"Fatal Flaw" in predestinary theory

[Ben johnson]

Quote:
You try to administer a "coup de grace" through misrepresentation, ignoring refutations that have been made, and claiming things to be as you want them to be, rather than as they are. All of your flowery talk about getting along, and allowing each other to differ, as you say here...​

It is not a "lack of flowery talk" to contend for the truth of Scripture; each "refutation" that I've been given, I've responded. I didn't mean to make you struggle so with the conflicts you're seeing between "born-again" and "adopted"; but we removed your first two inclinations (nearly-simultaneous, and simultaneous), now we've removed your third --- later event.

We ARE adopted sons through Christ, not will some day BE.

Quote:
All that is just so much hot air, because you don't intend to allow us to differ...​

"Allow"? Have I such power? No; there is one Savior, it's none of us.

What I am doing here, is not a "lack of respect for differing opinions"; each person can believe as he wishes --- but after the discussions, "Responsible Grace" is remaining solid.

So my involvement embodies "All Scripture is God-breathed, and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work." 2Tim3:16

Quote:
you intend to destroy Calvinism. You will, of course, fail, but you haven't learned that yet.​

I haven't failed; no I have not "destroyed Calvinism", but we've discovered here together, that Scripture does destroy it.

Quote:
Predestination is not denied by this understanding at all.
and according to your doctrines, and your stated positions, the following are true:

Originally Posted by Frumanchu

If anyone thinks this is a valid argument by "Responsible Grace" review the last several pages and notice that "Responsible Grace" refuses to acknowledge or answer the following conclusions drawn from its own reasoning:

There is a time when men believe but are not justified
There is a time when men believe but are still children of the devil
There is a time when men believe but are not born again
There is a time when men believe but are not adopted sons of God
There is a time when men believe but are not in Christ
There is a time when men believe but are not elect
There is a time when men believe but are not saved

You have never addressed these points.​

And you know why. But I will answer you --- belief is not "mental assent" (James2:19), it is action (Matt7:24-27).

He who BELIEVES, acts on that belief and receives Christ. Thus there is no time between "belief" and "justification" and "adoption" and "new-birth".

"God is just and justifier of he who believes". Rom3:26 Take that verse, and show me how there is ANY time between "belief", and "justification". Justification cannot precede belief, nor can one who believes, not be justified.

We see that those who RECEIVE the abundance of life and who receive the gift of righteousness will reign with Christ --- and that is identically "justified", in Rom5:17-18.

 

[Ben johnson]

Quote:
And you once again demonstrate your ignorance of the concept of logical order apart from temporal sequence...​

You'll have to come up with a new word; "order", means "sequence". Nothing else.

Quote:
which is a valid and wholly logical means of determining how something happens. The analogy I gave of scientists looking at the logical sequence of events in a nuclear explosion is rock-solid because they do not consider time in their analysis, in order to identify the events which comprise a nuclear explosion.​

But time IS involved; the only instance where time is NOT involved, is "quantum tunneling". Which does not happen in a fission event...

Quote:
It is exactly the same for theological examination of the logical sequence of events in Salvation, in order to identify what actually happens. Time is not considered in that examination. That is what you refuse to acknowledge, or even consider. Why? Because it does serious damage to your false doctrines.​

Heh heh heh --- you speak as though I have not been fully supporting everything with Scripture. I have.

Quote:
Sequence can exist apart from time. That fact is the basis for much scientific and theological study, and has increased the understanding of m any important things. Too bad your denial of it prevents you from benefiting from it.​

From Dictionary.com, "order" is sequence, "sequence" is succession, "succession" is "a number of persons or things following one another in order or sequence."

Time.

Quote:
And once again, you try to key everything to Predestination. We know why you try so desperately to do so, because Predestination, biblical Predestination, is absolutely 100% TOXIC to your false doctrines.​

Do you really see "desperation" here? There is none, on my side.

...but "predestination" is really being destroyed...

 

[Ormly]

How can regeneration NOT be sovereignly decided... the greek for being "born again" means "born from above". It must be an act of God, not an act of man on that principle alone?

I believe this is true. Many [saved] are called to it but few are chosen simply because they don't choose what is made available from above, refusing to take to themselves a condition of "singleness of eye" that being born again entails. There can be no compromise in Christ.

