Why Do God Have To Create (The Devil - Satan) and humans
-
It is a hard topic for a discussion.Originally posted by M©+square:I can see Sillyme not interested to discuss further.
Don't you sense it?
-
A discussion could be funOriginally posted by Icemoon:It is a hard topic for a discussion.
Just sharing of insights. I'm not asking for answers.
-
I was thinking whether we need to take into account the foreshadowing and prophecies if Joseph is to be replaced.Originally posted by M©+square:A discussion could be fun
Just sharing of insights. I'm not asking for answers. 
-
Me going kopitiam. Will be back in awhile's time.Originally posted by Icemoon:I was thinking whether we need to take into account the foreshadowing and prophecies if Joseph is to be replaced. 
-
Ok .. I'm turning in.Originally posted by M©+square:Me going kopitiam. Will be back in awhile's time.
Enjoy your kopi. -
careful guys.... scully kena accused of turning this into another chit chat thread...
get back to main discussion..... whips ice and mc.... piak! piak! -
Wah seh. paan chaan lah. I'm a "went-to-poly-because-don't-want-to-do-GP" person leh
I am not a very eloquent person, so it takes a conscious effort to structure my answers.
While I was typing the reply last night, my friend MSNed me asking for investment advice. My girlfriend MSNed me to tell me something. My two other friends MSNed me to chit chat. So it took me some time to type out something coherent.
Some more I want to double-check the Bible and give a reasonable answer. Don't want to give a slipshot answer (R.E.S.P.E.C.T. mah ).
Not that I don't want to discuss lah. I don't thrive on discussions. It zaps me. That's why I was reluctant to come back to be active in here again. Ask me to crap, still can lah. I crap 99.9999% of the time -
It should not be the expectation for the mod to participate in any discussion. None of us are true experts and if one is uncomfortable about a particular topic, then one should not be expected to take it any further....
... and good morning all...! 
-
Good morning, unker
I know my limits. If I don't know, I will keep quiet or make it known (that I don't know). I don't mind looking silly knowingly, rather than appearing silly with blaring words. -
Originally posted by Icemoon:
See earlier argument on giving prophecies. There is no proof that such a thing as 'outside of time' exists. Time is merely a means of measurement.
Of course got biblical basis. God referred to Himself as I AM. And for God to give prophecies mean He must not be confined by time. Duh!Originally posted by Icemoon:
If i gave you an expensive gift free, does it become "cheap"? What kind of logic is this? As for "salvation is never for everyone" i believe the others can draw their own conclusions...
Salvation is not for everyone. Your quote does not disagree with my view because the elect has already been predestined. As a Christian, you are to spread the gospel. The Holy Spirit convicts the elect. Obviously it can't be the Holy Spirit convicts everyone because not all will respond.
Salvation is never for everyone. Heard of total depravity? There is no way mankind will respond to the gospel because he is fallen. It is not his nature to accept the gospel and Christ due to his sinful and fallen state. Hence it is fallacious to state salvation is for everyone when no-one can receive it on their own. It is not a "please claim your gift" kind of thing (this version of salvation is cheapo and mocks the sovereignity of God, don't you think so?)Originally posted by Icemoon:
Verse 28 may apply to everyone. Verse 29 onwards applies to prominent people mentioned in the bible. Please refer to Ironside's comments on the bible being written for you, but not all of it about you.
I know what you will reply. Biblical basis right? Ok, here's it. Notice this was what you quoted, but you ignored the later parts!
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Romans 8:
28And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him,[j] who[k] have been called according to his purpose. 29For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summary:
Essentially what Icemoon pointed out is a very elitist view of salvation. He claims that salvation is only for chosen ones who are predestined to be saved. Yet nowhere is this mentioned in the bible!
If what Icemoon claims is true, there would be no need for Jesus to command his disciples to preach the gospel to the world. As the "chosen" are already predestined to be saved. -
It is conceivable in physics that not everything need to be bounded by time. Let me ask you a question - are photons ageless?Originally posted by Skibi:See earlier argument on giving prophecies. There is no proof that such a thing as 'outside of time' exists. Time is merely a means of measurement.If i gave you an expensive gift free, does it become "cheap"? What kind of logic is this? As for "salvation is never for everyone" i believe the others can draw their own conclusions...
How do you define expensive? Ah ha .. you are putting your own assumptions into it. Actually your logic doesn't hold .. because expensive gifts are never free for EVERYONE. They can be free for SELECTED PEOPLE though.
So salvation today is like distributing flyers. You know .. like those at Sim Lim Square? The flyers are free .. and they shove it at you. Are the flyers cheap? Definitely. Are they for everyone? Definitely. And what happen to most of them? Litter lor.Verse 28 may apply to everyone. Verse 29 onwards applies to prominent people mentioned in the bible. Please refer to Ironside's comments on the bible being written for you, but not all of it about you.
