Predestination vs. Seeking, knocking and Answering the Door

Navair2 said:

Amen.
I've never studied systematic theology per se, so it's hard for me to identify with what "Calvinism" is, exactly.
But I do know what the Bible says and I do agree with what many so-called "Calvinists" say about the Bible.
It is if one looks at it as conditional and not as evidential.

In other words, a person can believe themselves into God's kingdom, versus God granting them the new birth,

Click to expand...

But there is no believing without the new birth, for one "cannot even see (the truth regarding) the kingdom unless he is born again" (John 3:5).
No one can "believe themselves into the kingdom," right?

thereby guaranteeing that they will indeed willingly receive His words... instead of automatically rejecting them out of a hardened and rebellious heart.

One is conditional and predicated upon our reaction to God's words, and the other is evidential and based on His work in us through the power of His Spirit changing our hearts, so that the objects of His grace will listen.

Click to expand...

Navair2 said:

"Might"

• expressing purpose.
  "he avoided social engagements so that he might work"

Click to expand...

Expressing possibility--he avoided social engagements so that he would be free to choose to work.

Clare73 said:

But there is no believing without the new birth, for one "cannot even see (the truth regarding) the kingdom unless he is born again" (John 3:5).
No one can "believe themselves into the kingdom," right?

Click to expand...

Right.
But I didn't need to get involved with "Reformed churches" ( Baptist or otherwise ) to know that, Clare.

I simply picked up my Bible one day, and did what God wanted me to in 1 Peter 2:2 and 2 Timothy 2:15...
He did the rest.

Also, if you look carefully, I was contrasting one set of beliefs that people hold to today ( the vast majority view ), versus the other set of beliefs ( my view of the Scriptures, which is also the minority view ).

Some call it "Synergism" versus "Monergism":

"Syn" = "together" or...
"Mon" / "Mono" = "one, single, alone".
"erg" = "work"
"ism" = "practice, system".

Synergism is mankind working together with God, with Monergism is God working alone with no help from us as men.

Clare73 said:

They are the persons he foreknows because he has preordained and decreed that is who they will be, right?

Click to expand...

I agree.

But I'd prefer not to put things into terms that "Reformed Theology" teaches, like "eternal decree"...
To me, it sounds too clinical and institutional.

I like the way that God's word puts it:
" having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will," ( Ephesians 1:5 ).

" 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:" ( Ephesians 1:11 ).

Clare73 said:

His election is not based on the person, his election is his sovereign choice to make them that person, right?

Click to expand...

Yes...

What does Romans 8:28-39 say?
Romans 9?
Romans 11:1-8?
2 Thessalonians 2:13-14?
Ephesians 1:3-14?
Ephesians 2:10?
Acts of the Apostles 13:48?
John 6:37-47?
John 6:64-65?
John 17:2?

Do they not all describe those whom He has extended His grace to, because He chose to?

Clare73 said:

Are you saying that in Jeremiah and Psalm 139 there was something God saw in him that caused him to elect him?

Click to expand...

No,
I'm saying that God chose to love someone even when they were dead in their trespasses and sins ( Ephesians 2:1-10 ).
They are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus.

He chose to bless them by causing them to approach Him ( Psalms 65:4 ).

Their belief on His Son is the evidence of His love for them ( the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen, Hebrews 11:1 ), it does not gain them the favor of God.

Navair2 said:

There is none.
It's 42 months ( 3.5 years ).

See Revelation 13:5-8, Daniel 9:27.

Click to expand...

So you take the numbers in Revelation literally.

Keep in mind that God said he reveals things to the prophets in "dark sayings" (riddles--Numbers 12:8), which are not necessarily literal, particularly when it comes to numbers, which are usually symbolic, as 7, 12, 144, 1,000 are numbers signifying completion.

Clare73 said:

So you take the numbers in Revelation literally.

Click to expand...

Depends.
It took awhile for things to become obvious to me...

But 1,000 years as being literal?
That I inherently knew to be true the first time that I laid eyes on it...

The same as a literal 6-day creation, the same as Joshua and the children of Israel marching round Jericho 7 times, Jesus being in the depths of the earth for 3 days and 3 nights, etc.

