| Author |
Message |
    
mercyreigns (mercyreigns)
Member
Username: mercyreigns
Post Number: 70
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 65.8.153.217
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - 2:05 am: | 
|
I found this web site and article regarding election that seemed very clear to me. Since the only doctrine I ever was taught on election being that Christ is the only elect one I believed what I was taught.
Now the more I study the more I sense a cheapening of Grace as taught by gg and some others.
Please if anyone has the time to read this article I would so love to hear comments. Thank you so very much.
http://www.abideinchrist.com/keys/election.html
blessings,
nancy |
hodeuon (hodeuon)
Intermediate Member
Username: hodeuon
Post Number: 449
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 66.160.68.34
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - 8:13 am: |
|
The article is written from a Calvinist perspective, and it is one of the better explanations of the Calvinist view of election that I have seen. Actually, I suspect it is four-point Calvinism rather than five-point Calvinism - "God does not save or damn anyone against his will." - under the fifth bold heading
The section on free will, following the fifth bold heading, is very well done.
The section on election in Christ, following the sixth bold heading, is somewhat unusual to find in Calvinist theology, in my experience. I think that incorporating it really strengthens the overall position.
I disagree with the section following the ninth bold heading, foreknowledge. The basic meaning of proginosko is indeed "to know ahead of time". Hippocrates (the Greek doctor for whom the Hippocratic Oath is named) used the word to describe what would happen to patients over the course of their illness. This is where we get our English word prognosis. Also, anyone who takes this position - and there are a lot of people who do - really ought to deal with 1 Peter 1:1-2, "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To the pilgrims of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace be multiplied." The question is, foreknowledge of what? This article rejects foreknowledge of man's works - and rightly so - without mentioning that there are at least two other alternatives as to what the foreknowledge is of. It then quotes Bass in support, but Bass is actually arguing against foreknowledge of faith, one of the other views.
A second concern I have in this section is the first part of this statement: “God’s knowledge cannot be separated from His will, and His will cannot be conditioned by prior knowledge of an event.” None of God’s attributes should be separated from the others. God is love. God is also just. But in the system that this article lays out, I believe that God’s will overwhelms His other attributes.
I do agree with you, Nancy, that there was a cheapening of grace at GG. The system that this article lays out makes it somewhat more difficult for “cheap grace” to arise, but not impossible. If views on election were placed on an east-west axis, there are positions along the spectrum between GG and this article, and also positions “east” than GG and further “west” than this article. Unfortunately our old man has the ingenuity to take any position on election and stray “north” into legalism or “south” into cheap grace.
Hodeuon |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 318
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 69.148.59.74
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - 9:59 am: |
|
Nancy,
Predestination and foreknowledge is not the same thing. In Romans, God does not foreknow events--he foreknows people. Arminians and current day evangelicals like to say that because God foreknows how you will decide, he then predestines you--this is not biblical because it makes man's will the determining factor in salvation--thereby removing grace altogether. To know beforehand in this sense is to love beforehand--not that God just has seen the end of the movie therefore he knows what's going to happen. He directs the film.
This is a Calvinist and Anglican presentation of election that I find very helpful--from the 39 Articles of Religion:
XVII. Of Predestination and Election.
Predestination to Life is the everlasting purpose of God, whereby (before the foundations of the world were laid) he hath constantly decreed by his counsel secret to us, to deliver from curse and damnation those whom he hath chosen in Christ out of mankind, and to bring them by Christ to everlasting salvation, as vessels made to honour. Wherefore, they which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God, be called according to God's purpose by his Spirit working in due season: they through Grace obey the calling: they be justified freely: they be made sons of God by adoption: they be made like the image of his only-begotten Son Jesus Christ: they walk religiously in good works, and at length, by God's mercy, they attain to everlasting felicity.
As the godly consideration of Predestination, and our Election in Christ, is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort to godly persons, and such as feel in themselves the working of the Spirit of Christ, mortifying the works of the flesh, and their earthly members, and drawing up their mind to high and heavenly things, as well because it doth greatly establish and confirm their faith of eternal Salvation to be enjoyed through Christ as because it doth fervently kindle their love towards God: So, for curious and carnal persons, lacking the Spirit of Christ, to have continually before their eyes the sentence of God's Predestination, is a most dangerous downfall, whereby the Devil doth thrust them either into desperation, or into wretchlessness of most unclean living, no less perilous than desperation.
Furthermore, we must receive God's promises in such wise, as they be generally set forth to us in Holy Scripture: and, in our doings, that Will of God is to be followed, which we have expressly declared unto us in the Word of God.
The Westminster Confession provides further perspective. |
hodeuon (hodeuon)
Intermediate Member
Username: hodeuon
Post Number: 453
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 66.160.68.34
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - 11:33 am: |
|
"In Romans, God does not foreknow events--he foreknows people."
I agree wholeheartedly.
Hodeuon |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
New member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 1
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.245.235
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - 1:00 pm: |
|
I Also agree that God forknows people.
Psalms 139:13-17, Jeremiah 1:5, 2 Timothy 1:9, Galatians 1:15, Ephesians 1:4,11. |
duncwashburn (duncwashburn)
Junior Member
Username: duncwashburn
Post Number: 40
Registered: 5-2005
Posted From: 71.192.133.244
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - 1:40 pm: |
|
What about prophecy? Can that not be foreknowing of events? What about all the events surrounding the coming of Jesus that were fortold? Did not God pick the timing of the coming of Jesus because He foreknew situations?
Inquiring minds want to know!!! |
hodeuon (hodeuon)
Intermediate Member
Username: hodeuon
Post Number: 454
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 66.160.68.34
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - 1:53 pm: |
|
Sure, we're just saying that election isn't based on foreknowledge of a person's works or foreknowledge of a person's faith but on foreknowledge of the person himself/herself. God certainly foreknows the events, too. They're just not the basis of why He saves us.
I do have to quibble sometime with Jim's statement that to know before is to love beforehand.
Hodeuon |
mercyreigns (mercyreigns)
Advanced Member
Username: mercyreigns
Post Number: 646
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 65.8.153.217
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - 3:43 pm: |
|
thank you all for your comments. I appreciate them very much. I am still a bit confused about our free will and God's will concerning salvation.
I know that I am saved because of personal experience but when I share the Gospel with another I want to be sure not to confuse them. To ask someone to say a simple sinner's prayers does not save them, so can anyone comment on how you personally communicate the True Gospel to another?
Eternal security can only come when someone has a personal experience with God, truly transformed in their mind and heart. So how much is our free will choice involved when someone shares the Gospel and how much is God's will involved?
God doesn't condemn anyone to hell, we condemn ourselves? by our free will or His will? Predestination as I understand it is based upon God's foreknowledge of each person's acceptance or rejection of Him. If this is indeed true then why are we commanded to share the Good News with others?
I am honestly asking these questions not to incite anyone but to truly understand. Remember all my Christian teaching for 20 years was under CHS only.
Thanks for your help.
Nancy |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 312
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 69.148.59.74
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 18, 2006 - 5:09 pm: |
|
Nancy,
Do not, as many folks do, equate free will with ability--e.g. I am free to try to be like Tim Duncan of the World Champion San Antonio Spurs. But I am a 53 year old white guy with an arthritic hip.
We are free to do as we please--the problem is not the freedom but with what pleases us. We are desperately wicked and we love sin. That is why regeneration is miraculous--the Holy Spirit draws us against what we would naturally choose towards the Lord Jesus Christ. |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
New member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 13
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 141.157.17.161
| | Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 2:02 pm: |
|
Gods desire is that evey man would come to repentance and no He condemns no one to hell, man does that through his own free will of rejecting Christ.
I also don't believe he set us here and chose who He wanted. I remember studying a verse way back in reference to Him choosing the elect, but I think the word actually ment that He didn't choose them but forknew who would chose Him. |
hbjgrace (hbjgrace)
Junior Member
Username: hbjgrace
Post Number: 26
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 68.73.64.137
| | Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 2:13 pm: |
|
When I think of election i think of pharaoh. He could have chosen God, because God knew his heart he hardened it. Judas was chosen to forsake christ. Did he repent? I don't know. God knowing our hearts and election tied together? |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
New member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 15
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.165.4
| | Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 5:04 pm: |
|
Again there's the word chosen, was Judas chosen, or did God foreknow that Judas would forsake Him?
(Message edited by pressing_on1 on January 19, 2006) |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 314
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 69.148.59.74
| | Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 5:53 pm: |
|
I remember studying a verse way back in reference to Him choosing the elect, but I think the word actually ment that He didn't choose them but forknew who would chose Him.
Here's one verse:
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.
The verse does not say he foreknew that we would choose. It says he foreknew and then predestined. The verse says nothing about your choice. If you could choose God, why not just choose to obey his commandments perfectly? Freedom of will is not the issue, ability is the issue. If you were able as an unregenerate to choose God, why in the world would you need a Savior and why would you need to be regenerated?
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...
Many will want to muddle this verse. It has nothing to do with our will or our ability. It has everything to do with the Lord's predestination of us. These verses are never comfortable--but that does not make them unclear. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 315
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 69.148.59.74
| | Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 6:01 pm: |
|
Did God foreknow that Judas would betray Christ?
Have a look at Ps.41:9 and Zech.11:12.
That ought to suffice. |
orangetwopay (orangetwopay)
Intermediate Member
Username: orangetwopay
Post Number: 257
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 68.251.33.161
| | Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 7:19 pm: |
|
Since we're asking for comments, I'd like people's comments on this little video we are hosting on LW... This is what America thinks of Christians... what do you think of that?
http://liquidwaves.blogspot.com/2006/01/gorgons-slikicks-in-jesus-name-i-pray.html |
mercyreigns (mercyreigns)
Advanced Member
Username: mercyreigns
Post Number: 647
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 65.8.153.217
| | Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 8:49 pm: |
|
I am finding all comments very interesting. I do have a question again for all that wish to answer and if you could use Bible references I would so appreciate it.
First: If we are predestined due to God's foreknowledge or simply saved by His will, why the great commission? and soul winning?
Second: How do you personally (those of you who would answer) share the Gospel with another? Confrontation evangelism seems to be what is taught in Acts. But how did Acts Christians confront people? Graciously? Authoratatively? I am really feeling as if I need to be taught all over again. And 2 Cor 8:2 says we will never know anything as we ought anyway.
I am so appreciating all your input. Thanks so much.
Nancy |
hbjgrace (hbjgrace)
Member
Username: hbjgrace
Post Number: 52
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 68.73.70.102
| | Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 9:01 pm: |
|
the bible says he is not willing that one should die.2 pet 3:9 Sharing the gospel is different in each circumstance. The first time I witnessed to someone by my self was at the age of seven. I simply told my friend that jesus love her and died for her. She accepted Christ and i told her to get a bible. |
mercyreigns (mercyreigns)
Advanced Member
Username: mercyreigns
Post Number: 648
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 65.8.153.217
| | Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 10:05 pm: |
|
hb that is the simplicity of the Grace Gospel I was taught but my questions are very thought provoking and I would love Scripture references that address the complete questions in my above post. thanks.
Nancy |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
New member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 16
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.19.144
| | Posted on Thursday, January 19, 2006 - 11:28 pm: |
|
He forknew all of us, however not all of us will accept the gift of the Holy Spirit, which He of course knows because of His omniscience. Hence comes the verse you have not chosen me but I have chosen you.
2 Timothy 2:10 Therefore I endure all things for the "elect's" sakes, that they may also "obtain the salvation" which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.
We were all created in His image and for His glory.
Rev.4:11 For thou hast created all things and for thy pleasure they were created.
Exodus 4:11 Am I not the Lord God who created the deaf, dumb, blind, and seeing.
Jeremiah 1:5 before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee.
We must read the whole chapter of Ephesians 1 in order to know the context, rather than just picking out one verse.
Read Ephesians 1:4-12, speaks of adoption and the counsel of His will, then as you continue on reading from verses 12-13, you will see what makes the above verses clear.
Ephesians 1:12-13 That we should be to the praise of His glory, who first "trusted" in Christ. In whom ye also "Trusted", after ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, in whom also "after" that "ye believed", Ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise.
Thus the need for evangelism, we were created to know Him, but many will reject Him. That choice is ours.
It was not blind faith that lead us to Him, but it was He who used individuals, circumstances, and even creation itself to speak of Him.
Nancy you raised a very good question when you asked why soulwining or evangelism then.
Galatians 3:8 And the scripture, forseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying in thee shall all nations be blessed.
Galatians 3:9 So then they which be of the faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.
Galatians 3:22 But the Scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Christ Jesus might be given to them that believe.
(Message edited by pressing_on1 on January 19, 2006)
(Message edited by pressing_on1 on January 20, 2006) |
hbjgrace (hbjgrace)
Member
Username: hbjgrace
Post Number: 55
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 69.208.86.225
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 4:16 am: |
|
you know who has a good sermon on election charles H. Spurgeon. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 317
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 69.148.59.74
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 9:23 am: |
|
In all of Ephesians 1 or 2 for that matter you will find NOTHING that implicitly or explicitly places the cause of your trusting, adoption, belief, or predestination on YOUR will. |
mercyreigns (mercyreigns)
Advanced Member
Username: mercyreigns
Post Number: 650
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 65.2.119.113
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 11:24 am: |
|
The 3 of you have 3 opinions based on Scripture. But so far no one has addressed the issues together. God's will, our will, predestination, foreknowledge, soulwinning with Scripture references that link all these questions together. I really want to understand why the conflict of Scripture. When I share the Gospel, as I have for over 25 years, I have shared believing I was hearing from the Holy Spirit in each situation.
