Herb requested that I start a new thread on this issue. The next two posts will be my reply. -XD


By Herb Evans:


For the LORD your God is God of gods, and Lord of lords, a great God, a mighty, and a terrible, which regardeth not persons, nor taketh reward: -- Deut. 10:17

The LORD God of gods, the LORD God of gods, he knoweth, and Israel he shall know; if it be in rebellion, or if in transgression against the LORD . . . -- Josh. 22:22

For the LORD is a great God, and a great King above all gods. -- Psa. 95:3

For thou, LORD, art high above all the earth: thou art exalted far above all gods. -- Psa. 97:9

O give thanks unto the God of gods: for his mercy endureth for ever. -- Psa. 136:2

For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many) -- 1 Cor. 8:5

What we are about to say should not be taken in any way that would detract from the Godhead or Lordship of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit nor should it be taken to endorse the Mormon view of us all becoming gods after death. God is God, and there is none else. Still, in the sense, which Webster and the scriptures allow, i.e., one having supreme dominion or jurisdiction, a sovereign, a supreme authority (there be gods many).

For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be AS GODS, knowing good and evil. -- Gen. 3:5

Show the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that ye are gods: yea, do good, or do evil, that we may be dismayed, and behold it together. -- Isa. 41:23

The only requirements for god-ship seem to be doing good or evil or telling the future, so one may be a good god or an evil god but not THE God. Once Adam and Eve sinned, they became AS GODS, knowing good and evil. Though cursed, they became sovereign entities. They were given dominion over this earth and its creatures (Gen. 1:26, 28). Sovereigns do not impose their will on other sovereigns unless they conquer them. Sovereign entities must surrender their sovereignty and submit to another in order for another to become their master or they must be conquered and be captured by another in order to get their submission. This involves a sovereign choice. Sovereign man must choose to serve the Sovereign LORD or be conquered into submission, as those, whose unsaved knees shall one day also bow.

In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. -- 2 Cor. 4:4

They sacrificed unto devils, not to God; to gods whom they knew not, to new gods that came newly up, whom your fathers feared not. -- Deut. 32:17

And the king said unto her, Be not afraid: for what sawest thou? And the woman said unto Saul, I saw gods ascending out of the earth. -- 1 Sam. 28:13

What the witch saw is not entirely clear, but she thought she saw gods coming out of the earth, when she saw Samuel or an apparition of Samuel. If it was not Samuel, it was a demon god; If it was Samuel, it was a man god, who tells the future. The devil is also a god, who is sovereign but more powerful than man. Since Adam surrendered his service and submission to this devil god, mankind is taken captive at his will. He is the prince of the power of the air and demands his demon emissary gods to be served. Every man still has the sovereign choice of serving God or the devil and his mammon. They also choose the degree to which they obey and serve them.

Thou shalt not revile the gods, nor curse the ruler of thy people. -- Exo. 22:28

A Psalm of David. I will praise thee with my whole heart: before the gods will I sing praise unto thee. -- Psa. 138:1

The judges and leaders of Israel were considered to be gods in the sense of ones, who were in sovereign authority.

Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken . . . -- John 10:34,35

A Psalm of Asaph. God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods. -- Psa. 82:1

I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High. -- Psa. 82:6

If ordinary sinners can be considered as sovereign gods, how much more the children of God? Jesus quotes the Psalmist here in response to the complaints that Jesus was making Himself to be God. Jesus pointed out that he met the least requirements of scripture. He claimed to be the Son of God and told the future and did good and much more. Yes, it is a play on words but a valid play on words. Naturally, Jesus also met the most stringent requirements of scripture to be found the God of Gods and the LORD of lords.

The point that we are making is that many will teach the Sovereignty of God, while ignoring or gainsaying the sovereignty of man. After all the instruments of God come to bear on a sinner, - the Holy Spirit conviction, being reproved of sin, righteousness, judgement, the goodness of God, and an invitation from God Himself, man must still relinquish his sovereign will to receive the Lordship of Jesus Christ.

Instead of teaching unconditional election, some should be teaching unconditional surrender. Notions about not having a free will or a free choice is ludicrous in the light of God's explicit invitations and demand to choose. If a sovereign God offers sovereign man a choice and a chance to escape hell on the basis of what His Son did, how can man take credit for his own salvation? If the scriptures teach that man is a sovereign god with a free will, why should we do otherwise?

