web viewif you insist on that method, you can go elsewhere. first warning. august 8 at 11:09am ......

Chris Fisher The text from the article:

Sovereignty (Calvinism equates “sovereignty” with “meticulous control” although this concept is foreign to any human culture):

1. If God’s will is always already being done on earth as in heaven (as divine determinism implies) why did Jesus teach his disciples to pray, “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven?”

Verse: Luk 11:2 So He said to them, “When you pray, say: Our Father in heaven, Hallowed be Your name. Your kingdom come. Your will be done On earth as it is in heaven.

2. People are tempted by evil. Does God cause this?

Verse: Jas 1:13 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God”; for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone.

3. Can God’s appointments be thwarted by man?

Verse: 1Ki 20:42 Then he said to him, “Thus says the LORD: ‘Because you have let slip out of your hand a man whom I appointed to utter destruction, therefore your life shall go for his life, and your people for his people.’ ”

4. When God “struck” (aka “killed”) the children of Israel, did God’s intended purpose materialize?

Verse: Jer 2:30 In vain have I struck your children; they took no correction; your own sword devoured your prophets like a ravening lion.

5. In the parable of the potter, does God finish what He started to do?

Verse: Jer 18:4 And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter; so he made it again into another vessel, as it seemed good to the potter to make.

Omniscience (Calvinism believes God has complete knowledge of all future events):

6. Does God test people to learn what they will do?

Verse: Deu 13:3 you shall not listen to the words of that prophet or that dreamer of dreams, for the LORD your God is testing you to know whether you love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

Verse: 2Ch 32:31 However, regarding the ambassadors of the princes of Babylon, whom they sent to him to inquire about the wonder that was done in the land, God withdrew from him, in order to test him, that He might know all that was in his heart.

7. Does God ever regret something He did?

Verse: Gen 6:6 And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart.

Verse: 1Sa 15:11 “I greatly regret that I have set up Saul as king, for he has turned back from following Me, and has not performed My commandments.” And it grieved Samuel, and he cried out to the LORD all night.

8. Does God say He will do something although He knows that He will never do that thing?

Verse: 1Sa 2:30 Therefore the LORD God of Israel says: ‘I said indeed that your house and the house of your father would walk before Me forever.’ But now the LORD says: ‘Far be it from Me; for those who honor Me I will honor, and those who despise Me shall be lightly esteemed.

9. When the Bible says God “thought to do” something that He does not do, what does “thought to do” mean?

Verse: Jer 18:7 The instant I speak concerning a nation and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, to pull down, and to destroy it,

https://www.facebook.com/christopher.c.fisher?fref=ufi

Jer 18:8 if that nation against whom I have spoken turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I thought to bring upon it.

10. Did God do what He said He would do in Jonah?

Verse: Jon 3:10 Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God relented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it.

Immutability (Calvinism believes God cannot change in any way):

11. Could God have prevented the evil currently in this world? And if so, how can God be immutable? If no, how can God be omnipotent?

Verse: Jdg 2:20 Then the anger of the LORD was hot against Israel; and He said, “Because this nation has transgressed My covenant which I commanded their fathers, and has not heeded My voice,Jdg 2:21 I also will no longer drive out before them any of the nations which Joshua left when he died,Jdg 2:22 so that through them I may test Israel, whether they will keep the ways of the LORD, to walk in them as their fathers kept them, or not.”

12. When God became flesh, was that a change?

Verse: Joh 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.…Joh 1:14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

Timelessness (Calvinism believes God resides outside of “time”):

13. Does God ever wait patiently and endure up to a breaking point?

Verse: Isa 42:14 “I have held My peace a long time, I have been still and restrained Myself. Now I will cry like a woman in labor, I will pant and gasp at once.

Goodness:

14. How can a God who cannot lie make specific time-limit prophecies that do not come true when He said they would?

Verse: Jon 3:4 And Jonah began to enter the city on the first day’s walk. Then he cried out and said, “Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown!”

Verse: 2Ki 20:5 “Return and tell Hezekiah the leader of My people, ‘Thus says the LORD, the God of David your father: “I have heard your prayer, I have seen your tears; surely I will heal you. On the third day you shall go up to the house of the LORD.2Ki 20:6 And I will add to your days fifteen years. I will deliver you and this city from the hand of the king of Assyria; and I will defend this city for My own sake, and for the sake of My servant David.” ‘ ”

Jesus (Calvinism believes that Jesus is God except for the part of Jesus that was human):

15. Was the part of Jesus that was “body” also “Godhead”?

Verse: Col 2:9 For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily;

16. Did Jesus know everything?

Verse: Mar 13:32 “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

17. In what way does Jesus resemble an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, immutable, timeless, and simple God?

Verse: Joh 14:9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He

who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?

18. If Jesus’ will is the same as God’s will, then why would Jesus say that Jesus’ will would not be done if God’s will is done?

Verse: Luk 22:42 saying, “Father, if it is Your will, take this cup away from Me; nevertheless not My will, but Yours, be done.”

19. Could Jesus have been saved from crucifixion by praying to God?

Verse: Mat 26:53 Or do you think that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He will provide Me with more than twelve legions of angels?

Miscellaneous:

20. Why are the elect the enemy of the gospel?

Verse: Rom 11:28 Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers.August 7 at 5:08pm · Like

Will Duffy Linda Champion, it's unsafe for Calvinists, LOL!August 7 at 5:51pm · Unlike · 1

Charlie J. Ray You must be addressing those semi-Arminian Calvinists who follow the theology of apparent contradictions and paradox? I can assure you that there are no contradictions in the Bible.August 8 at 7:45am · Like

Charlie J. Ray It will take me some time to answer all the objections in the post. However, the first objection is so simple even a child can figure it out:

>>>1. If God’s will is always already being done on earth as in heaven (as divine determinism implies) why did Jesus teach his disciples to pray, “Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven?”<<<

If we are praying for God's will to be done, we are simply agreeing that God controls whatsoever comes to pass. That's why Jesus taught us to pray according to God's will. THY will be done. Jesus also prayed that if it were possible that the cup of His suffering would pass, but nevertheless not his human will be done but GOD'S will be done:

He went a little farther and fell on His face, and prayed, saying, "O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as You will." (Matthew 26:39 NKJ)Again, a second time, He went away and prayed, saying, "O My Father, if this cup cannot pass away from Me unless I drink it, Your will be done." (Matthew 26:42 NKJ)

God already knows the future because He has already determined it. It was NEVER God's will that Jesus would NOT go to the cross. Jesus providentially in time said the prayer but God had already by the set foreknowledge of God determined that wicked men, including Judas, Pilate, and Herod, would have him betrayed, tried, convicted and crucified.

"Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death; (Acts 2:23 NKJ)"For truly against Your holy Servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, were gathered together 28 "to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose determined before to be done. (Acts 4:27-28 NKJ)August 8 at 7:51am · Like · 1

https://www.facebook.com/will.duffy.543?fref=ufi

https://www.facebook.com/charlie.j.ray?fref=ufi


Charlie J. Ray Why pray if God is unable to determine the future? We don't know what the future holds. God does because He controls it. Even the day and hour of your death is already determined by God. Hebrews 9:27. Psalm 139.August 8 at 7:52am · Like · 2

Charlie J. Ray More later:)August 8 at 7:52am · Like

Charlie J. Ray It is irritating when Arminians flood with several questions instead of sticking to one proposition at a time. Prayer only makes sense if God is sovereign and can actually answer the prayer. God's answer could be yes or no. But His will shall be done!August 8 at 7:53am · Like · 1

Charlie J. Ray The more Arminian they are the more they hate the doctrine of predestination.August 8 at 7:54am · Like · 2

Charlie J. Ray I should point out that the OP is from an Open Theism site. Open Theism is worse than Arminianism because it says that God is ignorant of the future:) Unfortunately, some Arminians, including Roger Olson, think that Open Theism is within the Arminian camp. Ironically, Olson contradicts himself when he also claims that Arminianism is "reformed" theology. If Arminians were more logical, they wouldn't be Arminians.August 8 at 7:59am · Like

Charlie J. Ray The same applies to Open Theism. If Open Theism advocates were more logical they wouldn't believe Open Theism is true.August 8 at 7:59am · Like

Charlie J. Ray My best shot? My best shot is not mine. It is the Bible:)

The LORD of hosts has sworn, saying, "Surely, as I have thought, so it shall come to pass, And as I have purposed, so it shall stand: (Isaiah 14:24 NKJ)August 8 at 8:00am · Like

Chris Fisher 1:

///If we are praying for God's will to be done, we are simply agreeing that God controls whatsoever comes to pass.

That does not work. The text presents a contrast between Heaven and Earth. Why the contrast? In what way is Jesus asking that God's will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven? If Jesus believed God's will was being done on Earth, does this make sense? Wouldn't it have been easier to just say "I agree with your will". The sentence was not spoken by someone with a Calvinist mindset. That is why the question is so hard for Calvinists to answer. It is a request.August 8 at 9:06am · Edited · Like









Chris Fisher Ray 1: The LORD of hosts has sworn, saying, "Surely, as I have thought, so it shall come to pass, And as I have purposed, so it shall stand: (Isaiah 14:24 NKJ)

Isn't this about God being capable of doing what He says, not about meticulous control of the future? And isn't this Isaiah trying to convince Israel that God is powerful, which they do not believe? And if Isaiah were trying to convince the people that God controls everything (something they do not believe) wouldn't he have worded it extremely different. Isaiah reads like an Open Theist trying to convince a Calvinist that God can actually do what He says.August 8 at 7:15pm · Edited · Like

Chris Fisher Ray 2: Even the day and hour of your death is already determined by God. Hebrews 9:27. Psalm 139.

Hebrews 9:27, men are appointed to die once means that every person on Earth has a specific appointed day? You are bringing a lot of baggage into that verse. Plus you ignore Hezekiah and God's judgement of angels in Psalms 82 in which He punishes them with eventual death.

On Psalms 139. Absolutely that is not what Psalms 139 says. "the days that were formed" is an adverbial phrase meaning that over the days that David's body was forming, the body parts were being written into God's book. Here is Calvin on the issue:

Some read ימים, yamim, in the nominative case, when days were made; the sense being, according to them — All my bones were written in thy book, O God! from the beginning of the world, when days were first formed by thee, and when as yet none of them actually existed. The other is the more natural meaning, That the different parts of the human body are formed in a succession of time; for in the first germ there is no arrangement of parts, or proportion of members, but it is developed, and takes its peculiar form progressively.August 8 at 9:29am · Edited · Like

Chris Fisher All the attached translations agree with John Calvin that Psalms 139 is not about God recording every day of your life but about a series of days in which your body forms in the womb, notice the adverbial phrase:

Geneva Bible: 16 Thine eyes did see me, when I was without forme: for in thy booke were all things written, which in continuance were facioned, when there was none of them before.

The attached picture is the Jewish translation of Psalms 139.

King James BibleThine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.

Jubilee Bible 2000Thine eyes did see my substance yet being imperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which were then formed, without lacking one of them.

American King James VersionYour eyes did see my substance, yet being imperfect; and in your book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.

English Revised VersionThine eyes did see mine unperfect substance, and in thy book were all my members written, which day by day were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.




