Was sin foreordained and pre-determined by God

No, you are changing the word freewill. I differentiate between libertine free-will and free-will because of how some people have changed free-will. I reject libertine free-will, but embrace free-will (as did Calvin).

Libertine Free-Will is what you seem to imply. However, this is neither Biblical nor can be supported in Scripture, but is a philosophy imposed upon the text of Scripture. I believe in free-will as outlined by people like Edwards and the WCF.

You see, I don't want to say more than scripture. Thus, making a definition of free-will that is not found in Scripture or expanded upon, is something I cannot do. Do we have complete freedom to choose? Yes! That is clear in Scripture. However, is that in contrast to God's Sovereignty? No! Your argument against me says that we truly only have one choice. That is not my position thus I will not defend against that accusation. Yet, we choose what was in accordance to Christ's Sovereignty. Free to choose but our choice is under His sovereignty. This is a great mystery of God.

If you want to advocate libertine free-will, I think you must first argue against the Acts verse I keep citing about Pilate and Herod. Were these merely accidents in which they "just happened" to make the right choices? Or did they have Libertine Free-will? If they had Libertine Free-Will, then God did not predestine all that they did. Yet, if I am correct, they both had free-will and God predestined all that they did (Acts 4:27-28).

Hyper-Calvinists want to jettison freewill. That is not Biblical. Arminians want to jettison God's Sovereignty. That is not Biblical. I want both in a way that does not try to explain more than the Bible or add a philosophy onto the Bible.

 

Wrong answer, that strawman is rehashed over and over again. There is no Arminian alive which will accept this false allegation.

 

First off you are making up words (libertine free-will). You remind me of when someone says no and you say but you did not say "absolutely no."
It ends up being a game. Free will is free will. There is no need to make a class out of it.
I certainly do believe in God's Sovereign will. I also believe in mans free will but here is where we differ. You do in fact put one above the other. I put them on the same level. I believe God chooses and what He chooses will happen. I also believe that man choses and what he choses is his absolute choice without any predetermined set path.
Now I cannot get them together, but both are in scripture.
So let me ask again. Based on your view did God ordain sin like the house with one door, or could Adam have of chosen out of free will not to eat?

 

OK, I have chosen to be undecided, that way the Lord doesn't have to bother with me (in this area).

HankD

 

Actually, I am not making up that word and I have been using that word for years.

You don't put them together. If God is Sovereign and predestines all things, even Herod and Pilate, and you take out predestination then you take out a Biblical part of the equation.

I want to keep all parts of Sovereignty and Predestination. I also want to keep free-will.

Answer this question, do you believe Herod and Pilate were NOT predestined to do what they did? DO you believe the Cross was an accident of happenstance choices?

I believe both. I do not wish to separate Sovereignty and predestination because God does not separate them. Doing so takes away from what the Bible says.

 

It also keep you from being accused of saying things you don't say. :laugh:

 

I did not mean you just now made the word up. I meant you made it up and I gave the example of no and absolutely no. There is no need for it as it confuses things further.
Now about your question. I am willing to answer it but I asked you one first. Based on your view did God ordain sin like the house with one door, or could Adam have of chosen out of free will not to eat?

 

As for Adam, this is the only place where libertine free-will may be appropriate. Even in Reformed circles this is a debated issue as you may have seen with the discussion of supralapsarian and infralapsarian viewpoints. I do not think there is evidence enough to make a hard stand. I could not condemn either side and most who hold to their views understand it is not a clear cut issue.

Did God ordain sin? God is Sovereign over all things, even the evil of Pilate and Herod was predestinated, yet God is without sin. Or, to use Joseph's words (Genesis 50:20), "What man meant for evil, God meant for good." Both, a free choice by his brothers to sell him into slavery. Yet, God was sovereign in this situation and meant it for good. Joseph's brothers were evil, God was purely good... True free-will and true sovereignty.

