Featured Salvation Is By The Interposition And Mercy Of God Alone

The "whom" in the verse are persons plural. The Son doesn't need to conform to His own image. And I am not a Calvinist, BTW.

 

This guy should define just what he thinks Calvinism is then rather then making vague comments regarding it. My dear mother used to say that your thinking something may just be a guess but if you know something then you will study it, experience it 1st hand and then your able to truly know it. We had a guy on here recently (Archangel) who has studied both Greek & Hebrew for years securing masters degrees in both and I know he pastors a church on the east coast. Now he has credibility and when he speaks I am apt to listen.

 

Read that verse again 37. "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren." God being omniscient knows all that will freely trust in Him but knowing does not mean He causes them to trust in Him. Are you suggesting that He has chosen beforehand who will actually trust in Him?

 

I don't care whether or not you call yourself a Calvinist. The doctrine you are defending is Calvinism or a form of it. If you quack like a duck then I'm going to speak as though you are one. Get used to it.

The point about "whom" is utterly irrelevant to the point of literal stupidity. I hope you haven't formulated the rest of your doctrine on such a flimsy basis!

Guess what?

There are people would are members of the body of Christ!

DUH!

 

Yes, that is what he is saying that he believes.

Your beliefs concerning omniscience come from the same source as his belief in predestination. They are both wrong for essentially the same reason.

Biblically, God knows all that is both knowable and that He wants to know. Any doctrine that goes further than that is unbiblical and is almost certainly predicated on Augustinian doctrine which Augustine himself said was predicated on Greek philosophy (i.e. Socrates, Aristotle and Plato).

 

Do you not see how dumb your comment was? How could God know He did not want to know something unless He already knew it? Why should we believe anything you say since you deny an attribute of God?

Augustine brought many pagan ideas into the church from his past.

 

You are the one who doesn't understand Romans 8:29.

Now I have been Christian since 1962.

Romans 8:29, . . . For whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate [to be] conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. . . .

 

The "whom" are "them."

This has context, Romans 8:28-30, . . . And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. . . .

The "whom" are "them."

 

Once again this passage is claimed to say what it does not say. Eisegesis 101

1) All these things (blessings) work together for the good of those who love God, to those called into His kingdom.

2) Those that He planned for in His redemption plan, He also planned for them to be conformed to the image of His Son, made a child of God, so that Jesus would be the one born first from the dead, among many siblings made alive together with Christ. And now, for those fitting the requirements of His redemption plan, He transferred spiritually into Christ's body, and once in Christ, they have been washed by His blood, thus justified, and now are glorified spiritually being united with Christ.

3) The "whom" Paul has in view are the current in his day born anew believers.

 

"Eisegesis (/ˌaɪsɪˈdʒiːsɪs/) is the process of interpreting text in such a way as to introduce one's own presuppositions, agendas or biases. It is commonly referred to as reading into the text. It is often done to "prove" a pre-held point of concern, and to provide confirmation bias corresponding with the pre-held interpretation and any agendas supported by it" [from the internet]

 

@Van,
Re: Romans 8:28-30. Who is reading what into this text?

 

Did you intentionally miss the point here or what?

God knows pretty nearly everything that is knowable but He isn't required to know absolutely everything. I don't have to be omniscient to know that I don't want to watch my daughter and her husband have relations with each other. I don't have to be omniscient to know that I do not want to be a first person witness to the disgusting things that happen in the back rooms of gay bars. Likewise, God is not required to keep track of the meaningless minutia of existence like the precise disposition of every atom and photon of light.

Calvin's blasphemous doctrine doesn't merely teach that God is forced by His own nature to sit and watch every pornographic film ever made but that those films were all made because He predestined them to be made!

Chief among them being the idea that God is utterly immutable. The premise upon which all of the Omni doctrines (as normally taught) as well as the rest of Calvinism's distinctive doctrines are based.

 

I know you the them are but you did not answer the question. Are you suggesting that He has chosen beforehand who will actually trust in Him?

 

Even if so, that trust precedes pur regeneration. Ephesians 1:4, . . . According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, . . .

That doesn't change God's requirement.

 

So you are denying the omniscience of God? What your saying is that God can be surprised. Are you saying that God can lie, can change. Mal_3:6 "For I the LORD do not change..." God's character and mercy are constant and, so too, are Jesus Christ's. Heb 13:8 "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever." If God would change then how could we trust what He has said. Jas 1:17 " Every good thing given and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shifting shadow."

I do not ascribe to the illogical comments of Sproul re every molecule or hold to Calvins' misguided theories.

 

Repeating yourself as though I haven't refuted your claim doesn't count as a rebuttal.

What are you even doing here if you have no interest in debating your position? Your unsupported personal opinions and out of context proof-texting is boring.

 

Your staring to sound like a calvinist. By your answer to the question it would seem you think God has picked out all those that will be saved. That is a calvinist understanding of that verse.

If they were already picked out then what requirement do they have to meet?

 

Your argument is merely denial. Your agreement is not needed.

 

Remarkable. I am not a Calvinist.