Why I Don't Believe in Predestination

[shaitiger]

Me, I've never quite understood how Christians can claim that a loving God would declare, irrevocably, that some people are to be chosen for salvation, while others are to be chosen to burn in Hell. That's like a parent choosing some of his kids to receive love and care, while the rest get sent into the basement where they're locked in a cage and are fed gruel. "Oh, but the parent is loving and just, because his choice of which kid gets tormented is completely random!" Sorry, but no.

A loving God must necessarily offer all people an opportunity to achieve salvation through their own actions - by accepting Jesus as savior. If everyone does not have an equal chance to determine for himself whether he goes to heaven or not, then God ceases to be good and just, and becomes a wicked tyrant.

Pre-determination is something invented by arrogant Christians to justify looking down upon those who haven't yet been saved. No thank you.

First, your idea of God is skewed. It's ok though, because there a lot of Christians out there that think the same way.

If you are somewhat educated in Biblical scripture, you will also come to the conclusion that God is not only a "loving" God, but that he is also a God full of wrath. He is not only a loving God, but is also a just God. God hates sin and because of his nature, will judge it. Why does God choose some to be saved and some not to be? To bring glory to Himself ofcourse. Not so arbitray now huh?

Read Romans 9. It will blow you away. What human intellect perceives as arbitrary, God sees it as being purposeful. He created some to be vessels of wrath(unsaved) and some to be vessels of mercy(saved). We worship a God of purpose. When people really study the attributes of God (omnipotent, omnipresent, omnicient), they will not only understand predestination and election, but believe it. If God doesn't haven't those attributes, He is no longer God.

Do we have choice(volition), heck yes. Do we have free choice or free will, heck no. If we do then we don't serve a sovereign God. People always confuse volition with free will. Free will means we have the power to overrun God's sovereign will. No where in scripture does it say that. What scripture screams is that God is God and we are not. Do we have consciousness, yes. Do we make choices based off of that conscious, yes. Ultimately speaking, from God's perspective, could we have made any other choice? No. His plan will come to pass.

Do we know who will be saved or not? No. Hence, we preach the gospel. Ask yourself these questions. Must evil exist in order for good to exist? or vice versa? Must transgression exist in order for forgiveness to exist? Can mercy exist without wrath(due payment)? Can perseverance exist without adversity? If you are a human being that considers themselves to be a logical thinker, you will answer yes to all those questions. Heaven must exist in order for Hell to exist and vice versa. So if God is omnicient, he knows who will be saved or not. If God is omnipotent, then not only does he know who will be saved or not, it is because of his divine sovereignty that determines them to be.

Scripture screams this doctrine because God shows us his character to an extent in the Bible. I can list plenty of scripture to show this if you wish. I'm not sure it's going to matter coming from a non-believer.

You want to talk about arrogance? Free will means you can overrun God's will or plan. Free will puts salvation in the hands of humanity and not in the hands of God. That's arrogance. It takes sincere humility to believe in predestination and election.

 

[Heidi]

Good Day, Art

Please define the Greek word proorizō, then we shall see if it is invented.

I will leave you man cetered view of God alone... you can keep it

I think that one isolated verse that may or may not imply predestination doesn't stand up well to the many, many verses that reference men freely choosing whether or not to follow God. In light of this apparent contradiction, it's worthwhile to ask which seems more befitting of an omnibenevolent deity - allowing people to choose their fate, or arbitrarily condemning billions of people to eternal torture with no chance for them to alter their destinies.

As such, I will leave you your wicked, hate-filled, torture-happy God. I'll stick with a God who doesn't enjoy running a rigged game. But as I said, if it makes you feel better to suppose that God creates hordes of people strictly so that he can torture them for all time, knock yourself out.

Do you want to go to heaven? If so, then you can because Jesus said "he who seeks will find." If you don't want to go to heaven, then stop complaining about a God you don't want.

 

[bbas 64]

Good Day, Art

Please define the Greek word proorizō, then we shall see if it is invented.

