Election And Predestination In Complete Harmony

[Yeshua1]

Think since jesus is Yahweh, answer is no...

 

[MennoSota]

You tell me. Please provide scripture and a clear explanation of how you see that scripture speaking to that issue.

Oh my goodness. I provided scripture.
I take your response as you saying that God is, in fact, bound in time.
You think that God is bound in time. Yes or no.

 

[Yeshua1]

Oh my goodness. I provided scripture.
I take your response as you saying that God is, in fact, bound in time.
You think that God is bound in time. Yes or no.

Guess He is, as some seem to think that He is not sure who will get saved, just waiting on us to reply!

 

[Revmitchell]

Oh my goodness. I provided scripture.
I take your response as you saying that God is, in fact, bound in time.
You think that God is bound in time. Yes or no.

I don't care what you want to take my response as. I never said that however. People have a very bad habit of trying to impose their so called logic on scripture and God when it never clearly makes the case. I believe God is eternal. That is far as I am going with it because that is as far as scripture goes with it. Attributing to God what He has not clearly said, I believe, is very grievous.

 

[Revmitchell]

Guess He is, as some seem to think that He is not sure who will get saved, just waiting on us to reply!

If you are attributing this statement to me you are in error and completely misrepresenting my position.

 

[MennoSota]

I don't care what you want to take my response as. I never said that however. People have a very bad habit of trying to impose their so called logic on scripture and God when it never clearly makes the case. I believe God is eternal. That is far as I am going with it because that is as far as scripture goes with it. Attributing to God what He has not clearly said, I believe, is very grievous.

The question is not difficult for you to answer.

Is God bound in time?

My answer is no.

What is your answer, Rev?

Will you avoid the question or not?

 

[Revmitchell]

The question is not difficult for you to answer.

Is God bound in time?

My answer is no.

What is your answer, Rev?

Will you avoid the question or not?

I have already answered it.

 

[MennoSota]

If you are attributing this statement to me you are in error and completely misrepresenting my position.

Rev, we get it.
Scripture has been provided. You reject that God saying he is the "I Am" means that he is outside of time. You, therefore, impose upon God that he only exists in time...something that God, himself, created. So, in your view, God has bound himself within his creation and cannot get out of time.
Interesting.

 

[Revmitchell]

You, therefore, impose upon God that he only exists in time...something that God, himself, created. So, in your view, God has bound himself within his creation and cannot get out of time.
Interesting.

This is false I did not say this, claim, this, nor imply this. Leveling accusations of this sort is poor behavior and unChrisitan as well. It seems you are working to impose your own personal logic on me as you do scripture. A rather haughty attitude that leads to this poor behavior.

 

[Dr. Bob]

This is false I did not say this, claim, this, nor imply this. Leveling accusations of this sort is poor behavior and unChrisitan as well. It seems you are working to impose your own personal logic on me as you do scripture. A rather haughty attitude that leads to this poor behavior.

False accusation noted, brother. IF you said something, the accuser should "quote" it. To "draw inferences" from what you said is NOT acceptable.

A person who would attack you, therefore, must be a _____ ______ and _____ (if I were to draw inferences and attack, I would fill in those blanks.

 

[MennoSota]

This is false I did not say this, claim, this, nor imply this. Leveling accusations of this sort is poor behavior and unChrisitan as well. It seems you are working to impose your own personal logic on me as you do scripture. A rather haughty attitude that leads to this poor behavior.

Is God bound in time? Yes or No.

Even Arminians and Semi-Pelagian's say no.

 

[SovereignGrace]

But that is not the whole story.

It says none seek God. None understand.

God elected that those who would believe would be given the power (right) to become the sons of God. (John 1:12)

And who are those who receive Him? Those who are born of God. Yes, ppl do receive Him. But those who receive are born of God.[John 1:13] Who are those who love Him? Those who are born of God.[1 John 4:7] Who are those who know God?[again 1 John 4:7]

So if none understand, then those who know(exact opposite of not understanding), it shows regeneration by the Spirit is a must before they can understand and know God.

