Debating, 12th grade...

[ShadowMaid]

... and down. Here 12th graders and down can debate about any subject. You can be public schooled, or homeschooled.

Please, do not post in this thread if you are beyond 12th grade.

[Christine]

Is homeschooling the best form of education? Is it superior to public and private schools? Is it supported by the Bible?

[ShadowMaid]

Good topic Christine. :thumb:

[Greywolf]

Originally posted by Christine
Is homeschooling the best form of education? Is it superior to public and private schools? Is it supported by the Bible?

The diversity of opinion on this issue among the posters here who are 12th grade and lower should really make for a lively debate. :chuckle:

[ShadowMaid]

Yes it should. Are you 12th grade or lower? :)

[Greywolf]

Originally posted by ShadowMaid
Yes it should. Are you 12th grade or lower? :)

I'm in the 10th grade.

[ShadowMaid]

Really? I didn't realize. Welcome aboard!

[Greywolf]

Originally posted by ShadowMaid
Really? I didn't realize.

I've been trying to hide it.

Originally posted by ShadowMaid
Welcome aboard!

Thanks.

[Dread Helm]

Hi! Greywolf, didn't know you were in 10th grade. Hi, SM and Christine, :wave:

[ShadowMaid]

Hey Dread :wave:

[Elaine]

Hi, DreadHelm. :wave:

[ShadowMaid]

:chuckle: Can't turn this into a reunion thread now. Better go to the homeschoolers thread.

[ShadowMaid]

Originally posted by Christine

Is homeschooling the best form of education? Is it superior to public and private schools? Is it supported by the Bible?

So is anyone going to take up Christines challenge?

[Dread Helm]

So what is it, 4 on 1? Not very good odds for Greywolf

[Christine]

Greywolf, I must admitt, I wonder how old you are. I remember in another thread when the two of us were debating, you said you were raised Lutheran. If you were still at home (as I would expect you to be if your in the 10th grade) why did you use the past tense of raise? :confused:

[Greywolf]

Originally posted by Christine
Greywolf, I must admitt, I wonder how old you are.

15

Originally posted by Christine
I remember in another thread when the two of us were debating, you said you were raised Lutheran. If you were still at home (as I would expect you to be if your in the 10th grade) why did you use the past tense of raise? :confused:

Good memory. I was trying to indicate that up until my "conversion" (an event in the past) that I was raised as a Christian. I'm still being raised, but I'm not a Christian anymore. Sorry for the confusion.

[Christine]

Originally posted by Greywolf
Good memory. I was trying to indicate that up until my "conversion" (an event in the past) that I was raised as a Christian. I'm still being raised, but I'm not a Christian anymore. Sorry for the confusion.
Ok. I understand now.:) Did you want to debate me?

[Greywolf]

Originally posted by Dread Helm
So what is it, 4 on 1? Not very good odds for Greywolf

Sure they are. Don't you watch any action movies? :chuckle:

[Greywolf]

Originally posted by Christine
Ok. I understand now.:) Did you want to debate me?

Sure.

Originally posted by Christine
Is homeschooling the best form of education?

I think that public schooling is the best form of education. Both public schooling and home schooling have their pros and cons. For instance, public schools generally have better, more knowledgeable, more experienced teachers, while homeschooling has the advantage of small class sizes (Something that is becoming less and less common in public schools these days.)

I think that public schooling generally prepares you for life better. It forces you to deal with other people on a day to day basis, even people you may not necessarily like. I also think that public schooling exposes you to a greater variety of people and views. For instance, I have friends who are atheists, Buddhists, Muslims, Catholics, and Protestants (although, granted, we don't really discuss religion much).

Originally posted by Christine
Is it superior to public and private schools?

I can't really say anything about private schools, having never attended one. Some of my friends who have attended private schools told me that they were bad.

Originally posted by Christine
Is it supported by the Bible?

Is public schooling prohibited by the Bible?

[Christine]

Originally posted by Greywolf

Sure.
Great



I think that public schooling is the best form of education.
And I believe homeschooling is the best form. However, it sounds like both of us might be a little biased, neither having ever had any other form of education. :)
Both public schooling and home schooling have their pros and cons. For instance, public schools generally have better, more knowledgeable, more experienced teachers, while homeschooling has the advantage of small class sizes (Something that is becoming less and less common in public schools these days.)
Does it matter if the teachers are more experienced and more knowledgeable than, say the child's parents?

