KJB1611reader
Active Member
Define 'preservance of saints.' First we must make sure we have the right term defintions.
Yes, a Christian can be backslidden and still be saved.
Yes, a Christian can be backslidden and still be saved.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I am not Reformed.
- Thread starter KJB1611reader
- Start date
In short, we don’t see the same thing being said because of the difference in our theology concerning Calvinism.
I don’t think Jesus is saying that they can never believe Jesus. The Calvinist says that they are not permitted to come.
What I see in Jesus’ teaching is that the Pharisees have a problem with the things Jesus is doing. They don’t believe what Jesus is doing is from God because they are not following God.
The thieves and robbers are the teachers who are teaching something other than what God wants, whether they appear to be close like the Pharisees or far away like the prophets of Baal.
This comment is made directly to certain Pharisees. Jesus is teaching them that His works and words are spiritually discerned.
Once again this statement means different things to me than it does to the Calvinist. I see Calvinism adding to it what is not meant to be there.
No, God is not blocking any to come to Jesus, as their sin natures and desires do that quite well for them on their own
Did anyone say God was pretending not to know? Nope. Please address the actual issue.
Did anyone say God's omniscience is limited by our choices? Nope God seems to have limited His knowledge to provide us with actual choice.
To the contrary, I believe if God knows what we will choose, then we have no actual choice, only the non-choice of the only action God knows we will make.
Did anyone say if you think hard enough it will happen? Nope, please address the actual issue.
I believe God chose not to know if Adam would sin, to provide an actual choice to sin, and to hold Adam responsible for that sin.
Jesus was slain about 2000 years ago, well after the creation week and subsequent sin of Adam.
I believe once saved, always saved, so I claim to be a one point Calvinist. And I believe people sin of their own volition, rather than sin because God predestined "whatsoever comes to pass."
I am addressing the issue. You are running in circles with your conclusions.
To sum up your belief to the best of my understanding…
If I choose, and God knows what I will choose, then I didn’t choose because God knows.
Logically, it follows that if I didn’t choose, God can’t know what I chose because He knows so I can’t choose.
Now that God doesn’t know what I choose anymore I can choose but now since God knows what I choose it’s not my choice anymore.
Anyone else dizzy yet?
It’s very clear to me that God knows what He didn’t choose. Whatever I choose, God knows about. It doesn’t mess up His plan to give me a full choice without closing His eyes.
God doesn’t choose for people to do wrong so that He can judge them.
You have a misunderstanding of the omniscience of God.
If God didn’t know that Adam would sin, why is Jesus the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world? Just in case?
I do not think your conclusions are valid.
Did I say I did not choose because God knows what I will choose? Or did I say I did not choose because I had only one choice, which is a non-choice. Please address what I say. If I could choose something other that what God knows I will choose, then I would have a choice, but since God's knowledge is always accurate, then my choice is limited to a non-choice. This is not a difficult concept.
Returning to scripture, God says "Now I know" indicating He did not know before. Thus God can choose not to know our future actions beforehand, which is inherit omniscience.
It is a very limiting and finite concept.
Why can’t God know what you choose and actually give you a choice.
You explain it as if you have to be able to fool God as an option for having your own choice.
James 2:21-24
Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
Scripture clearly identifies that passage of Scripture as dealing with Abraham and his faith.
To say God didn’t know what Abraham would do is to deny that He chose Abraham to be the father of the Jews.
I have answered your question, but you ask it again. A choice is only a choice if more than one result is possible. If God knows I will choose to sin, I cannot choose not to sin. I do not think this is difficult to understand.
You are still thinking in circles. God is not limited by us.
God can know. He told Adam not to sin. He knew Adam would Choose wrong.
Because He already knew that Adam would sin, even though God does not make any one sin, Jesus was prepared to be salvation for us before the world was created.
So your "God can't know what I choose or I don't have a choice," doesn't match with what God has told us about what He knows.
I don't think this is a difficult concept.
i understand WHAT you are saying. I don't know how you can say God does not know what we are going to do. That is what foreknowledge is. If God can see my thought before it comes to me (Psalm 139:2 Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off.), He would have to know that He doesn't want to know it and decide to not know it yet. But in order to decide whether or not He wants to know it, He would need to know what it is to decide.
You are either overthinking the whole thing or, you have not thought out all the implications of what you believe.
They are not compatible with Scripture on this topic. If they were, Jesus would not be salvation, before man sinned, Unless God made man sin. And He didn't.
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
I think that is misunderstanding what Calvinists believe. They certainly do not believe that it's a matter of having permission to come. They believe, as non-Calvinists do, that Jesus invited all who labour and are heavy-laden to come to Him, and that whoever does come to Him He will not cast out. But they believe that by nature we are all "dead in trespasses and sins" and thus unable, without God "taking the initiative," to come to Jesus for salvation. As a hymn-writer put it: "Lord! I was dead, I could not stir My lifeless soul to come to Thee; But now since Thou hast quickened me I rise from sin's dark sepulchre!"
But that is not what Jesus said to them. He didn't say, "You do not believe because you are not following God," but "You do not believe because you are not of my sheep." As for following, He actually says:
“"My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me.” (Joh 10:27 NKJV)
I agree with that.