I will leave you man cetered view of God alone... you can keep it

I think that one isolated verse that may or may not imply predestination doesn't stand up well to the many, many verses that reference men freely choosing whether or not to follow God. In light of this apparent contradiction, it's worthwhile to ask which seems more befitting of an omnibenevolent deity - allowing people to choose their fate, or arbitrarily condemning billions of people to eternal torture with no chance for them to alter their destinies.

As such, I will leave you your wicked, hate-filled, torture-happy God. I'll stick with a God who doesn't enjoy running a rigged game. But as I said, if it makes you feel better to suppose that God creates hordes of people strictly so that he can torture them for all time, knock yourself out.

Good Day, Art

What verese????

I have asked you to define a word, why have you choosen not to do so??

Remember words have meanings the words used by the writter is very important as they convey ideas and truth....

Define the word please.. we shall see how invented it is.


Peace to u,

Bill

 

[Humble Servant]

Rightly understanding the doctrine of Predestination is a pertinent and necessary one. Wrongly understanding this great truth is tantamount to wrongly understanding salvation. Wrongly understanding salvation is to wrongly understand the Savior. Wrongly understanding the Savior results in worshipping a false Christ. Worshipping a false Christ results in rejection by the true Christ who will state, “I never knew you. Depart from me, ye that work iniquity.â€Â

The true Christ and true Christianity are offensive to the natural man. Had they not been, Christ, His Apostles and centuries of disciples would never have been persecuted, imprisoned, tortured and killed for their faith.

Theodicy is that branch of theology which attempts to vindicate God’s justice. However, the Lord is the Law itself. Thus, He cannot be judged. For everything He says and does is Lawful.

The parable of the vineyard laborers illustrates this point. In giving the vineyard worker hired last the same wage as the one hired first, the natural mind recoils at the injustice and unfairness of the owner. After all, the worker first hired labored to a much greater degree than the one hired last. Why should the last be paid the same wage as the first? The answer? “Friend, I do thee no wrong…….Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil ---- (i.e., do you perceive evil on my part) ------ because I am good?â€Â

Salvation is the gift of God’s love, mercy, and grace unto those who do not deserve it. All deserve everlasting punishment. However, for reasons hidden in the Lord’s unsearchable being, He has chosen to save some, giving them that which they did not deserve or earn – Jesus Christ, and Him crucified - while passing by others, choosing instead to give them exactly what they do deserve……..righteous judgment for their sins.

His choice is based on nothing inherently good or evil in man. Before they were born, having done neither good nor evil; in fact, before they were conceived; even before the Creation of the heavens and the earth, the Lord purposed Esau, the hated, should serve Jacob, the beloved.

“O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge ofGod! How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!â€Â

 

[Heidi]

But what makes it the most equitable system of all is that none of us knows if we are called so it all boils down to; if we want to go to heaven we can because Jesus says "He who seeks will find" and if we don't want to go to heaven, God will grant us our wish.

 

[ArtGuy]

Good Day, Art

What verese????

I have asked you to define a word, why have you choosen not to do so??

Remember words have meanings the words used by the writter is very important as they convey ideas and truth....

Rather than play word games for half a dozen posts, I decided to get to the point. I know where you're going with this.

The word can mean a number of things, including "ordained", "determined", and "predestined". If you want to support the notion of predestination of who's going to heaven and who'se going to hell, you have to hang your hat on this single passage:

Romans 8:28-30 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. For whom He foreknew, He also predestined (proorizo) to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He predestined (proorizo), these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.

One interpretation of that passage is that God has decided in advance who's going to Hell and who isn't.

Define the word please.. we shall see how invented it is.

I didn't say the word was an invention, I said the idea behind a pre-determination interpretation of the Bible was.

 

[ArtGuy]

His choice is based on nothing inherently good or evil in man. Before they were born, having done neither good nor evil; in fact, before they were conceived; even before the Creation of the heavens and the earth, the Lord purposed Esau, the hated, should serve Jacob, the beloved.