I think that public schooling generally prepares you for life better. It forces you to deal with other people on a day to day basis, even people you may not necessarily like.
I have to do that on TOL as well. Also, I'm sure a part-time job could also do that, though I really doubt most people need help with social skills.
I also think that public schooling exposes you to a greater variety of people and views.
True. Is that a good thing?
For instance, I have friends who are atheists, Buddhists, Muslims, Catholics, and Protestants (although, granted, we don't really discuss religion much).
Sounds neat. There aren't any Muslims or Buddhists in my area.



I can't really say anything about private schools, having never attended one. Some of my friends who have attended private schools told me that they were bad.
I've never attended a private school, either. However, I would expect them to be better than public schools, but that may not always be the case.



Is public schooling prohibited by the Bible?
Well, when God supports one view, it would follow he would not be in favor of it's counterpart. In Deuteronomy 6:7 God commands us to homeschool, "And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up." The only way this verse can be fulfilled is through homeschooling.

[Dread Helm]

Originally posted by Christine

Greywolf, I must admitt, I wonder how old you are. I remember in another thread when the two of us were debating, you said you were raised Lutheran. If you were still at home (as I would expect you to be if your in the 10th grade) why did you use the past tense of raise? :confused: Ahh, but you forget, in Publik Skool you can be 23 and in 10th grade, :chuckle:

[Christine]

Originally posted by Dread Helm

Ahh, but you forget, in Publik Skool you can be 23 and in 10th grade, :chuckle:
Dread! Quit fooling around and help me out!:chuckle:

[ShadowMaid]

Now now children, play nice. ;)

[ShadowMaid]

Just to let you all know, there can be more then one debate going at one time. So if one of you want to talk about something, you can start it here.

[Greywolf]

Originally posted by Christine
And I believe homeschooling is the best form. However, it sounds like both of us might be a little biased, neither having ever had any other form of education. :)

It's very possible. :think:

Originally posted by Christine
Does it matter if the teachers are more experienced and more knowledgeable than, say the child's parents?

I think that it would certaintly improve the child's education.

Originally posted by Christine
I have to do that on TOL as well.

That is true. But consider how many posters on TOL and other religion debate sites are homeschoolers. I'd imagine (I can't say for sure) that you, Shadowmaid, Elaine, and Dread Helm represent a minority of homeschoolers (and people, at that) who deliberately go somewhere for the purpose (or at least in part) of engage with people who you may not necessarily like or get along with. Most kids seem to follow the old "birds of a feather" adage.

Originally posted by Christine
Also, I'm sure a part-time job could also do that, though

That is true.

Originally posted by Christine
I really doubt most people need help with social skills.

I figure that the greatest contribution to the development of one's social skills is socializing. Granted, homeschoolers aren't necessarily unsocial, but public schooling almost forces you to socialize. If I homeschooled, my only contact with the outside world would probably be through the internet. :chuckle:

Originally posted by Christine
True. Is that a good thing?

From a Christian standpoint, you already have the truth, so I don't see how it would hurt anything. One might even see it as an opportunity to do some proselytizing. There was a kid who sometimes used to invite me to attend his church's youth group.

From the atheist/agnostic standpoint (or at least from my standpoint) it's a great thing.

Originally posted by Christine
Sounds neat. There aren't any Muslims or Buddhists in my area.

If I didn't attend a public school I wouldn't have realized that there were so many minorities in my area.

Originally posted by Christine
I've never attended a private school, either. However, I would expect them to be better than public schools, but that may not always be the case.

I'd imagine that there are many good private schools, but I think that many parents use private schools as dumping grounds for "problem children", which doesn't help the quality of the school any.

Originally posted by Christine
Well, when God supports one view, it would follow he would not be in favor of it's counterpart. In Deuteronomy 6:7 God commands us to homeschool, "And thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up." The only way this verse can be fulfilled is through homeschooling.

I disagree.

Here is the verse in context:
Deuteronomy 6:1-9

Now these are the commandments, the statutes, and the judgments, which the LORD your God commanded to teach you, that ye might do them in the land whither ye go to possess it: that thou mightest fear the LORD thy God, to keep all his statutes and his commandments, which I command thee, thou, and thy son, and thy son's son, all the days of thy life; and that thy days may be prolonged. Hear therefore, O Israel, and observe to do it; that it may be well with thee, and that ye may increase mightily, as the LORD God of thy fathers hath promised thee, in the land that floweth with milk and honey. Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD: and thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes. And thou shalt write them upon the posts of thy house, and on thy gates.

