Belief in predestination is inevitable even if the Bible didn't say it was true.

Marvin Knox · May 25, 2015

FireDragon76 said:
Luther never had a "conversion", he had assurance by coming to a clearer understanding of Scriptures that justification is something already done in his past through Christ, in his baptism and the sacraments of the Church. And he did not really understand election in the same way that a Calvinist in later centuries would. A Calvinist looks to sanctification or conversion experiences for signs they are elect, Luther looked to the sacraments. Election was a secondary matter in his theology. It's a different mindset than the Calvinist focused on interior examination. Like I said, Luther didn't think his discovery of Sola Fide saved him, it just gave him peace and confidence.

Bunyan actually had a spiritual experience that convinced him that Christ died for him and took away his sins. I believe the doctrinal understanding of imputed righteousness was a later matter. He was a hardcore English Baptist, a Calvinist, and believed God's election was mysterious and had nothing to do with baptism. Yet he struggled with sin, so he could never know for sure he was elect.

Even if I agreed to everything you say - it would not change the fact that the predestination of everything that happens in God's creation is a necessary understanding for anyone who accepts the basic teachings of scripture.

Some of those basics are omniscience, omnipresence, providential control, concurrency of the actions of God and men, God doing good through the evil acts of men and angels, God's sending forth of His Word to accomplish everything we see, and a host of other inescapable and basic concepts from scripture.

To allow the teaching of those who would jettison the most basic concepts in scripture for the sake of some beliefs that do not include those basics - is not something that God would desire His church to do.

I will not cease to teach strong doctrine in opposition to weak sloppy emotionally based doctrine.

"I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires" 2 Timothy 4:1-4

I understand your concern - at least somewhat.

The best you can do is to warn any mentally ill people you are worried about to not frequent the Christian Forums.

FireDragon76 · May 25, 2015

Wow, so much for compassion. Jesus didn't die for mentally ill people?

There are ways to talk about God being in control despite the evil in the world, without terrifying people of frail conscience and sensibilities.

And this isn't a church, no need to preach. But I do hope you don't take that attitude into real life, because its terribly un-pastoral.

Marvin Knox · May 25, 2015

FireDragon76 said:
Wow, so much for compassion. Jesus didn't die for mentally ill people?

There are ways to talk about God being in control despite the evil in the world, without terrifying people of frail conscience and sensibilities.

And this isn't a church, no need to preach. But I do hope you don't take that attitude into real life, because its terribly un-pastoral.

You obviously heard what you wanted to hear.

I returned online so soon because I intended to add a smiley face to that last statement just to soften it a bit. In retrospect, I'm glad that I was a little late. You seem to me to obviously have some personal interest in this issue. You need to examine that IMO.

Absolutely no one but you said anything about Jesus not dying for the mentally ill.

Predestination shouldn't terrify anyone any more than teaching the need for salvation to escape Hell in general does.

Belief in predestination doesn't, in and of itself, change any of what we all believe concerning the components of the gospel of salvation by believing on Christ.

This is indeed Christ's church gathered here together on the internet. I have observed over time that, along with His church, are gathered many who are of the Christian "religion" but who do not understand the gospel.

The attitude I take is extremely "pastoral".

Refusal to believe and teach all of the Word of God isn't pastoral. It is absolutely criminal.

If you are one of those needing extra compassion because of some personal issues - I apologize.

You did not present yourself that way. If I had known that you may have been - I may have soft pedaled things just a bit more.

FreeGrace2 · May 26, 2015

I said this:
"Here's a question: How does one accept God's forgiveness?

Or, on what basis does God offer forgiveness?"

bling said:
After one has sinned and feels a burden in his/her heart from past actions that have hurt others. That can happen for any mature adult living anywhere in the world. That person can try many wrong methods to relieve his conscience, but the only way is through humbly turning to his creator for help and God is willing and wanting to help those children.

My question had to do with an unsaved person. And I had Acts 10:43 in mind for the answer.

For believers, forgiveness is found in 1 Jn 1:9 through confession.

bling · May 26, 2015

FreeGrace2 said:
I said this:
"Here's a question: How does one accept God's forgiveness?

