-d’s promise that all will be at peace at some time in the future.



This is the foreknowledge versus control concept. You believe that G-d controls people’s actions. I believe that G-d is aware of people’s actions and choices, even before they themselves make them.



I find it to be a very comforting world. Though we have problems and disorder now, G-d told us that we will have Heaven on Earth in the future. G-d gives us hope for the future.



Again, foreknowledge versus control concept. Within my analogy, did G-d write the script?... I’m less sure, maybe part of it.



Not at all. G-d created evil. He knows some people will choose evil despite His saying that we should put forth the effort to choose good.



G-d is aware that people will choose to do evil, yes. Foreknowledge versus control, G-d doesn’t make people select evil choices. He is aware that we humans have a predilection for evil, after all, He created us this way.



Foreknowledge versus control.



We have lots of differences starting with the fact that we belong to two completely different religions.

G-d gave us freewill to make our own choices. All the stuff that people do is known to G-d. A true G-d can not be surprised by the actions of His creations.

I apologize for not realizing that you are practicing Judaism, by your very screen name. I didn't look at it long enough. I thought it was some girl's name .

Anyway...so foreknowledge versus control huh? Ok, since you don't accept the New Testament, there goes my source for authority.

I'm not sure what good it does for me to try to convince you of God's ways in the area of how He operates in the hearts and minds of people, while there exists a much more glaring problem.

Since it is my thread, I wouldn't mind a rabbit trail with you, if you don't mind. Perhaps you might briefly explain why you do not see Jesus of Nazareth as the fulfillment of your own Scriptures, to be the Messiah of Israel?

[Littlejoe]

Suppose I saw a movie before anyone else did. The day before the movie is released, I tell everyone what is going to happen in the movie. My fore-knowledge does not give me control over the actions of the characters in the movie. So it is with G-d. G-d knows all the actions that people will do, He exists outside of time. But He gave us all freewill to do as we please. G-d's fore-knowledge does not equate to control.

Could you tell us where you think the scriptures support your conclusion? Otherwise, this is just your opinion/assertion.

Thanks,

LJ

ETA: 1st tell us where you think scripture supports God's foreknowledge
2nd: tell us where you think scripture supports God exists exists outside of Time

Thanks,

[GoBahnsen]

<green cheese> My theory does not assume this.

This may come as a bit of a shock to you, but I happen to believe that God can be - nay, is - present in places where the Bible and the Church are not! To me, that's what "omnipresent" means! Job, Enoch, Noah, Abraham - they all managed to seek, to find, and to love God without having a copy of the Bible or a good Church to go to.

I realize that your emphasis is upon man and his own seeking. You realize that my position emphasizes God's seeking, not man's. We love Jesus, because He first loved us (1 John). I would argue that Job, Enoch and the others were found of God.

I don't think that Abraham made himself a seeker, but that God sought him out. The text in Genesis 12 informs us that God was the one who initiated with Abraham (while still called Abram). We know that much, but it's pure speculation to say that God approached Abram, because Abram was a self-made seeker.

Men are dependent upon God in order to become seekers. Look at the first 11 disciples of Christ. They weren't seeking the Messiah. The Messiah came to them. Called them out by name. Kept after them, even if they were to implore Him to depart from them, because of their unclean lips (Peter).
Rom 10:20 And Isaiah is very bold, and saith, I was found of them that sought me not; I became manifest unto them that asked not of me.

This is proof positive (as if St Paul's testimony was not enough) that God's witness is present even where the Bible and the Church are not.

So then, just leave ol Jezz in India, with a Hindu dad and mom, and he'll be one of the rare ones to follow his nose to the God of the Bible? Jezz would look around at creation and dismiss all of his father's teachings about reincarnation. Jezz would realize that he had a sin problem and needed a Savior, not another go around in the next earth life, as the rest of his Hindu teachers and leaders had taught him. Is that it Jezz?

Yes, the Bible and the Church are important witnesses to the love and glory of God, and they have a special role to play in His plan for the salvation of the universe. Nevertheless, they are not, and never have been, the only way in which God witnesses to His creation. Just because they might be absent from one part of the world doesn't mean that God is!

Again, this has really been a very patronizing effort on your part. Trying to show ol dull GoBahnsen what omni-presense means. So, the Bible is just one of many witnesses? Isn't it amazing how little "creation light" is doing in world evangelism? About the only thing these other witness's do, is condemn the world. The witness of conscience, condemns or excuses, but it doesn't lead a person to Christ.

God can and will use creation light and a guilty conscience as pre-runners to the hearing of the Gospel, but without that hearing of the Gospel, how shall they then be saved?
Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

[bridgeforsale]

I suppose that you, along with AW and others, might want to say that God does involve Himself in the movie, but that He didn't write the movie Himself. That so much of what takes place in the movie wasn't controlled by God or determined by God before creation, that it should indeed be in the movie?

If I haven't lost you yet, the difference between you and a Calvinistic thinker, like me, would be that you see people actually doing things that God ultimately did not really want them to do. Not "want" in the sense that God approves of sin, but "want" in the sense that it fit into God's plan and purpose in His bringing about redemptive history.

For example: Joseph's brothers greatly sinned in selling Joseph into slavery. God disapproves of their sin. Yet, before creation began, God brought each one of those brothers into the world, for one of many purposes, and one of the purposes of God was, that on the appointed day, they would betray Joseph.

They did not write the movie, when they got the evil idea to sell off Joseph. Yes, it was their evil idea, but they were also, at the same time fulfilling God's purposes and doing what God decided to take place in His movie.

I agree with you here -- we disagree on the mechanics of action.

Does this mean then that God author's their evil? I would answer, no. What it does mean is that God is able to write a script with evil in the script, but not be guilty of the evil Himself. Humans can write books with evil characters in it and we do not accuse the author of the evil deeds contained in it. But, then it is only a book.

God put the dream in Joseph's head. God knew Josephs and his brothers characters and inner most thoughts. God knew the brothers would be stirred to envy, God knew the master (who purchased Joseph) would be in the right place at the right time, God even knew the masters wife was a promiscuous women, God knew who would be in that Egyptian prison, and indeed God orchestrated all of those events. So you can say God wrote the movie. However, God DID NOT compel the will of any of those actors. God simply ordered events in the exactly right manner so His plan would be fulfilled.

With this creation we live in, the Author of the book, not only wrote the script, but makes sure that none deviate from it. The mystery of it all, is that each character actually does what they want to, just as God pleased. Not as THEY pleased.

It's not that much of a mystery .... Luis Molina explained it well. But you're exactly right, they did as they pleased but at the same time fulfilled God's will.

That's the difference between you and I. You see people doing things as they please, but I doubt that you would accept the idea that all the stuff that they do, is actually according to the will and plan of God. My text for such a belief is Act 4:26-28 The kings of the earth set themselves in array, And the rulers were gathered together, Against the Lord, and against his Anointed: for of a truth in this city against thy holy Servant Jesus, whom thou didst anoint, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, were gathered together, to do whatsoever thy hand and thy council foreordained to come to pass.

few events in human history have ever occurred without the will of God being involved. However, we still have free will and the freedom to choose between good and evil. This is called compatiblism.