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.
I asked you precise question about seeming contradictions because that needs to be clear, I believe, to the one who wants to have good understanding of any issue in the Bible.
They seem like contradictions to you (or maybe not you but others) because you (or they) are not putting them in context. To me, they are in complete harmony with all the rest of scripture.
I have read them and they are not in total contradiction or any other kind of contradiction.
Please pick at least one of them and show why you believe this is so.
Please produce such scripture. The ones you provided in no way disprove the notion of predestination.
How so?
It isn't productive to simply say that something is a contradiction. You must show how it is.
Obviously God could do anything He wants to do.
He has chosen to use the preaching of the gospel to bring His elect to the Son.
If Hebrews 6:4-6 proved loss of salvation then it would also prove that it is impossible to bring those who have fallen away to repentance - the very thing we are told to strive to do elsewhere in the scriptures.
You need to apply your own standards to your interpretation of passages and not interpret a passage in such a way that it is an obvious contradiction to numerous other passages in the scriptures.
Exactly. Please do so.
Your scriptures don't show what you are aiming to show.
What's more - you seem to not understand the doctrine of predestination.
The Westminster Confession of Faith (the most accepted authority on the Calvinist view of such things) says very clearly in several places that predestination and the ordination of all things in no way infringes on the right and ability of men to make choices.
You make assumptions about the doctrine of predestination which the most authoritative sources of Reformed doctrine have disavowed repeatedly.
You argue against things you do not understand. That's very common here in the forum of course.
But please --- educate yourself so you don't misrepresent your brothers and sisters in the faith.
Don't teach haphazardly against what you are not up to speed on. There awaits for you a stricter judgment than there would be if you simply asked questions and listened attentively to people who are up to speed on the doctrines in question and the appropriate related scriptures.
We say that God, Himself, predestines everything rather than simply saying that everything is predestined because He Himself uses that terminology whenever He speaks of the predestination of a thing.My question would be - why does God need to predestine anything?
Will they not come to pass if He didn't predestine them?
Does God's omniscience depend upon predestination?
You say that they prove something. I have simply asked you to show me how so.It is clear now you are not open for discussion and are totally closed off and seemingly judgmental and condescending. I have place the scriptures before you, they do prove so, I have yet to see you yourself explain why they do not disprove. I thank you for your time.
We say that God, Himself, predestines everything rather than simply saying that everything is predestined because He Himself uses that terminology whenever He speaks of the predestination of a thing.
God was the only one or thing in existence when he foreknew what would surely come to past if He acted in certain ways. There is no such thing as fate or chance which could cause those destinies He foreknew to actually play out in history.
Therefore it was His action which caused what He knew as possibilities (if you will) to actually become the various destinies of His creation.
The simple and scripture only based answer to your question though is that nothing can happen that He Himself does not command or ordain to happen.
"My word be which goes forth from My mouth; It will not return to Me empty, Without accomplishing what I desire, And without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it." Isaiah 55:11
Speaking of His Word God says, "He is before all things, and in Him all things consist." Colossians 1:17
Because He is the source of all things.Thank you MK. However, I would still like to know WHY does God need to predestine everything?
If you will not continue in dialog - it is not as if it's something we haven't seen here time and time again.
You say that they prove something. I have simply asked you to show me how so.
I'm simply pointing out what you are doing and you obviously don't have an answer for it.
I have read the entire thread.I have in the past posts proved such. However, forgive me for assuming you saw or followed the entire thread.,,,,,,,,,,,Again, I did provide answers but it was directed toward others and I assumed you followed through the entire thread since you chimed in on the discussion with me.
The evidence I bring you:
Unconditional Election........................
Bible Responses................
Limited Atonement......
Bible Responses...............
Irresistible Grace............
Bible Responses...............
Perseverance of the Saints.................
Bible Responses.....................
I have read the entire thread.
Thank you for the scriptures.
The thread is on predestination not on unconditional election, irresistible grace, or perseverance of the saints.
