Predestination

[Livindesert]

In the mind of the early church, free will was always taught.

Augustine might be interpreted as denying this. Certainly Calvin took this novel approach when he devised a new way of looking at scripture, 1,500 years after the events.

There's a good list of early church sources on the matter here...
http://www.austingrad.edu/images/Resources/church/Free Will.pdf

Romans 9:20-24 (English Standard Version)

20But who are you, O man,(A) to answer back to God?(B) Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?" 21(C) Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump(D) one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience(E) vessels of wrath(F) prepared for destruction, 23in order to make known(G) the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he(H) has prepared beforehand for glory— 24even us whom he(I) has called,(J) not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?

Yup this is soooo freewill

 

[Montalban]

In Genesis we read that people made choices.

God's response...
Genesis 4:7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

 

[Montalban]

Romans 9:20-24 (English Standard Version)

20But who are you, O man,(A) to answer back to God?(B) Will what is molded say to its molder, "Why have you made me like this?" 21(C) Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump(D) one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience(E) vessels of wrath(F) prepared for destruction, 23in order to make known(G) the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he(H) has prepared beforehand for glory— 24even us whom he(I) has called,(J) not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?

Thanks for repeating the same bible verse without context as you did earlier. I didn't miss it then either

Here's a good explanation. Better than I can state...
In Romans, particularly Chapter 9, Paul is explaining to the Jews how God could accept the Gentiles and reject part of the nation of Israel. This
was a hard concept for God's “Chosen People.” So Romans 9 is dealing primarily with the nation of Israel.

In the New American Standard Bible (NASB) the heading of Chapter 9 says "Solicitude for Israel." Merriam-Webster defines "Solicitude "as:

1 a : the state of being concerned and anxious b : attentive care and protectiveness; also : an attitude of earnest concern or attention
2 : a cause of care or concern -- usually used in plural

J. Vernon McGee's Thru The Bible says the theme of Romans Chapter 9 is: "Israel defined; Israel identified; the choice of Israel in the sovereign
purpose of God; the choice of Gentiles in the scriptural prophecies." McGee writes of the section of Romans containing Chapters 9 through 11 "it
deals with the eschatological, that is, the prophetic, section of the Bible that reveals God is not through with Israel.Now as we begin chapter 9,
notice that this has to do with God's past dealings with Israel. In chapter 10 we will see God's present dealings with Israel and, in chapter 11,
God's future dealings with Israel as a nation…”

What is being described is selection for "service" not "salvation." God was talking about forming clay (Israel) to be used to bring the Messiah into
the world.
Predestined for Free Will

 

[AndOne]

2 Peter 3:9

The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

Continuing on with responding to these scriptures...

If you look at the entirety of 2 Peter chapter 3 you will see that Peter is actually speaking to a specific group of people. The "not wishing for any to perish" that you have highlighted is specific to the people who Peter is writing to. In order to prove my point to you I would highlight within the very same verse the phrase "but is patient toward you." It is a mistake to pull this one verse out of the chapter and try to proclaim that the "any" in the passage if refering to every single person who has lived or will live. Again read all of chapter 3 and you will see that the entire chapter is speaking directly to the Christians Peter was writing to and hence they are the ones whom the Lord does not want to perish.

So it is a mistake to use this verse to refute calvinism - on the contrary it does just the opposite when read in the context of the entire chapter - particularly in the case of perseverence of the saints (eternal security). If you read down to verse 15 you will see that the "Lord's patience means salvation"! Basically the people Peter is writing to will attain it.

 

[chestertonrules]

Continuing on with responding to these scriptures...

If you look at the entirety of 2 Peter chapter 3 you will see that Peter is actually speaking to a specific group of people. The "not wishing for any to perish" that you have highlighted is specific to the people who Peter is writing to. In order to prove my point to you I would highlight within the very same verse the phrase "but is patient toward you." It is a mistake to pull this one verse out of the chapter and try to proclaim that the "any" in the passage if refering to every single person who has lived or will live. Again read all of chapter 3 and you will see that the entire chapter is speaking directly to the Christians Peter was writing to and hence they are the ones whom the Lord does not want to perish.

