Predestination and Calvinism

[Chopper]

Yes sir.

Abraham typtifies this one new man, being both Jew and Gentile, as it were... being the source of the seed group for the Jews, while at the same time being a Gentile.

Paul also speaks of these things concerning Melchizedek, as being a type of Christ... who have no ancestry from which to derive a lineage, making Him neither Jew nor Gentile.

Since the bloodline is determined by the father, and Jesus Himself being the seed of the woman, can be considered neither Jew nor Gentile, though He was born under the law.


JLB

Hmm, that's very interesting JLB. I've never thought of it that way. Would you think that Jesus is more Jewish than Gentile? Now look what you've done.

 

[childeye]

That passage is poorly translated. The word "eklectos" is actually in verse 1.

YLT 1 Peter 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the choice sojourners of the dispersion of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, (1 Pet. 1:1 YLT)

The word foreknowedge is actually a compound Greek word it is before+know. The best understanding of the word is to knowing in the past. This is how it is used in the Scriptures. I think the definition you found in the Blue Letter Lexicon is reading something into the word that isn't there. In verses 1 and 2 Peter is wishing grace and peace according to God knowing before the elect sojourners of the dispersion

If I understand you correctly, you have indicated that God does not pre-determine individuals unto salvation through His foreknowledge. But rather, through His foreknowledge, has pre-arranged a plan through which any individual who freely chooses to, can believe in the Christ unto salvation. Hence 'before-know' means that God knows that some people will believe and some will not, but God does not know exactly who. Since freewill is being seen as a component in this plan, then God would not use any means of power over individuals, to restrain nor compel any individual so as to believe or not believe. Is that correct?

 

[Chopper]

If it's about both then Isn't it about Israel? Verse 5 is about the Jews. As I've pointed out several times Paul references two groups, us and you. He explains clearly in chapter 2 that the group called "you" is the Gentiles. Therefore the other group, "us" is someone else. The statements in verses 3-12 tell us who the "us" group is, it's the Jews. It was the Jews who first trusted in the Christ. It was the Jews to whom God had given an inheritance. Notice that Paul said they had received an inheritance, past tense. The Gentiles had never received an inheritance from God. In verse 14 Paul speaks of a future inheritance of believers, it's future, not past. The past inheritance was to the Jews.

54 `And you shall divide the land by lot as an inheritance among your families; to the larger you shall give a larger inheritance, and to the smaller you shall give a smaller inheritance; there everyone's inheritance shall be whatever falls to him by lot. You shall inherit according to the tribes of your fathers. (Num. 33:54 NKJ)

This is what Paul is talking about in Ephesians.

It was the Jews who were predestined to adoption.

22 "Then you shall say to Pharaoh,`Thus says the LORD: "Israel is My son, My firstborn. (Exod. 4:22 NKJ)

The promise was to Abraham and his seed. Because Abraham obeyed God, God promised certain things to him. The Gentiles are made part of that through Christ. It is through Christ, by being grafted into the cultivated olive tree that the Gentiles become partakers of the promises to Abraham. Paul goes into detail about this in Galatians 3.

Paul
4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, (Eph. 1:4 NKJ)
OT Realization
6 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth. (Deut. 7:6 KJV)

2 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth. (Deut. 14:2 KJV)
Paul
6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved. (Eph. 1:1 KJV)

Accepted isn't the best translation the word actually means to pursue with grace. That's what God did for Israel.

OT Realization
6 For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth. (Deut. 7:6 KJV)

Paul
8 Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence; 9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself: 10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him: (Eph. 1:1 KJV)

OT realization.
God did this down through time with the prophets. He gave Israel prophet after prophet who came saying, "thus saith the Lord".

I find nothing wrong with what you're saying, nothing!! So, what are you trying to say as to the OP? Is predestination only for the Jews?

 

[childeye]

Knowledge before the fact does not cause the fact.
I can know that, if it continues to rain, the roads will be flooded. That knowledge does not cause the roads to be flooded.

Understood and well said. But as this pertains to God's foreknowledge, God even sends the rain, does he not?