It seems that I am correct about what you have been doing. You have referenced scriptures which may or may not address or refute these three things. But you have not referenced scriptures which address predestination.
It will not do to just try to show what you believe undermines 5-point Calvinism.
The so called 5-points of Calvinism do not mention predestination - the topic of this thread.
This is likely why you have been unable to connect with me on this subject or, from what I can see from the past, anyone else through the scriptures you have provided.
Obviously you aren't a 5-point Calvinist or any other kind of Calvinist. We can all see that.
Now - perhaps you could speak to the doctrine of predestination.
My apologies for my all too forceful presentation in the previous post.
Hopefully it won't seem belligerent if I tell you that you either don't understand the basis for the doctrine of predestination or you simply didn't realize what the subject of the thread was about and drifted into other areas.
By the way - the doctrine of predestination does not negate the doctrine of free will in any way. The confessions of the Calvinists make that clear in a number of places. In fact those same confessions reaffirm the honoring by God of the will of men.
I have to go now and I'll be gone for a few days to a wedding.
My apologies again for before.
Because He is the source of all things.
He alone has the power of being within Himself (the attribute of His "aseity").
What is said to have been predestined was so predestined before anything existed but God Himself.
The idea that we, for instance, predestined what would take place in our lives is tantamount to saying that something can come from nothing.
We could not logically create ourselves and we could not logically predestine those things which God knew were going to happen in history.
Since we are talking about about destinies, nothing can have a destiny except what God in some way provides. That is because their very being is in Him and the paradigm we exist in and make choices in have their being in Him as well.
By the way - if God had never used the term predestine - I would likely not use it either.
If God hadn't told us that He knew without doubt what would happen in the creation before there was a creation - I would not be saying that those things He so foreknew would come to past were destined to come to past.
As long as I'm on a rollI'll also say that God does nothing that He doesn't know the outcome of before He does it. If there is one thing that God is not it's unwise in that way.
God simply can't help (by His very nature) knowing everything before it happens. Everything He creates then has a destiny which He pre-knew before that thing existed
Also - God not only knew what the creation was going to do before there was one - He also knew what He was going to do.
Our lives (destinies) are inexorably linked to His innumerable actions, which in turn have resulted from His own willful choices.
The scriptures are filled with examples of the concurrent actions of God and men. But that's a deeper subject.
I come to this sub forum now and then and want to participate, but when I go over the threads and postings, I find argumentation against predestination lacking in a way that I don't even feel compelled to reply back, let alone argue on and on.
In other words, I don't find argumentation against predestination serious enough. Quite a few times it has a flavour of tamper tantrum, or being emotionaly driven one way or another. Sometimes it's just basic, off the hip, reaction against the idea that God not only has power to control things but that He actually does control things, that it depletes my motivation to answer back.
Is this the experience of others who believe in predestination? (I stay away to label myself as calvinist because I didn't read what he wrote, and my belief in predestination didn't originate from preaching but from reading the Bible.)
Anyway, I was thinking about that. I don't know if I am having a prejudice that skews my way of seeing things, or is there really a different quality of understanding God's word and reality between those who see predestination and those who don't see it. Of course, I am talking in general terms, an average of sorts, not about each and every individual who believes for and against predestination.
Interesting starting difference is that basically no one truly believes in predestination right away. Everybody starts by believing in free will, as I did too. Then, some start seeing what looks like predestined nature of our reality being revealed in the Bible. And then, some start seeing predestination all over the Bible.
On the other hand, I would say that most who believe in free will start with free will. Some do take predestination as fact early on if they are part of the church that teaches it, but if they just take it on surface they might retreat back to what is intuitive position, a free will position, which I suspect does happen much more often than conversion of someone who has seriously studied and believed in predestination but later moved to free will.
It seems there's no way around seeing a different level of understanding of positions between the two groups. Basically all who believe in predestination have also truly believed in free will at some point, while basically all or most who believe in free will have never truly believed in predestination. Thus first can talk with more authority about free will than second can talk about predestination.
