Predestination??

[ContraMundum]

Good Day, ContraMundum

I certianly do not wish to interfer with the ongoing dialog with you and Ref. But I do have question abot the passage in Matt that you raise here:

Mat 23:34 Therefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: some of them shall ye kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute from city to city:

Mat 23:35 that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of Abel the righteous unto the blood of Zachariah son of Barachiah, whom ye slew between the sanctuary and the altar.

Mat 23:36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.

Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, that killeth the prophets, and stoneth them that are sent unto her! how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!

Does not the "ye" here refer to Jerusalem? Who or what is "Jerusalem? The intent here was to gather "her Children" was not some of her children gathered... ie Paul.

Peace to u,

Bill

I fail to see how what light any interpretation would shed on the point I was making, regarding of how you interpret the "ye". It's stating a principle, applicable specifically to Jerusalem in this context, but a universal principle always.

 

[ContraMundum]

Hello Steve

Before the foundation of the world God had a plan. His plan was to glorify himself. So he chose a people for his own inheritance through which he would be glorified. By choosing some (elect) he chose not to choose others (reprobate).

Are you blaming God for reprobation? Is man not responsible for his own sins?

Also- can you direct me to a clear, unambiguous and unanimously agreed upon scripture that teaches that God's plan from eternity was self-engrandiosement?

God does not love everyone, he created the wicked for the day of judgement and hated Esau. His love is bestowed upon the elect alone, upon the reprobate the wrath of God abideth.

Men were never created for Hell. That place was prepared for Satan and his Angels, men will only go there if they die in their sins. Hence, even many Calvinists believe in Sublapsarianism, which obviously would go against what you've just said above.

Also note: God loves the whole world (Jn 3:16, for goodness sake! Not to mention 1 Jn 2:2 speaking of the results!) . That's pretty clear in the Bible. Esau being "loved less/hated" is not taught in scripture as a pre-ordained decision of God to be a respecter or persons, as this is not stated anywhere in the scripture. Rather, God's displeasure with Esau was based on his actions. Furthermore, according tot he context St Paul uses in Romans 9, this does not refer specifically to Jacob and Esau, but upon the nations founded on their individual posterity- eg. Israel and Edom. Read Malachi.

 

[ContraMundum]

So it is down to Unconditional Election after all

"Unconditional election" is the biggest irrelevant point in Calvinism.

It's only a very few number of "Arminian" theologians that take it to task because it means nothing in the scheme of things. (In fact, Wesleyan-Arminians have no problem with it, because it fits Wesley's ordo salutis- he's practically a Calvinist on that point).

Conversely, the idea that election is given "in view of faith" is pretty much agreed upon by most knowledgable protestants as irrelevant, just like the Calvinist view that faith comes after election is obviously missing the mark. In fact, it becomes obvious in scripture - and the original Protestants knew and taught this pre-Calvin - that Faith is the means of justification. I know to the Reformed mind (either from the Calvinist or Arminian splinter of that camp) this bends the programmed mind somewhat but re-read Eph 1:3-8 and 1 Pet 1:2 with such a thought in mind and you're halfway to becoming a Luther or Augustine protege.

 

[cygnusx1]

Are you blaming God for reprobation? Is man not responsible for his own sins?

Also- can you direct me to a clear, unambiguous and unanimously agreed upon scripture that teaches that God's plan from eternity was self-engrandiosement?



Men were never created for Hell. That place was prepared for Satan and his Angels, men will only go there if they die in their sins. Hence, even many Calvinists believe in Sublapsarianism, which obviously would go against what you've just said above.

Also note: God loves the whole world (Jn 3:16, for goodness sake! Not to mention 1 Jn 2:2 speaking of the results!) . That's pretty clear in the Bible. Esau being "loved less/hated" is not taught in scripture as a pre-ordained decision of God to be a respecter or persons, as this is not stated anywhere in the scripture. Rather, God's displeasure with Esau was based on his actions. Furthermore, according tot he context St Paul uses in Romans 9, this does not refer specifically to Jacob and Esau, but upon the nations founded on their individual posterity- eg. Israel and Edom. Read Malachi.

I always smile when I see this cliche
"Men were never created for Hell. That place was prepared for Satan and his Angels, men will only go there if they die in their sins."

it's like , God doesn't prepare hell for sinners because that would be cruel ......... but He would prepare a pit for satan and fallen angels , because ......................