 

[Jim Parker]

Why so?

Because there is no other alternative.

If I have purposed to throw a destination party this weekend at a far-off place, and I invite all whom I know to come there but by arranging for their own means of transport - then without any contemplation at all I already know there is the possibility that one might be deterred from coming owing to the sheer distance and/or transport arrangements...........

That is not an example of predestination.

I then predetermine - that I shall welcome whosoever makes it there on their own. At the same time, to safeguard against the theoretical case of none turning up, I shall also at this moment itself elect my very close inner circle of friends whom I have predetermined to drive by and pick up on the day of the party in case they have decided against coming due to difficulties in travel arrangements...........

That is not an example of predestination.

If my not so close friend Q decides not to come, then I wouldn't be at his door picking him up on that day - but Note, this is not because I predestined for him not to be at the party.

That is an argument for free will.

Since you based your illustration on the basis of an invitation, none of your objections reflect the sense of predestination.

Predestination is not an invitation. It is an incontestable selection of some individuals to have eternal life and an incontestable selection of others to be subjected to eternal torment. The basis of the selection is not disclosed and the selector does not answer any question about or challenge to the process or outcome. The selection is final and those selected for either outcome are not allowed any input into the process.

There are only two outcomes: eternal life and eternal torment.
If anyone is not predestined to eternal life then there is no other possible reality than he is predestined to eternal torment because that is the only other outcome.
If anyone is not predestined to eternal torment then there is no other possible reality than he is predestined to eternal life because that is the only other outcome.

iakov the fool

 

[childeye]

The Elect of God is the Remnant of God, chosen by Him before the world was created. Jeremiah is a good example. They are a special, hand picked followers by YHWH to represent Him in all generations and geographical locations. God has always had a witness. The three portions of Scripture that you have posted is simply a reference to this special Remnant of believers to live according to their calling as the Elect of God.

Calvin's TULIP is correct when applied to the Elect of God. It is not correctly applied to the rest of the believers who come to Christ thru the "General Call of the Gospel" as they come by their own free will to either choose or deny Jesus the Christ of YHWH. They are the ones who also can loose their Salvation if they don't adhere to the faith until death.

As I see it, according to what I am afforded to see, as concerning the general calling, I do not see any freewill. But that is also according to how I see freewill. To me, freewill can only be considered as truly free, if every individual has the same and equal ability, and not just the circumstantial opportunity, to believe or disbelieve. And since believing is also predicated on what we are believing upon, then it is also a matter of clearly seeing and hearing, so as to be clearly understanding what that Truth is, which we are going to either believe or deny.

So you have mentioned the faith, and I see the faith fundamentally as, True Love is Eternal, or God exists eternally and is the Eternal power. For that is what I see on the cross and in the resurrection. But I therefore have reason to believe that God is proving to heaven and earth, through the temporal flesh existence, that we do not have freewill in any moral/immoral capacity. Hence the power to believe is actually in the message of the cross, but it must be seen or revealed as such, for a person to believe as pertains to the general calling. Or to rephrase, the Truth is more convincing than the lie when clearly seen.

 

[Butch5]

If I understand you correctly, you have indicated that God does not pre-determine individuals unto salvation through His foreknowledge, but rather, through His foreknowledge, has pre-arranged a plan through which any individual who freely chooses to, can believe in the Christ unto salvation. Hence 'before-know' means that God knows that some people will believe and some will not, but God does not know exactly who. Since freewill is being seen as a component in this plan, then God would not use any means of power over individuals, to restrain nor compel any individual so as to believe or not believe. Is that correct?

What you've stated is partly what I believe. I submit that no individual has been predetermined to saved or lost. It is up to that person which happens to them. I submit, however, the word that is translated foreknowledge, proginosko means to know from the past, not the future. For instance, when Paul says,

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. (Rom. 8:29 NKJ)

It's my contention that foreknew here is not speaking of God knowing the future, but rather those He knew in the past. Consider verse 28.