How can you view as anything less than abhorrent the practice of creating a group of people specifically so you may torture them for eternity? Even if they deserve it, creating them thusly is cruel.

Consider the following: Some murderers may deserve to receive the death penalty for what they've done. What if I were to genetically engineer someone who was an awful murderer, let him go out and kill people, and then capture him and sentence him to death? Would he deserve this punishment? Possibly. Would creating him in the first place, knowing in advance that I would be inflicting suffering on him later on, and that he would inflict much misery before he had died, be anything less than a monstrous, wicked action? No.

And anyway, this presumes that the person can rightfully be said to deserve such a punishment. The pre-determinist supposes that God creates people specifically to be unrepentant sinners, meaning they have no choice in the matter. If people are specifically designed to not repent, how can you then punish them for not repenting? They're not repenting because you made them that way! The only way to imagine such a God isn't an awful, repulsive sadist is to suppose that the "people" he chooses to go to Hell aren't actual people at all, but only mindless, soulless automatons designed to further the salvation of the real people. But since I don't see many people espousing this view, I can't imagine this to be the case.

The pre-determinist God is a disgusting, awful creature that hardly is worthy of worship and glory. If I, for a second, believed that He existed as such, there's no way I would submit to Him. Better to burn for eternity than to offer myself to a God that delights in the torture of His children.

 

[Heidi]

His choice is based on nothing inherently good or evil in man. Before they were born, having done neither good nor evil; in fact, before they were conceived; even before the Creation of the heavens and the earth, the Lord purposed Esau, the hated, should serve Jacob, the beloved.

How can you view as anything less than abhorrent the practice of creating a group of people specifically so you may torture them for eternity? Even if they deserve it, creating them thusly is cruel.

Consider the following: Some murderers may deserve to receive the death penalty for what they've done. What if I were to genetically engineer someone who was an awful murderer, let him go out and kill people, and then capture him and sentence him to death? Would he deserve this punishment? Possibly. Would creating him in the first place, knowing in advance that I would be inflicting suffering on him later on, and that he would inflict much misery before he had died, be anything less than a monstrous, wicked action? No.

And anyway, this presumes that the person can rightfully be said to deserve such a punishment. The pre-determinist supposes that God creates people specifically to be unrepentant sinners, meaning they have no choice in the matter. If people are specifically designed to not repent, how can you then punish them for not repenting? They're not repenting because you made them that way! The only way to imagine such a God isn't an awful, repulsive sadist is to suppose that the "people" he chooses to go to Hell aren't actual people at all, but only mindless, soulless automatons designed to further the salvation of the real people. But since I don't see many people espousing this view, I can't imagine this to be the case.

The pre-determinist God is a disgusting, awful creature that hardly is worthy of worship and glory. If I, for a second, believed that He existed as such, there's no way I would submit to Him. Better to burn for eternity than to offer myself to a God that delights in the torture of His children.

But Art, you yourself said you don't want heaven. So what's the problem? :o

 

[mutzrein]

Rightly understanding the doctrine of Predestination is a pertinent and necessary one. Wrongly understanding this great truth is tantamount to wrongly understanding salvation. Wrongly understanding salvation is to wrongly understand the Savior. Wrongly understanding the Savior results in worshipping a false Christ. Worshipping a false Christ results in rejection by the true Christ who will state, “I never knew you. Depart from me, ye that work iniquity.â€Â

The true Christ and true Christianity are offensive to the natural man. Had they not been, Christ, His Apostles and centuries of disciples would never have been persecuted, imprisoned, tortured and killed for their faith.

Theodicy is that branch of theology which attempts to vindicate God’s justice. However, the Lord is the Law itself. Thus, He cannot be judged. For everything He says and does is Lawful.

