Love and Death

[The Rogue Tomato]

Okay, the subject line is click bait, but I do love Woody Allen's movie, "Love and Death".

Free-willers say that non-free willers don't take into account the love of God.

I would say free-willers don't really accept the sovereignty of God.

Discuss.

 

[civic]

An honest Calvinist who understands what sovereign means.

Paul D. Miller of The Gospel Coalition

What does it mean to say that God is sovereign? The refrain has become so common, almost clichéd, in Reformed writing and preaching that it sometimes slips away from the reader or listener without lodging meaning in the mind. Worse, we typically hear the phrase to mean something it doesn’t. When Christians affirm that “God is sovereign,” they often mean “God is in control.” Paul Tripp, for example, wrote in his excellent book Lost in the Middle that “God truly is sovereign . . . there is no situation, relationship, or circumstance that is not controlled by our heavenly Father.”

The problem is that the English word sovereignty does not mean control. The U. S. government is sovereign within American territory, but that doesn’t mean the government controls everything within American borders or causes all that happens. If you look up sovereignty in the dictionary you’ll not find control in the definition—nor even as a synonym in a thesaurus.

hope this helps !!!

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

An honest Calvinist who understands what sovereign means.

Paul D. Miller of The Gospel Coalition

What does it mean to say that God is sovereign? The refrain has become so common, almost clichéd, in Reformed writing and preaching that it sometimes slips away from the reader or listener without lodging meaning in the mind. Worse, we typically hear the phrase to mean something it doesn’t. When Christians affirm that “God is sovereign,” they often mean “God is in control.” Paul Tripp, for example, wrote in his excellent book Lost in the Middle that “God truly is sovereign . . . there is no situation, relationship, or circumstance that is not controlled by our heavenly Father.”

The problem is that the English word sovereignty does not mean control. The U. S. government is sovereign within American territory, but that doesn’t mean the government controls everything within American borders or causes all that happens. If you look up sovereignty in the dictionary you’ll not find control in the definition—nor even as a synonym in a thesaurus.

hope this helps !!!

I don't care what Paul D. Miller says. What do YOU say?

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Here, let me get more specific. Romans 9:

14 What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! 15 For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.” 18 So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.

19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” 20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? 21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? 22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? 23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.

Now, some of use interpret this as a demonstration of God's sovereignty. God will have mercy on whom he has mercy, and man has nothing to do with it. Not man who wills, not man who runs, but only God who has mercy. So you say, "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?" But God is the sovereign creator and has the right to make some vessels for glory and some vessels for destruction.

Now state why the above is somehow NOT a demonstration of God's sovereignty over His creation? Where is the "God is love" objection to this?

 

[civic]

Oh you mean the nations , yes

Jeremiah 18

At the Potter’s House​

18 This is the word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord: 2 “Go down to the potter’s house, and there I will give you my message.”3 So I went down to the potter’s house, and I saw him working at the wheel. 4 But the pot he was shaping from the clay was marred in his hands; so the potter formed it into another pot, shaping it as seemed best to him.

5 Then the word of the Lord came to me. 6 He said, “Can I not do with you, Israel, as this potter does?” declares the Lord. “Like clay in the hand of the potter, so are you in my hand,Israel. 7 If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, 8 and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. 9 And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, 10 and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it.

11 “Now therefore say to the people of Judah and those living in Jerusalem, ‘This is what the Lord says: Look! I am preparing a disaster for you and devising a plan against you. So turnfrom your evil ways, each one of you, and reform your ways and your actions.’ 12 But they will reply, ‘It’s no use. We will continue with our own plans; we will all follow the stubbornness of our evil hearts.’”

13 Therefore this is what the Lord says:

“Inquire among the nations:
Who has ever heard anything like this?
A most horrible thing has been done
by Virgin Israel.
14 Does the snow of Lebanon
ever vanish from its rocky slopes?
Do its cool waters from distant sources
ever stop flowing?[a]
15 Yet my people have forgotten me;
they burn incense to worthless idols,
which made them stumble in their ways,
in the ancient paths.
They made them walk in byways,
on roads not built up.
16 Their land will be an object of horror
and of lasting scorn;
all who pass by will be appalled
and will shake their heads.
17 Like a wind from the east,
I will scatter them before their enemies;
I will show them my back and not my face
in the day of their disaster

 

[praise_yeshua]

Okay, the subject line is click bait, but I do love Woody Allen's movie, "Love and Death".

Free-willers say that non-free willers don't take into account the love of God.

I would say free-willers don't really accept the sovereignty of God.

Discuss.

Not a fan of Woody Allen but not because of his low character. Just never saw the appeal. I didn't care enough to make it too far into the movie.

So basically the argument you're making is that God takes more value in ALWAYS being in control than actually loving His creation?

I'll bite.

Can I ask you to explain why you believe God MUST control everything..... everywhere?