But was I truly hearing the Holy Spirit or the voices of the "methodology" I was taught in GG. I was saved 10 years before I met GG but had no church.
Every church I went to rejected me because of the way I dressed or because I didn't speak in tongues or didn't line up right away. So I shyed away from churches until I met Pr. Tree in Miami. He taught me evangelism but much differently then what I was taught in Baltimore.
I only spent a very short season with Pr. Tree before getting under the teaching of CHS through Grace Hour. Tree's wife told me that CHS was the only one I should believe and I trusted her, being new at all this, so I became an avid Grace Hour listener from Miami a few years before I dragged my kids to Baltimore leaving my unsaved husband. i was encouraged to do this because he was abusive and honestly knew I had to get away from him so Baltimore seemed to be the right move for me at the time.
Immediately I was thrust into a frenzy of services and raps. I was told this was the "correct" way to live Christianity and I so wanted to serve and please God I jumped right in.
I believe my real deliverance from total control of CS was his rejection of me and my illness which isolated me for many hours and put me in the presence of the Lord for which I am thankful for, But still, all my Christian teaching, indoctrination to the point of brainwashing, came from my hundreds of hours in raps and grace hour and services etc and so on.
Thus I am asking these questions to get other Christians Biblical viewpoints. Thanks again for your time. It is very much appreciated and Cordell honestly you are the one that is making the most sense to me through the Scriptures.
Blessings,
Nancy |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
New member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 17
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.19.144
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 11:38 am: |
|
Cordell Ephesians 1:12+13 |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
New member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 18
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.19.144
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 11:39 am: |
|
Ephesians 1:12-13 That we should be to the praise of His glory, who first "trusted" in Christ. In whom ye also "Trusted", after ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, in whom also "after" that "ye believed", Ye were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise. |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
New member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 19
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.19.144
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 12:27 pm: |
|
Again Nancy the question comes up in Cordell's view why evangelism?
Are we like the Jehovah's who are hoping we will be one of the "chosen"
If so it does away with our own free volition which God does not and can not violate.
We see this with Adam and Eve in the garden of which they were cast out, However God still had a plan of redemtion for them Gen 3:21, For God clothed them, again His mercy revealed.
Honestly, why pray, I mean if it's Gods "will" for someone to die then they are going die reguardless right, so why pray? Can we change the will of God? We'll it seems Hezekiah did for God granted him more years to live.
Why soul win I mean God through His "will" already chose people, so they will be saved because He "willed" them to right.
If God already "willed" everything? Guess we should just live our lives the best we can and wait for Him to take us home or should I say hope we are one of the "chosen ones" who will spend eternity with Him.
I believe He provided the Lamb Revelation 3:18, before the foundation of the world. That His desire is that we would all come to know Him. That His offereing was all an act of mercy and grace that didn't depend on us. But in Psalms 51:5 we were all brought forth in sin and in iniquity we were born. Thus the need for a savior.
In that view if God willed us to be saved then he also willed others to hell.
I will never believe that God "willed" for someone to spend eternity in hell.
(Message edited by pressing_on1 on January 21, 2006) |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
New member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 21
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.185.3
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 9:25 pm: |
|
Since we never should base the principles of God on are own convictions, I decided to take the view I had a step further and go into the Hebrew and Greek in order to find out what the two phrases in Ephesians really mean.
In doing so I discovered the following:
There are two words in the passage of Ephesians chapter one that must be studied in order to explain the subject of God's election and predestiantion.
First in Ephesians 1:4 we have the words "HE HAS CHOSEN" they refer to the Greek word "exelexato" meaning "chosen out of" . In this context, the word means that at one particular time in the past, God chose individuals for salvation (Matt. 24:31, Luke 18:7, Rom. 8:33, 2 Tim. 2:10, James 2:5).
The second verb in verse 5 is "Proorisas" meaning to determine beforehand or predestinate, (Acts 4:28, Roma. 8:29; 9:11, 1 Peter 1:2,20)
During Peter's sermon at the day of pentecost, he refered to the concept of predestination (Speaking of Christ), he said, Him being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken by wicked hands and have cruicified and slain.
You can see in this verse evidence of the concept of man's free choice together with the responsibility for his actions.
God delivered up His Son, and men were given the choice of what they would do with Christ, They chose to crucify Him. Leaving them with the responsibility for their act. |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
New member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 22
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.185.3
| | Posted on Friday, January 20, 2006 - 9:26 pm: |
|
The scripture is clear, that Christ died for all. 1 John 2:2 And He is the propitiation of our sins, (believers) , and not for ours only but for the sins of the "whole" world.
What Christ did on the cross was intended for "all" over and over God says "Whosoever believeth in Him" can obtain salvation, (John 3:16-18,36, Acts 10:43, Rom. 10:13) To come to Christ is an ivitation to "All" but again not all will chose His free gift. We are all responsible and without excuse to either accept or reject Christ.
If one perishes in His sin it is a result of his own choice (Titus 3:10,11).
God alone knows at which point a person will receive Christ for salvation.
It is at that point we are fulfilling God's purpose for our life, resulting in us becoming one of God's elect.
That "all" may know Him.
Ephesians 1:13,14- the phrase "earnest of our inheritance" refers to the act of the Holy Spirit, whereby He makes a pledge, providing assurance for the believer of an eternal life in Christ, which the believer must accept by faith.
Romans 10:13- For "whosoever" shall call upon the name of Jesus Christ "shall be saved"
Also Romans 10:9 If thou shalt "confess" with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt "believe" in thy heart that God hath raised Him from the dead, "thou shalt be saved".
Romans 10:12 There is no difference between the Jew or Greek, for the same Lord over "all" is rich "unto all that call upon Him".
I hope this helps out Nancy, I know I was very encouraged in my studies, that God would allow "whosoever to come" |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 318
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 161.226.4.9
| | Posted on Saturday, January 21, 2006 - 4:35 pm: |
|
Why evangelize?
Because God ordains the means as well as the end.
Why pray?
Same answer.
Pressing on: You have still not established in Greek or any other language what your will has to do with your salvation in ANY of the verses you've used. Now look at these verses very closely from John 6:
29 Jesus replied, "This is the work of God: that you believe in the One He has sent."
If you believe, it is God's work that has accomplished this.
37 Everyone the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will never cast out.
The Father gives every one who comes and come they will because they are given, and they are not cast out.
This is the will of Him who sent Me: that I should lose none of those He has given Me but should raise them up on the last day.
None who are give are ever lost. All who are given are raised at the last day.
44 No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him, and I will raise him up on the last day.
The only ones who come are those who are drawn by the Father. If they are not drawn by the Father, they CAN'T come, meaning they are unable to come--meaning their WILLS have nothing to do with their coming because they are drawn by the Father. ALL of those who are drawn are raised at the last day.
If the Father were to draw everyone, everyone would come and everyone would be raised by Christ at the last day. We know that everyone does not come, therefore not all are drawn by the Father because everyone the Father draws comes--otherwise they can't come--because no one CAN come unless they are drawn. Let's not cancel out the words of Christ on the subject. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 319
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 161.226.4.9
| | Posted on Saturday, January 21, 2006 - 4:45 pm: |
|
The crucial issue at hand is what does the word "atonement" mean. (Please, let's not collapse into cliches about at-one-ment.) Atonement in the scriptures is never hypothetical, merely possible, or merely potential--it is always certain.
What this means is that every one for whom Christ died will come to him--because His death was not 'general' or 'universal' but particular and specific as atonement in the scriptures has always been.
One clue? "He shall save His people from their sins." That is what the name Jesus means. "Shall" is a certain word, not a hypothetical or potential word. "His people" is a definite number--not a potential or hypothetical group. "From their sins" is as specific as you can get.
Every one for whom Christ died will be drawn by the Father (and he uses evangelism and prayer as ordained means) and everyone drawn will be saved (by the miracle of regeneration by the Spirit--not by an act of the will).
See this, it does not get any clearer:
who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 320
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 161.226.4.9
| | Posted on Saturday, January 21, 2006 - 4:50 pm: |
|
Actually, Nancy, if hbjgrace is promoting C.H. Spurgeon we have no disagreement. Spurgeon was a Calvinist to the very core. |
orangetwopay (orangetwopay)
Intermediate Member
Username: orangetwopay
Post Number: 258
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 69.208.100.132
| | Posted on Sunday, January 22, 2006 - 8:55 am: |
|
Not to break up the repartee going on here, but I have an adjacent issue that I'd like to bring up. Perhaps those who are lurking can toss in their
two cents.
Abortion. I'd like to take a look at it from the stance of election, or at least get some perspective from the frame of reference of election. I'd also like to get your opinions on the value of human life.
Let me first state definitively that I am against abortion. I do think it's wrong, that it's killing a person. For me this is a moral, human position.
It's similar to the point of view that, you know, it's wrong to have a bias against people of different ethnic origins or to believe that some people don't deserve basic human rights, etc. It's a matter of fundamental human dignity to me.
I am not, however, convinced that God is pro-life. I think that God is pro-His glory. I'm not convinced that He sees intrinsic value in human life. I think He is interested in His creation - human life - glorifying Him. He only sees value in human life to the degree that it brings glory to Him. "Jacob I have loved, Esau I have hated." That's not just meaning specific people, that means entire people groups. When the Israelites were taking the land, we are lead to believe that the utter destruction of entire nations was
their due recompense for not being the chosen people. No, God isn't particularly interested in the value of human life. The "vessel made for
honor" is valuable. The "vessel made for dishonor" is not (See Romans 9). This seems to be the witness of scripture. It's offensive to me in some ways, but the Word is said to be sharp. It definitely is.
Part Two follows below... |
orangetwopay (orangetwopay)
Intermediate Member
Username: orangetwopay
Post Number: 259
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 69.208.100.132
| | Posted on Sunday, January 22, 2006 - 8:56 am: |
|
Part Two continued...
I was once convinced that the unborn were covered by what my old GG pastor called "the blood of innocence." If anyone else has heard of this concept, let me know. I can't find a precedent in scripture other than the concept of the age of accountability. This blood of innocence idea led me to believe that all aborted children went to heaven. I thought this a wonderful coup by God to turn the evil of abortion against Satan by redeeming all of those children from hell. I'm not certain how election works into this. Perhaps
some of those children were destined for hell, but because of abortion will now reside with God. This makes abortion a potential good thing, in a manner
of thinking. It also begs the question that if all aborted kids go to heaven, then why not abort all of them, saving them from the chance of going
to hell? Of course, this is a ridiculous concept, but it did pass through my mind.
Then there is the idea that God foreknows the little children who get aborted, and so chooses those who He will and abandons those who He will
according to His own election policies, which are not for men to quibble with. This leads me to the quandary of what is worse - to kill children or
to let them go to hell without even a chance to hear His name? We don't weep for the hundreds of thousands of people the Israelites killed in taking the land (nor do we seem to weep for those innocent Iraqis we happen to kill) yet we are really broken up about aborted babies who will be going to hell anyway. Is this reality? I'd like to have some clarity on this issue.
There is the other issue of the method of salvation: that is, confession of Christ (Romans 10:9-11) or Spirit witness (Romans 2:12-16 [on a side note, Spirit witness is something John Piper denies, BTW]), both of which seem to be the only ways to be found in Christ. Neither can happen for babies in utero, so where does that leave them?
Summation follows... |
orangetwopay (orangetwopay)
Intermediate Member
Username: orangetwopay
Post Number: 260
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 69.208.100.132
| | Posted on Sunday, January 22, 2006 - 8:57 am: |
|
To sum it up...
To sum it all up, basically 1) I don't think God is pro-human life, or all that concerned about the value of human life. I'm interested in what you
guys have to say about that. 2) I'm not clear on what happens to the souls of aborted babies, and I think it's important. 3) It is obviously morally
right for us to try to value human life (except when we decide it's time to bomb people), but how do we combine that with the sort of ultimate values that God has? It seems morally and philosophically right to believe that all human life is of value and that, to a different degree, all life in general is of value. Yet it is totally obvious from scripture that God does not share that view. What do we do with that? How does that affect our apologetic? What does that mean for our political stances? Should ultimate theological and transcendent concepts trump human moral systems, or should we work within the frame of reference we have available to us?
What do you think?
OTP
http://liquidwaves.blogspot.com/
http://www.cafepress.com/liquidwaves |
rjfernalld (rjfernalld)
Senior Member
Username: rjfernalld
Post Number: 1575
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 71.123.65.136
| | Posted on Sunday, January 22, 2006 - 3:04 pm: |
|
"1) I don't think God is pro-human life, or all that concerned about the value of human life. I'm interested in what you
guys have to say about that. 2) I'm not clear on what happens to the souls of aborted babies, and I think it's important."
Why is an aborted fetus' soul important if you believe that God does not value human life? |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
New member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 23
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 141.157.43.10
| | Posted on Sunday, January 22, 2006 - 4:26 pm: |
|
Before I begin I have one question.
What came first sin, or volitional choice?
Did not Adam who was not conscience of sin in the garden make a "choice" that resulted in being awakened to sin?
Did Adam have or not have the ability with his own God given will, or free volition to a choice?
Was it because God didn't want us to walk around as machines but wanted us to love Him because He first loved us?
Does He force any of us against our "will" to love Him?
Wasn't it God who allowed Adam to sin. Why did He allow it?
Does He really only "will" so many whom He will take home with Him? Ones whom had no "choice" in the matter.
Did He really create only a chosen few for heaven and destined, or "willed" the rest for hell?
Lots of questions.
