Pre-Destination?

[CCWoody]

Do you hate me, dearest Woody? Does not the word say that he who hates his brother cannot see God (1 John 4:20)? I am more than willing to eschew our futile bickering, and have always been, for I do not hold hate towards you.

You show no evidence of being my brother, so 1 John does not apply. Furthermore, I would not presume to insult the Lord by loving His enemies.

But, all of that is neither here nor there. I don't know if you are elect and will again embrace the faith. However, until then, and until you repent of calling the Lord Jesus a prophetic factual liar, I will continue to nearly completely ignore what you post.

Its hard to "bicker" when one party will not post. But, that is what this is really about anyway. You are having a giant hissie fit over multiple threads because I will not lower myself to your standard, pretend everything is OK, and post friendly nonsense.

Please note that I am not calling you saved/ lost/ reprobated/ or anything else. I clearly stated I don't know the state of your soul or your eternal destination. I can only use the Bible as my guide and I am instructed not to deal with you as long as you continue in your sin of calling the Lord a liar.

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

 

[drstevej]

I must point out that if you love an evil God, I have no place with you.

The God of the Bible is not evil. His absolute sovereignty might make you conclude that He is, but Who appointed you as the Judge?

Shouldn't you be honest and say, "I must point out that if you love a God whom I determine to be evil, I have no place with you."

Ottherwise your arrogance is lamentable.

 

[rnmomof7]

From yet another thread:



"To foreknow is to know before. Furthermore, I've heard of this claim of foreloving being applied to Romans 8:29, 30 (though, of course, there are excellent arguments against its validity), though not to this specific passage: the greek here is prognosis, and this word makes perfect sense even in the english language!

If God works only on Foreknowing what man will do He and His plan (including salvation and the final judgment ) is completely out of His hands.

Man is god and he simply reacts to man. Man is the greatest of all beings..God is simply a puppet .

If God elects based on foreknowledge salvation is of works not grace and not mercy

The argument is favored in view of common sense: to foreknow obviously means to know before. Predestination does not entail irresistible grace through the appearance of the former word in scripture."

God foreknows because He foreordains all of history and the live of every man . That is why we call Him God :>)

The greek word in this context is plain jane simple: it refers to knowledge, and nowhere to activity.

Actually the word for Foreknow and FOREORDAIN are the same word according to the greek lexicon
Original Word
Word Origin

proginwvskw
from (4253) and (1097)

Transliterated Word
TDNT Entry

Proginosko
1:715,119

Phonetic Spelling
Parts of Speech

prog-in-oce'-ko* *
Verb



*Definition
to have knowledge before hand
to foreknow
of those whom God elected to salvation


to predestinate

Those He did FOREORDAIN He did predestine.

Yet another unchristlike remark.

Have you eyes?! Paul declared in Romans 4 that belief is not a work!!!

It is not quite on the level of calling God a tyrant ...
Romans speaks of saving faith.

Saving faith is gift of God that comes from hearing the word of God.

Gen 15:4**
And, behold, the word of the LORD [came] unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.

Gen 15:5**
And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.
Gen 15:6**
And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

Notice that Abram was not righteous BECAUSE he believed God..He was righteous because God counted it to him as righteousness..God declares a man righteous..

Eph 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved

Phl 1:29**
For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake;


"Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believesin Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness." -- Romans 4:4,5 (NASB)[/quote]


Exactly
We do not need to work to believe..God does the work for us.
If we believe in a salvation by foreknowledge we have a salvation of works ad it is credited as wages due

Dear heavens, are you this assiduous in ignoring common biblical themes? Facts ignored do not cease to be facts.

Not only can you not realize common biblical arguments, but you also institute the steepest of slippery slopes to keep your intellect from grasping it. Have you read arminian systemmatic theology? Have you read common non-calvinist evangelical works? Perhaps you should.
Are you afraid of what you might find? Are you comfortable in the church you find yourself in? Wouldn't it be the greatest act of faith for you actually to seriously read some books that contradict your doctrine? Don’t even come to me with the claim that you used to be an arminian; this is hardly sufficient. I have some; if you wish to exchange books sometime, count me in.

I was an arminian for many years.I took the theology classes that were a part of the Elder program.

I do know what Arminians believe and I know that they read right over the parts they do not like .Calvinists respond to all scripture and read the word in context . i have only been in a Presbyterian church for 10 months..before that I was a Wesleyan /Arminian (Nazarene ).

