God's plan is so perfect, so complex, shortsighted Arminians and Calvinists just can't fathom it.

[Whatever]

Therefore, that some names can be written in, or blotted out from the book of life proves people "other than the Elect" are being saved, or lost.

But you are assuming something not said in Scripture. Just because Jesus says He will not blot out the names of those who overcome, does not imply that anybody actually have their names blotted out.

Once a person is born again, he can't unborn. Once they are given eternal life, they have eternal life, not temporary life. Once saved always saved is clear Bible teaching. Don't confuse me with anyone who denies "the eternal security of the believer."

But the fact that you can say that names can be blotted out of the book of life seems to imply that those blotted out were alive once (spiritually alive) and then can be damned.

I found one verse in the OT that sounds similar:
Psalm 69:28 Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, And not be written with the righteous.
David is talking about all those persecuting Israel.

In Exodus when God threatened to wipe Israel out and start over with Moses, Moses replied:
Exo 32:32 Yet now, if You will forgive their sin—but if not, I pray, blot me out of Your book which You have written."

I searches for "book of life" and only found 8 verses.
Php_4:3
Rev_3:5 He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.
Rev_13:8
Rev_17:8
Rev_20:12
Rev_21:27
Rev_22:19 and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

The only one that comes close to somebody having their name blotted out is the last one. And there is doesn't actually say "name blotted out," it says "take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book."

 

[Whatever]

Sheep
John 10:3 To him the doorkeeper opens, and the sheep hear his voice; and he calls his own sheep by name and leads them out.
John 10:14 I am the good shepherd; and I know My sheep, and am known by My own.

Jesus knows (ginōskō) His own sheep, He even knows their names.

Mat 7:22 Many will say to Me in that day, 'Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?'
Mat 7:23
And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew (ginōskō) you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!'

These "many" called Jesus "Lord" claimed to prophesy and cast out demons in His name.

Jesus:
I know (ginōskō) my sheep.
I never knew (ginōskō) you guys.
Therefore, they were not His sheep.
They could not have been born again sheep that lose their salvation. They were never saved in the first place.

 

[Dave...]

In answer, I question the logic of your premise. Just as I asked you how could someone "come" who had already "come"
No one can come to Me unless the Fathr who sent Me already had him come to me...


How can the text read:

Looking unto Jesus the AUTHOR and AUTHOR of our faith.

You argue initiating our faith (as an author) is the same as perfecting our faith (as a finisher), but these are two separate things, not the same.

Christ can initiate the faith simply by making us notice something needs to be done, finishing it however implies after we have begun a work He steps in and completes it. Perhaps as a Father would aid his child getting over a hurdle.

So this does not prevent our initiative, it only implies our inititative isn't enough to complete the task, to finish it.

Hi Alfred

I don't see the Author (first cause) and Finisher (upheld by Him) as the same thing. I'm not sure where you are getting that from.

Dave

 

[Alfred Persson]

But you are assuming something not said in Scripture. Just because Jesus says He will not blot out the names of those who overcome, does not imply that anybody actually have their names blotted out.

But the fact that you can say that names can be blotted out of the book of life seems to imply that those blotted out were alive once (spiritually alive) and then can be damned.

Last first. I disagree, Jesus is not talking to those "few names...who shall walk with Me in white" (Rev. 3:4). These "FEW" are the elect whose names were written in the book of life from the founding of the world cannot be blotted out from the book of life. They are predestined to be conformed to the image of Jesus (Rom. 8:28-31)

Only the "undetermined" who have begun their walk in Christ, but have not been born again can have their names blotted out. They received God's word with gladness, but have no root in themselves and are near to stumbling before they are saved (Mk. 4:16-17). They must overcome their doubts and fears and repent of anything they are clinging to in this world and confess Jesus is their LORD, their God publicly. Then they would receive the Holy Spirit, be clothed in white garments:

2 "Be watchful, and strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die, for I have not found your works perfect before God.
3 "Remember therefore how you have received and heard; hold fast and repent. Therefore if you will not watch, I will come upon you as a thief, and you will not know what hour I will come upon you.
4 "You have a few names even in Sardis who have not defiled their garments; and they shall walk with Me in white, for they are worthy.
5 "He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.
6 "He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches."' (Rev. 3:2-6 NKJ)

Moreover, if Jesus were only threatening to blot out their names but would never do that, He is lying. As Jesus never lies, its your interpretation that is incorrect.

