Problem with Election

[redleghunter]

Do you believe that the NASB has more authority than the Greek text?

@Radagast already showed above the NASB and many other versions get the Greek right.

 

[Radagast]

I showed from the text that Paul is referring to two groups.

No, you didn't. Paul refers to one group: Παῦλος ἀπόστολος Χριστοῦ Ἰησοῦ διὰ θελήματος θεοῦ τοῖς ἁγίοις τοῖς οὖσιν ἐν Ἐφέσῳ καὶ πιστοῖςἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ.

If there were two groups, there would be a τοῖς in front of πιστοῖςἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ (which would make it "and to the faithful in Christ Jesus").

As I pointed out, translators are agreed that there is only one group. It's not like the NASB is different from the ESV, CSB, NIV, etc.

 

[98cwitr]

Like I said, God created Lucifer, the light bearer. The anointed cherub that covers.

Lucifer became Satan, the enemy.


JLB

Has God been eternally aware (foreknowing) that this "conversion" of Lucifer to Satan (of sorts) would take place? Specifically prior to creating Lucifer?

 

[JLB777]

Has God been eternally aware (foreknowing) that this "conversion" of Lucifer to Satan (of sorts) would take place? Specifically prior to creating Lucifer?

Please post the scripture that pertains to your question.




JLB

 

[Dorothy Mae]

The logical conclusion of "Man makes choices and God makes choices based on what a man does." is that God does not know the future, that foreknowledge is excluded from the omniscience of God, neither could God's knowledge choices be in harmony with His attribute of immutability.

This is a wrong assumption. But rather than defending that, let us look at scripture.

Gen 18 "Then the Lord said, “The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous 21that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know.”"

Gen 22:12 "Do not lay a hand on the boy," he said. "Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son.""

These are clear descriptions of God seeking information. What can we learn from this? Do not assume you understand the foreknowledge of God such that you can build a case on it. Also, you see clearly here that God looks at man's choices and makes his own based on the man's choices. That is my position and it is born out in scripture.

"...we allow that man has choice and that it is self-determined, so that if he does anything evil, it should be imputed to him and to his own voluntary choosing. We do away with coercion and force, because this contradicts the nature of the will and cannot coexist with it. We deny that choice is free, because through man's innate wickedness it is of necessity driven to what is evil and cannot seek anything but evil. And from this it is possible to deduce what a great difference there is between necessity and coercion. For we do not say that man is dragged unwillingly into sinning, but that because his will is corrupt he is held captive under the yoke of sin and therefore of necessity will in an evil way. For where there is bondage, there is necessity. But it makes a great difference whether the bondage is voluntary or coerced. We locate the necessity to sin precisely in corruption of the will, from which follows that it is self-determined. - John Calvin from Bondage and Liberation of the Will, pg. 69-70

This was not God's opinion of man. It is, however, an example of intellectual suicide. Man is free but man is not free.

Chapter IX: Of Free Will

1. God hath endued the will of man with that natural liberty, that it is neither forced, nor, by any absolute necessity of nature, determined to good, or evil (Matthew 17:12; James 1:14; Deuturonomy 30:19; Isaiah 7:11-12†; John 5:40†; James 4:7†).

2.

Man, in his state of innocency, had freedom, and power to will and to do that which was good and well pleasing to God (Eccl 7:29; Genesis 1:26; Philippians 2:13‡; Colossians 3:10†); but yet, mutably, so that he might fall from it (Genesis 2:16-17; 3:6).

3. Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation (Romans 5:6; 8:7; John 6:44, 65†; 15:5): so as, a natural man, being altogether averse from that good (Romans 3:10, 12), and dead in sin (Ephesians 2:1, 5; Colossians 2:13), is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto (John 6:44, 65; 3:3, 5-6†; Ephesians 2:2-5; 1 Corinthians 2:14; Titus 3:3-5).

4. When God converts a sinner, and translates him into the state of grace, he freeth him from his natural bondage under sin (Colossians 1:13; John 8:34, 36; Romans 6:6-7†); and, by his grace alone, enables him freely to will and to do that which is spiritually good (Philippians 2:13; Romans 6:18, 22); yet so, as that by reason of his remaining corruption, he doth not perfectly, nor only, will that which is good, but doth also will that which is evil (Galatians 5:17; Romans 7:15, 18-19, 21, 23; 1 John 1:8†, 10).

