Can we choose Him before He wakes us up?

[Mark Quayle]

That again is a misrepresentation of God's omniscience.

"In God's mind.." is a bad way of thinking of things. It is not biblical. Yes God knew before creation who would eventually be saved, and the exact second that would happen. But that does not mean we are saved before that second. And it does NOT diminish our choice in the matter.

You make it sound as though God must operate within time, not only for making salvation effective, but for how to see his Creation. But God is not like us.

For now, we do not see ourselves there, but that is the Creation he had in mind from the beginning. What we see is only part of it. Who can say what he sees, except his Word? Christ was slain from the foundation of the world, and we were chosen from the foundation of the world. Of course it did indeed have to really happen, and that, within time. To say that he chose us by anything other than his own counsel is to say that he is subject to mere chance, or else it is to say that his "sovereignty" is subject to OUR free will. The Bible says no such thing.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I am not sure what "flesh faith" even is.
It is not something I am talking about.

True biblical faith comes from hearing the [rhema = spoken] Word of God. The drawing of the Holy Spirit is God speaking to us. That is faith from HIM. But as the author of Hebrews said; quoting Psalm 95:

Today if you hear HIS voice, do not harden your hearts....

By "flesh faith" (If I may speak for Dave L) he is referring to faith that is the work of the will of man. Faith that is the gift of God is the Gift of God, the work of God that necessarily produces the regeneration of the heart, which is specifically NOT of the will of man.

 

[FatalHeart]

Great verses. Jesus also said "If I am lifted up, I will draw all men to myself." (John 12:32) The word "if" could also be translated "when". I think "when" is the better choice. Jesus wasn't questioning whether he would be lifted up. So, before Christ was risen, The Father had to draw those who could come to Jesus, but when Jesus was lifted up, Jesus said He Himself would draw all men to Himself.

Is not the latter one from Paul after Jesus?

 

[Mark Quayle]

Not at all.
If you think that, you are using a false pagan logic system. (Aristotelian)

That is where Calvin went wrong (and to a degree so did Arminius) using Aristotle's logic (who was an idol worshiper) to analyze scripture.

Then you have a different meaning for free will. Much like mine. I admit to free will, meaning merely real and actual choice, (which, by the way, is not contrary to Calvinism.)

 

[Mark Quayle]

Verse please

"Now this is eternal life: That they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent."

"I am the way, the truth and the life."

I could go on, but you could too. What happens with salvation is what happens with eternal life --God in us.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Where does the scriptures say that? You have that backwards

Why do you say so? Are you implying that eternal life is earned? The only ones that overcome are those God keeps, and he doesn't keep them because of their performance or worthiness, but for his own purposes.

 

[Mark Quayle]

That's the thing with the predestination/free will debate... usually both sides don't recognize that both sides exist in Scripture. The difference is, and how I reconcile it... is God didn't create us to be saved or damned, He created us with the ability to choose. But being eternal, He simply knows who will and won't be with Him. From His perspective it is predestination to a degree because He knows... but we don't. We have to live and choose and that is why He said, as Dave W pointed point... "Choose this day." We can't say there is no choice when God Himself said to choose!

The problem with that is that God indeed did create for a specific purpose; he does not choose from a pool of possibles. He does not do random. He "inhabits" the very motions of the smallest particle and force --how then can free will reign over sovereignty?

As for the statement that both sides don't recognize that both exist in Scripture, both know the other uses Scripture to support their claims.

Your reconciliation of both is to deny at least the one--because the Gospel is necessarily specific to the fact that Eternal Life and Redemption and Regeneration is the sole work of God. The argument between them usually agrees on that point, but disagrees on whether "reaching out to grasp the gift" is a work of man, resulting in the work of God upon that man. Reformed doctrine insists that the whole matter is the work of God, irresistable to the elect, who indeed does grasp it, gladly so and with a softened heart, regenerated heart.

 

[Mark Quayle]

That's the thing with the predestination/free will debate... usually both sides don't recognize that both sides exist in Scripture. The difference is, and how I reconcile it... is God didn't create us to be saved or damned, He created us with the ability to choose. But being eternal, He simply knows who will and won't be with Him. From His perspective it is predestination to a degree because He knows... but we don't. We have to live and choose and that is why He said, as Dave W pointed point... "Choose this day." We can't say there is no choice when God Himself said to choose!

I don't know anybody who says there is no choice --it is obvious we choose, even animals choose. The question is what is the validity, or dignity --the authority --of that choice.

A good study on the matter of what the Scripture says concerning heaven --(things more specific than we want to admit to, I think, because he exalts us even above the angels, to the very body of Christ, flesh of his flesh and blood of his blood) --would be useful in understanding just how the choosing and the subsequent work of salvation, regeneration and sanctification, (not to mention the work of dragging us through this life to accomplish all his will upon us for the life to come), works.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I don't know anybody who says there is no choice --it is obvious we choose, even animals choose. The question is what is the validity, or dignity --the authority --of that choice.