I might ask the same of you.
Are you willing to put down your preconceived notions and read the word without predjustice .

Quite true, though the infants did nothing. God did not destroy the village to intentionally drown those who cannot know the difference between good and evil (Isaiah 7:16). To say He did is to consider God evil, and therefore unworthy of worship.

In the past you have said

"I don't understand. If men are born worthy of condemnation, why does God create them? Is not the man slave to sin? Did not Jesus come to save man from his sins (Matt. 1:21), and not some faulty view of divine eschatological judgment?

Well now...if the law condemns man, is not an eternal torment of the men already thus far condemned superflous? Again, this is why I hold that Hell is for those who will have nothing of God.



Men are born sinners, and therefore the claim that God eternally torments them for something He instituted -- namely, their existence, regardless of the fact that original sin is at the fault of Adam -- does not follow. You accept the premises I do, but you deny the inevitable conclusion. I actually find interesting argument clearly explained otherwise, such as Paul’s claim of eternal destruction in 2 Thessalonians 1 towards those who are enemies of the gospel, rather than those who simply exist.



We were in the loins of Adam, but men not yet in existence cannot make choices, for choice implies existence. Why can you not accept this simple truth?





Yup.



"For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am carnal, sold under sin. For what I am doing, I do not understand. For what I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that I do. If, then, I do what I will not to do, I agree with the law that it is good. But now, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me. For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) nothing good dwells; for to will is present with me, but how to perform what is good I do not find. For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice. Now if I do what I will not to do, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me." -- Romans 7:14-20

Wicked by hereditary nature, as argued previously. See above. Paul makes it quite clear that because we sin does not mean that we desire the sin we commit, even if this sin is committed perpetually. So it goes with this anthology of scripture.



As the legendary Brooks on The Shawshank Redemption once said: "easy peasy, Japenesey"





Ah, another comment without scriptural justification. Your interpretation stinks of tyranny and false benevolence. On the contrary, I am sure He is sorry He is not the kind of judicially perverted God you like (I use this last point not logically, but to reveal the absurdity of your fallacy).



Hah! Whatever blows your hair back. How many men commit suicide from lack of meaning; how many men in this position, close to the gun, choose Christ on the basis of this revelation? Men find momentary liberation in the deeds of the flesh, and this is because of their natural state of being born without the faith that sustains the many saints of the world!



A psychological interlude I suppose, but I find this quite interesting. Viktor Frankl stated a study in his immortal Man’s Search For Meaning that 100% of those interviewed who did indeed use drugs and why they did so. Their answer: no meaning. One hundred percent!!! Add to this sexual promiscuity, alcohol consumption, increased sleeping hours, and much more – you come to the conclusion that there is something fundamental to the fallen man’s makeup that causes him to desire transitory things; and it is this, I boldly warrant, is precisely the sinful nature that constrains their being, with the utterly depressing truth of their being born in a lack of faith that would otherwise make it possible for them to follow the divine commandments that bring life to them that know God.


[/quote]

Of course they love their lives or they would change them . I worked with addicts for 15 years..They did not want the consequence of the drugs (jail , sickness or death)..but they loved the drug more than their lives.

They love their sin or they would turn from it.

Men know adultery is wrong and that it hurts their spouse and their children..yet they do it because they love their sin more than their family.

Paul put it this way
Rom 3:10 As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:
Rom 3:11 There is none that understandeth, there is none that seeketh after God.
Rom 3:12 They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one.
Rom 3:13 Their throat [is] an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps [is] under their lips:
Rom 3:14 Whose mouth [is] full of cursing and bitterness:
Rom 3:15 Their feet [are] swift to shed blood:
Rom 3:16 Destruction and misery [are] in their ways:
Rom 3:17 And the way of peace have they not known:
Rom 3:18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.

Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

The "meaning" in their lives is self..and when they start to feel the natural effect of their the can find no more meaning in self.

Man is a victim.

Err, these scriptures refer to judgment, and not to the essential desire by God to commit evil. The idea is not moral evil, but environmental evil. Indeed, the Hebrew word gives the idea of calamity, rather than our common conception of evil, which is perfectly moral. God does not kill for killing’s sake – this is evil. He does, however – and through the workings of Satan, as Job points out --, rend upon man what he deserves, and judgement is a way for men to realize their imperfections.

So now sin is "imperfections"?
No one sins..they just make mistakes right?

