Predestination

[Bible Highlighter]

Jason0047,

[The word "if" is not a guarantee. The word "if" suggests a possibility.]
nope




[John 6 ...
37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.

Notice the word "should" in there. Again, this does not suggest a guarantee.
For example: That would be like me saying, "I should be over your house tomorrow, but I have a lot of work to do." Would you take this as a promise or guarantee that I was coming over? No. Of course not. So why would you read a guarantee into the words in John 6?
Because of your preconceived beliefs (or what you prefer to see).]

It is a certainty. Jesus is surety, [guarantee]hebrews 7:22-25....Your rebellion against truth is causing you to suggest Jesus did not accomplish a perfect redemption.

I am sorry. But reality disagrees with you. The word "if" suggests a possibility. Your saying, "Nope" does not change anything. If you look up the word "if" in a dictionary you will see what I am talking about. Oh, there is that "if" word again. Did you understand how I used it?

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

Yeah and your teaching has it that God commands all to repent but states they don't have the capacity to do so and they get punished for something not their fault unless you're going to claim they had a choice as to whether they'd be born or not. That'd be like saying someone is born disabled, can't walk, and you demand they run around the block and because they can't you put blame on them and punish them for not being able to do so. And that's your viewpoint of justice. That type of way IS NOT the God of the Bible.

Hello Bobber,

I do not think we have interacted yet.
let me say this about that.....
Did Jesus command the man who could not walk, ....to rise up and walk?

Did Jesus command the man with the withered hand to ...stretch for th his hand?

Did Jesus command dead Lazarus to come forth?

In each case he commanded them to do what they could not do, and supplied the power and ability to accomplish it .
Bobber....in the words of Jonah;
9 But I will sacrifice unto thee with the voice of thanksgiving; I will pay that that I have vowed. Salvation is of the Lord.
Do we agree here? also Jn 1:12-13

10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.

11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

..

I am sorry. But reality disagrees with you. The word "if" suggests a possibility. Your saying, "Nope" does not change anything. If you look up the word "if" in a dictionary you will see what I am talking about. Oh, there is that "if" word again. Did you understand how I used it?

Jason....there is no if, of contingency

.It is a perfect accomplished redemption....there is no, if, might, or should...all of the words denote certainty. Jesus died a Covenant death. He seeks and SAVES all His lost sheep...not one will be lost.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

..

Jason....there is no if, of contingency

.It is a perfect accomplished redemption....there is no, if, might, or should...all of the words denote certainty. Jesus died a Covenant death. He seeks and SAVES all His lost sheep...not one will be lost.

Try doing a keyword search on the word "if" at blueletterbible and get back to me on those passages. My guess is you will never do such a study because it refutes your belief.

 

[akmom]

Iconoclast, I'm not following your explanations. There is that same disconnect in communication between what Calvinists are saying and what I'm asking. Which is why I feel that either the predestination theology is wrong, or I'm not among the elect. But there is always this implication that there is a simple dichotomy, that one is either among the elect and destined to be saved (irresistable grace), or not among the elect and destined to reject God. There is no acknowledgement of a third group - a group that seeks God but isn't chosen. Is this a thing or not? This is the point at which Calvinists - who up until this point have all these answers - pull the plug on the discussion and present their trump card of "Who are we to question God?"

Why there? Why can we debate the nature of God and the intricacies of His plan, until we get to *that* question? That is the only question in this whole discussion that I would actually need an answer for, but that one is taboo. Is this not disingenuous?

I sense some resentment in your post, and I could be wrong, because I don't know your thoughts and written forums are not the best medium for conveying them. I don't know if that's a response to perceiving disrespect in my own post (which was not intended), or just the human tendency toward anger when views are questioned/challenged. But there is no resentment between the members of my church and myself, nor toward my pastor. There is only love and respect, or I would have left long ago. The discrepancy is with the doctrine and my place in it. And where I go from here.

 

[sdowney717]

Iconoclast, I'm not following your explanations. There is that same disconnect in communication between what Calvinists are saying and what I'm asking. Which is why I feel that either the predestination theology is wrong, or I'm not among the elect. But there is always this implication that there is a simple dichotomy, that one is either among the elect and destined to be saved (irresistable grace), or not among the elect and destined to reject God. There is no acknowledgement of a third group - a group that seeks God but isn't chosen. Is this a thing or not? This is the point at which Calvinists - who up until this point have all these answers - pull the plug on the discussion and present their trump card of "Who are we to question God?"