The "them" in that passage is referring to the Lord's commandments, not the children. Substitute "the Lord's commandments" for "them" in Deuteronomy 6:7 and read it like that. All that that verse is saying is that you should diligently teach your children the Lord's commandments, and homeschooling isn't the only way to do that.

[Christine]

Originally posted by ShadowMaid

Just to let you all know, there can be more then one debate going at one time. So if one of you want to talk about something, you can start it here.
You might want to start side threads. It could get confusing.

[ShadowMaid]

Originally posted by Christine

You might want to start side threads. It could get confusing.

We could. Or we could all get "un-lazy" and put stuff in the subject boxes. :chuckle:

[ShadowMaid]

Either one works, I'm sure.

[Christine]

Originally posted by Greywolf





I think that it would certaintly improve the child's education.
Do you have proof, or anything?



That is true. But consider how many posters on TOL and other religion debate sites are homeschoolers. I'd imagine (I can't say for sure) that you, Shadowmaid, Elaine, and Dread Helm represent a minority of homeschoolers (and people, at that) who deliberately go somewhere for the purpose (or at least in part) of engage with people who you may not necessarily like or get along with. Most kids seem to follow the old "birds of a feather" adage.
Yes, homeschoolers are a minority on internet forums (though there are forums more for homeschoolers). I know that some homeschoolers try to be "in" but I don't believe the majority of homeschoolers try. I certainly don't try.




figure that the greatest contribution to the development of one's social skills is socializing. Granted, homeschoolers aren't necessarily unsocial, but public schooling almost forces you to socialize. If I homeschooled, my only contact with the outside world would probably be through the internet. :chuckle:
Nonsense. Besides socializing with you and others on-line, I socialize with friends, neighbors, and family. Not to mention other activities. Some homeschoolers take clases at community colleges, volunteer, attend church, play on sport teams, etc. Socialization is not something that I worry if I'm getting enough of.



From a Christian standpoint, you already have the truth, so I don't see how it would hurt anything. One might even see it as an opportunity to do some proselytizing. There was a kid who sometimes used to invite me to attend his church's youth group.
Some Christians school kids are not firmly grounded in the faith. Other faiths and view points could cause them to loose faith.

From the atheist/agnostic standpoint (or at least from my standpoint) it's a great thing.
Really? Why's that?



If I didn't attend a public school I wouldn't have realized that there were so many minorities in my area.
I don't attend school and yet I know that my town has Japanese, Mexicans, and Blacks. How do I know this? I see them when I go shopping in the stores. :)



I'd imagine that there are many good private schools, but I think that many parents use private schools as dumping grounds for "problem children", which doesn't help the quality of the school any.
Unfortunately, I've heard stories of Christian private schools being ruined by "problem children" being sent there.



I disagree.

Here is the verse in context:
Deuteronomy 6:1-9


The "them" in that passage is referring to the Lord's commandments, not the children. Substitute "the Lord's commandments" for "them" in Deuteronomy 6:7 and read it like that. All that that verse is saying is that you should diligently teach your children the Lord's commandments, and homeschooling isn't the only way to do that.
It's pretty hard to dilligently teach your children God's commandments when their at school, you're at work, and the only time you're together is evenings and weekends. In the evenings kids have homework, and on Sunday they would probably attend church. Some families think Sunday is enough spiritual growth for one week. I disagree, two hours of church service compared to five eight-hour days of school? The parents would need more time, which they have when they homeschool.

[ShadowMaid]

This certainly is interesting. I'm glad Greywolf and Christine decided to debate on this topic. I'm very glad thet they're so far keeping it very friendly. Not yelling in each others faces. Which I would like to point out to future debaters here.

Please keep your posts and replys friendly.:)

[Christine]

Greywolf, are we going to continue?

[Greywolf]

Originally posted by Christine
Greywolf, are we going to continue?

Sorry about not responding. The school year is finishing up for me, so I've been a bit swamped with work.

As for the debate. I think that it would be a good idea to see what happens with the Battle Royal Jr. It's looking like we may be debating public schooling vs. homeschooling there. If the topic ends up being something else, than I'd love to continue this debate.

[Christine]

Originally posted by Greywolf

Sorry about not responding. The school year is finishing up for me, so I've been a bit swamped with work.

As for the debate. I think that it would be a good idea to see what happens with the Battle Royal Jr. It's looking like we may be debating public schooling vs. homeschooling there. If the topic ends up being something else, than I'd love to continue this debate.
That's fine with me. :)

[Pritykity]

Originally posted by Christine
Some Christians school kids are not firmly grounded in the faith. Other faiths and view points could cause them to loose faith.