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. (Rom. 8:28 NKJ)

Paul says we know or we have perceived that all things work together for good to those who love the Lord. To prove this he says those that God knew before (the time of Paul's writing) ie. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, etc. He also predetermined to be conformed to the image of His Son. Notice verse 28 is about those who love God and are the called according to His plan. The plan is the fulfillment of the promises that He made to Abraham. The called are Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, etc.

 

[Butch5]

I find nothing wrong with what you're saying, nothing!! So, what are you trying to say as to the OP? Is predestination only for the Jews?

I'm saying that predestination from the Bible refers to God fulfilling His plan through the Jewish people down to Christ. There's a teaching today that says some people (even today) have been chosen to be saved from before the foundation of the world. It is my contention that when the Bible speaks of predestination that is not what it's talking about.

 

[Jim Parker]

Understood and well said. But as this pertains to God's foreknowledge, God even sends the rain, does he not?

Again; knowing and sending are two different things.
Rain "is sent" to the just and the unjust without regard to the condition of their souls. And, as rain is a blessing to an agricultural society, that blessing is "sent" to the just and the unjust equally. The teaching of Jesus at Mat 5:45 is about God's mercy toward all of mankind regardless of their status as sinner or saint. It therefore supports the universality of the atonement rather than the limited atonement notion invented by Calvin.

iakov the fool

 

[Malachi]

Why do you say my above statement is not biblical - when a remnant is saved (Rom 9:27) , and this remnant is according to His election of grace (Rom 11:5), and such election is predetermined independent of any's works (Rom 9:11) ?

One must not use Romans 9-11 to establish predestination for the purpose of salvation. If predestination and election were for that purpose then every Jew should have been saved. Paul says that he would gladly give up his salvation for the sake of his Jewish brethren: For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: (Rom 9:3).

This in itself proves that there is no election/predestination for salvation. Why?

1. All have sinned.
2. All need to be saved.
3. All are commanded to repent.
4. All are offered the gift of eternal life.
5. Christ died for all.

You will find ample Scriptures to support each one of these statements. Therefore you should agree with God that predestination is for a different purpose (Rom 8:29):
For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

In plain English, sinners who are saved are predestined to be perfected so that they resemble Christ -- "the image of His Son". This perfection will take place at the Resurrection/Rapture. In the meantime we are to purify ourselves (1 Jn 3:21): Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not. Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is. And every man that hath this hope in him purifieth himself, even as he is pure.

 

[turnorburn]

I Peter 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,

4 To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,

5 Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

 

[childeye]

What you've stated is partly what I believe. I submit that no individual has been predetermined to saved or lost. It is up to that person which happens to them. I submit, however, the word that is translated foreknowledge, proginosko means to know from the past, not the future. For instance, when Paul says,

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. (Rom. 8:29 NKJ)

It's my contention that foreknew here is not speaking of God knowing the future, but rather those He knew in the past. Consider verse 28.

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. (Rom. 8:28 NKJ)

Paul says we know or we have perceived that all things work together for good to those who love the Lord. To prove this he says those that God knew before (the time of Paul's writing) ie. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, etc. He also predetermined to be conformed to the image of His Son. Notice verse 28 is about those who love God and are the called according to His plan. The plan is the fulfillment of the promises that He made to Abraham. The called are Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, etc.

I appreciate your time and response. Romans 8:28 suggests a 'purpose' or 'reason why', for "all things". The phrase 'work together for good', implies a pre-determined goal where even bad events that happen, are ultimately beneficial as part of a greater purpose that will be accomplished in the end. Freewill seems to be at the core of your theology. Your interpretation of scripture seems intent on establishing or defending freewill. But I am only speculating, and perhaps projecting my own aversion to the term.

Therefore my interest is specifically about freewill and whether it exists. So I wonder how you would answer if I asked you, if you are saying that those who Love God do so of their own freewill? Please allow me to further elaborate upon that thought before you give answer. Do men volunteer to Love God, or do we Love Him because of Who He is as a Person? Do you personally decide to worship God through a mental deliberation of whether you should or shouldn't, or does he move you to worship Him because He is everything Good and True and Holy? Do you feel so as to be moved by Love, or do you decide to feel Love? All of these questions are meant to provoke thought as to whether God's revelation of Himself has any power to bring men to their knees before Him in sincere worship.

