Foreordained?

[Ben johnson]

For the record, you don't help Ben. You cripple him into thinking that any of his views are actually supported in the Bible, which they aren't.

They aren't? Shoot --- then I'll hafta give up thinking "Responsible Grace".

...except, I've sure been quoting lots of "supporting Scriptures" for the last three years....


Time constrains me, I'll answer later...

 

[nobdysfool]

They aren't? Shoot --- then I'll hafta give up thinking "Responsible Grace".

That would be a start....

...except, I've sure been quoting lots of "supporting Scriptures" for the last three years....

Quoting scriptures in and of itself does not guarantee accuracy. You've been taken to task on that many times. Not that you've really listened, though....

 

[Easystreet]

Mike, do you think it's possible that a lot of the confusion stems from man's inability to adequately explain the thoughts of God?  It's very simple to me.  If God truly desires something to come to pass, it does.  If it doesn't come to pass, it wasn't God's desire.  Rather, the word "desire" was man's way of expressing something Divine in human terms.

Let analyze this statement:

(1) You argue that man is in error because he is in confusion based on inability to explain God.

(2) You then set yourself up to "It's very simple to me" and proceed to (as a man) contradict your first statement by what you posit."

(3) You are a man - You made the post - You thought about what you said - You again are a man.

Case closed.

You have fallen into your own trap.

Now back to the word of God - What does the passage say on its own.

 

[Reformationist]

Hi Reformationist,
Another question if that is ok

Certainly.

You say the bible explicitly says that all that God purposes comes to pass, I can`t find this passage could you give me the reference so that I can see it in its context

Sure. Aside from the fact that God is sovereign in the ultimate sense of the word, which in and of itself dictates that we acknowledge God's ability and authority to accomplish all that He purposes, here are a couple of passages which clearly relay God's sovereign ability to accomplish all that He purposes:

Job 42:2
I know that you can do all things,
and that no purpose of yours can be thwarted.

Dan 4:35
all the inhabitants of the earth are accounted as nothing, and he does according to his will among the host of heaven and among the inhabitants of the earth;
and none can stay his hand or say to him, "What have you done?"

also just a quickie Gods purpose for Israel was that they be a light to the Gentile nations, that they were obedient to Him, yet this was not fulfilled.

On the contrary, God purposed that they would rebel so that the Word of salvation would come to the Gentiles:

Romans 11:11,12
So I ask, did they stumble in order that they might fall? By no means! Rather through their trespass salvation has come to the Gentiles, so as to make Israel jealous. Now if their trespass means riches for the world, and if their failure means riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their full inclusion mean!

Thanx for the explanation of your view on Romans 9, it does clear up where you are coming from for me.

My pleasure.

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

That would be a start....

Quoting scriptures in and of itself does not guarantee accuracy. You've been taken to task on that many times. Not that you've really listened, though....

Amen brother!!

 

[Easystreet]

For the record, you don't help Ben. You cripple him into thinking that any of his views are actually supported in the Bible, which they aren't.

Either way, I'll try to address the major points of your post, sans all the silly formatting of course:



"World" in this context refers to the race of Adam, i.e., mankind.



Here is where your anthropocentric philosophy, once again, deviates from both logic and Scripture. The point being made in verse 32 can only truly be determined when we understand what "draw" means. If we are to gain any insight, whatsoever, from verse 32, we must understand that Christ's act of "drawing" has significance. It isn't some ridiculous notion of "wooing" or any other impotent action. IOW, for Christ to "draw" someone, that must mean something. How, pray tell, does your skewed understanding of Scripture allow you to understand the word "draw?"

[/color]

Here you truly go off the deep end. The text itself is clearly limited. Hello? "Everyone who believes in me.." Ring a bell? Unless your contention is that everyone without exception believes in Christ, "everyone who believes in me" cannot refer to everyone without exception.

[/color]

And here Gordo, is the most pitiful aspect of your views. You have no problem contending that Christ purposed to save the world, i.e., all people without exception, while simultaneously acknowledging that He does not realize that purpose. All this despite the fact that the Bible explicitly states that God accomplishes all that He purposes.