I don't know if that's the reason why, or not, but, again, I don't feel challenged to actually participate in an argument for or against predestination, because what I see that other side brings is usually rather lacking.
Because destinies only exist in the unfathomable mind of God without God speaking them into what we would call actualities.My question would be - why does God need to predestine anything?
No - they will remain only possible destinies within the mind of God.Will they not come to pass if He didn't predestine them?
No - God's predestination depends on His omniscience.Does God's omniscience depend upon predestination?
Yes - Calvin was correct in this.Calvin defines predestination as “God’s eternal decree, by which he compacted with himself what he willed to become of each [person]. For … eternal life is foreordained for some, eternal damnation for others.” So predestination is an act of God’s will through which God elects or chooses those whom God calls to faith and thus to eternal life, and through which God chooses those who will not receive faith.
Those doctrines are certainly involved in the destinies of those relating to salvation.In other words, the 5-points Calvinists make, Unconditional Election = God chose from eternity to save certain people, not based upon any foreseen virtue, faith, or anticipated acceptance of the Gospel. God chose to extend mercy to those He has specifically chosen and to withhold mercy from those not chosen. Those chosen receive salvation through Christ alone. Those not chosen receive wrath and damnation.
It would be a mistake to call the things related to God's actions to bring salvation to the heart of the elect and pass others by with that gift - the only things God has predestined.It would be a mistake to say they are different.I fully understand this.
No they do not.It would be a mistake to say they are different.I fully understand this. The verses in scripture I provided refute that thought/idea.
Thank you.I hope you are safe and have a wonderful time.
Right on..........My argument would not be against predestination for the bible teaches God predestined a group and men must use their free will to choose to be in that group. Therefore predestination does not preclude free will. But my argument is against Calvinistic predestination that does create theological problems.
In logic, the Law of Contradiction can be stated as such "Nothing can both be and not be"
Is the same thing or person under consideration?
Is the same time period in view?
Is the language that seems to be self-contradictory employed in the same sense?
To give an example: Robert is rich. Robert is poor.
Do these statements contradict one another? The answer is — not necessarily.
#1-Could be two different Roberts are under consideration.
#2-Could be two different time frames. Robert could have been rich at one time but then fell upon financial ruin later.
#3-Could be that the terms rich and poor could have been used in different senses. Robert could be spiritually rich but economically poor.
Anyhow, I am trying to show you that I do in fact understand by using this example.
To apply it to the bible, a couple examples:
The Scriptures affirm that faith saves apart from works and on the other hand, the New Testament declares that faith apart form works cannot save. “Surely,” some contend, “this is a contradiction.”
The fact is, it is not, for different types of works are addressed in the Scriptures. Salvation involves works of obedience to the commands of Jesus Christ (James 2:14ff; Philippians 2:12), but pardon cannot be obtained by works of the Mosaic Law (Romans 3:28; 4:2ff) or by boastful works of human merit (Ephesians 2:9). There is no contradiction in the Bible on this point.
Like I said before, when you thought I didn't understand,
The next example is this,
If the Bible is to be understood, it is imperative that recognition be given to the different senses in which words may be employed. Normally, words are used literally, but they can be used figuratively as well.
In Matthew 11:14, John the Baptizer is identified as “Elijah.” Yet, the forerunner of Christ, in John 1:21, plainly denied that he was Elijah.
These verses are reconciled quite easily. Though John was not literally Elijah, physically reincarnated; nevertheless he was the spiritual antitype of the great prophet; he prepared the way for the Lord “in the spirit and power of Elijah” (Luke 1:17).
Did the apostle Paul contradict himself when he affirmed on one occasion that he was “as touching the righteousness which is in the law, found blameless” (Philippians 3:6), and yet, at another time, he acknowledged that he was “chief” of sinners (1 Timothy 1:15)?
Again, the answer must be “No.” In the former passage, Paul was describing the reputation he enjoyed among his Hebrew contemporaries as a Pharisee, while in the latter verse, he expressed the anguish he felt at having been a persecutor of the Christian Way.
I hope now you can answer my questions? Thanks in advance.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?