 

[childeye]

Again; knowing and sending are two different things.
Rain "is sent" to the just and the unjust without regard to the condition of their souls. And, as rain is a blessing to an agricultural society, that blessing is "sent" to the just and the unjust equally. The teaching of Jesus at Mat 5:45 is about God's mercy toward all of mankind regardless of their status as sinner or saint. It therefore supports the universality of the atonement rather than the limited atonement notion invented by Calvin.

I can't speak for Calvin. It is my experience that misunderstandings are common when interpreting others meanings. I therefore tend to refrain from any definitive interpretation of what Calvin is implying by limited atonement. But I will say that I would also refrain from agreeing with that phrase if it means to imply a limited mercy. Unless of course, there exist those elements in creation that would test that mercy forever in an eternal unbelief.

 

[Jim Parker]

Why do you say my above statement is not biblical - when a remnant is saved (Rom 9:27) , and this remnant is according to His election of grace (Rom 11:5), and such election is predetermined independent of any's works (Rom 9:11) ?

It is an unfortunate that the chapter and verse numbers are so automatically assumed to be part of the scriptures. In the original writings, there were no "verses" or "chapters". (There weren't even any periods or capitalization to indicate the beginning of a sentence.) They were inserted in the 16th century for the sole purpose of convenience in finding specific parts of the writings. Unfortunately, since we are taught to see chapters and verses as a means of separating thoughts, we unconsciously apply that convention to the study of scripture. The result is that we see isolated comments where there are none.

What you have done by selecting individual verses is an outcome of that misunderstanding of the structure of Paul's letters. The verses are not little pieces of wisdom which can stand alone. They are parts of a whole thesis which we improperly strip out of their place in order to insert them into a new and too often unrelated thesis which we are building in support of some modern theological innovation.

Rom 9:27-28 (RSV) And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: "Though the number of the sons of Israel be as the sand of the sea, only a for the Lord will execute his sentence upon the earth with rigor and dispatch."
The "sentence" which the Lord executes is what the Old Covenant prescribed. If (when) Israel failed to keep the covenant, they would be cast out of the promised land and scattered among the pagan nations. Only a remnant of them would survive to return.

Rom 11:1-5 (RSV) I ask, then, has God rejected his people? By no means! I myself am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, a member of the tribe of Benjamin. God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the scripture says of Eli'jah, how he pleads with God against Israel? "Lord, they have killed thy prophets, they have demolished thy altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life." But what is God's reply to him? "I have kept for myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Ba'al." So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace.
The remnant which is according to grace are those who remained obedient to the Covenant. The grace was extended to them because they were steadfast in their commitment to serve the Lord. That commitment was certainly foreknown by God who knows the end from the beginning. That does not make it foreordained.

Rom 9:10-16 (RSV) And not only so, but also when Rebecca had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad, in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of his call, she was told, "The elder will serve the younger." As it is written, "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."
What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God's part? By no means! For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."
So it depends not upon man's will or exertion, but upon God's mercy.

This passage does not stand alone. It is introduced by the previous verses:
Rom 9:6-9 (RSV) But it is not as though the word of God had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, and not all are children of Abraham because they are his descendants; but "Through Isaac shall your descendants be named." This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are reckoned as descendants. For this is what the promise said, "About this time I will return and Sarah shall have a son."

None of this supports predestination. It explains that God, knowing the character of all men, chooses those whom He knows will do His will. God knew that Esau would have no regard for his birthright and that Jacob would highly value it. So, by grace, because Jacob did not merit the birthright, he inherited his brother's birthright in spite of the deceitful manner by which he acquired it.

Anyway, that's how I see it.

iakov the fool

 

[Chopper]

If I understand you correctly, you have indicated that God does not pre-determine individuals unto salvation through His foreknowledge. But rather, through His foreknowledge, has pre-arranged a plan through which any individual who freely chooses to, can believe in the Christ unto salvation. Hence 'before-know' means that God knows that some people will believe and some will not, but God does not know exactly who. Since freewill is being seen as a component in this plan, then God would not use any means of power over individuals, to restrain nor compel any individual so as to believe or not believe. Is that correct?