What did God Purpose​

“not purposing any to perish but all men to repentance to come.”
A word for word literal translation​

b o u l o m e n o V - bou-lo-me-nos

Verb -Participle

Present tense
Middle or Passive Deponent voice
Nominative case
Masculine gender
Singular in person

Because it is a participle in the present tense it looks to the verb “longsuffering”​

What does that mean?


First the participle is a verbal substantive ( in this case because it is a verbal substantive it is defined as follows: possessing substance; having practical importance, value, or effect: substantive issues under discussion.)


We could say it this way using the verb. “longsuffering is for the sole purpose of” “not any to perish but all men to come to repentance.

The longsuffering purpose or purpose of longsuffering is on behalf of men.

What is this on the behalf of men then?​

“not any to perish” and “all men to come to repentance”​

The intent of the action of the purposing is directed​

to “any” - t i n a V (tinas) ​

and “all” - p a n t a V (pantas).​

We know this because these are in agreement based upon the masculine gender.

It is a singular action directed to any and all which as you can see that they are both plural.

It is a single state of intention toward a plural audience “any and all”.

Notice above it is Nominative case = what does that mean? It means designation. This word designates the longsuffering toward “any and all” God’s wills or purposes in his long suffering that no one perish and that all repent. ​

Calvinist can stomp, jump, beg, borrow, steal, foam at the mouth, have convolutions, demonstrate, call others stupid, avoid the truth, all of that and more an not change the absolute meaning of the text. It just can not be done. It can not be reasoned away. I means exactly what it says. All the theology in the world will not change what it says.

Now that we know the truth that God’s Purpose is we don’t have to guess. We know that before all was created that He foreknew His purpose for fallen mankind. That is why Jesus came. For God so loved the world fits into his purpose. If you deny his purpose that is written out and theorize it away to say something else - then you are whatever that make you.

Why does God so love the world? Why did he die for all? What does the verse say above? God clearly tells you and me what His purpose is. We don't need Jacob or John to tell us what God says.

Jacob A and John C had their day - they tried - they are in heaven now.

What is God's purpose?

“not any to perish” and “all men to come to repentance”​

 

[Reformationist]

Aside from the fact that you have shown us nothing other than that you have graduated from the Ben Johnson school of post overformatting, your entire theory rests on the erroneous assumption that it is perfectly okay to submit that God Almighty purposes to accomplish something that He fails to accomplish. Your anthropocentric philosophy leaves us with only the following choice:

God purposes to save all people without exception and is successful, i.e., universal salvation,

or,

God purposes to save all people without exception and is unsuccessful, i.e., God fails to achieve His purpose.

Neither of these ridiculous assumptions are even close to what the Word of God actually expresses (thank God) so your entire post is a waste.

For those who would read this thread and wonder, if not the expression of universal salvation, what can possibly be the point of this regularly misinterpreted passage? Rest assured that God is never a failure and all of the man centered posts by people like Gordo and Ben Johnson cannot make Him a failure, no matter how hard they seek to credit themselves. Those who, like these two, seek only to pat themselves on the back for being so pious and smart have missed what the Bible does express, which is the constant theme of the sovereignty of God. Try as they will, the buffoons who would seek to credit themselves for their "responsible" response to the call of God can not change, or lessen, the nature of God's eternal plan.

The truth of the Gospel is this, that the Lord Jesus died on the Cross to reconcile His people by atoning for their sin. He does this perfectly and it is the gracious imputation of God Almighty that is the monergistic catalyst for the salvation of all who will be saved. Our response to God's supernatural work is just that, a response. Just as we once followed the course of the prince of the power of this world when we were dead in our sins, now, being made alive by His work in us, we follow our new Lord. Imperfectly but, thankfully, it is His sacrifice that keeps us reconciled to God, not our steadfastness, for He is faithful even when we are not.

Take comfort that if you are a child of God, God cannot fail to restore you. Likewise, all whom God purpose to save in the death of our Savior will be infallibly and invincibly saved.

Praise be to His holy name.

For the rest of you who would arrogantly credit yourselves, well, keep praising your own name. See where that'll get you.