But the biggest of all; then why calvary? If He had the power to "will" people to be saved, then He had the power to "will" people to be perfect. But nope He gave us the power of choice. And in His forknowlege He knew Adam would sin, and that Adams sin would effect all mankind, hence the need for the "blood" to cleanse that sin.
So before time the lamb was slain Revelation 13:8. A lamb whose blood was pure enough to take away the sins of the "whole" world. |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
New member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 24
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 141.157.43.10
| | Posted on Sunday, January 22, 2006 - 4:26 pm: |
|
You see the "Trinity" worked together a plan for mankind
We have the Fathers plan, the Son's execution of that plan, and the Holy Spirit's manifestation of that plan.
Acts 2:23- Him being delievered by the determinite counsel and the foreknowledge of God ye have taken by wicked hands and have crucified and slain.
Revelation 13:8- The lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
Luke 22:22 And truly the Son of man goeth as it was "determined", but woe unto the man by whom He is betrayed.
Acts 4:28 For to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done.
He sufferend and died for "all" humanity. The plan was for "all". God is no repector of persons. I mean why would he choose me, I just as wretched as all.
You see if he only did it for a chosen few that He "willed" then He really didn't do it for "all". And that makes Him and His word a liar which is not possible.
It voids the purpose of calvary, in that He should hang on a tree and die for the sins of "all".
You see Cordell, Job 32:8 says there is a spirit in man and the inspiration of God almighty giveth him understanding.
I said before that it was not blind faith that lead us to Him, of course it was Him drawing us. Which He does through circumstances, people, etc..
We were all created with a call if you will, but only few will come to Him. We were all created to know Him.
Every single human was created with value and purpose, Psalms 139:13-17, 2 Timothy 1:9,Eph1:4,11.
But not all of us accept Him and enter into the fulfillment of the purpose He created for our individual walk with Him.
He came that we may have life and have it more abundantly.
No matter how we put it, a person still has to be the one to accept the call of God in his or her life, yes God enlightens, inspires, etc , but the choice is still the individuals, and unfortunately many love their sin and don't want to be delivered from it.
Cordell, we can pull up verse after verse, and for every verse you give, I can give another and vise versa.
I choose to believe that the Lord Jesus Christ calls "whoseoever to come"
In Acts 2:17-23 we see prophecy of the end times and in the midst of that prophecy the Lord says again 2:21 whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
New member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 25
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 141.157.43.10
| | Posted on Sunday, January 22, 2006 - 4:56 pm: |
|
Man was created by special and solemn divine counsel. Genesis 1:26 And God said let us (trinity) make man in image, and after our likness.
He was created with 2 distinctive elements "dust and diety" Genesis 2:7- and the Lord God formed man of the "dust" of the ground, and and breathed into his nostrils the "breath of life".
Both of which gives him the ability to grow into the image of Christ and into his diety that he has designed (as He is so am I)
2 Corinthians 3:18 But we all with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord are "changed" into the same image from glory to glory.
Philippians 2:5 We were created to have the mind of Christ.
Genesis 2 reveals how creation was formed as the scene of mans activity, creation was formed for Adam.
He was created to have dominion. Genesis 1:28.
He was intended for a still higher purpose (In the sense of a permanant and fulfilled) position.
With the ability to rule and reign Romans 5:17.
In reference to abortion I was wondering if we as man even grasp in the slightest all the God has done and provided for us.
I believe Christ does value life more than we could even comprehend. |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 26
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 141.157.43.10
| | Posted on Sunday, January 22, 2006 - 5:43 pm: |
|
"Abortion"
Thats a big subject. A few years ago I had to study some on Genetics.
Here's a brief overview : an Australian monk named Gregor Mendel dicovered heredity and traits by self pollinating plants, though the official acceptance of genetics came 40 years after his death in 1884. His notes on gentics were then studied and found to be true.
Anyways our genes are made up of DNA, which is shaped like a coiled ladder called a double helix, which is made up of nitrogen bases. Then there are four chemical bases.
Believe it or not our DNA consists of approximately 3 billion of these chemical bases.
These bases have to connect in a specific way. Depending how they connect comes your hair and eye color, height, and such.
When children are born with deformities its usually due to lack of these chemical bases connecting properly. Which results in too much or too little protein.
3 billion chemical bases, talk about the hand of God.
What scientist are doing now is taking the egg of a female and sperm of a male and germinating it in a small container. This is called "Germ line engineering".
When joined they create a "live" embryo, "life".
Scientists are hoping to be able to take these live embryo's and alter the DNA, or natural connection of these chemical bases.
Thus altering the original design of life that God created.
It will may result in taking these chemicals strands from many different embryo's, which will actually result in more deaths of tiny babies. In hopes of creating a elite being and or catalogue picked child.
AS of now this type of engineering is illegal, though people are fighting it, claiming that even though the embryo is alive it's not actually a real life yet.
Quit sickening since at the moment the egg and sperm connect a protective coating is formed around them as the DNA immediately begins to connect, forming the traits of that individual baby, bloodtype and all. |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 27
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 141.157.43.10
| | Posted on Sunday, January 22, 2006 - 6:33 pm: |
|
Revelation 4:11 We were created for His good pleasure.
Exodus 4:11 Am I not the Lord who created the deaf, the dumb, the blind, the seeing.
God knows eveything about a child before it is even born.
Psalms 139:15- My substance was not hid from thee, when I was made in secret.
Psalms 139:16- Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, "when as yet there was none of them".
Jeremiah 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly i knew thee.
I believe a child that was aborted had every right to live and enter into the purpose of God for his life. God already knew and had a plan for that childs life.
Is it right to take the life of an unborn child, no. It violates his free volition to accept the gift of redemption, and it robs him or her of their opportunity to go forward in the purpose God had created for them.
No one will ever get me to believe that God "willed" them to be aborted.
I believe Christ redeems them. But that child never got to experience in a daily walk, the grace, mercy, and redemption that Christ gives to all makind that accept Him.
He was never given the opportunity to learn how to make proper decisions, and run the race that God had planned for him.
Ephesians 2:10 We are all the workmanship of Christ, created with a divine purpose in life, to get to know the Father, and to walk in the steps he has ordered for our life.
To experience the redemption of Christ Jesus and the liberty that comes from that redemption.
To enjoy fellowship and communion with the Holy Spirit and to experince the mighty things he will do in and through us as we go forward in Him.
Remember abortion in called murder for a reason.
God didn't "will" it, man in his old sin nature chose to do it.
Just as God didn't will for a child to be abused.
Man in all of his humanity used his free volition to violate the volition of another human being.
It's called the old sin nature and it exists in all of us.
This is why in Dueteronomy 30:15 it says, I set before thee this day life and good, death and evil.
Josh 24:15 Choose ye this day whom you will serve. |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 28
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.6.187
| | Posted on Sunday, January 22, 2006 - 10:19 pm: |
|
I just want to say to those reading who may have had an abortion in the past, that forgiveness is not extinct for anyone.
I know someone who had done so in the past and it really affected her for awhile.
But God is able to heal the effects it has on the soul.
It is something she has repented of, but I don't think it is something she will ever forget.
She had to learn God's heart for her in that issue, and that is what has made all the difference; knowing that she can and has been forgiven. |
hodeuon (hodeuon)
Intermediate Member
Username: hodeuon
Post Number: 447
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 66.160.68.34
| | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 7:36 am: |
|
OTP,
I have heard something similar to the "blood of innocence" position that you heard at GG, except it was called "age of accountability" - the gist of it being anyone too young to know right from wrong is going to heaven. However, this seems to me to fly in the face of all humanity being fallen.
About the only thing in the Bible specifically about what happens to a baby who dies is when David says his son won't come to him, but he will go to his son, i.e., also die some day. He is most likely speaking of sheol - the realm of death - in a general sense rather than paradise in particular.
I don't think we have enough information to say for sure. Which is not very comforting. Sorry.
Hodeuon |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 29
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 141.157.18.146
| | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 10:45 am: |
|
This is why I still believe that "every" human being was on the mind of Christ in eternity past and He had a plan for each and every life, but not all will accept Him and fulfil that purpose He had planned for thier life.
That He provides an opportunity for every life to hear of Him.
This is what Jeremiah 1:5, Ehp 1:4,11, Gal. 1:15, Is 12:10 and so on say.
Psalms 139:13-17 is a great passage to study, in verse 13 It says HE has "possessed my reigns", the word in the hebrew actually means "bought back", how through the blood of calvary, He provided a way for man. Revelation 13:8 the lamb slain before the foundation of the world.
God knew men would fail and would never be pure enough to enter into His gates, so His son Christ said Father I will do it, I will die for mankind.
The Holy Spirit said and I will be the one who indwells them, who interceeds for them, who comforts them, who teaches them to walk in your ways.
God created every human with body, soul, and spirit, but the human spirit is the one that exists in man Job 32:8 There is a spirit in man and the inspiration of God almighty giveth them understanding. At the moment of salvation the Holy spirit then abides in them.
The verse best to describe this is I believe Hebrews 4:12- For the word of God is quick and powerful sharper than any two edged sword peircing even to the "dividing asunder of soul and spirit" and joints and marrow , and is the discerner of the thoughts an intents of the heart.
gotta run but will continue later |
orangetwopay (orangetwopay)
Intermediate Member
Username: orangetwopay
Post Number: 261
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 68.251.41.182
| | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 4:31 pm: |
|
Here are a few links to information (sermons, essays, etc) on the subject:
Charles Spurgeon:
http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0411.htm
Randy Alcorn:
http://www.epm.org/articles/infant.html
Albert Mohler:
http://www.covenantnews.com/mohler050117.htm
John Piper and staff:
http://www.desiringgod.org/library/theological_qa/infant_salv/infants.html
Enjoy.
OTP |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 322
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 65.16.202.13
| | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 5:58 pm: |
|
OTP: I am not, however, convinced that God is pro-life. I think that God is pro-His glory. I'm not convinced that He sees intrinsic value in human life. I think He is interested in His creation - human life - glorifying Him. He only sees value in human life to the degree that it brings glory to Him. "Jacob I have loved, Esau I have hated."
That's not just meaning specific people, that means entire people groups. When the Israelites were taking the land, we are lead to believe that the utter destruction of entire nations was
their due recompense for not being the chosen people. No, God isn't particularly interested in the value of human life.
A joy to respond to one of the great minds of FN, OTP (absolutely no usual sarcasm intended).
All human beings are created in the image of God, and therefore have dignity, value and meaning--the image of God IS the intrinsic value of human life. As you say, God is for His own glory. In God's case, because he is good, righteous, holy and worthy of praise--this is not an egotistical thing as if we were interested in our own glory because we are none of the above.
As to the destruction of human life perpetrated by God, this is carried out precisely because of the value of the image of God in human beings. Consider:
5 And for your lifeblood I will require a reckoning: from every beast I will require it and from man. From his fellow man I will require a reckoning for the life of man. 6 Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image. 7 And you, be fruitful and multiply, teem on the earth and multiply in it.
When the fullness of sin in the individuals marked for destruction is considered, it is because they have violated God's commandments written on their hearts to both love God and their neighbor. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 323
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 65.16.202.13
| | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 6:09 pm: |
|
Pressingon whether you understand it or not--and I am not throwing around labels just to be contrary--you are are mostly Arminian in your thinking concerning election:
God looks down the tunnel of time and sees who will choose him and because of the free sovereign choice of man (which God will not violate) he predestines him accordingly.
Does that about sum up your view? Correct me if I have misunderstood you.
Let's grant you this for argument's sake for the moment. God's passive prescience sees how you will decide and God's will then becomes subject to your more powerful free will.
But is God not Creator? Does God not decide who to create?
Let us for a moment think that God passively foreknows that you will REJECT Christ as Lord.
But he decides to create you anyway.
Does he not by creating you condemn you?
He must be condemning you, because your decision to REJECT is as firm in the mind of God and as accomplished as the events of yesterday.
The only way out of this trap for you is to say that God does not really know--or that He in some way limits his 'knowledge'. But the truth is once considered, that if you believe in passive prescience and that God is Creator--you have a problem with God creating people specifically to condemn them.
Consider this:
Remember the former things of old: for I am God, and there is none else; I am God, and there is none like me, Declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times the things that are not yet done, saying, My counsel shall stand, and I will do all my pleasure...
For God to declare is for Him to decide and determine what will be and what will not be--including all things concerning man.
The king's heart is in the hand of the LORD, as the rivers of water: he turneth it whithersoever he will.
If it is so with a king, it is so with lesser men.
(Message edited by cordell on January 23, 2006) |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 30
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.168.137
| | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 10:37 pm: |
|
No cordell that is not my view. The view I have is that God has a predestined plan for "all" men, a purpose if you will. Which He planned in eternity past.
As I said before I believe He sees every human life in that perspective, and that He created every human being to be the vessels of His glory. This was His desire, that we may know Him.
That what He did at calvary is a free gift to "all".
He is a merciful God but also just.
He cannot look upon sin therefore there is no "communion" between God and the unsaved man.
Thus the need for salvation, which at that moment we are sealed with the Holy Spirit, and now one of God's elect, or chosen if you will. |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 31
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.168.137
| | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 10:37 pm: |
|
You see I believe God gives "all" men opportunity to receive His free gift. Unfortunately not all will.
which brings up a verse Revelation 4:11 We were created for His good pleasure. Do you believe He was only speaking of His elect in this verse? I doubt it. For He can't take pleasure in the unsaved.
However if God "willed" only a certain number to be saved, then that means He created or creates all the other men and women to spemd eternity in hell, tell me whats so merciful about that. Those people never had a chance they weren't one of His so called chosen.