Why there? Why can we debate the nature of God and the intricacies of His plan, until we get to *that* question? That is the only question in this whole discussion that I would actually need an answer for, but that one is taboo. Is this not disingenuous?

I sense some resentment in your post, and I could be wrong, because I don't know your thoughts and written forums are not the best medium for conveying them. I don't know if that's a response to perceiving disrespect in my own post (which was not intended), or just the human tendency toward anger when views are questioned/challenged. But there is no resentment between the members of my church and myself, nor toward my pastor. There is only love and respect, or I would have left long ago. The discrepancy is with the doctrine and my place in it. And where I go from here.

Sense resentment? I think your transfering your own resentment against the doctrine of predestination.
Predestination is a real word in a real bible and a real doctrine. It is a positive affirming message that those God has saved, are saved eternally, preserved in the faith since God is the author and finisher of their faith. Lots of other false doctrines, say people can fall away being eternally saved to go to hell, and add in things like their works to be saved. Add in man is in control of eternal life, being born again by the will of man, and don't need Christ at all to be saved, say God will judge people according to their conscience and their conscience excuses them at the judgement, so that unregenerate, those not in Christ, not born of God people will enter heaven..

You gotta watch out for antichrist doctrines. Such doctrines most obviously oppose what Christ has said in John 6.

 

[brinny]

Thank you for sharing this. What a precious precious song.

God bless you.

 

[Loren T.]

of course he is speaking of salvation....

He's talking about Israel.
"see Jeremiah 18:6 He said, "Can I not do with you, Israel, as this potter does?" declares the LORD. "Like clay in the hand of the potter, so are you in my hand, Israel. 7 If at any time I declare concerning a nation or a kingdom, that I will pluck up and break down and destroy it, 8 and if that nation, concerning which I have spoken, turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I intended to do to it. 9 And if at any time I declare concerning a nation or a kingdom that I will build and plant it, 10 and if it does evil in my sight, not listening to my voice, then I will relent of the good that I had intended to do to it.

What is is view are the different uses God has for people. He does not mold people only to smash them. The verses in Romans actually show us that we all have worth to God. The pots fit for destruction are those that fit themselves for destruction by disobedience

And that person talking back to God in Romans 9 is not the reader.
This is something I didn't immediately get about Romans 9, which really made me appreciate Paul's subtle way of wording things, or maybe it's not so subtle, but I never saw it for a long time.
"19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God?"

Paul is using a literary device where he is arguing against an unseen opponent, in this case, a hardened Jew who is mad at God for using Israel's rebellion to spread the gospel to the gentile dogs. See Romans 3 for a parallel chapter, that is a bit easier to understand.

But, sometimes I have wondered if Paul wasn't given a glimpse of how people would misuse Romans 9 to insist God arbitrarily chooses some for salvation and some for hell. Because he puts a subtle pun in here that not only proves the objecter wrong, it proves the determinist reader wrong too.
Once we know the objector is not us (unless we are mad at God for using our sin to save others)
we can see the objector is also wrong in what he says about us not being able to resist God's will. And this means, the one who believes in limited election is also wrong, because he thinks everything is predestined, therefore everything is God's will. But what does Paul say: "But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God?"
In one sentence, Paul confirms that we are, indeed, able to talk back to God, that we CAN resist God's will and that God is not controlling everything we do. And he tells the objector that he has no right to tell God who and how he can save and who he can't. Romans is about God's love and mercy being expanded by the cross to reach whosoever will. Those who think it's about limited atonement have it exactly backwards, which is actually quite sad. If they are right, then the rebellious objector is also right, God should not blame us for anything. But, thank God, they aren't!

 

[Loren T.]

It is a positive affirming message that those God has saved, are saved eternally, preserved in the faith since God is the author and finisher of their faith.

And who cares about the untold masses to whom salvation is never offered, Huh?

 

[Halbhh]

Iconoclast, I'm not following your explanations. There is that same disconnect in communication between what Calvinists are saying and what I'm asking. Which is why I feel that either the predestination theology is wrong, or I'm not among the elect. But there is always this implication that there is a simple dichotomy, that one is either among the elect and destined to be saved (irresistable grace), or not among the elect and destined to reject God. There is no acknowledgement of a third group - a group that seeks God but isn't chosen. Is this a thing or not? This is the point at which Calvinists - who up until this point have all these answers - pull the plug on the discussion and present their trump card of "Who are we to question God?"