August 8 at 9:36am · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray I showed you the prayer of Jesus in Gethsemane. I guess you don't believe the Bible.August 8 at 9:51am · Like

Chris Fisher Charlie, that is one of the questions. That proves that God's will does not have to be done and it proves that Jesus and God do not have the same will.August 8 at 9:52am · Like

Charlie J. Ray That isn't what Psalm 139 says. It says God is absolutely omniscient, not ignorant. God is not a man;)August 8 at 9:53am · Like

Chris Fisher Ray 2: Charlie, was John Calvin wrong when Calvin wrote:

Some read ימים, yamim, in the nominative case, when days were made; the sense being, according to them — All my bones were written in thy book, O God! from the beginning of the world, when days were first formed by thee, and when as yet none of them actually existed. The other is the more natural meaning, That the different parts of the human body are formed in a succession of time; for in the first germ there is no arrangement of parts, or proportion of members, but it is developed, and takes its peculiar form progressively.August 8 at 9:55am · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray I am working today. I would ask you to stock to one or two propositions at a time. I will rebut your answers one at a time.August 8 at 9:54am · Like

Chris Fisher Alright, I will keep my responses numbered per your points and will keep my counter points numbered per the original question.August 8 at 9:56am · Edited · Like

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10100395216310554&set=p.10100395216310554&type=1








Charlie J. Ray Since we do not know the future being limited in knowledge, we do petition God. But why pray to an ignorant and helpless finite god who has no providential control over history, time, or evil?August 8 at 9:57am · Like

Chris Fisher Ray 3: He went a little farther and fell on His face, and prayed, saying, "O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as You will." (Matthew 26:39 NKJ)

Doesn't this verse show us that God's will does not have to be done (indicated by Jesus' special asking that God not change His will on Jesus' account)? Doesn't this also show that Jesus did not know if it was a possibility, meaning even Jesus was not a Calvinist thinking in terms of immutable divine decrees?August 8 at 9:58am · Like

Chris Fisher Ray 4: But why pray to an ignorant and helpless finite god who has no providential control over history, time, or evil?

If prayer does not affect God. If the future was set (and God time and time again tells Israel that it is not... that He is waiting and pleading for them to change such that He does not have to punish them)... If God was immutable and cold like the stone idols that God despises... If God was timeless and unpersonal, as to make a mockery of the strong emotional highs and lows God ascribes to Himself throughout the Bible... then prayer would be pointless. We would be telling God what He already knows and has decreed. Instead, when God says something, people's natural inclination is that they can convince God not to do it. Followup question: what was the reason that God decided not to destroy Israel on Mount Sinai?August 8 at 7:16pm · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray Out of context quotes only prove you are an irrationalist.August 8 at 10:07am · Like

Chris Fisher The Geneva Bible that I quoted to you... is that out of context as well? Seriously, you reject Calvin on this verse as well as good Hebrew scholarship. You are the one not acting rational.August 8 at 10:13am · Like

Chris Fisher Here is something you can do. Write the following: "Chris, I was wrong about Psalms 139:16 being a good prooftext for my view. Calvin himself did not take the verse the way I see it and this is reflected in the Geneva translation. I am too set in my ways to admit when I am clearly wrong and I will attempt to treat valid points with more respect in the future. I promise not to let my ego just lash out when I am thoroughly called out on irrational positions I hold."August 8 at 10:16am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Calvin was not infallible. Scripture speaks for itself.August 8 at 10:16am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Some for afar off read beforehand, in which signification the Hebrew word is elsewhere taken, as if he had said—O Lord, every thought which I conceive in my heart is already known to thee beforehand. But I prefer the other meaning, That God is not confined to heaven, indulging in a state of repose, and indifferent to human concerns, according to the Epicurean idea, and that however far off we may be from him, he is never far off from us.








John Calvin. Psalm 139.August 8 at 10:17am · Edited · Like

Chris Fisher So, yes or no. Is Psalms 139:16 a good prooftext that God has planned our entire lives?August 8 at 10:17am · Like

Charlie J. Ray The Bible clearly says God knows the future and has exhaustive omniscience.August 8 at 10:18am · Like

Chris Fisher Yes or no... was I quoting Calvin "out of context" like you claimed?August 8 at 10:18am · Like

Chris Fisher In the opening link, I mention that Calvinists have a very hard time with yes or no questions. I will try this again:

So, yes or no. Is Psalms 139:16 a good prooftext that God has planned our entire lives?August 8 at 10:19am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris, no. Calvin said what you said he said. But as I said, Scripture is the final authority. Furthermore, I was on my phone earlier. How does it follow logically that Open Theism is true simply because Calvin's focus was wrong in a few places in his commentaries? Just asking?August 8 at 10:27am · Like · 1

Charlie J. Ray Chris, let's try a yes or no question for you. Is God absolutely omniscient? Yes or no?August 8 at 10:28am · Like · 1

Charlie J. Ray Isaiah 46:9-11 and many other places proves that God is absolutely sovereign and knows exhaustively everything that will happen. Ephesians 1:11 says God ordains all things that come to pass in time.August 8 at 10:29am · Like

Chris Fisher Did I claim Open Theism was true because Calvin interpreted a verse in a non-Calvinist way? No, my point is that your prooftexts, all your prooftexts, do not say what you want them to say. The fact that you admittedly oppose even John Calvin on some verses is very telling about your mindset towards the Bible. You are not interested in reading comprehension, and figuring out various and possibly understandings of texts, but you are looking for affirmation of your platonism. You disregard perfectly reasonable alternative understandings of the text.August 8 at 10:33am · Like

Chris Fisher Ray 5: Chris, let's try a yes or no question for you. Is God absolutely omniscient? Yes or no?

No.The Bible never makes the claim and neither do I.August 8 at 10:33am · Like










Charlie J. Ray Calvin also says in the same commentary on Psalm 139:16, "..... it was always one and the same in God’s book, who is not dependent upon time for the execution of his work." Clearly Calvin's view does not endorse that God is dependent on time or that God is ignorant of the future.August 8 at 10:34am · Like

Chris Fisher Ray 6: Isaiah 46:9-11 and many other places proves that God is absolutely sovereign

I feel like I am answering more of your questions than you are of mine. Refer back to my earlier question and answer that:

Ray 1: The LORD of hosts has sworn, saying, "Surely, as I have thought, so it shall come to pass, And as I have purposed, so it shall stand: (Isaiah 14:24 NKJ)

Isn't this about God being capable of doing what He says, not about meticulous control of the future? And isn't this Isaiah trying to convince Israel that God is powerful, which they do not believe? And if Isaiah were trying to convince the people that God controls everything (something they do no believe) wouldn't he have worded it extremely different. Isaiah reads like an Open Theist trying to convince a Calvinist that God can actually do what He says.August 8 at 10:35am · Like

Charlie J. Ray The Bible does make the claim. And that is because we logically deduce from the Scriptures by good and necessary consequence what the Bible says. There is a system of doctrinal and propositional truth in the Bible and the Scriptures cannot be broken into disparate parts that have no relationship to the other parts of the system of logical and propositional revelation in the Bible. John 10:35.August 8 at 10:36am · Like

Chris Fisher Ray 7: Ephesians 1:11 says God ordains all things that come to pass in time.

Eph 1:11 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will,

Doesn't perfectly normal reading comprehension allow this to say that God does everything that God does with careful thought. It would be like me saying "I eat everything according to my diet". No, I do not eat "everything", but "everything" I do eat is per my diet. And my statement is general, so even if there is slippage (I eat cake once), this does not invalidate my general statement.August 8 at 10:38am · Like

Charlie J. Ray If God is able to control the future, then it implication is that God DOES control the future. If the universe can run by itself, then the implication by logical deduction and good and necessary consequence is that the universe is indendent of God and therefore there is something that is God's equal. But that is Platonic dualism and even deism. God is in absolute control of all that happens, otherwise God is not God.August 8 at 10:38am · Like

Charlie J. Ray If you reject God as defined by Scripture, then you are not a Christian.August 8 at 10:38am · Like








Chris Fisher No, I am going skating today. That is me controlling the future. Wow, I much be omniscient and omnipotent.August 8 at 10:39am · Like

Charlie J. Ray The Westminster Confession of Faith summarizes the system of dogmatic theology in the Bible.August 8 at 10:39am · Like

Charlie J. Ray If God foreknows you are going skating today, is it possible you won't go skating today?August 8 at 10:39am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Oh, wait. You think your god is ignorant.August 8 at 10:39am · Like

Charlie J. Ray You have created a little god in your own finite and ignorant image.August 8 at 10:40am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Vain thinking is vain.August 8 at 10:40am · Like

Chris Fisher So, back to my questions. I am not really interested in non-Biblical metaphysics. In my estimation, you have not answered a single OP question.

1:

///If we are praying for God's will to be done, we are simply agreeing that God controls whatsoever comes to pass.

That does not work. The text presents a contrast between Heaven and Earth. Why the contrast? In what way is Jesus asking that God's will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven? If Jesus believed God's will was being done on Earth, does this make sense? Wouldn't it have been easier to just say "I agree with your will". The sentence was not spoken by someone with a Calvinist mindset. That is why the question is so hard for Calvinists to answer. It is a request.August 8 at 10:40am · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray You are not interested in what the biblical text says either. And if you are not interested in metaphysics, why read the Bible? The Bible alone is the source of all knowledge, including metaphysics.August 8 at 10:42am · Like · 1

Chris Fisher Charlie, in my estimation, I am the only one addressing the text. You allude to Psalms and Hebrews and you do not even use normal reading comprehension to understand them. You assume the text supports you, and I showed that you were wrong. You have zero verses; which verse have you used in which I did not follow up that your understanding was idiosyncratic and unwarranted?August 8 at 10:44am · Edited · Like









Charlie J. Ray Why is there a contrast between the Creator and His creation? Well, the answer to that question is obvious to any Calvinist. It's because God is eternally a God who possesses aseity by nature and essence. There never was a time when God did not exist and God transcends time, history, and creation. That's why in God's omniscient mind there is no passing of time or any passing of one thought to another thought. God is omniscient and never learns anything new--including the future. God knows the future because it is ordained by God's eternal decree. God never learns anything new by looking foreward to the future.August 8 at 10:44am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Well, your estimation is wrong because you presuppose a finite god. I presuppose an omniscient God who is also omnipotent and omnipresent. That's because the Bible also presupposes such a God. All Scripture is inspired by God. God controlled the wills of the men who wrote the Bible and every word they wrote is the very words of God.August 8 at 10:46am · Like

Charlie J. Ray I am indeed a presuppositionalist. I presuppose there are no errors in the Bible. You presuppose a finite god who does not control the wills of the men who wrote the Bible.August 8 at 10:47am · Like

Chris Fisher That is not rational argument. I am wrong because I do not assume your theology? [ding ding ding] We have a winner of the bad rational thinking award.August 8 at 10:47am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris, well, since you don't believe God controls men's wills, it follows that you cannot believe in the plenary verbal inspiration of Scripture or the infallibility and inerrancy of Scripture.August 8 at 10:48am · Like · 1

Chris Fisher Mat 6:10 Your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.

Has God's kingdom come? Is this a request by Jesus for God to bring His kingdom to Earth?

In the same way: "your will be done". Is this a request by Jesus for God's will to be done.

"On Earth as it is in Heaven". Is God's will currently being done on Earth in the same respect as it is in heaven.

My problem with Calvinism is that it takes clearly absurd readings of normal passages.August 8 at 10:48am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Well, as I said, the logical implication is that you don't believe the Bible since you cannot believe God inspired it.August 8 at 10:48am · Like

Chris Fisher Can God's will be rejected?









Luk 7:30 but the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected the purpose of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him.)August 8 at 10:49am · Like

Charlie J. Ray The Bible alone is God's Word. 2 Timothy 3:16. You cannot affirm this verse because for you God is ignorant and finite. But if God is finite, maybe God is evil and cannot do anything about good?August 8 at 10:49am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Of course the reprobate reject the Gospel:) But they were predestined to do so. That's not ability. It's inability.

8 and "A stone of stumbling And a rock of offense." They stumble, being disobedient to the word, to which they also were appointed. (1Pe 2:8 NKJ)August 8 at 10:50am · Like

Chris Fisher You reject Jesus's clear teachings. I am sure if we explored Exodus 32, you will reject a host of Biblical authors on the subject. You reject the Psalmist talking about fetology. Only one of us is rejecting the Bible, and that is you.August 8 at 10:50am · Like

Charlie J. Ray 38 that the word of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spoke: "Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed?"39 Therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said again:40 "He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts, Lest they should see with their eyes, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them." (Joh 12:38-40 NKJ)August 8 at 10:51am · Like

Charlie J. Ray You do not believe because you are not of His sheep:

26 "But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. (Joh 10:26 NKJ)August 8 at 10:51am · Like

Chris Fisher This is a yes or no question. Let me remind you that my original claim is that Calvinists are terrible with yes or no questions:

Can God's will be rejected?