The parable of the vineyard laborers illustrates this point. In giving the vineyard worker hired last the same wage as the one hired first, the natural mind recoils at the injustice and unfairness of the owner. After all, the worker first hired labored to a much greater degree than the one hired last. Why should the last be paid the same wage as the first? The answer? “Friend, I do thee no wrong…….Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil ---- (i.e., do you perceive evil on my part) ------ because I am good?â€Â

Salvation is the gift of God’s love, mercy, and grace unto those who do not deserve it. All deserve everlasting punishment. However, for reasons hidden in the Lord’s unsearchable being, He has chosen to save some, giving them that which they did not deserve or earn – Jesus Christ, and Him crucified - while passing by others, choosing instead to give them exactly what they do deserve……..righteous judgment for their sins.

His choice is based on nothing inherently good or evil in man. Before they were born, having done neither good nor evil; in fact, before they were conceived; even before the Creation of the heavens and the earth, the Lord purposed Esau, the hated, should serve Jacob, the beloved.

“O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out!â€Â

Yes - I agree with God's choosing of man. What trips most people up tho is the thought that a righteous God could choose to condemn someone who is not chosen (perhaps an 'innocent' child or a handicapped person) to eternal torment. Do you think that is inconsistent with what you know of God or is there an alternative outcome?

BTW your comments about worshipping Christ interest me. I presume you are saying that we must worship the 'true' Christ. Is that correct?

 

[bbas 64]

Good Day, Art

What verese????

I have asked you to define a word, why have you choosen not to do so??

Remember words have meanings the words used by the writter is very important as they convey ideas and truth....

Rather than play word games for half a dozen posts, I decided to get to the point. I know where you're going with this.

The word can mean a number of things, including "ordained", "determined", and "predestined". If you want to support the notion of predestination of who's going to heaven and who'se going to hell, you have to hang your hat on this single passage:

Romans 8:28-30 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. For whom He foreknew, He also predestined (proorizo) to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He predestined (proorizo), these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.

One interpretation of that passage is that God has decided in advance who's going to Hell and who isn't.

[quote:83797]Define the word please.. we shall see how invented it is.

I didn't say the word was an invention, I said the idea behind a pre-determination interpretation of the Bible was.[/quote:83797]

Good Day, Art

Acts 4:28 For to do <poieo> whatsoever <hosos> thy <sou> hand <cheir> and <kai> thy <sou> counsel <boule> determined before <proorizo> to be done <ginomai>.

Romans 8:29 For <hoti> whom <hos> he did foreknow <proginosko>, he <proorizo> also <kai> did predestinate <proorizo> to be conformed <summorphos> to the image <eikon> of his <autos> Son <huios>, that <eis> he <autos> might be <einai> the firstborn <prototokos> among <en> many <polus> brethren <adelphos>.

Romans 8:30 Moreover <de> whom <hos> he did predestinate <proorizo>, them <toutous> he <kaleo> also <kai> called <kaleo>: and <kai> whom <hos> he called <kaleo>, them <toutous> he <dikaioo> also <kai> justified <dikaioo>: and <de> whom <hos> he justified <dikaioo>, them <toutous> he <doxazo> also <kai> glorified <doxazo>.

1 Corinthians 2:7 But <alla> we speak <laleo> the wisdom <sophia> of God <theos> in <en> a mystery <musterion>, even the hidden <apokrupto> wisdom, which <hos> God <theos> ordained <proorizo> before <pro> the world <aion> unto <eis> our <hemon> glory <doxa>:

Ephesians 1:5 Having predestinated <proorizo> us <hemas> unto <eis> the adoption of children <huiothesia> by <dia> Jesus <Iesous> Christ <Christos> to <eis> himself <autos>, according <kata> to the good pleasure <eudokia> of his <autos> will <thelema>,

Ephesians 1:11 In <en> whom <hos> also <kai> we have obtained an inheritance <kleroo>, being predestinated <proorizo> according to <kata> the purpose <prothesis> of him who worketh <energeo> all things <pas> after <kata> the counsel <boule> of his own <autos> will <thelema>:


Here is all the places in the NT where the word proorizō is used, as you can see the translations you posted are used, but define the word. This word in a compound word made up of a prefix.

