Modern predestination.

[rdclmn72]

A collective call is made before humanity as the divine intention is that we all become saved.
Unto those that heed the calling are those that will be counted as saved in the latter day.
It then goes from those under the collective call to those that specifically heed it.

Many are those that go by the modern opinion that states that they are those that are predestined, yet it only serves the interest of the few self-righteous that are still out there.

A singularly offensive doctrine that ultimately denies the need for repentance and creates that phenomenon of once saved, always saved.
A fruitless doctrine that is ultimately a false application of biblical truth that we don't need as fossilized remains of the worthless opinions of some of the founders of protestant theology.

 

[Bluelion]

Is this another debate with the OSAS and those who are not? Maybe you would like to explain How a person could be unborn once they are born spiritually of God. Are you suggesting a person dies 3 times? Because that is not Biblical. So a person is born in to this life, then born spirituality, buried and resurrected with Jesus, there old self dies, then they die again spirituality and they die in body, and then die again in Hell? We are Human not cats(9 lives).

 

[luv2breformed]

I've have never heard anyone espouse the opinion that God predestines only the self-righteous. I've also never heard anyone espouse the idea that if God predestines you then you need not repent.

Everyone I have ever heard espouse predestination stated firmly the God predestines out of his free choice and not of anything that man has done (ie NOT the self-righteous). Also, they have affirmed that repentence is a necessary fruit of God's saving work.

You have failed to represent the position you oppose truthfully with honor and respect.

The rest of your post is pure rhetoric. You do not offer an argument against the position, you simply state that it is not needed. I would encourage you to represent your opponent's position as accurately as you can and then procede to refute it with arguments. All Christians - even when they disagree - ought to treat others' positions with honesty.

 

[JM]

A self-righteous (biblical) predestinarian is a contradiction in terms. Those predestined are predestined because they are worse than scum and can't do a thing to help themselves.

 

[Skala]

A self-righteous (biblical) predestinarian is a contradiction in terms. Those predestined are predestined because they are worse than scum and can't do a thing to help themselves.

I love when synergists confuse UNCONDITIONAL election with conditional election.

Oh wait, no I don't. I don't love it. It infuriates me

 

[98cwitr]

A collective call is made before humanity as the divine intention is that we all become saved.
Unto those that heed the calling are those that will be counted as saved in the latter day.
It then goes from those under the collective call to those that specifically heed it.

Many are those that go by the modern opinion that states that they are those that are predestined, yet it only serves the interest of the few self-righteous that are still out there.

A singularly offensive doctrine that ultimately denies the need for repentance and creates that phenomenon of once saved, always saved.
A fruitless doctrine that is ultimately a false application of biblical truth that we don't need as fossilized remains of the worthless opinions of some of the founders of protestant theology.

I guess we are just to ignore the Scripture that teaches predestination then....silly Paul...would should even listen to that guy. Let's cut out John 3:1-15 too...all this reborn of Spirit stuff seems to suggest predestination as well, and John 3:16 is so much better to open the chapter with anyway.

You can use the attributes of God and some simple logic to KNOW for a 100% fact that predestination is true:

1. God is Omniscient
2. God is the Creator

This means that before you were ever created God foreknew whether or not you would wind up in heaven or hell, and despite your final destination, He decided to create both those destined for heaven and hell. As to why, Romans 9 is rather detailed on the subject.

 

[Skala]

A singularly offensive doctrine

Bible truth is always offensive to those who place their own understanding and subjective feelings about how God works above the scripture.

that ultimately denies the need for repentance

Thank you for this statement, as it demonstrated that you don't understand predestination as reformed people do.

In reformed theology, all those that are predestined always, inevitably, come to repentance. There is no such thing as being predestined without also coming to repentance.

and creates that phenomenon of once saved, always saved.

God's grace and faithfulness to finish what He started is what creates the phenomenon of once saved always saved.

A fruitless doctrine

Baseless assertion. And simply untrue based on my experience. I know many people who, upon embracing the doctrine of election, developed a love for God and obedience to Him beyond anything they experienced in the past. You know, back when they partly credited themselves for their own salvation (synergism)

that is ultimately a false application of biblical truth

By all means, tell us what the proper and correct application is, then?

that we don't need as fossilized remains of the worthless opinions of some of the founders of protestant theology.

Jesus and the Apostles created this doctrine, not anyone else. Do you even read the Bible?

 

[rick357]

A collective call is made before humanity as the divine intention is that we all become saved.
Unto those that heed the calling are those that will be counted as saved in the latter day.
It then goes from those under the collective call to those that specifically heed it.

Many are those that go by the modern opinion that states that they are those that are predestined, yet it only serves the interest of the few self-righteous that are still out there.