I hope I have shown you that Calvinists don't need to add anything to John 10.
This statement is not compatible with limited atonement.
God did take the initiative. He died for us. How much more dees He have to do to convince you that he has taken the initiative.
This is where you stop believing that Jesus invited all.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
@David Lamb and this is why it is important to read verses in context.
Because you have ignored the context you have come to a wrong conclusion.
Joh 10:25 “I already told you,” Jesus replied, “but you did not believe. The works I do in My Father’s name testify on My behalf.
Joh 10:26 But because you are not My sheep, you refuse to believe.
Joh 10:27 My sheep listen to My voice; I know them, and they follow Me.
But here Jesus tells them they can become His sheep by doing what we all have to done, Believed in Him.
Joh 10:37 If I am not doing the works of My Father, then do not believe Me.
Joh 10:38 But if I am doing them, even though you do not believe Me, believe the works themselves, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I am in the Father.”
In other words He is telling the Jews to trust in what they have seen if they cannot trust His words. When they have trusted in His works would they not then be of His sheep? Of course they would be.
Did anyone say or suggest God is limited to us? Nope
But we are to use our minds, our study, our diligence to understand His word, we are not to say it means nonsense because it might not be nonsense if we were not finite. That is just an argument from silence.
Yes God can know whatever He chooses to know. And God can choose not to know whatever He chooses not to know.
Your claim that God knew before hand that Adam would sin because He knows the un-predestined future is nonsense.
Your claim of what foreknowledge is totally false and unstudied. I have explained how the Greek words translated as foreknow and foreknowledge are used in scripture to refer to previously acquired or formulated knowledge that is being utilized in the present. They have nothing to do with future knowledge.
Again, you claim what God can do He does all the time, which is adding to scripture.
No, he would only want our actions to not be predestined.
Again, you claim this view, "Inherit Omniscience" is something I came up with. It is a modern view, but held by multiple theologians who have thought through why we are responsible for our sinful actions. Look it up.
And again, God anticipated the fall, thus He choose Jesus as His Redeemer, and formulated His Redemption plan before the fall, and He arranged for Adam to fall, allowing Satan, and putting in the forbidden tree, but Adam could have chosen not to sin, thus, his sin was "volitional" because he could have chosen not to sin. Something he could not have done if God knew beforehand he would sin, as then he could not choose otherwise.
This is nonsense. You have the cart driving the horse. (Not literally by the way. It’s a figure of speech that means you are approaching everything backwards. This disclaimer is for anyone who feels the need to over apply the figure of speech.)
God’s knowledge of something doesn’t mean that He made it happen. Your logic is flawed. It is like you are sitting up on a mountain somewhere, deprived of oxygen, and you think you are enlightened.
It is this simple.
1. God gives us a choice.
2. We make a choice.
3. God knew what we would choose and made a plan to save us when man chose wrong.
You are half way a fatalist. The God you describe is not able to know the whole future and still give man a free choice.
God clearly gives man a free choice and does know the future because He has planned it.
This whole, “if God knows it, I don’t have a choice,” idea is human reasoning and not Scriptural.
If you want to defend it, use Scripture and don’t use Abraham’s obedience that is the showing of his faith.
You are going to have to establish this idea elsewhere.
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
I've said it before and it seems to be coming true. The more Van rambles the more he sounds like a calvinist.
I am a Radical Christian & a Child of God
God's PRIOR knowledge of what we will choose precludes us from choosing anything else, the predestining that one outcome.
I have presented the basis for Inherit Omniscience from scripture. You, OTOH, have not presented scripture that says if God knows something will happen, humans can override His perfect knowledge and cause something else to happen.
I presented the actual meaning of foreknow and foreknowledge.
God gives us a choice, He sets life or death before us, and begs us to choose life. Deuteronomy 30:19
You are talking through your hat. If God knows what WE CHOOSE, then we had a choice.
OTOH? What is this supposed to mean?
Also PRIOR?
Nobody is changing the outcome of what God knows. But that is not the foundation for a good theory of God’s knowledge.
God is not bound by time. He created it. How can He not know the future without recognizing that someone He created is missing. He takes notice of the sparrows. Aren’t we better?
God’s perfect knowledge is able to know what we do with the choice He gives.
I don’t use your dictionary, especially because the definition you gave is not the actual definition.
The actual definition of foreknowledge is not knowledge of the past. It is knowledge of the future. It means to know before. Not to know what was before.
Websters 1828 gives this definition which is much closer to the definition the translators had in mind than what you do.
FOREKNOW, v.t [See Know.] To have previous knowledge of; to foresee
To show you how much language changes, both are restatements of the same definition. If you read the first part without familiarity with older English, you probably think it means to know what was before. But the second part is very clear. It is not a second meaning or it would have a second entry under the word in the dictionary. It is a restatement of the same meaning. Foresee means to see what is coming. That means the first part of the definition means the same thing. It means to have knowledge of something previous to its happening or existing.
History is not foreknowledge, it’s an afterthought.
This has nothing to do with the knowledge of God.
But I agree that God gives each man a choice and wants man to choose Him.