No. In my theology, as well as John Calvin, there is such a thing called "Irresistible Grace". It is the sovereignly given gift of faith that cannot be rejected by the Elect. God did not look into the future and see who would choose Him and then elect them. God chose men before they were born to be a part of a Remnant that would love and be obedient to His Commands and to be a witness to all others.

My theology includes what Calvin did not address, and that is the "General Call of the Gospel" in which, as the Evangelists go out spreading the Gospel, men and women have a free will choice to either accept God's offer of Salvation or not.

Thank you for your questions.

 

[childeye]

No. In my theology, as well as John Calvin, there is such a thing called "Irresistible Grace". It is the sovereignly given gift of faith that cannot be rejected by the Elect. God did not look into the future and see who would choose Him and then elect them. God chose men before they were born to be a part of a Remnant that would love and be obedient to His Commands and to be a witness to all others.

My theology includes what Calvin did not address, and that is the "General Call of the Gospel" in which, as the Evangelists go out spreading the Gospel, men and women have a free will choice to either accept God's offer of Salvation or not.

Thank you for your questions.

While I sincerely do appreciate your responses, this post that you have responded was initially meant for another poster. If I may point out, I have specifically submitted a post to you that is a response to one of your prior posts, but for whatever reason it remains unanswered. That would be post #306. Respectfully, it would be informative to me, pertaining to your personal views, if you would respond to that post. Thank you for your time and patience.

 

[ivdavid]

That is not an example of predestination...
Since you based your illustration on the basis of an invitation, none of your objections reflect the sense of predestination.

Let me assure you, setting up an illustration with the word "invite" does not make it the very basis. The illustration rests on my predestining one group of people to be where I want them, while choosing not to do any predestining at all concerning the rest - you could re-read my post to see if that isn't the central point.

Of course, there are only 2 outcomes - either one is at the party or one is not. But it is not quite so with my act of predestining - I could either predestine one to be at the party, or I could predestine one to not be at the party, Or I could simply not predestine anything at all, permitting the person to determine his destination for himself. For predestining involves an act of my volition, which I may or may not choose to exercise over a person - and which I have chosen to exercise over my elect group of close friends and similarly have chosen not to exercise over the rest.

While I have conceded there are only 2 outcomes possible for any individual, do you concede that there are 3 paths in which to reach them - 1. I predestine some to be there, 2. I predestine some not to be there, 3. I choose not to do any predestining at all for some and permit the natural course of events to occur in/by them.

People who do not believe in Predestination concerning salvation, hold only 3 to occur. People who believe in double predestination hold both 1 and 2 to occur. People who believe in single predestination hold both 1 and 3 to occur. Why do you without any reason limit my choices to just 1 and 2 with "no other alternative", when obviously there is also a 3rd which you yourself hold to be true?

 

[Butch5]

I appreciate your time and response. Romans 8:28 suggests a 'purpose' or 'reason why', for "all things". The phrase 'work together for good', implies a pre-determined goal where even bad events that happen, are ultimately beneficial as part of a greater purpose that will be accomplished in the end. Freewill seems to be at the core of your theology. Your interpretation of scripture seems intent on establishing or defending freewill. But I am only speculating, and perhaps projecting my own aversion to the term.

Therefore my interest is specifically about freewill and whether it exists. So I wonder how you would answer if I asked you, if you are saying that those who Love God do so of their own freewill? Please allow me to further elaborate upon that thought before you give answer. Do men volunteer to Love God, or do we Love Him because of Who He is as a Person? Do you personally decide to worship God through a mental deliberation of whether you should or shouldn't, or does he move you to worship Him because He is everything Good and True and Holy. Do you feel Love or decide to feel Love? All of these questions are meant to provoke thought as to whether God's revelation of Himself has any power to bring men to their knees before Him in sincere worship.