A singularly offensive doctrine that ultimately denies the need for repentance and creates that phenomenon of once saved, always saved.
A fruitless doctrine that is ultimately a false application of biblical truth that we don't need as fossilized remains of the worthless opinions of some of the founders of protestant theology.

If a coin were to be placed on edge between two men; one would say there is a certain image with certain script, the other would say you are with out doubt wrong about both image and script. Which man would be right... both. The Father by forknowledge is aware if a man will harden against him or submit in his presance. Consider both pharaoh and Jona. The hardening of pharaoh is a special act of the Father. The scripture states both that the man hardened his heart and also God hardened it. Gods appearing through His Word caused a point of decision. Pharaoh hardened his heart by choice; God hardened him by for knowledge of his choice. this was a special case made to teach his people that no power on earth was greater than him.The Father would not normally come to one that he knew would not accept him by his for knowledge because this would only cause deeper judgement and send to come up on them. however becase of Jonah is different he also called judgment to come upon himself to a will that would not submit but the father knew that Jonah would come to obedience and submit in time. God has said in the scripture that we did not choose him he chose us also no man comes to the Father except he be drawn. that being said both grace and free will are correct ideas but both sides reflect the goodness of God. To those who will accept His will he appears and offers himself to those who will not he does not come and add to their troubles.

 

[rdclmn72]

Thanks for your input, it is greatly appreciated.

 

[98cwitr]

7 What then? What Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but [e]those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened; 8 just as it is written,

“God gave them a spirit of stupor,
Eyes to see not and ears to hear not,
Down to this very day.”


Read more at https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans+11&version=NASB#oqeqlS8KcrEQmhd5.99

 

[rick357]

7 What then? What Israel is seeking, it has not obtained, but [e]those who were chosen obtained it, and the rest were hardened; 8 just as it is written,

"God gave them a spirit of stupor,
Eyes to see not and ears to hear not,
Down to this very day."


Brother it is important to know that the election or chosen that Paul speaks of in verse seven is Israel. Consider verse one of chapter seven and eleven of same chapter. The meaning of this verse is that the elect are in Israel ( the gentile church is grafted in) but because of unbelief some in Israel have stumbled and been cut off. Paul states in verse 24 that if they come to belief they will be grafted back into the elect. To sum all this passage up. The nation as a whole saught after the promise of GOD, but because of unbelief only an elect within them obtained to the promise. This elect was sent to the gentiles to adopt us into the promise that those in unbelief would be moved to jealousy; that by the mercy extwnded to us they too would recieve mercy. God could have proven Jesus to them but instead he has delayed thier promise that he could bring us into that promise. Hence the apostle says if their unbelief works to our good how much more shall we inherate when their unbelief is turned.

 

[98cwitr]

Faith is of God and not ourselves. In the same chapter it says all of Israel will be saved.

 

[rick357]

Faith is of God and not ourselves. In the same chapter it says all of Israel will be saved

The first point faith is simply what one trust in wether it is self, society, money, ect. Men can not have faith in God unless God comes to them. This is called grace when God brings his goodness to you. You are saved by grace through faith. Faith is your reaction to his goodness. The same apostle who delivered this message to us also warned that some shall depart from the faith and also some had cast off their faith and again that he had kept the faith.
Second point all Israel shall be saved. All here points to them as a nation or as considered as a whole. If all is taken as everyone of them then it would have to include every Israelite wich we know there are some that scripture has concluded as lost already.
Third understand that this is not a contension between us. You say faith does not come from us. I say God must come to us with his grace for us to have faith. Both of us agree all glory is to the Father who has given his son who is blessed forever amen.

 

[BBAS 64]

As Follows:

1689 LBCF

1. Those whom God hath predestinated unto Life, he is pleased in his appointed, and acceptedtime, 179effectually to call by his word, and Spirit, out of that state of sin, and death, in which theyare by nature, to grace and Salvation 180by Jesus Christ; inlightning their minds, spiritually, and
savingly to 181understand the things of God; taking away their 182heart of stone, and giving untothem an heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by his Almighty power determining them 183to that
which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ; yet so as they come 184most freely,being made willing by his Grace.


2. This Effectual Call is of God’s free, and special grace alone, 185not from any thing at allforeseen in man, nor from any power, or agency in the Creature, coworking with his special Grace,186the Creature being wholly passive therein, being dead in sins and trespasses, until being quickned& renewed by the holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the Grace offered and conveyed in it; and that by no less 187power, then that which raised up Christ from thedead.

3. Elect Infants dying in infancy, are 188regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; whoworketh when, and where, and 189how he pleaseth: so also are all other elect persons, who are uncapable of being outwardly called by the Ministry of the Word.