I would say that Sodom and the flood and the slaughter of the Egyptian infants was a "calamity"

Nothing happens that God does not ordain..not floods or fires or "accidents" or planes ramming into buildings..NOTHING.

The bible is written for man . God uses the words of men to describe himself and His works so that we can understand.

Men called 9/11 EVIL yet it was a foreordained act of God.

 

[rnmomof7]

The blessed logic that reveals the absurdity of a plethora of arguments. You really should see how it works when it comes to big questions – not silly theological debate, but atheism, agnosticism, and theism – that is, in the general apologetics.

So I assume you do not want to answer this..so you mock it .


Is God the God of history or not?

Is god simply a reactor to man and not the primary actor?

And yet the quotation is from Malachi, which tells of God’s hatred of Esau after he has been born and died. Which means that context of Romans 9 is very likely the nations.

I know that this comforts you , but the chapter is about individuals not nations or groups

Rom 9:8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these [are] not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
Rom 9:9 For this [is] the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son.
Rom 9:10 And not only [this]; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, [even] by our father Isaac;
Rom 9:11 (For [the children] being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil,] that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth
Rom 9:12 It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
Rom 9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
Rom 9:14 What shall we say then? [Is there] unrighteousness with God? God forbid.
Rom 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
Rom 9:16 So then [it is] not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
Rom 9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.
Rom 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will [have mercy], and whom he will he hardeneth.
Rom 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will?
Rom 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed [it], Why hast thou made me thus?

Paul’s usage of persons means nothing, for he could have been speaking metaphorically, and, what is even greater weight, he is arguing from Malachi, which holds Esau and Jacob via simple names, though the historical context speaks to nations (this means that God hates the nations of Esau, for it is after the consummation of his nation to flourish that God speaks this in the context of Malachi; nevertheless, this does not mean the rejection of Esau the person, for this seems contrary to what the Old Testament reveals regarding their embrace, and I see no reason whatsoever to believe otherwise, as the Calvinist maintains). Nonetheless, I still find the embrace between Esau and Jacob a little too much to simply neglect regarding the Calvinist camp. And I think God left the scripture open for a reason.

It seems that the reason that Malachi as "simple names" enforces the personal nature of the words of Paul.

Paul did not present it as a metaphor he presented it as a truth about God and election.

I find this nowhere in scripture; on the contrary, the implication strongly bars against this interpretation. Remember that Talbott holds the persons Esau and Jacob to refer to individuals, while Geisler and Bruce do not.

Geisler HATES predestination and biblical Calvinism.

I can bring many commentaries and books that say the opposite of Giesler.

The hatred of Esau entails an anthropomorphic slur, which externalizes in God’s choosing Jacob over Esau to win the birthright (even though Esau was the first-born), which means precisely that Esau did very much accept the forgiveness of God. Indeed, Paul’s conclusion of v. 11 and 12 seems to refer precisely to an earthly victory by Jacob, for “the elder shall serve the younger,” this being “not by works but by His call” (v.12). Perhaps even more intriguing is verse 17, which seems to follow with this logic in saying that God has raised up Pharoah precisely for His glory to be exhibited throughout the earth. A point I bring to you is the fact that because they are chosen for earthly advantage or disadvantage does not negate their capacity for righteousness in the face of God who freely offers.

So God slurs people? Or does the Holy Spirit lead into all truth.



Do you call the glorification of God an "earthly goal"? Or an eternal one?
The purpose of ALL things and ALL men is to glorify God . God desires His name magnified on this earth, so of course the purpose of the Pharoah was to raise up the name of God here among His creation..

The events of the OT were for a sign. We know the character of God through them
God is immutable..as He dealt with the earthly futures of men so he will deal with the eternal.

Salvation in the OT was like the salvation in the New..it was by faith . Their good works or self righteousness did not and does not save.

We do not read if Pharaoh was converted and looked forward to salvation by faith so it is speculation, nothing more.

The bible declares that Pharoah did indeed harden his heart as well; likewise, it states a compassionate embrace between the two brothers that would seem to indicate an eternal union between them, and therefore between Esau and God (regardless of how his nation turns out).

As I said before, the embrace may have reunited the brother , but the seed of Esau was constantly an enemy of the nation Israel.
There are earthy consequences to all sin

Moreso, as with the case of Pharoah, God’s electing him for instrumental use (though it is intrinsically not so, seeing how Pharoah desired the means, and God provided them [strengthening his otherwise weak heart (cowardice)]) was not to limit His glory, but that the whole earth might behold it (v. 17). This means precisely that God is using those who would rebel against Him for the blessedness of all, and this seems quite an opposition to limited atonement.

