Comments on soap box debate with Butero and Shiloh

[enoob57]

The debate has stalled in that no Scripture has been provided that God is responsible for all evil because
He 'IS' sovereign... it is important to note that Butero has in fact stressed his own common sense
as motivation for his conclusions. Where as Shiloh has stressed Biblical context as to structure his
reason. Butero cannot counter the debate as the Ezekiel passage states from God's end Lucifer was
created perfect and Butero diverges from this to common sense ... clearly the Word teaches us Christ
the Living Word our only foundation and the objective nature of the written text in literal face
value hermeneutic combined with Holy Spirit's guidance is the determining factor to that of truth...   
Love, Steven 

[Marilyn C]

On ‎17‎/‎08‎/‎2016 at 3:45 PM, The_Patriot2016 said:

 

now, Shiloh makes a point, that nowhere in the Bible does God use evil to fulfill his plan. Butero, is right, thats a false argument, though Buteros examples, are incorrect. Butero brings up Israel being ordered by God to destroy the canaanites, and the philistines, and the flood. None of these things are evil brought upon by God. If God is a holy, and just God, and perfect, then anything that He expressely orders-or causes, therefore cannot be evil. God ordered the destruction of the canaanites, He ordered it, it wasnt evil. same with the philistines, and same with the flood. If God had the right to create the world and every living thing in it-He also has the right to destroy anything in it, at will, and not be evil. Its like me going out and buying a car. That car is mine to do with as I please. I can treat it nice, and keep it in tip top shape, or I can lace it with C4 and blow it up. its my car, I can do with it as I please. Same with God and His creation. If God ordered it, its not evil.

The examples that He should have used, and has in the past, is, like in the case of the Pharoah in egypt, God intentionally hardened Pharoahs heart, in order to fulfill His bigger plan. God also allowed other countries such as babylon and persia, to take over Israel, as punishment for the Israelites disobediance.

Hi The_Patriot2016,

I would say that God is bringing judgment in those cases - re: destroying of Philistines etc. God is long suffering, however when evil comes to a head then judgment.

 As to hardening Pharaoh`s heart, if we read in context we see that that was the result of God continually showing to Pharaoh His great power. Pharaoh had many opportunities to repent, acknowledge God, but he chose to not humble himself.

regards, Marilyn.

Edited August 22, 2016 by Marilyn C

[Guest shiloh357]

On 8/17/2016 at 0:45 AM, The_Patriot2016 said:

now, Shiloh makes a point, that nowhere in the Bible does God use evil to fulfill his plan.

Actually, I did not  made that point.  

I said that God does not create people to be evil to fulfill His plans and that God does not orchestrate, nor ordain moral evil (sin).   I also made the point that God did not create sin for his purposes either.

There is a huge difference between claiming that God uses evil people and claiming that God created them to be evil for the purpose of destroying them.   God will often use evil people as a tool of judgment, but   James 1:13 tells us not to blame God when we sin, that God cannot be tempted and does not tempt anyone.  He does not cause anyone to sin.

Quote

And now matter how you look at it, the question "How can I believe in a God that creates evil" is in reaity, not entirely different then "how can I believe in a God that allows bad things to happen to good people"

 There is a huge difference in those questions.   One is an assault on God's integrity, and the other one is questioning Gods' goodness in the middle of adversity and discouragement.    Those are light years apart.

[The_Patriot21]

1 minute ago, shiloh357 said:

 

 

 

 There is a huge difference in those questions.   One is an assault on God's integrity, and the other one is questioning Gods' goodness in the middle of adversity and discouragement.    Those are light years apart.

 

not to someone who has hit the bottom and is struggling with either of those questions.

[Guest shiloh357]

Just now, The_Patriot2016 said:

not to someone who has hit the bottom and is struggling with either of those questions.

