Why Would God Enable us To be Able To Receive Jesus, Knowing that we would reject Him

[JesusFan]

Isn't that weird, that the Lord would enable sinners to potentially accept Jesus, knowing all the while that they would end of rejecting Him?

that Jesus death to provide for their potential salvation would be null and void by lack of faith?

How is that ANY better biblically than when cals say that Jesus death atoned 'for sure" those whom he intended to save, instead of just "on paper?"

 

[preachinjesus]

Does God desire mindless robots or worshipping free peoples?

Ah, we see the quagmire of grace.

 

[mandym]

Isn't that weird, that the Lord would enable sinners to potentially accept Jesus, knowing all the while that they would end of rejecting Him?

No..........

 

[Amy.G]

No. It's not weird. Love is given freely or it's not love. Simple.

 

[JesusFan]

No..........

So Jesus endured the shame of the Cross in order to 'maybe"have some come to Him and get saved?

Doesn't the Bible insteda say that he endured it, as he knew that there WOULD be those to come to Him and be saved?

 

[Amy.G]

So Jesus endured the shame of the Cross in order to 'maybe"have some come to Him and get saved?

Doesn't the Bible insteda say that he endured it, as he knew that there WOULD be those to come to Him and be saved?

Jesus died for the sins of the whole world. Period. Why is not enough just to believe what it says???

 

[matt wade]

Isn't that weird, that the Lord would enable sinners to potentially accept Jesus, knowing all the while that they would end of rejecting Him?

that Jesus death to provide for their potential salvation would be null and void by lack of faith?

How is that ANY better biblically than when cals say that Jesus death atoned 'for sure" those whom he intended to save, instead of just "on paper?"

Isn't it weird, that the Lord would create people just to send them to Hell?

Isn't it weird that you and others continue to promote the [snip - inflammatory]

 

[quantumfaith]

Isn't that weird, that the Lord would enable sinners to potentially accept Jesus, knowing all the while that they would end of rejecting Him?

that Jesus death to provide for their potential salvation would be null and void by lack of faith?

How is that ANY better biblically than when cals say that Jesus death atoned 'for sure" those whom he intended to save, instead of just "on paper?"

Sorry, but I don't see anything weird about this. I don't think it has anything to do with being "better", just as I hope that none of the Cals feel "better" due to theology they subscribe to. Each of us simply think we are "correct" no matter which side of the aisle we find ourselves on.

 

[Winman]

I doubt you'll get this, but God knows who will reject Jesus because that is what they actually do. If they repent and accept Jesus, then God knew they would repent and believe.

God knowing what free will agents will do does not determine what they do. He simply knows it, that is why it is called foreknowledge.

 

[matt wade]

God knowing what free will agents will do does not determine what they do. He simply knows it, that is why it is called foreknowledge.

This is an interesting statement and sheds some more light on the heresy of Calvinism. In Calvinism, they must not believe God is powerful enough to know future events. They only believe God has foreknowledge of things because he planned and programmed them. So, this is yet another area where the heresy of Calvinism limits the power of God.

 

[menageriekeeper]

Isn't that weird, that the Lord would enable sinners to potentially accept Jesus, knowing all the while that they would end of rejecting Him?

Ah the mysteries of God's grace and mercy! I'm just glad He offered it to me!

 

[jbh28]

This is an interesting statement and sheds some more light on the heresy of Calvinism. In Calvinism, they must not believe God is powerful enough to know future events. They only believe God has foreknowledge of things because he planned and programmed them. So, this is yet another area where the heresy of Calvinism limits the power of God.

You can call that heresy all you want, but at least don't use the name "Calvinism" because Calvinist don't believe what you just posted.

Name one Calvinist that believes that God doesn't know future events. The only person on this board that I know that believes that is not a Calvinist.

 

[Winman]

You can call that heresy all you want, but at least don't use the name "Calvinism" because Calvinist don't believe what you just posted.

Name one Calvinist that believes that God doesn't know future events. The only person on this board that I know that believes that is not a Calvinist.

That is not what Matt said and you know it. You intentionally misrepresent what he said. Matt said Calvinists believe God can only foreknow what he has determined.

Tell me, what marvel is there in foretelling something determined? Suppose I told you which horse would win the Kentucky Derby, and I had drugged all the horses except one. So when I predict the lone horse who was not drugged would win, where is the marvel? It is fixed. ANYBODY could do this.

But if the horses were not drugged and I predicted exactly which place each horse would place, this would be an astonishing demonstration of power indeed.

But Calvinists do not believe God is powerful enough to predict undetermined events.