-- by Herb Evans

Flaming Torch - Oct/Nov/Dec 2002, p. 19

__________________
Sola Scriptura,

XD

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

"This isn't about Calvinism/Arminianism... it's about the gospel!"
-Paul Washer

"we all, by nature, are Arminians."
-C. H. Spurgeon

First, per the definition of sovereignty, the sovereignty of man and the sovereignty of God cannot both exist at the same time. For what if one’s sovereignty would violate the others? This would redefine the whole situation. The only way this could work is for both God and Man to be fully independent (key word) from each other. (Picture two parallel lines which never cross.)

Since we clearly see that man depends of God, we can obviously see that man is not sovereign. Sure, man can still make decisions, but they aren’t independent from any outside interference. Nevertheless, God is clearly sovereign over everything, including man. (Psalm 113:4, Acts 17:27-28, Proverbs 16:9, James 4:15, and many more). Of course, Romans 9:20 shows a response to those who question God.

Let’s see what you say:

Ok so you show God’s sovereignty above all, which includes his sovereignty over man. Great! Then you complete your section with what seems to insist that man is also sovereign. You aren’t entirely clear here, but the word sovereign is a word to describe, as you stated, supreme authority. Man certainly doesn’t fall into this state. We know man is in bondage to sin, definitely not sovereign over sin. Can you clarify?

I’m sure you put a lot of time into your literature, but your section on Adam is completely out of context, which appears to be the reason you place such exuberance in human ability. The serpent contradicts what God had previously said in Genesis 2:17. So you believe that Satan was in fact correct, not God? I doubt you do. Now God gave Adam and Eve dominion, certainly, but to insinuate they are now sovereign over the earth would mean they now have equal authority, in some sense, as God, for God cannot be sovereign over the earth and man be sovereign over the earth at the same time. A King can give someone dominion over a town, but when the dust settles, the King is still in charge.

Regardless, the world was soon to change upon their sin. You insist that sovereign entities will only impose their wills on other sovereigns when they are conquered. According to this, one would assume that at some point God will conquer man after mans indifference, as in trying to keep his sovereignty. I believe God will conquer sin, in which an unregenerate man is in bondage – and certainly not sovereign over it. By the way, has God not imposed much of his will on earth, which you believe to be the sovereign land of man and Satan at the same time? Of course He has. God can manipulate anything in anyone’s life at any time according to his mere pleasure, which is in direct violation of what you are teaching. Man is not sovereign.

I believe you are confusing sovereignty with man’s choice. Man does choose what he wants, but his choices are based on his desires. These desires, since the fall, have been evil (Genesis 6:5) and furthermore, they have been evil ever since the Flood (Genesis 8:21). The only way out of this dire state is by the mere will of our sovereign God (John 1:13), man thus being inferior and certainly not sovereign. More on this later...

__________________
Sola Scriptura,

XD

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

"This isn't about Calvinism/Arminianism... it's about the gospel!"
-Paul Washer

"we all, by nature, are Arminians."
-C. H. Spurgeon

There is nothing here to challenge the sovereignty of God. The devil is sovereign to what? The use of the word “god” in the bible isn’t referring to sovereignty. Someone’s TV can be their god, yet their TV isn’t a sovereign being. Then you state, “Since Adam surrendered his service and submission to this devil god, mankind is taken captive at his will.” So sovereign man is captive by sovereign Satan who is waiting for the uninvolved sovereign God to conquer them unless the sovereign man somehow decides that he hates his sovereignty and therefore thwarts and escapes the bondage of the sovereign Satan only to yield and worship the sovereign God – and all this because he read some scripture and decided to believe with no inclination or bias either way; going from being the king of all his decisions to being a subject to someone else’s? Your above statement alone refutes your premise that man is sovereign. What power does he have over himself? He is controlled by his desires which are manifested in the choices he makes. A man controlled or otherwise in is sovereign (supreme ruler) over nothing.

You equate the passage in John 10:34,35 (taken from Psalm 82:2-6) with Christ admitting that people are gods. And then since he called them gods, they must be sovereign entities… at least “sovereign” over their own person (which isn’t the correct use of the word sovereign). Look at the context of Psalms 82. The “gods” were the rulers, and/or, human judges. They were representatives of the true God. Jesus, in John 10, quotes the Psalms 82:6 to show that as the human judges were call gods, how much more applicable is it for the one who truly is the Son of God. From these passages you leap to this conclusion: “If ordinary sinners can be considered as sovereign gods, how much more the children of God? “ Notice how you conveniently add the word “sovereign.” If by “ordinary sinners” you mean that the judges were still sinners then that is ok. If by “ordinary sinners” you equate the Psalms passage to mean all of humankind are gods, then that is totally out of context and added. To make the jump to sovereignty is simply additional jargon.