Prove it. I bet there is no way to distinguish between prominent people and selected people. Because those prominent people are selected! Ironside's comments doesn't apply to the argument here.Essentially what Icemoon pointed out is a very elitist view of salvation. He claims that salvation is only for chosen ones who are predestined to be saved. Yet nowhere is this mentioned in the bible!
Elitist? Why is it elitist? God is sovereign and He has foreknowledge. Surely God did not throw a dice and say "ok .. Skibi will get the gift".
If what Icemoon claims is true, there would be no need for Jesus to command his disciples to preach the gospel to the world. As the "chosen" are already predestined to be saved.
Oh .. you want scriptural support ah? There are a lot, but we need not go into them. Neither of us are spiritually mature enough to handle the topic. My aim is to present to you (and the readers) an alternative framework that is logical, does not turn God into a clown, and one that is supported by many theologians.
If what I claim is true, it does not absolve the responsibility of Christians to preach the gospel. This is hypercalvinism and is an extremist view not taken up by most Christians. For more info - http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil//articles/hypercal.htm -
For the scriptures saith unto Pharaoh,even for this same purpose have I raised thee up,that I might shew my power in thee,and that name might be declared throughtout all the earth (Romans 9:17)
He that hath an ear,let him hear what the spirit saith... -
Originally posted by solomon1983:
Solomon1983 is your clone?
[b]For the scriptures saith unto Pharaoh,even for this same purpose have I raised thee up,that I might shew my power in thee,and that name might be declared throughtout all the earth (Romans 9:17)
He that hath an ear,let him hear what the spirit saith...
[/b] -
Originally posted by Icemoon:
Contradicting yourself(again)?
How do you define expensive? Ah ha .. you are putting your own assumptions into it. Actually your logic doesn't hold .. because expensive gifts are never free for EVERYONE. They can be free for SELECTED PEOPLE though.Originally posted by Icemoon:
So you appointed yourself the judge on the value of salvation?
So salvation today is like distributing flyers. You know .. like those at Sim Lim Square? The flyers are free .. and they shove it at you. Are the flyers cheap? Definitely. Are they for everyone? Definitely. And what happen to most of them? Litter lor.Originally posted by Icemoon:
See earlier argument. The choice is ours to accept the gift, not God's.
Elitist? Why is it elitist? God is sovereign and He has foreknowledge. Surely God did not throw a dice and say "ok .. Skibi will get the gift".Originally posted by Icemoon:
Ad hominen style character assassination? Earlier name-calling me a gnostic and now a hypercalvinist? You still haven't say why it does not absolve...when it is clear that it does.
If what I claim is true, it does not absolve the responsibility of Christians to preach the gospel. This is hypercalvinism and is an extremist view not taken up by most Christians. For more info - http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil//articles/hypercal.htm -
How did I contradict myself? You came out with the 'expensive' label which is not found in the bible or theology, so I'm cautioning you on the danger. The danger is expensive gifts are never free for everyone. In the real world, only a selected people get the expensive gifts, the rest get 'consolation' prize.Originally posted by Skibi:Contradicting yourself(again)?So you appointed yourself the judge on the value of salvation?
Only those with an incorrect view of salvation have judged salvation, not me. So how have they judged? By presenting salvation as a number game - the more the merrier. By presenting salvation as a marketing ploy - using cheap tricks to attract people to church. By presenting salvation as the work of man - pestering people, even Christians, on the streets or outside their house to convert.See earlier argument. The choice is ours to accept the gift, not God's.
How can fallen mankind receive the gift? Is it not our inborn tendency to turn away from the gift which is contrary to the sense? It does not make sense to put the gift in the same league as other 'gifts', wordly philosophies and religions. By saying the choice is yours to accept the gift, how are you different from one who has accepted the other gifts? How can you tell who is right? Using your fallen/post-Eden faculty of reason?
From the way you reply, I don't think you understand what I'm talking about, neither can you appreciate the richness of this perspective.Ad hominen style character assassination? Earlier name-calling me a gnostic and now a hypercalvinist? You still haven't say why it does not absolve...when it is clear that it does.
I never call you a hypercalvinist. OMG .. you know what is hypercalvinism or not? Read my reply (which I acknowledge was composed badly in the heat of the moment). I said the position you accused me of IS hypercalvinism and hypercalvinism is something not accepted by most Christians. Or at least Christians who should have known better.