As I said, previously, I don't think free will is an issue here. I do believe man has free will. However, as I said, the passages about predestination, when they pertain to man, are speaking about the Jews as the method that God used to bring to fruition His promises to Abraham. I submit that it has nothing to do with God choosing which individual is saved and which isn't. That idea is a man made doctrine that stems from a misunderstanding of the passages that speak of predestination. There is nothing in the Bible that states one person is predestined to be saved and another is not.

When we understand this from Paul's Jewish perspective rather than from a Greek philosophical point of view the problems all go away. I can answer the questions you asked, but I don't think they bear on the subject of predestination as it is in the Bible.

The predetermined goal n Romans 8:28 is the fulfillment of the promises that God made to Abraham. Paul goes on to explain this in Romans 9.

3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh,
4 who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises;
5 of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen.
6 But it is not that the word of God has taken no effect. For they are not all Israel who are of Israel,
7 nor are they all children because they are the seed of Abraham; but, "In Isaac your seed shall be called."
8 That is, those who are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted as the seed.
9 For this is the word of promise: "At this time I will come and Sarah shall have a son."
10 And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac
11 (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls),
12 it was said to her, "The older shall serve the younger." (Rom. 9:3-12 NKJ)

As proof of this Paul says,

13 As it is written, "Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated." (Rom. 9:13 NKJ)

God choose Jacob and not Esau. But does the passage say he was chosen to be saved? Not at all. It says the elder, Esau, shall serve the younger Jacob. It was part of God's plan. God told Abraham that he would be the father of a great nation. It was through Jacob that the Jewish nation came into being. Romans chapter 9 is an explanation of what Paul said in Romans 8:28-30.

 

[Chopper]

As I see it, according to what I am afforded to see, as concerning the general calling, I do not see any freewill. But that is also according to how I see freewill. To me, freewill can only be considered as truly free, if every individual has the same and equal ability, and not just the circumstantial opportunity, to believe or disbelieve. And since believing is also predicated on what we are believing upon, then it is also a matter of clearly seeing and hearing, so as to be clearly understanding what that Truth is, which we are going to either believe or deny.

So you have mentioned the faith, and I see the faith fundamentally as, True Love is Eternal, or God exists eternally and is the Eternal power. For that is what I see on the cross and in the resurrection. But I therefore have reason to believe that God is proving to heaven and earth, through the temporal flesh existence, that we do not have freewill in any moral/immoral capacity. Hence the power to believe is actually in the message of the cross, but it must be seen or revealed as such, for a person to believe as pertains to the general calling. Or to rephrase, the Truth is more convincing than the lie when clearly seen.

Ok, I'm really pleased that you are accepting the General Call of the Gospel. Now, you did not mention the Holy Spirit. In my theology of the General Call, the Holy Spirit is the One of the godhead that calls sinners to repentance....

John 16:7 Nevertheless, I tell you the truth: it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you.
16:8 And when he comes, he will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment:
16:9 concerning sin, because they do not believe in me;
16:10 concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father, and you will see me no longer;
16:11 concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.
16:12 "I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
16:13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come.
16:14 He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you.

Once a person has been in a position to hear the Gospel, probably moved by the Holy Spirit, upon hearing the Gospel of Christ's death burial and resurrection, the Holy Spirit's power either convicts that person of their sinful nature and they of their own free will choice accept this Grace of God and by faith, believes on Jesus the Son of God. Others may hear the same message preached and are unmoved to make a decision by his own free will. It all comes down to a choice, do they or don't they.

 

[Chopper]

I'm saying that predestination from the Bible refers to God fulfilling His plan through the Jewish people down to Christ. There's a teaching today that says some people (even today) have been chosen to be saved from before the foundation of the world. It is my contention that when the Bible speaks of predestination that is not what it's talking about.

Oh, wow!! Now I understand where you're coming from. Interesting to say the least. I've never heard it that way. I guess you could say that there was a dispensation of time whereby predestination was working and once the Messiah was born, the dispensation ended, or shortly there after.

I'd have to have Scripture to back up this notion of yours, I don't see it at all.