Featured Non-cal view #2

Combining Calvinisms arbitrary selection model with their denial of the Bible doctrine regarding prevenient Grace - results in God being the cause of His own Lament over the lost.


=====================

[FONT=&quot]God's Lament
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Hosea 11[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]:7 So My people are bent on turning from Me.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Though they call them to the One on high,[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]None at all exalts Him.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]8 How can I give you up, O Ephraim?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]How can I surrender you, O Israel?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]How can I make you like Admah?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]How can I treat you like Zeboiim?[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]My heart is turned over within Me,[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]All My compassions are kindled[/FONT][FONT=&quot].[/FONT]

"He came to HIS OWN and HIS OWN received Him not" John 1

[FONT=&quot]Now Deut 5:29 -- 29 O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!.

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Ezek 18[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]30“Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, each according to his conduct,” declares the Lord GOD. “Repent and turn away from all your transgressions, so that iniquity may not become a stumbling block to you. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]31“Cast away from you all your transgressions which you have committed and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die, O house of Israel? [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]32“For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies,” declares the Lord GOD. “Therefore, repent and LIVE!"

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“He CAME to HIS OWN and [/FONT][FONT=&quot]His OWN received Him not[/FONT][FONT=&quot]” John 1[/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Matt 23[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]37“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]38“Behold, your house is being left to you desolate![/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]Luke 7[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]28 [/FONT][FONT=&quot]When all the people and the tax collectors heard this, they acknowledged God’s justice, having been baptized with the baptism of John. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]29 [/FONT][FONT=&quot]But the Pharisees and the lawyers rejected God’s purpose for themselves, not having been baptized by John.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]Is 5:4[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?[/FONT]

 

That is the fiction of your own making for what "prevenient grace" needs to be bent into. But it is not how Arminians use it.

Point of fact - even Calvinists will admit that the "DRAWING of God" enables all the CHOICE that depravity "disables".

Thus "I will DRAW ALL mankind to Me" John 12:32 is an enabling a pre-venient grace enabling of CHOICE -- even by Calvinist standards - how much more by Arminian standards for the drawing of God prior to salvation of the lost person.

"To as many as received him" --

And as Rev 3 points out these are those who "hear and OPEN the door".

And the response to that by Christ is "I WILL come in".

Perfect Arminian scenario - but Calvinism does not survive the details at that point.

You are ignoring so much in the post that I gave that the same answers - continue to apply since you do not move the point forward.

As stated before -- even Calvinists will admit that not everyone in church is saved.


Why keep circling back to that as if the Bible ever said that every person with church membership is saved?

The LOST inside the church need the same gospel solution as the LOST outside the church.

We all know that is not true - even Calvinists.

All admit that there are both lost and saved people in the church.

What is more you make your case by ignoring the very details in Rev 3 that doe not please Calvinism.

17 Because you say, “I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing,” and you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked,

20 Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if anyone hears My voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and will dine with him, and he with Me.

The person is poor, wretched, miserable, naked, alone on the inside, Christless.

Christ is on the OUTSiDE -- standing, knocking, calling out.

The person on the INSIDE - must hear and OPEN THE DOOR.

Then Christ says He will "come in".

that is what is actually in the text - and we both know it.

in Christ,

Bob

 

Both Calvinism and Arminianism are relics from the dark ages, based on speculation rather than sound hermeneutics.

1) Is it possible God predestines everything yet is not the author of sin? Nope.

2) Is it possible knowing the future both exhaustively and with perfect certainty does not predestine it to happen as foreknown? Nope.

So like two dinosaurs in a death struggle, they kick up a lot of dust, signifying nothing, except perhaps as a shroud over the truth.

 

Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

He predestinated "free will" which demands alternative options, thus demands the option of sin be permissible and thus God is the author of sin in so much as he purposely created the ability to sin and necessarily with that determination must have permitted the option to sin. However, what you don't understand is that he also created with free will total moral responsibility with that ability and so man is the immediate and primary cause of his own choice to sin - Rom. 5:12.

 

No text that I know of says the lost are "predestined to be lost".

No text that I know of says that God has only limited knowledge of the future.

No text that I know of says that God does not have free will because He knows what He will do in the future.

in Christ,

Bob

 

1) If God knows the future exhaustively and with perfect certainty, it is predestined. No text says otherwise.

2) When Abraham drew his knife to slay his son, God said, "stop, now I know...." If your view was correct, the text would say, "stop, I always knew...." Why do you think it reads as if God had not known before?

3) No text says God has free will because He knows the future exhaustively and with perfect certainty.