 

Well I cannot tell you if I agree or not because I am not sure what you mean by what you said. I can only tell you this. I believe in the Sovereignty of God to elect and predestinate all things. I also believe that within that He has allowed for man's free will unhindered or cohered by God in any way. As I have stated I am not able to explain the view any more then I can explain the Trinity, but the bible teaches both Sovereign will and free will so that is where I am at.

I would make this one point about Adam and free will. If Adam had free will to eat or not to eat and to suggest that no one else after has the same free will it makes a mockery of their definition of God's Sovereignty.

So to the question;
Was sin foreordained and pre-determined by God"

Yes along with justice, holiness, and truth, in the allowances of God, but also no in deciding it has to happen, by whom, when, and what kind. The free will of man and the sovereignty of God work together to bring about the Sovereign will of God and the choice of man without one forcing itself on the other or herding one to accomplish the other.

 

God is Love and Though He was glorified when He gave His life for all of man kind. It was man kind He died for not the glory.

1Co 13:5 Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;
MB

 

If your view of Sovereignty is that God controls every action of man then show it with scripture. The problem is you can't there fore your view is unbiblical and then you claim I'm getting away from scripture.

You must have read this in scripture before;
Mat 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
An invitation that requires a decision on the part of those who come to Him.
We are invited to call on Him
Act 2:21 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.
Notice it says clearly whosoever. It doesn't say those prechosen.
Act 28:28 Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.
Notice it says Gentiles will hear it.
Rethink your false accusation of philosophy. Show me your proof of your own election to Salvation if you can.
MB

 

MB,

Should I show that Sovereignty is BIblical? I have listed a number of verses but I am glad to list more verse if you like.

44 “No one can come to Me, unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day (John 6:44).

65 And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me, unless it has been granted him from the Father” (John 6:65).

48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed (Acts 13:48).

14 And a certain woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple fabrics, a worshiper of God, was listening; and the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul (Acts 16:14).

34 For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD OR WHO BECAME HIS COUNSELOR? 35 Or WHO HAS FIRST GIVEN TO HIM THAT IT MIGHT BE PAID BACK TO HIM AGAIN? 36 For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen (Romans 11:34-36).

30 But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption, 31 that, just as it is written, “LET HIM WHO BOASTS, BOAST IN THE LORD” (1 Corinthians 1:30-31).

6 For I am confident of this very thing, that He who began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of Christ Jesus (Philippians 1:6).

5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5).

2 Fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God (Hebrews 12:2).

Dan 4:35 And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?

Proverbs 16:9 A man's heart deviseth his way: but the LORD directeth his steps.

Proverbs 16:33 The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof [is] of the LORD.

Proverbs 20:24 Man's goings [are] of the LORD; how can a man then understand his own way?

Here are some verses that list the absolute sovereignty of God in many ways.

 

I agree hat God's glory has direct implications on His love for us. Yet, in the highest sense this love glorified Him which is the ultimate purpose. To quote multiple people with a paraphrase: glory of God is the highest and chief end of man (WCF) and it would be evil for God not to seek His glory above all as it is the only right fit for anything to rest in. God is glorified in mercy as well as His just payments to those who oppose Him.

To say "His love always thinks the best" is a statement that needs to be defined much better. I simply had no idea where he got that idea and how he applied it. See my later explanation to my initial challenge to his post.

There is a difference between the 1 Cor 13 and "love always seeks the best"?

For what or whom?

Did he mean that God always seeks the best for humans or Himself? or something else?

I conclude that He seeks His own glory not like we humans view self glory.

Obviously it isnt the best for humans if most of them end up in hell. Im just saying, If one is unsaved and God was seeking his or her best He would have never made them in the first place.

Does that clear my thinking up?

 

I agree yet all men are drawn.

LOL it has been granted to the whole world to come for He died for the sin of the whole world
1Jn 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

In the Greek it plainly states it differently Believe comes before appointed to eternal life. Better luck! try again

Yes and she was already a worshipper of God one must believe to worship. Opening a heart is a lot different than actual regeneration.