4. Others not elected, although they may be called by the Ministry of the word, 190and may havesome common operations of the Spirit, yet not being effectually drawn by the Father, they neitherwill, nor can truly 191come to Christ; and therefore cannot be saved: much less can men that receive
not the Christian Religion 192be saved; be they never so diligent to frame their lives according tothe light of nature, and the Law of that Religion they do profess.

179 Rom. 8.30. Rom. 11.7. Eph. 1.10,11. 2 Thes. 3.13,14. [Note: It appears that the reference to 2 Thessalonians 3:13-14 in the
original manuscript is an error. Most modern versions have 2 Thessalonians 2:13-14, which seems more relevant.]
180 Eph. 2.1-6.
181 Act. 26.18. Eph. 1.17.18.
182 Ezk. 36.26.
183 Deut. 30 6. Ezek. 36.27. Eph. 1.19.
184 Ps. 110.3. Cant. 1.4.
185 2 Tim. 1.9. Eph. 2.8.
186 1 Cor. 2.14. Eph. 2.5. Joh. 5.25.
187 Eph. 1.19,20.
188 Joh. 3.3 5,6.
189 Joh. 3.8.
190 Mat. 22 14. ch. 13.20,21. Heb. 6.4,5.
191 John 6.44,45.65. 1 Joh. 2.24,25.
192 Act. 4.12. Joh. 4.22. ch. 17.3.

 

[98cwitr]

^^^nailed it

 

[rick357]

^^^nailed


There are without a doubt many scriptures that speak of our inability to come to any thing good by our own works. There are just as many that tell us to trust believe repent love. Again I say God does not offer his grace to those He knows ahead of time will not submit. Further if grace can not be denied then talk of all these things makes God bear a false witness. But God is true. If we see him say two things that to us oppose each other then our understanding is at fault. As a last point if God makes some men to be good and others evil than the atheism is right to say he has authored all the wrong in the world. For who has denied his will. The Father is not a worker of evil but of good. It is men who reject him and seek their own way.

 

[luv2breformed]

rick, I am having a hard time understanding what position you are arguing for, so I apologize in advance if I misrepresent you. However, please consider the following:

1. Romans 11 ought not be divorced from the context of it's larger perciope (which begins in Romans 9), nor from the theology of the book as a whole. While corporate election is certainly an important doctrine and I would not deny it's presence to an extent in Ch 11, individual election is very strongly represented in Ch 9. Paul makes clear that Isaac was chosen instead of Ishmael in v 7. He proceeds to distinguish in individual terms between Jacob and Esau and adds specific qualifiers of before they were born or had the opportunity to do anything good or bad. This demonstrates God's predestining election clearly.
The fact that Paul gets his quote from the OT context of corporate election is irrelevant because he is making a DIFFERENT application here. Further, even if corporate election were in place, Jacob and Esau are still INDIVIDUALS who are the heads of each group and therefore God began the process of corporate election by the means of individual election. You still must explain that piece regardless of the interpretation you take.

Paul's whole point in this section is the fact that God's promises to save Israel continue to be fulfilled precisely because of the fact that true "Israel" is made up of individuals who are known as the remnant in the OT, and the elect in the NT.

2. You misinterpret foreknowledge as represented in Rom 8. If God's election depends upon human actions whether in the future or in the past, Paul's language in Rom 9:11 make no sense whatsoever. God is not electiing in order that his purpose might stand, but rather because we have selected in advance. I will not go into this further as you simply mentioned it in passing, but suffice it to say that understanding proginosko as simply God "knows ahead of time" is not taken in context and destroys Paul's own argumentation.

3. The calvinistic theodicy is on no worse footing than yours. You affirm that God knew in advance who would not submit. Why then did he choose to create them? Presumably he also knew that man would sin, why then did he create them? You see, the simple response of "free will" to the atheistic assertion of the problem of evil does not actually resolve the problem. All it does for you is push the problem out by 1 step. If the calvinistic God is the author of evil, then so is yours, yours simply happens to be a bit more passive in the whole matter. To escape this charge you either must deny God's foreknowledge (as the open theists have done) or deny God's omnipotence, destroying historic Christianity in the process.

The third option is to not buy into such flawed argumentation to begin with and instead affirm what the Bible says rather than trying to make your own logical inferences from your sin-riddled logic (as mine is too). Do not let the atheists trap you at this point!

I am sorry if I have come off as harsh, that is not my intention. In fact, I am very disappointed with the harsh language of the calvinists I have found across this board. It is not befitting of those who claim Christ. I wonder if we have not allowed the world's method of communicating on the internet to influence our own.

That said, please consider these ideas and seek to confirm/deny them with Scripture.

In Christ.