Your last two paragraphs are a misrepresentation of the debate between man and his free choice. I believe man has a free will. I’m not sure who says man doesn’t, but I would disagree with them. But we must know what “man having a free will” means. Your sovereign free will, which can also be called an autonomous free will, is not found in scripture. Since you see choices that must be made you assume it is an unbiased choice of the man to choose what he deems best in light of his own personal desires. I agree that man chooses based on his desires, but it is these desires which are corrupt. I have commonly used the word inclinations on other threads. All of your decisions come from your inclinations or desires. You may say, “well I don’t desire to pay my mortgage every month, but I still do it.” But you still desire to keep the house and stay out of foreclosure . Everything is based on an inclination.

Now, spiritually, our inclinations are opposite of desiring God, they are evil and we are hopeless, less the miraculous interceding of Him on our behalf. Man has a the free will to choose God, but only God can change man's inclinations, and man will only choose based off these inclinations - so why would he choose God if his inclinations are evil... why would he not choose God if his inclinations are good. “But don’t unsaved people still do some good things,” is a common reply. Sure they do, but at their core their inclinations are evil. Just as at the core the regenerate man’s inclinations are good, yet he can still sin -> but after that sin he repents and desires God, and sees his sin for what it is in light of a holy and just God. The former does good for his own desires; be it for something as simple as fame or recognition.

In summary, “If the scriptures teach that man is a sovereign god with a free will, why should we do otherwise?” is the battle cry of your position. Yet, as we have seen, it is not the battle cry of the God of the bible.


...

__________________
Sola Scriptura,

XD

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

"This isn't about Calvinism/Arminianism... it's about the gospel!"
-Paul Washer

"we all, by nature, are Arminians."
-C. H. Spurgeon

[quote=xtreme_devotion_120;1292443]
First, per the definition of sovereignty, the sovereignty of man and the sovereignty of God cannot both exist at the same time.

Why not? The USA is sovereign and so is Canada. Sovereigns respect the sovereignity oof each other. – Herb Evans

For what if one’s sovereignty would violate the others?

Then you have war, and one must surrender to the other. – Herb Evans

This would redefine the whole situation.

How so? – Herb Evans

The only way this could work is for both God and Man to be fully independent (key word) from each other. (Picture two parallel lines which never cross.)

Both of us acknowledge that God is fully independent. Calvinists acknowledge that the non-elect are completely and irreconcilably and uncurably severed from God. – Herb Evans

Since we clearly see that man depends of God, we can obviously see that man is not sovereign.

If the lost non-elect man is dependent only on himself and does as he pleases, he is sovereign. – Herb Evans

Sure, man can still make decisions, but they aren’t independent from any outside interference. Nevertheless, God is clearly sovereign over everything, including man. (Psalm 113:4, Acts 17:27-28, Proverbs 16:9, James 4:15, and many more). Of course, Romans 9:20 shows a response to those who question God.

Well, there you go again verse flinging without any eisegesis of the verses or explanation as to what you mean. You are proving that God is sovereign, to which I agree. Still, the god of this world is Satan. Nothing here that proves that man is not sovereign. Moreover, passages that you apply to a saved man are not applicable since a saved man surrenders his sovereignity to God and is no longer sovereign after salvation.

To try to use Acts 17:27, 28 is unfortunate for you in that that proof text tells us that the non-elect lost men can seek the Lord and find Him and can feel after Him and that the Lord is not far from the non-elect lost man.

Act 17:27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:
Act 17:28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.

-- Herb Evans

__________________
And by the holy Scriptures we understand, the Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament, as they are now translated into our English Mother-Tongue, of which there never hath been any doubt of their verity, and authority, in the protestant Churches of Christ to this day. --The English Orthodox Baptist Confession of 1679

1. Scriptures in the English mother tongue.
2. Authoritive in the English mother tongue.
3. No doubt as to their verity in the English mother tongue.

Every man serves a master, Hreb. No man is an island unto himself.

Paul is addressing the children of God in Acts 17. If he's not, would not verse 28 contradict your position, that the non-elect is dependent only on himself?

Acts 17:28 For in him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also his offspring.

__________________
Facebook Profile

My blog

M. M. Knight

Age: 20

Denominational Affiliation: Presbyterian

Statement of Salvation: I was saved at a young age, went to Christian school from a toddler to a senior in high school, and only became truly aware of the indescribable majesty of God's grace in May 2007.