5. The will of man is made perfectly and immutably free to good alone, in the state of glory only (Ephesians 4:13; Hebrews 12:23; 1 John 3:2; Jude 24; Revelation 21:27†).

—Westminster Confession of Faith (1643-49)

This is a good example of isolating individual scriptures to form a theology foreign to the writers of the Bible. To do this, verses need to be taken out of the context of the whole of the writers's thinking. It is also completely divorced from real life. It attributes nothing good to God and removes the responsibility of choice from man. It also condemns man accusing him of evil and we know who likes to take that job. Various verses that completely counter this are totally ignored. In any case, the author(s) made up this theology totally outside of a working relationship with God. There are no marks of love for God or man in any of this. Glad I never heard any of this when I was starting to walk with the Lord. I can see how believing this would really block a man from coming to know God. It directly attacks the character of God as well as man.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

For more confirmation, faith comes through HIM alone.
Every pure and perfect gift comes down from the Father.
Acts 3:16
And His name, through faith in His name, has made this man strong, whom you see and know. Yes, the faith which comes through Him has given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all.

James 1:16-17 New King James Version (NKJV)
16 Do not be deceived, my beloved brethren. 17 Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow of turning.

James is warning us not to be deceived about God's gifts to us.
Without Him you can do nothing.

You can also refuse to do anything despite him trying to help you. The gifts and callings of God can be refused or wasted.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

The mother obviously runs and stops the child. Anyone who believes God, to honor free will above the safety and security of Love, suggests that the mother lets the child run into the street and be killed. 1 cor 13 says that Love always protects and keeps no record of wrongs, and yet you claim that God loves those He chooses not to protect [from Hell] and keeps a record of their wrongs, condemning them to hell. You cannot reconcile free will with Scripture. At best, you simply must pick and choose which verses fit your narrative.

What do you think this is supposed to say? Does she do this the whole life of the child including when he is 40 and she is 70? What about other choices she thinks will do him harm? Does she lock him so he never makes a false choice?

What you have done is pick one example of a mother and a very small child and think the child never grows up and takes responsiblity for his life and choices but the loving mother is preventing the child from making any and all mistakes. I have heard grown children talk about mothers like that and it was anything but positive.

Now 1 Cor 13 is directed at who? God? Is Paul giving God a standard for behaviour? If not who? Man? Hummm, that fits the teaching of God. Because God toasted a few cities in his day. Promises to punish the guilty too when they stand before him and otherwise. So God is certainly keeping a record of wrongs by which unbelievers will be judged at least. Do you need a scripture for that?

Now I can find that free will and a loving God are the only perfectly fitting position. No free will is not loving. It is a prison. You can think all men are like little children if you want. YOu can think that God is making sure none of us hurt ourselves like the mother you describe if you want. But don't look into the news of the world. And as a matter of fact, better live alone and be self-employed. Avoid cars and street and public transportation. In face, better stay home all the time and you will miss all the times people are hurt or killed by accident where God does not "save them" like the senerio you suggest.

Now if you think there is no God because you realize that they things do happen, you need to read about the ways of God and how he set up the world. It involved free will and men being free to obey Him and love others or not. Makes perfect sense and combines free will and a very loving God. No problem at all and frankly, it is the only position that perfectly combines both.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

This is a wrong assumption. But rather than defending that, let us look at scripture.

These are clear descriptions of God seeking information. What can we learn from this? Do not assume you understand the foreknowledge of God such that you can build a case on it. Also, you see clearly here that God looks at man's choices and makes his own based on the man's choices. That is my position and it is born out in scripture.

This was not God's opinion of man. It is, however, an example of intellectual suicide. Man is free but man is not free.

This is a good example of isolating individual scriptures to form a theology foreign to the writers of the Bible. To do this, verses need to be taken out of the context of the whole of the writers's thinking. It is also completely divorced from real life. It attributes nothing good to God and removes the responsibility of choice from man. It also condemns man accusing him of evil and we know who likes to take that job. Various verses that completely counter this are totally ignored. In any case, the author(s) made up this theology totally outside of a working relationship with God. There are no marks of love for God or man in any of this. Glad I never heard any of this when I was starting to walk with the Lord. I can see how believing this would really block a man from coming to know God. It directly attacks the character of God as well as man.