And if it were God who "willed" us to believe in Him, and who gave us our faith, to the point were men had nothing to do with it as far as choice, then why these verses.
1 Thessalonians 3:10- night and day praying exceedingly that we might see your face, and might perfect that which is lacking in your faith.
Hebrews 11:6 without faith it is impossible to please God.
2 Thessalonians 1:3 that you faith groweth exceedingly.
1 Timothy 6:10 They have erred from the faith.
Luke 18:8 When the Son of man commeth, shall He find faith on the earth.
Many will fall away from the faith, they will stop believing.
If It is "Gods" faith in us, that would not be so.
In Matthew 21:21 Christ's own words "I say it unto you if you have faith".
See faith comes through hearing, hearing of the word of God. Why is it that some people are more trusting of God? Because their faith in Him is stronger.
yes God does many things, he is the giver of life and the taker. The issues of life and death belong to Him.
He bottles our tears, hears our prayers, and yes the Holy Spirit within believer helps them to turn from their wicked ways.
He is God and yes I have a healthy fear of Him, He can do as He desires, but he came to give life.
And He offers it to "whosoever" will. |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 32
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.168.137
| | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 10:42 pm: |
|
Does He by not "willing" you to be one of the elect condemn you already? |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 33
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.168.137
| | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 10:46 pm: |
|
By the way He does know who will and will not receive Him. And He provided a way for "all" through his "mercy", but not all will accept that gift, and being He is "just" also, others will spend eternity in hell because of refusing His free gift of salvation. |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 34
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.168.137
| | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 10:54 pm: |
|
Cordell, doesn't your view "exclude" that the blood shed was for the sins of the "whole" world,
And make it only applicable to those whom He "willed" to be His chosen.
(Message edited by pressing_on1 on January 23, 2006) |
boss_martian (boss_martian)
Advanced Member
Username: boss_martian
Post Number: 702
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 192.91.147.35
| | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 11:32 pm: |
|
My daughter was born with a very serious heart defect. She had open heart surgery on her third day. She survived that surgery, and after 43 days in the hospital, we took her home. Other than the scar on her little chest, she seemed perfectly normal: she smiled, she cried, she loved to look at her black and white panda bear. At almost three months, after she had gained some weight, she had her second surgery to install an artificial valve in her heart. She didn't survive that surgery.
So now Charlotte is burning in hell for eternity.
After all, she never got saved.
Isn't God's love wonderful!
I think I've finally had enough of this site, thank you very much. |
orangetwopay (orangetwopay)
Intermediate Member
Username: orangetwopay
Post Number: 265
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 68.251.41.182
| | Posted on Monday, January 23, 2006 - 11:42 pm: |
|
I'm sorry for your loss Boss.
These are the very sorts of stories that make me wonder, make me question.
I don't have enough faith for that. How you made it through, I can't imagine.
I wish the Word was clearer on this issue. If the varied and intrepid debate above shows anything, it's that we know so little, have so little to go on.
Faith is the lynchpin.
It's all we have.
otp |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 324
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 7:19 am: |
|
Boss,
The comfort is that God is both just and merciful--and he is good. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 325
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 7:27 am: |
|
Cordell, doesn't your view "exclude" that the blood shed was for the sins of the "whole" world,
And make it only applicable to those whom He "willed" to be His chosen.
My view holds thats Christ's sacrificial and vicarious death on the cross is not only sufficient but efficient for every one for whom he died--which view is consistent with the biblical representation of atonement.
The words 'whole' and 'all' don't in the context of the verses you quote mean every single human being.
The view that every single human being has the 'opportunity' to accept or reject the offer of the gospel is just patently untrue. There have been millions who've died without ever even hearing that there even was a Savior. Where was their 'opportunity'? |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 327
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 7:40 am: |
|
And if it were God who "willed" us to believe in Him, and who gave us our faith, to the point were men had nothing to do with it as far as choice, then why these verses.
Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.
For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure
pressing on, you need to see that your view, regardless of how you may need to impose it on the scriptures--is yours alone and is inconsistent with the scriptures.
And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed. |
orangetwopay (orangetwopay)
Intermediate Member
Username: orangetwopay
Post Number: 266
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 68.251.41.182
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 8:03 am: |
|
I appreciate Pressing-On's viewpoint. I think it is a view consistent with someone who loves God, has a moral and ethical perspective on justice, and who wants all things to come to their conclusion in Him.
However, God's idea of justice and our idea of justice are not necessarily the same.
God's idea of mercy and our idea of mercy are not necessarily the same.
These two concepts inform this debate. I have to admit that from a human perspective, I really want things to be the way Pressing-On is advocating. It breaks my heart that they might not be that way. It dramatically affects my view of God's character that the philosophical ideas of mercy and justice do not really apply to God. He is above human determinations.
For us, it seems wrong that little kids would die, or that people who had no choice to know God or not should go to hell forever, or that people who sinned only for a few decades should spend endless ages in total darkness and separation. The punishment doesn't seem to fit the crime to us. When we think of these things, no, God doesn't seem just.
I don't like Calvinism. I don't like it's principles of election, nor do I like it's conception of the limited atonement. I do think that it is probably the best description of what is actually going on.
It makes my heart heavy. It is not intuitive, doesn't speak to our inner song of redeption and justice.
But God doesn't have to do that for us. We are called to faith. Not by sight, but by faith. Faith is paradoxical.
It's the only way to Him. We can't explain it, no matter how much apologetics we know, no matter how much theology we think we understand.
Praise Him.
OTP
(Message edited by OrangeTwoPay on January 24, 2006) |
sidethorn (sidethorn)
Advanced Member
Username: sidethorn
Post Number: 550
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 169.253.4.21
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 8:28 am: |
|
I don't like Calvanism either. It blatently violates the Scriptures in 1st John where it is written that Jesus died for the sins of the WHOLE world. That's as plain as can possibly be. Jesus died for everybody and purchased salvation for everybody. Its the person's responsibility to recieve that salvation for themselves by faith in Christ's work. Sure God knew before He created the earth who would recieve Christ as Saviour and who would not, but He still sent His only begotten Son to die and pay the price for everybodys' salvation even if only some people ever recieve it.
Boss, I too am sorry for your loss. I do believe that God is just and will hold people accountable for what they know. I will never, ever believe that God will hold little children and infants accountable like an adult. There is an age of accountability way after infanthood. I believe Charlotte is in Heaven with Christ in paradise just like any other little baby or little child that sadly passed on. God will never, ever send a tiny little baby to Hell that never had a chance to fully comprehend who Christ is and what sin is and what salvation is. That would be cruel and unjust. God would never do that!!
SIDETHORN |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 35
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.5.151
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 8:38 am: |
|
Boss I'm sorry for the lose of your daughter. I have a cousin who has cerebral disorder and is mentally unable to make any decision just as a baby is. A friend of mine also just lost her baby girl.
I don't believe that God would ever condemn those individuals to hell.
This is what I choose to believe. He had a plan for them this I will never doubt. I'm not going to ever see my God as and angry unjust God who only does what He desires, He desires much more for us than we will ever know.
There was no need for him to create Adam and Eve so why? I tell you why because he wanted companionship, and He desires everyone of us.
This is why He created us.
Cordell,I am not the only one who thinks this way, there are hundreds of thousands of people who do.
I guess Paul said it best when he said not to argue so long as we preach Christ and Christ cruified.
My God is loving God and a just God, but His mercy preceeds His justice. |
redsnapper (redsnapper)
New member
Username: redsnapper
Post Number: 5
Registered: 8-2005
Posted From: 216.183.184.253
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 9:45 am: |
|
"I think I've finally had enough of this site, thank you very much."
Dear Boss Martian,
My sincere condolences on the loss of your little angel.
No one knows the depth of your sorrow except you and God.
God is a lot bigger and more caring than any human can claim to know. Especially self appointed theologians here, wig wearin' charlatans like carl stevens, and pretenders like tommy shallow.
If little ones like your daughter are not in his loving presence at this moment,
then this whole "good news" Gospel thing is bullshit, and the most righteous among us have nothing to look forward to.
btw - I hope you stay connected here. |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 36
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.5.151
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 2:29 pm: |
|
your absolutely right, redemption would be meaningless if it didn't include a plan for all.
I choose not to waiver in my faith in believing that God is loving and merciful, and that His mercy comes before His justice. The lamb was slain before a single man was created, talk about mercy.
I'd much rather live my life believing that, than to be one who questions everything of God. Or always wonders. Like He said have faith, hold fast to the faith that is in you.
How could we believe that He does hold he children in His arms.
We can see His love for children in the scriptures, He told the disciples to suffer the little children to come unto Him.
Matthew 18: 1-6. The Disciples came unto Jesus and asked Him who is the greatest among them. So Jesus calls a little child to come unto Him, and set the child in the midst of the disciples and said "very I say unto you unless you be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter the kingdom of heaven".
Whosoever shall receive such a little child in my name receiveth me.
But whosoever shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged around his neck and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.
Take heed that you dispise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you. That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.
There is nothing like "child like" faith, for a child is so trusting.
There's such security and peace at the end of the day to lay my head down and believe that the Lord God is so very merciful.
We have so much to look forward to in Him, who is our all and all. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 328
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 8:38 pm: |
|
OTP: I don't like Calvinism. I don't like it's principles of election, nor do I like it's conception of the limited atonement.
This, OTP, is what mercy is all about. If God were ONLY just and and not merciful--where would we all be? Would we not all stand condemned? Could not God in His great justice allow the human race go on for a million years giving them only the rewards of this life and then justly send the entire lot of us to hell?
What God has done is instead to show mercy to some:
What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
And, dear OTP, concerning the limited atonement--we ought to consider its limitations. The biblical atonement is powerful to save, certain in fact to redeem everyone for whom it is made. While the so called 'universal' atonement saves absolutely not one person, and is so really limited in its power to save--the human will is the deciding factor in salvation, not anything done by God in Christ.
I don't like Calvanism either. It blatently violates the Scriptures in 1st John where it is written that Jesus died for the sins of the WHOLE world. That's as plain as can possibly be. Jesus died for everybody and purchased salvation for everybody.
See next> |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 329
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 8:39 pm: |
|
Sidethorn you make the mistake of taking out of context the so called 'big three plus one'--verses that seem to point to a universal atonement. I can only point you to discussions I had earlier on this board with Nic (do a search). On closer examination, as John Owen pointed out centuries ago in the Death of Death in the Death of Christ, those scriptures do not teach a 'universal' atonement.
Here is the beginning of J.I. Packer's Introductory Essay to that book:
The Death of Death in the Death of Christ is a polemical work, designed to show, among other things, that the doctrine of universal redemption is unscriptural and destructive of the gospel. There are many, therefore, to whom it is not likely to be of interest. Those who see no need for doctrinal exactness and have no time for theological debates which show up divisions between so-called Evangelicals may well regret its reappearance. Some may find the very sound of Owen’s thesis so shocking that they will refuse to read his book at all; so passionate a thing is prejudice, and so proud are we of our theological shibboleths. But it is hoped that this reprint will find itself readers of a different spirit. There are signs today of a new upsurge of interest in the theology of the Bible: a new readiness to test traditions, to search the Scriptures and to think through the faith. It is to those who share this readiness that Owen’s treatise is offered, in the belief that it will help us in one of the most urgent tasks facing Evangelical Christendom today—the recovery of the gospel.
Read the rest here.
(Message edited by cordell on January 24, 2006)
(Message edited by cordell on January 24, 2006) |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 330
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 9:00 pm: |
|
It makes my heart heavy. It is not intuitive, doesn't speak to our inner song of redeption and justice.
While your heart may indeed be heavy, and you may well have an 'inner song' of redemption and justice--we--all us humans are finite in thought, song, intuition and knowledge. We can not see the whole picture.
We may all sympathize with the death of a child and the suffering of loss of loved ones. But the fact remains that we are all born in sin. That means we are sinners from birth. That means that there is (and I don't say this without heartfelt sorrow) no such thing as an innocent human being. If we think of all the human tragedy caused by nature (so called acts of God) and acts of man--every one who has perished is born a sinner. Normally, when in the face of great loss and tragedy we try to be sympathetic and 'loving'--Christ was not always so himself:
There were present at that season some that told him of the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things? I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem? I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.
The hope we have as parents, spouses, siblings, children can only be in the fact that unlike God, we are not omniscient but that we know that He is loving, kind, just, righteous and good. As far as believers are concerned we know that not one hair shall fall from our heads without Him and that all things work for our benefit and our salvation. |
orangetwopay (orangetwopay)
Intermediate Member
Username: orangetwopay
Post Number: 267
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 68.251.41.182
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 10:37 pm: |
|
I'm agreein' with you here brother! Swing me 'round a little bit to the left next time! Dough-see-dough! |
yer_awesome_pahsta (yer_awesome_pahsta)
New member
Username: yer_awesome_pahsta
Post Number: 5
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 72.226.190.201
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 10:43 pm: |
|
See, people, the problem is this: yeah, God is great and God is mercyful, but guess what? He made us the way we are only so he could toot His own horn! I'm not really sure if in the end it's really anything overly great!
Sure, I/we deserve to get our azzes beat, but again, God pretty much jerked us around to the point that we needed salvation, and if He wasn't the one to do it then who cares? It's a great cute wonderful picture, ain't it? But in the end it's all BS... BS that could have been avoided. |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 37
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.248.246
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 11:51 pm: |
|
In studying the words called and chosen there is quite a vast amount of meaning for these words.
A few of the Greek word meanings for two words are:
Kletos, fem. Klete, nuet. Kleton, verbal adjective from kaleo, to call, called, invited, welcomed, or appointed.