Well, yes when someone is in an emotional fog, they probably lack the clarity of mind to tackle those questions, or see the difference, but the fact remains that to anyone else who is simply being objective, those questions are miles apart in their assumptions.  One assumes God is evil and is inflicting us with evil.  The other assumes God is good and is confused about how He is working the situation out.  It is natural to question God's providence in times of adversity. 

[enoob57]

The difficulty in this issue is clarity in distinction... God's position is one of never having anything to
do with sin with exception at the cross. If we take all of The Scripture and formulate it to directive
we find this: sin's only fruit is confusion and we born as sin in a place of sin must seek that which is
without sin to see clearly! 'Ye must be born again' as the sower of seed so must the Seed of God be
placed within you by  The Word bearing faith within enabling that birth... doesn't it make sense
(uncommon sense) that a Holy and Righteous God have a path to us that we have never used as a sin
means? That being through His Word through faith generated by That Word unto belief... trans-
forming us into aliens from our first begin and living totally by faith in our second begin! This; God
desiring for all the children of Adam but it is a narrow and hard to find for it requires us to exit our
own being to cry out to God for a new being only ratified by faith in His Word and we, who have done
so, know by The Witness of God s/Spiritually within- 'it 'IS' so'...
Love, Steven

[enoob57]

On ‎8‎/‎22‎/‎2016 at 7:40 PM, shiloh357 said:

Well, yes when someone is in an emotional fog, they probably lack the clarity of mind to tackle those questions, or see the difference, but the fact remains that to anyone else who is simply being objective, those questions are miles apart in their assumptions.  One assumes God is evil and is inflicting us with evil.  The other assumes God is good and is confused about how He is working the situation out.  It is natural to question God's providence in times of adversity. 

In counseling we must be tender to that condition and endeavor to support them through their
emotional instability so that when that fog lifts we are able to effectively minister The Word to
them for healing... The theological issues must be lightly applied with Holy Spirit led discern-
ment! The need to see what we are in (the present state of this world)~ we are also responsible
for and that we have been provided with an escape yet through a fire of which we started... I
believe once we see we were left here to see the fruit of choice in sin we are learned to the
indisputable fact that God's Way is the only way... at least that is what I am learning

[Ezra]

On 8/22/2016 at 9:15 AM, enoob57 said:

The debate has stalled in that no Scripture has been provided that God is responsible for all evil because
He 'IS' sovereign..

The sad fact is that the sovereignty of God has been distorted by Reformed Theology to the point where God is made responsible for every sin and evil deed.  This leads to more distortions regarding the grace of God and the salvation of sinners. You will notice though, that those who commit themselves to Reformed Theology never admit that it is false in many critical aspects. In a sense they have been brain-washed.

[Guest shiloh357]

14 hours ago, Ezra said:

The sad fact is that the sovereignty of God has been distorted by Reformed Theology to the point where God is made responsible for every sin and evil deed.  This leads to more distortions regarding the grace of God and the salvation of sinners. You will notice though, that those who commit themselves to Reformed Theology never admit that it is false in many critical aspects. In a sense they have been brain-washed.

To be fair, mainstream Reformed theology doesn't make God responsible for sin.   There are extremists in the Reformed camp, might make that leap, but your Reformed teachers like Sproul, MacArthur, Begg, Spurgeon, etc., don't argue that God engineers sin.   Nor, do they take a hard deterministic approach that states that every action and event has been set in stone.  The mainstream view of predestination, as far as I can tell, really only applies to salvation.  I disagree with them on their TULIP theology, but I do think Reformed leaders get it right when they talk about holiness, grace, Christian living principles.

[Ezra]

11 hours ago, shiloh357 said:

To be fair, mainstream Reformed theology doesn't make God responsible for sin.  

Which means that mainstream Reformed Theology has departed from its own Westminster Confession of Faith

Chapter III

Of God's Eternal Decree

I. 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]

If God ordains "whatsoever comes to pass" He ordains all the sin and evil in the world, notwithstanding the disclaimer which shows how ridiculous that concept is.