Nothing but insults and opinion, lacking in substance, and validity. I see style in your writing, silver tongued wordsmith capable of tearing down with rhetoric, but sadly not using it for the glory of God. Lord have mercy!

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Nothing but insults and opinion, lacking in substance, and validity. I see style in your writing, silver tongued wordsmith capable of tearing down with rhetoric, but sadly not using it for the glory of God. Lord have mercy!

I presented you with scripture where God was looking for information. Why can't you answer those scriptures?

And where did I insult you? You did not write what Calvin did? You did not write the Westminster confession of faith in the 17th century. Why do you take offense when I merely evaluated the writing that you did not write? Is it because you do not have a defense and so you falsely claim I insulted you? Have you never faced the scriptures that show your thinking is wrong? If you think your theology is iron clad, you are very wrong.

In any case, I did not insult you. I evaluated the writings, all of them even ones you did not. Do you only like agreement?

For calling yourself an apologetic warrior you pretty quickly run away from a disagreement you did not expect. This was what I mean (for DKent) by names.

 

[DeaconDean]

I presented you with scripture where God was looking for information. Why can't you answer those scriptures?

I saw your two "proof texts".

Kinda rips the "omniscience of God" to shreads.

It also means that Isa. 46:9-10 lie!

Why would God need to "go see"? Kinda rips the belief that God is omnipresent.

It means that Jer. 23:23-24 and Psa. 139: 7-10 lie too.

What was it Desi Arnez said?

"Ay yi yi"

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

I presented you with scripture where God was looking for information. Why can't you answer those scriptures?

Why would I want to after your pages of insults? Why would I want to do a Bible study with you, knowing how you will reply? I do not read the Scriptures in isolation, among other things, it would require working through surrounding context (and greater context) and slowly going through the process of exposition. And this would be an unfruitful event with an Open View Theist. So, no thank you.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I saw your two "proof texts".

Kinda rips the "omniscience of God" to shreads.

It does not. But the matter is for grown-ups and not children in their understanding.

It also means that Isa. 46:9-10 lie!

If you don't provide the text or a link then my answer will be "no it does not" since there is nothing presented that shows this.

Why would God need to "go see"? Kinda rips the belief that God is omnipresent.

Again, it does not. But the understanding is for adults, not children.

It means that Jer. 23:23-24 and Psa. 139: 7-10 lie too.

Same as above. I am not doing your homework. So I will just say that no information presented here says that the Bible lies.

What was it Desi Arnez said?

"Ay yi yi"

God Bless

Does this date you?

By the way, I am not a bible writer. I just read it and believe it...all of it. I have been asking God for understanding for over 40 years but I am not very well versed in the labels men use nor the theology they made up when relationship with God was not present.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Why would I want to after your pages of insults? Why would I want to do a Bible study with you, knowing how you will reply? I do not read the Scriptures in isolation, among other things, it would require working through surrounding context (and greater context) and slowly going through the process of exposition. And this would be an unfruitful event with an Open View Theist. So, no thank you.

There are no insults there. You just imagine it. You quote the scripture in isolation. Stop doing that. How you read it we cannot judge except by how you quote it....isolated verses. Talk about whole chapters. I offered a single quote that is not changed by reading the text. They are direct quotes from what God said.

But if you do not want to talk to someone who does not agree with you, what can I do? I am sure there are those who are not very well educated in these matters who are easier for you to tackle. Since your post consisted mainly of what others wrote, I assume you are not used to doing your own defense and so I can see how this is a challenge. I do not generally quote what others write in a post besides the Bible. I think for myself.

 

[DeaconDean]

It does not. But the matter is for grown-ups and not children in their understanding.
If you don't provide the text or a link then my answer will be "no it does not" since there is nothing presented that shows this.
Again, it does not. But the understanding is for adults, not children.
Same as above. I am not doing your homework. So I will just say that no information presented here says that the Bible lies.
Does this date you?

Again, as I have said to countless others, your funny.

Can't look at the scriptures w/o somebody posting them for you.

Well, I'll say one thing, one was right when they said:

Why would I want to after your pages of insults?

Nothing but insults in your last post.