Then they are probably not 'true' believers. At the same time, a friend at school could invite them to their church and maybe then they would believe more. Or it could open them up to other views in the same religion.

[ShadowMaid]

Originally posted by Pritykity

Then they are probably not 'true' believers. At the same time, a friend at school could invite them to their church and maybe then they would believe more. Or it could open them up to other views in the same religion.

That's a maybe, PrityKity.

[Christine]

Originally posted by Pritykity

Then they are probably not 'true' believers.
Mortal man has no way of knowing who's saved and who's not. More than likely, their "babes" in Christ.
At the same time, a friend at school could invite them to their church and maybe then they would believe more. Or it could open them up to other views in the same religion.
But none of this would change the fact that their being exposed to secular humanism on a daily basis at school. The humanism is going to have an impact on their faith and life.

[Dread Helm]

PrityKity, are you a student?

[Christine]

Well, since the Battle Royale Jr. is going to be over Public school vs. Homeschool, what should we debate now?

[Pritykity]

Yes, I am a student, Dreadhelm. I go to a public high school.

[ShadowMaid]

How about predestination? Anyone willing to debate me in that?

[ShadowMaid]

I stand against it.

[ShadowMaid]

Christine has taken up my offer. It will be a 1 on 1. Christine, would you like to post first?

[Christine]

First, I would like to briefly explain where I stand on this issue. I am a full-5 point Calvinist. I believe that man has no free will, and that God has complete control. I believe that everything is predestined, including prophetic events and day-to-day life. I believe that no one can get saved save that they are "called" of God. I'm going to focus on this last point, and provide scriptural references.

Some verses that support the view that you must be called in order to be saved are:

Luke 24:45 "Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures"

John 12:37-40 "But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him:
38 That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?
39 Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them."

The above passage from Luke tells us that God can blind people's eyes from understanding the truth, thus saying that God does have a say in who gets saved.

Another passage that talks of God "blinding men's eys" is 2 Thessalonians 2:11-12,"For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie 12and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness. "


John 15:16, "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you."

We see again that God chooses who gets saved.

Philippians 2:13, "for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose"

We see in Philippines that God's will is fulfilled in our lives and that we do as he wills.

There are many more passages that I could mention, but I believe this is sufficient for a starting point. :)

[ShadowMaid]

Hey :Christine

It will take awhile for me to get my post up. But I'm going to try and get it as soon as possible.

[Christine]

That's fine :shadowmd: Take your time, no need to feel rushed. :)

[Imrahil]

First of all, I would like to say thank you to Christine and Shadowmaid for inviting me to participate in this discussion. I am looking forward to an honest discussion of this important topic of the nature of God. I will lay out my beliefs and examine Christine’s post.

I believe that God is a God of love, God has emotions, He has given us free-will and the freedom to choose where we will spend eternity. I believe God interacts with His creation and can be moved by our prayers and actions.

In your post Christine, you stated the opposite of much of the above paragraph.
I believe that man has no free will, and that God has complete control. I believe that everything is predestined, including prophetic events and day-to-day life. I believe that no one can get saved save that they are "called" of God. Although some people might find comfort in this image of God, it is truly frightening to me. The idea that our all-powerful God is the author of sin and arbitrarily decides the fate of people’s eternal souls is not one I can find comfort in. However, you have provided several verses to support your position and I will take a look at them now.

The first passage listed is Luke 24:45 Then opened He their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures
You commented that The above passage from Luke tells us that God can blind people's eyes from understanding the truth, thus saying that God does have a say in who gets saved. However, let’s examine this to see if that is what it really says.
In Luke 24 Jesus is speaking with the disciples after His resurrection and explaining why He had to suffer and die. He explains in verse 44 the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah and the need to fulfill those prophecies. So Christ is not opening or closing anyone’s eyes to salvation. He was simply explaining the Messianic prophecies to the remaining disciples. So on closer inspection, this verse does not have anything to do with salvation it is dealing with prophecy.