Originally it was used to designate those invited to a banquet-1 Kings 1:41,49.
Then we have the word called in Matthew 20:1-15. In this Parable the word had nothing to do with entrance into the kingdom of heaven. It speaks of those who were called to work and labored with a contractual agreement. Though they did not all work the same hours nor get the same pay.
Then in Matthew 22:14 we have these words for the call again. Following the parable of the marriage supper. Here Kletoi "the called' are those who have received an invitation to enter Christs kingdom and the eklektoi "The chosen" are ones who have obeyed the call. Many are called but few are chosen.
Romans 1:1, Colossians 3:12- One who is called means one who is saved. Romans 1:1, 1 corinthians 1:1 The called ones (Kletoi) are those who received the divine call (Klesis) having conformed to Gods saving purpose.
Then we have eklektos, eklego, ekloge,- choice or election, selection involves thoughtful and deliberate consideration. Select, choice, or elect, used as an adjective in reguard to stone in 1 peter 2:4,6 Is. 28:16, see Ezra 5:8, in both these instances the stone is the Lord Jesus Christ as the one chosen of God the Father to accomplish the work of redemption for sinful man.
Then we have 1 Peter 2:9- genos eklekton genos "a chosen generation" , refering to believers in Christ.
By implication meaning chosen with the accessory idea of kindness, favor, love, equivalent to cherished, beloved. In Luke 23:35 the enemies of Christ around His cross said "let him save himself, if he be Christ, the chosen of God" which means the one cherished and beloved of God who was selected to accopmlish the work of salvation for others.
Romans 16:13- referring to Rufus "the chosen one in the Lord" meaning the beloved one as in the previous verse referring to Peris, For Paul Rufus was special in the Lord, he was dearly beloved by Paul. |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 38
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.248.246
| | Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2006 - 11:54 pm: |
|
Cordell, interesting verses you used Rom 9:22-24
What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?
Romans 9:22
The word "calleth" in this verse in the Greek is "kaleo" meaning to bid, or call forth, Christ had bid the people to come unto Him.
The verb "fitted" in the above verse in Greek is "katertismena", which is in the perfect.passive.participle with mid. meaning of the verb katartizo, prepared or adjusted. These unbelivers were not fitted to become vessels of perdition by God Himself, but buy their own selves refusing to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. Calleth- meaning bid or call forth. He had bid them to come and they refused.
The whole principle of election is that man may know that His salvation is not because he deserves it, but because of the grace of God. Also, someone who will not accept God's salvation can never face God and claim that He was unjust and had caused this persons loss.
God's disposition and will is that "all" men be saved and come to the knowledge of truth
(1 Timothy 2:4) and that none be lost
(2 Peter 3:9). God cannot go against His own declared will and willfully cancel His plan to save the human race by deliberately and capriciously assigning some to hell.
No man can be saved on his own, it is Christ that speaks to mans human spirit Job 32:8, it is He that bids or invites them to come. Those who are lost are not lost because Christ discriminated against them, but because they did not respond to Christ's offer of salvation and grace.
(Message edited by pressing_on1 on January 24, 2006) |
mercyreigns (mercyreigns)
Advanced Member
Username: mercyreigns
Post Number: 652
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 65.8.131.129
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 1:31 am: |
|
Hi all and thank you. this is a lively discussion full of information, all Bible based, different interpretations though.
The link I posted on Election was not written by Calvinists. It is from a Baptist web site. And it is the most Biblically sound sermon on election I have ever read to date. They have not stated that God chooses people to go to hell.
It is very balanced in its theology. And I agree with the poster who said we have no concept of what God's mercy is. We don't have the capability to understand it at all. We taste of it as mentioned "taste and see the Lord is good" and we know nothing as we ought on any given day at any given moment 2 Corinthians 8:2
I love that God wants us to dig deep into His word, not because He needs us to or that we even need to but because He wants a relationship with us. That is astounding to me. He doesn't need us a stitch to complete His plan. He uses donkeys and rocks and trees.
He has given us a great privelege to co labor with Christ and I don't even know what that really means. All I do know is that for God from us obedience and child like faith are key.
We don't have to understand Him to obey Him. A child doesn't always understand a parent when they are asked to obey. The parent knows why they need the child to obey. A wise child simply obeys their parent out of trust and not necessarily love. Sometimes a child is too young too understand love but he is never too young to understand trust.
lovingly
Nancy |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 331
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 6:23 am: |
|
OTP, your agreement didn't escape me. But then neither does the disgruntlement.
Election and predestination are doctrines that are intended to bring joy to the believer but that confuse and bewilder unbelievers. Listen to the language of Ephesians 1. Does it sound pained as if God is some cosmic Kiljoy or a Grand Puppeteer? I don't think so. We always forget about the gravity and severity of sin and its effects. Sin is the great result of man's free will--not salvation.
Immediately following Paul's explanation of the results of God's foreknowledge (loving beforehand-not mere prescience of events) and predestination the language is neither sad or disgruntled nor is his belief a begrudging acquiescence, but rather this is what Paul says:
What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare his own Son but gave him up for us all, how will he not also with him graciously give us all things? Who shall bring any charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies. Who is to condemn? Christ Jesus is the one who died more than that, who was raised who is at the right hand of God, who indeed is interceding for us. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword? As it is written, No, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him who loved us.
Note that the first 'all' in this passage speaks of 'us'--not every single human being. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 332
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 6:34 am: |
|
Nancy:The link I posted on Election was not written by Calvinists. It is from a Baptist web site.
Nancy, most Baptists in this country--especially the Southern Baptists--have a Reformed and Calvinistic heritage of which many, if not most of them are largely ignorant. When they arrived in this country they held to the Second London Baptist Confession about which Spurgeon (a Baptist) said:
"This ancient document is the most excellent epitome of the things most surely believed among us. It is not issued as an authoritative rule or code of faith, whereby you may be fettered, but as a means of edification in righteousness. It is an excellent, though not inspired, expression of the teaching of those Holy Scriptures by which all confessions are to be measured. We hold to the humbling truths of God's sovereign grace in the salvation of lost sinners. Salvation is through Christ alone and by faith alone."
On "God's decree, that Confession (following the Westminster) says:
By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestinated or foreordained to eternal life through Jesus Christ, to the praise of His glorious grace. Others are left to act in their sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of His glorious justice.
Those angels and men thus predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed, and the number of them is so certain and definite, that it cannot be either increased or diminished.
Those of mankind who are predestinated to life, God chose before the foundation of the world was laid, in accordance with His eternal and immutable purpose and the secret counsel and good pleasure of His will. God chose them in Christ for everlasting glory, solely out of His free grace and love,
without anything in the creature as a condition or cause moving Him to choose.
(Message edited by cordell on January 25, 2006) |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 333
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 6:49 am: |
|
Nancy,
The site where you found the article is a 'sovereign grace' site--in other words Calvinistic Baptist. The following, from the article you posted is exactly what Calvinists teach on foreknowledge (and it agrees with what I posted above from the London Confession):
Foreknowledge
One of the erroneous interpretations is to imply that election was based on foreknowledge by God of the choice which men would make, using foreknowledge or “prior” knowledge. That effectively removes any Biblical concept of election. It completely contradicts the idea of sovereignty, and ignores the basic idea of the word “foreknow.”
The Greek word proginosko has the idea of “regard with favor,” or “to make an object of care,” and carries the additional idea of approval (cf. Ex. 2:25; Rom. 11:2). More than a mere knowledge beforehand is involved. God does indeed have a prior knowledge of man’s actions, but it does not follow that any such actions were the basis of God’s choice of the individual. Prior knowledge arose out of God’s unconditional choice. Foreknowledge implies an act of God’s will to accomplish that which He knows. God’s knowledge cannot be separated from His will, and His will cannot be conditioned by prior knowledge of an event.
The article also favorably quotes Jonathan Edwards, John Stott, John Murray and other known usual Calvinistic suspects. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 334
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 6:57 am: |
|
Nancy, here's another interesting quote from that same article you posted:
The Canons of Dort give a good conclusion to this study. “He decreed to give them true faith in Him, to justify them, to sanctify them, and, after having powerfully kept them in the fellowship of His Son, finally to glorify them, for the demonstration of His mercy and the praise of the riches of His glorious grace."
FYI, The Canons of Dort are affectionately known by Calvinists (and are an epithet on the lips of their detractors) as--TULIP--or the Five Points of Calvinism. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 335
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 7:03 am: |
|
Nancy wrote: And it is the most Biblically sound sermon on election I have ever read to date. They have not stated that God chooses people to go to hell.
Here's actually the sticky point--the problem of 'double predestination'. Calvinists themselves hold differing views on the subject depending on how they see God's plan being formed in the beginning. I personally do NOT hold to double predestination--but predestination and reprobation. Predestination brings about the final result of salvation as an act of God, reprobation brings about condemnation as a final result and testimony to the original free will of man. |
sidethorn (sidethorn)
Advanced Member
Username: sidethorn
Post Number: 551
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 169.253.4.21
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 7:17 am: |
|
Here it is in 1 John 2:2!!!!
(KJV) And He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for those of the WHOLE world.
Either 1 John 2:2 means WHOLE or it doesn't. This verse is as plain as day that Jesus died and paid the price for everyones' sins!!! People are just going to have to decide for themselves whether they want to believe the Word and submit to the Word or not. Every other translation of this verse portrays the same meaning that Christ died for all. This issue is a very simple one. Whole means whole, period!!!
As far as little babies and children go, they are humans born in sin like everyone else. But God's mercy will always prevail here over judgement. God does have His ways or bringing dying babies into right standing with Himself. God's ways are not our ways and we know only in part in this life. There are many things that we don't know or understand in this life and we just have to leave them in God's hands. We're not going to figure out every little thing out on this side of eternity!!! But seeing God's loving character where He chose to send His only begotten Son to die for all us sinners tells me that God is merciful enough not to send a tiny little baby into the fires of Hell for all eternity just because that baby has inherited sin. God is big enough to deal with the baby's inherited sin and provide that soul a way to redemption and right standing for all eternity. Thank God I can rest in that. God is just and merciful. God says that in His own Word. Sending babies to Hell is the height of injustice so forget about ever trying to convince me and many others on this board otherwise. It ain't gonna happen!!! God is good. God is just. God does punish sin. God does save whosoever will accept His provision of salvation. God is more than just enough to provide babies a way to Heaven, period.
SIDETHORN |
hodeuon (hodeuon)
Intermediate Member
Username: hodeuon
Post Number: 450
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 66.160.68.34
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 7:26 am: |
|
Jim, on what basis do you define foreknowledge as "loving beforehand"? Are you getting this from the Hebrew word yada' "to know"?
Hodeuon |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 336
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 8:03 am: |
|
Sidethorn, what the verse concentrates on is not the concept of every single human being but on the exclusivity of Christ's propitiation--there is no other. Other passages make this clear--there is only ONE mediator between man and God.
Where in Scripture do you find God's will thwarted? Does God say that he accomplishes all his good pleasure or not? If God wills all men to be saved--then you can put away your toys and go home--all men will be saved. If Christ's atonement is intended universally for every single human being--no human will can thwart the effectiveness of it--all for whom Christ died will be saved. So you must either be a universalist--if Christ died for Hitler et al. they will be saved whether they like it or not--or Christ's sacrifice is particularly effective for the elect for whom it was intended. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 337
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 8:11 am: |
|
No Hodi, from the context of Romans 8, in the result brought about upon ALL those foreknown, called, justified, glorified--conformed to the image of His son. This is not mere prescience of events spoken of here--as you should well know.
Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or danger, or sword?
(Message edited by cordell on January 25, 2006) |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 338
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 8:17 am: |
|
Sending babies to Hell is the height of injustice so forget about ever trying to convince me and many others on this board otherwise.
So you don't believe this?:
Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.
All sin, including original sin, deserves the ultimate punishment doesn't it? Let's not confuse the mercy of God (on which we agree) with the concept of the innocence of infants (which we may not)--there is no such thing as an innocent human. |
hodeuon (hodeuon)
Intermediate Member
Username: hodeuon
Post Number: 452
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 66.160.68.34
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 8:45 am: |
|
Jim, I am not disputing that the love of Christ is central to the passage. But that does not make it part of the definition of the word foreknow.
Are you making this word mean something different when used of God than when used of man?
Hodeuon |
sidethorn (sidethorn)
Advanced Member
Username: sidethorn
Post Number: 552
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 169.253.4.21
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 9:15 am: |
|
Cordell:
So are you saying Boss Martian's little Charlotte is burning in Hell right now just because she has inherited sin and never got to live long enough to reach an age where she could understand what sin and salvation is so she could accept Christ as her personal saviour like an adult would??? So Hell is full of millions of screaming little babies that never got a chance either. So all the babies that were aborted in this country over the years are burning in Hell too. So the idea is if you die before you reach an age to fully understand the Gospel, there's no hope for you. You just go straight to hell!!! How wonderful life really is!!!! Boy is there sure a lot of love out there. Man does justice prevail. The weakest and most defenseless never have a chance. No redemption plan exists for the little babies to get them into right standing with God because they can't understand the Gospel as adults do. What about the profoundly mentally retarded? They just go to Hell too without ever getting a chance to get right with God. THIS IS ALL A BUNCH OF BULL$HIT!!!!