PRO:

before
Part of Speech: preposition

horizō:


1) to define
1a) to mark out the boundaries or limits (of any place or thing)
1b1) that which has been determined, acc. to appointment, decree
1b2) to ordain, determine, appoint

Part of Speech: verb

so, one can see that Predetermination is very much taught in the scripture, because it defines the word in question here. Not sure who interprets the bible this way again words have meanings.

If this is not an explict teaching of scripture based on the meaning of this word than I do not know what one does with the verse you quoted along with many others. I guess you would have to show where in scripture it says explictly " non-predistination" if there is such a word found in the text, I am sure there is, but where what context. In that case the best you have done is created a contridiction that you must deal with.

Remember use the clear text to help understand those things that are not so clear.

2Th 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

Peace to u,

Bill

 

[bbas 64]

God's predestination is based in accordance to His good pleasure or His will.l

Greeting bbas 64 (Bill):

Thanks for your charitiable response. My concern is that, if we analyze what it actually might mean for God to exercise his will or to act according to his good pleasure, the "conceptual" problem remains - if election is not based on personal attributes, it must be random. This is simply being true to the way the world is. What makes you "you" you? It is things like your height, your hair colour, your sense of humour, your knowledge, etc..... There is simply no basis for anyone, God included, to choose between individuals without necessarily taking account of personal characteristics.

I hope people don't think I am playing a trick here. Lets say that we agree that God chooses his elect "according to his will". We need to do the real work of analyzing what this could mean - we cannot leave the concept of "God's will" unresolved. It seems reasonable to assume that the content of God's will is essentially a reflection of His purposes and goals.

In respect to the matter of election in particular, let's say that we know that God chooses Fred and not Joe. Obviously this means that the election of Fred fulfills God's will (whatever it is) and the non-election of Joe also fulfills God's will. This is a position one must take if one believes in election based on God's will.

What if we brazenly suggest to God that he should really elect Joe and not elect Fred? God says no - this would not be his will. After all, his will is that Fred be elected and not Joe. We then ask God to explain. God will understandably reply that the election of Joe (and the non-election of Fred) would not be in accordance with His goals and purposes.
But how could this be, if not for the fact that there is something about Fred and something about Joe that results in this "difference of outcomes" between the options (1. elect Fred, do not elect Joe, 2. elect Joe, do not elect Fred)? If the choice of Fred for election is not based on characteristics that distinguish him from Joe, then the fulfillment of God's will cannot be based on such distinctions. The believer in predestination is in a pickle, because he has already claimed that the election of Fred is what God wants, and not the election of Joe.

It is true that we must look to the Scriptures for the truth. But when there are texts that suggest pre-destination (such as the Ephesians text) and texts which suggest free-will acceptance of the gift of salvation (such as texts which suggests God wants "all to come to repentance"), we can indeed use "rational argument" to help resolve the problem.

Good Day, Drew

I will have to think on this post for a bit, not sure that I understand the conclusions nor the basis of some of the premises you lay out here.

I do have one question, does God have goal, and purposes that in and of him self he is unable to bring to an ends?

I by no means hold that man does not have a "will", that being said how "free" that will is the question. I also affirm that a choice of acceptance is a piviotal part of salvation, but why do some choose and some do not?

Repentance is something that is granted:

2Ti 2:23 But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.
2Ti 2:24 And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,
2Ti 2:25 In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;
2Ti 2:26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

God gives a "repentance" that will lead to the acknowledment of the truth.

Peace to u,

Bill

 

[Drew]

Consider the following: Some murderers may deserve to receive the death penalty for what they've done. What if I were to genetically engineer someone who was an awful murderer, let him go out and kill people, and then capture him and sentence him to death? Would he deserve this punishment? Possibly. Would creating him in the first place, knowing in advance that I would be inflicting suffering on him later on, and that he would inflict much misery before he had died, be anything less than a monstrous, wicked action? No.