The next passage mentioned is John 12:37-40. "But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him:
38 That the saying of Esaias (Isaiah) the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?
39 Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
40 He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them."
At first glance it may appear that God is preventing people from seeing the truth but let’s look closer. Verse 37 says "But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on Him This seems to be a statement of surprise. Even though Christ had performed all these miracles the people would still not believe Him. This does not fit with the idea that Jesus was purposely misleading or blinding people from the truth does it? It does seem to fit with the idea that Jesus was giving them the choice to accept or reject His message. Jesus had just entered Jerusalem before the Passover and is speaking to the people in the city. He had just spoken of His death in verses 27 to 33. The people then said to Him, The people answered Him, “We have heard from the law that the Christ remains forever; and how can You say, ‘The Son of Man must be lifted up’? Who is this Son of Man?� (35) Then Jesus said to them, “ A little while longer the light is with you. Walk while you have the light, lest the darkness overtake you; he who walks in darkness does not know where he is going. (36) While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light.� These things Jesus spoke and departed and was hidden from them. The people did not want to become “sons of light� they wanted an earthly savior to free them from their gentile oppressors. Because Jesus was not going to fulfill this role in His First coming, the people did not believe Him. So God blinded these people just as someone "makes" you angry. They do something and you react to it. That person does not force you to become angry but that is how you react to it. In the same manner, Christ proclaimed His message and the people rejected it.
Another passage is in 2nd Thessalonians 2:11-12. For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie 12and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.
Here we see a verse that definitely says God is preventing people from coming to salvation right? Well, let’s dig a little deeper. Two things stand out to me right away. Look at how the verse starts. For this reason. What reason? The answer is given to us in verse 10. they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. In verse 12 we see that these men preferred their wickedness to the truth. that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in their unrighteousness. So we see that these are not men who were earnestly seeking the truth and God is blinding their eyes. These were men who turned their backs on God and God allowed the fools to believe their folly. So as before in John 12 we see that these verses are not supporting the idea of a cold-blooded God picking who will be saved and who will not. We see men rejecting God’s offer of salvation of their own free-will.

The next verse you listed was in John 15:16. "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you." You commented that, We see again that God chooses who gets saved. But is that really true? Who is Christ speaking to in this verse? Well, if you look at the context we see that this conversation is taking place at the Last Supper between Jesus and the Twelve. So we see that Christ is not speaking of salvation of mankind or making a sweeping theological statement but rather it is a basic statement of fact and reassurance. On closer examination, this verse like the others listed does not support the Calvinist worldview.

The final verse you listed was in Phillippians 2:13 "for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to His good purpose" Does this verse mean that God has predestined everything anyone will do? I would think that would be stepping out too far on the strength of this verse’s statement. I completely agree that God is working in us for His good pleasure. I stated this at the beginning of my post. I believe God interacts with us. I do not think that means He is controlling every atom in the universe and every action of every man. If God is working in us that is interaction which is very different from watching His creation act out the pre-ordained roles He set for them. Indeed, as it says God is working in us [QUOTE] for His good pleasure If it were true that God is controlling everything we do for His pleasure, why does Paul exhort us in Ephesians 4:30 And do not grieve the Holy Spirit by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption. This verse implies that we can grieve the Holy Spirit. It would be a contradiction in terms to say it pleases God when we grieve Him. So yes, God is working in us. God is not forcing us to act exactly as He dictates for all eternity however.
In the next post I hope to list some more verses and points for my position but this should do for now.

[Christine]

Originally posted by Imrahil

I believe that God is a God of love
The Bible says God is also a God of wrath. "And when the LORD saw that they humbled themselves, the word of the LORD came to Shemaiah, saying, They have humbled themselves; therefore I will not destroy them, but I will grant them some deliverance; and mypb] wrath[/b] shall not be poured out upon Jerusalem by the hand of Shishak." (2 Chonicles 12:7)

" Through the wrath of the LORD of hosts is the land darkened, and the people shall be as the fuel of the fire: no man shall spare his brother." (Isaiah 9:19)

" He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." (John 3:36)

There are many other passages, I just provided a few to show that God is not just a God of love.

God has emotions
please provide scriptural support for this claim. :)

He has given us free-will and the freedom to choose where we will spend eternity. I believe God interacts with His creation and can be moved by our prayers and actions.
I hope you will provide further scriprtural support for this idea of free-will.


some people might find comfort in this image of God, it is truly frightening to me. The idea that our all-powerful is the author of sin arbitrarily decides the fate of people’s eternal souls is not one I can find comfort in.
Whoa. I did not say God is the author of sin. If God was the author of sin, that would indeed be a scary thought.



Luke 24:45 :Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
However, let’s examine this to see if that is what it really says.
In Luke 24 Jesus is speaking with the disciples after His resurrection and explaining why He had to suffer and die. He explains in verse 44 the Old Testament prophecies about the Messiah and the need to fulfill those prophecies. So Christ is not opening or closing anyone’s eyes to salvation. He was simply explaining the Messianic prophecies to the remaining disciples. So on closer inspection, this verse does not have anything to do with salvation it is dealing with prophecy.
Jesus opened the disciples minds so they could understand the prophecies. Without God opening our understanding, we couldn't understand anything. The very fact that you know or accept certain doctrines, is because God has allowed you that understanding.