So it is a mistake to use this verse to refute calvinism - on the contrary it does just the opposite when read in the context of the entire chapter - particularly in the case of perseverence of the saints (eternal security). If you read down to verse 15 you will see that the "Lord's patience means salvation"! Basically the people Peter is writing to will attain it.

It is irrelevant who he is speaking to you.
Whether I am speaking to you alone or the Los Angeles Lakers when I say God doesn't want anyone to perish, the meaning doesn't change.


I know that you are closely tied to your dogma, but it is not biblical. You are distorting the crystal clear words of scripture.

 

[cygnusx1]

Thanks for repeating the same bible verse without context as you did earlier. I didn't miss it then either

Here's a good explanation. Better than I can state...
In Romans, particularly Chapter 9, Paul is explaining to the Jews how God could accept the Gentiles and reject part of the nation of Israel. This
was a hard concept for God's “Chosen People.” So Romans 9 is dealing primarily with the nation of Israel.

In the New American Standard Bible (NASB) the heading of Chapter 9 says "Solicitude for Israel." Merriam-Webster defines "Solicitude "as:

1 a : the state of being concerned and anxious b : attentive care and protectiveness; also : an attitude of earnest concern or attention
2 : a cause of care or concern -- usually used in plural

J. Vernon McGee's Thru The Bible says the theme of Romans Chapter 9 is: "Israel defined; Israel identified; the choice of Israel in the sovereign
purpose of God; the choice of Gentiles in the scriptural prophecies." McGee writes of the section of Romans containing Chapters 9 through 11 "it
deals with the eschatological, that is, the prophetic, section of the Bible that reveals God is not through with Israel.Now as we begin chapter 9,
notice that this has to do with God's past dealings with Israel. In chapter 10 we will see God's present dealings with Israel and, in chapter 11,
God's future dealings with Israel as a nation…”

What is being described is selection for "service" not "salvation." God was talking about forming clay (Israel) to be used to bring the Messiah into
the world.
Predestined for Free Will

seldom seen a post with so many mistakes.


Go read Romans 9 without the filters on , it's not Paul explaining why God saves Gentiles as well as Jews . Rather , it is , if The Jews are God's chosen people how can it be true , on what basis are some saved and many are lost ; that is the real question , Paul is finding the subject painful and the answer he gives
(unconditional election ) implies a logical objection , an objection where your derived understanding would make the expected question entirely unnecessary ........ "why does God still find fault seeing as none resist God's will " ? .


show , demonstrate , just how Paul's expected objection fits with your Arminianization of scripture.

 

[AndOne]

Is 55:7

Let the wicked forsake his way And the unrighteous man his thoughts; And let him return to the LORD, And He will have compassion on him, And to our God, For He will abundantly pardon.

In using this verse to disprove Calvinism one is merely making an assumption. Although there is a call to the wicked to forsake his way - there is nothing in all of Isaiah 55 which proves that man is indeed capable of doing so. The basic assumption that is being made is that just because the Lord calls the wicked to repent means that they are capable of doing so. Of course I realize one would say I'm making assumptions as well - but the difference is that I have other scriptures that back my claim - which is that man will never repent of his own free will. Specificaly Romans 3 that states that all man is wicked and foresakes the ways of God.

The onus is on the person who claims free-will to show where scripture plainly says that man is capable of repenting of his own volition. Calling for repentence doesn't mean that man is capable of doing it in and of himself. What it certainly does do is show that man is still accountable when he doesn't repent. Why? Because the reason no man will repent in and of himself is because it is not the desire of his heart. Never was - and never will be until the Holy Spirit changes it. One only need look back to my response to the Ezekial 33:11 passage to show that it is indeed God who changes the heart so that man is capable of repentence - see Eze 36 (since I'm posting rather sporadically here one is welcome to check out my blog on CF where these replies are being put together for easier access).

But let us read on in Isaiah 55 and see what verse 8 says. There God specifically says: 'For my thoughts are not your thoughts,
neither are your ways my ways,"
declares the LORD.

This statement was made right after the call to repentence. So there is nothing in all of chapter 55 that says man is capable of repenting - despite the call to repentence - and you have this verse in the text showing why. One cannot look at verse 8 and deduce that man is in and of himself capable of repentence. In fact there is no verse in the entire chapter that shows that.