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

There are no insults there. You just imagine it. You quote the scripture in isolation. Stop doing that. How you read it we cannot judge except by how you quote it....isolated verses. Talk about whole chapters. I offered a single quote that is not changed by reading the text. They are direct quotes from what God said.

But if you do not want to talk to someone who does not agree with you, what can I do? I am sure there are those who are not very well educated in these matters who are easier for you to tackle. Since your post consisted mainly of what others wrote, I assume you are not used to doing your own defense and so I can see how this is a challenge. I do not generally quote what others write in a post besides the Bible. I think for myself.

Oh please, do you have amnesia? Collect your posts in this thread alone and read, and do try considering others in the process.

Proverbs 16:18 "Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall."

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Again, as I have said to countless others, your funny.

Ah yes, jeering at others is common for some teams.

Can't look at the scriptures w/o somebody posting them for you.

I find it a cowards way to simply put a chapter and verse with no thought as to how it deals with the matter. IT is like "so there" in response hoping the other does NOT look it up. And I know that nothing in the Bible lies.

Well, I'll say one thing, one was right when they said:

Nothing but insults in your last post.

Untrue. But the scriptures I post show that the position the other took is wrong. It is simply wrong.

God Bless

You write a nasty post and think saying "God bless" makes it OK??

Till all are one.

This does not make it better either
But no one can answer the scriptures I posted. That is the real problem. So instead of facing them, you falsely accuse me.

Oh well. I know exactly how those scriptures fit in with God knowing and seeing everything everywhere. I understand it as I understand Him. Sometimes I present a scripture and offer a bit of understanding to see who (if anyone) wants to understand it. Instead I get "you insult us" so they don't have to deal with the scripture that blows their theology out of the water. Focus on the messenger so the message can be ignored. I know that defense.

 

[DeaconDean]

Oh please, do you have amnesia? Collect your posts in this thread alone and read, and do try considering others in the process.

Proverbs 16:18 "Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall."

I agree.

But the matter is for grown-ups and not children in their understanding.

Insulting me calling me:

"children in their understanding".

Need I say more?

"Do not personally attack (insult, belittle, mock, ridicule) other members or groups of members on CF. Address only the content of the post and not the poster."

Link

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Oh please, do you have amnesia? Collect your posts in this thread alone and read, and do try considering others in the process.

Proverbs 16:18 "Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall."

And you accuse me of insulting. You ask me if I have amnesia as though something is wrong with my mind. And you think I am insulting you.

Jeremiah from memory: "Let him who boasts boast in this, that he understands and knows me. "

No man who tells the truth regarding his knowing God will face the warning in Proverbs 16:18 as this is the only boasting that God approves of.

AW, best move on to less informed posters. You are not doing your soul any good by insulting me.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I agree.

Insulting me calling me:

"children in their understanding".

This was not directed at you. Where do you think it was? There is no "you are a child" like "do you have amnesia" which was an insult. Paul wrote that the believers ought to desire the meat and not the milk. Was he insulting them?

There are matters of God that are for adults because the concepts are hard to understand. I did not mean you need to be an adult. I did not say "you" in the sentence. I mean anyone who wants to really know God is going to have do so with a grown-up adult mind. Do you think difficult matters of God are not for adults no matter who it is? You are reading an insult where there is none.

Need I say more?

"Do not personally attack (insult, belittle, mock, ridicule) other members or groups of members on CF. Address only the content of the post and not the poster."

Do you want to say that to the warrior who asked me if I have amnesia instead of me? Don't you think the gospels were all written by grown-up mature adults in their thinking?

 

[Dorothy Mae]

DD and AW, you completely misunderstand me and I notice that you refuse to deal with the scriptures that show God made choices that clearly indicate that he was looking for information in time. You attack me instead of dealing with these scriptures. Too bad because this is how adults learn. (Not an insult but stating a fact...this is how ALL adults learn.) One exchanges information and views with other adults. This is how I have also learned a lot on discussion sites, by considering those whose opinions are different than mine. But OK. We can move on. I will leave you two alone. I can only say you completely mistake my posts and I was at a loss as to where you saw the insult until you explained it DD and I thank you for doing so. I did not think saying that matters of understanding God is for adults is a personal insult. I just think I was saying an obvious truth.

AW, you are now on ignore so we can both move on. The more lofty the name, the less the poster lives up to it is my experience. AW, adieu.