Or, on what basis does God offer forgiveness?"

My question had to do with an unsaved person. And I had Acts 10:43 in mind for the answer.

I was addressing the unsaved anywhere in the world. The problem with just using Acts 10:43 is Cornelius is described: He is a righteous and God-fearing man, who is respected by all the Jewish people. Most nonbelievers do not start out that far along.

Why do you think Cornelius did not ask God to forgive his sins and God did not forgive them yet?

Cornelius prior to his conversion to Christianity could have had his sins forgiven, like Jews in the OT prior to their conversion.

EmSw · May 26, 2015

Marvin Knox said:
Even if I agreed to everything you say - it would not change the fact that the predestination of everything that happens in God's creation is a necessary understanding for anyone who accepts the basic teachings of scripture.

It is not a necessary understanding; this is primarily a Calvinist teaching.

Marvin Knox said:
Some of those basics are omniscience, omnipresence, providential control, concurrency of the actions of God and men, God doing good through the evil acts of men and angels, God's sending forth of His Word to accomplish everything we see, and a host of other inescapable and basic concepts from scripture.

If predestination is a basic, Jesus would have taught it. Besides the WCF calls it a mystery, and mysteries are not basic teachings of the church.

Marvin Knox said:
To allow the teaching of those who would jettison the most basic concepts in scripture for the sake of some beliefs that do not include those basics - is not something that God would desire His church to do.

If it is not God's desire, why did He predestine it?
If God doesn't want man to sin, why did He predestine it?
If God has no pleasure in the death of one who dies, why did He predestine it?
If God has no pleasure in wickedness, why did He predestine it?
If God takes pleasure in those who fear Him, why did He predestine those to not fear Him?
If God loves righteousness, why did He predestine unrighteousness?
Why does God predestine that which He hates?
If God was sorry that He made man on earth in Genesis 6, why did He predestine their actions?
If God was grieved with the children of Israel in the wilderness, why did He predestine them to go astray?

Marvin Knox said:
I will not cease to teach strong doctrine in opposition to weak sloppy emotionally based doctrine.

"I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires" 2 Timothy 4:1-4

The street goes both ways.

FreeGrace2 · May 26, 2015

bling said:
I was addressing the unsaved anywhere in the world. The problem with just using Acts 10:43 is Cornelius is described: He is a righteous and God-fearing man, who is respected by all the Jewish people. Most nonbelievers do not start out that far along.

Why do you think Cornelius did not ask God to forgive his sins and God did not forgive them yet?

Cornelius prior to his conversion to Christianity could have had his sins forgiven, like Jews in the OT prior to their conversion.

We know from Hebrews 10:1-4 that animal sacrifice didn't really forgive sins. It was an annual reminder of sins. And a tutor to lead us to Christ, who made the perfect sacrifice which is the basis of forgiveness.

Marvin Knox · May 26, 2015

EmSw said:
It is not a necessary understanding

When I say necessary, I am talking about it being a necessary conclusion to a logical approach to scripture - hence the title and thrust of the thread.

EmSw said:
this is primarily a Calvinist teaching.

In so far as Calvinistic teaching is more logical than yours - you are correct.

EmSw said:
If predestination is a basic, Jesus would have taught it.

In my list of basics I did not include predestination as you can clearly see. But predestination is the necessary conclusion of good logic when those listed basics are included in ones reasoning.

Jesus did teach it - both in person, when He walked the earth, and when He inspired the other writers of the N.T. through His Spirit.

EmSw said:
If it is not God's desire, why did He predestine it?
If God doesn't want man to sin, why did He predestine it?
If God has no pleasure in the death of one who dies, why did He predestine it?
If God has no pleasure in wickedness, why did He predestine it?
If God takes pleasure in those who fear Him, why did He predestine those to not fear Him?
If God loves righteousness, why did He predestine unrighteousness?
Why does God predestine that which He hates?
If God was sorry that He made man on earth in Genesis 6, why did He predestine their actions?
If God was grieved with the children of Israel in the wilderness, why did He predestine them to go astray?

If you die and get a chance to talk to Him in person before I do - ask Him.

Given what I've read about your view of what is necessary for salvation - that's a fairly big if.