Bring sunscreen.

 

[Ben johnson]

Aside from the fact that you have shown us nothing other than that you have graduated from the Ben Johnson school of post overformatting...

Bwaaaahahahaha! I shall take that as a compliment.

your entire theory rests on the erroneous assumption that it is perfectly okay to submit that God Almighty purposes to accomplish something that He fails to accomplish.

His purpose is clearly stated: "That all who SEE Jesus AND BELIEVE may be saved". (Jn6:40) God's purpose is to allow people to believe, or not.

Your anthropocentric philosophy leaves us with only the following choice:

God purposes to save all people without exception and is successful, i.e., universal salvation,

or,

God purposes to save all people without exception and is unsuccessful, i.e., God fails to achieve His purpose.

Both wrong; God's purpose is "universal redemption", which is "conditioned on belief". But PAUL words it better than I could: "He is the Savior of the world, MALISTA-ABOVE-ALL (specially) believers." 1Tim4:10

Neither of these ridiculous assumptions are even close to what the Word of God actually expresses (thank God) so your entire post is a waste.

Gordon's point is well taken; Peter said: "God does not DECREE ('boulemai') that any perish, but patiently waits for ('choreo' makes-room-for) all to repent."

For those who would read this thread and wonder, if not the expression of universal salvation, what can possibly be the point of this regularly misinterpreted passage? Rest assured that God is never a failure and all of the man centered posts by people like Gordo and Ben Johnson cannot make Him a failure, no matter how hard they seek to credit themselves.

If "Gordo" and "Ben" are in error, please point out the error; but it must be "pointed" with more credibility than imposing "not-really".

For instance --- "Those who WERE entering, you STOP; you shut off the kingdom of Heaven from men." Those who were entering --- were they REALLY entering? And then they were shut off --- were they REALLY shut off? Focus on "now", not "tomorrow"; by evading the discussion with "maybe they won't be shut off forever, they might enter tomorrow" --- that absolutely is imposing "not really shut off (forever)".

Those who, like these two, seek only to pat themselves on the back for being so pious and smart have missed what the Bible does express, which is the constant theme of the sovereignty of God.

Please point out where we have "piously patted our backs". God IS sovereign; but we are responsible. Please demonstrate how Scripture does not say "God sovereignly predestined Jesus, that all who BELIEVE may not perish but have eternal life".

Try as they will, the buffoons who would seek to credit themselves for their "responsible" response to the call of God can not change, or lessen, the nature of God's eternal plan.

"Buffoon" --- isn't that a kind of monkey???

(Wait --- that might be "baboon"; my bad....)

The truth of the Gospel is this, that the Lord Jesus died on the Cross to reconcile His people by atoning for their sin. He does this perfectly and it is the gracious imputation of God Almighty that is the monergistic catalyst for the salvation of all who will be saved.

Before, or after belief? (Please cite Scriptural foundation for your answer...)

Our response to God's supernatural work is just that, a response. Just as we once followed the course of the prince of the power of this world when we were dead in our sins, now, being made alive by His work in us, we follow our new Lord.

Hmmm; Eph2:1-8, says "while we were dead, He made us alive by grace THROUGH FAITH" --- so, "made alive", succeeds "faith". Show us "made alive before faith". Anywhere...

Imperfectly but, thankfully, it is His sacrifice that keeps us reconciled to God, not our steadfastness,

Excuse me? In Col1, Paul says "He has reconciled us to God, if indeed we CONTINUE in the faith firmly established and steadfast and not be moved away from the Hope (Jesus!)." Sure sounds like "reconciliation" conditions on "steadfastness"; how am I understanding it wrongly?

for He is faithful even when we are not.

What does this mean, Don? If He is faithful when we are not --- do you think we are still saved? CAN anyone be "faithlessly-saved"?

Take comfort that if you are a child of God, God cannot fail to restore you.

Then how does Rom11 warn, "If you do not CONTINUE in His kindness (by belief), you will ALSO be CUT OFF!"

Likewise, all whom God purposed to save in the death of our Savior will be infallibly and invincibly saved.