Charlie J. Ray Oh, but I do believe the plain teaching of the whole bible in context. How do you think I decided to become a Calvinist? By reading heretical Open Theist scholars?August 8 at 10:52am · Like









Chris Fisher ^And this is boolay... God's strong will.

boo-lay'From G1014; volition, that is, (objectively) advice, or (by implication) purpose: - + advise, counsel, will.August 8 at 10:52am · Like

Chris Fisher Can God's will be rejected?


Chris Fisher Heb 6:17 uses the same word.August 8 at 10:52am · Like

Charlie J. Ray I don't answer yes or no questions. Here's why? "Did you stop beating your wife?" Answer the question: YES or NO?August 8 at 10:52am · Like

Chris Fisher No, because I never started, therefor there is nothing to stop.August 8 at 10:53am · Like

Chris Fisher Easy... now answer my question.August 8 at 10:53am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Logical fallacies are irrational and invalid. Asking irrational questions does not entail that the question was legimate.August 8 at 10:53am · Like

Chris Fisher I answered your "impossible question"... now answer mine. The only reason you dont want to answer is that it is clear you reject the Bible:

Can God's will be rejected?


Charlie J. Ray But you didn't answer with a yes or no. You answered with a qualification. So there's the reason your debate questions are fallacious. Thanks for demonstrating the fallacy for me:)August 8 at 10:54am · Like

Chris Fisher Your intellectual dishonesty does not make my question a logical fallacy.










August 8 at 10:54am · Like

Chris Fisher Then answer my question with a qualification... but say yes or no.August 8 at 10:55am · Like

Chris Fisher The qualification was to ensure you dont misunderstand the answer... it does not invalidate the answer.August 8 at 10:55am · Like

Charlie J. Ray The reprobate resist God's will. No Calvinist says otherwise. The reprobate have a will. But the question is whether the will is free or not. The answer is a resounding NO.August 8 at 10:55am · Like

Chris Fisher So... in your estimation... when the text says that the lawyers rejected God's will, that the lawyers did not. You reject the Bible. Clearly.August 8 at 10:56am · Like

Charlie J. Ray THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD.

Sect. 9.—THIS, therefore, is also essentially necessary and wholesome for Christians to know: That God foreknows nothing by contingency, but that He foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His immutable, eternal, and infallible will. By this thunderbolt, "Free-will" is thrown prostrate, and utterly dashed to pieces. Those, therefore, who would assert "Free-will," must either deny this thunderbolt, or pretend not to see it, or push it from them. But, however, before I establish this point by any arguments of my own, and by the authority of Scripture, I will first set it forth in your words.

Martin Luther

http://www.truecovenanter.com/trueluth.../luther_bow.html...TrueCovenanter.com: The Bondage of the WillSect. 9.T, therefore, is also essentially necessary and wholesome for Christians to know: That God foreknows nothing by contingency, but that He foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His immutable, eternal, and infallible will. By this thunderbolt, "Free-will" is thrown prostrate, an…TRUECOVENANTER.COM|BY MARTIN LUTHER


Chris Fisher Your argument is literally the text does not mean what it says because you have overriding theology.August 8 at 10:57am · Like

Charlie J. Ray >>>So... in your estimation... when the text says that the lawyers rejected God's will, that the lawyers did not. You reject the Bible. Clearly.<<<<<

This is so obviously false that it does not need a rebuttal. Obviously if the will is not free, then if the lawyers rejected the commands of God to repent they did so willingly. Where does the Bible say that men do not have a volition? I have not seen such a verse.









Charlie J. Ray The reprobate willingly rebel and reject God's commands.August 8 at 10:58am · Like

Chris Fisher They didnt reject their own will, they rejected God's will.August 8 at 10:58am · Like

Chris Fisher This discussion is about reading comprehension.August 8 at 10:59am · Like

Charlie J. Ray 7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be.8 So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God.(Rom 8:7-8 NKJ)August 8 at 10:59am · Like

Chris Fisher Ok, can God's will be rejected?August 8 at 10:59am · Like

Chris Fisher And did the lawyers reject God's will?August 8 at 10:59am · Like

Chris Fisher Your argument is literally the text does not mean what it says because you have overriding theology.August 8 at 10:59am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Define "will." Do you mean God's commands or do you mean God's decrees?August 8 at 10:59am · Like

Charlie J. Ray You are equivocating. The term "will" has to be defined. And you are obviously deliberately defining it otherwise from the Word of God:

29 "The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law. (Deu 29:29 NKJ)August 8 at 11:00am · Like

Chris Fisher ^ Feel free to define it however is the most favorable to your position. Make it work in both the context of Luk 7 and Heb 6.

Luk_7:30 ButG1161 theG3588 PhariseesG5330 andG2532 lawyersG3544 rejectedG114 theG3588











counselG1012 of GodG2316 againstG1519themselves,G1438 being notG3361 baptizedG907 ofG5259 him.G846

Heb_6:17 WhereinG1722 G3739 God,G2316 willingG1014 more abundantlyG4054 to shewG1925 unto theG3588 heirsG2818 of promiseG1860 theG3588 immutabilityG276 of hisG848 counsel,G1012 confirmedG3315 it by an oath:G3727August 8 at 11:01am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Do you claim to know everything that God knows in every single detail? If so, then you are claiming to be omniscient. We can only know what God reveals in nature and in the Bible.August 8 at 11:01am · Like

Chris Fisher ^I told you I am not interested in metaphysics. Please ask questions about the Bible and what the Biblical authors believed.August 8 at 11:02am · Like

Charlie J. Ray My position is God is omniscient. Your position is that your god is finite and ignorant. But can a god who is subject to creation and evil save you? I sincerely doubt it.August 8 at 11:02am · Like

Chris Fisher ^Platonism. Yum. I get my theology from the Bible. Can we discuss Exodus 32 now?August 8 at 11:02am · Like

Charlie J. Ray You're not interested in logic? So why are you here? God IS LOGIC. John 1:1. And logic was imparted to all men: John 1:9. Man IS the image of God. Genesis 1:27.August 8 at 11:03am · Like

Charlie J. Ray If you are admitting that you are an irrationalist, then there is nothing more to discuss. That's because without logic nothing makes any sense whatsoever.August 8 at 11:03am · Like

Chris Fisher Exo 32:14 And the LORD relented from the disaster that he had spoken of bringing on his people.

What is the reason that God did not destroy Israel, as Yahweh told Moses that He would?August 8 at 11:04am · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray The Bible is not inherently contradictory because God has no contradictions in His mind and it is God who inspired the Bible.August 8 at 11:04am · Like

Chris Fisher Metaphysics is not "logic". I would give you a rundown on logical propositions, but it will detract from the Bible. I can school you in another thread if you wish.August 8 at 11:04am · Like










Charlie J. Ray So Exodus 32:14 says that God works providentially in time in ways that we as creatures can understand. So how does that prove your metaphysical assertion that your god is ignorant of the future? I thought you didn't want to talk about metaphysics? Hello?August 8 at 11:05am · Like

Chris Fisher Exodus 32, what are Moses' arguments as to why God should not destroy Israel.August 8 at 11:05am · Like

Charlie J. Ray God already knew that He would relent and the reason is He had already ordained that the people of Israel would repent. Acts 11:18 implies it.August 8 at 11:05am · Like

Chris Fisher At this point, this should be friendly reading comprehension.August 8 at 11:05am · Like

Chris Fisher Here is the text to save you some time:

Exo 32:11 But Moses implored the LORD his God and said, "O LORD, why does your wrath burn hot against your people, whom you have brought out of the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand? Exo 32:12 Why should the Egyptians say, 'With evil intent did he bring them out, to kill them in the mountains and to consume them from the face of the earth'? Turn from your burning anger and relent from this disaster against your people. Exo 32:13 Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, your servants, to whom you swore by your own self, and said to them, 'I will multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have promised I will give to your offspring, and they shall inherit it forever.'" Exo 32:14 And the LORD relented from the disaster that he had spoken of bringing on his people.August 8 at 11:06am · Like

Charlie J. Ray 18 When they heard these things they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, "Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life." (Act 11:18 NKJ)

Repentance is a giftAugust 8 at 11:06am · Like

Chris Fisher Yes or no, did Moses argue that God would look bad to the neighboring people? Basically, God should refrain for His own sake and not due to the people's sake. Did this argument work on convincing God?August 8 at 11:07am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris, so when God speaks to creatures who are subject to time and discursive thinking, how else would God communicate to them in ways that they could understand? They are NOT omniscient. But your error is that you think because creatures need to be talked to on their level that the reverse is true of God and that God is therefore ignorant like men. False conclusion. God is not a man.August 8 at 11:08am · Like









Charlie J. Ray 9 "God is not a man, that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent. Has He said, and will He not do? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good? (Num 23:19 NKJ)August 8 at 11:08am · Like

Chris Fisher Calvinists are terrible at yes or no questions. Let us try this again:

Yes or no, did Moses argue that God would look bad to the neighboring people? Basically, God should refrain for His own sake and not due to the people's sake. Did this argument work on convincing God?August 8 at 11:08am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Your stupidity is in confusing the creature with the Creator.August 8 at 11:08am · Like


Charlie J. Ray So did you stop beating your mother? Yes or no?August 8 at 11:09am · Like

Chris Fisher No, because I never started therefor there is nothing to stop.August 8 at 11:09am · Like

Chris Fisher Stop being ridiculous.August 8 at 11:09am · Like


Charlie J. Ray You will not persist in fallacious arguments here. If you insist on that method, you can go elsewhere. First warning.August 8 at 11:09am · Like

Charlie J. Ray I am the head admin here. Behave yourself.August 8 at 11:10am · Like












Chris Fisher New question: does God himself claim that God changed His mind for His own sake in this narrative:

Eze 20:8 But they rebelled against Me and would not obey Me. They did not all cast away the abominations which were before their eyes, nor did they forsake the idols of Egypt. Then I said, ‘I will pour out My fury on them and fulfill My anger against them in the midst of the land of Egypt.’Eze 20:9 But I acted for My name’s sake, that it should not be profaned before the Gentiles among whom they were, in whose sight I had made Myself known to them, to bring them out of the land of Egypt.August 8 at 11:10am · Like

Charlie J. Ray If you cannot argue logically, you will be banned. Scriptural arguments and logic are required here.August 8 at 11:10am · Like

Chris Fisher This is God recounting the Exodus 32 event.August 8 at 11:10am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Irrationalism and invalid arguments are not permitted. So if you keep attacking the man with abusive ad hominem, then it is a fallacious argument.August 8 at 11:11am · Like

Chris Fisher What does Yahweh say the reason is that He spared Israel?August 8 at 11:11am · Like

Charlie J. Ray I do not say that God changes His mind because the Bible says that God is eternally immutable. Malachi 3:6 and James 1:17. Psalm 119:89. The anthropomophisms and anthropopathisms in Scripture do not entail that God is a creature or a man. God is defined by metaphysical propositions that are revealed in Scripture and by the logical deductions made from that system of propositional truth by good and necessary consequence. The word Trinity is not in Scripture. But the Bible teaches both the Trinity and the absolute sovereignty of God.August 8 at 11:13am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Is God ignorant of what Israel would do?August 8 at 11:13am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Yes or no?August 8 at 11:13am · Like

Chris Fisher What does God say in this text is the reason God did not destroy Israel:










Charlie J. Ray There are conditional commands in the Bible. If man disobeys, God lays out the consequences. If man obeys, then God rewards the obedience. But it does not follow that God does not ordain what man's response will be.August 8 at 11:14am · Like

Charlie J. Ray God could not be God if there is anything that happens apart from His sovereign permission. And if God willingly permits evil, then obviously God willed for the evil to occur since God could easily prevent it.August 8 at 11:15am · Like

Chris Fisher Right, we are not talking about "conditional actions". It is clear from the text that the only actor is Moses. The people do not repent and God is not reacting to their repentance. God Himself states that He acted for His own sake. God's change of mind was due, literally, to Moses' argument that God would look bad if He killed Israel.August 8 at 11:16am · Like