Precisely the position of Calvinist..all men are ordained for a purpose in Gods plan even the evil.

This has noting to do with "limited atonement "

Even Satan is a tool in the hand of God.(That does not mean salvation is a possibility for him)

I also do not understand your logic. If by a judgment of God – the hatred of Esau --, an entire nation is made contrary to Him, how does it not follow that God caused the dissonance and is therefore responsible for it?

Nothing happens that God does not ordain

 

[rnmomof7]

Hebrews 6:6 If they shall[verb] fall away, to renew them again unto repentance seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to open shame.

here we as christians are not having faith on what God has said about us...
But just because we fail God allows us to be renewed and we show no works
with our faith which goes to James 2 which goes towards men and romans 4 which goes toward God


Hebrews 10:14 For by one offering he hath perfected forever them that are sanctified..

this is postional in the heavenlies not here on earth at this time....eph 2:6




I m not sure if the point I m talking about came thru tell me if I did or not

For some reason some posters assume that every one that had contact with the gospel and/or the church were saved.Therefore if they leave they have lost a salvation they have never had.

As Paul says it they went out from us , they never were of us

Good scripture Hebrews 1:14


He that has started a good work in you is faithful to finish it !!

 

[Gamecock]

Has God predestined ANYTHING in your mind?

​

 

[Mr Potato Head]

I voted no for whether or not predestination exists because of what predestination has come to mean. I do believe that God has predestined the Body of Christ to be with him, but I do not believe that he chooses us individually based on nothing but his own arbitrary will. Is God so weak that he cannot possibly be sovereign over creation unless he minutely controls every detail? Or can he still rule sovereingly yet allow us a considerable degree of autonomy?

Oh and rnmom... what passage in the OT would Romans 9 be referring to? Think potter... And it is definitely about the nation of Israel. Read the context. Yet it is about individuals as well. But what is it that is God's will? What pleases him? When a son returns. Let's not forget about 1 Tim 2:4.

 

[Ragman]

Predestination is indeed in the scriptures, but all have been reconciled in the Son.

"For God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not counting men's sins against them." 2Cor. 5:19

God's is the Saviour of all men

"...we trust in the living God who is the Saviour of all men, specially those that believe." 1Tim. 4:10

Since by nature of Christ's divinity he is the One by whom all things are created (Jn. 1:3, Col 1:16) and the One in whom all things (humanity included) are held together (Col. 1:17), therefore all men die in His death (2Cor. 5:14), rise in His resurrection (1Pet 1:3 Eph. 2:5) and ascend in His ascension (Eph. 2:6). Christ is the 2nd Adam, whereby if all fell in the 1st Adam all are reconciled in the 2nd. (Rom. 5:18-19). To deny that all are reconciled in Christ is to deny the divinity of Christ that He is the One in whom all things are held together (Col. 1:17) and the One in whom we all live and move and have our being (Acts 17:28).

Ragman

 

[rnmomof7]

I voted no for whether or not predestination exists because of what predestination has come to mean. I do believe that God has predestined the Body of Christ to be with him, but I do not believe that he chooses us individually based on nothing but his own arbitrary will. Is God so weak that he cannot possibly be sovereign over creation unless he minutely controls every detail? Or can he still rule sovereingly yet allow us a considerable degree of autonomy?

Oh and rnmom... what passage in the OT would Romans 9 be referring to? Think potter... And it is definitely about the nation of Israel. Read the context. Yet it is about individuals as well. But what is it that is God's will? What pleases him? When a son returns. Let's not forget about 1 Tim 2:4.

Yes, it is about individuals as well

**
Rom 9:20**
Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed [it], Why hast thou made me thus?

**
Rom 9:21**
Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?


So it is a fitting citation .

You come a little late to the discussion of Gods sovereignty

The word all and whosoever are both from the greek PAS.