God can save anyone that is willing to work with Him in His way. You don't have to understand it. Just accept it!!! Babies don't go to Hell. God can take care of their inherited sin issues in His own way and He always does!!!!! God's perfect intentional will is for every human to get saved but He will not force that on anyone. He knows who will accept salvation and who will not. He knows who by their own will, will become a vessel of honor and who will become a vessel of destruction. God is a Gentleman who will judge sin in His own way. He extends forgiveness to everyone but only those who take it will ever experience it. The others get the judgement!!!!!
As far as 1 John 2:2 goes. If salvation was not offered to all, the term WHOLE WORLD would not be in there. God would have seen to that!! If you look at the rest of the Scriptures with an open mind, you'll find that they actually line up with the WHOLE WORLD teaching. Christ loved the WHOLE WORLD and came to forgive and cleanse. If He can save adults, He can save the little babies too. So please don't insult Boss Martian and slap him in the face as he grieves with such ridiculous teaching. Thank you very much.
SIDETHORN
(Message edited by sidethorn on January 25, 2006) |
david_munson (david_munson)
Senior Member
Username: david_munson
Post Number: 2135
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 65.148.21.2
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 11:26 am: |
|
I have eight grandchildren on the other side of this life.
I completely trust that they are with the Lord.
Children are very trusting.They are special to the Lord or He would never have told us:
Mark 10:13-16 And they brought young children to him, that he should touch them: and his disciples rebuked those that brought them.
But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.
Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.
And he took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them.
It would be evil of God to condemn little children to hell.Since God is not evil,I cannot except that He would do such a thing regardless of who says what.
Mark 9:36-37 And he took a child, and set him in the midst of them: and when he had taken him in his arms, he said unto them, Whosoever shall receive one of such children in my name, receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me.
---
This was a child of unaccountable age,young and unlearned.Look what Jesus said about the child.
Dave
} |
mercyreigns (mercyreigns)
Advanced Member
Username: mercyreigns
Post Number: 653
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 65.8.109.225
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 11:47 am: |
|
On the issue of babies and God foreknowing each human being's decision would He not have known should those babies had lived what their decision would have been? Not trying to infume just trying to figure this out.
Nancy |
sidethorn (sidethorn)
Advanced Member
Username: sidethorn
Post Number: 553
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 169.253.4.21
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 12:16 pm: |
|
Thanks Dave. Very good post. God is a good God that is just. That too is a big reason nobody will ever convince me that God sends babies to Hell over the inherited sin problem. God is bigger than that. God knows who will accept and reject the Gospel and who can be brought to a saving faith. Those who can be brought to a saving faith will get their chance to get saved before death. God will see to that. I will always believe that God also has a system here for the babies too. They can be brought to right standing before God for eternity too. I don't think God would allow someone who refuses to repent and accept Christ to die without reaching that age of accountability first. Then their rejection of Christ becomes fully accountable and binding on them for eternity. Point is if someone repents and calls on Christ to save them in this life, they get saved. After death, its too late. If those babies had lived longer, I do believe that they would call on Christ for salvation at some point and get saved like anyone else. God is love and God is just. Nobody is going to Hell without a chance at recieving Christ first. God will reach out to those who never heard of Christ in their lifetimes or the babies in His own way. He has not forgotten them one bit or left them out of His plans.
SIDETHORN |
mercyreigns (mercyreigns)
Advanced Member
Username: mercyreigns
Post Number: 655
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 65.8.109.225
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 12:44 pm: |
|
Can someone please give me chapter and verse concerning the age of accountability? This "doctrine" was taught by CHS but without Bible references. thanks
Also can someone explain this verse to me?
Deuteronomy 19:10 That innocent blood be not shed in thy land, which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance, and so blood be upon thee.
Nancy
(Message edited by mercyreigns on January 25, 2006) |
david_munson (david_munson)
Senior Member
Username: david_munson
Post Number: 2139
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 65.145.114.73
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 1:50 pm: |
|
I know that it is generally believed that since Jesus first showed up in the Temple as a 12 year old,that this relates to the age of accountability.
I doubt it.
The reason is because each individual child reaches the age of "ability" to comprehend salvation at a differant time in thier lives.
That to me is the linch pin.The ability to receive the truth with comprehension.
How many little children do you know that fit into this ability?
If you cannot with understanding receive the gospel,how can you be accountable to it?
If you have no understanding,you have no free informed choice in the matter.
Do any of us expect our children to be able to do that which is beyond their ability?
Would any of us punish our children for not knowing what was expected of them?
God is "just" beyond our justice.
Think like a parent.
God is The Father.
Matthew 2:17-18 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, In Rama was there a voice heard, lamentation, and weeping, and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not.
Jeremiah 31:15-17 Thus saith the LORD; A voice was heard in Ramah, lamentation, and bitter weeping; Rahel weeping for her children refused to be comforted for her children, because they were not.
Thus saith the LORD; Refrain thy voice from weeping, and thine eyes from tears: for thy work shall be rewarded, saith the LORD; and they shall come again from the land of the enemy.
And there is hope in thine end, saith the LORD, that thy children shall come again to their own border.
Dave
} |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 39
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.124.93
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 2:13 pm: |
|
Nancy
In Deuteronomy 19:10
The word "innocent" "naqiy" In the Hebrew, means clean, free from, exempt.It frequently refers to innocent blood shed, or the blood of an innocent individual. Seen in that verse and also in (1 Samuel 9:15, 2 Kings 21:16, Psalms 94:21, 106:38, Proverbs 6:17, Isaiah 59:7, Jeremiah 7:6, 22:3,17).
It also refers to a person who is innocent. (Job 4:7, 17:8, Psalms 10:8, Proverbs 1:11)
It also refers to those who are free from blame (Genesis 44:10) Free from liability of punishment (Exodus 21:28, 2 Samuel 14:9) Or released from an oath, ( Joshua 2:17,19,20)
In Deuteronomy 10:19 " dam naqi" meanning "Innocent blood"
In this verse guiltless people were being threatened with intentional murder or homicide. The Lord was proclaiming that His justice would prevail. |
mercyreigns (mercyreigns)
Advanced Member
Username: mercyreigns
Post Number: 657
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 65.8.109.225
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 2:33 pm: |
|
the deuteronomy verse is one of the verses chs used to say that aborted babies go to Heaven, thus my question. Hope others will comment too.
Hi dave thanks for the comments but it doesn't answer my question about the age of accountability Biblically. but really thanks.
thanks again
nancy |
john_krainis (john_krainis)
Intermediate Member
Username: john_krainis
Post Number: 167
Registered: 1-2005
Posted From: 207.5.195.112
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 2:35 pm: |
|
Nancy, John MacArthur in "Safe In The Arms Of God" describes a "condition of accountability". His premise is that those too young or mentally incapable to understand the consequences of sin and the gospel message go safely into the arms of God upon death. While this has been the commonly held view throughout much of church history there are many who object. The objection is based upon the fact that even an infant is born a sinner in need of redemption.
MacArthur's reasons:
1. The innocent children of Jonah’s Nineveh were the objects of God’s pity.
2. Calling children “innocent” in various places in Scripture (e.g. Jeremiah 19:4-7).
3. Heaven is filled with people out of every tribe and tongue (Revelation 5:9) – this could not be the case, since not every tribe and tongue heard the gospel, unless children are in heaven.
4. The children at Exodus were considered innocent of their parents' sin and therefore allowed into the Promise Land (Deuteronomy 1:39).
5. Adults who have never heard the gospel are held accountable because they have rejected both natural revelation and their own conscience. (Romans 1:16-2:1). This is not true of children.
6. Jeroboam’s baby (1 Kings 14:9-11) which was spared the judgment of the rest of the family.
7. Job’s description of the paradise enjoyed by stillborn children (Job 3:11-19).
8. Jesus likening our becoming believers to becoming like children (Matthew 18:10).
9. Jesus blesses children but at no other time blesses nonbelievers.
10. We are saved by grace, but damned by works (Revelation 20:11-15). Nowhere in the Bible is anyone condemned to hell merely for the guilt of Adam’s sin. The inhabitants of hell are there because of their own willful sin and rebellion (1 Corinthians 6:9-10; Galatians 5:19-21; Ephesians 5:5; Colossians 3:6; Revelations 21:8; 22:15). God’s wrath comes on those who suppress truth (Romans 1:18), children cannot do that. Babies are not without sin natures, but those the Bible describes as damned are willful practitioners.
11. At the death of David’s son, David expected to one day be with him. Where, in hell? Of course not. In a grave in the ground? That would hardly make a person want to clean up and have a meal. No, David expected to dwell with God forever (Psalm 23:6). |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 40
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 151.196.49.95
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 3:36 pm: |
|
Cordell
God does have foreknowledge and He does know "all" those that will accept His gift of grace/salvation.
He does not need to wait until someone believes to write His name in the book of life (Revelation 3:18, 17:8) By virtue of God's omniscience, it is impossible for Him to make a mistake and write someone's name in the book of life from the beginning of the world and then for Him to find out that He has erred and that person is not saved.
If God can err, He is no longer God. God's dispostion and will is that all men be saved and come to the knowledge of truth.
I'm not sure how this would be so hard to understand.
He is God, He knows who will accept Him, He knew before time. The very reason the Lamb was slain before the foundation of the world was to offer a free gift; for man could not save himself, his own blood was not pure enough.
His forknowledge did not destin man to hell, His forknowlege provided a way of escape for every man, through the Lamb being slain. But not every man will heed the "call", not everyman will come.
"Whosoever" Pantos - A totality or the whole, indefinate number.
"pas" Including the idea of plurality meaning "all" or "every".
Acts 2:21 and it shall come to pass, that "whosoever" shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
"Whosoever" in this verse is "pas hos an" everyone who would call on or whosoever shall call.
Also Romans 10:13- For "whosoever" shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Same Greek words "Pas hos an" Everyone who would, or whosoever shall call. |
mercyreigns (mercyreigns)
Advanced Member
Username: mercyreigns
Post Number: 659
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 65.8.109.225
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 5:48 pm: |
|
Thanks so much Press. I truly believe that God does not predestine babies and children at a young age to Hell.
I believe this because I believe His plan already allowed for abortion and children. I study the Word on a variety of subjects but I believe it is healthy and wise to gather information from other Spirit taught Christians.
I believe also that even in Calvinism as I have read many articles they never rule out Sovreignty, grace or God's mercy.
I also agree with Jim concerning Jesus propitiation. It refers to Him not to us. His dying is for the whole world but the whole world obviously isn't in or going to Heaven less there would be no hell and the mention of people going there.
Soul winning is commanded so we do it out of obedience. So whether one believes in 5 pt or 4 pt or grace alone, man's will or God's will I suppose is not an issue regarding the great commission.
I am always in wonderment of God, His whys and ways. The Bible says that God does reveal His ways to at least Moses. This leads me to believe that there are others that His ways are revealed to because He is no respecter of persons.
He also tells us those who seek Him will find Him. He is as complex as the Gospel is simple I suppose.
I am so appreciative of everyone who is participating in this discussion and hoping it is causing others who read to think.
Since leaving GG I feel much freer in my exploration of the Bible, not stuck in a box of one man's making.
And since each joint of the Body supplies I believe that every believer on the earth has something to offer me so that I may know our God that much deeper.
blessings,
Nancy |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 339
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 6:26 pm: |
|
Nowhere in the Bible is anyone condemned to hell merely for the guilt of Adam’s sin.
While I, along with many others, hold John MacArthur in very high regard-- I wonder how this statement of his comports with this:
For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 340
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 6:53 pm: |
|
Sidethorn: So are you saying Boss Martian's little Charlotte is burning in Hell right now just because she has inherited sin and never got to live long enough to reach an age where she could understand what sin and salvation is so she could accept Christ as her personal saviour like an adult would??? So Hell is full of millions of screaming little babies that never got a chance either...etc.
Sidethorn that is not what I am saying at all. I am saying that the Scriptures no where hold out comfort to human beings simply because they die in infancy.
If that were true, it is better for all of us to die in infancy rather than to reach any sort of "age of accountability" for our sins (of which so-called 'age' the Scriptures are silent).
The comfort in the Scriptures is for the children of believers in the following:
For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.
For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for joy.
This verse, speaking of John the Baptist (and I realize this is stretching it) may indicate that God can regenerate whoever he wants, whenever he wants, however he wants--even in the womb.
This also concerning John the Baptist, I think gives hope to believers for their children:
For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother's womb.
Then Paul says this of himself:
But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace
This interesting verse is in 1 Cor. 7, and we Reformed often use it for backing up our practice of paedobaptism:
For the unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.
Boss is a believer. He has every reason to hope in the Lord for his departed child on the basis of the above. Unbelievers on the other hand, have no reason to hope at all for any reason. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 341
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 7:03 pm: |
|
Jim, I am not disputing that the love of Christ is central to the passage. But that does not make it part of the definition of the word foreknow.
Sorry Hodi, I am saying that the context brings out the fullness of the meaning of the word "those whom he foreknew" which does not woodenly mean mere prescience--the intent of foreknowledge here is that those foreknown would never be separated from the love of Christ--adversely those not so foreknown fit into the "Esau have I hated" category. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 342
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 7:21 pm: |
|
Sidethorn: God can save anyone that is willing to work with Him in His way
Sorry, Sidethorn, here is precisely your gravest error. God saves those who are incapable of any sort of work or willing at all, that is why it is called grace and that is why regeneration is so miraculous.
Your will had nothing to do with your first birth, it has less to do with your second birth.
Salvation is of the LORD. Jonah 2:9c
That means all of it, you don't get to help God out--at all. |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 41
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 141.157.68.234
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 8:47 pm: |
|
Who shall seperate us from the "The love of Christ".
No one could ever do so.