 

[ContraMundum]

Romans 8


For those he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, so that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.
30 And those he predestined he also called; and those he called he also justified; and those he justified he also glorified.
31 8 What then shall we say to this? If God is for us, who can be against us?
32 He who did not spare his own Son but handed him over for us all, how will he not also give us everything else along with him? 33 Who will bring a charge against God's chosen ones? It is God who acquits us.
​

Shall we look at this text? By the way, you should have quoted the previous verse too.

a) The saved are predestined to be conformed to the image of His son, who are "called according to His purpose" (the verse you omitted), which of course is the redemption "of all things" (Eph. 1:10)

b) God calls, justifies and glorifies them.

Arminians believe that too.

c) The context of this passage is dealing with the persecution of Christians, Paul stating that God will save them to the uttermost.


So- how is that a proof text that God chose them from eternity by the process of selective salvation?

Note: I am not denying election by God from eternity. I am questioning how this text is being used to back that position up.

 

[cygnusx1]

Shall we look at this text? By the way, you should have quoted the previous verse too.

You should have quoted the whole Bible!

a) The saved are predestined to be conformed to the image of His son, who are "called according to His purpose" (the verse you omitted), which of course is the redemption "of all things" (Eph. 1:10)

the saved are first chosen ............... and there are various purposes for their being chosen ; 'sanctification' , 'to be like Christ' , 'to be saved' and to be Jutified and Glorified ....... this is so logical , why would God choose to save anyone anyway .The answer is a given.

b) God calls, justifies and glorifies them.

Arminians believe that too.

wrong!
Arminians believe that there are thousands who lose Justification and are NEVER jglorified!

c) The context of this passage is dealing with the persecution of Christians, Paul stating that God will save them to the uttermost.

that goes without saying .............

So- how is that a proof text that God chose them from eternity by the process of selective salvation?

Because it is a golden unbreakable chain .............. and there are also other texts that show salvation is in the Election ...

Note: I am not denying election by God from eternity. I am questioning how this text is being used to back that position up.

Those whom He Glorified He also called and sanctified .... Calling here is not the outer call (many were called but few chosen) it is the inner call (those whom He called He also justified ........ etc)

 

[ContraMundum]

I always smile when I see this cliche
"Men were never created for Hell. That place was prepared for Satan and his Angels, men will only go there if they die in their sins."

it's like , God doesn't prepare hell for sinners because that would be cruel ......... but He would prepare a pit for satan and fallen angels , because ......................

It's scriptural, and if you have a problem with that, that's your own fault (unless God predestined you to deny the verse, of course, and then, it's His fault, and you're in big trouble).

Mat 25:41 Then He will also say to those on His left, Go away from Me, cursed ones, into the everlasting fire prepared for the Devil and his angels.

The problem you have here is that you aren't being orthodox in your Calvinism. The predominant Sublapsarian view accepts this fact not as a cliche but as part of God's revelation. You see, in this view, Hell was prepared for Satan and his minions, but after man fell, that would be the eternal abode of sinners, them being somewhat of an intruder into that realm.

On the other hand, the revealed doctrine of God who cannot lie states clearly that the original abode for man was heaven.

Mat 25:34 Then the King shall say to those on His right hand, Come, blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.

It seems to me like you need to do some thinking before you start wriiting off the use of scriptures that don't support your fallible reason as "cliches"

Relax though, you can still be a Calvinist and believe this scripture.

 

[ContraMundum]

You should have quoted the whole Bible!



the saved are first chosen ............... and there are various purposes for their being chosen ; 'sanctification' , 'to be like Christ' , 'to be saved' and to be Jutified and Glorified ....... this is so logical , why would God choose to save anyone anyway .The answer is a given.


wrong!
Arminians believe that there are thousands who lose Justification and are NEVER jglorified!




that goes without saying .............




Because it is a golden unbreakable chain .............. and there are also other texts that show salvation is in the Election ...




Those whom He Glorified He also called and sanctified .... Calling here is not the outer call (many were called but few chosen) it is the inner call (those whom He called He also justified ........ etc)

Read carefully first, then reply,

 

[cygnusx1]

Read carefully first, then reply,

yes , take time and do read through very carefully , it helps!

