So we have no control of our lives?

[Jeffinator]

An internal presence as opposed to an external presence. The Holy Spirit teaches us internally, so that when we read the bible (if we read the bible) and when we think on what we've read (if we think on what we've read), God teaches us from the inside. We now have an internal moral compass which we did not have before (or at least we have a "helper" for our intrinsic compass).

Does this mean that those who lived in the past could never really grasp God's word when they read it?

Um... why do you think half the book is not applicable?

Stoning witches? Not sleeping with women on their period? Not cutting your beard?..etc.

And which part of the book taught you that?

Science book

[Bandit]

Does this mean that those who lived in the past could never really grasp God's word when they read it?

The presence of the Holy Spirit is an intrinsic promise to each participant of the New Covenant; during the Old Covenant this was not so.

Stoning witches? Not sleeping with women on their period? Not cutting your beard?..etc.

Is this all you come away with from the half of the bible (Old Testament protion) which you say is not aplicable to us today? And be honest with me, have you actually studied the Old Testametn carefully? I think that if you had, you would not reduce it in the way you have. So in my eyes, you are not a believer.

Science book

So, since you have a science book which says you are a monkey, you take that over the word of God which says man is the direct and ultimate creation of God? So what do you believe? Where is your faith placed?

[Jeffinator]

The presence of the Holy Spirit is an intrinsic promise to each participant of the New Covenant; during the Old Covenant this was not so.

Not to argue, but your restating what you already claimed.

Is this all you come away with from the half of the bible (Old Testament protion) which you say is not aplicable to us today? And be honest with me, have you actually studied the Old Testametn carefully? I think that if you had, you would not reduce it in the way you have. So in my eyes, you are not a believer.

Of course that's not all I took away from the OT, but the way God did things and interacted with individuals in the OT is almost incomprehensible in our society today. The anecdotal stories are nice to read, ex. Job, but does this ever happen in society anymore? It seems like in the past if you had a strong faith or were a good person Angelic beings would be sent to you to tell you some important message. Now if that happened they would have some guys in white coats put you away.

So, since you have a science book which says you are a monkey, you take that over the word of God which says man is the direct and ultimate creation of God? So what do you believe? Where is your faith placed?

I dont want to be a monkey, but I feel as though there is more evidence for this idea than against it.

[BrckBrln]

Of course that's not all I took away from the OT, but the way God did things and interacted with individuals in the OT is almost incomprehensible in our society today. The anecdotal stories are nice to read, ex. Job, but does this ever happen in society anymore? It seems like in the past if you had a strong faith or were a good person Angelic beings would be sent to you to tell you some important message. Now if that happened they would have some guys in white coats put you away.

I think you have a mistaken impression. The Old Testament is not a complete account of the daily life of ancient Israel. And lets not forget the many Psalms that talk about the hiddenness of God.

I dont want to be a monkey, but I feel as though there is more evidence for this idea than against it.

Evolution doesn't say we are monkeys or that we come from monkeys. It says we have a common ancestor.

[Dani H]

I guess my point was God just doesnt feel as relevant today as He seemed in the past. Seemed like He used to be more in your face, where now its just a bunch of mostly misguided souls telling you how you should live.

Actually one of Jesus' names is "Immanuel" which means "God with us."

Which is a lot more up close and personal than anything you read in the OT actually where many visitations would happen only from time to time and often with many years in between them. We can have God with us, interacting with us 24/7 now. Which used to be unheard of (except for maybe Adam and Eve and perhaps Enoch if memory serves me right). God is in my face with regularity so I'm not sure where you get that idea from?

Maybe get your head out of the Atheist web sites/books and do your own thinking? You're beginning to sound rather regurgitative and a bad case of deja vu with arguments we've already heard elsewhere, as if they're not even your own ...

[Warrior4God]

For those that believe that God doesn't give us free will, that He micro-manages everything we do, and that He predestines some people for Heaven and some for Hell and there's nothing that people can do to get out of either destination, I have a question for you. Explain to me how God is not responsible for the sin, that He says He hates so much, that we commit if we really don't have free will? If we don't have free will, that means that all the things we do, good and bad, are what God makes us do. You can't have it both ways. You can't say that we don't have free will while simultaneously saying that God isn't responsible for the sin we commit. If we are incapable of being able to choose on our own to sin, (no free will, remember?) then who's responsible for us sinning? It would have to be God. Explain, if you can, in a way that makes any sense how that wouldn't be true.

