Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Trainwreck said:That's exactly what the point of my post was. We are separated from God (ie hell) if we do not choose to follow him. The point is that it is our choice.
RapeOfAngels said:But if God's plan includes the free will of man being involved in salvation, then without fail, it comes to pass. THAT is the truth of a sovereign God.
You may disagree that God has actually done this, fine. But you have no right to tell a sovereign God that he isn't allowed to do this.
RapeOfAngels said:I am not sure what Paul is saying in Romans 9.
However, I find it difficult to believe he is saying what you claim, because it would be a blatant logical fallacy. (Weak analogy, for making a comparison with something lifeless.) I don't think that God could make an error like that.
Brazell said:I just have a hard time believing that everything that I may do has already been decided, it would seem to suggest that God has already chosen who will be saved and who will perish, without giving them any sort of choice.
Reformationist said:Let's, for the sake of discussion, set aside Scripture which explicitly states that God has decided that very thing. I'm curious if you think God would be within His rights to do what you suggest, i.e., chosen who will be saved and who will perish, without giving them any sort of choice?
Jig said:God is omniscient. He knows before you are born if you will accept Him or not.
The only thing we can't choose for ourselves is who we are born to, God has to do this. Using the knowledge He has about how we will live our life (for Him or not), could He not place us with a family who He also knows will not turn to Him and vise versa for those who will live for Him?
I gave the example of children born in Muslim/Buddist/Hindu/etc families, and also those American Indians who lived after Jesus's death but before Columbus with no way of hearing the Good News.
Could God have placed these people in their locations and families knowing in advance they wouldn't turn to Him even if they were born in a Christian household?
Just a thought...
Cyg, if you offer this in an attempt to soften the jagged edges of the biblical teaching of predestination to those who have trouble swallowing it, I applaud you. If, instead, you cite this because you see a marked difference between the reformed doctrine of God's passive predestination of the reprobate to destruction as it is taught under the larger umbrella of double predestination and that of the reprobate being consigned to destruction through God's act of leaving them to sin that it run its course, that being their destruction, I'd have to acknowledge a bit of confusion. It seems rather a distinction without a difference. Am I simply misunderstanding your point?cygnusx1 said:[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Book Antiqua, Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Predestination - Reprobation Contrasted[/FONT]
[/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Book Antiqua, Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
1. [The Scripture] does not teach or imply a double predestination. In an attempt to distinguish between election and reprobation we should use predestination for the elect and foreordination for the reprobate. [/FONT]
[FONT=Book Antiqua, Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]2. Election and reprobation rest on different grounds: election on the redeeming love of God that undertakes the salvation of the lost; reprobation on the moral necessity to manifest to the universe the nature and consequences of sin in moral personality. [/FONT]
[FONT=Book Antiqua, Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]3. Means are used of God to fulfil the purpose of election, but God uses no means to fulfil His purpose of reprobation. It is left to sin to run its course and receive its wages. [/FONT]
[FONT=Book Antiqua, Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]4. The fruits of election are attributable to divine grace, the fruits of reprobation to personal sin. This means that while there is grace to some, there is injustice to none. [/FONT]
[FONT=Book Antiqua, Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]5. While God finds pleasure in the salvation of the elect, He has sworn by Himself that He has no pleasure in the death of the wicked. God does not need sin or its retribution for His self-manifestation, but its reality in the universe can serve that end. [/FONT]
[FONT=Book Antiqua, Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]6. That the elect will constitute a recreation of the race under a new Head is evident, while the retribute are but the branches cut off from the tree of humanity. Christ will be revealed as the Saviour of the world, though many are lost in the process. [/FONT]
[FONT=Book Antiqua, Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]- Finlayson[/FONT]
Reformationist said:Additionally to claim that God chooses what to do with us on the basis of what He sees us doing/choosing is to give the creation a reason to boast, something explicitly prohibited in the Gospel. The truth of mankind is that he is fallen to such a degree that, apart from the intercessory, regenerative work of the Almighty, he would NEVER come to faith. To claim that God makes a choice about you based on what He sees you doing violates explicit Scripture, which plainly states that God receives counsel from no one nor does He elect based on anything you say or do. The plan of redemption is grounded firmly AND EXCLUSIVELY in His eternal mercy. The Bible explicitly states that it is NOT based on the works or desire of mankind but, rather, upon the merciful plan of God to set apart a people unto Himself.
Forest said:And yet, what happened here with the chosen people...who decided to be an unwilling participant?
Matthew 23:37 (NASB) "Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling.
Trainwreck said:That's exactly what the point of my post was. We are separated from God (ie hell) if we do not choose to follow him. The point is that it is our choice.
Where did I see that animation that someone posted of a man beating a dead horse?Augustine_Was_Calvinist said:There is none who choose God while in their sinful state.
Whatever is not done in faith cannot please God.
It is the Lord who seeks out His sheep, and performs the pleasure of His Will as prophecied in Ezekiel 36;
24 For I will take you from among the nations, gather you out of all countries, and bring you into your own land. 25 Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. 26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 27 I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them.
The active Person is God, and those whom God seeks after receive the benefit of God's acts.
Dmckay said:Where did I see that animation that someone posted of a man beating a dead horse?
I already have, so many times that I have come to realize that there are those here who have made their life's work trying to discredit T.U.L.I.P., Calvinism and any other argument that doesn't put man completely in control.Augustine_Was_Calvinist said:Obviously you are a Biblical scholar and theolgian of the highest degree, so perhaps you would like to offer something of substance.
And the Response:RapeofAngels said:No. Because I am not denying that God has a complete knowledge of the future. I am denying that God can have a knowledge of the future before it actually exists.
RapeofAngels said:Quote
Originally Posted by: Dmckay
Did you actually think about this statement as you wrote it? You are displaying a pitiful knowledge about the essence and attributes of G-d.
Did you think about your own statement before you wrote it? It doesn't look that way.
Reformationist said:Setting up strawmen is pointless. I don't presume to authorize God to do anything, as all authority is His and His alone. What I do know is that your so called "free will" doctrine is nothing more than a watered down version of the heresy that Pelagius spouted.
There is none who choose God while in their sinful state.
It is the Lord who seeks out His sheep, and performs the pleasure of His Will as prophecied in Ezekiel 36;
Brazell said:No, which it why it is merely an image of God that man is created in.
I have established a thread to specifically discuss the Biblical nature of the human will: The Fainting Warrior OR why "free" will is useless.RapeOfAngels said:One point I would make, is that we aren't in my view talking about the creative activity purely of God. With libertarian free will, power is delegated to the creature.
Why? Because you have some Biblical support for the idea that God couldn't know the outcome of the choices of his creatures before they are made? I'd sure be interested in it. If this is a non-Biblical based, belief, then I'd like to know what as well.RapeOfAngels said:When you talk about creation already existing in God's mind, I think that would be perfectly possible if everything were determined by God. But it looks very questionable that God could have "in mind", before creation, the free choice of creatures who aren't yet in existence. The decisions haven't been taken.
Well, I agree. There is no such thing as a "free" will, especially in the libertarian sense of the word. But, seeing that discussion is off topic, and I have already devoted a thread to discussing the nature of the will, we can retire there: The Fainting Warrior OR why "free" will is useless.RapeOfAngels said:If God already has them "in mind" before creation, then it looks as if God is taking those decisions, and that isn't free will.
Reformationist said:I have no clue of the error to which you refer, nor am I aware that I attributed any error to God. If I did it was certainly not my intent. If not, can you explain what you mean?![]()