Why there? Why can we debate the nature of God and the intricacies of His plan, until we get to *that* question? That is the only question in this whole discussion that I would actually need an answer for, but that one is taboo. Is this not disingenuous?

I sense some resentment in your post, and I could be wrong, because I don't know your thoughts and written forums are not the best medium for conveying them. I don't know if that's a response to perceiving disrespect in my own post (which was not intended), or just the human tendency toward anger when views are questioned/challenged. But there is no resentment between the members of my church and myself, nor toward my pastor. There is only love and respect, or I would have left long ago. The discrepancy is with the doctrine and my place in it. And where I go from here.

Don't follow or rely on anyone to tell you Truth, judge you, straighten you out (you could end up following a blind guide). Those answers men give won't help you. Follow and rely and learn from Christ Jesus instead of men. His words are able to teach and help us and comfort us no matter our age or maturity. A good preacher relies on all Christ said, not some pet doctrine repeatedly.

 

[aiki]

I was saved when I was young, and it was very real to me, and I was compelled to share Jesus with everyone. But I came from a family of end-times fanatics and a church of hell-fire-brimstone preachers that urged us into a really aggressive form of evangelism that I tried to adopt, but ultimately found it really hard to tell everyone to hurry and repent or they’d burn. It felt like following a script, so I decided it was disingenuous and stopped.

But if the Bible is the word of God - which it is - and the lost are destined for an eternity in Hell as the Bible plainly teaches, why wouldn't you be urgent in your evangelism? God's "script" is very clear and doesn't change with the times. Those who die unrepentant in their sin will stand before God the Judge, not God the Father. Telling folks this truth may sound script-like but it is nonetheless the truth. Should you neglect to share the life-saving truth of the Gospel just because it doesn't feel right to you?

2 Corinthians 4:3-4
3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:
4 In whom the god of this world has blinded the minds of them who believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

I did share my experiences of Jesus’s love with close friends, some whom went on to accept Jesus but later abandoned that faith. I remember having candid, honest talks with people of different faiths, no faith, similar faith... around a campfire with no agenda, no threats of hell, no accusations of heresy. Just love for one another and a sincere interest in others’ thoughts and experiences, and a unanimous desire to seek God’s truth. Even when no consensus materialized.

Did your sharing of Jesus' love include his greatest act of love to you which was to save you from the eternal penalty of your sin? It should have. He laid down his life for you because you were a wicked sinner incapable of saving yourself from your sin. He did for you what you could not do for yourself. This is an integral truth of the Gospel and the greatest demonstration of God's love for you that you can point to.

Your spiritual egalitarianism in your campfire conversations might have made you feel good, but it was akin to chatting to your neighbors in the doorway of their house about the weather while the roof above them was on fire and about to cave in on them. Jesus and the apostles all preached repentance and the Gospel to the lost; they did not engage in "candid, honest talks...with no agenda, no threats of hell, no accusations of heresy." Why was their approach so different from yours? Perhaps because they understood - and believed - the terrible, eternal jeopardy of the lost and were moved by love to preach to them the truth that could save them.

Luke 13:1-5
1 There were present at that season some who told Him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices.
2 And Jesus answered and said to them, "Do you suppose that these Galileans were worse sinners than all other Galileans, because they suffered such things?
3 I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.
4 Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them, do you think that they were worse sinners than all other men who dwelt in Jerusalem?
5 I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish."

Acts 17:30-31
30 Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent,
31 because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead."

Romans 2:5-11
5 But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,
6 who "will render to each one according to his deeds":
7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality;
8 but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness--indignation and wrath,
9 tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek;
10 but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
11 For there is no partiality with God.

So I really kind of shut off when I go to churches with divisive attitudes, who obsess over hell as if they are eager to see theological opponents go there.

Is it an evil thing to be obsessed with saving people from Hell? Are you maybe mistaking a passionate concern for the lost for an eagerness to see "theological opponents" under God's wrath? There are some who seem to be...enthusiastic about Hell, who preach the wrath of God without His love and concern for the lost. But their poor approach to sharing the Gospel ought not to gag us all from preaching the hard (but very necessary) truths of salvation.

And especially groups who are resistant to discussing anything that challenges their dogma. I just grew up seeing that version of practicing faith and it was ugly.

What does "discussing" look like to you? Is what you think "discussing" ought to be necessarily how it should be? If so, why?