Yet it still doesn't call everything preordained to happen does it.

True every word It's just your interpretation here, that is the problem.
We are drawn, We are convinced of the gospel, We are convicted of our sin. And if we do not submit we are still lost.

Rom 10:3 For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.
We by submission a freewill choice made by the one who is giving up put on the righteousness of Christ.

Agreed. Our Salvation is the product of His faithfullness to save us to begin with. after all He didn't have to die for the sins of the whole world.

Agreed
Yet this doesn't say we are washed and regenerated before Salvation.

Agreed. Notice it requires our focus on Jesus.

Praise God. and no one can assume He does a thing when they clearly can't prove He did with scripture.

Only if He belongs to God. Other wise God would be responsible for the sin in the world. Making God our adversary as well as our Savior.

True.

Pro 20:25 It is a snare to the man who devoureth that which is holy, and after vows to make enquiry.

According to this God is all powerful and nothing is impossible to Him yet Calvinist like your self want to blame God for there sins. They want to claim Salvation before faith. That man cannot hear or understand the gospel message, and that the atonement of Christ is limited to men who were chosen because of something God knew they would do before eternity
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Not before faith through faith and I bet you think it was your own.
Peace to you
MB

 

Actually I think he uses a #2 pencil with sketching paper....sometimes uses charcoal. He's pretty good too

 

Interesting.....now if I told you that my salvation did not involve any faith....not until I was saved by Gods grace, what would you say in response?

 

That is awesome for you omit you. I think the you is ok if you don't begin with you but I don'want to take a chance with it. The grace to me was always there for me, but I didn't know about until I was given faith by God through His word.

 

MB,

When someone appeals to John 6:44 showing the need to be drawn by God and then someone else appeals to John 12:32 interpreting that to mean all men are drawn to Jesus to be saved then many times you will get charged with universalism. I don't want to sound as though I am attacking you for this claim, but I do want to explain what I believe to be as error.

The context of John 6 is faith in Christ. You need to read 6:35-45 very carefully. You will notice that faith is the way to come to Christ. Yet, Jesus says that no one can come without the Father giving them to Him. Notice that all who are given WILL COME AND WILL BE RAISED ON THE LAST DAY. In order for your interpretation to be correct (without even looking the context of John 12:32) then John 6:35-45 would have to mean that everyone gets saved because the drawing work Jesus is speaking of doesn't fail based on whether one responds or not, yet He does say that the response must be faith.

I think that it is very important to discuss John 6 about the drawing work of the Spirit, which in our terms we call effectual calling although the text doesn't use that language.

 

You challenged me to point out verses that show God’s Sovereignty. I did, but instead of arguing against these verses showing God is Sovereign, you proceed to laugh at the verses, point out verses where man is responsible for his actions, change the subject, and accuse me of things I do not espouse. While I did not mention the verses in the Bible that attribute God as Sovereign, I showed that God controls things.
Before I address your points, let me note a few things. First, my position has been consistent on this board that I believe God is Sovereign and I believe man has free will. I freely choose but I will never choose anything that God did not sovereignly ordain. He is not evil or the author of evil, but I cannot thwart God’s will. This is a great mystery that I choose not to reconcile. Secondly, this is not an issue about regeneration, but about God’s Sovereignty. If you want to argue regeneration, this should be addressed in another thread. Finally, are you really advocating God is not Sovereign? I can understand disagreements on the finer points of Calvinism, but no orthodox theologian, on either side of this issue, would deny God’s Sovereignty except the most radical. To be consistent, no one denies man has free-will except the most radical Calvinists. What I deny is libertine free-will, but I do not deny free-will. I truly and really make decisions, and all of them were based on God’s Sovereignty.
One more thing, do you believe Pilate and Herod were not predestined to send Christ to the cross as noted in Acts? Do you think that they could have made a decision where Christ would not have been crucified? Do you think that the cross was an accident? I believe they had a totally free choice, but that choice was predestined by God. This is a mystery that I cannot and will not try to explain because the Bible never explains it, but both are true.

