Predestination

[Hammster]

Eph 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places,
Eph 1:4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love
Eph 1:5 he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will,
Eph 1:6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved.
Eph 1:7 In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace,
Eph 1:8 which he lavished upon us, in all wisdom and insight
Eph 1:9 making known to us the mystery of his will, according to his purpose, which he set forth in Christ
Eph 1:10 as a plan for the fullness of time, to unite all things in him, things in heaven and things on earth.
Eph 1:11 In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will,
Eph 1:12 so that we who were the first to hope in Christ might be to the praise of his glory.
Eph 1:13 In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit,
Eph 1:14 who is the guarantee of our inheritance until we acquire possession of it, to the praise of his glory.

Rom 8:28 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.
Rom 8:29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.
Rom 8:30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

1Pe 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who are elect exiles of the dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
1Pe 1:2 according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in the sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood: May grace and peace be multiplied to you.
1Pe 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to his great mercy, he has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
1Pe 1:4 to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you,
1Pe 1:5 who by God's power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

Joh 3:8 The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit."

1Co 1:22 For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom,
1Co 1:23 but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles,
1Co 1:24 but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.

 

[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?

No place has anyone suggested that God has no power over us. It's the exercise of that power to the detriment of our ability to choose that's at point of discussion

 

[Dorothea]

Show me.
[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']The Bible a "Personal Matter"[/FONT][FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']

Protestantism's Sola Scriptura insists that the interpretation of the Bible is a personal matter. This is a position that not only demands departure from what has been universally and consistently believed by Christianity since the time of Christ but which also directly contradicts the Bible itself: "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation" (2 Peter 1:20).

The "dogma" of Scripture alone was a product of the Protestant Reformation's opposition to abuses committed by the Western Church at Rome under Pope Leo X in the early sixteenth century. Because the criticisms lodged by Martin Luther failed to result in correction action, Protestant Reformers had no choice but to turn from organized religion and the Church's authority. This was a course that severed any and all reliance on apostolic teaching, the Church, and the Church Fathers.

There was another alternative to the split with Rome. Protestant Reformers could have returned to the church that had been established by the Lord Jesus Christ in the first century. Unfortunately, that avenue was not pursued and without any connection to the historical New Testament Church Protestantism was left at sea in an every-man-for-himself dilemma.

The Church is guided by the Holy Spirit into all truth (Jn. 14:26 & Jn 16:13), is the dwelling place of God in Spirit (Eph. 2:22), and is the pillar and ground of truth (1 Tim. 3:15). As such the Church serves as the keeper and protector of apostolic teaching (which, in part, involves written Scripture). This, to turn from the Church must also result in departing from what the Body of Christ has always believed, a replacing of that corporate belief with personal opinion. And in turn this undermines the authority of the bible because if one doesn't trust the tradition that produced it, one can hardly trust the Bible.

The collection of the books of the New Testament scriptures into a book was the church's and the Church Fathers' fourth-century response to rising false teachings that claimed apostolic authority.

One of the many insurmountable problems within Protestantism involves the quandary resulting from the claim that the Holy Spirit provides each believer with an accurate interpretation of Scripture (the foundation of Sola Scriptura). Yet there are countless contradictory understandings of the same verses. For instance think of the controversy over infant baptism, over the various views of creation and evolution, or how to interpret biblical teachings on the so-called End Times.

The Bible says that "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever" (Heb. 13:8), so for there to be even two valid interpretations of Scripture is impossible.

Another strange consequence of Sola Scriptura is the disregard of some Bible passages in favor of others. This is particularly alarming because the precept of Sola Scriptura includes the contention that Scripture is the binding, sole authority yet there exists many departures from clear biblical verses. Take by way of example:

* Protestant denominations generally do not accept that our Lord Jesus Christ conferred upon His disciples the power to forgive sins. The Savior said: "If you forgive the sins of any they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained" (Jn. 20:23). And Christ Jeus also stated that "I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you gind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth, will be loosed in heaven" (Mt. 16:19; see also Mt. 18:180.

*Most of Protestantism insists that the Eucharistic bread and wine are not the actually Body and Blood of Christ, finding them instead to be a symbolic remembrance of all Jesus Christ ad accomplished on the cross. But in the bible we see that the Lord says, "This is My body...this is My blood" (Mt. 26;26, 28). Christ Jesus also instructs that: "Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life...for My flesh is food indeed and My blood is drink indeed: (Jn. 6:53-55).[/FONT]
[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif'][/FONT]
[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif'][FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']*Protestants proclaim that upon belief in Christ a salvation attaches to a person that cannot be lost. This "eternal security" theory misconstrues verses such as "I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present nor things yet to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Rom. 8:38-39) and "I gave them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand" (Jn. 10:28).