Both Calvinism and Arminianism are mistaken views, based on sloppy exegetics dating from the dark ages. If all things are predestined by exhaustive and with perfect certainty knowledge of the future, then God is the author of sin.

We are to believe what the Bible teaches, and not believe inventions of men not found in the Bible. Hermeneutics 101.

 

The claim "Easter bunnies delivered the mail at the time of Paul and no text says otherwise" is not a form of Bible support for an idea - I think we both agree on that.

In Genesis 6 God "repented" in regard to making mankind -

In scripture God says He "does know the end from the beginning" but at times He responds as if He did not.

In Job 1 - God declares Job to be righteous - but then tests him anyway because doubt is being inserted into the discussion by Satan.

In Rom 3:1-4 God "is judged".

You are presenting the text above as in "God has just learned something He never knew before". And I agree with you that the text does put the point that way.

In a free will universe - right decisions are accomplished by presenting compelling evidence. Thus there is a "myriads and myriads" group as in Dan 7:9-10 when the "court sits" and judgment is taking place - where those "myriads" are not all knowing, and so "books are opened" and as Rev 20 confirms judgment is base on the things written in the books.

Not because "God can't remember history" - but because there is a wider context than God when "God is judged" Rom 3;1-5.

I do not say that either. I say He has free will in spite of knowing what He will do.

You only come to that conclusion because we are all are stuck in time.

If you had just watched a movie and someone asked you what was in it - that fact that you might have perfect knowledge of all events in the movie - does not make you puppet master of the movie. Humans can get accurate knowledge about past events without puppet-mastering those events.

God who is not so limited by time - can do that for both past and future events - even though humans can only do it with the past.

in Christ,

Bob

 

Hi Bob, yes, I do reject the "time travel" defense of the absurd. Again, it is an invention of men with absolutely no support in scripture.

Scripture does not say God "knows" the end from the beginning, it says God declares the end from the beginning. Scripture tells us many circumstances that will occur in the future because God declared them. But then God brings them about, He causes them to occur. Totally different mechanism than your crystal ball theology. He fulfills prophesy.

I agree, many times in scripture, God's inspired and trustworthy word indicates God does not know what will occur and allows man to choose to repent or not. God says if you repent, then I will relent. These sort of conditional covenants can be found many times in scripture.

There is no debate that God knows everything that has occurred in His creation and everything that is occurring in His creation, just as He said "now I know" when Abraham chose to draw back the knife. And the issue is not that God knows the future, because He does.

The issue is if God knows what will happen exhaustively, and with perfect certainty, then that future is predestined, including each and every one of our sins. Now you can say God knows the future because He made the film, but we do not because we are living the film till the cows come home. This is not the view found in scripture, it is an invention of men.

 

When you ask a historian to recount the past - or watch a video record of what happened in your driveway last night - you usually do not refer to it as "time travel" do you??

Does He declare that which He does not know?

Does He know more than He wrote in scripture?

In John 6 Christ said "Have I not chosen the 12 and yet one of you is a devil" -- was Christ "dooming Judas to failure" by "knowing" the future?

in Christ,

Bob

 

An Alternative View/Interpretation

As I look at all the posts there is certainly no shortage of passion, nor a shortage of excellent attempts from both sides to support each one's position. But at times, I feel like a referee in a game with the need to pull out and throw down the yellow flag.

This salvation/election/free will/God's sovereignty, etc debate has so many aspects to it and the reason it is such a disputable doctrine is because it is one of the great mysteries of the Bible just as is the timing of the Tribulation & 2nd Coming of Christ.

There are a few strong points in Arminiasm, a few stronger in Calvinism, but the Harmonizing of both leads to the fact that what we have here is an Antinomy (Paradox if you will). Election & Free Will (human responsibility) are both truths on parallel tracks that lead to the same destination and our finite minds cannot reconcile how that can be. It is a mystery, just like the mystery about Israel being saved, but hardened "in part" in Rom. 11:25.

A point that Arminians need to consider is that if man can lose his salvation then how does Jesus lose his grip on us when he stated "I shall lose none of those you have given me" John 6:39????

On the other hand a point that Calvinists need to consider is that whether you look back to the Old Covenant that required obedience through faith or to the New Covenant that requires obedience through faith to accept the gift of salvation and repent is not a work, is not works nor ever has been works.

Submitting to the Lord Jesus as your Savior should not be compared to works which are clear to anyone that reads the gospels:
Ministering to others
Serving in the church
Sharing of worldly possessions
Feeding those in need
And the list goes on.

The scriptures truly do say that God had foreknowledge and elected those to salvation, but nowhere does it say he elected others to condemnation/hell. So how do we harmonize both truths of election & free will. Ask Alistair Begg or a number of other great theologians/preachers who are mostly Calvinist but they can't harmonize it in their mind but admit that both truths are in the Word.

