Featured “I was predestined to be an Arminian or I chose to be a Calvinist.”

I do not believe that any who trusted in Jesus will ever be told that I never knew you only those who we're doing their own will not the Fathers and doing it in Jesus name. They are the evil doers.

 

I'd like you to attempt these questions:

What are the distinguishing qualifications of those that are in favor with God, and entitled to his eternal rewards? Or, which comes to the same thing, What is the nature of true religion? And wherein do lie the distinguishing notes of that virtue and holiness that is acceptable in the sight of God?

 

IC,
Jesus in the next "chapter" prays for the apostles and then all of us who will believe their testimony. One of those apostles, Paul, says by the Holy Spirit: For all the promises of God in Him are Yes, and in Him Amen, to the glory of God through us. Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and has anointed us is God, who also has sealed us and given us the Spirit in our hearts as a guarantee. We have the same Holy Spirit and the COMPLETE Word of God.

Concerning your second paragraph. I am in agreement with the text that I already quoted. He WILL guide us into All truth. It is a process. We are to grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. It's called sanctification and it is the work of God just as the rest of the process is. Why do the elect persevere? Because Jesus never fails.

I thank my God upon every remembrance of you, always in every prayer of mine making request for you all with joy, for your fellowship in the gospel from the first day until now, being confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ; just as it is right for me to think this of you all, because I have you in my heart, inasmuch as both in my chains and in the defense and confirmation of the gospel, you all are partakers with me of grace. For God is my witness, how greatly I long for you all with the affection of Jesus Christ.

Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling; for it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure.

 

My apologies Skandelon. I was needling you a bit. I read this board far more often than I post so I feel like I know some of the "characters" on here when I really do not.

My post was merely trying to point out that predestination according to the determinate counsel of the will of God does not negate man's choices, volition or accountability.

However, one of the problems with your post is that you are putting predestination up against the freedom of the will. Election is not an argument against the freedom of the will, that is addressed in the doctrine of Total Depravity.

Predestination is really about the Counsel of God's will that is not reactive and subjective but sovereign and objective and it relates to his sovereignty, immutability and the distinction between that which he has decreed, that which he has declaratively willed.

On God's Will and Decrees Boyce says:

and concerning election:

With respect to free will I suggest to you that the pervasiveness of total depravity has corrupted the freedom of the will so that the choices made with volition are always coloured by, informed by and tainted by the corruption in the heart.

So in other words it is not predestination that is somehow preventing you from making certain choices, it is your depravity. A belief in the decrees and plan of God according to the determinate counsel of his will does not deny that you make choices, possess a will and act with volition. In some cases God will act and intervene and in other's he will not, but all to the accomplishment of his sovereign purpose and design.

Does this then mean that man cannot choose God because his will is tainted by depravity? That depends on what you mean by "choose God." Unsaved men have been "choosing God" for centuries. There are unsaved men with faith. So then we must understand that it is not any faith that saves but faith in the shed blood of Lord Jesus Christ and a trusting in him personally as an all sufficient saviour. This kind of faith does not arise from a decision produced in the exercise of our will, nor can it because of depravity. It is the product of a repentant heart whereby our will is changed. This repentance and faith are gifts of grace bestowed at the effectual calling of the Holy Spirit.

The difference between the two positions as I see it is that one believes salvation is provided by God generally and that while God compels men to be saved it is effected by man in the exercise of his will to have faith. In opposition to that, and the position that I hold is that God offers salvation to all but has purposed some specifically to obtain it, compels them specifically and effects that salvation wholly by grace all according to the design and immutability of his purpose. Man becomes active as a recipient of the grace of God and before this he is at enmity and opposition to God.


While I am declaring more than arguing a position I think it is necessary when such a position does not appear to be understood.

 

One subnote friend. If you are a student of James Montgomery Boyce, please note he was never a fan of the term " Total depravity" as he felt it to be misleading. See to JMB, totally could mean "utterly" which easily could imply that people are as bad as they could possibly be (which isn't true)

I'd prefer you adjust to Radical Depravity and/or Total Inability..... maybe even "radical corruption" which I personally like.