Again John 1:12

Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God—

Ppl wanna focus on John 1:12 and think we Calvinists deny ppl receive Him. Au contraire mon ami. But when there are none who understand(none knowing God), none who seek Him, how can they receive Him in who they don't know(understand) and seek?

Now, these are the ppl who understand and seek Him...
children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.[John 1:13]

It is way off from your errant view I will agree.

Yah. Riiiiiiiiiiiight!!!

No, I never said such a thing nor can anything I have said be taken that way. What I have said is that God predestined, elected, chose all who believe to have the power, the right, the privilege, the capacity, the freedom to become the sons of God. John 1:12 Nothing about that statement says people are predestining themselves. Not even close.

Ppl don't have the freedom to become the sons of God in an unregenerate state. They are dead(nekros...corpse) in transgressions and sins.[Ephesians 2:1] They are slaves to sin.[Romans 6:6 & 6:16] Jesus said no one can come(bound in sin...slave) to Him except the Father draw him. And those who come the Father will raise up on the day of Judgment.[John 6:37 & 6:40]They, in that state, no more seek God than Lazarus did whilst in the grave, those piled up bones in Ezekiel 37, the widow's son in Luke 7, the 12 y/o virgin in Mark 5, the widow's son in 1 Kings 18, &c.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Brother, your desire to understand the Scriptures is commendable. But I believe there is a way we can impose meaning into a text that was never meant to be there. I'm not sure what I want to phrase it, but for now we will call it hyper-christocentricism. When we force some facet of Christ's work into a text that may not really be there, we are bordering on bad hermeneutic.

I really appreciate Abraham Kuruvilla's principles of "Christ-iconic" approach to the Scriptures (for preaching).

Here is a blurb about his book...

Abraham Kuruvilla’s book, Privilege the Text, offers a theological hermeneutic for preaching. I have surveyed the book here and offered some review here. Today I would like to nudge our thinking in respect to AK’s suggestion that we replace a Christocentric approach with a Christiconic approach. That is, rather than trying to see Christ in every text of Scripture, we should see a facet of Christ’s perfect morality in every text, and as we present that theologically derived “divine demand,” the hope is that our listeners will be moved to align themselves with it and thus become progressively sanctified into the image of Christ (hence, “christ-iconic”). (not my blurb)

Ok, now, understandably so, when we see a shadow or a prophetic occurrence of Christ or His Work, we should take that Literally, no doubt. But we mustn't let the Scriptures speak of something that isn't quite there. This Isaiah Passage, a pre-exilic Prophet, Has future prophecies of Israel, the Church, the Messiah, the Kingdom and the Heavenlies. Differentiating between a near fulfillment (exilic) or far fulfillment (Is. 53--Christ's Death and Resurrection) can be foggy and can be clear. But the reconciliation language must be applied to the context and Jesus does not always equal Israel in the sense that God is simply talking about the Nation at times. Also, once again, we must not smash "Jesus" into passages that may not really be talking about Him.

On the Road to Emmaus, Jesus Spoke to the two disciples and Expounded on the Scriptures that were speaking about Him. It is implied that there are some Scriptures that are not directly talking about Him. Some people do not like that thought, but it's the truth.

Hope this helps, blessings my friend!

I may have misapplied that passage. Sorry for that.

 

[Yeshua1]

I was referring to some as not you, but others in the Body....

 

[Yeshua1]

Is God bound in time? Yes or No.

Even Arminians and Semi-Pelagian's say no.

The Open Theists would say yes, and I am NOT calling our friend here that!

 

[Mr. Davis]

Some believe that salvation requires God's part and our part. Predestination + man's response.
This really means that Christ's blood does not have infinite value. His blood, alone, was totally and completely sufficient to save us in eternity past. (God does not exist in time). Christ's work is finished. We have no part to add to our salvation.

Everyone hears God's outward call. Those who are predestined to perdition, God will not allow to also hear His inward call. The Elect will hear both calls. God works in their hearts. They can do nothing but receive Him.

God is not unjust. Some (the Elect) will receive mercy. The rest will receive eternal retribution for their deeds.

