3 Questions

[Marvin Knox]

"His personally overcoming sin" A ? The whole debate is about MAN's free will leading to man's responsibility for his own sin. Maybe you are typing too fast.

Jesus Christ was fully man as well as fully God.

This isn't the first time you've seemingly disputed that doctrine and it's implications.

Yet Calvin, Dort and WCF say the opposite. They say ALL things are predestined before the foundation of the world. Read it for yourself why don't you..

I have read them all - thank you very much.

They all say that not only did God "ordain" or "predestine", as you prefer, everything that happens in His creation - they also say that sin proceeds only from the creature, that the Lord holds all people responsible for their personal choices, and that He does not, in His ordaining all that takes place, coerce or "do violence" to the will of the creature.

You clearly feel that you can pick and choose which statement in those sources you will and will not use in your argument.

You also clearly feel that you can pick and choose one side of what God says about these things and simply reject the other side as being irreconcilable.

Unlike you - the sources you have been using considered all of what God says on the matter to be true and based their overall teaching on that fact.

Join the club and give up all the man made stuff from the 16th century.

The vast majority of this "man made stuff" is the result of the thinking of theologians who have included all that God has said about these things --- quite unlike yourself.

 

[EmSw]

Apparently you are missing some of the most rudimentary truths in the scriptures.

“For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways,” declares the Lord.
“For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways and My thoughts than your thoughts.
“For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and do not return there without watering the earth and making it bear and sprout, and furnishing seed to the sower and bread to the eater; so will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; it will not return to Me empty, without accomplishing what I desire, and without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it." Isaiah 55:8-11

It was ordained from the first sending forth of God's Word that the Word of God would do exactly as He had been predestined to do.

It does not say it was ordained from the sending of His word, nor does it say God predestined what He would exactly do in Isaiah 55. These verses are NOT about predestination, even though you want to read it into these verses.

Here are verses 6 and 7 of Isaiah 55 -

6 Seek the Lord while He may be found, call upon Him while He is near.
7 Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; let him return to the Lord, and He will have mercy on him; and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon.

God said His thoughts are not the thoughts of the unrighteous, nor His ways the ways of the wicked. God's ways and thoughts are for the wicked and unrighteous to seek Him, call upon Him, forsake their ways and thoughts, and return to the Lord.

This is what these verses are speaking of, nothing else. God's word, which goes forth from His mouth says He will abundantly pardon the wicked and unrighteous if they do these things. This is what He desires, and it will succeed, if the wicked and unrighteous do as He says.

Do not make these verses say more than what is written.

 

[Patmos]

Since you obviously think you know so-oo much more than the rest of us, I'm done responding to you Your attitude is not taking into account that no one else here has the time you demand to try and take all of this on. And you ARE trying to overwhelm things here which is a sure way to get to where nobody listens to you. Take. a. break.

Pardon

 

[Patmos]

Jesus Christ was fully man as well as fully God.

This isn't the first time you've seemingly disputed that doctrine and it's implications.

From what post did you manufacture the false accusation from?

.. "ordain" or "predestine", ....

Ill get to this very shortly as Nobdysfool thinks these words are 'playing fast and loose! ?

You also clearly feel that you can pick and choose one side of what God says about these things and simply reject the other side as being irreconcilable.

When I downloaded WCF into Word it exceeded 100 pages, So no, I cannot post all of it. Would you read it if I did?

The vast majority of this "man made stuff" is the result of the thinking of theologians who have included all that God has said about these things --- quite unlike yourself.

If you think they do not say what they actually say then post our assertion rather than making false accusations to the poster.

Thanks

 

[Patmos]

Right off the bat, you change the terms, and I think intentionally. I did not say they were born reprobates, I said they were born sinners. There is a difference.

I'll get to this shortly in another post to help both you and Marvin.

.... No one is born reprobate, they become that way.

Synod and Dort and WCF say the OPPOSITE as I have posted previously. Shall I post them again?

So right out of the gate, you try to slip by a little word change, one you think won't be noticed, and won't make any difference. It makes a difference and you need to correct it.

No slip, I'll get to this shortly in another post.

You're playing fast and loose with the terminology.

See following post on dictionary definitions.

No, I am not playing. Please elaborate.

NF - You did not answer this.

That's the problem. Until the terminology and such are the same on both sides all we are doing is talking past each other. Calvinists tend to use the terms in the same way, meaning the same things, so it is YOU who will have to get the terminology right.

Se following post on dictionary definitions.

Actually, I wasn't talking to you in the above quoted Conversation.

If it was not a response to me as the links erroneous show then who was it to ? You did not answer this.