* As a companion to, or a by-product of, the eternal security philosophy there exists the mistaken view of "the just shall live by faith" (Rom. 1:17), to which Martin Luther added "alone" in order to imply that man is saved by faith alone. The book of James rebuts that proposition: "Faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead" (James 2:17) and again, "Faith without works is dead" (James 2:20).

Of special interest, when contemplating how Protestants both support Sola Scriptura and contradict some Bible verses, is with the precept of Scripture alone. For instance: "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped by every good work" (2 Tim. 3:16-17).

St. Paul was obviously referring to the Old Testament. This means that if interpreted as Protestants do, as an invalidation of anything other than Scripture, then not only would Holy Tradition (the Church, oral apostolic teachings, etc.) have to be done away with but the New Testament would also have to be discarded because it had not been written when St. Paul authored this passage.

Additionally, in the same chapter (2 Tim. 3:8) we find an example of oral tradition. The names of Jannes and Jambres, the two magicians who opposed Moses in Exodus (chapters seven and eight), are listed, and that the names of these two magicians do not appear in Exodus but were known to Apostle Paul demonstrates a use of, and validates as genuine, oral tradition. Consequently, 2 Tim. 3:16-17 does not serve as a passage that establishes a "Scripture only" rule but rather authenticates the Bible as a legitimate component of Holy Tradition.

Scripture unequivocally condemns a fractured spiritual state: "Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment" (1 Cor. 1:10). Verses 1 Cor. 11:18 and 1 Cor. 12:25 provide similar exhortation as does St. Clement, "the abominable and unholy schism," and St. Ignatius, "if anyone follows a maker of schism he will not inherit the kingdom of God."

Other consequences of biblical self-interpretation include acceptance of Jesus Christ as Savior and then going on to ignore the authorities He established over us: "Obey those who rule over you, and be submissive" (Heb. 13:17) and "Submit yourselves to your elders" (1 Pet. 5:5). In addition to disregarding Church authorities there is the previously treated abandonment of Holy Tradition's other three strands. That is to say, self-interpretation deviates from what has been believed for two thousand years; from the interpretation of apostles, "according to the glorious gospel of the blesssed God which was committed to my trust" (1 Tim. 1:11), and Church Fathers, "I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you" (1 Cor. 11:23) and "I delivered to you first of all that which I also received" (1 Cor. 15:3). The interpretation and teaching by apostles and Church Fathers has, through Sola Scriptura, been replaced by the fallen human intellect of modern man, assuredly a transgression of the instruction to "keep the traditions just as I delivered them to you" (1 Cor. 11:2).

The first century faithful possessed no New Testament Scripture yet still accuractly lived the apostolic faith. We observe a deviation from Scripture because rather than insisting that the Bible is the sole guide for Christian living we find in Scripture that faithful believers are an example of the life in Christ:

* Brethren, join in following my example, and not those who so walk, as you have us for a pattern" (Phil. 3:17)
* "Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ" (1 Cor. 11:1)
* "Be an example to the believers" (1 Tim. 4:12)--also 1 Pet 5:3 "being examples to the flock.

Protestantism insists on a Scripture-only path, condemns as "man-made" and extraneous first and second century Church Father's writings, and then goes on to draft modern books after "authoritative" book on "Christian life" and "Bible interpretation." This is a far cry from the just-read-the-Bible mantra. Not only is there an inconsistency here but it is also incredibly arrogant to set oneself up as the expert and authority in lieu of the apostles and Church Fathers.[/FONT]
[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif'] [/FONT]
**from the book "West of Jesus" by Anthony (Protestant convert to EO) that I am currently reading and finishing up. But most is already known to an EO through reading the Bible, teachings of the Church, and from our spiritual fathers. [/FONT]

Never seen it in scripture, especially the way the RCC does it (not sure how the EO does it).

"Now on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread...." (Acts 20:7)

don't know what that is. Where is it in scripture so I can look it up?

Chrismation = the receiving and sealing of the Holy Spirit.

I don't hold to a pretrib rapture, and know a lot of reformed folks that don't, either.

That's good to know, Hammster.

Boy, talk about traditions of men, and getting it WAY wrong.

And how did you come about acquiring all of this knowledge?

I'll get you the info on the Eucharist in my next post. As far as your last question, by reading the bible, attending Church, talking with my priest and bishop.