It does not absolve. You can read more if you are interested. From the url I quoted:The hyper-Calvinist position at this point amounts to a repudiation of the very gist of 2 Corinthians 5:20: "Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God." The whole thrust of the gospel, properly presented, is to convey an offer (in the sense of a tender, a proffer, or a proposal) of divine peace and mercy to all who come under its hearing. The apostle's language is even stronger, suggesting the true gospel preacher begs sinners to be reconciled to God—or rather he stands "in Christ's stead," pleading thus with the sinner. Hyper-Calvinism in essence denies the concept of human responsibility, and so it must eliminate any such pleading, resulting in a skewed presentation of the gospel.
-
what you say is true to a certain extend, cause there are 2 limitsOriginally posted by Icemoon:How did I contradict myself? You came out with the 'expensive' label which is not found in the bible or theology, so I'm cautioning you on the danger. The danger is expensive gifts are never free for everyone. In the real world, only a selected people get the expensive gifts, the rest get 'consolation' prize.
1) the ability of the giver, as in how much the giver is able to give
2) the choice of the giver, as in who the giver want to give.
(btw, ot a bit, this brought the question, can those that did not receive a gift from the giver call him unfair?)
for these 2, then the only time these can be discounted is when the giver have unlimited resources, and have the desire to give to everyone.
.... oh, actually there is a 3rd limitation, that is on the receiver, as in the receiver will not get to receive the gift, if he/she refuse to receive it (pasieh lah, sure or not got free one meh? no such thing as free lunch one lah ...etc).
-
I believe Icey is talking about Calvinist view on pre-destination of the elects, not elites (Icey, pls correct me if I am wrong)Originally posted by Skibi:Verse 28 may apply to everyone. Verse 29 onwards applies to prominent people mentioned in the bible. Please refer to Ironside's comments on the bible being written for you, but not all of it about you.
Summary:
Essentially what Icemoon pointed out is a very elitist view of salvation. He claims that salvation is only for chosen ones who are predestined to be saved. Yet nowhere is this mentioned in the bible!
If what Icemoon claims is true, there would be no need for Jesus to command his disciples to preach the gospel to the world. As the "chosen" are already predestined to be saved. -
I scare use the terms wrongly.Originally posted by vince69:I believe Icey is talking about Calvinist view on pre-destination of the elects, not elites (Icey, pls correct me if I am wrong)
I dunno the diff between election and predestination, actually.
-
OT a bit .. what's the real problem with elitism? Who dun want elites? You want mediocre people?Originally posted by vince69:I believe Icey is talking about Calvinist view on pre-destination of the elects, not elites (Icey, pls correct me if I am wrong)
I suppose elitism might foster discrimination and deepen the social divide. But this argument cannot be applied to Christianity - predestination should not be seen as elitism.
Predestination should be understood in the light of God's sovereignity and His foreknowledge. I'm sure if one truly yearns for God, he or she will be an elect, one who has been chosen by God (R.C Sproul has a book by the same name).
On the contrary, those who made the choice and accepted the gift thinking their choice is all powerful better beware. This is the kind of view that foster discrimination and smacks of MLM or timesharing. You know la .. the kind of people who psycho you "hey joining us brings big benefit, why don't you join, you won't lose out .. joining is so easy .. just raise your hand can liao".
To be an elect is no elite. You are not the "best". You are the worst! Which is why you need Christ .. am I right? -
???? why you quote me???? I simply says, its elects not elites ???Originally posted by Icemoon:OT a bit .. what's the real problem with elitism? Who dun want elites? You want mediocre people?
I suppose elitism might foster discrimination and deepen the social divide. But this argument cannot be applied to Christianity - predestination should not be seen as elitism.
Predestination should be understood in the light of God's sovereignity and His foreknowledge. I'm sure if one truly yearns for God, he or she will be an elect, one who has been chosen by God (R.C Sproul has a book by the same name).
On the contrary, those who made the choice and accepted the gift thinking their choice is all powerful better beware. This is the kind of view that foster discrimination and smacks of MLM or timesharing. You know la .. the kind of people who psycho you "hey joining us brings big benefit, why don't you join, you won't lose out .. joining is so easy .. just raise your hand can liao".
To be an elect is no elite. You are not the "best". You are the worst! Which is why you need Christ .. am I right?
and I didn't even say anything about elites ... -
or else put where?Originally posted by vince69:???? why you quote me???? I simply says, its elects not elites ???
and I didn't even say anything about elites ...
I have to show the context of my reply right?
For the record, my reply wasn't directed at vince. -
wah ... same here leh.... gave up JC to go to Poly because I don't want to take GP .... (only spend 3mths in JC)Originally posted by sillyme:Wah seh. paan chaan lah. I'm a "went-to-poly-because-don't-want-to-do-GP" person leh -
ok, ok ,... me get Icey a glass of Ice tea...Originally posted by Icemoon:or else put where?
I have to show the context of my reply right?
For the record, my reply wasn't directed at vince. -
So happening...