Your point being? Again, we are dealing with Sovereignty and choice. I see how neither of these verses disagree with my viewpoint. I find it interesting that you seem to laugh off a verse and quote another verse without really dealing with the verse you laughed off. I do not know if I find that troubling or if you are merely engaging in a red herring.

The Greek is a little more on my side than on your side. Believe in this verse is in the Aorise, Active, Indicative. Appoint is in the past. So, saying one comes before the other in Greek is somewhat simplistic. Voice, mood, and case have tremendous importance in Greek. While word order does have meaning at times, you can’t violate Greek grammar.

:

Again, you are changing the subject. If you want to talk about regeneration that is fine. However, I am talking about Sovereignty in these verses. God is sovereign in this situation. Regeneration, while a somewhat related subject, is not the same subject. If you want to discuss regeneration, we may move to a different thread.

:

It says everything is from him, through him and to Him. I think that shows his complete sovereignty. You made a statement, but it appears to not be a rebuttal.

Again, I am addressing God’s Sovereignty, not regeneration. While I would love to defend regeneration, this is not the purpose of this verse. God saved us not based upon us, but on His mercy. This shows His Sovereignty in salvation otherwise we would not be saved.

The context disagrees with you. It mentions both the righteous and unrighteous. Yet, what is more disturbing is that you think God is only Sovereign for Christians, and not for non-Christians. This is cataclysmic in that you believe there is more free-will given to the non-Christian than the Christian. Historically, and I do not think there is a tradition that would disagree, people have said that Christians have more free-will than non-Christians. Do you really want to stand by that statement?
Secondly, you add a philosophy into this statement that is not Biblical. Namely, you say that if God is Sovereign he would be responsible for sin. That is not the case. As noted with Pilate and Herod, which you do not address, they were predestined to do their job by God, but God is still good and not evil. Going back to my main point, God is fully Sovereign and man has freedom. This ensures God is not the author of sin nor does it embrace a heresy of saying God is not Sovereign.

I do not know how this is a rebuttal, I take it that you are supporting my post. What I have been seeing from your responses, for the most part, is that you never address the verse but you give some apparent jabs that are not really arguments. If you meant to show that man is responsible for his actions, that is what I have been saying all along. Man has free will but God is Sovereign. These two verses introduce the mystery.

This is an outright misrepresentation of everything I have said, a slander of my beliefs and statements. I have never blamed God for my sin. If anything, and I encourage you to read my posts on what I have said, is that God is completely Sovereign and man has complete free will. Man can choose any choice but he will always choose based upon God’s Sovereignty. This makes man totally guilty for his choices but never makes man sinful. However, man can never thwart God’s plan because they always act within His Sovereignty.
As well, we never claim salvation before faith. Your accusation is a result of theological sloppiness on your part, not our actual beliefs. We, as well, do not deny Soli Fide, faith alone. Within the realm of the Gospel, we choose God out of our free will, but God was total sovereign in that choice. Again, a mystery that I refuse rectify. It is by Grace alone through faith alone, but it never says “libertine free-will.”
Finally, you did concede some of my verses discuss Sovereignty. That was the question asked, and that is what I answered. You quoted other verses that I agree with that indicates we must choose God, but I never disagreed with those verses. The question is whether God is Sovereign. You seem to indicate that God is not and I believe He is. What amazes me is that any Christian would deny God’s Sovereignty. I am saddened. Just open up any theological textbook, and they will proclaim God is Sovereign. The Bible directly calls him Sovereign several times. However, you want me to prove it.
Now, to the question I have asked several people with no explanation yet. Do you think Pilate and Herod acted outside of God’s Sovereignty when they condemned Jesus Christ to be crucified on the cross? Was the cross an accident? Or, were they predestined as Acts tells us?