And how in the world does one become un-born again???

Neglect > stagnation > discouragement > despair > rejection > out >>>>>

Now what would it take to bring that one back into the fold if he has tasted of the heavenly gift and partaken of the Holy Ghost and then fallen away?

 

[cygnusx1]

Quoted by Cygnus:
it seems you still can't make up your own mind ben , that is why you skipped replying to the post that shows your contradiction.

no ben , that doesn't work , The fact that we do sin proves the old nature is not eradicated , instead of pushing the false and absurd dogma approving supporting and enticing creatures to resist God saying they can when scripture says they can't *; you need to study the doctrine of mortification... instead of trying to destroy Predestination!​

And that's the point, Cygnus --- the old nature is not destroyed. Thus, "in Christ" requires diligence, just as Paul and Peter and everyone else there said.

.

First of all deal with your own self made contradiction ben , until you do I will continue to remind you ;

To be fair, Calvinists do NOT assert "wanton sin"; but many do assert "back-slidden-saved". It seems to me that we must agree that regeneration means the END of the old nature, and the beginning of a "new creation" (2Cor5:17); and this is for anyone who is "in Christ".

try to make up your mind what you believe ben , it does no good to debate the same person with incoherent views.

​

 

[Ormly]

First of all deal with your own self made contradiction ben , until you do I will continue to remind you ;

try to make up your mind what you believe ben , it does no good to debate the same person with incoherent views.

​

What quackery is that to say our old nature has been destroyed? What do you believe overcoming is to be all about, fun and games? You are never tempted? What gets tempted when you are? You reveal you know nothing about the "way of the cross".

 

[JDS]

What quackery is that to say our old nature has been destroyed? What do you believe overcoming is to be all about, fun and games? You are never tempted? What gets tempted when you are? You reveal you know nothing about the "way of the cross".

The predestination of the believers in Jesus Christ, and that is the ones who have been predestinated, is unto the image of Jesus Christ. In Romans 8:29,30, it is to the IMAGE of Jesus Christ and is individual in nature. Every believer is predestinated to this eventuality. What does that mean? It means that at this moment we are not in the image of Jesus Christ! The context of Rom 8 says we will have that image at the redemption of the body, which will take place at our translation. Meanwhile, in these corruptible bodies we are earth-bound. Now, what is different between Jesus Christ and those of us who have been born again? Jesus Christ was quickened by the Spirit! 1 Pet 3:18. We are quickened by the Spirit. Rom 8:11. But he was raised from the dead with a glorified body. Rom 1:1-4. We await that glorification but have been predestinated to it and meanwhile, the Spirit that quickened us seals us in our relationship with God as sons and is the earnest of the final redemption. For anyone to teach that this relationship that is accomplished by a birth can be annulled by sin simply does not understand God and his salvation.

In Ephesians, the predestination does not have individual believers in mind, but the collective body of members in the body of Christ. Even in verse 10 we see that! God is planning to gather together in one all things which are in Christ, menaing those believers that have died and have gone on to heaven to be with Jesus (Without a glorified body of course) and those on earth, meaning those who are alive on earth when he accomplishes this.

The Spirit of God indwells a corruptible body that is prone to sin, but the blood of Jesus Christ is greater than sin and the Spirit of God is the surety of salvation, because he is salvation.

The Spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak, we are told. So then, the corruptible body is the nature of sin. When we receive the body like the body Jesus has, it will be impossible for us to ever sin again!

Php 3:20 For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: 21 Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.

1Jo 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

42 So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption:
43 It is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power:
44 It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body.
45 And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.
46 Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual.
47 The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
48 As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.
49 And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.
50 Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.

The image of Jesus Christ is the soul, the Holy Spirit, and the glorified body. We have not attained that yet, but it is our hope.

Jesus Christ is the image of God! Trinitarian. We are made in the image of God by being made in the image of Christ! Soul, The gift of the Holy Spirit to indwell us and give us the nature of God, the glorified body.

1Co 15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
54 So when this corruptible (those who have died) shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal (Those who are alive at his coming see 1 Th 4:13-18) shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?
56 The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law.
57 But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[frumanchu]

The "coup de gras", si vou plait, is delivered by the text itself. Take what happened on the other thread --- first "born-again" was nearly simultaneous with "adoption", leaving a time when a person was "regenerated reprobate". Then it was "simultaneous", leaving the person "born-again, AND adopted, AFTER belief". Both places deny "predestination".