So to conclude on this verse - in order to use this verse to disprove Calvinism one has to make an assumption that man is capable of repentence in and of himself. An assumption that is not based on the entirety of scripture.

 

[Hammster]

It is irrelevant who he is speaking to you.

Whether I am speaking to you alone or the Los Angeles Lakers when I say God doesn't want anyone to perish, the meaning doesn't change.





I know that you are closely tied to your dogma, but it is not biblical. You are distorting the crystal clear words of scripture.

Your Lakers analogy falls short. When Phil Jackson says that practice is tomorrow at 3, every NBA team doesn't show up because his message wasn't for them, but for his team.

Remember, the bible is written for us, not to us. That is why context is important so you don't end up thinking that all always means all people at all times.

 

[AndOne]

Your Lakers analogy falls short.

But I did like the fact he tried to use an NBA analogy to make his point. Even if it was the Lakers....

 

[Hammster]

But I did like the fact he tried to use an NBA analogy to make his point. Even if it was the Lakers....

He gets bonus points for using the Lakers.

 

[Albion]

No, because I was speaking from what my perception of Predestination.

Ah, I see. Would you agree that your perception of what Predestination amounts to is not as relevant as what Predestination actually is?

believe that God in His grace grants us a choice.

Many people I have met say the same thing to me and appear to me to take comfort in that concept of God's workings.

It seems to me that if we were Predestined, and God made the choice for us, from what He says, we would have to all be predestined for salvation, not just some of us. Seems like a mess to me.

I can't imagine how it is a mess if God makes all the decisions. What DOES seem a mess IMO is the contrary system believedin by some people that we are all on our own to save ourselves, having no particular way of knowing what it takes to succeed at it!

I have asked people who are adamant about their Free Will how many good deeds they need to perform. They don't know. I asked if it's at all troubling to them that they can losesalvation after a lifetime of living "right" if they slip up and commit a sin just before death (That would send them to Hell alongside people who defied God all their lives and didn't give a fig for anything religious). They said that they don't thinik about it--yet this is what their own church teaches.

 

[chestertonrules]

In using this verse to disprove Calvinism one is merely making an assumption. Although there is a call to the wicked to forsake his way - there is nothing in all of Isaiah 55 which proves that man is indeed capable of doing so.

So God is just taunting the wicked? Nice.

"Repent if you can, reprobates!!"

 

[chestertonrules]

He gets bonus points for using the Lakers.

I used the Lakers because they most need to repent! Go Rockets!

 

[Hammster]

So God is just taunting the wicked? Nice.



"Repent if you can, reprobates!!"

So do you believe that every command given by God has to be able to be obeyed, otherwise God isn't fair?

 

[chestertonrules]

So do you believe that every command given by God has to be able to be obeyed, otherwise God isn't fair?

No.

I'm saying that God would not give us instructions if it were impossible for us to obey.

With God, all things are possible. This includes the repentence of the wicked.

God WANTS the wicked to repent. He would not forbid it.


Why do you think God exhorts the wicked to repent?

 

[AndOne]

So God is just taunting the wicked? Nice.

"Repent if you can, reprobates!!"

Not what I said at all....

 

[chestertonrules]

Not what I said at all....

OK.

What did you mean by this:

Although there is a call to the wicked to forsake his way - there is nothing in all of Isaiah 55 which proves that man is indeed capable of doing so.

 

[AndOne]

It means what it says - it certainly doesn't mean "God is taunting the wicked." That is your interpretation - not mine. And I certainly didn't say it...

 

[chestertonrules]

It means what it says - it certainly doesn't mean "God is taunting the wicked." That is your interpretation - not mine. And I certainly didn't say it...

It means that all men are called by God to repentence, even the wicked.

Right?

 

[Hammster]

No.



I'm saying that God would not give us instructions if it were impossible for us to obey.



With God, all things are possible. This includes the repentence of the wicked.



God WANTS the wicked to repent. He would not forbid it.





Why do you think God exhorts the wicked to repent?

He wants the wicked to repent because He hates wickedness.

So any command God gives we must have the ability to obey, correct?