Once a person is born again, he can't unborn. Once they are given eternal life, they have eternal life, not temporary life. Once saved always saved is clear Bible teaching. Don't confuse me with anyone who denies "the eternal security of the believer."

But the fact that you can say that names can be blotted out of the book of life seems to imply that those blotted out were alive once (spiritually alive) and then can be damned.

This is important. Once saved always saved. That is true for everyone born again, Elect or Undetermined. It would be true of the wicked who repented and believed also, but the wicked never would choose to be Holy in Christ.

Once a person is born again that is the "outward physical evidence" they were saved "to the uttermost". They now have "eternal life", they have passed over from death into life. That can't be undone.

That proves those who can have their names "written in" or "erased from" the book of life, are not yet saved.

The Rabbis called this category of people "the Middling people":

[I.15 A] Said R. Kruspedai said R. Yohanan, “Three books are opened [by God] on the New Year: one for the thoroughly wicked, one for the thoroughly righteous, and one for middling [people].
“The thoroughly righteous immediately are inscribed and sealed for [continued] life.
[C] “The thoroughly wicked immediately are inscribed and sealed for death.
[D] “Middling [people] are left hanging from New Year until the Day of Atonement.
[E] “If they [are found to have] merit, they are inscribed for life.
[F] “If they [are found] not [to have] merit, they are inscribed for death.”
[G] Said R. Abin, “What is the Scriptural [foundation for this]? [Ps. 69:28 states]: ‘Let them be blotted out of the book of the living. Let them not be inscribed among the righteous.’ ‘Let them be blotted out of the book’-this refers to the book of the thoroughly wicked. ‘[… of the] living’-this refers to the book of the righteous. ‘Let them not be inscribed among the righteous’-this refers to the book of middling [people].”-Neusner, J. (2011). The Babylonian Talmud: A Translation and Commentary (Vol. 6b, p. 83). Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers.

You cited the Psalm 69:28 they based this on. Notice how they inferred from the writing and erasing names, the three groups. Inference is a valid way to obtain truth from scripture. Both Jesus and Paul (Jewish Rabbis) do the same and both were expert in Judaism. Jesus described some Rabbinic belief as "treasure":

51 Jesus said to them, "Have you understood all these things?" They said to Him, "Yes, Lord."
52 Then He said to them, "Therefore every scribe instructed concerning the kingdom of heaven is like a householder who brings out of his treasure things new and old." (Matt. 13:51-52 NKJ)

Most Christians don't see the agreement Christ and Paul have with the Pharisees because the Gospels give the impression Jesus only got along with a few Pharisees.

In fact, a good portion of Christ's followers were Pharisees:

But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, "It is necessary to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses." (Acts 15:5 NKJ)
That is why the rulers of the Pharisees hated Christ so much. He was taking their followers. They were jealous, filled with envy (Mt. 27:18; Acts 13:45)

Its a little known Fact Jesus agreed with the scribes and Pharisees so much He could say:

2 saying: "The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat.
3 "Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do. (Matt. 23:2-3 NKJ)

Christ disputed their perversions of the law, and lack of compliance with it, not everything they believed.

Its unfortunate some believers become anti-semitic because of the way the gospels record Jewish oppostion to Christ. FACT IS: ALL OF THEM WERE JEWS.

"You worship what you do not know; we know what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews. (Jn. 4:22 NKJ)

 

[Alfred Persson]

Hi Alfred

I don't see the Author (first cause) and Finisher (upheld by Him) as the same thing. I'm not sure where you are getting that from.

Dave

Perhaps I misunderstood your position. In Post #49 You cited FastFreddy0 approvingly:

This statement does not address whether or not you are "putting the cart before the horse". In other words it does not address which comes first logically: "saving faith" or "regeneration". The verse you quote does not give a time sequence. You assume the one must first believe salvificly and then be sealed. One could be given faith and sealed concurrently.-FastFreddy0

FastFreddy0's premise requires an overlap where both "items" have the same property to regenerate as he believes both cause regeneration "concurrently".

I see nothing in "saving faith" that has the properties that cause "regeneration" so I illustrated that by making both the same in the verse, and ask if it still made sense when it is read.