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][size=+1]2 Thessalonians 2:13 [/size][/font]​

But we are bound to always give thanks to God for you, brothers loved by the Lord, because God chose you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief in the truth; (WEB)

But we are bound to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, for that God chose you from the beginning unto salvation in sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: (ASV)

But it is right for us to give praise to God at all times for you, brothers, loved by the Lord, because it was the purpose of God from the first that you might have salvation, being made holy by the Spirit and by faith in what is true: (BBE)

But we ought to give thanks to God always for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, that God has chosen you from the beginning to salvation in sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: (DBY)

But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: (KJV)

But we are bound to give thanks always to God for you, brethren, beloved by the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation, through sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth: (WBS)

And from us thanks are always due to God on your behalf--brethren whom the Lord loves--because God from the beginning has chosen you for salvation through the Spirit's sanctifying influence and your belief in the truth. (WEY)

And we -- we ought to give thanks to God always for you, brethren, beloved by the Lord, that God did choose you from the beginning to salvation, in sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth, (YLT)

 

[ContraMundum]

yes , take time and do read through very carefully , it helps!

​

Um....what's your point?

I was saying you didn't read my post carefully because...well....you just missed the whole point. Now you proof-text a Bible verse that means nothing to my post.

Where's Reformationist? I need substance.​

 

[cygnusx1]

"Unconditional election" is the biggest irrelevant point in Calvinism.

It's only a very few number of "Arminian" theologians that take it to task because it means nothing in the scheme of things. (In fact, Wesleyan-Arminians have no problem with it, because it fits Wesley's ordo salutis- he's practically a Calvinist on that point).

what !

forseen conditional election is the same as the Calvinist unconditional election ............ right , you are well clued up...

and if it's soooooooo irrelevant why are you responding to it

 

[ContraMundum]

what !

forseen conditional election is the same as the Calvinist unconditional election ............ right , you are well clued up...

and if it's soooooooo irrelevant why are you responding to it

Oh have mercy....

I knew you wouldn't be up for this the minute I saw you that you think Queen's "Night at the Opera" was a good album....

Well, let me lay this out, plain and simple for you.

a) I didn't say "forseen conditional election is the same as the Calvinist unconditional election", did I? Save your lampooning for someone who is more prone to fall for it. They are different doctrines, but they are also offspring of the same malady. The malady being a misunderstanding of the relationship of faith to election. The Calvinist places election first before faith, the Arminian places foreseen faith before election. However, according to others, the entire process is wrong. That is, according to earlier theological schools such as Lutheranism and patristic theology. In those less humanized (driven by human reason) theologies, faith is the means of election. It is therefore a misunderstanding to debate whether or not is preceeds election or follows it. It's the means, not the ends or the condition.

Do you understand my point? If yes, then God willing you will see how your proof-texting is not relevant to this point in particular. If no, then I can't help you further.

b) You said this: "wrong!
Arminians believe that there are thousands who lose Justification and are NEVER jglorified!" (sic)

You missed the point here, again, and this comment is indicative of someone who has never read Arminian theologians first hand (although your favorite hymn was composed by one, right??). Arminians do, in fact, believe the Bible- that God calls, justifies, and glorfies the elect. They do, however, believe that man has a synergistic role to play in that. Thus, it is all God's work, if man by faith recieves it. Man cannot call himself, justify himself or glorify himself. God does the work, man recieves the blessings by faith. One who perseveres to the end is rightly proven to be one of the elect, those who fall away were in fact not foreknown to be so. This is Arminian doctrine, according to H Orton Wiley, Charles Carter, Adam Clarke and H Ray Dunning, to name a few. I know what I'm talking about here- I attended an Arminian sem, but I do not believe Arminian doctrine nowadays, nor do I believe Calvinism.

 

[tmcothran]

Before the foundation of the world God had a plan. His plan was to glorify himself. So he chose a people for his own inheritance through which he would be glorified. By choosing some (elect) he chose not to choose others (reprobate).

God does not love everyone, he created the wicked for the day of judgement and hated Esau. His love is bestowed upon the elect alone, upon the reprobate the wrath of God abideth.

I haven't read back through the first 40 pages or so, so if I say anything that has already been addressed, point me to it.