 

[Montalban]

How do you respond to Ephesians 1:4-5?
Question: Ephesians 1 refers to believers as predestined before the foundation of the world. How do you reconcile this with your view that free actions of people (like choosing to believe in Christ) can’t be predestined or even foreknown ahead of time?

Answer: It took three hundred years before anyone in Church history interpreted the New Testament to teach that God individually predestines certain people to go to heaven, and “leaves” (viz. a nice way of saying “predestines&#8221 all others to go to hell. Augustine’s interpretation decisively influenced Church history, and was followed by the early Protestant Reformers and those who continued in the Reformed tradition. The fact that you have trouble reading the verses you mention in a non-Calvinist way testifies to how influential this tradition continues to be in terms of how we (as opposed to the pre-Augustinian church) read the Bible.

As you mention in your question, one of the texts most frequently appealed to in support of this view is Ephesians 1.

He chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world to be holy and blameless before him in love. He destined us for adoption as his children through Jesus Christ, according to the good pleasure of his will…. (Eph. 1:4–5)

In keeping with the Jewish practice of his day, I think Paul was speaking of a corporate election in this passage. When Jews thought of election or predestination, they thought primarily of the nation of Israel. Israel as a nation was elected (not for salvation, but for service). But this didn’t mean that every individual born into Israel was part of God’s chosen people. Only those who kept covenant with God were considered “true Israelites.”

Notice that Paul doesn’t say that God chose us to be in Christ. He rather says God chose us in Christ to be holy and blameless. What God chose from the foundation of the world was that whoever is in Christ will be holy and blameless.

Suppose I conduct a conference at which I show a movie clip from The Princess Bride. You choose at the last moment to attend this conference. At the end of the movie clip you raise your hand and ask, “Mr. Boyd, when did you decide that we’d have to watch that silly movie clip,” to which I might respond, “Well, I decide that six months ago.” You then turn around and say, quite accurately, to the whole conference, “Mr. Boyd predestined us to watch this movie clip six months ago.”

But notice, I didn’t predestine that you individually would watch this movie clip. What I predestined is that whoever shows up at this conference would watch this movie clip. Now that you decided (even at the last minute) to be part of this conference, what was predestined for the whole becomes predestined for you. You are part of the “us” who was predestined to watch the clip.

So too, from the foundation of the world God predestined that whoever is in Christ would become holy and blameless in his sight. But he didn’t predestine certain individuals — as opposed to other unfortunate individuals — to be in Christ. This is left up to our choice. Now that you’ve chosen to be in Christ, what was predestined for the group becomes predestined for you. You, with Paul, can say “In Christ WE (who have chosen to believe) were predestined to be holy and blameless…”

I’m convinced this is what Paul is communicating in this passage.
How do you respond to Ephesians 1:4-5? » Defending Free Will » New Testament » Open Theism » Responding to Objections » Greg Boyd (Christus Victor Ministries)

 

[Montalban]

Dorothea,
The really odd thing about the pro-predestination camp is the insistence that reading the Bible is a 'personal matter', but there's nothing 'personal' about a person who's been compelled to be saved, and what would be the point in reading the Bible anyway, nothing about reading it would make a person more, or less saved.

 

[Dorothea]

oops.

 

[Dorothea]

sorry, computer issues.

 

[Dorothea]

Hmmm...some difficulties getting my last post to come through...in fact lost it with some jam ups in this website. Anyhow, I'll try again:

Some info on the Eucharist (just a bit):

The difficulty of grasping the concept of eating Jesus Christ's actual Body and of drinking His literal Blood is acknowled in Scripture: "Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this, said, 'This is a hard saying; who can understand it?...' From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more" (Jn. 6:60, 66). Nevertheless, the Bible confirms that Holy Communion is the real Body and Blood of our Savior and goes on to say that if anyone sees the Eucharistic elements as merely symbolic, punishment will result: "Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the convenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace" (Heb. 10:29).

The Eucharist is not optional. We are unequivocally commanded to partake of it:

"If anyone eats of this bread he will live forever" (Jn. 6:51).

"Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you" (Jn. 6:53).

"Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life (Jn. 6:54)...as well as by "do this in remembrance of Me" (Lk. 22:19 ; 1 Cor. 11:24), and "This do" (1 Cor. 11:25).

...the discussion on the utilization of Eucharist as only a form of remembrance. The Greek construct of the type of "remembrance" in these verses is anamnesis and this encompasses far more than merely some passive mental recollection of an historical event. What is involved in anamnesis includes active participation in Jesus Christ. To more fully understand what this means, we must turn briefly to the concept of deification.