The next passage mentioned is John 12:37-40.
At first glance it may appear that God is preventing people from seeing the truth but let’s look closer. Verse 37 says This seems to be a statement of surprise.
God is omniscent, he knows everything, past, present, and future. Nothing surprises God. And nowhere in that verse does God say he was surprised at their unbelief. It's probably a figure of speech.

Even though Christ had performed all these miracles the people would still not believe Him. This does not fit with the idea that Jesus was purposely misleading or blinding people from the truth does it? It does seem to fit with the idea that Jesus was giving them the choice to accept or reject His message
This verse says nothing about God giving man a choice.
. Jesus had just entered Jerusalem before the Passover and is speaking to the people in the city. He had just spoken of His death in verses 27 to 33. The people then said to Him, The people did not want to become “sons of light� they wanted an earthly savior to free them from their gentile oppressors. Because Jesus was not going to fulfill this role in His First coming, the people did not believe Him. So God blinded these people just as someone "makes" you angry. They do something and you react to it. That person does not force you to become angry but that is how you react to it. In the same manner, Christ proclaimed His message and the people rejected it.
We're talking God here, not a man. Sometimes, people are blinded because of anger, but this was not such an occasion. If God says he blinded their hearts, maybe the verse literally means, "He blinded their hearts." A similiar passage in the Old Testament is "Then the LORD said to Moses, "Go to Pharaoh, for I have hardened his heart and the hearts of his officials so that I may perform these miraculous signs of mine among them 2 that you may tell your children and grandchildren how I dealt harshly with the Egyptians and how I performed my signs among them, and that you may know that I am the LORD ." (Exodus 10:1) God really can and does blind peoples eyes and hearts.


Another passage is in 2nd Thessalonians 2:11-12.:"And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness"
Here we see a verse that definitely says God is preventing people from coming to salvation right? Well, let’s dig a little deeper. Two things stand out to me right away. Look at how the verse starts. What reason? The answer is given to us in verse 10. In verse 12 we see that these men preferred their wickedness to the truth. So we see that these are not men who were earnestly seeking the truth and God is blinding their eyes. These were men who turned their backs on God and God allowed the fools to believe their folly
Verse 10 states, "And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved."
So, the question becomes, why didn't they receive the truth? The answer is given in verse 13 and 14, "But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:
14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ." Theese that were believing a lie were doing so because they had not been called of God to be saved.

So as before in John 12 we see that these verses are not supporting the idea of a cold-blooded God picking who will be saved and who will not. We see men rejecting God’s offer of salvation of their own free-will.
That is not what I see

The next verse you listed was in John 15:16 " Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you."

But is that really true? Who is Christ speaking to in this verse? Well, if you look at the context we see that this conversation is taking place at the Last Supper between Jesus and the Twelve. So we see that Christ is not speaking of salvation of mankind or making a sweeping theological statement but rather it is a basic statement of fact and reassurance. On closer examination, this verse like the others listed does not support the Calvinist worldview.
The previous verse, 15, seems to show Jesus speaking to the disciples not as just disciples, but as servants, "Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you" All believers are servants of God, so it would logically follow all believers are called.

you listed was in Phillippians 2:13:"For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure."

If it were true that God is controlling everything we do for His pleasure
Exactly. :)

Paul exhort us in Ephesians 4:30, "And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption."
verse implies that we can grieve the Holy Spirit. It would be a contradiction in terms to say it pleases God when we grieve Him
I did not say it pleases God when we sin, or grieve Him. God gave us this passage in Ephesians because He knew ahead of time that some would grieve the Spirit of God. That's why He's warning them

. So yes, God is working in us. God is not forcing us to act exactly as He dictates for all eternity however.
He is, however. Fortunately, we don't feel like "robots" as many people call such a doctrine. We still seem to have freedom and choices, even though in reality we don't.


In the next post I hope to list some more verses and points for my position but this should do for now.
I'm looking forward to it :)

[Dread Helm]

I don't want to get into this debate but I'd like to share a quick observation:
quote:
Originally posted by Imrahil

I believe that God is a God of love


The Bible says God is also a God of wrath. "And when the LORD saw that they humbled themselves, the word of the LORD came to Shemaiah, saying, They have humbled themselves; therefore I will not destroy them, but I will grant them some deliverance; and mypb] wrath[/b] shall not be poured out upon Jerusalem by the hand of Shishak." (2 Chonicles 12:7)

" Through the wrath of the LORD of hosts is the land darkened, and the people shall be as the fuel of the fire: no man shall spare his brother." (Isaiah 9:19)

" He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." (John 3:36)

There are many other passages, I just provided a few to show that God is not just a God of love.


quote:
God has emotions


please provide scriptural support for this claim.