Chris Fisher Here is Moses recounting the event:

Deu 9:13 “Furthermore the LORD spoke to me, saying, ‘I have seen this people, and indeed they are a stiff-necked people.Deu 9:14 Let Me alone, that I may destroy them and blot out their name from under heaven; and I will make of you a nation mightier and greater than they.’…Deu 9:19 For I was afraid of the anger and hot displeasure with which the LORD was angry with you, to destroy you. But the LORD listened to me at that time also.Deu 9:20 And the LORD was very angry with Aaron and would have destroyed him; so I prayed for Aaron also at the same time.August 8 at 11:17am · Like

Chris Fisher So, you discount God, you discount Ezekiel, you discount Moses...August 8 at 11:17am · Like

Chris Fisher When you are denying Yaweh's speech about Himself, you should be afraid.August 8 at 11:18am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Let me clue you in, Chris Fisher. I am not just another ignorant plow boy:) I have two degrees in Arminian theology. I did my BA at an Assemblies of God college and my master of divinity at an Evangelical and Wesleyan seminary. I know your arguments better than you do. If you're not going to answer my objections, you can go elsewhere to talk to thin air. Here you are required to answer my objections as I have answered all of yours thus far.August 8 at 11:18am · Like

Chris Fisher ^Better ask for your money back. What does God say in this text is the reason God did not destroy Israel:










Charlie J. Ray I do not deny that there are anthropopathisms in Scripture. Does God literally have emotions or body parts? No. And so when the text attributes human qualities to God such as "relenting" it does not literally mean that God repents or changes His mind as humans do.August 8 at 11:19am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Next question?August 8 at 11:19am · Like

Charlie J. Ray I will warn you again, Chris, you do not get to ignore me. If you want to preach, go elsewhere. This is a debate forum. I answered you objection several times and you keep repeating misrepresentations of the Calvinism position. Our position is laid out clearly in the Westminster Standards. So why do you keep creating straw man fallacies?August 8 at 11:20am · Like

Charlie J. Ray The idea that men do not have a will is refuted several times over in the WCF.August 8 at 11:20am · Like

Chris Fisher Read the text, answer the question, then you can explain the question. I will provide you a copy paste version for your convenience:

"God says in the text that He did not destroy Israel and this was for His own sake lest His name is profaned among the Gentiles. I believe this is an anthropopathism. "

What does God say in this text is the reason God did not destroy Israel:

Eze 20:8 But they rebelled against Me and would not obey Me. They did not all cast away the abominations which were before their eyes, nor did they forsake the idols of Egypt. Then I said, ‘I will pour out My fury on them and fulfill My anger against them in the midst of the land of Egypt.’Eze 20:9 But I acted for My name’s sake, that it should not be profaned before the Gentiles among whom they were, in whose sight I had made Myself known to them, to bring them out of the land of Egypt.August 8 at 11:23am · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray Chapter 3: Of God's Eternal Decree

1. God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass:1 yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin,2 nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.3

See also: WLC 12 | WSC 7

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------







1 Eph. 1:11; Rom. 11:33; Heb. 6:17; Rom. 9:15,18.

2 James 1:13,17; 1 John 1:5.

3 Acts 2:23; Matt. 17:12; Acts 4:27,28; John 19:11; Prov. 16:33.August 8 at 11:21am · Like

Chris Fisher Ask your question, I will answer:August 8 at 11:22am · Like

Chris Fisher And, for the record, I have been answering almost all your objections. I even labelled them. You have not hardly answered any of my objections.August 8 at 11:22am · Like

Charlie J. Ray The reason God did not destroy Israel is stated in the text. But simply quoting a text does not prove your deduction from the text is correct. That's because plenty of other texts prove that God is not finite. Your error is in confusing God with the creature and ignoring what are clearly anthropomorphisms. We do not attribute human qualities to God just because God relates to humans in anthropomorphic or anthropopathic terms in Scripture. God does not literally have a nose or mouth or emotions. Nor does God literally repent or even relent. Those are clearly anthropopathic terms. God is totally distinct from creation and cannot literally repent because God is eternally unchanging. If God changes, then He is not God but something else.August 8 at 11:25am · Like

Charlie J. Ray You have not answered my objection that your view confuses the Creator with anthropomorphisms and anthropopathisms in Scripture. Does God literally smell or taste?August 8 at 11:25am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Does God literally "breathe"????

7 And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being. (Gen 2:7 NKJ)August 8 at 11:26am · Like

Chris Fisher Anthropomorphisms, like your describe, are alien to normal reading comprehension. They are a mechanism invented such that Calvinists can deny the Bible. There is no hint in the narratives that the narratives are to be discounted, and the authors show zero familiarity with immutability, omniscience, etc.August 8 at 11:26am · Like

Charlie J. Ray So you agree with the Mormons that God has a body? Oh, brother!August 8 at 11:27am · Edited · Like

Chris Fisher R8: Does God literally "breathe"????

Maybe. Jesus breathed. God can cause wind movement which is breathe. The Bible is not clear on God's physical properties, so maybe is the best answer.










Charlie J. Ray Maybe you think God loses His temper, too?

6 "For I am the LORD, I do not change; Therefore you are not consumed, O sons of Jacob. (Mal 3:6 NKJ)August 8 at 11:28am · Like

Chris Fisher Charlie, do you understand the difference between metaphor and Anthropomorphism?August 8 at 11:28am · Like

Charlie J. Ray God has no physical properties! God is a spirit:

"God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth." (John 4:24 NKJ)August 8 at 11:28am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Act 17:24 "God, who made the world and everything in it, since He is Lord of heaven and earth, does not dwell in temples made with hands.August 8 at 11:29am · Like

Charlie J. Ray 18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. (Act 15:18 KJV)August 8 at 11:30am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Looks like God is not ignorant after all.August 8 at 11:30am · Like

Chris Fisher Metaphor is using two similar concepts, one to illustrate the other. A King might have a "hand of the King". This is not literal, but symbollic (this doesnt mean he doesnt have a hand either). But symbols have meaning. Your Anthropomorphism does not have a meaning. What does it mean that God says that He repents for His own sake that the pagan nations will not think of Him poorly? You want to dismiss the text and have to resort to some any-text mechanism to do so.

And note: spirits have bodies:

1Co 15:42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. The body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption.1Co 15:43 It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power.1Co 15:44 It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.August 8 at 11:31am · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris, I thought you said God literally relented? Now you're saying it is a metaphor? Behind every metaphor in the Bible is a logical proposition.August 8 at 11:31am · Like










Chris Fisher No, nowhere do I say it is a metaphor.August 8 at 11:31am · Like

Chris Fisher Im explaining to you Language 101.. the difference between metaphor and anthropomorphism as you use it. Ezekiel and Exodus do not fit a metaphor.August 8 at 11:32am · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray A metaphor can relate to anything symbolic. An anthropomorphism is attributing human characteristics to something that is not human. Dogs can be attributed with human characteristics such as thoughts and emotions. But are dogs humans? No. Dogs don't think. In the same way we can attribute human characteristics to God so we can understand and relate to Him. But it does not follow that God is a man any more than it follows that a dog is a man. God is defined by the propositions and attributes given Him in the Scriptures.August 8 at 11:33am · Like

Charlie J. Ray God is from everlasting to everlasting. He is not a man who is born and then dies.August 8 at 11:33am · Like

Chris Fisher There is nothing in the text and there is no figure of speech that explains away what is described. God saying that He repents for His own sake that the pagan nations will not think of Him poorly... this is not a concept to be pasted to a real concept in an informing way.August 8 at 11:34am · Like

Charlie J. Ray 2 Before the mountains were brought forth, Or ever You had formed the earth and the world, Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God. (Psa 90:2 NKJ)August 8 at 11:34am · Like

Chris Fisher Anthropomorphism are fiction: The Brave Little Toaster. Disney Cars.August 8 at 11:35am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Well, since you keep saying God is a man, you are therefore an heretic who does not believe the Bible. Anthropomorphisms do not make God a creature or a man. Sorry.August 8 at 11:35am · Like

Chris Fisher Metaphors and figures of speech need to be able to illustrate a real concept. God having wings and sheltering us gives us an image of God protecting us as a bird protects its young. The concepts are similar and related. What does "God saying that He repents for His own sake that the pagan nations will not think of Him poorly" mean?August 8 at 11:36am · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray You have lost this little debate from the get go. You have denied that God is defined by Scripture as a whole. ALL Scripture is profitable for doctrine, not just a few verses taken out of context. There is a system










of dogmatic truth in the Bible and the Westminster Standards are the best summary of that biblical system of truth.August 8 at 11:36am · Like

Charlie J. Ray So if God does not have wings, does God repent? No.August 8 at 11:37am · Like

Charlie J. Ray God does not think discursively. He is omniscient. He never learns anything new. Sorry.August 8 at 11:37am · Like

Chris Fisher Wings illustrate protection... The Genesis 6 narrative is a LONG NARRATIVE... it is not a idiom or figure of speech, but a story.August 8 at 11:37am · Like

Charlie J. Ray 18 To whom then will you liken God? Or what likeness will you compare to Him?19 The workman molds an image, The goldsmith overspreads it with gold, And the silversmith casts silver chains.20 Whoever is too impoverished for such a contribution Chooses a tree that will not rot; He seeks for himself a skillful workman To prepare a carved image that will not totter.21 Have you not known? Have you not heard? Has it not been told you from the beginning? Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth?22 It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.23 He brings the princes to nothing; He makes the judges of the earth useless.(Isa 40:18-23 NKJ)August 8 at 11:38am · Like

Charlie J. Ray All Scripture is inspired.... That would include the verses that you disagree with. God is sovereign.August 8 at 11:38am · Like

Charlie J. Ray 35 All the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing; He does according to His will in the army of heaven And among the inhabitants of the earth. No one can restrain His hand Or say to Him, "What have You done?" (Dan 4:35 NKJ)August 8 at 11:38am · Like

Charlie J. Ray In fact, it is you who reads into the text. I interpret the Scriptures by other more plain Scriptures.August 8 at 11:39am · Like

Chris Fisher Do you want to deal with the text one by one like an adult, or do you want to spray and pray?August 8 at 11:39am · Like










Charlie J. Ray God even ordains evil according to Isaiah 45:7....

I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. (Isaiah 45:7 KJV)Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it? (Amos 3:6 KJV)August 8 at 11:40am · Like

Chris Fisher Exo 32:7 And the LORD said to Moses, “Go, get down! For your people whom you brought out of the land of Egypt have corrupted themselves.Exo 32:8 They have turned aside quickly out of the way which I commanded them. They have made themselves a molded calf, and worshiped it and sacrificed to it, and said, ‘This is your god, O Israel, that brought you out of the land of Egypt!’ ”August 8 at 11:40am · Like

Chris Fisher Eze 4:12 And you shall eat it as barley cakes; and bake it using fuel of human waste in their sight.”Eze 4:13 Then the LORD said, “So shall the children of Israel eat their defiled bread among the Gentiles, where I will drive them.”Eze 4:14 So I said, “Ah, Lord GOD! Indeed I have never defiled myself from my youth till now; I have never eaten what died of itself or was torn by beasts, nor has abominable flesh ever come into my mouth.”Eze 4:15 Then He said to me, “See, I am giving you cow dung instead of human waste, and you shall prepare your bread over it.”August 8 at 11:40am · Like

Chris Fisher Eze 2:3 And He said to me: “Son of man, I am sending you to the children of Israel, to a rebellious nation that has rebelled against Me; they and their fathers have transgressed against Me to this very day.August 8 at 11:40am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris, this is your second warning. I told you I decide what goes on here. If you don't like the rules, go elsewhere.August 8 at 11:40am · Like

Chris Fisher Isa 5:4 What more could have been done to My vineyard That I have not done in it? Why then, when I expected it to bring forth good grapes, Did it bring forth wild grapes?August 8 at 11:40am · Like

Chris Fisher Jdg 2:20 Then the anger of the LORD was hot against Israel; and He said, “Because this nation has transgressed My covenant which I commanded their fathers, and has not heeded My voice,Jdg 2:21 I also will no longer drive out before them any of the nations which Joshua left when he died,Jdg 2:22 so that through them I may test Israel, whether they will keep the ways of the LORD, to walk in them as their fathers kept them, or not.”Jdg 2:23 Therefore the LORD left those nations, without driving them out immediately; nor did He deliver them into the hand of Joshua.August 8 at 11:40am · Like








Charlie J. Ray The rules are laid out in the group description. We adhere to confessional and biblical theology here. The Bible is the final authority and the Westminster Standard are the best summary of that system of dogmatic theology.August 8 at 11:41am · Like

Chris Fisher Yes, only one of us has been taking the Bible seriously. And this is evident in the Exodus 32 discussion.August 8 at 11:41am · Like

Charlie J. Ray You will refrain from slanderous propaganda like this" "...like an adult...."August 8 at 11:42am · Like

Charlie J. Ray If you cannot answer logically and biblically, go elsewhere. I'm sure others will tolerate your abusive ad hominem. Here it does not fly.August 8 at 11:42am · Like

Chris Fisher How is this an anthropomorphism? What does it mean?