Carry on... your doing well :thumbs:

 

thanks EWF, you make a good point.
Depravity is not total in degree, but total in extent. I agree with the caveat about how the term can be misunderstood. I think the term depravity on its own is pretty good since you pretty much have to qualify and explain any descriptor you use anyways...

 

SM,

We are on the same page as far as God's grace goes. And yes In Jn 17...we are included as those who would believe on THIER word..[the apostolic word}

But ...it is that very reason that the Apostles were unique.....let me show what i am saying like this:

These are spoken directly and only to the Apostles ;

We all are given the Holy Spirit since Pentecost.....but follow along for a minute-

None of us was present with Jesus when he spoke to the Apostles here as in vs 25,
He promised to teach them.....ALL THINGS.....

He did not teach them how to build a maytag refrigerator....but all things that pertain to life and godliness as Peter tells us.

1} He did this in person by direct revelation

2} he did this after he rose from the grave

3} He did this after ascending to Heaven through the Spirit.

This is why all charismatic ideas are wrong, because He has guided the Apostles into ALL TRUTH....The Faith Once{once for all time} delivered to the saints

And In verse 26...he will bring ALL THINGS to your remembrance...you see this in Acts 11:18

jn15

None of us was with Jesus from the beginning...but these were ordained :

Jn16; he gives further instuction to them:

If you read chapter 14, 15, 16 together ...then you see when and how we are concluded in 17....because of the ALL TRUTH...given to the Apostles...otherwise we would all be infallable...

Jn17;

 

The whole book of james goes a long way to lay this out for us.
20 For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God.

21 Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.
22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.

23 For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:

24 For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.

25 But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.

26 If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion is vain.

27 Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.

Peter tells us how to make our Calling and Election...sure
[QUOTE Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord,

3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:

4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

5 And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge;

6 And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness;

7 And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity.

8 For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.

9 But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins.

10 Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:

11 For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

12 Wherefore I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and be established in the present truth.
][/QUOTE]

 

Your premise is still wrong. It could be that these men simply did not understand Scripture.

 

Nice try...

But whatever you two wish to call it to support your systematic philosophy, it still logically fails in regards to totality of inability vs creaturely volition because humans either have volitional abilities or they do not, both cannot logically be true.

How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn’t make it a leg. ~ Abraham Lincoln

Now to qualify and explain “volition” further through a simple logical truth– I’ll suggest you read my signature:

 

:laugh: Keep that up & you will be in line to win the VAN award :tongue3:

 

he would have to include though statements to how illogical and non biblcal calvinism is!

 

Boring first post. Pointless if you know your Bible.

 

So instead of engaging in the topic, you merely fire away an ad hominem in questioning Skan's knowledge of the Bible.

Typical.

 

Hello Taffy

Can you deall Welsh wrth Spoken ysgrifenedig. Os so, are you Doctrines of Grace in Faith?:smilewinkgrin:

 

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

Hello Benjamin,

I think there are some problems with the statement in your signature. Forest Keener in his Grace not Calvinism says:

The point being that when you say that a Calvinist denies volition you are mischaracterizing the doctrine. Furthermore, your signature says you define Free will as volition but that is incomplete. Volition (in the common and accepted "Websters" understanding of the word) is "The faculty or power of using one's will" In the psychological sense it is defined as: "the cognitive process by which one decides on a particular course of action." Free will on the other hand by necessity also concerns whether there are constraints upon that volition. This is where I suggest the will is not free in man. The constraints upon his will are governed by his nature as sinful creature at enmity with God.

There is a difference between total incapability to choose any moral good and a total incapability to choose a course of action that has in its purpose solely the glory of God. I hope you can see the difference.

You see, according to your definition volition is already made void due to his response determined by the irresistible effect of his sinful nature from which he cannot outrun.

 

Earth Wind and Fire,

I should have pointed out that my earlier quote was from James Petigru Boyce, not James Montgomery Boyce...

 

:thumbsup::applause::thumbs::applause:

 

Arguing on things like this is just chasing tails though. I did not mean disrespect but it gets nowhere. Apologize anyway if I was rude.