.. you are setting yourself up for frustration, as you clearly are frustrated now. Take a break.

Responding to the poster rather than what is posted is against CF rules.

Since you obviously think you know so-oo much more than the rest of us,

No, I do not think that at all.
Responding to the poster rather than what is posted is against CF rules.

.. you demand ..... Take. a. break.

Responding to the poster rather than what is posted is against CF rules.

 

[Patmos]

Word Definitions as requested.

You're playing fast and loose with the terminology.

Calvinists tend to use the terms in the same way, meaning the same things, so it is YOU who will have to get the terminology right. As it is, you play fast and loose with the term.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ (hi-lights in red are mine)

WCF and Dort use the word 'Predestine' and 'Foreordain' a lot.


Definition of foreordain
transitive verb
: to dispose or appoint in advance : predestine

Definition of predestine
transitive verb
: to destine, decree, determine, appoint, or settle beforehand

Definition of predestinate
: destined, fated, or determined beforehand

Obviously we look past the word in blue. BUT, 'foreordain' has the SAME meaning as 'predestine' which means 'determine'. The words are interchangeable. Has this cleared things up? Please check any other dictionary if Webster's has got it wrong.

 

[Patmos]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/(hi-lights in red are mine)

Full Definition of sinner
1
: one that sins

2
: reprobate, scamp


Definition of reprobate
transitive verb
1
: to condemn strongly as unworthy, unacceptable, or evil
2
: to foreordain to damnation

3
: to refuse to accept : reject

As we saw in the previous post, 'foreordain' has the SAME meaning as 'predestine' which means 'determine'.

I hope this answers my critics who have alleged I have played ' fast and loose' with words or got the 'terminology' wrong.

 

[Albion]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/(hi-lights in red are mine)

Full Definition of sinner
1
: one that sins

2
: reprobate, scamp


Definition of reprobate
transitive verb
1
: to condemn strongly as unworthy, unacceptable, or evil
2
: to foreordain to damnation

3
: to refuse to accept : reject

As we saw in the previous post, 'foreordain' has the SAME meaning as 'predestine' which means 'determine'.

I hope this answers my critic who has alleged I have played ' fast and loose' with words. NO, I haven't.

You're still mistaken. Predestine IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT has a particular meaning, just like Trinity or Rapture or Communion.

All of these words mean something completely different when used in another context, and a general definition does little more than give a meaning that incorporates all of the possible uses at once.

 

[David4223]

MOD HAT ON

Address the content of the post and not the character of the poster.

Further violations will result in staff actions being issued.

Thank you.

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[Patmos]

You're still mistaken. Predestine IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT has a particular meaning, just like Trinity or Rapture or Communion.

All of these words mean something completely different when used in another context, and a general definition does little more than give a meaning that incorporates all of the possible uses at once.

I would be extremely pleased if you would elaborate in depth.

Many thanks.

 

[Albion]

I would be extremely pleased if you would elaborate in depth.

Many thanks.

?? I don't exactly know how to elaborate on this:

Predestine IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT has a particular meaning, just like Trinity or Rapture or Communion. All of these words mean something completely different when used in another context.

When we are speaking of the Calvinist or Reformed idea of predestination, there is a particular meaning to the word that wouldn't apply if we were using it in a non-religious sense. I gave examples of other words about which the same principle would hold.

If this still is unclear, perhaps you could point me to what part of the above doesn't sit well with you....

 

[Patmos]

?? I don't exactly know how to elaborate on this:


When we are speaking of the Calvinist or Reformed idea of predestination, there is a particular meaning to the word that wouldn't apply if we were using it in a non-religious sense. I gave examples of other words about which the same principle would hold.

If this still is unclear, perhaps you could point me to what part of the above doesn't sit well with you....

It is very unclear to me. For example WCF says this (hi-lights mine):

CHAPTER 1 Part 7.

"All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, Nor alike clear unto all yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded, and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them."

Therefore, I assert, an unlearned person such as myself in the due use of ordinary means - a dictionary - may attain sufficient understanding of those things necessary for salvation.

Would you say WCF is completely wrong on this ?

When speaking of the Calvinist idea of predestination what is this particular meaning of the word ?

Why is it that even the Calvinist fraternity on CF cannot define it or agree what it is ?

Maybe the whole world, from the Apostles, early Church Fathers, Lutherans and all this who are not Calvinist might be right in their common understand of this word! What do you think?

 

[Patmos]

I guess there will be no reply to my last post.

As I have posted at length, WCF is to contradictory to me. God predestines/foreordains/determines ALL things; I have quoted WCF verbatim. Yet, though ALL things are pre determined, God did not determine man's sin. Am I confused ? Oh yes.