So why can't both sides lay down their weapons and agree to disagree on some points? But also agree that is a great mystery that we will all know in Heaven one day when all things will be revealed.

 

First of all when you bring up the subject of OSAS you are right to frame it as an distinctly "Arminian" POV. Not is not merely "non-Cal" it is "Arminian".

in Matt 18 Jesus explains the principle of "Forgiveness revoked" without ever stating that for this to happen first Jesus must "lose his grip" or "Fail" in some way.

Thus the Arminian position does not require that Jesus "Fail" for Lucifer to fall, or for Adam to Fall or for saints to have free will.

Rather the warnings of the Bible are simply taken seriously - "you stand by your faith" - and then what comes next??

[FONT=&quot]20 Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear;
21 for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. [/FONT]


[FONT=&quot]Rom 11[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
13But I am speaking to you who are Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle of Gentiles, I magnify my ministry,
14if somehow I might move to jealousy my fellowcountrymen and save some of them. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
15For if their rejection is the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance be but life from the dead? [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
16 If the first piece of dough is holy, the lump is also; and if the root is holy, the branches are too.
17 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree, [/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]18 do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you.
19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.”

[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]20 Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear;
21 for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
22Behold then thekindness and severityof God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]23And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.

======================================

It is no wonder then that Arminians such as myself see no reason to blame Christ for giving free will to the saints in the case where a saint fails to persevere firm unto the end.

Having said that - a number on this board do not hold to the Arminian doctrine - but rather they refer to themselves as "not Calvinist" because they belive the saints lose free will - once they are saved and can not choose to fail to persevere.

Thus to get all the non-Calvinist views as opposed to Calvinism here - you would have to focus on the one point where non-Calvinists will admit to free will - and that is the case of the lost. In that context both Arminians and non-Cals have some degree of common ground in opposing the Calvinist POV. (At least to an extent.)

in Christ,

Bob
[/FONT]

 

1) No, God declares something will happen, and then makes it happen. Entirely different from looking in a crystal ball and telling what will occur without His intervention.

2) Yes, God knows more than we can measure or comprehend.

3) Yes, exactly, God had said (prophesied) the "betrayer" and then made what He had declared happen.

Look into the meaning of "fulfilling" prophesy.

 

First, welcome, and thanks for your thoughtful post.

Some of us (at least me) do not agree that election and free will constitute a paradoxical mystery.

1) Your use of "foreknowledge" indicates a view inconsistent with how the Bible uses the words translated as foreknow and foreknowledge. They do not refer to knowledge of the future, but rather to knowledge formulated or acquired in the past and being utilized in the present. So if you made a plan in the past, and were carrying it out in the present, your actions would be according to your foreknowledge.

2) Yes, there are mysteries in the Bible, but the existence of other mysteries does not necessarily indicate the Free will/Election difficulty is one of them.

3) Not all "non-Calvinists" hold to the loss of salvation viewpoint. As a one point Calvinist, I accept the "P" of the TULIP, thus in once saved always saved. And we do not save ourselves, so we cannot undo what God has done.

4) Works as defined by Paul are things we do that merit compensation, but our putting our wholehearted faith in Christ does not merit anything, because all our acts of righteousness are as filthy rags. However, God can choose to credit our filthy rag faith as righteousness, or not, for He has mercy upon whom He chooses, so salvation does not depend on the man that wills (trusts in Christ) but upon God alone.

5) Once we are saved, i.e. God puts us in Christ spiritually, then we arise in Christ a new creation created for good works such as ministering to others, serving the church, being ambassadors of Christ, and on and on.

6) For all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Therefore everyone not individually chosen by God for salvation through faith in the truth is condemned to the lake of fire.

7) In order to harmonize individual election and free will you have to go away from Calvinism's mistaken views.

a) Our individual election for salvation was conditional, i.e. through faith in the truth, 2 Thessalonians 2:13

b) In Ephesians 1:4, where God chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that refers to God choosing Christ as His redeemer, and there anyone subsequently redeemed was chosen corporately when God chose Him, thus we were chosen in Him.​

 

So in your view - God made Judas betray Christ by knowing the future? Or God made Judas betray Christ so that Christ's prediction could be correct?? (Which is the only way that a human could predict that future - by working to make the person do what was predicted.)

In Matt 23 Christ predicts the failure of the Jewish nation - does God then "make them fail" so that His prediction would come true - in your view?

My point is that while humans are "stuck in time" and can only "recount the past" -- God is not stuck in time and so He can "recount the future as well".

in Christ,

Bob