--------------------------------------------------
I just think that she obviously gives references to God's Wrath and then ask to see scriptural evidence that God has emotions.

[Christine]

Originally posted by Dread Helm

I don't want to get into this debate but I'd like to share a quick observation:
quote:
Originally posted by Imrahil

I believe that God is a God of love


The Bible says God is also a God of wrath. "And when the LORD saw that they humbled themselves, the word of the LORD came to Shemaiah, saying, They have humbled themselves; therefore I will not destroy them, but I will grant them some deliverance; and mypb] wrath[/b] shall not be poured out upon Jerusalem by the hand of Shishak." (2 Chonicles 12:7)

" Through the wrath of the LORD of hosts is the land darkened, and the people shall be as the fuel of the fire: no man shall spare his brother." (Isaiah 9:19)

" He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." (John 3:36)

There are many other passages, I just provided a few to show that God is not just a God of love.


quote:
God has emotions


please provide scriptural support for this claim.


--------------------------------------------------
I just think that she obviously gives references to God's Wrath and then ask to see scriptural evidence that God has emotions.

Hi Dread,
First off, thanks for the input, but in the future, how about limiting it to the debate discussion thread? Also, I would like to clarify. I did not say that I do not believe God to be emotionless. I believe God has emotions, and I'm interested in seeing Imrahil's scriptural support.

[Dread Helm]

Oh ok. Sorry didn't know that there was a discusstion thread. :blush:

[Imrahil]

In your last post, you again brought up several important points. I will try to address them all directly in this post.
1. Originally posted by Christine
The Bible says God is also a God of wrath.
I may have been a bit unclear in my opening post. I am not disputing the fact that God is not merely a God of love. I do not think God is one dimensional. He has a loving nature but this does not mean He is never wrathful or angry. I said He is a God of love simply to point out that He would not be spiteful or cruel to His creatures.

2. Originally posted by Imrahil
God has emotions
Originally posted by Christine
please provide scriptural support for this claim.
You have said that you do not disagree on this subject so I was a little surprised by your request. However, here are a few passages mentioning God with varying emotions and feelings.

Originally posted by Christine

"And when the LORD saw that they humbled themselves, the word of the LORD came to Shemaiah, saying, They have humbled themselves; therefore I will not destroy them, but I will grant them some deliverance; and my wrath shall not be poured out upon Jerusalem by the hand of Shishak." (2 Chonicles 12:7)

" Through the wrath of the LORD of hosts is the land darkened, and the people shall be as the fuel of the fire: no man shall spare his brother." (Isaiah 9:19)

" He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." (John 3:36)

“ So the anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses ( Exodus 4:14)

Now when the people complained it displeased the Lord; for the Lord heard it, and His anger was aroused. So the fire of the Lord burned among them, and consumed some in the outskirts of the camp. (Numbers 11:1)

The Lord did not set His love on you nor choose you because you were more in number than any other people, for you were the least of all peoples; (Deuteronomy 7:7)

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)

For you shall worship no other god, for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God (Exodus 34:14)

For the Lord your God is a consuming fire, a jealous God. (Deuteronomy 4:24)

These are just a few of a number of verses describing God’s emotions. These may be discussed more thoroughly later but right now we are in agreement on them.

3. Originally posted by Christine
I hope you will provide further scriprtural support for this idea of free-will.

They will be placed throughout this post as the topics come up .

4. Originally posted by Christine
I did not say God is the author of sin. If God was the author of sin, that would indeed be a scary thought.

You did not state this directly but that is the logical conclusion I drew from your statements.

I believe that man has no free will, and that God has complete control.

I believe that everything is predestined, including prophetic events and day-to-day life.

If man has no freewill, and God has predestined everything that happens, how is He not responsible for sin? If He ordained everything that happens doesn’t that include sin? In the end, sin is either God’s fault or man’s fault. If it is God’s fault, then He is not the loving God we believe in. If it is man’s fault, then predestination is false.

5. Your response to my points on Luke 24:45 was brief but you said something interesting. Without God opening our understanding, we couldn't understand anything. The very fact that you know or accept certain doctrines, is because God has allowed you that understanding.