In my view, God doesn't "care" to control sinners to prevent them from sinning. That alone tells you that God doesn't value the type of sovereignty I believe you're insisting God values/practices.

This world is a prison surrounded by bars. We are confined to limit our sinful influence. We operate freely in this prison. The inmates are running the prison.

We are no danger to corrupting anything. God allows us to do was we please within the prison we self govern. God intervenes at various moments to limit us.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Here, let me get more specific. Romans 9:

14 What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! 15 For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” 16 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth.” 18 So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.

19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” 20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it? 21 Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use? 22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? 23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.

Now, some of use interpret this as a demonstration of God's sovereignty. God will have mercy on whom he has mercy, and man has nothing to do with it. Not man who wills, not man who runs, but only God who has mercy. So you say, "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?" But God is the sovereign creator and has the right to make some vessels for glory and some vessels for destruction.

Now state why the above is somehow NOT a demonstration of God's sovereignty over His creation? Where is the "God is love" objection to this?

Can you consider a very important phrase found in what you're quoting?

"Of the same lump".

It is clear to me at least that the argument you're making isn't really based upon the "same lump". The "same material".

Flesh can't be anything other than flesh. Yet, your argument seeks to deny this.

 

[civic]

Can you consider a very important phrase found in what you're quoting?

"Of the same lump".

It is clear to me at least that the argument you're making isn't really based upon the "same lump". The "same material".

Flesh can't be anything other than flesh. Yet, your argument seeks to deny this.

Spot on !!!

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Oh you mean the nations , yes

Jeremiah 18

At the Potter’s House​

18 This is the word that came to Jeremiah from the Lord: 2 “Go down to the potter’s house, and there I will give you my message.”3 So I went down to the potter’s house, and I saw him working at the wheel. 4 But the pot he was shaping from the clay was marred in his hands; so the potter formed it into another pot, shaping it as seemed best to him.

5 Then the word of the Lord came to me. 6 He said, “Can I not do with you, Israel, as this potter does?” declares the Lord. “Like clay in the hand of the potter, so are you in my hand,Israel. 7 If at any time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be uprooted, torn down and destroyed, 8 and if that nation I warned repents of its evil, then I will relent and not inflict on it the disaster I had planned. 9 And if at another time I announce that a nation or kingdom is to be built up and planted, 10 and if it does evil in my sight and does not obey me, then I will reconsider the good I had intended to do for it.

11 “Now therefore say to the people of Judah and those living in Jerusalem, ‘This is what the Lord says: Look! I am preparing a disaster for you and devising a plan against you. So turnfrom your evil ways, each one of you, and reform your ways and your actions.’ 12 But they will reply, ‘It’s no use. We will continue with our own plans; we will all follow the stubbornness of our evil hearts.’”

13 Therefore this is what the Lord says:

“Inquire among the nations:
Who has ever heard anything like this?
A most horrible thing has been done
by Virgin Israel.
14 Does the snow of Lebanon
ever vanish from its rocky slopes?
Do its cool waters from distant sources
ever stop flowing?[a]
15 Yet my people have forgotten me;
they burn incense to worthless idols,
which made them stumble in their ways,
in the ancient paths.
They made them walk in byways,
on roads not built up.
16 Their land will be an object of horror
and of lasting scorn;
all who pass by will be appalled
and will shake their heads.
17 Like a wind from the east,
I will scatter them before their enemies;
I will show them my back and not my face
in the day of their disaster

You can't just cut out Romans 9 and insert Jeremiah 18 in its place. Deal with Romans 9.

 

[praise_yeshua]

You can't just cut out Romans 9 and insert Jeremiah 18 in its place. Deal with Romans 9.

I don't know why you're rejecting the source of what Paul quoted. Did Paul extend the revelation? Or did Paul seek to explain the revelation?

If the latter is true, then it must be included in any explanation.

This is what those at Berea did. They searched the Scripture to verify what the apostles were saying were true and accurate to the Scriptures. Paul didn't mind being questioned. He preferred it.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Can you consider a very important phrase found in what you're quoting?

"Of the same lump".

It is clear to me at least that the argument you're making isn't really based upon the "same lump". The "same material".

Flesh can't be anything other than flesh. Yet, your argument seeks to deny this.

My argument? I'm simply showing what the text says. Out of the same lump doesn't change the fact that God makes some vessels for glory and others for destruction. You seem to think that it is impossible for God to do that because the source material is the same for both.

Still nobody has explained how "God is love" changes this declaration of God's sovereignty over His creation.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

I don't know why you're rejecting the source of what Paul quoted. Did Paul extend the revelation? Or did Paul seek to explain the revelation?

If the latter is true, then it must be included in any explanation.

This is what those at Berea did. They searched the Scripture to verify what the apostles were saying were true and accurate to the Scriptures. Paul didn't mind being questioned. He preferred it.