But you don't?
OK, if that's what you want to believe when you read it, then I cannot stop you.
We'll have to agree to disagree, and I'll go my way and you can go yours.

May God bless you, Clare, in many ways.

Navair2 said:

I've never had any use for "Dispensationalism",
and I do not follow John Nelson Darby, Harry Ironside, C.I. Schofield or E.W. Bullinger.

I see the Scriptures clearly teaching a "millennium" in Revelation 20, and I believe it literally.
I see the Scriptures teaching that in the last days, the Lord Jesus shall reign at Jerusalem ( Zechariah 12, Zechariah 14, Micah 4 ) and we as believers will rule and reign with Him ( Revelation 20 ) for exactly 1,000 years.

New Testament authoritative teaching is exactly what I hold to, and I reserve the right to agree or to disagree with Augustine, John Calvin, John Welsey, John R. Rice or Jonathan Edwards as I see fit.

In the end, I follow Jesus Christ and I hear His words alone ( John 8:43-47, John 10:26-27 )...and a stranger I will not follow ( John 10:5 ).

Click to expand...

Unfulfilled prophecy is subject to interpretation, and I don't interpret Revelation literally.

I see Zechariah 12 as promises to the NT gospel church: defeat of Satan, repentance, cleansing, atonement, judgment and salvation, destruction of Jewish nation (i.e., law), imperfect church.

I see Zechariah 14 as judgment of Israel and nations (ruled by Rome, who destroyed Jerusalem) at Christ's first coming, the New Jerusalem and the gospel church.

I see Micah 4 as the new creation in the gospel, as the gospel church presented, fulfillment of promises to Jerusalem fulfilled in the spiritual Jerusalem--the church, (Hebrews 12:22), the triumph of the church, and spiritual victories of the gospel of Christ over the powers of darkness in conversion of the Gentiles.

Navair2 said:

Depends.
It took awhile for things to become obvious to me...
But 1,000 years as being literal?
That I inherently knew to be true the first time that I laid eyes on it...
The same as a literal 6-day creation, the same as Joshua and the children of Israel marching round Jericho 7 times,
Jesus being in the depths of the earth for 3 days and 3 nights, etc.
But you don't?

Click to expand...

I don't treat prophecy (Revelation, etc.) as universally literal, but rather as God characterized it: riddles ("dark sayings," KJV--Numbers 12:8)

OK, if that's what you want to believe when you read it, then I cannot stop you.
We'll have to agree to disagree, and I'll go my way and you can go yours.

May God bless you, Clare, in many ways.

Click to expand...

Clare73 said:

Hearing the gospel is how mankind learns these facts of "repent or perish," and decides whether to apply the remedy or not, and are thereby sorted out between the saved and the damned.
The elect will receive and believe it, the non-elect will reject it in unbelief, preferring instead their own mind, thought and will.

But the elect are no different than the non-elect, until God actually softens their hardened heart, thereby disposing them to receive the gospel. The elect aren't born with softened hearts, God softens them later in life, sometimes very late in life.
The elect must hear the gospel in order to receive it. So the gospel is preached to all, so that the (unknown) elect may hear and receive it, and the non-elect reject it.

Click to expand...

Which is exactly what I said. Just in longer form. If some are chosen to recieve and believe, they are never actually in danger of hell. And the unchosen never really have the option of heaven.

Carl Emerson said:

Yes, theologically correct...

However apart from this, He can give a special love for a people group - be that Jews or whatever, according to his calling on our lives personally.

Click to expand...

God's special love is for his own, those who believe in his one and only Son.
He has no other special love.

Navair2 said:

I think you're giving him more credit than he deserves, sister.
Satan is on a short leash per the book of Job.
He cannot do anything unless the Lord allows it.

Click to expand...

Agreed. . .I was stating the nature of things were he not on a short leash: terrifying powerful evil.

Don't underestimate the sheer magnitude of what the Lord can do with a word or a thought.
But right now He is allowing Satan to do many things...
Things that he could not do if he were locked away in the bottomless pit and had a seal set on him so he could not carry out his will.
However, if you wish to go along with Augustine and the Roman Catholic Church on this one, you're free to go with them.
Myself, I won't allegorize that which I don't see as allegory or symbolism.
To me, Revelation 20 is literal, and other parts of Revelation are both literal and symbolic.