And anyway, this presumes that the person can rightfully be said to deserve such a punishment. The pre-determinist supposes that God creates people specifically to be unrepentant sinners, meaning they have no choice in the matter. If people are specifically designed to not repent, how can you then punish them for not repenting? They're not repenting because you made them that way! The only way to imagine such a God isn't an awful, repulsive sadist is to suppose that the "people" he chooses to go to Hell aren't actual people at all, but only mindless, soulless automatons designed to further the salvation of the real people. But since I don't see many people espousing this view, I can't imagine this to be the case.

I certainly agree with Artguy here. Let's try to be sure that we all understand each other. It is my understanding that you "Calvinists" believe the following assertions.

1. Man is born with an inclination to sin that cannot be resisted - man will necessarily sin. Man has no freedom to freely choose to not sin. He can no more avoid sinning than an apple can avoid falling from the tree when it stem breaks.

2. The penalty for this sin is eternal torment.

3. God has decided, from the foundations of time, that He will rescue a sub-set of all humans from this fate. He will draw them to Christ using a process that they simply cannot resist - if God chooses you, you will indeed be saved. More precisely, this saving act is in no way contingent on any free decision on the part of the person saved. Again, the person who is thus "elected" can no more reject this gift than can the apple resist falling to the ground.

4. By extension, God has decided, from the foundations of time, that he will not rescue the rest of humanity. Such unfortunates have absolutely no power to alter their destination: eternal torment.

Now, of course, I could be mistaken in my characterization of what many "Calvinists" believe. If so, please correct me.

At a certain point, I think that we who do not embrace Calvinism have to admit the following:

We take it to be a self-evident moral truth that it is not just to punish someone for moral transgressions that he has no control over committing.

If it were true that man chose "freely" to sin, then one might be able to say that "the elect get mercy and the non-elect get justice - what is the problem with this?" It has been my experience that many try to use this argument to defend election, but they conveniently do not bring up the belief that the sinner has no choice but to sin.

When this belief is exposed, it becomes clear that a non-elect person has been "programmed" to sin, is sentenced to eternity in hell for that sin, and simply has no way of escape.

I take it a self-evident fact that this is not a just state of affairs.

Again, please correct me if I have incorrectly characterised the "Calvinist" viewpoint.

 

[Drew]

I do have one question, does God have goal, and purposes that in and of him self he is unable to bring to an ends?

No. God can implement any purpose he wishes. The trouble lies in the naive belief (and I do not intend to be perjorative here) that this somehow requires that all the variables be under his control.

I think a big problem lies in our tendency to adopt the solution that is easiest to understand. As a result, we assume that God has to control all the variables to effect his purposes. But this seems to be an unjustified conclusion.

Let's suppose that I am playing chess against the world's greatest (I only know the rules of chess - I do not play the game at all). I am free to make any legal move I wish - my opponent, expert though he is, does not control my moves. Each time it is my turn, I have a large number of legal moves that I can make. And since I am a bad player, my opponent will probably have very little idea what move I will make - the worse that I am, the less predictable will be my moves.

Even though my opponent (the expert) does not control my moves, he is still almost certainly guaranteed to win. Why? Because his skill and knowledge so greatly exceeds mine that any move I make will not thwart his ultimate purpose - to place me in checkmate.

With God, the situation is even more extreme. He can give up control of a number of variables and still accomplish his goals - unless, of course, one maintains that God has a plan the prescribes every event in the universe, down to when some proton in intergalactic space is going to decay.

I see no reason to believe that God has such a fine-grained plan. I suspect that he does not really care whether I wear light blue or dark blue socks and has not pre-destined that choice. I certainly stand to be corrected, but I suspect that one will be hard-pressed to find scriptures that require the conclusion that God's "control" over his universe is so total.