I love this church because the people are loving, and humble, and sincerely willing to make personal sacrifices for the body of Christ and the community. I do think they are for real. And they are upfront about non-Calvinist persuasions being welcome and within the scope of orthodox Christianity.

Glad to hear it. It is...unusual for Calvinists to acknowledge that there are other legitimate, competing soteriological views.

However, that’s where it ends. Because every sermon is about predestination. Repetitive is an under statement. I leave every Sunday with the question, “What did I get from this? What do I do with this??” Nothing. God did everything for you. So just accept His grace. And yet everyone else seems to respond with conviction, post to Facebook about how moved they are. And me, I don’t even get it. I’m so confused I found I couldn’t even explain it to my kids.

Well, then, use your confusion as motivation to understand the doctrines of salvation better. What purpose does it serve to remain in your present confusion? Check out the websites I gave you links to. Calvinism isn't the only game in town.

www.soteriology101.com
www.reasonablefaith.com (see Molinism)

I haven’t grown spiritually in so many years I don’t even know why I’m in church. That connection I had to God at one point just feels gone.

Because of the preaching at your church? Goodness, I hope not! Your walk with God shouldn't be so susceptible to, or dependent upon, the noise from the pulpit.

And everything about predestination theology seems wrong, like the aggressive hell-based evangelism felt wrong.

The Calvinist ideas about predestination are a bit screwy, but, as I said, there are other points of view on predestination. Check them out. Get informed. Grow in your understanding.

 

[sdowney717]

But if the Bible is the word of God - which it is - and the lost are destined for an eternity in Hell as the Bible plainly teaches, why wouldn't you be urgent in your evangelism? God's "script" is very clear and doesn't change with the times. Those who die unrepentant in their sin will stand before God the Judge, not God the Father. Telling folks this truth may sound script-like but it is nonetheless the truth. Should you neglect to share the life-saving truth of the Gospel just because it doesn't feel right to you?

2 Corinthians 4:3-4
3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost:
4 In whom the god of this world has blinded the minds of them who believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.



Did your sharing of Jesus' love include his greatest act of love to you which was to save you from the eternal penalty of your sin? It should have. He laid down his life for you because you were a wicked sinner incapable of saving yourself from your sin. He did for you what you could not do for yourself. This is an integral truth of the Gospel and the greatest demonstration of God's love for you that you can point to.

Your spiritual egalitarianism in your campfire conversations might have made you feel good, but it was akin to chatting to your neighbors in the doorway of their house about the weather while the roof above them was on fire and about to cave in on them. Jesus and the apostles all preached repentance and the Gospel to the lost; they did not engage in "candid, honest talks...with no agenda, no threats of hell, no accusations of heresy." Why was their approach so different from yours? Perhaps because they understood - and believed - the terrible, eternal jeopardy of the lost and were moved by love to preach to them the truth that could save them.

Luke 13:1-5
1 There were present at that season some who told Him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices.
2 And Jesus answered and said to them, "Do you suppose that these Galileans were worse sinners than all other Galileans, because they suffered such things?
3 I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish.
4 Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them, do you think that they were worse sinners than all other men who dwelt in Jerusalem?
5 I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish."

Acts 17:30-31
30 Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent,
31 because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained. He has given assurance of this to all by raising Him from the dead."

Romans 2:5-11
5 But in accordance with your hardness and your impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,
6 who "will render to each one according to his deeds":
7 eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality;
8 but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness--indignation and wrath,
9 tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek;
10 but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
11 For there is no partiality with God.



Is it an evil thing to be obsessed with saving people from Hell? Are you maybe mistaking a passionate concern for the lost for an eagerness to see "theological opponents" under God's wrath? There are some who seem to be...enthusiastic about Hell, who preach the wrath of God without His love and concern for the lost. But their poor approach to sharing the Gospel ought not to gag us all from preaching the hard (but very necessary) truths of salvation.



What does "discussing" look like to you? Is what you think "discussing" ought to be necessarily how it should be? If so, why?



Glad to hear it. It is...unusual for Calvinists to acknowledge that there are other legitimate, competing soteriological views.



Well, then, use your confusion as motivation to understand the doctrines of salvation better. What purpose does it serve to remain in your present confusion? Check out the websites I gave you links to. Calvinism isn't the only game in town.

www.soteriology101.com
www.reasonablefaith.com (see Molinism)



Because of the preaching at your church? Goodness, I hope not! Your walk with God shouldn't be so susceptible to, or dependent upon, the noise from the pulpit.