Two questions for all Calvinists: did God predestine man to sin? And is everything that happens God's will?

Now a few thoughts. First, God does not love everyone?!?!? I thought God is love, is he not the same for everyone? You seem to speak of love as a passion or emotion that God feels towards some. Yet God is impassible, He may not submit to passion. He is inalterably, eternally the same: Love. John 3:16 says "For God so loved the world..." The world. The Greek word κοσμον signifies the entirety of creation without exception.

God's purpose for humanity is all about His pride? This sounds more like the anthropomorphic gods of the Greeks than the Christian God.

And what kind of God glorifies in human pain and suffering? How does eternal damnation show forth the glory of God? If God wanted, intended, caused, or glorifies in the damnation of sinners it does not show His love, but His sadism. But of course God is good, He is love. He is not sadistic.

I do not wish to worship such a God as yours. But stating my revulsion would not be nearly as eloquent as quoting from the greatest Christian novel ever written: The Brothers Karamozov.

Ivan: "This poor child of five was subjected to every possible torture by those cultivated parents. They beat her, thrashed her, kicked her for no reason till her body was one bruise. Then, they went to greater refinements of cruelty- shut her up all night in the cold and frost in a privy, and because she didn't ask to be taken up at night (as though a child of five sleeping its angelic, sound sleep could be trained to wake and ask), they smeared her face and filled her mouth with excrement, and it was her mother, her mother did this. And that mother could sleep, hearing the poor child's groans! Can you understand why a little creature, who can’t even understand what’s done to her, should beat her little aching heart with her tiny fist in the dark and the cold, and weep her meek unresentful tears to 'dear, kind God' to protect her? Do you understand why this infamy must be and is permitted? Without it, I am told, man could not have existed on earth, for he could not have known good and evil. Why should he know that diabolical good and evil when it costs so much? Why, the whole world of knowledge is not worth that child’s prayer to ‘dear, kind God’!... Listen! If all must suffer to pay for the eternal harmony, what have children to do with it, tell me, please? It’s beyond all comprehension why they should suffer, and why they should pay for the harmony. It’s not worth the tears of that one tortured child who beat itself on the breast with its little fist and prayed in its stinking outhouse, with its unexpiated tears to ‘dear, kind God’! It’s not worth it, because those tears are unatoned for. And so I hasten to give back my entrance ticket to heaven, and if I am an honest man I am bound to give it back as soon as possible. And that I am doing. It’s not the existence of God that I don’t accept, Alyosha, only I most respectfully return Him the ticket.”

“That’s rebellion,” murmured Alyosha, looking down.

"Imagine that you are creating a fabric of human destiny with the object of making men happy in the end, giving them peace and rest at last, but that it was essential and inevitable to torture to death only one tiny creature—that baby beating its breast with its fist, for instance—and to found that edifice on its unavenged tears, would you consent to be the architect on those conditions? Tell me, and tell the truth."

“No, I wouldn’t consent,” said Alyosha softly.

Here Ivan (in the words of Dostoeyevsky) is speaking only of the idea that sin is necessary to appreciate heaven. I shudder to think what he would say of a god who delighted in the pains of children.

What would you say, lambath (or any hard-core Calvinist out there)? What if that child of five was not one of the lucky ones that God loves, but one of the damned. Did god (I'm using lower case because God would never do such a thing, and I have no wish to blaspheme Him) bask in his glory while her parents beat her? Did he laugh when her mother forced excrement in her mouth? Were her cries for his comfort music to his ears?

How much worse will the tortures of hell be than the suffering of that girl? How could God desire this if He were good? How could anyone with a conscience worship a god that caused this.

I hope that if some sort of malevolent deity ruled the universe (one so devoid of love as this), I would have the moral courage to stand up to him, as Ivan did, and return my ticket to heaven.

 

[cygnusx1]

Oh have mercy....

I knew you wouldn't be up for this the minute I saw you that you think Queen's "Night at the Opera" was a good album....

Well, let me lay this out, plain and simple for you.

a) I didn't say "forseen conditional election is the same as the Calvinist unconditional election", did I? Save your lampooning for someone who is more prone to fall for it. They are different doctrines, but they are also offspring of the same malady. The malady being a misunderstanding of the relationship of faith to election. The Calvinist places election first before faith, the Arminian places foreseen faith before election. However, according to others, the entire process is wrong. That is, according to earlier theological schools such as Lutheranism and patristic theology. In those less humanized (driven by human reason) theologies, faith is the means of election. It is therefore a misunderstanding to debate whether or not is preceeds election or follows it. It's the means, not the ends or the condition.