Third, a person has a LOGICAL order but without TEMPORAL order, as if this answers the "nearly-simultaneous-delay" and/or the "simultaneous-AFTER-BELIEF". It doesn't.

The concept of "order", is by definition "sequence"; two events that occur at the same instant, have no sequence. Two events that occur in order, do.

...and neither perspective allows "predestination"...

I will say it again: Time requires sequence, but sequence does not require time.

You continue to ignore this fact and claim that sequence = time when in fact it does not. Thus you base one of your primary argument on a glaring fallacy.

"Responsible Grace" MUST accept the following statements if its applications of "sequence" and "time" are used consistently:

1. There is a time when men believe but are not justified
2. There is a time when men believe but are still children of the devil
3. There is a time when men believe but are not born again
4. There is a time when men believe but are not adopted sons of God
5. There is a time when men believe but are not in Christ
6. There is a time when men believe but are not elect
7. There is a time when men believe but are not saved

Cause and effect require sequence. BY DEFINITION an effect must necessarily follow its cause. Therefore if you maintain the causal relationship you constantly appeal to, you CANNOT object to the above seven points.

There is no wiggle room here, Ben. "Responsible Grace" must either acknowledge the above seven points, or cease the "simultaneous" argument from which they are logically derived.

Edit: I see that the above points were finally mentioned. Response is below.

 

[Ormly]

The predestination of the believers in Jesus Christ, and that is the ones who have been predestinated, is unto the image of Jesus Christ. In Romans 8:29,30, it is to the IMAGE of Jesus Christ and is individual in nature. Every believer is predestinated to this eventuality. What does that mean? It means that at this moment we are not in the image of Jesus Christ!

Stop! Explain to me the "way of the cross". What does it accomplish and how is it accomplished? What is the evidence of its success?

 

[Ben johnson]

Quoted by Cygnus:
try to make up your mind what you believe ben , it does no good to debate the same person with incoherent views.​

Not "incoherent" --- though I might not have communicated it clearly...

"Regeneration", means what 2Cor5:17 says --- we are new creations, the old is passed away and all is new. Yet, the Greek tense supports "the old is pass-ING away, new things have come".

Thus is embodied 1Jn3:5-6, 10: "You know that He appeared in order to take away sins; and in Him there is no sin. No one who abides in Him sins; no one who sins has seen Him or knows Him. ...No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him, and he cannot sin, because he is born of God."

The whole premise of this, is "in-Christ", "abiding". Christianity is a constant walk of "abiding in Christ"; we ONLY sin, when we take our focus off of Him.

After each sin we have the same choice; to run back to Him in repentance, that fellowship is restored, or to sin again. It is the "again" that ruins us.

It is the "born-of-God" concept, that CANNOT sin, which demonstrates the dual responsibility --- clearly stated in 2Pet1:5-10, 2Tim1:12-14, 1Tim4:16, and many other places --- we abide in Christ, and abide in regeneration, by faith.

And that is completely incompatible with "sovereign-monergistic-regeneration"...

Make sense? I think I've explained it better, and shown the connection with more Scriptures...

 

[frumanchu]

"Mental ability"? Has such a person EVER turned? You can only answer, "no". So there is no ability whatsoever...

FALSE. That is a clearl logical fallacy. You are saying that ability only exists if it is exercised. If that is the case, then you should apply that logic consistently and say that Jesus was never really tempted at all (despite what Scripture says) because there was no possibility of Him sinning.

As we discussed (you, and I, and everyone here, and my little froggy) --- (the frog is quite an intent listener) --- (you might even say he finds my words RIVITTING...) --- this makes all of Jesus' rebukes, "hyperbole". Matt11:21-24, 23:13, John 5:39-47 to mention a few...

FALSE. You claim they are hyperbole because, based on the flawed logic demonstrated above, you evaluate the vailidity of something based upon your paradigm of pragmatism. To you a rebuke is only valid if it is meant to fit into your paradigm of God doing everything in His power to draw men out of their unbelief, when in fact God is perfectly justified in rebuking them for the mere fact that their sin deserves such a rebuke.