May I introduce you to Knight? After one year of being aware of whatever, the poor kid is trying to propagandize Calvinism. Of course, the boy does not know exactly when he was saved, since most Calvinists do not have salvation experiences as such. They sort of grow into it. Then they become REALIZERS instead of believers. They finally realize that they are one of the elect. Of Course, it must have been in May 2007 that he became TRULY aware that he was regenerated before he repented and believed (IF HE EVER DID) and also decided that he knew it all after one year of that realization. Before we address ANY of his remarks, we would like to know what happened when he was saved. Where he was saved? How he was saved? In addition to that, we would like to know how he knew that he was one of the elect and when? – Herb Evans

P.S. I knew that this immature kid was a kid, before I looked up his profile.

__________________
And by the holy Scriptures we understand, the Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament, as they are now translated into our English Mother-Tongue, of which there never hath been any doubt of their verity, and authority, in the protestant Churches of Christ to this day. --The English Orthodox Baptist Confession of 1679

1. Scriptures in the English mother tongue.
2. Authoritive in the English mother tongue.
3. No doubt as to their verity in the English mother tongue.

The first time I was asked to "let Jesus in my heart" was when I was 5, in my kindergarten class. I did, not being told why I should do so (or at least I don't remember being told so). I attended a Methodist church regularly from that time until 8th grade. When I was 10, I remember sitting on a stool in the kitchen wondering if I had ever taken what I had been taught in church seriously: that I was a sinner who had offended God and needed for Him to save me from condemnation. So I prayed for Him to save me and since then I have tried, and failed, to live as God tells His children to live. As for when I "knew I was one of the elect," I didn't even know what that meant until freshman year of college, when I started discussing theology on facebook. It was at that time I first heard of Calvinism and Arminianism. After a week of reading the evidence for both sides, I came to the realization that Calvinism was biblical. That's not when I was justified; I had faith before then. But it was the first time I realized my faith was given to me by God, and that it was only by His doing that I was saved. Before then, I never really thought about it. I believed salvation was of God, but didn't understand how it worked. I didn't understand the basis of my belief. Now I do.

So, if you now want to accuse me of not truly believing Jesus is my Lord and Savior, don't *****foot around - say it. Be done with it and then either answer my previous points or continue to equivocate.

__________________
Facebook Profile

My blog

In your response to my opening remark, let me hit on a few things.

- Your USA/Canada example isn’t the same as your claim that both man and God are sovereign at the same time. To believe this you must admit that God is uninvolved in man’s life… because we know that Canada isn’t involved in the livelihood of the USA, or vice versa. Sovereignty is speaking of supreme ownership, and in no way is any definition of free will a representation of supreme ownership. If God has the "rights" to our lives, than we can't be supreme over anything. I agree with certain freedoms, responsibilities, and such within the human... but not sovereignty.

- In the issue of sovereign entities violating each other you state, "Then you have war, and one must surrender to the other. – Herb Evans" So it is then possible, under your set of circumstances, for God to submit to man. God doesn’t have to declare war, he can do as he pleases and rain all over our parade. Also, your statement insinuates that God is limited by human sovereignty. Actually, he violates our sovereignty all the time, and has all throughout humanity… so is God a bully, violating our right of supreme rule over our life?

- God’s independence is involved within every facet of human life. He does what he pleases, when he pleases, and how he pleases. Man cannot be independent or dependent on himself when this is going on, for many of his decisions are manipulated by God (hardened heart, open heart, etc.). ” If the lost non-elect man is dependent only on himself and does as he pleases, he is sovereign. – Herb Evans” Being dependent on oneself is the same as independence.

- If God is sovereign, what is he sovereign over? Is he sovereign over the whole universe, everything imaginable, except the pockets of unregenerate souls lurking around the earth?

- We’ll get into more verses as we go on in our discussion. You replied to my opening statement, but that wasn’t in reply to specifics of your paper. The rest of my original replies will cover many of the points you brought up.

- I do believe in free will, lest we forget. But I also believe that your description of free will (e.g., human sovereignty) is incompatible and a misrepresentation of scripture. More on this as we proceed.


...

__________________
Sola Scriptura,

XD

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

"This isn't about Calvinism/Arminianism... it's about the gospel!"
-Paul Washer

"we all, by nature, are Arminians."
-C. H. Spurgeon

[quote=xtreme_devotion_120;1294116]

In your response to my opening remark, let me hit on a few things. - Your USA/Canada example isn’t the same as your claim that both man and God are sovereign at the same time.

Why not the same? Canada and the USA are both sovereign at the same time. – Herb Evans

To believe this you must admit that God is uninvolved in man’s life… because we know that Canada isn’t involved in the livelihood of the USA, or vice versa.