[Jeffinator]

For those that believe that God doesn't give us free will, that He micro-manages everything we do, and that He predestines some people for Heaven and some for Hell and there's nothing that people can do to get out of either destination, I have a question for you. Explain to me how God is not responsible for the sin, that He says He hates so much, that we commit if we really don't have free will? If we don't have free will, that means that all the things we do, good and bad, are what God makes us do. You can't have it both ways. You can't say that we don't have free will while simultaneously saying that God isn't responsible for the sin we commit. If we are incapable of being able to choose on our own to sin, (no free will, remember?) then who's responsible for us sinning? It would have to be God. Explain, if you can, in a way that makes any sense how that wouldn't be true.

Knowing the future and controlling it are two different things.

[BrianW]

Knowledge of God and knowing God are also two different things and the former is sorely lacking without the latter.

[Cody Cann]

I'm just learning quotes (new here), "An internal presence as opposed to an external presence. The Holy Spirit teaches us internally, so that when we read the bible (if we read the bible) and when we think on what we've read (if we think on what we've read), God teaches us from the inside. We now have an internal moral compass which we did not have before (or at least we have a "helper" for our intrinsic compass)." - Bandit


Not to set myself up a counterpoint.... but what scripture backs up this statement of an "internal compass" rather than and external presence? Yes, I know for example the deal with Saul... but does that mean that before Christ there were no "internal morals"? I see this as a confusing statement because it would alter the presence of Free Will without internal morals.

[Bandit]

I'm just learning quotes (new here), "An internal presence as opposed to an external presence. The Holy Spirit teaches us internally, so that when we read the bible (if we read the bible) and when we think on what we've read (if we think on what we've read), God teaches us from the inside. We now have an internal moral compass which we did not have before (or at least we have a "helper" for our intrinsic compass)." - Bandit


Not to set myself up a counterpoint.... but what scripture backs up this statement of an "internal compass" rather than and external presence? Yes, I know for example the deal with Saul... but does that mean that before Christ there were no "internal morals"? I see this as a confusing statement because it would alter the presence of Free Will without internal morals.

Hello Cody,

The presence of the Holy Spirit with every believer is an explicit promise of the New Covenant (John 16 comes to mind). The Old Covenant makes no such promise - though it does seem individuals could both pursue and receive the Spirit's presence before the New Covenant - like Joseph or Kind David. Only the New Covenant has the specific promise of the Spirit to every person. But all persons, even unbelievers, have a conscience, which is basic "internal morals".

[BroRog]

For those that believe that God doesn't give us free will, that He micro-manages everything we do, and that He predestines some people for Heaven and some for Hell and there's nothing that people can do to get out of either destination, I have a question for you. Explain to me how God is not responsible for the sin, that He says He hates so much, that we commit if we really don't have free will? If we don't have free will, that means that all the things we do, good and bad, are what God makes us do. You can't have it both ways. You can't say that we don't have free will while simultaneously saying that God isn't responsible for the sin we commit. If we are incapable of being able to choose on our own to sin, (no free will, remember?) then who's responsible for us sinning? It would have to be God. Explain, if you can, in a way that makes any sense how that wouldn't be true.

I'm not sure anyone argues that humans have no freedom of will. The question is whether human will is autonomous from God's will. And the answer to this question will depend on how we understand the relationship between creature and creator. Frankly, some people seem to think that God is another creature. They would NOT say so. But what they argue amounts to the same thing.

In fact, they argue along these lines: a. God needs love. b. God made creatures to love and that might love him. c. In order to accomplish a. and b. he gave man freedom of the will. Essentially, this perspective denies what theologians call the Simplicity of God. He is not perfect within himself as he "needs" to be loved.

So, to highlight the difference I will answer your questions from that perspective.

God needs love, man is a creature that might love him or not:

1. Does man have free will?
Yes, both God and man have free will. And man's free will is independent of God's free will in order that he might return God's love.

2. Does God micromanage everything we do?
No, man must be allowed to make overtures toward God on his own.

3. Does God predestine whom he will bless and whom he will not bless? Heaven/Hell etc.?
No. God waits to see whether a person will return his love first.