The Calvinist ideas about predestination are a bit screwy, but, as I said, there are other points of view on predestination. Check them out. Get informed. Grow in your understanding.

Yous stopped quoting after verse 11.
A little OT here, but.
About obsessing over saving people from hell, some on this forum have told me and believe Christ is not needed for salvation, God will judge people on what they know and their thoughts will excuse themselves to God...and so then they are going to enter heaven if their hearts are light, I suppose....
I am not in agreement with that, I view that as antichrist talk.
How do you view Romans 2:12-16 and unbelieving gentiles, specifically their thoughts excusing themselves.

12 For as many as have sinned without law will also perish without law, and as many as have sinned in the law will be judged by the law 13 (for not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the doers of the law will be justified;

14 for when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves,
15 who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them)
16 in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

Loren T.,

Hello Loren
[He's talking about Israel.]

Yes...he has been explaining what happened to Israel since chapter9 began;

but notice this portion-
6 Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel:

7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
Paul explains that God has made individual choice among the chosen nation...in other words, not every physical Israelite is found in the promised seed. and to make matters worse...he is going to show that God finds some of the elect seed among the previously non covenanted gentiles...see the following;
22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,

24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

25 As he saith also in Osee, I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved.

26 And it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children of the living God.

27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:

28 For he will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness: because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.

29 And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodoma, and been made like unto Gomorrha.

30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.

31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
Notice in verse 27 the reference is to individual salvation

["see Jeremiah 18:6 He said, "Can I not do with you, Israel, as this potter does?" declares the LORD. "Like clay in the hand of the potter, so are you in my hand, Israel. 7 If at any time I declare concerning a nation or a kingdom, that I will pluck up and break down and destroy it, 8 and if that nation, concerning which I have spoken, turns from its evil, I will relent of the disaster that I intended to do to it. 9 And if at any time I declare concerning a nation or a kingdom that I will build and plant it, 10 and if it does evil in my sight, not listening to my voice, then I will relent of the good that I had intended to do to it.]
Yes....the potter has the freedom to elect and save a multitude of His own choosing...You were correct to reference jer 18...it was language they should have immediately known.

[What is is view are the different uses God has for people.]
Sorry, that is an anti cal falsehood put forth to divert away from the biblical truth....this is a recent novelty among the connect 316 people.

[ He does not mold people only to smash them. The verses in Romans actually show us that we all have worth to God. The pots fit for destruction are those that fit themselves for destruction by disobedience]
utside of Christ all men are fitted to destruction, that is why it is called mercy when God elects and saves His sheep.
[And that person talking back to God in Romans 9 is not the reader.
This is something I didn't immediately get about Romans 9, which really made me appreciate Paul's subtle way of wording things, or maybe it's not so subtle, but I never saw it for a long time.
"19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God?"

Paul is using a literary device where he is arguing against an unseen opponent, in this case, a hardened Jew who is mad at God for using Israel's rebellion to spread the gospel to the gentile dogs. See Romans 3 for a parallel chapter, that is a bit easier to understand.]

agreed

[But, sometimes I have wondered if Paul wasn't given a glimpse of how people would misuse Romans 9 to insist God arbitrarily chooses some for salvation and some for hell. Because he puts a subtle pun in here that not only proves the objecter wrong, it proves the determinist reader wrong too.]

Much to the contrary my friend, Paul's argument makes no sense if individual election to salvation among the remnant of Israel and the elect Gentiles is not in view...WHICH IT CLEARLY IS.
tHIS PASSAGE IS TO ANSWER PERSONS SUCH AS YOURSELF WHO AVOID THE POTTERS FREEDOM AT ALL COST.




[Once we know the objector is not us (unless we are mad at God for using our sin to save others we can see the objector is also wrong in what he says about us not being able to resist God's will.]
You are the objector


[And this means, the one who believes in limited election is also wrong, because he thinks everything is predestined, therefore everything is God's will.]
First off everyone limits the atonement....Do you believe satan can be saved, when there is no redemption for fallen angels?
Individual election to salvation is the biblical teaching flat out...

[But what does Paul say: "But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God?"]
That is to the non cal who hates these teachings...

[In one sentence, Paul confirms that we are, indeed, able to talk back to God, that we CAN resist God's will]
tell that to King Nebuchadrezzar when he was eating grass for 7 years,lol...or Jonah when he did not want to go to Ninevah...lol


[and that God is not controlling everything we do.]