I'm not passing judgment concerning your salvation. But I am warning you again, as I have in the past, about the gospel of works that you preach.

As for me, I'm satisfied that I know enough right now that I have no questions that need answering before crossing over - at least none that will keep me from teaching about the basics and the necessary conclusions drawn when one includes those basics in their world view.

SkyWriting · May 26, 2015

Marvin Knox said:
Isn't predestination of all things as I view it the only logical position considering what we know about God from His Word?

There is no "logical" way to explain that God is not subject to time.
God exists outside of time that we are exposed to.
So you can talk about us living in linear fashion.
Or you can talk about God's view who exists in an eternal fashion.

Marvin Knox · May 26, 2015

I’m going to cut to the chase along toward the end of this post.

The things we are talking about that are predestined are only the things that exist and happen in time.

God exists in time as well as outside of time. He is omnipresent in this universe and outside of this universe as well.

He is always present with all of His attributes intact – including His omniscience.

According to the Word of God, if He wasn’t present in every single thing in this creation, that thing would simply cease to exist.

If, at a certain point in time, God knows what will happen for sure (and He does) – there is no chance that what He knows will happen will not happen. It is predestined to happen just the way God knows it will happen prior to it happening.

If something was known (as everything has been) as a possibility – that would not in itself make that possibility predestined. It is only when God decrees that something be done that it is predestined to occur. At that time God sends forth His Word to create, sustain and eventually bring to past what He has decreed to happen. And there is not a power on earth that can stop what He has decreed from happening.

You and I are predestined to take our last breath at a certain point in time and God knows that time for sure.

If we go back in time to the instant we were born, we were at that time and every other time before a particular event in our life occurs predestined to have that event occur just as God knew it would occur.

One of those events, in the case of us believers, is that moment when we believe on Christ as our personal Savior. One of those events, in the case of an unbeliever, is that moment when that person will draw his last breath in an unbelieving state.

Of course – these kinds of events are the REAL reason that people fight so hard against the concept of predestination.

If it were not for us looking forward to the time when this particular kind of event might become unavoidably linked with predestination in our Christian based logic – I am convinced that no one would fight against the logic of the predestination of all things that happen in this world as they very clearly do.

There is only one reason why anyone would not include predestination his or her belief system.

That reason is this. We all suspect that sooner or later we must come up against the fact that people who believe are predestined to believe and people who will die in unbelief are predestined to do so.

This seems to fly in the face of the pride of men and the near constant drumbeat of free will, free will, free will that we see here in this section of the forum.

Interestingly - the concept of predestination does not negate the concept of free will. The two are completely compatible.

Some of the other things that so call “Calvinists” believe may not blend well with free will. But predestination in and of itself does not conflict with free will.

One can subscribe to predestination as I have presented it and still not believe in total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, or eternal security. Those doctrines are not linked directly with predestination.

Never the less – the hatred of anything that may eventually lead us to subscribe to those other Calvinist beliefs is resisted – even in the face of unavoidable logic.

That’s a heck of a way to run a systematic theology.

Now if, when considering those 5 doctrines I listed above, you include some other clear teachings from scripture in your deliberations – you may well end up leaning hard to the Calvinist’s side even if you disagree somewhat with them on a few points.

A list of those doctrines would include but not be limited to:

1. The omnipresence of God
2. The providential control of His creation through that omnipresence
3. The concurrent action of God and men in dozens of examples in the scriptures
4. The fact that God does good through the evil acts of men and angels
5. The fact that God is not averse to controlling men’s hearts and minds – whether they are good or evil men
6. The fact that men in their natural sinful state do not seek God, and cannot understand God
7. The fact that no one can say Jesus is Lord except by the Holy Spirit
8. The fact that having that Holy Spirit is life

And, as I have said, a host of other truths from scripture.

Come now – let us reason together.

Why would you want to resist truth just to win an argument in this life? Particularly why would you resist so strongly when you have a false name and an avatar to hide behind?

It seems to me that there is way too much at stake to play Calvinist/Arminian/free-will nonsensical games.

FreeGrace2 · May 27, 2015

Marvin Knox said:
He is always present with all of His attributes intact – including His omniscience.