Chris Fisher Calling something an anthropomorphism does not give you license to ignore the text. What is being communicated?August 8 at 11:44am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Conditional statements in Scripture do not entail that God literally changes His mind. God is eternally unchanging.August 8 at 11:45am · Like

Chris Fisher How is this an anthropomorphism? What does it mean? Calling something an anthropomorphism does not give you license to ignore the text. What is being communicated?










Chris Fisher And why when we look at Biblical commentary from within the Bible does it always interpret like the face value of the original text. It is never discounted at metaphorical like Calvinists are prone to do. Could it be that Calvinists do not really care for what the Bible teaches?August 8 at 11:48am · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray "It now follows, And I said I would pour forth, that is, I determined to pour forth. God here signifies that he was inflamed by anger, and unless they had respect to his name he would not withdraw his hand from the vengeance to which it was armed and prepared. We know that this does not properly belong to God, but this is, the language of accommodation, since first of all, God is not subject to vengeance, and, secondly, does not decree what he may afterwards retract. But since these things are not in character with God, simile and accommodation are used. As often as the Holy Spirit uses these forms of speech, let us learn that they refer rather to the matter in hand than to the character of God. God determined to pour forth his anger, that is, the Israelites had so deserved it through their crimes, that it was necessary to execute punishment upon them. The Prophet simply means that the people’s disposition was sinful, and hence God’s wrath would have been poured out, unless he had been held back from some other cause. I have already touched upon the obstacle, because he consulted his honor lest it should be profaned."

John Calvin's Commentary on Ezekiel 20:8...August 8 at 11:48am · Like

Chris Fisher Yeah, but what does it communicate the the audience?August 8 at 11:48am · Like

Chris Fisher God is literally recounting a past event, and not in terms conducive to Calvinism. Why would God "accommodate" with that event? What purpose does it serve and how is that more meaningful than God communicating what He actually means?August 8 at 11:49am · Like

Chris Fisher So, the first event describes God repenting due to Moses' argument that God will look bad. Moses follows this up explaining that is what happened. God comments on this event saying the same thing. The Psalmist describes this event as Moses saving Israel from God.

Calvinists: Oh, that is just accommodation. Baby talk.August 8 at 11:51am · Like

Charlie J. Ray You keep confusing God with the creature:)August 8 at 11:51am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Yes, men are not omniscient:) Hello?August 8 at 11:52am · Like

Chris Fisher One of the OP questions is about Jesus. Seeing Jesus shows us God.









Verse: Joh 14:9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?August 8 at 11:52am · Like

Chris Fisher 16. Did Jesus know everything?

Verse: Mar 13:32 “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.August 8 at 11:52am · Like

Charlie J. Ray bblAugust 8 at 11:53am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Jesus was a man. So no, Jesus didn't know everything. Don't confuse the Logos with the human person of Jesus. They are united but not mixed.August 8 at 11:55am · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray LaterAugust 8 at 11:53am · Like

Chris Fisher Great, Jesus did not know everything. That makes this question much harder for your belief:


Verse: Joh 14:9 Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and yet you have not known Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father; so how can you say, ‘Show us the Father’?August 8 at 12:25pm · Like

Charlie J. Ray You are ignorant of the doctrine of the incarnationAugust 8 at 1:33pm · Like · 1

Chris Fisher So, let us sum up the conversation thus far. The Opening Post asserted that Calvinists were bad at answering questions, listing out 20 questions. You attempted to answer one question, which led to further complications of the text (which I pointed out and which you never answered). You attempted to use prooftexts to override the meaning of Jesus’ words. And every prooftext you used, I explained a common sense understanding that uses normal reading comprehension to show these verses do not necessarily support your theology (Psalms 139, Hebrews 3, Ephesians 1, Isaiah 14 and 46) and that allow Jesus’ words to be taken at face value. On a side note: This should call into question any prooftext you used that I did not address, as you regularly misquote the Bible unapologetically for your theology. Contrastingly, all the verses that I used, you attempted to just dismiss on the grounds that they do not fit your theology! You attempt to dismiss long narratives and grounded events that are commented on throughout the Bible in a manner never hinted at throughout the Bible with linguistical mechanisms that are alien to normal human speech. You even go so far as discounting the words of God, Himself. This, you believe, is rational thinking. Furthermore, you think people who take these events literally are irrational.

It is pretty clear to me that you have zero Biblical evidence for your beliefs. You are not interested in examining








your prooftexts individually for context and meaning. Instead, you want to flood the conversation with prooftexts which you load with assumptions (assumptions unfounded when we turn to the texts in question). You have shown yourself hostile to answering very basic questions (proving the point of the OP) forcing me to ask repeatedly. You did not answer a ridiculous amount of questions throughout this conversation and wasted my time having to repeat several again and again. You also would not admit when you were clearly wrong when you claimed I misquoted Calvin. Your arrogance will not allow you to give any inch anywhere. You then use loaded language and insults to distract from the issues at hand. You are not a Biblical scholar and you use Platonism to override the Bible.August 8 at 6:05pm · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris Fisher, it takes time to answer long posts. We have solidly rebutted your contention that God changes like men do and that God learns anything new. Your anthropocentric theology leads inevitably to atheism since a god who is not all powerful is not God at all.August 9 at 9:45am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Also, since I am the admin here, you will follow MY rules. That means you don't get to soap box and preach here. This is a debate forum. If you can't hold your own in a Scriptural and logical debate, that is your problem not mine.August 9 at 9:46am · Like

Charlie J. Ray A very basic error on your part is that you confuse the definitions of Deity with human definitions and thus you have read human limitations into your definition of God instead of allowing Scripture to define the logical propositions that tell us who God is. God is according to Scripture omnscient. Yet you say God is ignorant. Scripture says God is all powerful or omnipotent. Yet you contend that God cannot do anything about evil. Scripture says that God is not a man, yet you contend that God is a man with body parts and emotions and every other human limitation we could bring up. You basic axiom is that God is not God. So if your beginning axiom is wrong, it logically follows that every other proposition you have about God is wrong because it does not fit with the system of propositional and logical truth in the Bible.

You also resort to straw man fallacies like your contention that man has no will according to Calvinism. The Westminster Confession of Faith gives only a handful of the many verses that say otherwise in the Bible. No Calvinist denies human volition. What we do deny is that the will is free from the sovereign decrees of God or from the curse of sin and slavery to sin that God placed on Adam and all of Adam's progeny when Adam rebelled. Furthermore, prior to the fall God predetermined that Adam would fall. Thus, God is the ultimate cause of evil. He could have easily prevented evil by not placing the tree of the knowledge of good and evil in the garden of Eden and by not placing the serpent in the garden. Moreover, God could have told Adam and Eve that they could eat from that same tree, yet God told them not to eat from it. So the basis for truth is what God says, not what you think should be the basis for morality or truth. God determines right and wrong.August 9 at 9:53am · Like

Charlie J. Ray >>>And every prooftext you used, I explained a common sense understanding that uses normal reading comprehension to show these verses do not necessarily support your theology (Psalms 139, Hebrews 3, Ephesians 1, Isaiah 14 and 46) and that allow Jesus’ words to be taken at face value.<<<

Proper exegesis takes into account the immediate context as well as the larger context of any verse of Scripture, including the context within the total system of logical and propositional truth in Scripture. Since you seem to make it up as you go along, one has to question whether or not you follow any logical system in your theology. Rejecting logic refutes your position from the get go.

Furthermore, you seem to be totally ignorant of the fact that both Scripture and the Definition of Chalcedon 451 A.D. states that the two natures of Christ are not mixed, confused or separated. Therefore, Jesus in His human soul and human nature was limited in knowledge. The divine Logos, the eternal Son of God is perfectly united with the man, Jesus Christ. Yet the Logos does not replace the reasonable human soul of Jesus Christ the man.





The two natures and two persons are perfectly united without any confusion of the two natures and persons whatsoever. The Trinity is not changed one bit by the union of the second Person of the Trinity with the man, Jesus Christ. God cannot die. But Jesus died. God never learns anything new. Yet Jesus grew up from a baby and learned things as all humans do.

Your misunderstanding of the Incarnation is therefore a huge problem for you.August 9 at 9:58am · Like · 1

Charlie J. Ray The Incarnation (Trinity Paper, #23)The Incarnation by Gordon H. Clark13 ratings, 4.38 average rating, 3 reviewsThe Incarnation Quotes (showing 1-1 of 1)“A theologian’s epistemology controls his interpretation of the Bible. If his epistemology is not Christian, his exegesis will be systematically distorted. If he has no epistemology at all, his exegesis will be unsystematically distorted.”― Gordon H. Clark, The Incarnation

http://www.goodreads.com/.../2759301-the-incarnation...August 9 at 10:01am · Edited · Like

Chris Fisher 1. You say: “We have solidly rebutted your contention that God changes like men do and that God learns anything new.”

Where and with what Bible verses? You have done no such thing. I continually answer your objections as you bring them up without any semblance of a rebuttal on your part. You believe that somehow by just saying something, then it makes it true. All your prooftexts were shown to be forcibly understood in light of theology you bring to the text. You are left with zero texts at the end of the day. How can you make the claim that you hold a Biblical position with a straight face? This is not Biblical scholarship.

2. You say: "god who is not all powerful is not God at all."

a. This is a completely unfounded assertion. That sort of metaphysical argument might fly in a debate on Platonism (of which Calvinism is a subset), but we are talking about reality here. Reality does not conform to what we think is nice.b. Did I ever say God is not all powerful? This shows us: either you have unfounded assumptions of what it means to be Almighty, you have poor reading comprehension abilities, or you are a liar. I will hope for option 2, as both option 1 and option 3 would show a sever lack of intellectual integrity on your part.

3. You say: “God is according to Scripture omniscient.”

First, you come up with a non-Biblical word for God. Then you import pagan understandings to that word. Then you fail to give ANY scripture to support your definition. This is not Biblical scholarship.

4. You say: “Yet you say God is ignorant.”

This is another example of you disingenuous arguments. I am again left with two options: either you lack basic reading comprehension abilities or you are a liar. Where do I say God is ignorant?

5. You say: “Yet you contend that God cannot do anything about evil.”

Again. Either you lack basic reading comprehension abilities or you are a liar. Show me where this was claimed. In fact, the Calvinist position is that God cannot do anything about evil. After all, evil is eternally decreed and cannot be thwarted. God is immutable and cannot stop it. If it is decreed, it must happen. God cannot do anything about it. That is your position, mind you.

6. You say: “Scripture says that God is not a man, yet you contend that God is a man with body parts…”

Again. Either you lack basic reading comprehension abilities or you are a liar. Show me where I said this.



7. You say: “You basic axiom is that God is not God.”

Notice the Platonistic assumptions in your statement here. Pretend God is who I say He is, how does that make Him “not God”. I assert you are importing your Platonistic metaphysics into a debate on the Bible.