We do what we do and are fully responsible for our actions, nevertheless here is the 1689 cof on this matter;

Chapter 3: Of God's Decree
1._____ God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass; yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein; nor is violence offered to the will of the creature, nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established; in which appears his wisdom in disposing all things, and power and faithfulness in accomplishing his decree.
( Isaiah 46:10; Ephesians 1:11; Hebrews 6:17; Romans 9:15, 18; James 1:13; 1 John 1:5; Acts 4:27, 28; John 19:11; Numbers 23:19; Ephesians 1:3-5 )
2._____ Although God knoweth whatsoever may or can come to pass, upon all supposed conditions, yet hath he not decreed anything, because he foresaw it as future, or as that which would come to pass upon such conditions.
( Acts 15:18; Romans 9:11, 13, 16, 18 )

3._____ By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated, or foreordained to eternal life through Jesus Christ, to the praise of his glorious grace; others being left to act in their sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of his glorious justice.
( 1 Timothy 5:21; Matthew 25:34; Ephesians 1:5, 6; Romans 9:22, 23; Jude 4 )

4.______These angels and men thus predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed, and their number so certain and definite, that it cannot be either increased or diminished.
( 2 Timothy 2:19; John 13:18 )

5._____ Those of mankind that are predestinated to life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will, hath chosen in Christ unto everlasting glory, out of his mere free grace and love, without any other thing in the creature as a condition or cause moving him thereunto.
( Ephesians 1:4, 9, 11; Romans 8:30; 2 Timothy 1:9; 1 Thessalonians 5:9; Romans 9:13, 16; Ephesians 2:5, 12 )

6._____ As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so he hath, by the eternal and most free purpose of his will, foreordained all the means thereunto; wherefore they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ, by his Spirit working in due season, are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto salvation; neither are any other redeemed by Christ, or effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only.
( 1 Peter 1:2; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Thessalonians 5:9, 10; Romans 8:30; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 1 Peter 1:5; John 10:26; John 17:9; John 6:64 )

7._____ The doctrine of the high mystery of predestination is to be handled with special prudence and care, that men attending the will of God revealed in his Word, and yielding obedience thereunto, may, from the certainty of their effectual vocation, be assured of their eternal election; so shall this doctrine afford matter of praise, reverence, and admiration of God, and of humility, diligence, and abundant consolation to all that sincerely obey the gospel.
( 1 Thessalonians 1:4, 5; 2 Peter 1:10; Ephesians 1:6; Romans 11:33; Romans 11:5, 6, 20; Luke 10:20 )



[And he tells the objector that he has no right to tell God who and how he can save and who he can't. Romans is about God's love and mercy being expanded by the cross to reach whosoever will. Those who think it's about limited atonement have it exactly backwards, which is actually quite sad. If they are right, then the rebellious objector is also right, God should not blame us for anything. But, thank God, they aren't!]

One of us has it exactly backwards, and I know who it is...lol.

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

"Halbhh,

Hello Halbhh,

[Don't follow or rely on anyone to tell you Truth, judge you, straighten you out (you could end up following a blind guide). Those answers men give won't help you.]

I believe you mean this in a helpful way, and Iagree we need to use caution. That being said, God has given pastors and teachers to the church, so we are to listen and learn...no sense having a teacher, if there are no students. Acts 17:11 is the attitude we need to filter what we hear.

[Follow and rely and learn from Christ Jesus instead of men. ]
Every teacher believes Jesus has given him some truth...


[His words are able to teach and help us and comfort us no matter our age or maturity. A good preacher relies on all Christ said, not some pet doctrine repeatedly.]

Hal....do you really think that any bible scholar does not seek God's face and ask to learn from him? These doctrines come from scripture itself...not the other way around.
from the 1689;
Chapter 1: Of the Holy Scriptures
1._____ The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience, although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and his will which is necessary unto salvation. Therefore it pleased the Lord at sundry times and in divers manners to reveal himself, and to declare that his will unto his church; and afterward for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan, and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing; which maketh the Holy Scriptures to be most necessary, those former ways of God's revealing his will unto his people being now ceased.
( 2 Timothy 3:15-17; Isaiah 8:20; Luke 16:29, 31; Ephesians 2:20; Romans 1:19-21; Romans 2:14,15; Psalms 19:1-3; Hebrews 1:1; Proverbs 22:19-21; Romans 15:4; 2 Peter 1:19,20 )

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

aiki,


{Well, then, use your confusion as motivation to understand the doctrines of salvation better. What purpose does it serve to remain in your present confusion? Check out the websites I gave you links to. Calvinism isn't the only game in town.

www.soteriology101.com
www.reasonablefaith.com (see Molinism)]

Leighton Flowers has it wrong and backwards 24/7...and molinism is cousin to open theism

[The Calvinist ideas about predestination are a bit screwy, but, as I said, there are other points of view on predestination. Check them out. Get informed. Grow in your understanding.]
Bad advise...