I think the reality is that our lack of imagination prevents us from seeing how God can fulfill his purposes without pre-destining every event.

 

[JM]

I do have one question, does God have goal, and purposes that in and of him self he is unable to bring to an ends?

God question. Does God do what He does without reason? What is God's purpose in creating man?

 

[ArtGuy]

so, one can see that Predetermination is very much taught in the scripture, because it defines the word in question here. Not sure who interprets the bible this way again words have meanings.

Not quite. You're taking the fact that the word "proorizo" can sometimes be defined as "pre-destined" and using it as proof that the Bible supports pre-determination in the manner it's being argued in this thread. That's like me finding a single instance of a word that can be translated as "evolved" and using it to prove that the Bible supports Darwinian evolution. You're reading far too much into one word in one passage.

 

[Heidi]

I do have one question, does God have goal, and purposes that in and of him self he is unable to bring to an ends?

God question. Does God do what He does without reason? What is God's purpose in creating man?

God's purpose in creating man was for man to spend eternity with him in heaven. All those who want to will and all those who don't want to won't. And since none of knows if we are called or not then salvation is open to anyone who wants it.

 

[ArtGuy]

God's purpose in creating man was for man to spend eternity with him in heaven. All those who want to will and all those who don't want to won't. And since none of knows if we are called or not then salvation is open to anyone who wants it.

How does your claim that all those who want to will wind up in heaven mesh with your claim that we have no choice where we'll end up, because God has already chosen those who are destined to burn? Does God design the heaven-bound to want heaven, and the hell-bound to want hell? Why would he design people who wanted to burn in hell?

 

[Humble Servant]

Drew wrote: “With God, the situation is even more extreme. He can give up control of a number of variables and still accomplish his goals - unless, of course, one maintains that God has a plan the prescribes every event in the universe, down to when some proton in intergalactic space is going to decay.â€Â

I respond: Consider Christ’s admonition that not one of the earth’s trillions of bird falls without the Lord’s decree. The very hairs on every human’s head are numbered. That infinite number is constantly changing…..on every human’s head. (Matt. 10:29-30). Even the outcome of a toss of the dice is of the Lord. (Proverbs 16:33). Consider, “A man’s heart deviseth his way: but the Lord directeth his steps.†(Prov. 16:9). All men’s plans and actions lead them to where the Lord decreed they would go.

Thus, what part of governing His creation does the Lord neglect? The answer: Not one part.

We can go further. If the Lord is actively involved with governing every jot and tittle of His creation so that His purposes for His creation come to pass, would He not be actively involved in His primary purpose of gathering a people in His name?

We are living in the time of God’s calling out a people in His name to join Him as a family unit forever. To accomplish this end He sent His Son to do that which Adam could not and would not do………live a perfectly sinless life in obedience to the Father. His sinless Son then gave Himself to be wrongly punished and executed in the stead of sinners, that sinners might escape the just punishment due them.

Not only did the Lord devise and perfectly carry out this plan of salvation, but He did it using sinful men to accomplish His purpose. What wicked men devised in their hearts, the Lord used it to accomplish a good and holy outcome. (Acts 2:22-24).

Before Christ was captured, He prayed the Father on behalf of those sinners whom the Father gave Him. He prayed not for the whole world. He prayed only for the Elect, chosen by the Father, for whom Christ was to die a substitutionary death. (John 17).

The Father knew the identity of all those He chose before the foundation of the world because He created them. Christ’s knowledge is co-equal with the Father. Thus, He knew for whom He was to die.

The Holy Spirit, whose knowledge is co-extensive with the Father and the Son, regenerates those for whom Christ died, whom the Father had chosen.

The Elect were predestinated to become members of the family of God through Christ. Their ultimate destinies are in the hands of God, who loses not one.

On the flip side, the Lord also knows those whom He did not choose to save.

It is these He chooses to judge. Their judgment will be meted out perfectly and justly, according to the grievous nature of their sins.