So, non-Cal theology views God as more powerful than Calvinism does, Calvinism limits God's power and foreknowledge.

 

[matt wade]

Name one Calvinist that believes that God doesn't know future events.

Winman explained it quite well.

Calvinists believe that God knows future events, but since he predetermined all future events it's pretty easy for Him to do so. In my non-Cal theology, God's foreknowledge has Him knowing events that came about as the result of man's free will. My non-Cal theology affords God much more power in regards to foreknowledge than Calvinism.

 

[jbh28]

That is not what Matt said and you know it. You intentionally misrepresent what he said. Matt said Calvinists believe God can only foreknow what he has determined.

My apologies, I meant "all future events." That should have been understood by my next comment, but I see the confusion. However, your "intentionally misrepresent" is uncalled for. I have a very good track record of not purposefully misrepresenting others. Instead of accusing me of something, maybe read it again and know I have no reason to misrepresent Matt.

But Calvinists do not believe God is powerful enough to predict undetermined events.

So, non-Cal theology views God as more powerful than Calvinism does, Calvinism limits God's power and foreknowledge.

Sorry, but this is totally untrue. No Calvinist says God isn't powerful enough to do something. As I pointed out Matt's gross error, you have just repeated it here.

Why must you falsely accuse us? Maybe you think we are more correct than you want to admit. If you really thought we were wrong, you wouldn't post untruths such as this.

 

[jbh28]

I meant the word "all" to be included. In my mind it was understood, but I went back and read it again and see that it wasn't.

Calvinists believe that God knows future events, but since he predetermined all future events it's pretty easy for Him to do so. In my non-Cal theology, God's foreknowledge has Him knowing events that came about as the result of man's free will. My non-Cal theology affords God much more power in regards to foreknowledge than Calvinism.

that doesn't even make sense at all, and has a hint of untruth in there. We do not teach that God is unable/less power.... to know something he hasn't predetermined/preordained.

Let's keep the cheap shots out of the discussions, ok. And please don't blame someone else or say that because someone else is doing it it's ok for you.

 

[JesusFan]

That is not what Matt said and you know it. You intentionally misrepresent what he said. Matt said Calvinists believe God can only foreknow what he has determined.

Tell me, what marvel is there in foretelling something determined? Suppose I told you which horse would win the Kentucky Derby, and I had drugged all the horses except one. So when I predict the lone horse who was not drugged would win, where is the marvel? It is fixed. ANYBODY could do this.

But if the horses were not drugged and I predicted exactly which place each horse would place, this would be an astonishing demonstration of power indeed.

But Calvinists do not believe God is powerful enough to predict undetermined events.

So, non-Cal theology views God as more powerful than Calvinism does, Calvinism limits God's power and foreknowledge.

Does your God both cause events to occur because he determined they would happen directly by act of His divine Will, and other events happen as he permitted them to, but in BOTH causes he already would know ALL that would be happening?

There Is NOTHING that God has to learn for himself, God does NOT have to 'wait" for it to happen before He sees and knows it?

 

[convicted1]

Isn't that weird, that the Lord would enable sinners to potentially accept Jesus, knowing all the while that they would end of rejecting Him?

that Jesus death to provide for their potential salvation would be null and void by lack of faith?

How is that ANY better biblically than when cals say that Jesus death atoned 'for sure" those whom he intended to save, instead of just "on paper?"

Brother, why must you start threads that seem to only inflame those of your opposing view? Threads like this never start, let alone end, in edification.

Jesus died for the ungodly(Romans 5:6)
Jesus came to save sinners(1 Timothy 1:15)
Jesus is the propitiation of the world(1 John 2:2)
Jesus loved the world, and died for it(John 3:16)

 

[convicted1]

Does your God both cause events to occur because he determined they would happen directly by act of His divine Will, and other events happen as he permitted them to, but in BOTH causes he already would know ALL that would be happening?

There Is NOTHING that God has to learn for himself, God does NOT have to 'wait" for it to happen before He sees and knows it?

That which is bolded isn't necessary. There is no your God or my God, just one triune God. I am not trying to tell you how to post Brother, but please, think before you press the "submit reply" at the bottom. Believe me, I wish I had done this a few times myslef....:laugh:

 

[JesusFan]

That which is bolded isn't necessary. There is no your God or my God, just one triune God. I am not trying to tell you how to post Brother, but please, think before you press the "submit reply" at the bottom. Believe me, I wish I had done this a few times myslef....:laugh:

Thanks!

meant to say "how do you view God" in this area under discussion!