Paul wasn't quoting anything. He was using a similar metaphor.

 

[civic]

I don't know why you're rejecting the source of what Paul quoted. Did Paul extend the revelation? Or did Paul seek to explain the revelation?

If the latter is true, then it must be included in any explanation.

This is what those at Berea did. They searched the Scripture to verify what the apostles were saying were true and accurate to the Scriptures. Paul didn't mind being questioned. He preferred it.

oh the irony and the cherry picking isolating verses ripped from the biblical narrative.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Paul wasn't quoting anything. He was using a similar metaphor.

I would disagree. At the very least, he is appealing to the substance of the metaphor as set forth in the Scripture. The believers at Rome would of well understood the reference from scrolls/books of the OT. Like most others converted to Christianity, they sought to know the basis of beliefs espoused by Christianity.

There are several references to "potter and clay" relative to creation throughout the OT. All of them have the same connotations.

 

[praise_yeshua]

My argument? I'm simply showing what the text says. Out of the same lump doesn't change the fact that God makes some vessels for glory and others for destruction. You seem to think that it is impossible for God to do that because the source material is the same for both.

There is a narrative that comes along with the words you wrote. It is a common narrative.

It is clear from these words shared by Paul that flesh is flesh. There is no other equation that comes forth from these comments.

Rom 8:8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

No one disputes that it is God that changes mankind. Please don't leave out the "change". The power comes from God. However, there is only one lump.... and you are part of that lump. You are the same lump as all of us. There is no difference in the lump at all.

Your common narrative presents the scenario that the lump is different. It is not. It never is. The change that happens to the lump doesn't take place until the Resurrection. In that the "lump" will be changed.

Thusly, this common narrative presented by Calvinists doesn't work nor match what the Scriptures espouse.

Paul is making the argument that God's purpose is without question. You're extend this beyond its meaning to include an incorrect "premise" that there are some preferred from flesh by God. This is clearly not taught by these words.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Still nobody has explained how "God is love" changes this declaration of God's sovereignty over His creation.

I tried and I believe I did.

There is also a problem with your comments above. I didn't want to assume this earlier from your words so as to avoid questions from you. However, it seems clear now that your assume your definition of sovereignty without properly establishing it to begin with.

Can you clearly define "sovereignty"?

Sovereignty isn't absent love. Nor does it imply that God loves a particular "lump" differently that He loves others. Flesh is flesh.

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Sovereignty in the context of Romans 9 is that God is our sovereign creator, and He has the right to do whatever he pleases with His creation, including making some people for glory and others fitted for destruction. If you find that objectionable, you are talking back to God, which you are in no position to do since you are one of His created beings. You are not God.

 

[Eleazar]

An honest Calvinist who understands what sovereign means.

Paul D. Miller of The Gospel Coalition

What does it mean to say that God is sovereign? The refrain has become so common, almost clichéd, in Reformed writing and preaching that it sometimes slips away from the reader or listener without lodging meaning in the mind. Worse, we typically hear the phrase to mean something it doesn’t. When Christians affirm that “God is sovereign,” they often mean “God is in control.” Paul Tripp, for example, wrote in his excellent book Lost in the Middle that “God truly is sovereign . . . there is no situation, relationship, or circumstance that is not controlled by our heavenly Father.”

The problem is that the English word sovereignty does not mean control. The U. S. government is sovereign within American territory, but that doesn’t mean the government controls everything within American borders or causes all that happens. If you look up sovereignty in the dictionary you’ll not find control in the definition—nor even as a synonym in a thesaurus.

hope this helps !!!

Perfect explanation! I like how Theodicy deals with the problem of evil and suffering in a world supposedly governed by a sovereign God. When in fact the bible clearly tells us that Satan is the ruler of this fallen world.

in whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
2 Corinthians 4:4 Scripture Source: https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/Satan-As-The-Prince-Of-This-World

If God is all-powerful and all-loving, why does evil exist? It's interesting to study the various explanations that have been proposed, including the idea that God allows evil for a greater purpose.

The concept of God’s sovereignty is often linked to the idea of divine providence. According to this view, God actively governs and orchestrates events in the world, including both natural occurrences and human actions. Nothing happens without God’s knowledge or permission.

The problem that a lot of people have with that is the issue of sin. When God created Adam and Eve did he know and give his permission that they would fall into sin? And through their offspring so would the rest of the world?

 

[Eleazar]

Sovereignty in the context of Romans 9 is that God is our sovereign creator, and He has the right to do whatever he pleases with His creation, including making some people for glory and others fitted for destruction. If you find that objectionable, you are talking back to God, which you are in no position to do since you are one of His created beings. You are not God.

Therefore you must listen to John Calvin No back talk

 

[The Rogue Tomato]

Therefore you must listen to John Calvin No back talk

John Calvin is not God.