Do you understand my point? If yes, then God willing you will see how your proof-texting is not relevant to this point in particular. If no, then I can't help you further.

b) You said this: "wrong!
Arminians believe that there are thousands who lose Justification and are NEVER jglorified!" (sic)

You missed the point here, again, and this comment is indicative of someone who has never read Arminian theologians first hand (although your favorite hymn was composed by one, right??). Arminians do, in fact, believe the Bible- that God calls, justifies, and glorfies the elect. They do, however, believe that man has a synergistic role to play in that. Thus, it is all God's work, if man by faith recieves it. Man cannot call himself, justify himself or glorify himself. God does the work, man recieves the blessings by faith. One who perseveres to the end is rightly proven to be one of the elect, those who fall away were in fact not foreknown to be so. This is Arminian doctrine, according to H Orton Wiley, Charles Carter, Adam Clarke and H Ray Dunning, to name a few. I know what I'm talking about here- I attended an Arminian sem, but I do not believe Arminian doctrine nowadays, nor do I believe Calvinism.

laying aside your rather rude abrasive opening line (is there really any need)

you say something interesting at the end ,

"One who perseveres to the end is rightly proven to be one of the elect, those who fall away were in fact not foreknown to be so."

If this were true , how can the Arminian speak of REAL Christians losing salvation , Arminians hold that even the Elect can commit apostacy.

 

[ContraMundum]

laying aside your rather rude abrasive opening line (is there really any need)

Well, I was responding to your rather abrasive, sarcastic remark about me not being "clued up", when in fact I know what I'm on about. Perhaps you ought to try to be less inflammatory yourself first? Please understand that I regard myself as the respondant, not the initiator, of the snide comments.

you say something interesting at the end ,

"One who perseveres to the end is rightly proven to be one of the elect, those who fall away were in fact not foreknown to be so."

If this were true , how can the Arminian speak of REAL Christians losing salvation , Arminians hold that even the Elect can commit apostacy.

No, they don't, not exactly anyway, although you've probably met dozens that say they do. The rank-and-file Arminian usually hasn't done much homework on the fineries of their doctrine, judging from what I've read here especially. Their theologians on the other hand acknowledge that the elect are known from eternity, and that the true number of elect is set. This is considered an immutable fact. But, the way they deal with it is the same way Calvinists deal with "the call" (dividing it up into "types" of the call), they slice it up. The elect can fall from grace- but God knew they would fall from grace so they were in effect not the ultimate final "elect". Such distinctions are based on foreknowledge and not synergism. Lutherans have a similar doctrine, but with different language. They believe in a positive election from eternity, the number known and set from eternity, based on decree, but that those in faith can still fall away, proving they were never elect.

Complicated.

 

[ContraMundum]

God's purpose for humanity is all about His pride? This sounds more like the anthropomorphic gods of the Greeks than the Christian God.

I agree. More Allah than Father, Son and Holy Spirit.


Good post too.

 

[cygnusx1]

[/color]

Well, I was responding to your rather abrasive, sarcastic remark about me not being "clued up", when in fact I know what I'm on about. Perhaps you ought to try to be less inflammatory yourself first? Please understand that I regard myself as the respondant, not the initiator, of the snide comments.

so , a response to something seen as abrasive sarcastic is to reply in kind ?
Well , I apologise for getting off on the wrong foot.

No, they don't, not exactly anyway, although you've probably met dozens that say they do. The rank-and-file Arminian usually hasn't done much homework on the fineries of their doctrine, judging from what I've read here especially. Their theologians on the other hand acknowledge that the elect are known from eternity, and that the true number of elect is set. This is considered an immutable fact. But, the way they deal with it is the same way Calvinists deal with "the call" (dividing it up into "types" of the call), they slice it up. The elect can fall from grace- but God knew they would fall from grace so they were in effect not the ultimate final "elect". Such distinctions are based on foreknowledge and not synergism. Lutherans have a similar doctrine, but with different language. They believe in a positive election from eternity, the number known and set from eternity, based on decree, but that those in faith can still fall away, proving they were never elect.