What has this to do with predestination?

If, at a certain point in time, God knows what will happen for sure (and He does) – there is no chance that what He knows will happen will not happen. It is predestined to happen just the way God knows it will happen prior to it happening.

It seems your working of "predestination" is merely omniscience.

From the Merriam-Webster on-line dictionary:
"the doctrine that God in consequence of his foreknowledge of all events infallibly guides those who are destined for salvation"

So, how is one "destined for salvation"? The definition doesn't say. So we are still left with questions. We all know that God knows "all things". So He knows who will believe or not. That isn't the debate. The debate is whether He causes some to believe and some to not believe. Merriam-Webster seems to favor God causing what He predetermines.

For me, to "predetermine" means to make the decision for something to happen. There is nothing in Scripture to suggest that God predestines who will believe. Or not to believe.

If something was known (as everything has been) as a possibility – that would not in itself make that possibility predestined. It is only when God decrees that something be done that it is predestined to occur.

This sounds as though God knowing all possibilities, decides which actions will actually occur. But this would mean that God chooses who will believe, and the Bible does not teach that.

You and I are predestined to take our last breath at a certain point in time and God knows that time for sure.

If we go back in time to the instant we were born, we were at that time and every other time before a particular event in our life occurs predestined to have that event occur just as God knew it would occur.

But knowing and predestining are not the same. It seems you're going back and forth between the 2 different words.

There is only one reason why anyone would not include predestination his or her belief system.

OK…wait for it...

That reason is this. We all suspect that sooner or later we must come up against the fact that people who believe are predestined to believe and people who will die in unbelief are predestined to do so.

Since Scripture does not teach this, it doesn't make sense to believe that everything has been predestinated. While God does know everything that will occur, that doesn't mean that He has predestinated that it will occur. It means that He has permitted it to occur. That's what seems to be missing from reformed doctrine.

This seems to fly in the face of the pride of men and the near constant drumbeat of free will, free will, free will that we see here in this section of the forum.

Of course; time to beat the drum against freedom of choice. The Bible seems quite clear that God predestined mankind to be free in his decisions. Reading through Paul's epistles demonstrates his desire to get people to believe in Christ. Why try to persuade people if predestination were true? And please don't pick up the old saw about man doesn't know who is 'of the elect' so we need to try to persuade everyone.

In fact, the gospel message, clearly articulated by Paul in 1 Cor 15:3, wouldn't be true for those for whom Christ didn't die. And we know that the Bible teaches that the gospel is for everyone. In the reformed view of the so-called "non-elect", there is no good news, right? So giving the good news (gospel) to one of them would be untrue.

What's good news about the "fact" (in reformed thought) that one wasn't predestinated to go to heaven, but rather, to hell?

Interestingly - the concept of predestination does not negate the concept of free will. The two are completely compatible.

Seems here you're using predestination in the sense of omniscience.

Some of the other things that so call “Calvinists” believe may not blend well with free will. But predestination in and of itself does not conflict with free will.

It does conflict if by it one means that God chooses all actions.

Come now – let us reason together.

Always good advice. And using Scripture as the source of our reason.

Marvin Knox · May 27, 2015

FreeGrace2 said:
What has this to do with predestination?

The post before mine said that God did not exist in time. I refuted that with my words to the opposite of what he said. In context they follow.

Marvin said, “The things we are talking about that are predestined are only the things that exist and happen in time. God exists in time as well as outside of time. He is omnipresent in this universe and outside of this universe as well. He is always present with all of His attributes intact – including His omniscience. According to the Word of God, if He wasn’t present in every single thing in this creation, that thing would simply cease to exist.”

FreeGrace2 said:
It seems your working of "predestination" is merely omniscience.

This is not so as you well know if you have read my posts.

FreeGrace2 said:
From the Merriam-Webster on-line dictionary:
"the doctrine that God in consequence of his foreknowledge of all events infallibly guides those who are destined for salvation"
So, how is one "destined for salvation"? The definition doesn't say. So we are still left with questions. We all know that God knows "all things". So He knows who will believe or not. That isn't the debate. The debate is whether He causes some to believe and some to not believe. Merriam-Webster seems to favor God causing what He predetermines.
For me, to "predetermine" means to make the decision for something to happen. There is nothing in Scripture to suggest that God predestines who will believe. Or not to believe.