No one can come to Me unless the Fathr who sent Me already had him come to me...

How can the text read:

Looking unto Jesus the AUTHOR and AUTHOR of our faith.

This illustrates regeneration occurs in a linear fashion, saving faith occurs first when God grants revelation to the human soul, but regeneration is a different process entirely. Christ authored our faith via revelation, He finishes it via regeneration. These do not occur concurrently, one is logically first and the other follows.

 

[Alfred Persson]

It just occurred to me the three categories of people are manifest in Christ's parable. The Thoroughly Wicked are in verse 15. As God does NOT Reprobate or predestine who is "thoroughly wicked" some of them appear for a time among the "Middling People" (vs. 16-17) but their hearts are "stony ground".

The Middling People are in verses 18-19. These are the ones whose names could be blotted out of the book of life (Rev. 3:5) because they didn't "perfect their faith by truly repenting and believing in Christ 100%". That "INCOMPLETION" is symbolized by their "works not being perfect" (Rev. 3:2) and they haven't yet been "clothed in White" (Rev. 3:5).

The "Thoroughly Righteous" or "the Elect predestined unto salvation" are in Vs. 20 but of course includes those "Middling People" who overcame the obstacles and believed in Christ 100%, had saving faith:

14 "The sower sows the word.
15 "And these are the ones by the wayside where the word is sown. When they hear, Satan comes immediately and takes away the word that was sown in their hearts.
16 "These likewise are the ones sown on stony ground who, when they hear the word, immediately receive it with gladness;
17 "and they have no root in themselves, and so endure only for a time. Afterward, when tribulation or persecution arises for the word's sake, immediately they stumble.
18 "Now these are the ones sown among thorns; they are the ones who hear the word,
19 "and the cares of this world, the deceitfulness of riches, and the desires for other things entering in choke the word, and it becomes unfruitful.
20 "But these are the ones sown on good ground, those who hear the word, accept it, and bear fruit: some thirtyfold, some sixty, and some a hundred." (Mk. 4:14-20 NKJ)

 

[Fastfredy0]

No one can come to Me unless the Fathr who sent Me already had him come to me...

Aside ... I can't find this verse in the Bible as stated.

• NET© No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.
• NIV© "No-one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.
• NASB© "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.
• ESV© No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.
• NLT© For no one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them to me, and at the last day I will raise them up.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Aside ... I can't find this verse in the Bible as stated.

• NET© No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.
• NIV© "No-one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day.
• NASB© "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.
• ESV© No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.
• NLT© For no one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them to me, and at the last day I will raise them up.

Of course, I made it up to illustrate a point. Go back and reread the context or better, read my reply to Dave in #65 where I quote you.

I'd love to discuss the bad logic my "fake scripture" illustrated.

 

[Whatever]

Moreover, if Jesus were only threatening to blot out their names but would never do that, He is lying. As Jesus never lies, its your interpretation that is incorrect.

Jesus never threatens to blot out anybody's names.
Rev 3:5 He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.

I will not blot out the names of those who overcome, is not the same thing as saying
I will blot out the names of those who don't overcome.

That is some kind of logical fallacy.

Taking the saying "who ever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved
And saying the opposite
Whoever does not call on the name of the Lord will not be saved.
Is a logical fallacy. Christians normally believe that infants dying in infancy will be saved, especially if their parents are Christian, but infants can not call on the name of the Lord.

This is important. Once saved always saved. That is true for everyone born again, Elect or Undetermined.

There is no category of "undetermined people." This is something you have made up in your mind by misinterpreting passages of Scripture.

Its a little known Fact Jesus agreed with the scribes and Pharisees so much He could say:

2 saying: "The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat.
3 "Therefore whatever they tell you to observe, that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do. (Matt. 23:2-3 NKJ)

Christ disputed their perversions of the law, and lack of compliance with it, not everything they believed.

Jesus said that they sat in Moses seat because under the Old Covenant they were there lawfully. This does not mean He agreed with everything they believed.
John 5:46 For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me; for he wrote about Me. 47 But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?"

How could they be teaching sound theology when Jesus says they didn't believe the OT writings.

Its unfortunate some believers become anti-semitic because of the way the gospels record Jewish oppostion to Christ. FACT IS: ALL OF THEM WERE JEWS.