Theosis (Deification) is the process of our becoming more like God. This is a movement of the soul toward God that Apostle Peter describes as "that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature" (2 Peter 1:4).

In other words, just as we participate initially in God's divine energy at baptism and Chrismation through God the Holy Spirit, we also actively participate in His divine energy, and become more like Him, via Holy Communion. This is the "remembrance" indicated in "do this in remembrance of Me" (Lk. 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24).

~~"West of Jesus"


I saw your many scriptures quote that you believe support your own interpretations. But, as St. Peter said, nobody is to have private interpretation or prophecy of the Scriptures. It is through the teachings of the Apostles and their successors that teach what the meanings of the verses in the Bible meant and mean. So, the bible in its entirety was already translated and interpreted by the Church Fathers (successors many of the Apostles, i.e. the bishops assigned by the Apostles and their students under them) eons ago. So we already know what they verses mean. any newer interpretations are of one's own beliefs of what the Bible is saying.

 

[Dorothea]

Hmmm...some difficulties getting my last post to come through...in fact lost it with some jam ups in this website. Anyhow, I'll try again:

Some info on the Eucharist (just a bit):

The difficulty of grasping the concept of eating Jesus Christ's actual Body and of drinking His literal Blood is acknowled in Scripture: "Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this, said, 'This is a hard saying; who can understand it?...' From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more" (Jn. 6:60, 66). Nevertheless, the Bible confirms that Holy Communion is the real Body and Blood of our Savior and goes on to say that if anyone sees the Eucharistic elements as merely symbolic, punishment will result: "Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the convenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace" (Heb. 10:29).

The Eucharist is not optional. We are unequivocally commanded to partake of it:

"If anyone eats of this bread he will live forever" (Jn. 6:51).

"Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you" (Jn. 6:53).

"Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life (Jn. 6:54)...as well as by "do this in remembrance of Me" (Lk. 22:19 ; 1 Cor. 11:24), and "This do" (1 Cor. 11:25).

...the discussion on the utilization of Eucharist as only a form of remembrance. The Greek construct of the type of "remembrance" in these verses is anamnesis and this encompasses far more than merely some passive mental recollection of an historical event. What is involved in anamnesis includes active participation in Jesus Christ. To more fully understand what this means, we must turn briefly to the concept of deification.

Theosis (Deification) is the process of our becoming more like God. This is a movement of the soul toward God that Apostle Peter describes as "that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature" (2 Peter 1:4).

In other words, just as we participate initially in God's divine energy at baptism and Chrismation through God the Holy Spirit, we also actively participate in His divine energy, and become more like Him, via Holy Communion. This is the "remembrance" indicated in "do this in remembrance of Me" (Lk. 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24).

~~"West of Jesus"


I saw your many scriptures quote that you believe support your own interpretations. But, as St. Peter said, nobody is to have private interpretation or prophecy of the Scriptures. It is through the teachings of the Apostles and their successors that teach what the meanings of the verses in the Bible meant and mean. So, the bible in its entirety was already translated and interpreted by the Church Fathers (successors many of the Apostles, i.e. the bishops assigned by the Apostles and their students under them) eons ago. So we already know what they verses mean. any newer interpretations are of one's own beliefs of what the Bible is saying.

 

[Hammster]

You still haven't responded to these verses:


Eze 33:11

Say to them, 'As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways!

Behe's Boy already addressed this (he asked if he could step in, and since I was running behind today, I said sure). But I am not sure what you think it says that somehow refutes Calvinism.

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.

Peter says the the Lord is patient towards who? Who is he writing to? He is addressing a specific problem in the church concerning those who say Christ isn't returning because it has been so long. Does it say he is patient towards everyone? No. All will come to repentance. All, that is, whom He is patient towards.

To be fair, there is another line of thinking on this from the reformed view, but I am still looking at that one, and am not yet convinced.

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.

Wow. Not sure how this is supposed to destroy the reformed view, either. Isn't this basically the same thing Jesus said when He said "Repent"?

1 Tim 2

3This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.

If this means what you think it means, are you saying that God is in heaven wringing His hands, hoping upon hope that someone takes Him up on His offer? Could God not just save everyone if He wanted to? Have you not said that Christ died for the sins of every person who ever lived? If so, then God could just save everyone.

Matt 23

37"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing.

Just goes to show you what free will leads to. But was all of Jerusalem discarded? Nope.

But on this one, as well, there are a few views from the reformed folk. But all of these verses have been dealt with for hundreds upon hundreds of years. You haven't stumbled onto something new.