Must I submit to your continual demand that I admit something? Canada and the USA are involved with one another without any sacrifice of sovereignty. – Herb Evans

Sovereignty is speaking of supreme ownership, and in no way is any definition of free will a representation of supreme ownership. If God has the "rights" to our lives, than we can't be supreme over anything. I agree with certain freedoms, responsibilities, and such within the human... but not sovereignty.

What dictionary are you using to develop the meaning of the word the way that you want to employ it in your pontificated argument (ownership)? Strange talk for someone who believes that the non-elect are not God’s in any way, shape, or form. Let anyone define their terms their way and they can make their doctrines work. I learned that from the JW’s. – Herb Evans

In the issue of sovereign entities violating each other you state, "Then you have war, and one must surrender to the other. – Herb Evans" So it is then possible, under your set of circumstances, for God to submit to man.

You mean that you got that out of my example on war? The God of gods neither surrenders nor submits to any one. If there is a war, God wins. Again, XD tries to put words in Herb Evans’ mouth. – Herb Evans

God doesn’t have to declare war, he can do as he pleases and rain all over our parade.

God often pleases to do what Calvinists do not allow Him to do. Still, he declares certain as enmity to Him, whether elect or non-elect. If they so oppose Him, that is proof that they are sovereign. You can’t have humans to be Robots on the one hand and then turn around and allow them to have a sinful will on the other. – Herb Evans

Also, your statement insinuates that God is limited by human sovereignty.

Insinuates? Editorializing Herb Evans again? God is not limited by human sovereignty unless it pleases Him to do so. – Herb Evans

Actually, he violates our sovereignty all the time, and has all throughout humanity… so is God a bully, violating our right of supreme rule over our life? - God’s independence is involved within every facet of human life.

God does rule in the affairs of men, but He does exert circumstances and influence to achieve His plans. Still, God does not force man to be saved. So much for irresistible grace! Even with Christians, someone has so aply said, He does not make you go against your will, He just makes you willing to go. Even with countries, they exert influence on each other to achieve their own concerns. Naturally, there are no earthly examples that can sufficiently explain anything about a triune God. – Herb Evans

He does what he pleases, when he pleases, and how he pleases.

That is true of God. It is also true of man, but God uses what man pleases, when man pleases, and how man pleases to accomplishwhat God please. Case in point -- The crucifixion. – Herb Evans

Man cannot be independent or dependent on himself when this is going on, for many of his decisions are manipulated by God (hardened heart, open heart, etc.).

God does manipulate man’s decisions and actions, but He does it without violating man’s free will. Of course, Calvinists do not concede man’s free will to accept the gospel. They only accept man’s will to sin and reject God and the gospel. In either case, man is sovereign or he would have NO will at all -- as an automaton. – Hreb Evans

” If the lost non-elect man is dependent only on himself and does as he pleases, he is sovereign. – Herb Evans” Being dependent on oneself is the same as independence.- If God is sovereign, what is he sovereign over? Is he sovereign over the whole universe, everything imaginable, except the pockets of unregenerate souls lurking around the earth? –

You keep inserting the word OVER in keeping with your view of sovereignty. Man sovereignty is not OVER God but of himself. If you want to declare God as being LORD OVER ALL, I have no problem with that, although Satan is the god of this world. Still, until you are prepared to make God the author of men’s sins (and some Calvinists do), you can not take that “sovereign over” route definition. Of course, I do not know if you are a sub Lapsarian, a Supra Lapsarian or a Infra Lapsarian. Perhaps, you will tell me. – Herb Evans

We’ll get into more verses as we go on in our discussion. You replied to my opening statement, but that wasn’t in reply to specifics of your paper.

No, it was in reply to your introduction. – Herb Evans

The rest of my original replies will cover many of the points you brought up. - I do believe in free will, lest we forget. But I also believe that your description of free will (e.g., human sovereignty) is incompatible and a misrepresentation of scripture. More on this as we proceed. –XD

You are inconsistent! There is no free will without sovereignty – with countries or human kind. Now, if you wish to take the position of some Calvinists, then your position would be consistent. – Herb Evans

__________________
And by the holy Scriptures we understand, the Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament, as they are now translated into our English Mother-Tongue, of which there never hath been any doubt of their verity, and authority, in the protestant Churches of Christ to this day. --The English Orthodox Baptist Confession of 1679

1. Scriptures in the English mother tongue.
2. Authoritive in the English mother tongue.
3. No doubt as to their verity in the English mother tongue.

Hreb, how is man sovereign over himself if he's a slave to sin/righteousness? He serves one of two masters, and I don't remember either one of those choices being himself.

__________________
Facebook Profile

My blog