8. your contention that man has no will according to Calvinism.

Again. Either you lack basic reading comprehension abilities or you are a liar. Where do I say this?

9. You say I have been: “Rejecting logic…”

Where do I reject logic? I reject your metaphysical assumptions, which have nothing to do with logic. Again. Either you lack basic reading comprehension abilities or you are a liar.

10. You say: “Furthermore, you seem to be totally ignorant of the fact that both Scripture and the Definition of Chalcedon 451 A.D. states that the two natures of Christ are not mixed, confused or separated.”

So, have you considered the possibility that I understand your position but find it counter to the Bible? In Colossians, Paul was dealing with Platonists who saw a divine between the physical and spiritual. Paul was countering this “vain philosophy” when he wrote:

Col 2:9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily,

Was Jesus’ body divine? You seem to side with the Platonists. And that is not surprising.

Conclusion.

You are and have been very disingenuous. You fail to understand or address my points. You claim I make points that I never do. You then reject large portions of the Bible, long narratives of God’s actions, thoughts, and speech. You then pretend you make good points, although I address your points and you offer zero rebuttals.

PS. You still have failed to apologize for your blatantly obvious incorrect statement that I was taking Calvin out of context.August 11 at 11:22pm · Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris Fisher, you cannot escape the fact that your god is not the God of the Bible. You are totally ignorant of basic biblical doctrine and therefore you are an heretic and not a Christian.

As for the commentary on Psalm 139, I already said that you cited Calvin correctly. What else do you want? I also stated that I disagree with Calvin there. In fact, there are several places where I disagree with Calvin's commentaries.

But I have adequately demonstrated that you don't understand Calvin even if you got one quote correct.August 12 at 1:57am · Like · 1

Charlie J. Ray Chris, the Bible defines who God is and the Westminster Confession of Faith is the best summary of the system of theological and propositional statements in the Bible. The God defined in Scripture is not the finite god that morphs with your every back peddling comment. Feel free to leave since it is obvious that you cannot even stand by your own statements in this thread. You clearly said that you think your god could have body parts. You denied the doctrine of anthropomorphism and anthropopathism and instead you asserted that God has emotions and body parts.

Also, since you think God looks to the future to learn what will happen, it logically follows that you think God is ignorant and has to learn things. The God of the Bible is absolutely omniscient. It is irritating that I need to repeat myself because you insist on lying about what you said.

If you persist in doing this I will ban you. This is your last warning.




Charlie J. Ray Have you considered that disagreeing with Reformed confessional creeds and the Bible is heresy? Your interpretation of the Bible is an innovation of liberals who invented process theology. Alfred North Whitehead is one of the most well known proponents of that view.August 12 at 2:03am · Like

Charlie J. Ray The word metaphysical has not been defined by you. And since theology and philosophy are both metaphysical sciences, it follows that your view is a metaphysical view as well, albeit a wrong one. Words that have no definitions can have no meaning.August 12 at 2:04am · Like

Chris Fisher You start with the assumption that God is the ultimate good. Now the Bible does not talk like this; the Bible does not talk about what God MUST be like to be God. But this type of “God MUST be xyz” language is par for the course in Platonism (see Timaeus, the Republic, or the Enneads). It is also telling that Augustine literally said that he thought the Bible was absurd and could not convert to Christianity until he read the Bible in light of Platonism. You, Sir, are a Platonist.

When you reject as fable the long narratives in which God says and does things (God repenting of His own action of making man, God repenting of His own action of making Saul king, God describing His thoughts and motivations for the things He does, etc.) then you show you value your Platonism over the Bible. You have not shown ANY solid verses that prove your position (quixotically, you claim at the same time to be Biblical). And when we examine your prooftexts, it is clear that your theology is not obvious from the text. You are importing your theology into the text. You are not a Biblical scholar. Instead you are a Platonist with mild allegiance to the Bible. Again, we have looked at Psalms 139, Hebrews 3, Ephesians 1, Isaiah 14 and 46. You literally have zero verses expounding on your theology.

Here is my challenge to you: show me one verse or passage (pick your best) that shows God knows the future in some sort of exhaustive way.

Let me predict the future. I can do this, not because I am omniscient, but because I do know you, I know the Bible, and I know the possibilities of what you will quote as your best evidence. Here is me making a prophecy of the future: The verse or passage that you use has an alternative and very straightforward meaning which does not support your theology. And this meaning will not be understood through some linguistical concept that I make up on the spot that has no parallel in human communication (like your anthropomorphisms), but the meaning will be deduced by normal reading comprehension standards accessible to any 8th grader. So again, and this is important, you have shown zero verses that support your belief. Show just one and explain how it supports your belief (you need to explain because we have shown that you assume meaning into your verses).

Back to your causal rejection of long narratives about what God thinks, says, and does. What use is the Bible to you if nothing in it is true and it all has to be rejected in favor of your theology? Why not just become a straight out Platonist?

And PS: You say: "As for the commentary on Psalm 139, I already said that you cited Calvin correctly."

That is a lie. You don't directly state it anywhere. And you never apologize for saying that I misquote him (which shows everyone your lack of intellectual integrity).August 12 at 9:12pm · Like · 1

Charlie J. Ray God determines what is good and evil. He is the standard and there is no law to which God is subject or which God must obey.August 13 at 12:22am · Like





Charlie J. Ray Platonism is the view that the Ideas or Law is above God and God is subject to law. Sorry but God is the one who is thinking the Ideas and they exist only in God's mind.August 13 at 12:23am · Like

Charlie J. Ray If you reject logic, you have no argument. God IS logic. And the Westminster Confession of Faith is based on a logical SYSTEM where all the parts and propositions are related to all the other parts. We can logically deduce the Trinity from the Scriptures because the Trinity is taught in the Bible by good and necessary consequence. So your contention that God is ignorant of the future and is not omniscient is similar to denying the Trinity because both God's absolute and exhaustive omniscience AND the Tri-Unity of God as Father, Son and Holy Spirit are both logically deduced by good and necessary consequence from the Scriptures. And I can give you many verses that proves God is exhaustively omniscient. There is nothing God does not know because God is eternally unchanging and eternally immutable. So are all His plans.August 13 at 12:27am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Westminster Confession of Faith 1:6

6. The whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men.1 Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the word;2August 13 at 12:28am · Like

Charlie J. Ray As for your contention that I lied about Psalm 139, it does not need repeating that I disagreed with Calvin. So you found that I didn't know Calvin's exact position on that prior to responding to your quote. Big deal. I'm not omniscient. I forgot about Calvin's comment on that one but I have read it before. But since God knows all the days of the formation of a fetus in the womb, does it not also follow that God knows every hair on your head as well? And if one hair falls to the ground, is God ignorant of that?August 13 at 12:31am · Like

Charlie J. Ray 29 "Are not two sparrows sold for a copper coin? And not one of them falls to the ground apart from your Father's will.30 "But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.31 "Do not fear therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows.(Mat 10:29-31 NKJ)August 13 at 12:31am · Like

Charlie J. Ray God's eternal will is eternally unchanging:

There are many plans in a man's heart, Nevertheless the LORD'S counsel-- that will stand. (Proverbs 19:21 NKJ)August 13 at 12:32am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things that are not yet done, Saying,`My counsel shall stand, And I will do all My pleasure,' (Isaiah 46:10 NKJ)August 13 at 12:33am · Like








Charlie J. Ray Predestination is taught pervasively in the Old Testament. It's not just a New Testament doctrine.August 13 at 12:33am · Like · 1

Charlie J. Ray God calls those things that be not as though they already were in existence. That's because God predetermines all things.

17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were. (Rom 4:17 KJV)August 13 at 12:35am · Like

Charlie J. Ray 18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. (Act 15:18 KJV)August 13 at 12:36am · Like

Charlie J. Ray Plain verses;)August 13 at 1:12am · Like

Chris Fisher Here was my prediction (direct quote): “Here is my challenge to you: show me one verse or passage (pick your best) that shows God knows the future in some sort of exhaustive way… Here is me making a prophecy of the future: The verse or passage that you use has an alternative and very straightforward meaning which does not support your theology. And this meaning will not be understood through some linguistical concept that I make up on the spot that has no parallel in human communication (like your anthropomorphisms), but the meaning will be deduced by normal reading comprehension standards accessible to any 8th grader.”

You respond with:

Verse 1:29 "Are not two sparrows sold for a copper coin? And not one of them falls to the ground apart from your Father's will.30 "But the very hairs of your head are all numbered.31 "Do not fear therefore; you are of more value than many sparrows.(Mat 10:29-31 NKJ)

I assume this is your best verse because this is the first one you use. This, like Psalms 139, is about present knowledge. Yes, God can count and God can watch birds. This has absolutely nothing to do with knowing the future, but observing the present.

Let me make a further observation: people generalize (use hyperbolic language) all the time. Notice in that last sentence that “all the time” is itself hyperbolic language. I bet you read it without blinking. No, people are not using hyperbolic language at every second of every day. But by the nature of language, saying generalities are used “all the time” means generalities are used fairly often. If some sort of robot were trying to differentiate between hyperbolic language and universal literal statements, a sure-fire was to determine which is being used is to see if there are any exceptions. So if God is said never regret anything, but then the text shows God regretting, normal language comprehension would understand the “never regretting” anything as limited to context or a generality.

My prediction about the future has come true. You quote a verse that has nothing to do with knowledge of the future (and, even if it did, it might be hyperbolic). I predicted this, not because I am omniscient, but because I do have some knowledge about the world.

Verse 2:






There are many plans in a man's heart, Nevertheless the LORD'S counsel-- that will stand. (Proverbs 19:21 NKJ)

Refer to the second part of my first answer. Language is often general. You want to force statements into absolute and all-encompassing statements. This is not how Proverbs is even written. Notice these two Proverbs, one right after each other:

Pro 26:4 Do not answer a fool according to his folly, Lest you also be like him.Pro 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, Lest he be wise in his own eyes.

They contradict, but not if we understand Proverbs as generalities. Read the Proverbs, they are general advice and general principles.

Notice also that your verse does not even prove your point. This verse does not say that God has one set will that never changes, but that once God declares something, it will stand. We see often God making declarations in the Bible. This is not even about “eternal” will.

Verse 3:

Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things that are not yet done, Saying,`My counsel shall stand, And I will do all My pleasure,' (Isaiah 46:10 NKJ)

Notice that this verse is about power, not knowledge. God is saying that if He says He will do something, He will do it. God declares something (not eternally) but from ancient times.

Notice the very next verse:

Isa 46:11 Calling a bird of prey from the east, The man who executes My counsel, from a far country. Indeed I have spoken it; I will also bring it to pass. I have purposed it; I will also do it.

These verses are not about God willing everything that ever happens, but about God being able to do what He says He will do. It is not God claiming some mystical foreknowledge of the future. That is not the point, and the entire Isaiah 40-55 is written precluding that understanding of omniscience. If God knew things because He was outside of time or omniscient, the prophet Isaiah would certainly argue like that, but Isaiah does not. Isaiah says that God knows what will happen because God does those things. By the way, remember when I told you I will go skating? Well I did, but that does not make me omniscient or omnipotent.

Verse 4:

17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were. (Rom 4:17 KJV)

Not sure what your point is. In Genesis, God speaks and reality comes to be. You will have to explain how this supports your belief and is against mine. Again, my claim is not that God is not powerful. You pretend God is weak. If God does not know all the future and control all things, you think God would fall apart. I don’t buy your defamation of God.

Verse 5:

18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. (Act 15:18 KJV)

The context seems to be Peter explaining the history of God’s interaction with the Gentiles and reminding his listeners that God remembers God’s own history with the Gentiles. This is not talking about future events, but past events. Eternity is more accurately translated “ages”.