 

[tyndale1946]

AMEN!... My Brother In The Lord Jesus Christ... Who is the common denominator in the following verses... Is it talking about man responsibility?... No God does it ALL!... Brother Glen

Romans 8:28 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.

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.

8:30 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.

8:31 What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?

8:32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?

8:33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.

8:34 Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.

 

[Mr. Davis]

AMEN!... My Brother In The Lord Jesus Christ... Who is the common denominator in the following verses... Is it talking about man responsibility?... No God does it ALL!... Brother Glen

8:28 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.

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.

8:30 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.

8:31 What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?

8:32 He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?

8:33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.

8:34 Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.

Thank you, Brother Glen!! May God have ALL the Glory and none to man.

 

[Revmitchell]

It says none seek God. None understand.

Until God seeks them.

And who are those who receive Him? Those who are born of God. Yes, ppl do receive Him. But those who receive are born of God.[John 1:13]

That is your imposition on that passage. It in no way places born in front of receive or believe.

Who are those who love Him? Those who are born of God.[1 John 4:7] Who are those who know God?[again 1 John 4:7]

OK? This passage in no way explains the mechanics of salvation.

So if none understand, then those who know(exact opposite of not understanding), it shows regeneration by the Spirit is a must before they can understand and know God.

Again imposing your personal logic and reasoning on scripture. However, God is not limited by our spiritual condition. Being dead in our sins does not restrain God from reaching in our hearts and opening it up and allowing us to choose. We have a big God and He can choose to do it however He wants. There is nothing to stand in the way.


Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God—

Ppl wanna focus on John 1:12 and think we Calvinists deny ppl receive Him. Au contraire mon ami. But when there are none who understand(none knowing God), none who seek Him, how can they receive Him in who they don't know(understand) and seek?

You are welcome to repeat yourself but it fails to make your point regardless of how many times you say it.

Now, these are the ppl who understand and seek Him...
children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.[John 1:13]

God requiring a response to the gospel in no way makes it by the will of man.

Ppl don't have the freedom to become the sons of God in an unregenerate state.

God has the power to reach their hearts in an unregenerate state. Is God required or limited by our unregenerate state to only be able to save them in complete regeneration in order for them to choose to believe? Or is our God more powerful than that.

They are dead(nekros...corpse) in transgressions and sins.[Ephesians 2:1] They are slaves to sin.[Romans 6:6 & 6:16] Jesus said no one can come(bound in sin...slave) to Him except the Father draw him.

Which also supports John 1:13. The debate here is just what is this drawing and how far does it go?

And those who come the Father will raise up on the day of Judgment.[John 6:37 & 6:40]They, in that state, no more seek God than Lazarus did whilst in the grave, those piled up bones in Ezekiel 37, the widow's son in Luke 7, the 12 y/o virgin in Mark 5, the widow's son in 1 Kings 18, &c.

They do seek God if they have been drawn by God and their hearts opened up by God to choose to receive God. I'm sorry but simply saying we are dead in our sinful state does nothing to address the mechanics of what work God does in our hearts in the salvation process. No scripture says this comes first then this and then that other than we must believe, receive, and be saved. To speak on it beyond that is just simply not in scripture.

When we are given a gift does reaching out and receiving it from the giver over show that it is no longer a gift but something we worked for? I am unaware of this being the case ever. yet when it comes to salvation our reformed brethren want to apply such logic that in no case anywhere else gets applied. If someone says Mark I have this gift for you do I just let my hands hang loose at my side and do nothing to receive it? When I do receive it does anyone say that I worked for that gift? Does opening a present up that was given to me for my birthday mean it is no longer a gift.

When we take things like Spiritual death and give it power beyond what God and do, in other words limit God because of the power of spiritual death then I think we have take our understanding of spiritual death too far.

 

[Revmitchell]

Is God bound in time? Yes or No.

Even Arminians and Semi-Pelagian's say no.

Good think I am neither one of those. Once again I have answered your question. You want to set up a limitation around that question as if it is nothing more than a yes or no response. I reject your self imposed limitation on that. Go back and read my answer. This is that last time I will address this question.