In the Elect, His merciful grace is manifested.
In the non-elect, His righteous justice will be manifested.

In the Elect, His righteous judgment was satisfied through Christ’s crucifixion on their behalf.
In the non-elect, His righteous judgment will be satisfied by the individual himself.

It is both OT and NT theology which states the potter --- the Creator --- has the right to make clay vessels --- or humans ---- for different purposes…..some to honor and some to dishonor.

This is both the right of the potter and the Creator.

And man has no cause to cry, “Foul.â€Â

Paul explains the deep truths of Predestination in Romans 9.
Rightly understanding these passages was a turning point in my early walk with the Lord.

In creating these different vessels, the Lord commits no evil, for all He does is righteous, holy, and lawful.

In studying the passages in Scripture addressing the Last Judgment, you should note that one person condemned cries, “Foul.†They all accept the truth that their life choices and actions were exactly as they had wished. They will even acknowledge the goodness of God in their life, and their willful rejection of Him as Lord and Savior.

“That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow [both Elect and non-elect], of thing in heaven, and in earth, and under the earth; and that every tongue [both Elect and non-elect] should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.â€Â

 

[Drew]

Greetings Humble Servant:

I am not convinced that the Matthew 10:29-30 text is really a strong endorsement of the idea that God prescribes all things that come to pass:

"29Are not two sparrows sold for a penny[d]? Yet not one of them will fall to the ground apart from the will of your Father. 30And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered"

What is this text actually saying? It is actually a little ambiguous in respect to the matter we are discussing. I claim that the following 2 interpretations of this text are both true to the text:

1. Each and every bird that falls to the ground does so in accordance with the will of God that prescribed the details of that event. This is what I understand to be your interpretation.

2. Consider the set of birds that fall to the ground. No bird in this set falls so as to thwart the general will of the Father. Many a bird could fall, without prescription by God, and yet still not thwart this general will. All we can legitimately take away from this text is the notion that God will not allow a bird to fall if that falling bird will interfere with the fulfillment of his higher purposes.

Back to the chess analogy. Let's say that I am playing Kasparov (I think he is some chess master). Even in a situation where I am free to make whatever move I want, it could be said of me and Kasparov: "Not one of Drew's moves will take place outside the will of Kasparov". The reason why someone could say this is as follows: Kasparov's will is to win the game, not control my moves. Kasparov is so clever that he puts me in a situation where, even though I am free to make any legal move that I want to, I cannot thwart his will. Whatever move I make, he can deal with it and still accomplish his will.

Returning to the Matthew text, the only way I can think of the negate plausibility of this argument I have provided is to make a case that the "will of the Father" referred to in this text can only be interpreted as his specific will in relation to the birds, not as his more general will. If it can be read as referring to the relation of the birds to God's general will, then the text does not really require that God prescribe what happens to each and every bird.

 

[ArtGuy]

I respond: Consider Christ’s admonition that not one of the earth’s trillions of bird falls without the Lord’s decree. The very hairs on every human’s head are numbered. That infinite number is constantly changing…..on every human’s head. (Matt. 10:29-30). Even the outcome of a toss of the dice is of the Lord. (Proverbs 16:33). Consider, “A man’s heart deviseth his way: but the Lord directeth his steps.†(Prov. 16:9). All men’s plans and actions lead them to where the Lord decreed they would go.

Thus, what part of governing His creation does the Lord neglect? The answer: Not one part.

Really? I offer you a challenge, then. Take a coin. Toss it ten times. If it comes up heads every time, then you continue along your current spiritual path. If it doesn't, renounce your faith and become a buddhist. If God wills it, you'll get heads every time, and thus God will be ensuring that you remain a Christian. If you get any tails, then clearly God is saying that you going to heaven isn't part of his plan, and for you to continue along the path to Christianity would be in violation of his decree.

Can you give me a reason why this would not be a valid challenge? If it is, will you take it in good faith?