I have clearly stated what I am talking about. I am talking about the entire concept of God’s predestining of all things that happen in His creation. If Webster wants to limit the word to only having to do with salvation that’s up to him.

He can be wrong. Predestination has to do with everything that happens in God’s creation. Salvation is only one of those things.

FreeGrace2 said:
This sounds as though God knowing all possibilities, decides which actions will actually occur. But this would mean that God chooses who will believe, and the Bible does not teach that.
But knowing and predestining are not the same. It seems you're going back and forth between the 2 different words.

I have said it so many times that it is really getting old. I know that you know what I believe. I believe that you are constantly misrepresenting what I have said I believe.

It isn’t God’s knowing what will happen if He does certain things. It is His acting in time to make possibilities realities that equates to predestinating all events.

FreeGrace2 said:
While God does know everything that will occur, that doesn't mean that He has predestinated that it will occur. It means that He has permitted it to occur. That's what seems to be missing from reformed doctrine.

What seems to be missing from non-Reformed doctrine is the fact that God does not merely permit things to occur.

He is involved at every level to bring those things to past.

FreeGrace2 said:
Of course; time to beat the drum against freedom of choice. The Bible seems quite clear that God predestined mankind to be free in his decisions.

Wow – show me that verse. Like you said, and I agree, the Bible seems quite clear about that (just as it is about what I have said is true). Please show me the verse or quit asking for one that says what I am saying.

At least the title of this thread lays out for all to see that mine is a position of logic and not individual scriptures. Be honest enough to say that many of yours are as well (supposedly).

FreeGrace2 said:
Reading through Paul's epistles demonstrates his desire to get people to believe in Christ. Why try to persuade people if predestination were true? And please don't pick up the old saw about man doesn't know who is 'of the elect' so we need to try to persuade everyone.

Oh, I don’t know. Maybe to be obedient to God? Maybe because that is God's stated method to bring men to salvation?

FreeGrace2 said:
In fact, the gospel message, clearly articulated by Paul in 1 Cor 15:3, wouldn't be true for those for whom Christ didn't die. And we know that the Bible teaches that the gospel is for everyone. In the reformed view of the so-called "non-elect", there is no good news, right? So giving the good news (gospel) to one of them would be untrue.

I have said many times that I do not believe in limited atonement (as you well know).

FreeGrace2 said:
What's good news about the "fact" (in reformed thought) that one wasn't predestinated to go to heaven, but rather, to hell?

Preaching the gospel is not preaching predestination. No one said that it was.

FreeGrace2 said:
It does conflict if by it one means that God chooses all actions.

I have said many times that believing in predestination doesn’t conflict in any way with believing in the willful actions of men.

I'm going to try to make this my last response to you. You have misrepresented my position so many times that I don't believe you are doing it because you don't understand.

I have corrected you too many times for me to believe that.

FreeGrace2 · May 28, 2015

Marvin Knox said:
I'm going to try to make this my last response to you. You have misrepresented my position so many times that I don't believe you are doing it because you don't understand.

I have corrected you too many times for me to believe that.

In spite of your corrections, what you keep posting keeps making me think what I post in response. So maybe this is just a semantics problem after all. I've never ever misrepresented anyone. My approach to everyone has been straight forward and direct. I have no reason to misrepresent anyone.

bling · May 28, 2015

FreeGrace2 said:
We know from Hebrews 10:1-4 that animal sacrifice didn't really forgive sins. It was an annual reminder of sins. And a tutor to lead us to Christ, who made the perfect sacrifice which is the basis of forgiveness.

We know from the Old Testament Prophets, God did forgive people that truly sought God's forgiveness and repented, were forgiven without any mention of the

Marvin Knox said:
I'm not any much more clear than I was before. But thanks for trying anyway brother.

I do notice that you error mightily in saying that God does nothing for His own sake. Quite the opposite is the case.

Misunderstanding this basic principal as you do can and may have already led you into much error.

God's love for Himself is the most powerful force in the universe. That is what compels God.