With respect, were you elected "spokesman"???

Easy for you to say...you're the spokesman for "Responsible Grace" by default....because nobody else will rise to its defense!

No, you haven't shown that "it includes the Gospel of Jesus". Your claim to the passage, is not supported.

"things", are "things"; as verse 14 says "spiritually discerned" --- this aligns with "taught by the Spirit with spiritual thoughts and words".

...that is, "RECEIVED Spirit"...

So you will admit then that the "they/them" refers to the false teachers in 2 Peter 2:20-22? Or is this just another argument of convenience where you apply rules selectively based on whatever supports your preconception?

If "regeneration" is sovereignly decided by God, why do we sin?

Why isn't He sovereign enough???

Because He has chosen to sanctify us over the course of our lives rather than instantly. We still battle against the flesh, but we are no longer captive to it.

Do you believe we have the ability to sin in Heaven?

 

[Ben johnson]

Quoted by Cygnus:
try to make up your mind what you believe ben , it does no good to debate the same person with incoherent views.​

Not "incoherent" --- though I might not have communicated it clearly...

"Regeneration", means what 2Cor5:17 says --- we are new creations, the old is passed away and all is new. Yet, the Greek tense supports "the old is pass-ING away, new things have come".

Thus is embodied 1Jn3:5-6, 10: "You know that He appeared in order to take away sins; and in Him there is no sin. No one who abides in Him sins; no one who sins has seen Him or knows Him. ...No one who is born of God practices sin, because His seed abides in him, and he cannot sin, because he is born of God."

The whole premise of this, is "in-Christ", "abiding". Christianity is a constant walk of "abiding in Christ"; we ONLY sin, when we take our focus off of Him.

After each sin we have the same choice; to run back to Him in repentance, that fellowship is restored, or to sin again. It is the "again" that ruins us.

It is the "born-of-God" concept, that CANNOT sin, which demonstrates the dual responsibility --- clearly stated in 2Pet1:5-10, 2Tim1:12-14, 1Tim4:16, and many other places --- we abide in Christ, and abide in regeneration, by faith.

And that is completely incompatible with "sovereign-monergistic-regeneration"...

Make sense? I think I've explained it better, and shown the connection with more Scriptures...

 

[A Brother In Christ]

we are still waiting for answers to scripture given in other threads...

same issues just starting over and over

Ben tell me why ... will it make a difference....

 

[frumanchu]

Oh I answered the answers --- refuting them.

THIS IS DEMONSTRABLY FALSE.

I have posted several points directly answering your arguments that have not been answered ONE SINGLE TIME. To claim that you have "answered the answers" is simply NOT TRUE.

When will you stop making demonstrably false statements about Calvinists?

 

[frumanchu]

And Pharaoh sinned and hardened his own heart. Black-n-white, Cygnus.

"Black-n-white"...except that "Responsible Grace" refuses to acknowledge or explain the fact that the first mention of the hardening of Pharaoh's heart occurs in Exodus 4:

And the LORD said to Moses, "When you go back to Egypt, see that you do before Pharaoh all the miracles that I have put in your power. But I will harden his heart, so that he will not let the people go. - Ex 4:21
​

Several things must be accounted for which "Responsible Grace" will not address:

1. The first mention of Pharaoh's heart being hardened is in Exodus 4:21 prior to the circumstances under which Pharaoh's heart is hardened.

2. The LORD is the first mentioned as the agent of Pharaoh's heart being hardened, not Pharaoh

3. Exodus 4:21 makes it clear that the LORD hardens Pharaoh's heart for His own purpose ("so that he will not let the people go")

4. In the book of Exodus, the LORD is mentioned as the agent hardening Pharaoh's heart ten times (Ex 4:21, 7:3, 9:12, 10:1, 10:20, 10:27, 11:10, 14:4, 14:8, 14:17), while Pharaoh is cited as the agent only three times (Ex 8:15, 8:32, 9:34).


Will "Responsible Grace" answer this? No...it will simply continue to make the same claim over and over again without ever addressing the issue, while claiming falsely that it has been answered.

 

[A Brother In Christ]

was pharaoh saved.... no thus no grace being used By God as example

 

[frumanchu]

The point, is that if "regeneration" was sovereignly decreed, we WOULD be sinless. Else God would not be sovereign enough.

