Jesusfreak5000,
It is not about leaving at all. It is about the action. The action is what is predestined, not an event. Just what event do you think is being predestined?
Your assertion has some credibility, in that these are verbs, describing God's actions. However, these actions certainly take place in time; they would not be able to be referred to as a past act if they weren't in fact events. Would "God's predestinating of certain men to be in Him" not be considered an event? Would "God's calling of certain men" not be an event? Would "God's justifying of certain men" not be an event? Then necessarily, God's action in glorifying the one who is in Him is an event; and that event is sure to happen, because the foreordination of that event has already taken place. Those who have been justified by God
WILL BE GLORIFIED, because He has already foreordained that any and all who are justified are to be glorified. God's foreordination cannot be overturned; it is an
eternal decree.
But you have yet to even establish that it is an event. Scripture is speaking of actions upon a believer which cannot be changed. They were ordained, predestined to happen TO THOSE THAT LOVE GOD. TO THOSE WHO OBEY, ARE FAITHFUL, REMAIN IN CHRIST. It is not being directed to the believer in the least.
Huh? Tell me, those who "obey and are faithful" are descriptions of what? Believers.
1Jo 2:3 By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments.
1Jo 2:4 The one who says,
"I have come to know Him," and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him;
1Jo 2:5 but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him:
Therefore, anyone who is "In Christ" is obedient. That is how you know you are a true believer; you keep His word. If you do not keep His word, you are not a believer,
and never were.
Let me spell this out.
1. One who is in Christ obeys His word.
2. One who is not in Christ does not obey His word.
Those would be accurate descriptions as per 1 John 2. Now, if these are what categorize each of the distinct individuals (those in Christ vs. those not in Christ), then how can they deviate from their course of action? Surely, the inverse is true:
1. One who is in Christ cannot (continually, 1 Jn 5:18) disobey His word.
2. One who is not in Christ cannot obey His word (Rom. 3:12).
Given that all of this is true, then necessarily, one who is a believer simply cannot and will not "abandon" Christ. Their character as a believer dictates this.
If one does "abandon" Christ, then we ought to think as John thought:
1Jo 2:19 They went out from us, but they were not {really} of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but {they went out,} so that it would be shown that they all are not of us.
If one claims to be in Christ, but then shows signs that He is not, then He never was:
1Jo 2:4 The one who says, "I have come to know Him," and does not keep His commandments,
is a liar, and the truth is not in him;
The entire NT would be overturned if some individuals were actually predestined to be saved, soul saved. It eliminates the need for Christ to save us. God has already imputed, ordained salvation to some individuals. Yet Scripture categorically denies this from beginning to end. It overturns the purpose of our very existance and being created to give glory to God freely, Not compelled by some act of predestination. Animals have more freedom with instinct than you give to man who is actually a bearer of God's Image.
Not true. Man has all the free will in the world, that is, he has free will as far as his volition can take him. The question is, can man's volition bring him to place true saving faith in the work of Christ? Paul seems to say no:
Rom 3:11 THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS,
THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD;
Now is "NONE" really "NONE", or is it just "sort of none". Mostly none, except a few? According to you, Paul is writing needlessly here because it isn't really true.
Never claimed I know Greek. But after 2000 years of millions of Greeks no one has changed the meaning, as yet. Unless you can show that it has? It is your interpretation, not that of the Church.
You mean "your church" (small "c").
Tell me, did not your own St. Augustine teach predestination? And not just any old predestination,
superlapsarianism - an elect to heaven and an elect to hell? And that was in the 4th century! So don't try to wave history around, saying that because your church may have been mislead for 1700 years makes it impossible for me to be right. That is the weakest argument I have heard from you, and I hope that you cease from using it because it makes you look quite misinformed.
The filioque was actually rejected by Rome for many years, but Charlemagne forced it upon the Church when he was coronated by the Pope. It was not officially accepted until several centuries later. But typical of Rome an single man or a group of men deternine or interpret doctrine, not the Church as it has always been.
Language does not determine doctrine. Christ and the Holy Spirit gave it, it was taught, written and practiced and understood in Greek for almost exclusively for 500 years. Show me something historically that what you claim has always been believed. You give not historical evidence to date. The language here is not the problem, it is the Gospel and what it means and has meant that does not align with your view. Explain what event is being predestined or person?
Ahhhh.... history. If you wish to talk about history, as if whoever has the oldest form of Christianity is the true church, then you can throw me out! lol.
Dispensationalists always get thrown out, as if it couldn't be true because it is so new.
Dan 12:4 "But as for you, Daniel, conceal these words and seal up the book until the end of time;
many will go back and forth, and knowledge will increase."