Uhmmmm --- what Scripture citation do you have for this?

Praise be to His holy name.

To THAT, I say !!!

For the rest of you who would arrogantly credit yourselves, well, keep praising your own name. See where that'll get you.

Hmmm; according to Rom11:21-23, (warning, red format approaching!) the arrogant position is thinking we can NOT fall!

"Do not be arrogant towards the natural branches, but FEAR --- for if God did not spare them, neither will He spare YOU; behold the kindness and severity of God --- to those who fell, SEVERITY; to you, kindness, if you CONTINUE in His kindness else YOU ALSO will be CUT OFF!!! And if THEY do not continue in unbelief, they will be grafted in again..."

Arrogance is not in thinking we can fall; arrogance is in thinking we cannot.

Bring sunscreen.

That's always a good idea; sunlight causes great damage that doesn't show up until later life.

 

[holdon]

the following choice:

God purposes to save all people without exception and is successful, i.e., universal salvation,

or,

God purposes to save all people without exception and is unsuccessful, i.e., God fails to achieve His purpose.

Neither of these ridiculous assumptions are even close to what the Word of God actually expresses (thank God) so your entire post is a waste.

Waste Management: Save what you can.

1 Tim 2:4 "our Saviour God who desires that all men should be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth."

That God fails to achieve His desire that all men be saved is due to: that some won't believe Him.

Do you believe Him that He desires that all men should be saved?

 

[Reformationist]

Waste Management: Save what you can.

You seem to be claiming that God desires that all people be saved but man's obstinacy renders God impotent to bring that desire to fruition. Do you mean to say that you believe this "save what you can" scenario is an accurate representation of what the Bible teaches?

Do you believe Him that He desires that all men should be saved?

I don't believe that God fails to accomplish anything that God desires to bring to pass. That said, you set up your usual strawman. I don't believe that God desires that all people without exception be saved. I think you make the same mistake that your buddies Ben and Gordo make. You mistake "all without distinction" for "all without exception."

 

[holdon]

I don't believe that God desires that all people without exception be saved.

There you have it: you don't believe what God says. Period.

 

[Reformationist]

There you have it: you don't believe what God says. Period.

What I don't believe is your anthropocentric understanding of God's Word. The sad thing is that you see nothing wrong with turning God into a pitiful failure so long as the sovereignty of your precious free will is maintained.

The real question, at least for me, is, do you have anything useful to add to this discussion or are you simply going to waste my time, yet again?

 

[holdon]

What I don't believe is your anthropocentric understanding of God's Word. The sad thing is that you see nothing wrong with turning God into a pitiful failure so long as the sovereignty of your precious free will is maintained.

The real question, at least for me, is, do you have anything useful to add to this discussion or are you simply going to waste my time, yet again?

Simply wasting your time...?!?

You make God a failure, (as He desires to save all men, but is not successful in doing so), whereas I make man a failure: God wants them to come, but all don't want to.

 

[Reformationist]

Simply wasting your time...?!?

Absolutely....

See:

You make God a failure, (as He desires to save all men, but is not successful in doing so)

Who's view is this, because it sure isn't mine?

I make man a failure: God wants them to come, but all don't want to.

What you contend is that God wants something, i.e., all to come, that He knows won't happen and does nothing to ensure that it does come to pass.

The obvious flaw in your self-centered philosophy is that Scripture explicitly states that "all whom the Father gives to the Son will come":

John 6:37
All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.

"Another one bites the dust...and another one gone and another one gone and another one bites the dust..."

 

[holdon]

Absolutely....

Hey, you don't have to...

Who's view is this, because it sure isn't mine?



What you contend is that God wants something, i.e., all to come, that He knows won't happen and does nothing to ensure that it does come to pass.

The obvious flaw in your self-centered philosophy is that Scripture explicitly states that "all whom the Father gives to the Son will come":

John 6:37
All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out.

Oh, so, you're saying God contradicts Himself? Because He did say:

"God desires that all men be saved".

See, you make God fail in Word and Deed.....

 

[Reformationist]

As I thought. You plan only to waste my time. I'll not play into your game any further holdon. Have a good day.