A good study on the matter of what the Scripture says concerning heaven --(things more specific than we want to admit to, I think, because he exalts us even above the angels, to the very body of Christ, flesh of his flesh and blood of his blood) --would be useful in understanding just how the choosing and the subsequent work of salvation, regeneration and sanctification, (not to mention the work of dragging us through this life to accomplish all his will upon us for the life to come), works.

I meant to finish with the statement, that the Bride of Christ is no random gathering of members.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Ah, but this slippery bit of semantics (called compatibilism) is just determinism one step removed. Who gives the sinner their fundamental inclinations? God. He gives to the sinner their desire to rebel against Himself. And He gives the one who is saved the desire so to be. Thus, we are back to the problems in Calvinism that I have already pointed out.

Dave didn't tell the whole story, but he is correct. (By the way, "determinism" is also semantics). The fact is the whole matter of salvation is the work of God. According to Scripture, nobody wants it unless God does a work in him first. Even if I was to admit to the Arminian claim that salvation is not effective until after a person takes hold, accepts, receives, relinquishes control, or whatever other semantics they wish to use, the fact remains that until God does a work on him, an unbeliever does not want God, and will not pursue him. Likewise, the elect, who are also unbelievers until God does a work on them, will necessarily want him when God does that work.

It does not add up to a matter of chance.

 

[Thee Librarian]

Slightly different question to the one yesterday. Does it matter?

If we are born spiritually dead or become dead spiritually because of our own unavoidable sin nature, we need the work of God to make us spiritually alive again.

If we come spiritually dead, regardless of how, what do you base your belief on that we can choose God? Do you believe He has to make us spiritually alive before we can choose Him or can we choose Him before He awakens us?

We are Spirits that can die physically, then in the lake of fire, the second death. We are born seperate from God, in sin. We are saved by our faith God did fix this problem.

 

[Thee Librarian]

Forigive me for saying so brother but that doesn’t make much sense. You have to already believe before you can believe? Is there perhaps evidence I’m missing to support this idea?

God provides the faith. We try to describe it.

 

[Thee Librarian]

But you didn’t believe it was there until you saw it with your eyes or someone told you about it. You won’t be sitting on your couch at home and all the sudden go outside to pick up a dollar bill already knowing it’s laying on the sidewalk without either seeing it or being told about it. A person cannot believe the gospel of they have never heard the gospel.

Yes, you will. The gospel message is provided direct from the Spirit. Man just reflects this message with witnessing. God does not need men to carry the message of the salvation.

 

[Dave-W]

We are unable to turn to Christ simply because there is a draw. We are in and of ourselves at enmity with God until he gives us new birth. We hate God --in fact, the unbeliever who says he does not hate God doesn't even know who God is, to turn to him. This is the work of God, not of man.

That certainly is the Calvinist viewpoint. But I tend more toward being a Wesleyan Arminianist.

 

[Dave-W]

Then you have a different meaning for free will. Much like mine. I admit to free will, meaning merely real and actual choice, (which, by the way, is not contrary to Calvinism.)

Actually, it is. "Total Depravity" means that we cannot make any kind of moral choice except to do evil. That is core Calvinist teaching. It also negates any scripture that says to "choose."

 

[Dave-W]

That's the thing with the predestination/free will debate... usually both sides don't recognize that both sides exist in Scripture.

And that is a problem if you use Aristotelian logic. Both cannot exist at the same time.

They can coexist quite nicely if you use Hebraic Block logic - the logic system of the Bible.

 

[Dave L]

Romans 1 also says that no one can deny there is God--that the evidence is plainly seen. That would include even those who choose to disbelieve. Do you disagree with the Scriptures to maintain your theology?

All intuitively know there is a god. But only those born again know God.

 

[Bobber]

This goes back to our original discussion. Only believers will choose to believe, thinking it is a condition for salvation. Had you not believed, you would not have chose to believe.

So in a court of law with a jury they listen to evidence. From that they chose to believe or not believe a certain thing. If you were a defense attorney and they found your client guilty you'd walk away claiming, well they always believed my client was guilty or they wouldn't have found him guilty! The overseeing judge might hold you in contempt for that.

 

[Dave L]

So in a court of law with a jury they listen to evidence. From that they chose to believe or not believe a certain thing. If you were a defense attorney and they found your client guilty you'd walk away claiming, well they always believed my client was guilty or they wouldn't have found him guilty! The overseeing judge might hold you in contempt for that.

No, this is not the case. After hearing the evidence (gospel) they believed and then as an act of faith produced the verdict (in this case - chose to believe).

Normally baptism and repentance follows in the NT, but choosing is an act of faith too.

 

[Bobber]

“And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.” (1 Peter 2:8)

How outrageous that you'd even think to connect this verse of scripture to people that don't agree with Calvinistic theology! It's about accepting Christ for who he was or not doing so, period. Sure most Christians find Calvinism most offensive but we find other things offensive too like the doctrines of cults.