Conclusion:

I asked you to show me your best verse that God knows the future in some sort of exhaustive way and you come up with five(!) verses that say nothing of the kind. Again, you are not a Biblical scholar. You have zero verses to support your claims. You take your Platonism (which I have studied thoroughly and I have documented Platonic influence on the Christian church) and then you plaster you Platonism over the verses of the Bible. In the process you reject everything God says about Himself, about what God does, and about what God thinks.August 14 at 5:32pm · Like

Chris Fisher You say: "Charlie J. Ray As for your contention that I lied about Psalm 139, it does not need repeating that I disagreed with Calvin. So you found that I didn't know Calvin's exact position on that prior to responding to your quote. Big deal. I'm not omniscient. I forgot about Calvin's comment on that one but I have read it before. But since God knows all the days of the formation of a fetus in the womb, does it not also follow that God knows every hair on your head as well? And if one hair falls to the ground, is God ignorant of that?"

Here is the point: you were dead wrong about my understanding of Calvin's quote. You claimed I was misquoting Calvin, that I didn't understand Calvin . You defamed me and never retracted yourself. This is your character. You are not intellectually honest.August 14 at 5:39pm · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris Fisher, presupposing that God is ignorant does not make it so:) Listen, I warned you about slandering me and about soap boxing. If you persist in doing that I will ban you. Final warning. The fact that you reject the plain verses that teach the sovereignty of God is enough to show that you don't believe the Bible. There are plenty of other passages that teach God's absolute predestination.August 14 at 6:30pm · Like

Charlie J. Ray As for my being intellectually honest, you again attack my character. A mistake is not the same thing as being intellectually dishonest. I warned you against personal attacks. If you do this once more, you are banned. Final warning. If you cannot defend your views from the Bible alone, it is not my problem.August 14 at 6:31pm · Like

Charlie J. Ray If God knows all of His works in the past, then God's knowledge is exhaustive, which you denied:) And the clear logical implication is that God knows everything in the future as well. How could biblical prophecies come to pass if God is ignorant of the future and not in control of the future, Chris Fisher?

18 "Known to God from eternity are all His works. (Act 15:18 NKJ)August 14 at 6:34pm · Like

Charlie J. Ray God also knows the end of time and everything that will happen in between:

9 Remember the former things of old, For I am God, and there is no other; I am God, and there is none like Me,10 Declaring the end from the beginning, And from ancient times things that are not yet done, Saying,`My counsel shall stand, And I will do all My pleasure,'11 Calling a bird of prey from the east, The man who executes My counsel, from a far country. Indeed I have spoken it; I will also bring it to pass. I have purposed it; I will also do it. (Isa 46:9-11 NKJ)

That's because God purposed it.August 14 at 6:35pm · Like

Charlie J. Ray Here is just one example of many in the OT where God caused a direct outcome by controlling man's will:

14 So Absalom and all the men of Israel said, "The advice of Hushai the Archite is better than the advice of Ahithophel." For the LORD had purposed to defeat the good advice of Ahithophel, to the intent that the LORD might bring disaster on Absalom. (2Sa 17:14 NKJ)

God caused Absalom and his men to follow the bad advice of Hushai rather than the good advice of Ahithophel







because why? Because the LORD had a purpose, namely that God would bring defeat to Absalom. God causes all things that happen to come to pass just as He purposed them to happen.

Even the casting of the lot is predetermined by God:

33 The lot is cast into the lap, But its every decision is from the LORD.

(Pro 16:33-17:1 NKJ)August 14 at 6:39pm · Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris Fisher, I can give you lots of examples. If you have the time, I've got the verses. The entire Bible is full of examples of God's exhaustive control of every detail of the detail of the detail. In fact, even the existence of the universe in all its minute detail is created by God. But you insist that God is not all powerful or all knowing. Maybe your position is that the universe exists independently of God?

The first verse in the Bible teaches that God's knowledge is exhaustive because He created it all:

NKJ Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. (Gen 1:1 NKJ)August 14 at 6:42pm · Like

Charlie J. Ray Too bad your god didn't know Adam would rebel and cause sin to come from nowhere.August 14 at 6:43pm · Like

Charlie J. Ray As I said before, the more Arminian they are the more they despise predestination. God never changes.August 14 at 6:44pm · Like

Charlie J. Ray http://www.trinitylectures.org/.../Predestination_in_OT...

Predestination In OT ClarkTRINITYLECTURES.ORG

August 14 at 6:46pm · Like

Charlie J. Ray Westminster Confession of Faith

Chapter 1 Of the Holy Scriptures

6. The whole counsel of God, concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man's salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men.1 Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illumination of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the word;2.....

Logic matters. The word trinity is not in the Bible. Yet the doctrine is logically deduced by good and necessary consequence from the Scriptures.

So the doctrine of God's absolute omniscience is deduced from Scripture. So is God's unchanging nature and mind. God never learns anything new. If He did, He would not be God. God by definition is exhaustively omniscient.

God knows all the propositions that can be known. We only know in part. But He knows in full. His knowledge is impossible to measure by human standards.






August 14 at 6:54pm · Like

Charlie J. Ray 5 Then He brought him outside and said, "Look now toward heaven, and count the stars if you are able to number them." And He said to him, "So shall your descendants be." (Gen 15:5 NKJ)

Does God know the number of the stars? Of course He does:)August 14 at 6:55pm · Like

Charlie J. Ray "The inference is this: No one can consistently object to Christianity being based on an indemonstrable axiom. If the secularists exercise their privilege of basing their theorems on axioms, then so may Christians. If the former refuse to accept our axioms, then they can have no logical objection to our rejecting theirs. Accordingly, we reject the very basis of atheism, Logical Positivism, and, in general, empiricism. Our axiom shall be that God has spoken. More completely, God has spoken in the Bible. More precisely, what the Bible says, God has spoken."

Gordon H. Clark (2013-09-19T04:00:00+00:00). In Defense of Theology (Kindle Locations 323-327). Kindle Edition.August 14 at 6:59pm · Like

Charlie J. Ray 23 "Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you have taken by lawless hands, have crucified, and put to death; (Act 2:23 NKJ)August 14 at 7:02pm · Like

Chris Fisher Act 15:18 "Known to God from eternity are all His works.

The scene is the Paul’s trial in Jerusalem in front of the elders of the church (known as the Council of Jerusalem). The detractors of Paul’s argue that Paul’s message of Jewish-Gentile equality is blasphemous. James argues on behalf of Paul that the Gentiles were long ago singled out for inclusion to some extent with the Jews:Act 15:13 And after they had become silent, James answered, saying, "Men and brethren, listen to me: Act 15:14 Simon has declared how God at the first visited the Gentiles to take out of them a people for His name. Act 15:15 And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written:Act 15:16 'AFTER THIS I WILL RETURN AND WILL REBUILD THE TABERNACLE OF DAVID, WHICH HAS FALLEN DOWN; I WILL REBUILD ITS RUINS, AND I WILL SET IT UP; Act 15:17 SO THAT THE REST OF MANKIND MAY SEEK THE LORD, EVEN ALL THE GENTILES WHO ARE CALLED BY MY NAME, SAYS THE LORD WHO DOES ALL THESE THINGS.'</blockquote>

Verse 14 recalls that God chose through Peter some gentiles to follow God. James points out that the prophets have written as much. Indeed, this theme of the <a href="http://realityisnotoptional.com/.../israel-chosen-as-a.../">Gentiles turning to God</a> is systematic throughout the Bible. Peter then adds:

<blockquote>Act 15:18 "Known to God from eternity are all His works.</blockquote>

Those wishing to have some sort of view that God has exhaustive omniscience of future events will claim this phrase means that God always knows everything He is going to do. But that does not seem to fit the argument of James:

God has chosen gentiles to serve Him. God has written about this in the prophets. God knows everything He will ever do. Therefor let the gentiles join in fellowship.

This does not flow right. Why add the statement about God's knowledge. What is it telling the audience that they





do not already know? How does it support the argument?

The ESV is translated from the Wescott Hort Greek text. It renders the verses in a more sensible manner:

<blockquote>Act 15:16 "'After this I will return, and I will rebuild the tent of David that has fallen; I will rebuild its ruins, and I will restore it, Act 15:17 that the remnant of mankind may seek the Lord, and all the Gentiles who are called by my name, says the Lord, who makes these things Act 15:18 known from of old.'</blockquote>

Notice how the ESV translates the same word as "from of old" that other versions translate "from eternity" or "from the foundation of the Earth". This just helps show that theology dictates translation of texts.

The Alexandrian text does not have the phrase: “to God… are all His works.” Regardless of the Alexandrian text’s accuracy, this meaning can easily be extended to the Byzantine translations.

"Known to God from eternity are all His works.” could be James’ way of saying: “God has let us know that He was going to do this long ago.” There is no reason to extend them meaning to “all things that God will ever do God knows from ancient times”. It makes more sense to be limited to context. In this manner, James' argument is:

God has chosen gentiles to serve Him. God has written about this in the prophets. God has been planning this for a long time (and has made no secret of it). Therefor let the gentiles join in fellowship.

This is most likely James’ argument.2 hrs · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray You have an ignorant god. So how do explain the Bible's inspiration? Maybe you think MAN authored the Bible and God was waiting to find out what the book would say?

This isn't a blog. Please keep your points short and concise and to the point. If you wish to post a link to support a quote in context, that would be acceptable,Chris Fisher.32 mins · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray Dumping tons if questions and speculations is a fallacious method of argument. Like Donald Trump, you like to bait and switch.3 hrs · Like

Charlie J. Ray Gee. Interesting how God predicts the gentiles will be brought in if God is ignorant and unable to control the minds and wills if men.2 hrs · Like

Chris Fisher Here is the thing. I asked you for you best verse on God exhaustively knowing the future. You respond with 5 verses which are nothing of the sort. Please publicly admit that Luke 12:6-7 (the verse you chose as the best evidence that God has exhaustive knowledge of the future) has absolutely nothing to do with future knowledge:

Mat 10:29 Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father.Mat 10:30 But even the hairs of your head are all numbered.2 hrs · Like




https://www.facebook.com/christopher.c.fisher

Charlie J. Ray 21The king’s heart is in the hand of the Lord,Like the rivers of water; He turns it wherever He wishes.

Proverbs 21:1.

Plain Scripture bothers you?2 hrs · Like

Chris Fisher Let me try again. Note that my original premise was that Calvinists are terrible at answering questions:

Mat 10:29 Are not two sparrows sold for a penny? And not one of them will fall to the ground apart from your Father.Mat 10:30 But even the hairs of your head are all numbered.

Where in this verse talks anything about knowledge of the future?2 hrs · Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris Fisher. Read WCF 1:6 again. Logic matters;2 hrs · Like

Charlie J. Ray Look, I've warned you about the fallacies you keep using. You aren't answering my points. You keep baiting and switching.2 hrs · Like

Chris Fisher Ok, You have zero understanding of what Logic actually is. I will give you a primer here to help you out. Logic is made up of logical principles. Here are the three axioms of logic:

1. The Law of Identity: For things, the law asserts that “A is A,” or “anything is itself.” For propositions: “If a proposition is true, then it is true.”2. The Law of Excluded Middle: For things: “Anything is either A or not-A.” For propositions: “A proposition, such as P, is either true or false.”3. The Law of [Non-]Contradiction: For things: “Nothing can be both A and not-A.” For propositions: “A proposition, P, cannot be both true and false.”

Logic follows these principles to describe logical proofs. I will just link you a bunch to help you out: http://www.millersville.edu/.../rules-of-inference.html

Logic is not making wildly unfounded assumptions like: "God is the best being we can imagine" and then making up absurdities based on unwarranted speculation. Do you understand? Where do I reject logic?2 hrs · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray Are not two sparrows sold for a copper coin? And not one of them falls to the ground apart from your Father’s will. But the very hairs of your head are all numberer. Mt. 10:29

The verse says apart from the Fathers will. Volition.2 hrs · Like







Chris Fisher If you point to me where I am changing subjects... all my posts have been in response to you. If you want to keep on a subject, you should stop switching subjects.2 hrs · Like

Chris Fisher Charlie, look at what I ask for. I ask for ANY verses that give any sort of idea that God knows the future in any exhaustive sort of manner. Controlling or knowing the present has nothing to do with future knowledge... correct?2 hrs · Like

Chris Fisher Here is the Greek of Mt 10:29. Please point out the word that means "will". This is the Byz text, from which your quote is derived:

Mat 10:29 ουχι δυο στρουθια ασσαριου πωλειται; και ἓν εξ αυτων ου πεσειται επι την γην ἄνευ του πατρος υμων.2 hrs · Like

Chris Fisher The more natural understanding is that in light of God numbering hairs, this is about sorrows being sold without God's knowledge. Present knowledge.2 hrs · Like

Chris Fisher And "numbering hairs" is counting hairs, something you deny God does. In your view God instantly knows from before the foundation of the Earth the number of hairs.2 hrs · Like

Charlie J. Ray How many hairs have you had on your head over you entire lifetime? Did you count them? And how many more will you have before you die? I'm amazed at the lack of precise thinking you have demonstrated thus far.