Click to expand...

Right, and it is our own personal non-authoritative interpretation that distinguishes which is which.

d taylor said:

For it will come on all those who live on the face of the whole earth. Be always on the watch, and pray that you may be able to escape all that is about to happen, and that you may be able to stand before the Son of Man.”

Click to expand...

Scripture reference?

Points To Ponder said:

I know that a debate has continued since Calvin and will continue until the Rapture BUT I'm curious how the debate on grace alone and predestination are rationalized with scriptures that mention "seek the Lord" "answering the door" (Rev 3:20).
Why answer the door if it's not necessary?

Click to expand...

How will the elect exercise the means to faith/salvation if they aren't stated?
God gives the pro-disposition to the means to faith, hearing, receiving, committing, acting.
Without the pro-disposition given by God alone, there would be no hearing, receiving, committing nor acting.

It certainly looks like some action is required on our part. Why "seek" Hebrews 11:6. I just cannot ignore the simple logic in the scripture and go through scripture gymnastics to see things differently. When scripture is defined by the context it seems overwhelmingly clear to me.
If exercising faith is a "Works" then answering the door and seeking are much more so.

Click to expand...

Is faith the work of man or the work of God?

Navair2 said:

Right.
But I didn't need to get involved with "Reformed churches" ( Baptist or otherwise ) to know that, Clare.
I simply picked up my Bible one day, and did what God wanted me to in 1 Peter 2:2 and 2 Timothy 2:15...
He did the rest.
Also, if you look carefully, I was contrasting one set of beliefs that people hold to today ( the vast majority view ), versus the other set of beliefs ( my view of the Scriptures, which is also the minority view ).

Some call it "Synergism" versus "Monergism":

"Syn" = "together" or...
"Mon" / "Mono" = "one, single, alone".
"erg" = "work"
"ism" = "practice, system".

Synergism is mankind working together with God, with Monergism is God working alone with no help from us as men.

Click to expand...

You're right. . .you were contrasting systems, I didn't see that, I'm not too good at reading between the lines. . .thanks for clearing that up.

Navair2 said:

I agree.

But I'd prefer not to put things into terms that "Reformed Theology" teaches, like "eternal decree"...
To me, it sounds too clinical and institutional.

I like the way that God's word puts it:
" having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will," ( Ephesians 1:5 ).

" 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:" ( Ephesians 1:11 ).

Yes...

Click to expand...

What does Romans 8:28-39 say? Romans 9? Romans 11:1-8? 2 Thessalonians 2:13-14? Ephesians 1:3-14? Ephesians 2:10? Acts of the Apostles 13:48? John 6:37-47? John 6:64-65? John 17:2?

Do they not all describe those whom He has extended His grace to, because He chose to?

Click to expand...

Do you have a way of stating the principle common to all those verses? So you can translate it in comparison to another group of verses with a different principle, without having to cite 59 verses as demonstration for everyone to sort out?

Do we need to re-invent the wheel here?

Clare73 said:

The elect must hear the gospel in order to receive it. So the gospel is preached to all--and the gospel includes the fact that all are born condemned, so that the (unknown) elect may hear and receive it, and the non-elect reject it.

Click to expand...

renniks said:

Which is exactly what I said. Just in longer form. If some are chosen to recieve and believe, they are never actually in danger of hell. And the unchosen never really have the option of heaven.

Click to expand...

I understood you to be saying you did not understand why some statements were necessary in light of God's sovereignty regarding salvation and damnation, and was presenting an answer to your question.

So you did you understand my answer?

Clare73 said:

I understood you to be saying you did not understand why some statements were necessary in light of God's sovereignty regarding salvation and damnation, and was presenting an answer to your question.

So you did you understand my answer?

Click to expand...

Yes, but I don't agree with it. God draws all men. Only some respond.

Clare73 said:

God's special love is for his own, those who believe in his one and only Son.
He has no other special love.

Click to expand...

Correct and these can be the unsaved ones, one is called to reach out to by His inspiration.

Carl Emerson said:

Correct and these can be the unsaved ones, one is called to reach out to by His inspiration.

Click to expand...

Indeed, all God's own were once in unbelief.