This can all without exception or some of all types.
individually
each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things, everything


collectively
some of all types
... "the whole world has gone after him" Did all the world go afterChrist? "then went all Judea, and were baptized of him in Jordan."Was all Judea, or all Jerusalem, baptized in Jordan? "Ye are of God,little children", and the whole world lieth in the wicked one". Doesthe whole world there mean everybody? The words "world" and "all" areused in some seven or eight senses in Scripture, and it is veryrarely the "all" means all persons, taken individually. The words aregenerally used to signify that Christ has redeemed some of all sorts-- some Jews, some Gentiles, some rich, some poor, and has notrestricted His redemption to either Jew or Gentile



The word all was used by Christ and the apostles to indicate that salvation was not only for the Nation of Israel , but now extended to the Samaritans and Gentiles ( an impossible believe to the Law keeping Jews.)

We see how the principal works in Revelation


Rev 7:9 After this I beheld, and, lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hand


I always give this example. I have 7 children , 4 live out of town. When I say to my mother that ALL the kids were over yesterday, she understands that the ALL is a sub set of the entire family.

Predestination simply means that nothing happens that God does not ordain .

You are who you are because God predestined you to be you.

We are not Deists that believe that God created the world and then decided to let it spin out of control.

Every single bit of the History of this earth and every bit of the future is known by God because He predestined it before the foundation of the earth.

Predestine means just what it means

TDNT Reference
Root Word

TDNT - 5:456,728
from 4253 and 3724

Part of Speech

v

Outline of Biblical Usage


1) to predetermine, decide beforehand

2) in the NT of God decreeing from eternity

3) to foreordain, appoint beforehand

 

[Mr Potato Head]

Rnmom, you didn't answer my question as to what OT passage Romans 9 refers to.

And one more question: is there anything that happens against God's will?

 

[rnmomof7]

Rnmom, you didn't answer my question as to what OT passage Romans 9 refers to.

And one more question: is there anything that happens against God's will?

Sure I did..I agreed that in the OT it was a text speaking to Israel..but in the NT under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit it was applied to individuals.

(BTW by extension when God acts on a city or a nation it is also on the individuals that compose the nation.)

For it is the actions of then people within the nation that determine that fate of the nation...note Sodom well


NOTHING happens that God has not foreordained.

 

[Jerry_M]

I do believe that God has predestined the Body of Christ to be with him, but I do not believe that he chooses us individually based on nothing but his own arbitrary will.

So, God's will is arbitrary to you. I guess that when you act it is based on logic, but when God acts it is arbitrary.

Do you have any problem praying "Thy will be done, on earth as it is heaven"? After all, His will is arbitrary according to your statement, so why would I want it to become a reality?

If we truly believe that the church is the body of Christ, why does it come as a surprise to any of us that He has designed this body as carefully as He has designed our mortal bodies? Do we somehow believe that His body will not be perfectly crafted?

 

[Mr Potato Head]

rnmom - if God's will always occurs then why does he will that we avoid sexual immorality? "Therefore it is God's will that you be sanctified, that you avoid sexual immorality." Obviously that doesn't happen. How do people "grieve the Holy Spirit"? If it was all predestined...

The OT passage I was getting at was Jeremiah 18. In this it describes God as a potter who is willing to respond to the clay. He does not arbitrarily decide what to do with it. If it repents, he will fashion it into something beautiful, if not he will destroy it.

Jerry- I was not claiming that God's will is arbitrary. I was saying that that is how Calvinism's definition of God's will seems to me. If he chooses me over my brother on the basis of... i dunno.... nothing?.... that seems arbitrary to me. As to the Body, that is an image used to describe us. I think you're taking it too far. We will be perfect, but that doesn't mean that one more or less person will tip the balance or anything like that.

 

[rnmomof7]

rnmom - if God's will always occurs then why does he will that we avoid sexual immorality? "Therefore it is God's will that you be sanctified, that you avoid sexual immorality." Obviously that doesn't happen. How do people "grieve the Holy Spirit"? If it was all predestined...

Nothing happens that God has not foreordained yet
man is fully responsible for his sin .
Sound confusing huh?

When God created each of us He created our preferences, yes even things like sexual perversion , greed etc.
So God know how each of us will react when His hand of restraint is removed in certain situations.
Yet we are each responsible for making the decision to sin..it is always a free will choice.

MR.P
Remember God is as glorified in His just judgment as He is in his Love or Mercy.
God could have foreordained that the Pharaoh allow the Jews to leave immediately . We would not have His justice and miracles to remember to glorify God with . If He had that Jews would not have the Passover for a sign and a ritual that Jesus celebrated.
Jesus could not have been the passover lamb.

Every thing that happens on this earth point to God to glorify Him..yes even our sin.