What do you mean by Jews? Do you mean "Children of Abraham?" or Abraham's seed?"
John 8:39 They answered and said to Him, "Abraham is our father." Jesus said to them, "If you were Abraham's children, you would do the works of Abraham. 40 But now you seek to kill Me, a Man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Abraham did not do this.
John 8:44 You are of your father the devil . . .

Paul:
Rom 2:28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh;
Rom 9:8 That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God;

And "anti semite" is too broad of a term.
Semite, name given in the 19th century to a member of any people who speak one of the Semitic languages, a family of languages spoken primarily in parts of western Asia and Africa. The term therefore came to include Arabs, Akkadians, Canaanites, Hebrews, some Ethiopians (including the Amhara and the Tigrayans), and Aramaean tribes.

I am more anti-Judaism. The false religion that rejects the Messiah (the One that actually came, not some future one they believe will show up in the future.)

 

[Tenchi]

Calvin and Arminius are like two shortsighted observers who can barely see only half of the elephant. One can see only the head to the middle of its body, the other only the tail to the middle of its body. So both agree what an Elephant's torso looks like, but fight tooth and nail when describing what the entire elephant looks like.

But, you're assuming you see the "elephant" better than they. On what grounds? Why aren't you just another believer groping at only a part of the "elephant"? How is it you believe you see the whole of it? You could be just as myopic in your own way as Calvin and Arminius, could you not? What makes you somehow immune to this problem and thus able to tell everyone else the true, full shape of the "elephant"? Wouldn't both Calvin and Arminius look at you and think you were the one groping about the "elephant" unable to see its true form? I think they would.

Sherlock Holmes would grasp the error immediately, and put the testimony of both together and draw the full picture of an elephant accurately, with both Head and Tail.

Only given your assumption that you see the "elephant" in its true, full form. Those you suggest are partially blind to the full shape of the "elephant" would both contend that they are the ones seeing the "elephant" correctly and you are not.

Was Christ blind when He contradicts Arminus saying He would lose no one given to Him?

"This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day. (Jn. 6:39 NKJ)

Have you searched out how Arminius has answered this verse?

Was Paul blind when he contradicts Arminus saying those predestined He also glorified:

29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.
30 Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.
31 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? (Rom. 8:29-31 NKJ)

See my question above.

Was God blind when twice contradicts Calvin repeating"whosever believes" in Christ has eternal life (John 3:14-16)?

14 "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up,
15 "that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.
16 "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (Jn. 3:14-16 NKJ)

No, its more complex than Arminius or Calvin could see.

Come on, now. You have offered nothing even close to a proper rendering of what either Calvin or Arminius put forward in answer to such challenges as you've offered. It's quite silly, then, for any reader to take your evaluation of their perspectives seriously.

 

[Alfred Persson]

But, you're assuming you see the "elephant" better than they. On what grounds? Why aren't you just another believer groping at only a part of the "elephant"? How is it you believe you see the whole of it? You could be just as myopic in your own way as Calvin and Arminius, could you not? What makes you somehow immune to this problem and thus able to tell everyone else the true, full shape of the "elephant"? Wouldn't both Calvin and Arminius look at you and think you were the one groping about the "elephant" unable to see its true form? I think they would.



Only given your assumption that you see the "elephant" in its true, full form. Those you suggest are partially blind to the full shape of the "elephant" would both contend that they are the ones seeing the "elephant" correctly and you are not.



Have you searched out how Arminius has answered this verse?



See my question above.



Come on, now. You have offered nothing even close to a proper rendering of what either Calvin or Arminius put forward in answer to such challenges as you've offered. It's quite silly, then, for any reader to take your evaluation of their perspectives seriously.

The puzzle pieces (scripture details) when assembled make a clear picture. Elegance is how I know.

If you can't prove the picture inaccurate, then I have nothing to respond to. Doubts, everyone has 'em.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Jesus never threatens to blot out anybody's names.
Rev 3:5 He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.

I will not blot out the names of those who overcome, is not the same thing as saying
I will blot out the names of those who don't overcome.

If He will NOT blot out overcomers, then He will blot out those who were overcome or the first statement is babble.

 

[Tenchi]

The puzzle pieces (scripture details) when assembled make a clear picture. Elegance is how I know.