 

[Jipsah]

As you note, Calvinism first of all has virtually no applications. It's a passive puppet theology in which people are viewed as being inanimate objects devoid of free will, and no suprise when they treat others that way. To affirm their point they have to restrict themselves to certain scripture and avoid most of the rest of the scriptures, which is what he's doing.

Short form: You really don't like the idea of predestination or election. Got it.

The best teachings come from a verse by verse study of the New Testament epistles

Try these:
Ephesians 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:
4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
8 Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence;
9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:
12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

Now, tell us what St. Paul really meant. That's how this works, right?

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

akmom,


[Iconoclast, I'm not following your explanations. There is that same disconnect in communication between what Calvinists are saying and what I'm asking. ]
I thought i was very clear..meet with the pastor.

[ Which is why I feel that either the predestination theology is wrong, or I'm not among the elect.]

You do not know enough about it to know which is right or wrong...ask the pastor.
predestination is what is happening to each believer becoming more like Jesus....that is it.


[But there is always this implication that there is a simple dichotomy, that one is either among the elect and destined to be saved (irresistable grace), or not among the elect and destined to reject God. There is no acknowledgement of a third group - a group that seeks God but isn't chosen. Is this a thing or not? ]

There are sinners who are in Adam and are unsaved as of yet...they are in the kingdom of darkness.....Others who God saves who are In Christ..they are saved from their sins.

no sitting on the fence....a person is unsaved unless and until God saves them.
Non elect persons hate God , His word, and His people. That is why they are in darkness as compared to those sinners who believe and are saved by God.
col1;
12 Giving thanks unto the Father, which hath made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light:

13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:

14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

[ This is the point at which Calvinists - who up until this point have all these answers - pull the plug on the discussion and present their trump card of "Who are we to question God?" ]
Nonsense...you need to examine yourself;2cor13;
5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

[Why there? Why can we debate the nature of God and the intricacies of His plan, until we get to *that* question? ]
We can when you ask those questions, right now you seem to be whining about those evil Calvinists.

[That is the only question in this whole discussion that I would actually need an answer for, but that one is taboo. Is this not disingenuous? ]

To have a bible discussion..,\many find it helpful to actually use the bible. Are you ready to use your bible?

[I sense some resentment in your post, and I could be wrong, because I don't know your thoughts and written forums are not the best medium for conveying them.]

This is not the best medium that is true....resentment is not the word...I am always puzzled by someone who is critical of an elder, or other believers positions who cannot give a scriptural reason for it...they just accuse without backing it up.
[ I don't know if that's a response to perceiving disrespect in my own post (which was not intended), or just the human tendency toward anger when views are questioned/challenged.]
you have not challenged anything...your confused state of mind , does not constitute a challenge.


[But there is no resentment between the members of my church and myself, nor toward my pastor. There is only love and respect, or I would have left long ago. The discrepancy is with the doctrine and my place in it. And where I go from here.]
you speak with the pastor...and if time permits listen to this;
https://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=111909144100

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

Loren T.,

[And who cares about the untold masses to whom salvation is never offered, Huh?]
We are to go to all men...but not everyone is going to be saved. Many have lived and died and died in their sins who never heard the gospel.

 

[bcbsr]

Short form: You really don't like the idea of predestination or election. Got it.

Wrong! Guess again.

Try these:
Ephesians 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:
4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
8 Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence;
9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:
12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

Now, tell us what St. Paul really meant. That's how this works, right?

Who is the "we". The "we" is believers in Christ. God predestines a category - believers in Christ. Before the world began He decided that those who end up in that category would be predestined for the inheritance. Once a person enters that category through faith he is predestined. According to Calvinism the "elect" were never objects of wrath. But Paul says, "All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath." Eph 2:3

 

[Loren T.]

One of us has it exactly backwards, and I know who it is...lol.

I'm going to assume you were looking the mirror when you wrote that.