"All things work together for the good for those that love God AND ARE CALLED ACCORDING TO HIS PURPOSE"

The OT passage I was getting at was Jeremiah 18. In this it describes God as a potter who is willing to respond to the clay. He does not arbitrarily decide what to do with it. If it repents, he will fashion it into something beautiful, if not he will destroy it.

Jerry- I was not claiming that God's will is arbitrary. I was saying that that is how Calvinism's definition of God's will seems to me. If he chooses me over my brother on the basis of... i dunno.... nothing?.... that seems arbitrary to me. As to the Body, that is an image used to describe us. I think you're taking it too far. We will be perfect, but that doesn't mean that one more or less person will tip the balance or anything like that.

For Brother Jerry ,

MrP.

Is there an issue with God having His ways with His creations?
Is man willing to allow God the same free will that they claim?

All men deserve Hell..Yet in His mercy He saved a remnant for His glory .
Rom 11:5**
Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

Eph 1:11 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:

Eph 1:5**
Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

Eph 1:9**
Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:

2Ti 1:9 Who hath saved us, and called [us] with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,


Isa 46:10**
Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times [the things] that are not [yet] done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure: [/b]

Tts 3:5**
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghos

See the problem is men think they are worthy of the love and mercy of God. Or that in some way they can impress God so He is not "arbitrary " . That is the pride of man talking if God choices by His will it does not seem fair .

We are proud creatures Mr P ..and that is one of the 7 "capital sins"

Rom 11:6 And if by grace, then [is it] no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if [it be] of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

 

[Jerry_M]

Jerry- I was not claiming that God's will is arbitrary. I was saying that that is how Calvinism's definition of God's will seems to me. If he chooses me over my brother on the basis of... i dunno.... nothing?.... that seems arbitrary to me.

On the basis of nothing?

Isn't the fact that He wants to chooses one sinner over another due to the fact that it pleases Him good enough for you? For you to consider that God's pleasure is meaningless ("i dunno.... nothing?") is troubling.

 

[CCWoody]

On the basis of nothing?

Isn't the fact that He wants to chooses one sinner over another due to the fact that it pleases Him good enough for you? For you to consider that God's pleasure is meaningless ("i dunno.... nothing?") is troubling.

Hi, Jerry. Just so you can know for sure the Evangelical nature of your discussion, you can check out this thread here.

Your friendly neighborhood Cordial Calvinist
Woody.

 

[Mr Potato Head]

On the basis of nothing?

Isn't the fact that He wants to chooses one sinner over another due to the fact that it pleases Him good enough for you? For you to consider that God's pleasure is meaningless ("i dunno.... nothing?") is troubling.

Yes, it is good enough. If you take into account that one sinner repented while the other did not. I think that is certainly within God's good pleasure. Which is not meaningless. He wants to show mercy on us. He does not delight in the destruction of the wicked. He desires all of us be saved.

 

[A Brethren IN CHRIST]

Yes, it is good enough. If you take into account that one sinner repented while the other did not. I think that is certainly within God's good pleasure. Which is not meaningless. He wants to show mercy on us. He does not delight in the destruction of the wicked. He desires all of us be saved.

IS ARE GOD NOT ALL POWERFUL ????

so if God had Determinative will this it would have happened but He did not do this....

 

[Jerry_M]

Yes, it is good enough. If you take into account that one sinner repented while the other did not. I think that is certainly within God's good pleasure. Which is not meaningless. He wants to show mercy on us. He does not delight in the destruction of the wicked. He desires all of us be saved.

I would agree with you that "He desires all of us be saved" with the one stipulation that the "us" refers only to the elect, and not all men without exception. (It doesn't take more than a cursory reading of II Peter 3 to see this. God is going to destroy His enemies, and is going to save all of His elect without exception.)

Why does one sinner repent and another not? Unless you hold to the doctrines of grace you are always going to answer that it is due to something that the sinner did, something that he performed. We know that "Salvation is of the LORD", and that no sinner ever repents unless the Holy Spirit works the miracle of regeneration, the new birth, within him.

 

[Jerry_M]

Hi, Jerry. Just so you can know for sure the Evangelical nature of your discussion, you can check out this thread here.

If Mr. Potato Head is a proponent of Open Theism, then he is a heretic, and has denied the faith. I haven't read enough of the other thread yet to determine whether he holds to this pernicious doctrine, or whether he is just "toying" with it.