 

[Livindesert]

Dorothea,
The really odd thing about the pro-predestination camp is the insistence that reading the Bible is a 'personal matter', but there's nothing 'personal' about a person who's been compelled to be saved, and what would be the point in reading the Bible anyway, nothing about reading it would make a person more, or less saved.

You forget "ultimate truth" everything is predestined by God. Temporal truth we have no idea what is going to happen next so we act as if we have free will.

 

[Dorothea]

Dorothea,
The really odd thing about the pro-predestination camp is the insistence that reading the Bible is a 'personal matter', but there's nothing 'personal' about a person who's been compelled to be saved, and what would be the point in reading the Bible anyway, nothing about reading it would make a person more, or less saved.

Yes, well, that doesn't make sense to me either.

 

[Hammster]

Dorothea,
The really odd thing about the pro-predestination camp is the insistence that reading the Bible is a 'personal matter', but there's nothing 'personal' about a person who's been compelled to be saved, and what would be the point in reading the Bible anyway, nothing about reading it would make a person more, or less saved.

We love God and all He says. We are pro-God.

 

[Hammster]

Yes, well, that doesn't make sense to me either.

Where does Peter say we can't interpret scripture for ourselves?

 

[Dorothea]

We love God and all He says. We are pro-God.

No doubt, Hammster. I see the love of God through your posts. I believe everyone here loves God, or we wouldn't be constantly talking about Him in here, for sure.

 

[Dorothea]

Where does Peter say we can't interpret scripture for ourselves?

I posted a bunch of info on that subject. You can go back and read it when you have time.

 

[Dorothea]

I will be honest here and say that I normally don't engage with EO for the very reasons we see here. They have a different view on scripture, and who can interpret it. So it is almost like we are using different playbooks, to borrow a sports analogy. And when things get going, they go to the old dead guys for support, and criticize us for using THE VERY WORDS OF GOD.

lol Everything we believe is through Scripture. Even the traditions handed down by Paul by word or epistle, as he said. God bless.

 

[chestertonrules]

Behe's Boy already addressed this (he asked if he could step in, and since I was running behind today, I said sure). But I am not sure what you think it says that somehow refutes Calvinism.

It refutes Calvinism because it makes it clear that God wants the wicked to repent, but he doesn't force them to. It is their response to God's grace that separates them from those who do not repent. It is not God's will that any wicked men fail to repent.

Peter says the the Lord is patient towards who? Who is he writing to? He is addressing a specific problem in the church concerning those who say Christ isn't returning because it has been so long. Does it say he is patient towards everyone? No. All will come to repentance. All, that is, whom He is patient towards.

He doesn't want any to perish. How much more clear could he be? You are reading it without a tarnished lens.

Wow. Not sure how this is supposed to destroy the reformed view, either. Isn't this basically the same thing Jesus said when He said "Repent"?

If this means what you think it means, are you saying that God is in heaven wringing His hands, hoping upon hope that someone takes Him up on His offer? Could God not just save everyone if He wanted to? Have you not said that Christ died for the sins of every person who ever lived? If so, then God could just save everyone.

God wants all men to repent, but he doesn't force us to repent. That's exactly what the passage says even though it doesn't fit your dogma.

God wants us to love him. Love must be voluntary. Note that God will abundantly pardon AFTER we have turned to him. He calls, then we choose to accept or reject his call.

Just goes to show you what free will leads to. But was all of Jerusalem discarded? Nope.

It shows that even though Jesus wills to gather up his children, their wills can prevent this from happening.

But on this one, as well, there are a few views from the reformed folk. But all of these verses have been dealt with for hundreds upon hundreds of years. You haven't stumbled onto something new.

And yet you've done nothing but ignore the passages.

If it is so easy to conform these passages to Calvinism, why can't you do it?

 

[Albion]

God's love and mercy are denied by the gloomy Freewill POV. We should be eternally grateful that God is in charge of all things including his choice of his elect. Man-centered religion isn't able to see that, unfortunately, and still thinks that we save ourselves--or to be more exact, beleives that we are left to stumble around trying to do so!

 

[laconicstudent]

And when things get going, they go to the old dead guys for support,

Why can't one use the theology and apologetics of the Church Fathers? Are they somehow inferior to modern evangelists?

and criticize us for using THE VERY WORDS OF GOD.

I have never seen that. I have, however, seen them criticize people for interpreting verses in ways they disagree with, which is the entire point of the theology forum and something Protestants do all the time when Orthodox cite the very Words of God that support venerating icons, so I really don't see why you would get upset over the issue.