Complicated.

Is this varifiable , I see no quotes from Arminian theologians .
It seems that they believe in TWO Elections , one temporary and one permanent .
I have never met an arminian who said that there are two elections (or two classes of Elect) where is this in scripture ?

you say "The elect can fall from grace- but God knew they would fall from grace so they were in effect not the ultimate final "elect". "

how many Arminian commentators and expositors hold this view?

It just seems at least to me like an act of sophistry to say that the elect can fall away from salvation , but they weren't the ultimate final elect , for they were Elect and they were fallen elect and their Election meant nothing.

 

[cygnusx1]

I haven't read back through the first 40 pages or so, so if I say anything that has already been addressed, point me to it.

Two questions for all Calvinists: did God predestine man to sin? And is everything that happens God's will?

Now a few thoughts. First, God does not love everyone?!?!? I thought God is love, is he not the same for everyone? You seem to speak of love as a passion or emotion that God feels towards some. Yet God is impassible, He may not submit to passion. He is inalterably, eternally the same: Love. John 3:16 says "For God so loved the world..." The world. The Greek word κοσμον signifies the entirety of creation without exception.

God's purpose for humanity is all about His pride? This sounds more like the anthropomorphic gods of the Greeks than the Christian God.

And what kind of God glorifies in human pain and suffering? How does eternal damnation show forth the glory of God? If God wanted, intended, caused, or glorifies in the damnation of sinners it does not show His love, but His sadism. But of course God is good, He is love. He is not sadistic.

I do not wish to worship such a God as yours. But stating my revulsion would not be nearly as eloquent as quoting from the greatest Christian novel ever written: The Brothers Karamozov.



Here Ivan (in the words of Dostoeyevsky) is speaking only of the idea that sin is necessary to appreciate heaven. I shudder to think what he would say of a god who delighted in the pains of children.

What would you say, lambath (or any hard-core Calvinist out there)? What if that child of five was not one of the lucky ones that God loves, but one of the damned. Did god (I'm using lower case because God would never do such a thing, and I have no wish to blaspheme Him) bask in his glory while her parents beat her? Did he laugh when her mother forced excrement in her mouth? Were her cries for his comfort music to his ears?

How much worse will the tortures of hell be than the suffering of that girl? How could God desire this if He were good? How could anyone with a conscience worship a god that caused this.

I hope that if some sort of malevolent deity ruled the universe (one so devoid of love as this), I would have the moral courage to stand up to him, as Ivan did, and return my ticket to heaven.

you will find many Calvinists who believe God loves only the Elect , that God offers salvation to only the Elect .
I am not one of them.
I believe in a very broad Love of God , a Love that is even towards those who will never be saved.
consider the amazing kindensss of God to Cain , Esau and even Pharoah ....... each were blessed with thousands of gifts . Why ?

Also , although I believe in double predestination , both Reformationist and myself do not accept equal ultimacy ...... being predestined for heaven is not the same as being predestined for hell.

Furthermore may I say I did not come to this conclusion easily or quickly , it took years of agonising over certain texts . Hosea 11 ; Luke 19 ; Romans 9:1-5 : Ezekiel 18:23- ; Ezekiel 33:11 ; the entire book of Jonah !

Basically Jesus spelled out what manner of people we should be , we should be like our Heavenly Father who Loves (the word is Love not merely kindeness) His enemies , this is proven by The Lord giving rain and sun even to the "unrighteous" .He grants such a degree of love that in common things there is no discrimination . from this fact we are to maintain a love for all mankind , even our enemies !

This love , is not merely a granting of rain and sunshine , we see Jesus who healed a bunch of leapers , was it nine ? and only one came back and gave God praise!
Yet why would God do such a thing ?
Why if He knew that His love would be despised did He not just save healings for the righteous ?
Again , when we examine the cases of God's kindness we see it is bigger than would be supposed .

Now you maintain that it is kindeness but not love , but what is kindness but a form of love ?
We are not merely told to be kind to our enemies , we are told to LOVE our enemies , God's Love is massive , it is wide , deep , high and varied.