4. Is God responsible for sin?
No. Sin was a risk he decided to take in order to get love.

5. Does God make us do stuff, especially against our will?
No. God patiently waits for history to play itself out, waiting for us to act.

I don't know if anyone sees a problem here. But I think, upon review of the Biblical text, we will not find the premise anywhere in the text. Where does it say that God created us because needed someone to love him? If you find it let me know. God commands us to love him, but not out of a sense of need. We ought to love God because God is love and our desire should be that we want to be like him.

If we begin with mankind as the beginning premise, it is easy to build an argument to the absurd conclusion, (Reductio ad absurdum) as you have done. But what if we start with God as the beginning premise? What kind of being is he? What makes God different from the creatures he made? What does it mean for God to create everything that exists as John says in his gospel?

John 1:3 All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.

If all things came into being through him, then what is left that has not come into being through him? So then, let's answer the question assuming God as creator.

God as creator:

1. Does man have free will?
Yes, both God and man have free will. However, man's free will is NOT independent of God's free will. God creates the free will choices we make.

2. Does God micromanage everything we do?
Yes, nothing exists unless God creates it; nothing happens unless God causes it.

3. Does God predestine whom he will bless and whom he will not bless? Heaven/Hell etc.?
Yes. God has predestined whom to bless according to HIS purposes.

4. Is God responsible for sin?
Yes. God is responsible for everything in this creation, including sin.

5. Does God make us do stuff, especially against our will?
No. God creates us doing stuff according to our own will.

[Warrior4God]

I'm not sure anyone argues that humans have no freedom of will. The question is whether human will is autonomous from God's will. And the answer to this question will depend on how we understand the relationship between creature and creator. Frankly, some people seem to think that God is another creature. They would NOT say so. But what they argue amounts to the same thing.

Actually, what I interpret from Calvinism, people really don't have free will, as they can only do what God "predestined" them to do. Please explain how this understanding of mine is wrong if it, indeed, is wrong.

In fact, they argue along these lines: a. God needs love. b. God made creatures to love and that might love him. c. In order to accomplish a. and b. he gave man freedom of the will. Essentially, this perspective denies what theologians call the Simplicity of God. He is not perfect within himself as he "needs" to be loved.

I don't know of anybody that claims God "needs" our love. I've always been taught that He loves us and desires to be in fellowship with us, however, I don't see that as being the same as God being incomplete and "needing us." He existed for eons of time without us quite fine. He chose to create us, but not because He was somehow lacking.

1. Does man have free will?
Yes, both God and man have free will. However, man's free will is NOT independent of God's free will. God creates the free will choices we make.

So, how do we have free will if it's God creating our choices for us? Do you know how absurd you sound with your statement?

2. Does God micromanage everything we do?
Yes, nothing exists unless God creates it; nothing happens unless God causes it.

So, you're saying that God micro-manages and controls us to the point that I like pizza, not because I like pizza, but, because God decided that I will like pizza? Or the color blue? Or donuts? Again, do you know how absurd you sound?

3. Does God predestine whom he will bless and whom he will not bless? Heaven/Hell etc.?
Yes. God has predestined whom to bless according to HIS purposes.

So, God is this sadistic God who decided to make some people sin so He can throw them in Hell, even though He's the puppet master who pulls the strings of His puppets and makes them sin? If this is who God is, then I'm renouncing my Christianity. I won't serve a twisted, two-faced God who makes people sin and then holds them accountable as if He weren't the one making them do the evil things they were doing. The kind of God you describe reeks of sadism and hypocrisy.

4. Is God responsible for sin?
Yes. God is responsible for everything in this creation, including sin.

Then why doesn't He take the blame that He rightfully deserves? He's always making it sound like in His Word that we sinned willingly, which we're incapable of doing. Also, God's always telling us to repent of our sins. Well, we can't choose to repent on our own, remember? He has to make us do that. Does He have a short memory or what?

5. Does God make us do stuff, especially against our will?
No. God creates us doing stuff according to our own will.

I don't see how we have free will according to you. If God is the one that decides how we act, what we say, what we think, what we feel, then it's not us doing it. Therefore, it's not really free will that we have.

[BroRog]

Actually, what I interpret from Calvinism, people really don't have free will, as they can only do what God "predestined" them to do. Please explain how this understanding of mine is wrong if it, indeed, is wrong.