In Romans 8:35 the "Love of Christ", is love in the objective , it is the Love of which "Christ" is the absolute object in the hearts of Christians.
"Agape" His benevolence.
Many verses speak of love that is derived from Christ, but in this verse He is that Love. He is the absolute Object. There is no changing it, Mal. 3:6, I am the Lord God and I change not.
Now this is absolute assurance for we are kept by Him and nothing or no one can cause that to change. |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 42
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 141.157.68.234
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 - 9:20 pm: |
|
Nancy,
Yes God's ways are past finding out. Our thoughts are not His, neither are our ways.
That no flesh should glory in His presence. So that He and He only get the glory.
One of my favorite verses is:
Psalms 103:4 Who redeemeth thy life from destruction; who crowneth thee with lovingkindness and tender mercies.
He encircles us, and protects us, while bestowing His blessings upon us.
He truly is a merciful and loving Lord. |
sidethorn (sidethorn)
Advanced Member
Username: sidethorn
Post Number: 554
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 169.253.4.21
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 7:04 am: |
|
Cordell:
God forknew that I would take Christ as my personal Saviour before time when confronted with the facts. Certainly He drew me unto Himself and gave me saving faith, something that I could not do on my own. But repentance unto salvation does have something to do with a human's will, my own included. God foreknew that I would WILLINGLY repent and recieve Christ, so He willingly drew me unto Himself. My will definately did have something to do with my salvation, it was in repentance and believing on Christ and His saving work. I couldn't work myself into God's favor or righteousness. All I could do is as an act of my own will, is take the saving work of Christ for the forgiveness of all my sin and accept Christ as my personal Saviour!!! My will had nothing to do with my first birth but definately did have something to do with the second!!!!
Your other arguments make no sense. So you're saying that if Boss Martian was not a believer that little Charlotte may be burning in Hell. No way!!! Little babies don't go to Hell because their parents don't want to follow God or believe in Christ or for any other reason. God's mercy and compassion extend far enough to cover all the little babies that died so early!! Sending a baby to Hell because their parents refuse to follow Christ is total injustice!! God will never do this kind of thing ever!!
SIDETHORN |
hodeuon (hodeuon)
Intermediate Member
Username: hodeuon
Post Number: 454
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 66.160.68.34
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 7:58 am: |
|
Jim, does the fullness of the meaning of proginosko appear in Acts 26:5 when it is used there?
"My manner of life from my youth, which was spent from the beginning among my own nation at Jerusalem, all the Jews know. *They knew me from the first*, if they were willing to testify, that according to the strictest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee." Acts 26:4-5
The words between asterisks are a translation of proginosko. I can't see where love was involved in Paul's opponents prior knowledge of him.
Hodeuon |
angelathisfeet (angelathisfeet)
New member
Username: angelathisfeet
Post Number: 24
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 68.186.254.22
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 8:52 am: |
|
All children who die under the age of accountability ARE in Heaven...that includes of course all miscarriages, abortions. At the moment of conception, its a person, whether the baby survives the womb or not. God help us as we have made the womb a tomb for countless children and continue to do so. Those of us who have lost children WILL see them again! Hallelujah, all praise, glory and honor to our soon to come KING! |
angelathisfeet (angelathisfeet)
New member
Username: angelathisfeet
Post Number: 25
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 68.186.254.22
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 8:58 am: |
|
I should add that only the Lord knows what age that is for each person. |
hodeuon (hodeuon)
Intermediate Member
Username: hodeuon
Post Number: 455
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 66.160.68.34
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 10:16 am: |
|
I would like to expand my comment of Monday, January 23, “7:36 am”, which was “I don't think we have enough information to say for sure. Which is not very comforting. Sorry.”
God is love. (1 John 4:8) God is merciful. “The LORD, the LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abounding in goodness and truth…” (Exodus 34:6) God does not want any to perish. “The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.” (2 Peter 3:9)
God is also just, not allowing sin in His presence. All people are sinful and need to be forgiven if they’re going to be with God.
With just this much information, I would not have figured out that Jesus was going to die on the cross for our sins. I would only be able to say that God is loving and just and what He does will be according to both love and justice. Fortunately we got to live after Christ’s death and resurrection and can look back and God had a plan consistent with His character. And that it totally confused everyone at the time.
continued, next message... |
hodeuon (hodeuon)
Intermediate Member
Username: hodeuon
Post Number: 456
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 66.160.68.34
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 10:17 am: |
|
Babies, mentally handicapped, those who have never heard…we know God is loving and just. We know Christ died for whomsoever will. (John 3:16) When a baby dies, is there an instinctive embracing of Christ’s love when coming before Christ? Maybe. I hope so. It’s a happy thought. But it’s sheer conjecture. Could it work this way without violating the character of God? Well, by definition, we don’t have a comprehensive, all-encompassing understanding of God. What about the mentally handicapped? They can grasp that Christ loves them and died for them without understanding “substitutionary atonement” and “hypostatic union”, right? But where is the line drawn? I have no idea. What about those who have never heard the gospel? See, this is exactly how you can slide right into universalism. But concerning those who haven’t heard the gospel – Romans 1 & 2 – God *has* given them conscience and nature. He writes in Romans that they know they’re not all right, and that they ought to be able to know *some* things about Him, too. We have all heard missionary stories about someone whom God drew to Himself, promising more information would come. And a missionary arrived. Has that happened every time? I don’t think there’s any way we can say either yes or no - too many billions of people, not enough time to check it all out, no way to check back through history. Where are we left? God is loving and just. Christ died for whomsoever will. God calls people to Himself. Just to bring this back around to Greater Grace – I can’t even figure out if Carl Stevens is sincere on some level. I’m pretty sure it’s beyond me to figure whether and how God saves people who don’t appear to be able to know they need Him. It doesn’t seem to me that an age of accountability really deals with original sin. At least, I’m still not aware of any verse that supports an age of accountability. But I trust that God’s solution is in harmony with His character, loving, just, merciful, etc.
Hodeuon |
angelathisfeet (angelathisfeet)
Junior Member
Username: angelathisfeet
Post Number: 26
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 68.186.254.22
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 11:20 am: |
|
I should add that only the Lord knows what age that is for each person. |
angelathisfeet (angelathisfeet)
Junior Member
Username: angelathisfeet
Post Number: 27
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 68.186.254.22
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 11:28 am: |
|
Sorry about the repeat, thought it didn't post. Still stand by what I said but has their own belief in these cases, no offense intended. |
angelathisfeet (angelathisfeet)
Junior Member
Username: angelathisfeet
Post Number: 28
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 68.186.254.22
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 11:29 am: |
|
but *each* |
mercyreigns (mercyreigns)
Advanced Member
Username: mercyreigns
Post Number: 660
Registered: 9-2005
Posted From: 65.8.99.158
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 1:36 pm: |
|
Hi Angel
While what you say is very idealistic and I, myself choose to believe this viewpoint, you gave no Scriptual references to back up your statements. This is one of the most fascinating subjects I have ever been involved with other Christians, many using Scripture to proove their viewpoint but there is still some disagreement. Interesting.
Unfortunately I am an idealist at heart but I don't think God is an idealist. He is the ultimate in reality. I wonder if we even have a grasp of His reality. We don't want to believe certain people are in hell, but the Truth is that the Bible is clear that there are people in Hell.
blessings
Nancy |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 344
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 7:21 pm: |
|
Please, anyone--show from scripture the so-called 'age of accountability'.
It does NOT exist. At all. Anywhere. Only in your minds--because you think God needs your P.R. for him.
If you believe that infants are innocent, you believe that there is NO SUCH thing as original sin. That means that when you are born, as an infant you are as perfect and capable of obeying God's law as was your father Adam--who was created capable of obeying God's law. That means that you don't have Adam's nature from birth. That means you (and all humans) are freshly condemned at first sin. That means a Savior could not save you, you could be your own Savior by just being obedient. Christ would just be a 'back-up'.
Original sin is real. It has a gravity and severity which obviously very few of you understand. It is your original sin, which you have by nature of being descended from Adam--that makes you sin. We don't become sinners by 'following the world'.
There is just no place in Scripture where God lowers his standard for anyone--of any age.
Does God send babies to hell? I don't bloody know. Neither do a single one of you.
Do all HUMANS regardless of age deserve hell? Yes. Beyond the shadow of a doubt. That is why ALL humans need a Savior--right from the start.
That is why Christian parents have a grave responsibility to raise their children in the 'nurture and admonition of the Lord' as Scripture directs. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 345
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 7:32 pm: |
|
Jim, does the fullness of the meaning of proginosko appear in Acts 26:5 when it is used there?
I have pointed out before that there are synonyms and shades of meaning in all languages Hodi.
You can choose, as do most of dispensationalists, to woodenly interpret the passage if you will.
Your passage is applied to humans. Do they have prescience? Do they foreknow before time, from the womb as God does, in the same manner? Is human foreknowledge like divine foreknowledge?
Now Hodi, you know that the word 'agape' can be used for the love of God as well as for lust. Does the word or the context determine the meaning?
But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you.
Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts;
Same word, Hodi, 'splain dat, Lucy. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 346
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 7:38 pm: |
|
sidethorn: God forknew that I would take Christ as my personal Saviour before time when confronted with the facts.
No, sidethorn God didn't foreknow passively what you would do and therefore base his predestination on your precious decision. He foreknew YOU, and therefore because you were regenerated FIRST, you then responded in faith and repentance.
when confronted with the facts...
The 'facts' don't confront God. God ordains them.
(Message edited by cordell on January 26, 2006) |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 347
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 7:44 pm: |
|
You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you.
We love because he first loved us. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 348
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 7:48 pm: |
|
Sending a baby to Hell because their parents refuse to follow Christ is total injustice!!
Sending the entire human race (at any age) to hell on a greased pole is total justice.
Saving some or any at all, even by the skin of their teeth, is mercy.
(Message edited by cordell on January 26, 2006) |
hodeuon (hodeuon)
Intermediate Member
Username: hodeuon
Post Number: 457
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 68.50.121.170
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 9:12 pm: |
|
Jim, your two examples of agape are only different if one comes to the table with the assumption that agape specifically and only means divine love. Well, it's doesn't - the Greeks already had it as a word before the New Testament, obviously.
As I understand it, you are stating that proginosko, "to foreknow", means something different when God is doing the foreknowing than when humans are doing the foreknowing. Without bringing Calvinist presuppositions to the table, it becomes difficult (impossible) to tell what the meaning is once you decide a word changes its meaning when describing God's actions.
I know you said foreknowledge & predestination aren't the same. Are you distinguishing election from both of them? While I'm asking questions, based on article 3.3 of the Westminster Confession would you distinguish between predestination and foreordinaton?
I have no idea why you want to keep attacking my position on the basis that I'm dispensational. There are dispensationalists who agree with you on this issue. There are non-dispensationalists who agree with me. I really think our disagreement on this issue stems from different views of God's sovereignty.
Hodeuon |
pressing_on1 (pressing_on1)
Junior Member
Username: pressing_on1
Post Number: 44
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 141.157.12.53
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 10:03 pm: |
|
Cordell,
What has happened to you today? Total change of attitude in your writting.
Are you pulling peoples legs here. I'm sure you know that it depends on the context. And I'm sure you know the word "love" has different meanings in the scripture.
"Agape"- affection, benevolence. With reference to God's love, it's His willful direction towards man.
"Agapao"- to love, and in a moral or social sense to be loved, also indicates a direction of the will and finding one's joy in something or someone.
"philos", or "phileo"- loved, dear, friend, affection or fondness for someone,
(Mark 12:38)- Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long robes, and love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief rooms at feasts;
They were seeking the love of others for themselves, seeking glory for themselves. "love" in this verse is "agapao"
(John 5:42)- But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you.
Meaning Christ was not the object in the heart of men, they did not have His love in them. "love' in that verse is "Agape"
(1 John 4:10)Herein is "love"(agape), not that we "loved"(agapao)God, but that He "loved"(agapao)us, and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.
(Message edited by pressing_on1 on January 26, 2006) |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 349
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 11:07 pm: |
|
pressing on, I have been round and round the houses on these issues before on this board. What you sense is my exasperation (perhaps unwarranted) of the inability of some individuals to read and understand plain English--But I blame the public schools.
Are you pulling peoples legs here. I'm sure you know that it depends on the context. And I'm sure you know the word "love" has different meanings in the scripture.
Pressingon are you quite aware that this is the very case I am making concerning the word 'foreknowledge'? If not please reread. You are making my point. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 350
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 11:11 pm: |
|
Hodi, I don't know how much more clear I can be than I already have.
The word "to foreknow" when applied to humans and to God can't possibly be the same because of the circumstances. Human prescience and Divine foreknowledge are different. We are powerless to direct the events of the future, God is not. Even if you were psychic and knew exactly that I was going to type--
bizzarro world
--there would be nothing that you could do about it.
God does not merely "know from the beginning" as in the sense of the passage in Acts you quote. His foreknowledge is a declaration of that which he is the cause (while not excusing human responsibility) as in Acts 2:23:
Though He was delivered up according to God's determined plan and foreknowledge, you used lawless people to nail Him to a cross and kill Him.
The folks who knew Paul from the beginning did not have a determined plan did they? Yet here with God the concepts are inseparable--as are the concepts of God's love and determination that we should be conformed to the image of his son in the eighth of Romans.
The point you make concerning the presuppositions concerning agape are equally applied to 'foreknowledge' are they not? Quibble if you must...
Do you or do you not hold that foreknowledge is mere prescience?