We measure Love by how unselfish the person is toward another. God is totally unselfish toward man and thus is the greatest Lover. How would you measure Love?

Marvin Knox · May 28, 2015

bling said:
...................We measure Love by how unselfish the person is toward another. God is totally unselfish toward man and thus is the greatest Lover. How would you measure Love?

“‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.” Matthew 22:37-40

“Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails..........…” 1 Corinthians 13:4-8

Bling,

The error of not seeing God’s love for Himself as a good thing and the very thing that motivates Him arises from overlooking the reality that God is Triune.

The persons in the Godhead love each other to overflowing and it is out of that fullness of love that God's love to man originates. Go gives His love to His creation from out of His fullness, not from want or need.

If we look at God’s self love in terms of the Trinitarian nature of God, we can more easily understand why God cannot and will not seek any kind of fulfillment outside of His own self.

To say that God loves out of some kind of need – denies the “ASEITY” of God (one of His attributes). He is not dependent on anything outside of Himself for anything including love. God Himself is love. He is not dependent upon the creature to become love or He would not be “IMMUTABLE”. He would not be love in and of Himself if He needed the creature to become love.

It is the Father's good pleasure to give His glory to His Son. It is the Son's good pleasure to return that glory to His Father.

I hope this helps.

FreeGrace2 · May 29, 2015

bling said:
We know from the Old Testament Prophets, God did forgive people that truly sought God's forgiveness and repented, were forgiven without any mention of the

Please finish your sentence so I know how to reply.

bling · May 30, 2015

FreeGrace2 said:
Please finish your sentence so I know how to reply.

without any mention of Christ going to the cross.

bling · May 30, 2015

Marvin Knox said:
“‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ This is the great and foremost commandment. The second is like it, ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.” Matthew 22:37-40

“Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered, does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things. Love never fails..........…” 1 Corinthians 13:4-8

Bling,

The error of not seeing God’s love for Himself as a good thing and the very thing that motivates Him arises from overlooking the reality that God is Triune.

The persons in the Godhead love each other to overflowing and it is out of that fullness of love that God's love to man originates. Go gives His love to His creation from out of His fullness, not from want or need.

If we look at God’s self love in terms of the Trinitarian nature of God, we can more easily understand why God cannot and will not seek any kind of fulfillment outside of His own self.

To say that God loves out of some kind of need – denies the “ASEITY” of God (one of His attributes). He is not dependent on anything outside of Himself for anything including love. God Himself is love. He is not dependent upon the creature to become love or He would not be “IMMUTABLE”. He would not be love in and of Himself if He needed the creature to become love.

It is the Father's good pleasure to give His glory to His Son. It is the Son's good pleasure to return that glory to His Father.

I hope this helps.

All that is good but, I never said “God does not Love Himself” and I see Christ Loving Himself (perfection is something to be Loved). I said God is totally unselfish and is always doing stuff for others. Those “others” can include the other members of the trinity, just as Christ Loved God the Father, but Christ did not Love God the father to get God’s Love for Himself.

With all this Love God has would it not compel God to make beings that He could give this great gift of Love to, so they could be like God himself in that they had Love?

Marvin Knox · May 30, 2015

bling said:
With all this Love God has would it not compel God to make beings that He could give this great gift of Love to, so they could be like God himself in that they had Love?

Sure.

FreeGrace2 · May 30, 2015

You said this:
"We know from the Old Testament Prophets, God did forgive people that truly sought God's forgiveness and repented, were forgiven without any mention of the"

To which I asked to finish your sentence:

bling said:
without any mention of Christ going to the cross.

Actually, Isaiah was fairly specific about the Messiah dying for mankind. Isaiah 53 clearly portrays the cross.

People were saved in the OT the same way we are in the NT; faith in Christ. Those in the OT looked ahead to the cross, and we look back to the cross. God's plan of salvation has never been different or changed.

In fact, it was preached in the garden of Eden after Adam and Eve rebelled.

Belief in predestination is inevitable even if the Bible didn't say it was true.

Senior Veteran

Well-Known Member

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Regular Member

White Horse Rider

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

The Librarian

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Regular Member

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Similar threads