I don't know Calvinism so I can't help you there. What I know is that I experience myself making my own decisions and I see nothing in the scriptures to suggest otherwise. Our will is as free as we think it is. IMHO

I don't know of anybody that claims God "needs" our love. I've always been taught that He loves us and desires to be in fellowship with us, however, I don't see that as being the same as God being incomplete and "needing us." He existed for eons of time without us quite fine. He chose to create us, but not because He was somehow lacking.

I agree in general. I don't know about desiring fellowship with us. I don't see how that is possible.

So, how do we have free will if it's God creating our choices for us? Do you know how absurd you sound with your statement?

Yes, I realize that it sounds absurd. But let me ask you a question. Does it sound absurd for a novelist to create the free will choices of characters in that novel? It only gets absurd if we assume that God is on our same level existence, but if God is on a higher plane of existence in an analogous way that a novelist is in relation to the characters in the novel, then it isn't so absurd as it first sounded.

So, you're saying that God micro-manages and controls us to the point that I like pizza, not because I like pizza, but, because God decided that I will like pizza? Or the color blue? Or donuts?

Not either/or -- both/and. You like pizza because you like pizza because God is creating you liking pizza. Again, think Creator/Creature -- Author/Character

So, God is this sadistic God who decided to make some people sin so He can throw them in Hell, even though He's the puppet master who pulls the strings of His puppets and makes them sin? If this is who God is, then I'm renouncing my Christianity. I won't serve a twisted, two-faced God who makes people sin and then holds them accountable as if He weren't the one making them do the evil things they were doing. The kind of God you describe reeks of sadism and hypocrisy.

First of all, I personally don't think that the Lake of Fire is eternal torture. In Romans 9, Paul says that he creates some for destruction and others for mercy. The contrast is destruction and eternal life.

Having said that, again, don't think of God as one of us, on our level. God is NOT a puppet master on the same level as his puppets, directing their every move against their will. He is a creator, authoring a story in which characters in that story are making choices according to their own preferences, desires, lusts, motivations and etc. Everything a man does makes sense in the context of his life, his culture, his religion, etc. and etc. We don't sin because someone has pulled our strings. We sin because we are tempted according to our own lusts etc. It's easy to get lost in our vocabulary. In one sense, God is making us sin but in another sense is not making us sin. My sins are my sins -- the bad choices I make out of my freedom and according to what I want and without coercion, which are choices that the author of the story is having me make.

Remember, concepts like force, violence, cause and effect, coercion only make sense between two people living on the same plane of existence like two characters in a story. What is absurd is to think that an author of a novel is "forcing" his characters to do stuff. It is absurd to say that an author is making his characters do stuff. They are doing stuff because the author is writing it that way and if the author didn't write it, it wouldn't exist at all. See, we tend to think the alternative to God "making" us do stuff is that we make ourselves do stuff, but this is absurd because we know that people and things can't create themselves. We aren't self-created beings who simply create ourselves doing stuff. As Paul says in Acts, in God we move and live and have our being. If he didn't create us doing it, the alternative isn't us creating ourselves doing it; the alternative is that it doesn't exist.

Then why doesn't He take the blame that He rightfully deserves? He's always making it sound like in His Word that we sinned willingly, which we're incapable of doing. Also, God's always telling us to repent of our sins. Well, we can't choose to repent on our own, remember? He has to make us do that. Does He have a short memory or what?

Again, if God is the author, then isn't it absurd to think that the author is to "blame" for what he writes? If the author needs an evil person to fit his story, he will write an evil person into the story. Makes perfect sense to me. On our level of existence, we are blameworthy for the evil choices we made according to our own motives, desires, preferences, and etc. even if at some transcendent level about ours he is authoring the whole thing.

I don't see how we have free will according to you. If God is the one that decides how we act, what we say, what we think, what we feel, then it's not us doing it. Therefore, it's not really free will that we have.

Again our will is as free as we think it is. God is not forcing us to do anything. He is not using coercion or manipulation or persuasion or deception or any other method creatures use to motivate each other. But freedom of the will only makes sense among creatures existing on the same plane of existence. But if God exists, and if, as John said, "All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being", then God is the author of every that that comes into existence including material things, spiritual things, creatures, events, history, good, evil, my freewill choices, your freewill choices -- everything.