I feel the pressure from those who attack me rather than respond to my genuine concerns. I get told to 'take a rest' then 'take. a. rest'. Seems like bullying to me.

Despite that there is a thought in my mind, perhaps Dort is wrong when it says "God will not snuff out a smoking flax" ( if you want me to find the actual article, I will), maybe I am a unelected reprobate; seed cast on stony ground, to grow in faith, only to wither and fall away. The problem for me with Calvinism is it DESTROYS assurance. How can an unlearned person like me be right, understand what the Bible says, perhaps WCF 1.7 is wrong!

And then, AMAZING, alleluia, glory be.

I am introduced to a very learned theologian - Karl Bart.

FAN

TAS

TIC

I'll quote (just a bit), see next post.

alleluia, alleluia,alleluia amen

 

[Patmos]

".....Finally, and in accord with the Reformed tradition Barth posits a double predestination, albeit one which has been radically reconfigured. As noted, he rejects the absolute decree which divides humanity into those elect and those rejected (me too, and lots of other since Jesus Christ), and insists, rather that in the primal decree God elected himself for rejection, and in Jesus Christ bore that rejection in time, so that humanity could be elect in him. Thus Barth is adamant:

Man is not rejected. In God's eternal purpose it is God Himself who is rejected in His Son...He is rejected in order that we might not be rejected. Predestination means that from all eternity God has determined upon man's acquittal at His own cost.... We shall never find...the decreed rejection of ourselves or of any other men. This is not because we did not deserve rejection, but because God did not will it, because God willed the rejection of His Son in our stead... "

Oh the joy.

Guess what book I am going to read next! I am even going to pass by GMM4J's book ( Amazon is taking a while anyway).

 

[Patmos]

Joy to the World , the Lord is come!
Let earth receive her King;
Let every heart prepare Him room,
And Heaven and nature sing,
And Heaven and nature sing,
And Heaven, and Heaven, and nature sing.

 

[Patmos]

11“Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. 12Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you

 

[Hoghead1]

You're still mistaken. Predestine IN A THEOLOGICAL CONTEXT has a particular meaning, just like Trinity or Rapture or Communion.

All of these words mean something completely different when used in another context, and a general definition does little more than give a meaning that incorporates all of the possible uses at once.

Yes, very true. Problem is, some members here are trying to play fast and loose with this term.

 

[Patmos]

You're still mistaken....
All of these words mean something completely different when used in another context, and a general definition does little more than give a meaning that incorporates all of the possible uses at once.

Webster' gave many possible meanings of which I focused on the Biblical ones.

Please could you elaborate how they mean something completely different ?

Perhaps give an example of predestination and foreordination.

Thanks

 

[Patmos]

Webster' gave many possible meanings of which I focused on the Biblical ones.

Please could you elaborate how they mean something completely different ?

Perhaps give an example of predestination and foreordination.

Thanks

I have asked this same question other threads and the universal reply from the Calvinist community?

So far just the sound of crickets.

I am disappointed. I wonder what Karl Bart would say!

 

[Patmos]

Here is what some CALVINIST web sites say:

http://www.gracegospelministry.com/Articles/foreordination_predestination.htm

"Foreordination and predestination are terms that are sometimes used interchangeably. Foreordination denotes God’s sovereign plan whereby in eternity He has already decreed all that is to happen in the entire universe, which He created.

Predestination is modern terminology depicting the functions of foreordination; it defines the specifics of God’s eternal plan, i.e., God’s foreknowledge in election, the manifestation of His call (summons) and justification in time and the glorification of His elect in eternity (Romans 8:30). In Ephesians 1:5, the Greek verb "pro· o•ree· sas", rendered "foreordained", is formed from a combination of the Greek preposition "pro" meaning "before" prefixed to the word "o· ree· zo", meaning boundary or limits or restrictions. Hence, its etymological meaning conveys the idea of to limit, restrict and mark out beforehand to "in prior time design and determine" or to "ordain before hand", thus to specifically predestinate or predetermine."

"Foreordination denotes that all things are planned and worked out in eternity with nothing left to decide .....(Predestinated),"

http://www.reformed.org/index.html - type 'Foreordain' in the search box and it came up with this:

"predestination.html
themselves. he must foreordain the non-believing, as well as the believing, although the events
www.reformed.org/definitions/predestination.html - "


(Twin1954 told me "God predestines people but foreordains things." Seems reformed.org disagrees )

Seems like Webster's dictionary is correct.

Albion, do you have anything on this ?