This is patently absurd. So much so in fact that I'm at a loss at the moment as to where to start. I'll pick this point back up later.

But if "regeneration" is by faith (as Titus3:5-6 states, regeneration is by the POURED Spirit, and "poured" denotes "belief" --- Acts10:45 & 11:17.

FALSE. You continue to cite these passages as though they have not been thoroughly dealt with. You once again demonstrate your lack of aptitude in linguistics by claiming that Titus 3:5-6 proves that the Spirit is poured and then subsequently regenerates. That is not what the verse says, and with apologies to Robertson "no amount of legerdemain" can make it say that.

If I say "no", then I would be following the Calvinistic logical progression of "sovereign-predestined-regeneration"; for what God decrees, cannot be undone. I would not be able to sin.

But alas, I do sin; God does not want me to sin, therefore God is resistible.

See how it works? That we sin, PROVES that regeneration is not sovereignly-decreed by God. Else we COULD NOT sin.

Because regeneration is by voluntary faith, we CAN resist God, and like the man in 2Pet1:9, we can become unregenerated again.

See if you can deny that "formerly purified from sins", equates to "regeneration".

And you also won't be able to deny that "forgotten former purification, LACKS godly qualities", is no longer regenerate.

So do you admit then that you lose your regeneration all the time by sinning? That is necessarily the logical conclusion of what you just wrote.

Fatal flaw, after fatal flaw, Cygnus. I pray these discussions cause you no harm; it has always been an extreme delight to converse with you; and I only seek the truth as revealed in Scripture, for I believe only then can both of us emerge more mature in Christ.

So long as you blatantly and demonstrably REWRITE SCRIPTURE you will never come close to finding the truth you seek? I submit you have already decided the truth apart from Scripture and are seeking that "truth" within its pages, looking for anything you can to support it.

 

[JDS]

Stop! Explain to me the "way of the cross". What does it accomplish and how is it accomplished? What is the evidence of its success?

I am sorry I posted like I did, Ormly. I am not disagreeing with your comments. Seems to me that you make sense in the few comments of yours I have read. I just used your comments to launch into a commentary about predestination.

 

[frumanchu]

And you know why. But I will answer you --- belief is not "mental assent" (James2:19), it is action (Matt7:24-27).

He who BELIEVES, acts on that belief and receives Christ. Thus there is no time between "belief" and "justification" and "adoption" and "new-birth".

FINALLY you address it...by completely dodging it.

According to your own arguments there MUST be. After all, you claimed that sequence establishes time, and that faith is causal to these things. Thus it follows IRRESISTIBLY that belief precedes these other things in sequence, and according to you there then must be a "time" when they believe but do not have these other things.

There is no denying it, Ben. Your argument is self-defeating. It has been clearly demonstrated. QED

"God is just and justifier of he who believes". Rom3:26 Take that verse, and show me how there is ANY time between "belief", and "justification". Justification cannot precede belief, nor can one who believes, not be justified.

You argue for logical order without time while trying to argue against it! You're demonstrating very clearly just how shaky the ground is under your feet by showing that you are obviously manufacturing arguments to attack Calvinism. Romans 3:26 refers to the fact that God in the same action (Jesus' atoning sacrifice) is both just in upholding the requirements of the Law and the justified of men by applying the benefits of the Cross to those who believe. You are completely missing the point of the verse in order to twist it into an attack on Calvinism. You are not seeking truth from Scripture, you are imposing your doctrines upon it.

 

[Charis kai Dunamis]

Now what would it take to bring that one back into the fold if he has tasted of the heavenly gift and partaken of the Holy Ghost and then fallen away?

To answer this question in any way is to assume your interpretation of hebrews 6:4 is correct, which I highly disagree with.

 

[Ormly]

I am sorry I posted like I did, Ormly. I am not disagreeing with your comments. Seems to me that you make sense in the few comments of yours I have read. I just used your comments to launch into a commentary about predestination.

Ok and thanks. I can say the same for you from what I have read of yours. It's good Bible.

I'll continue reading where I left off. . . . ))

However, using your "Good Bible" how 'bout an explanation of your understanding of the 'way of the cross'? If you have none, that's OK too. Perhaps I can bring it up as a thread, that's if the Mod's will allow it. They are picking me apart these days.