Without God’s direct revelation we cannot understand anything? Please provide some evidence for this.

6.Your response to John 12:37 was broken into several parts so I will deal with them separately. God is omniscent, he knows everything, past, present, and future. Nothing surprises God. And nowhere in that verse does God say he was surprised at their unbelief. It's probably a figure of speech.

The point of the discussion is to determine if this kind of statement is true. Simply saying that God knows everything and we cannot surprise Him does not provide any evidence or add any weight to your position.

This verse says nothing about God giving man a choice.
I agree that the passage does not deal with free-will directly I was simply commenting that the verse includes the phrase “Even though�. So the verse is saying that in spite of the fact that Jesus did so many miracles the people still did not believe Him. Is this a figure of speech as you suggested? What might it be implying? That man actually cannot choose whether they will believe or not? It seems a rather complicated way of conveying that message by stating the opposite idea. Why would it say that if the people were literally incapable of belief? Why would Jesus have even performed miracles that He knew would be of no use?

7. We're talking God here, not a man. Sometimes, people are blinded because of anger, but this was not such an occasion. +I did not mean that God blinded these men by angering them. My point about angering someone was merely an illustration. It was simply an example that we can relate to. I could “make� someone angry by doing something they did not want me to do. Did I force them to become angry? No, I simply did something and they reacted to it. Similarly, God simply tells someone the truth and they become blinded to it because they do not want to accept it.
8. A similiar passage in the Old Testament is "Then the LORD said to Moses, "Go to Pharaoh, for I have hardened his heart and the hearts of his officials so that I may perform these miraculous signs of mine among them 2 that you may tell your children and grandchildren how I dealt harshly with the Egyptians and how I performed my signs among them, and that you may know that I am the LORD ." (Exodus 10:1) God really can and does blind peoples eyes and hearts.
This passage is another example of people reacting to God in a negative way. Pharaoh hardened his heart because of God’s power and might . God showed this proud ruler of Egypt that he was completely powerless compared to God and the proud Pharaoh hardened his heart (Exodus 8:15, 8:32) and refused to submit.
9. Verse 10 states, "And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved."
So, the question becomes, why didn't they receive the truth? The answer is given in verse 13 and 14, "But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:
14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ." Theese that were believing a lie were doing so because they had not been called of God to be saved.
So these men did not come to Christ because He did not want them to? Does the Lord not really desire “all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth�? (1 Timothy 2:4) These men did not receive the truth because they did not want it. To receive something, it must first be offered to you. God offers the truth and salvation to all men but not all of them want it. Your points about verses 13 and 14 leave out the context of the chapter which is discussing the End Times and the Tribulation. The salvation that believers are being chosen to in this passage is salvation from the Tribulation. The Lord decided when He revealed the grace message that those who accepted it would be spared the wrath of the End Times.
10. The previous verse, 15, seems to show Jesus speaking to the disciples not as just disciples, but as servants, "Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you" All believers are servants of God, so it would logically follow all believers are called.
I think you mean that Christ is calling the Twelve friends instead of servants. Regardless of their title, this does not deal with predestination or salvation in any way.
You basically passed over my first point on Phillippians 2:13. You said this about my second point.
11. I did not say it pleases God when we sin, or grieve Him. God gave us this passage in Ephesians because He knew ahead of time that some would grieve the Spirit of God. That's why He's warning them
Why? Why on earth would God warn believers against grieving the Holy Spirit? If God knows it is going to happen, there is no way we could possibly avoid it. Why would He have predestined us to grieve Him anyway? This verse completely goes against the idea of predestination along with every other example of God’s pain, anger, sorrow, or anytime He warns us against sin.
12 Originally posted by Imrahil
So yes, God is working in us. God is not forcing us to act exactly as He dictates for all eternity however.
Originally posted by Christine
He is, however. Fortunately, we don't feel like "robots" as many people call such a doctrine. We still seem to have freedom and choices, even though in reality we don't.
Again, why? Why would God go through such an elaborate charade to deceive us? Is our God who does not lie (Titus 1:2) tricking us for no reason other than He wants to? The deeper I go into the idea of predestination I see it paints God as a cruel malicious God who is the cause of pain and suffering. Many people reject God because of the idea that God is responsible for pain, misery, sin and death. Our ideas and teachings about God affect not only our relationship with God but others’ as well.

So in closing, I have two questions for you:
1. Has God predestined everything including sin?
2. Is God responsible for sin?

[Dread Helm]

I'd like to see Christine reply to this....