But this is exactly what anyone with any perspective could say about their perspective! Why else would they hold to Calvinism, or Arminianism, or Molinism, or Provisionism, or Pelagianism if not because they think the "pieces of the puzzle fit"? Those holding these other views can claim their views are just as "elegant" as yours, too - elegance, like beauty, being a very subjective thing. Your reply here, then, is quite facile and deflective, ignoring, really, the substance of my criticism.

If you can't prove the picture inaccurate, then I have nothing to respond to. Doubts, everyone has 'em.

I don't have to prove your picture inaccurate since your attempt to show your view the "right one" has relied upon an enormously incomplete rendering of the Calvinist and Arminianist perspectives. Until you offer a better, more thorough, representation of both of these soteriological views, your conclusions about them - and your expectation that we should accept your conclusions - is completely unreasonable.

 

[Alfred Persson]

But this is exactly what anyone with any perspective could say about their perspective! Why else would they hold to Calvinism, or Arminianism, or Molinism, or Provisionism, or Pelagianism if not because they think the "pieces of the puzzle fit"? Those holding these other views can claim their views are just as "elegant" as yours, too - elegance, like beauty, being a very subjective thing. Your reply here, then, is quite facile and deflective, ignoring, really, the substance of my criticism.



I don't have to prove your picture inaccurate since your attempt to show your view the "right one" has relied upon an enormously incomplete rendering of the Calvinist and Arminianist perspectives. Until you offer a better, more thorough, representation of both of these soteriological views, your conclusions about them - and your expectation that we should accept your conclusions - is completely unreasonable.

Incorrect. I cited the scripture paradox my construct resolves, elegantly. I can't help you see it, that you must do on your own. Like seeing how Sherlock Holmes infers from events, to facts. It requires skill.

 

[Tenchi]

Incorrect. I cited the scripture paradox my construct resolves, elegantly. I can't help you see it, that you must do on your own. Like seeing how Sherlock Holmes infers from events, to facts. It requires skill.

Well, I'm sorry to have to say this, but your answer above reveals that you don't have the Holmes-like logic you're implying I have yet to acquire. It is because you haven't been able to grasp my points that you've responded in the way you have. I suspect this inability to understand plagues also your treatment of both Calvin's and Arminius' soteriological views.

 

[Dave...]

If He will NOT blot out overcomers, then He will blot out those who were overcome or the first statement is babble.

Hi Alfred

I've always been taught, (and it makes sense to me given the rest of scripture), that we should see that verse a great promise, not a great threat. That's the way I have always seen it. God is promising that He will never blot our names out of the book of life. This is the same as the Holy Spirit being the Seal of our inheritance. The cultural idea of a seal is that only the one who made it can break it. There are other examples as I'm sure you are aware.

Anyways, I think think that I may understand our point of contention with that overlapping, as you called it. Is it that you believe that all regeneration begins with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in response to faith? So my claim in saying that the natural man cannot respond positively to the Gospel would need some intervention (regeneration) which you believe they don't have yet? Did I understand that/you right?

Dave

 

[Alfred Persson]

Hi Alfred

I've always been taught, (and it makes sense to me given the rest of scripture), that we should see that verse a great promise, not a great threat. That's the way I have always seen it. God is promising that He will never blot our names out of the book of life. This is the same as the Holy Spirit being the Seal of our inheritance. The cultural idea of a seal is that only the one who made it can break it. There are other examples as I'm sure you are aware.

Anyways, I think think that I may understand our point of contention with that overlapping, as you called it. Is it that you believe that all regeneration begins with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in response to faith? So my claim in saying that the natural man cannot respond positively to the Gospel would need some intervention (regeneration) which you believe they don't have yet? Did I understand that/you right?

Dave

Revelation is not regeneration. Revelation comes first in linear time, the Father reveals, draws. Then saving faith appears, and regeneration occurs.

I could be in Russia when my need for God is revealed, I might be drawn to the US for a revival meeting where I believe, have saving faith and born again, regenerated.

I fail to see the difficulty.

As for Christ's promise not to blot out names of overcomers, it logically follows He could blot out names of those who are overcome.