Answer that before you query me any further so we know your own position--my stand is fairly clear here, isn't it? Let's hear yours, please, rather than you just playing the role of grand inquisitor. I trust that this isn't one of those more difficult questions, as the one concerning the commandments of God for believers--I have made it as simple as possible.
It is fairly clear to me that the passage in Romans indicates an active and decisive knowing beforehand rather than mere passive prescience. Perhaps it is not so clear to you. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 351
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Thursday, January 26, 2006 - 11:19 pm: |
|
Hodi: I have no idea why you want to keep attacking my position on the basis that I'm dispensational.
Because dispensationalists claim what they call (and you know this full well) a literal hermeneutic--which is what you are displaying now. You are woodenly interpreting the word 'foreknow' in one passage to mean exactly the same as in another. I am saying that ain't necessarily so--as in the difference between 'rich' food and 'rich' man and a concept that is 'rich' because of irony. This concept occurs in Greek as well as in English. |
hodeuon (hodeuon)
Intermediate Member
Username: hodeuon
Post Number: 458
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 66.160.68.34
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 7:39 am: |
|
Jim,
"Grand inquisitor"??? That's pretty rich, coming from you. I am not the one who posted, "Answer that before you query me any further so we know your own position." Nor am I the person who demanded answers consisting of a simple yes or no last time we discussed theology.
I freely grant that the predetermined plan in Acts 2:23 is, well, predetermined. But that is not part of proginosko / foreknowledge. The whole phrase is "by the predetermined counsel and foreknowledge of God" / horismene boule kai proginosko. Horismene / predetermined is from orizo, a compound form of which is proorizo / "to predestine". Yes, in Acts 2:23, God had a predetermined plan, but the predetermined-ness of that plan is made known to us by the word horismene, not the word proginosko. Otherwise why be redundant?
My position is that God's foreknowledge is foreknowledge of a person - *whom* he foreknew (Rom 8:29). He foreknows those who are with Him in eternity. It's not causative. It is not foreknowledge of people's works nor foreknowledge of faith, although God certainly does know those matters.
The causative part is the next step - predestination. God has predestinated that those whom He knows in eternity will definitely be conformed to the image of Christ, that is, glorified. To bring this about, God calls, justfies, and will glorify those people.
While it's not part of Romans 8:29-30, I don't think that an unsaved person can choose God. I also don't think that a person without faith will be regenerated. Therefore I believe that regeneration and faith occur simultaneously.
Hod*euon* |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 352
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 8:02 am: |
|
Hodi: "Grand inquisitor"??? That's pretty rich, coming from you.
Gotta love 'em. That is exactly what I'm talking about. Does that mean having a lot of money in a wooden sort of way--applying one meaning to the definition of 'rich' or does context determine meaning? |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 353
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 8:16 am: |
|
Your answer and comments do determine, however (and thankfully) where we disagree--and it is the standard Calvinist/Arminian disagreement. I believe that foreknowledge is causative and that predestination is the effect of that cause.
That seems to be the case in both Acts 2:23 and in Romans 8:29. Whereas it appears that conversely reprobation is passive--and many Calvinists (supralapsarians) would disagree with me there. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 354
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 8:29 am: |
|
While it's not part of Romans 8:29-30, I don't think that an unsaved person can choose God.
Neither do I and here we agree. This concept is very much a part of Eph. 2:4-7. While foreknowledge is not specifically mentioned exactly here, the concept of the person being loved beforehand as the cause of God's action is very much there:
But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved--and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
Over the past 50 years, I've been to not just a few cemeteries. Never seen a dead person make a decision yet.
Oh yeah, let me pre-empt the 'but'...
"But this is spiritual death."
Right.
And if you were making a decision for Christ how would that not be spiritual? |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 355
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 8:41 am: |
|
Without bringing Calvinist presuppositions to the table, it becomes difficult (impossible) to tell what the meaning is once you decide a word changes its meaning when describing God's actions.
Hodi, Hodi, Hodi. (I know, you're the one in the excluded middle)
I would have thought--regardless of what presuppositions we bring to the table--that when an omnipotent Creator-Provider-First Cause God foreknows a person as in Romans 8:29 and when a finite, created-dependent human foreknows a person that the CONTEXT determines if there is a change in meaning.
I don't think that's arbitrary--but rather sensible. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 356
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 8:48 am: |
|
He foreknows those who are with Him in eternity. It's not causative.
Scene: God in heaven (wide-eyed and surprised) looking at a lot of people. God speaks:
"Hey, I know you! How'd you get in here?"
If it's not causative--you think foreknowledge is passive, right?
(Message edited by cordell on January 27, 2006) |
hodeuon (hodeuon)
Intermediate Member
Username: hodeuon
Post Number: 459
Registered: 11-2004
Posted From: 66.160.68.34
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 8:59 am: |
|
"Never seen a dead person make a decision yet."
Dead as in deceased or dead as in separated? Who is being wooden when it suits him now?
Hodeuon |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 357
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 9:10 am: |
|
From "Why I Am Not An Arminian" by Peterson and Williams, IVP (2004):
Arminians and Calvinists understand foreknowledge differently. Arminians hold that God foresees who will believe in him and chooses people for salvation on that basis. This is called conditional election because God's choice is based upon foreseen human belief or unbelief. Calvinists disagree and usually maintain that God's foreknowledge means his choosing of people for salvation. Arminians rightly protest that if this is true then Paul teaches that those whom God chose (foreknew) he also chose (predestined). The apostle is not merely reiterating the same idea. More>>> |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 358
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 9:14 am: |
|
Dead as spiritually dead and incapable of making spiritual decisions as physically dead people are incapable of making any decisions.
That's why I continued with, "Right". |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 359
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 9:31 am: |
|
More>>>...When Paul says, "God foreknew" people in Ro.8:29, therefore, he means that God planned to enter into a saving relationship with them, to set his love upon them. Scripture teaches that God did this "before the creation of the world" (Eph.1:4) and "before the beginning of time"(2Tim.1:9). "For those God foreknew he also predestined," means that "God predestined us on the basis of his gracious commitment to us before the world was."[quotes from "The Meaning of Foreknowledge" in Still Sovereign (Baker, 2000)]
"Because those foreknown are the same ones who are predestined, called, justified, and glorified and because Scripture teaches that not everyone will be finally glorified, it follows that not everyone is foreknown or loved beforehand."
God knows beforehand all events, contingencies, etc. But in the Romans passage foreknowledge is not passive, and is causative because all those foreknown are those glorified in the following verses. None of those foreknown (or loved beforehand) are not glorified. |
cordell (cordell)
Intermediate Member
Username: cordell
Post Number: 360
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 67.11.216.61
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 9:56 am: |
|
More>>> Arminius wrote:
To these (God's first three decrees) succeeds the FOURTH decree, by which God decreed to save and damn certain particular persons. This decree has its foundation in the foreknowledge of God, by which he knew from all eternity those individuals who would through his preventing grace, believe and, through his subsequent grace would persevere, according to the before described administration of those means which are suitable and proper for conversion and faith; and by which foreknowledge, he likewise knew those who would not believe and persevere.
It becomes obvious that Arminius was at least sensible in his logic of passive foreknowledge. He did not necessarily hold to the current "once saved always saved" notion of his American descendents (whose logic is wanting). Arminius is consistent that if the human will is active and synergistic in salvation it must be active and synergistic in keeping a person saved. His theological descendents want to rob a form of Calvinism's perseverence of the saints which morphs into a Chaferian view of the scripturally non-existent carnal Christian who can make a decision and have nothing in his life changed but that now he has 'fire insurance' and a prepunched ticket to heaven. Arminius misses the flow of the Romans 8 passage, however, because every one foreknown is glorified there, and in his thinking this is not so--in fact, one foreknown and justified may not necessarily be glorified. This violates the passage.
(Message edited by cordell on January 27, 2006) |
hadasa (hadasa)
Intermediate Member
Username: hadasa
Post Number: 148
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 205.172.107.75
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 10:16 am: |
|
Gentlemen,
so were tackling what theologians wincingly refer to as "The Question" eh,
just like to share what I consider one of the better approaches to the subject:
Now I guess L.S. Chafer falls under the 'label' of dispensationalist, and to some that connotes some negative things (not sure why because reading Chafers presentation of the dispensations - seems balanced and obvious)....but try to read the following excerpt on it's own merits in context of this election/choice debate. It's of note that this 'dispensationalist' (as some may label him) may tend towards the calvanistic side WITH what I may loosely term 'qualifications'
My problem has been 'if their was no choices made in connection to our regeneration', their surely seems to be myriads of scriptural references of choices to be made in our sanctification as seen in the consequences of sin unto death in corinthians of believers and eternal rewards in heaven vs wood hay and stubble. Also, even the appeal to beleive unto regeneration seems to be strongly couched in a choice basis - all thru scripture.
saying that God gives both the power and desire to obey will not satisfy the argument of choice/no choice because it's apparent that christians can fall short of God's desired will for them in the temporal realm.
This following excerpt helps some with the choice question but it should not be a surprise that in the seasoned mind and research done by Chafer of the Church's theologians past work on this subject; the conclusion remains that some of it cannot be completely comphrehended (on this side of eternity anyway).
I would appreciate any comments regarding my comments or on the attached excerpt (SEE NEXT POST).
(Message edited by hadasa on January 27, 2006) |
hadasa (hadasa)
Intermediate Member
Username: hadasa
Post Number: 149
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 205.172.107.75
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 10:18 am: |
|
The following is from L.S. Chafer -
"One of the knotty problems on the doctrine of election is the relationship of election to foreknowledge. One form of interpretation which tends to soften the concept of election builds on the idea that God foreknew those who would recieve Christ, and on the basis of this foreknowledge elected them to salvation. This concept, however, has inherent problems as it seems to make God subject to a plan in which He is not sovereign. While election and foreknowledge are coextensive, foreknowledge in itself would not be determinative.
Although theologians have wrestled with these problems and often have failed to come up with satisfactory conclusions, one possible solution is to recognize to begin with that God is omniscient, that is, He had knowledge of all possible plans for the universe. Out of all the possible plans with their infinite number of variations, God chose a plan. Having chosen a plan and knowing all its details, God could then foreknow those who would be saved or elected and also all the facts that relate to their salvation.
The immediate problem that faces the interpreter, however, is that of human freedom. It seems evident from experience as well as from Scripture that man has choices. How can one avoid a fatalistic system where everything is predetermined and no moral choice are left? Is human responsibility just a mockery or is it real? These are the problems which face the interpreter of Scripture on this difficult doctrine. (SEE NEXT POST) |
hadasa (hadasa)
Intermediate Member
Username: hadasa
Post Number: 150
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 205.172.107.75
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 10:20 am: |
|
While theologians have never been able to resolve completely the problem of divine election as related to human choices and moral responsibility on the part of man, the answer seems to be that in choosing a plan God chose the plan as a whole, not piecemeal. He knew in advance, before the choice of a plan, who in this plan would be saved and who would not be saved. By faith we must assume that God chose the best possible plan, and that if a better plan could have been put into operation God would have chose it. The plan included much that God would do Himself, such as creation and the establishment of natural law. It included what God sovereignly chose to do Himself, such as to reveal Himself through the prophets and influence men in their choices even though they still are responsible for the choices they make.
In other words, the plan included giving man some freedom of choice for which he would be held responsible. The fact that God knew under each plan what each man would do does not mean that God forced man to do something against his will and then punish him for it.
In the notable instance of the cruxifiction of Christ, on which the whole plan of God hinged, Pilate freely made a choice to crucify Christ and was held responsible for it. Judas Iscariot freely determined to betray Christ and was held responsible for it. yet the choices of both Pilate and Judas wee essentially God's program and were sure long before they made them.
Accordingly, while there are problems in human comprehension, the best solution is to accept what the Bible teaches whether or not we can understand it completely.
It must be concluded, then, that election and its kindred terms are clearly taught in the Bible, that it involves some being chosen to salvation with others being nonelect or passed by. Election is eternal and not an Act of God in time. In election God does not adjust to foreknowledge, although election may be seen to proceed from omniscience of God. While there are serious problems in human comprehension of this doctrine, one should submit to divine revelation even if he cannot completely understand it." |
hadasa (hadasa)
Intermediate Member
Username: hadasa
Post Number: 151
Registered: 6-2005
Posted From: 205.172.107.75
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 10:52 am: |
|
"I trust that this isn't one of those more difficult questions, as the one concerning the commandments of God for believers--I have made it as simple as possible." - Cordell
This wasn't difficult at all; The commandments (moral will) of God for believers are to be kept/fulfilled thru faith by the power of the Holy Spirit within the believer in tandem with a knowledge of those commandments in nature and in the scriptural revelation. |
sidethorn (sidethorn)
Advanced Member
Username: sidethorn
Post Number: 555
Registered: 1-2006
Posted From: 158.59.27.35
| | Posted on Friday, January 27, 2006 - 11:30 am: |
|
Cordell:
When meeting Christ years ago, I knew that the justice of God for sin condemns the entire human race to Hell. I also know that nobody can work their way into God's favor or earn their way into Heaven. You've been misinterpreting my posts and Scripture all over this thread here!!!
While the justice of God demands punishment for sin and the whole human race, the mercy of God provides for God the Son to die and go to Hell for EVERY human (1 John 2:2)!!! God the Father was satisfied with the payment of God the Son in His blood sacrifice and taking on all the punishment we would have had to take had He not come to die for us. Therefore God the Father physically resurrected God the Son back to life for us!!! The gift of salvation is for whosoever WILL accept it by faith. That's what I meant by saying who would work with God in my other post. I never meant works for salvation. God extends salvation to all, but only a few will "work with God" in accepting it b | |