 

[rick357]

rick, I am having a hard time understanding what position you are arguing for, so I apologize in advance if I misrepresent you. However, please consider the following:

1. Romans 11 ought not be divorced from the context of it's larger perciope (which begins in Romans 9), nor from the theology of the book as a whole. While corporate election is certainly an important doctrine and I would not deny it's presence to an extent in Ch 11, individual election is very strongly represented in Ch 9. Paul makes clear that Isaac was chosen instead of Ishmael in v 7. He proceeds to distinguish in individual terms between Jacob and Esau and adds specific qualifiers of before they were born or had the opportunity to do anything good or bad. This demonstrates God's predestining election clearly.
The fact that Paul gets his quote from the OT context of corporate election is irrelevant because he is making a DIFFERENT application here. Further, even if corporate election were in place, Jacob and Esau are still INDIVIDUALS who are the heads of each group and therefore God began the process of corporate election by the means of individual election. You still must explain that piece regardless of the interpretation you take.

Paul's whole point in this section is the fact that God's promises to save Israel continue to be fulfilled precisely because of the fact that true "Israel" is made up of individuals who are known as the remnant in the OT, and the elect in the NT.

2. You misinterpret foreknowledge as represented in Rom 8. If God's election depends upon human actions whether in the future or in the past, Paul's language in Rom 9:11 make no sense whatsoever. God is not electiing in order that his purpose might stand, but rather because we have selected in advance. I will not go into this further as you simply mentioned it in passing, but suffice it to say that understanding proginosko as simply God "knows ahead of time" is not taken in context and destroys Paul's own argumentation.

3. The calvinistic theodicy is on no worse footing than yours. You affirm that God knew in advance who would not submit. Why then did he choose to create them? Presumably he also knew that man would sin, why then did he create them? You see, the simple response of "free will" to the atheistic assertion of the problem of evil does not actually resolve the problem. All it does for you is push the problem out by 1 step. If the calvinistic God is the author of evil, then so is yours, yours simply happens to be a bit more passive in the whole matter. To escape this charge you either must deny God's foreknowledge (as the open theists have done) or deny God's omnipotence, destroying historic Christianity in the process.

The third option is to not buy into such flawed argumentation to begin with and instead affirm what the Bible says rather than trying to make your own logical inferences from your sin-riddled logic (as mine is too). Do not let the atheists trap you at this point!

I am sorry if I have come off as harsh, that is not my intention. In fact, I am very disappointed with the harsh language of the calvinists I have found across this board. It is not befitting of those who claim Christ. I wonder if we have not allowed the world's method of communicating on the internet to influence our own.

That said, please consider these ideas and seek to confirm/deny them with Scripture.

In Christ.

I will try to make myself more clear.
As to point one I agree that the election is individual within the nation called elect by God. Also that our own individual election is grafted into said corperate election.
point two I do not believe that by our will do we recieve anything from God. God gives his grace to us our trust in his goodness to work in us makes our will that his will be done in our lives. My trust does not make him act nor does my will, but it is his free goodness that works in me. This taking place does not rob me of free will.
concerning the third point I do not for one moment consider any calvanist doctrine to be like an athiest thought. It was meant as an exaggeration in the way our Lord said those who come to him must hate thier brother mother or father. In truth my understanding of scripture is much closer to calvins than most other understandings.
to forknowledge... As Jesus was slain before the foundatio of the earth it should follow that God was aware of Adams fall before Adam was formed. So why did he not just abort the creation of Adam for one he does not murder. Adam also had in him every person who would ever be born. Meaning to abort Adam is to abort every saint.... When I was concieved the blood type of my mother and father made a deadly mix. I was fine as long as I was in the womb, but as soon as I was born i needed a blood transfusion or I would have died. I imagine it was tramatic for a newborn to go thru somthing like that but I cant remember it. So when the poison has been removed from men we will live forever with him. That being said The Father knew me in the son before Adam.
To the last I am not offended. Your post is written in the love of christ. To those who are harsh I thank my Father for your zeal and ask that you continue in his grace. By that same grace I trust him to lead me into all truth

 

[98cwitr]

^^^nailed


There are without a doubt many scriptures that speak of our inability to come to any thing good by our own works. There are just as many that tell us to trust believe repent love. Again I say God does not offer his grace to those He knows ahead of time will not submit. Further if grace can not be denied then talk of all these things makes God bear a false witness. But God is true. If we see him say two things that to us oppose each other then our understanding is at fault. As a last point if God makes some men to be good and others evil than the atheism is right to say he has authored all the wrong in the world. For who has denied his will. The Father is not a worker of evil but of good. It is men who reject him and seek their own way.

Agreed, but men reject because it's in their nature to reject.

 

[Skala]

Without predestination, nobody would be saved and heaven would be empty, because fallen man's default disposition towards God is one of hostility and rebellion.

Predestination is mandatory if anyone at all is going to be saved.