So I work long days. But your answers are so easily refuted.1 hr · Like

Charlie J. Ray You keep insisting that your god is ignorant, Chris. But where does the Bible say that God is ignorant? Just asking?1 hr · Like

Charlie J. Ray The word "will" is implied in the text. It's not in italics in the text. But if the sparrow does not fall to the ground "apart from your Father," does that not imply logically that God is in control of even a sparrow's falling to the ground?

I guess providence bothers you? How does chance and random events that are outside God's control bring you comfort? I suppose that you dislike a God who is all powerful? Maybe you should go whole hog and become an atheist? How does having a finite god solve the problem of evil, Chris Fisher? Just asking? A god who can do nothing about moral evil or natural disasters does what for your position?1 hr · Like









Charlie J. Ray Chris Fisher, if you cannot accept that God is Logic and that the Scriptures contain a logical system of propositional truth statements that are all related to each other in systematic form, then nothing I say will convince you of anything. How does irrationalism support your interpretation of Scripture?1 hr · Like

Charlie J. Ray I have lots of verses that teach the sovereignty of God and that God not only exhaustively knows every possible proposition, but I can also so show that God is the cause of every event and the reason He foreknows exhaustively is because He has predetermined everything in every single detail. That would include your unbelief. God causes unbelief.1 hr · Like

Charlie J. Ray 8 and "A stone of stumbling And a rock of offense." They stumble, being disobedient to the word, to which they also were appointed. (1Pe 2:8 NKJ)1 hr · Like

Charlie J. Ray I'm asking you to show me logically how the Holy Scriptures entail dualism and/or a finite god who can do nothing to prevent moral evil?58 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray A god who can do nothing about evil is not god. In fact, if there are two equal forces of good and evil, it might be that you finite god is evil and cannot do anything about good, Chris Fisher.58 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray This is nothing more than eisogesis since the text says no such thing and the text does not logically imply such a thing:

"The more natural understanding is that in light of God numbering hairs, this is about sorrows being sold without God's knowledge. Present knowledge."

The more natural reading is that God is in providential control of every event. Even an Arminian agrees with general providence. Apparently Open Theists do not even believe in general providence. Calvinism teaches particular and absolute providence. Everything that comes to pass is ordained of God.

11 In Him also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counsel of His will, (Eph 1:11 NKJ)

What part of "being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works ALL THINGS according to the counsel of His will..." do you not understand?54 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray God's plan or counsel is unchangeble and immutable because God is Himself immutable and eternally so. God never learns anything new.

Thus God, determining to show more abundantly to the heirs of promise the immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an oath, (Hebrews 6:17 NKJ)53 mins · Like · 1








Charlie J. Ray If Open Theists were more logical, they wouldn't be Open Theists. Matthew 10:29 does not mention the future. But the logical deduction can be made from the verse by good and necessary consequence. If God knows every sparrow that falls to the ground and every hair that you will ever have on your head from birth to the day of your death, the plain logical deduction is that God knows all the days of your life and every hair you will ever have from this point forward. There is nothing God does not know in every detail, including the numerical number of the hairs on your head from birth to death. But do you know how many hairs you have had or will have on your head, Chris Fisher? I sincerely doubt it. God's knowledge is immeasureable from a human perspective.

We can know single propositions that God knows. But we could never know all the propositions God knows. He knows them all while we know only in part.

9 For we know in part and we prophesy in part.10 But when that which is perfect has come, then that which is in part will be done away.11 When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things.12 For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known.(1Co 13:9-12 NKJ)48 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray By virtue of His deity, the man Jesus Christ after the resurrection knew all things. That's because the Logos is the eternal Son of God and is in perfect union with the human person, Jesus Christ, even after the resurrection.

17 He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?" Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, "Do you love Me?" And he said to Him, "Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You." Jesus said to him, "Feed My sheep. (Joh 21:17 NKJ)

What part of "all things" do you not understand, Chris Fisher?46 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray "In what appeared to be an effort to solve, or at least soften the “problem of evil,” Boyd and others had begun to teach that God creates people, but the people create their own decisions, and therefore God cannot know what they will be, until they come to pass. Reactions have included the strange and novel as well as the orthodox. Some of Boyd’s defenders concluded that he was merely being “Arminian” and therefore within the pale of evangelical acceptability. Others, who proved themselves better historians, pointed out that Arminians, along with Calvinists, have always affirmed the doctrine of God’s omniscience. The Baptist General Conference (Swedish Baptists) affirmed Boyd’s “orthodoxy” by a close vote of 270-251. The controversy goes on.[2]"

http://founders.org/.../the-omniscience-of-god-does-the.../37 mins · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray Unfortunately, having a finite and ignorant god does not solve the problem of evil.29 mins · Edited · Like

Charlie J. Ray 20 For if our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart, and knows all things. (1Jo 3:20 NKJ)32 mins · Like






Charlie J. Ray Chris Fisher, how could God control even the present universe in minute detail if God is not omniscient of past, present and future? All the possible contingencies would be too great for a finite mind and a finite god to control. The God defined in Scripture is eternal, not changing with time from one second to the next.30 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray 21 But after long abstinence from food, then Paul stood in the midst of them and said, "Men, you should have listened to me, and not have sailed from Crete and incurred this disaster and loss.22 "And now I urge you to take heart, for there will be no loss of life among you, but only of the ship.23 "For there stood by me this night an angel of the God to whom I belong and whom I serve,24 "saying,`Do not be afraid, Paul; you must be brought before Caesar; and indeed God has granted you all those who sail with you.'25 "Therefore take heart, men, for I believe God that it will be just as it was told me. (Act 27:21-25 NKJ)25 mins · Like

Chris Fisher You say: "How many hairs have you had on your head over you entire lifetime? Did you count them? And how many more will you have before you die? I'm amazed at the lack of precise thinking you have demonstrated thus far. "

This is going to be a lesson in reading comprehension:

"Mat 10:30 But even the hairs of your head are all numbered."

Is this about current hairs or does it entail past and future hairs?16 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray Who determined the number of hairs on your head?15 mins · Like

Chris Fisher You say: "Charlie J. Ray You keep insisting that your god is ignorant, Chris. But where does the Bible say that God is ignorant? Just asking?"

I don't say that. But you say God is lifeless stone idol, who is a sadist and tortures kids with cancer. Stick to the text, and save your commentary.15 mins · Like

Chris Fisher Answer the question. I try to ask one at a time, but still you cannot answer:

"Mat 10:30 But even the hairs of your head are all numbered."

Is this about current hairs or does it entail past and future hairs?15 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray And if God knows all of the number of your head hairs past, present and future, how does this prove that God is ignorant?15 mins · Like








Chris Fisher No, the point is that the verse is absolutely not about past and future hairs... where do you get that? You assume it onto the text with zero evidence... the text really says God COUNTS our hair. That is what it means to "number" our hair.13 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris Fisher, you will answer MY questions or be banned. I'm growing weary of your stupidity. Asserting your view is correct does not demonstrate from Scripture that your presupposed ignorant god is the God of the Bible.13 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray Where do you get that the verse teaches God is ignorant? Just asking?13 mins · Like

Chris Fisher arithmeoar-ith-meh'-oFrom G706; to enumerate or count: - number.13 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray I've been on my phone all week and working. I couldn't respond in detail. So you assume too much by my brief replies.12 mins · Like

Chris Fisher I dont have verses that God is "ignorant". You use loaded language. Show me your verses where God gives babies bone cancer like a sadist.12 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray Does your stupid god know how to count? Just asking? Maybe you cannot count either? And if you are ignorant of how many hairs your head has had and will ever have, how does that non sequitur follow that God is as stupid and ignorant as you are? Reading human ignorance back into God is called anthropomorphism. God is not a man. He is a tri-Personal and eternal Spirit.10 mins · Like

Chris Fisher God knows because God can count. Just like how God knows how much water is in the oceans:

Isa 40:12 Who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand, Measured heaven with a span And calculated the dust of the earth in a measure? Weighed the mountains in scales And the hills in a balance?10 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray You admit then that you cannot prove God is ignorant from the Scriptures. Now we're getting somewhere.10 mins · Like










Charlie J. Ray I have lots of Scriptures that prove God's omnipresence, omniscience, and omnipotence. All three attributes of God are systematically necessary by good and necessary logical consequence. God IS Logic. John 1:1. Logos9 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray Isa 40:12 proves that God knows the exact number of grains of dust on the earth. But a human cannot measure the exact number. Our knowledge is discursive and limited to human understanding. God's understanding is not limited.7 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray 21 Have you not known? Have you not heard? Has it not been told you from the beginning? Have you not understood from the foundations of the earth?22 It is He who sits above the circle of the earth, And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers, Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain, And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.23 He brings the princes to nothing; He makes the judges of the earth useless. (Isa 40:21-23 NKJ)7 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray Chris Fisher, where were you when God created the foundations of the earth?

NKJ Job 39:1 "Do you know the time when the wild mountain goats bear young? Or can you mark when the deer gives birth?2 Can you number the months that they fulfill? Or do you know the time when they bear young?3 They bow down, They bring forth their young, They deliver their offspring.4 Their young ones are healthy, They grow strong with grain; They depart and do not return to them.5 "Who set the wild donkey free? Who loosed the bonds of the onager,6 Whose home I have made the wilderness, And the barren land his dwelling?(Job 39:1-6 NKJ)

4 "Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? Tell Me, if you have understanding.5 Who determined its measurements? Surely you know! Or who stretched the line upon it?6 To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone,7 When the morning stars sang together, And all the sons of God shouted for joy? (Job 38:4-7 NKJ)4 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray Reading your own ignorance into your doctrine of God is simply eisogesis and misappropriating anthropomorphic language as if it were literally true of God. God does not need to count the grains of sand because He created them all and He determined their number from before creation in His eternal mind and His unchanging and eternal plan.2 mins · Like

Charlie J. Ray God does not count like a child. Numbers exist only in God's eternally unchanging mind. The number line goes off immeasureably into infinity in both the positive and the negative direction. It's impossible for a human to measure how many numbers there are on the number line. But God knows them all because they only exist in God's mind. Without God there would be no numbers. We know numbers innately because we are created in God's image. Man thinks logically because God IS Logic and we are God's image. Genesis 1:27; John 1:9. Chris Fisher







1 min · Edited · Like

Chris Fisher Charlie, You are a very irrational man. You cannot answer simple questions. You have continually shown yourself dishonest and disingenuous. The conversation can be located on GodisOpen.com(http://godisopen.com/.../apologetics-thrusday-fisher-v.../), and sure enough I will be making a lot of images with the gems you have given me in this conversation.

You shotgun all over the place, you flood the board with your proofs, but as I examine them one by one, none of them support your premise. You cannot read your own prooftexts without imposing flatly absurd meanings into the text. You will never admit or apologize when you defame me, showing your ugly character.

This is what Calvinism is. They rip the Bible into pieces, they throw the Bible in the trash, and their adherents would like nothing more than to not discuss the meaning and context of their prooftexts. I have said it before and I will say it again: You are a Platonist. You are not a Christian.

Just now · Like


https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10100399699062084&set=p.10100399699062084&type=1

web viewif you insist on that method, you can go elsewhere. first warning. august 8 at 11:09am ......

Documents