Do you believe that "apart from him nothing came into being that has come into being?" I realize that it's hard to get our minds around it, but seriously, John has said something about God that he thought we needed to hear. The real, true God really is THAT big.

[Warrior4God]

Yes, I realize that it sounds absurd. But let me ask you a question. Does it sound absurd for a novelist to create the free will choices of characters in that novel? It only gets absurd if we assume that God is on our same level existence, but if God is on a higher plane of existence in an analogous way that a novelist is in relation to the characters in the novel, then it isn't so absurd as it first sounded.

You're doing exactly what you yourself said we're not supposed to do; you're bringing God down to a human level by comparing Him to an "author" and us to "characters."

Not either/or -- both/and. You like pizza because you like pizza because God is creating you liking pizza. Again, think Creator/Creature -Author/Character

That one is just too weird for me to even respond to.

Having said that, again, don't think of God as one of us, on our level. God is NOT a puppet master on the same level as his puppets, directing their every move against their will. He is a creator, authoring a story in which characters in that story are making choices according to their own preferences, desires, lusts, motivations and etc. Everything a man does makes sense in the context of his life, his culture, his religion, etc. and etc. We don't sin because someone has pulled our strings. We sin because we are tempted according to our own lusts etc. It's easy to get lost in our vocabulary. In one sense, God is making us sin but in another sense is not making us sin. My sins are my sins -- the bad choices I make out of my freedom and according to what I want and without coercion, which are choices that the author of the story is having me make.

Well, then, according to your way of thinking, God must be "authoring me" to call Him a hypocrite because that's how I see Him for writing me in His little story and having me sin and then getting all hypocritically indignant about it as if I chose to sin when it was really Him doing it for me. It's like a dad telling his kid he'll punish him if he takes a cookie out of the cookie jar before dinner and then the dad grabs the kid's hand, puts it in the cookie jar, and makes him grab a cookie. Then, the dad has the nerve to start swatting the kid's rear end for taking the cookie that he himself made the kid take. That's the kind of God you are presenting.

See, we tend to think the alternative to God "making" us do stuff is that we make ourselves do stuff, but this is absurd because we know that people and things can't create themselves. We aren't self-created beings who simply create ourselves doing stuff. As Paul says in Acts, in God we move and live and have our being. If he didn't create us doing it, the alternative isn't us creating ourselves doing it; the alternative is that it doesn't exist.

People "not having created themselves" has what to do with anything? God created humans. I get that. Once we're in existence, however, there's nothing that says we can't then start making decisions on our own, some obviously good and some bad.

Again, if God is the author, then isn't it absurd to think that the author is to "blame" for what he writes? If the author needs an evil person to fit his story, he will write an evil person into the story. Makes perfect sense to me. On our level of existence, we are blameworthy for the evil choices we made according to our own motives, desires, preferences, and etc. even if at some transcendent level about ours he is authoring the whole thing.

Well, thank you for pointing out that I have a license to sin. After all, I'm just a "character" in "God's story" and I'm only capable of doing what God writes out for me to do. Apparently, He wants me to sin, so that's what I'll do, I suppose.

Do you believe that "apart from him nothing came into being that has come into being?" I realize that it's hard to get our minds around it, but seriously, John has said something about God that he thought we needed to hear. The real, true God really is THAT big.

Yes, I believe God created everything that exists. I also believe that He allows His creation (humans and angels) to make decisions that He doesn't write out for them ahead of time. I also believe God holds His creation accountable for their decisions and punishes and rewards those decisions. Again, though, they're decisions that God lets humans and angels make completely on their own.

[awestruckchild]

I guess my point was God just doesnt feel as relevant today as He seemed in the past. Seemed like He used to be more in your face, where now its just a bunch of mostly misguided souls telling you how you should live.

Jeffinator,
If God does not seem like a relevant God to you, it is because you have just not met Him yet.
You have not met Him or learned to recognize His voice. You have not felt Him speak where waves wash over and through you and the hair on your arm and the back of your neck raises up, and so you know what is being said by someone is truth or know which direction to go by that voice.
You can either choose to reject that it is possible that you are blind and deaf in this way and only have your human eyes and ears, or you can ask Him for this sight that Jesus spoke about. Why should you not LIVE and have this when He has said all you have to do is ask and ask with your entire heart?