Again, I fail to see the difficulty because this isn't about people already saved. Those who taught you it was were wrong. Its about those who have not yet overcome the cares of this world, and can be overcome:

The Red font are the "thoroughly wicked" children of the devil. Some reject right away at the slightest argument from the devil, others rejoice for a time in the light but have no root and fall away.

The Yellow are the "Middling (Undetermined) people" Christ was speaking to. If they overcame He would not blot out their name from the Book of life, but if they are overcome....He would.

The Green are the Elect, "thoroughly righteous" who don't fail to produce fruit for Christ.

18 "Therefore hear the parable of the sower:
19 "When anyone hears the word of the kingdom, and does not understand it, then the wicked one comes and snatches away what was sown in his heart. This is he who received seed by the wayside.
20 "But he who received the seed on stony places, this is he who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy;
21 "yet he has no root in himself, but endures only for a while. For when tribulation or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he stumbles.
22 "Now he who received seed among the thorns is he who hears the word, and the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and he becomes unfruitful.
23 "But he who received seed on the good ground is he who hears the word and understands it, who indeed bears fruit and produces: some a hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty." (Matt. 13:18-23 NKJ)

 

[Alfred Persson]

Well, I'm sorry to have to say this, but your answer above reveals that you don't have the Holmes-like logic you're implying I have yet to acquire. It is because you haven't been able to grasp my points that you've responded in the way you have. I suspect this inability to understand plagues also your treatment of both Calvin's and Arminius' soteriological views.

On the contrary, this entire thread proves it. Hiding in plain sight was the key Calvin and Arminius missed. Neither realized from God's perspective....there are two versions of everyone born since the foundation of the world.

In God's Omniscience (He knows all things), before He created....He knew Satan would rebel and deceive Adam and the fall would occur. He saw what happened to everyone who came into existence in the fallen realm.

He also knew a version of everyone BEFORE they were fallen. When these "woke up" God revealed His love for them. Some responded immediately with love. Some were neutral, thinking "so what's next". Some responded with terror knowing they were evil.

God then selected those who responded with love, and in a separate "foreknowing" God enjoyed life with these infinitely.

This "foreknowing" is analogous to reading print where some of the text is highlighted. What is highlighted is "seen before, known before" the rest of the text. In that heightened state of knowing, God really enjoyed life with these beings (both elect angel and elect humans), who fully knew who God is and loved Him with all their heart.


But there was a problem. Many of these would be deceived in a fallen world, and die the death of the wicked. Lest that happen, God Elected these He foreknew to be conformed to the image of His Son.

That is what is implied by these verses:

28 And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.
29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.
30 Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.
31 What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us? (Rom. 8:28-31 NKJ)

Both Calvin and Arminius missed a simple truth, God didn't "foreknow" everyone, He already knew in His Omniscience who were children of God and who were children of the Devil and who were inbetween.

He only foreknew the Elect and predestined them to salvation.

He did not reprobate anyone. Everyone else has the opportunity to join the elect in salvation, but they must overcome this fallen world or their names will be blotted out of the book of life.

Sherlock would infer from the facts, this is what explains the phenomena we see in the Bible. Calvinists focus on election predestination....and deny what Arminius sees, that some can miss out on salvation even though they started as believing...they just couldn't endure to the end. And Arminius couldn't permit Election not based on foreseen faith. So both are wrong.

Christ and His apostles clearly reveal it in the NT but it requires one be like Sherlock Holmes and fit the Bible pieces together without forcing them to fit a preconceived picture.

It was also known to some in Judaism of the 1st century as proved by the Talmud quotes.

 

[Fastfredy0]

Well, I'm sorry to have to say this, but your answer above reveals that you don't have the Holmes-like logic you're implying I have yet to acquire.

Agreed ... that conclusion lead me to end the conversation with him.

 

[Alfred Persson]

Agreed ... that conclusion lead me to end the conversation with him.

Is that really why, or was this indefensible:
One could be given faith and sealed concurrently.-FastFreddy0

What would Sherlock say about this?

Forensically its impossible faith and sealing (regeneration) are concurrent as belief comes first, then salvation:
31 So they said, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household." (Acts 16:31 NKJ)

To illustrate with a Sherlockian analogy "a cake is not found baked before cooked in an oven my dear Watson."

Could it be deduced a certain inability to prove your "concurrent theory" might have led to the "ending the conversation."