Now I am not saying that God has the same intimate Love with the world as He certainly has with the Church .
I maintain Christ died for His Bride alone and He nourishes His own flesh .
Yet I may say the invitation to receive forgiveness and eternal life from God is certainly an act of love.
In fact because it is an act of love , any despising of it will outrage the Spirit of Grace .
If men despised the Law , they were stoned , what will they face if they despise God's love ?

 

[tmcothran]

Also , although I believe in double predestination , both Reformationist and myself do not accept equal ultimacy ...... being predestined for heaven is not the same as being predestined for hell.

If this has been asked before, sorry for the redundancy. This seems like it would be one of the first to come up.

If God does love all, then why doesn't he predestine everyone to heaven? If he wills all to be saved, and he works out His will through predestination, why aren't all to be saved.

Also, I think I do recognize the difference of being predestined to heaven and being predestined to hell. Correct me if I'm wrong, but when one is predestined to heaven, they get what they did not deserve. God's grace is given to them in abundance. Yet when one is predestined to hell, they get what exactly what they deserve, and they have made the decision. So it is not injust, because it would have been just for all to have been damned. The fact that some are saved speaks to God's goodness.

I tend to see this (and I really don't mean to be inflammitory or over-dramatic) as the difference between pushing some one off a cliff and willfully allowing them to fall. Neither seems to be loving to me.

A couple more questions. First, of those that are saved, is it against their sinful will? In other words, does God act on their will from without, changing it?

Secondly (I'm repeating this from my first post on the thread), are all things that happen God's will.

Thirdly, does the damnation of some glorify God? How is God's love manifested to the damned?

I ask these, because as a former hardcore (and I mean hardcore) Calvanist, I tend to think all other Calvinists were are brutal in their soteriology as I was. I want to avoid that this time around.

 

[cygnusx1]

If this has been asked before, sorry for the redundancy. This seems like it would be one of the first to come up.

If God does love all, then why doesn't he predestine everyone to heaven? If he wills all to be saved, and he works out His will through predestination, why aren't all to be saved.

Notice in the parable of the wedding feast many are invited few are compelled ....... those invited one by one bgan to make excuse!!!
Man's total depravity is that he wants sin and salvation , and he wants independance (free-will) from God , not have the Love of Christ which will "constrain him" ........ so the Lord in wisdom commands that the underdogs , the dross of humanity , those who are unable , incapable and underpriviledged shall be compelled (Biblical word) to come in!

I see Love in the first instance , and Grace and Love in the latter situation ....... only those who are compelled will come . "No man can come to me unless the Father draws (drags) them "

Also, I think I do recognize the difference of being predestined to heaven and being predestined to hell. Correct me if I'm wrong, but when one is predestined to heaven, they get what they did not deserve. God's grace is given to them in abundance. Yet when one is predestined to hell, they get what exactly what they deserve, and they have made the decision. So it is not injust, because it would have been just for all to have been damned. The fact that some are saved speaks to God's goodness.

Yes , and God doesn't work sin in them , as He does work righteousness in the Elect.

I tend to see this (and I really don't mean to be inflammitory or over-dramatic) as the difference between pushing some one off a cliff and willfully allowing them to fall. Neither seems to be loving to me.

Man is already over the cliff , he is fallen , what is being offered is a rope , yet , men would rather use it to hang themselves than be hauled out !

A couple more questions. First, of those that are saved, is it against their sinful will? In other words, does God act on their will from without, changing it?

At first it does appear to be against their will , but God makes us willing ....... those who are opposed to God changing men's hearts need to read the scriptures there are many instances where God places a new disposition in someone , see Esau on his way to massacre his brother and his family ....... what was the result!

Secondly (I'm repeating this from my first post on the thread), are all things that happen God's will.

That depends on what you mean ........... yes , for all things are from Him and to him , yet God's revealed will , His will of command is that we be perfect.

Thirdly, does the damnation of some glorify God? How is God's love manifested to the damned?

all things were made to glorify God , even the wicked.
His love is manifested by the contrast , see Romans 9

I ask these, because as a former hardcore (and I mean hardcore) Calvanist, I tend to think all other Calvinists were are brutal in their soteriology as I was. I want to avoid that this time around.

Well I know what you mean , i think , the trick is to keep God's Love at the center of our Soteriology ........... God so loved the world sounds a lot better than for God so Controlled the World