Why I Don't Believe in Predestination

[Drew]

The literature available to sincere truth-seekers which prove the doctrines of grace is staggering. By the Lord's sovereign decree, we live in the Age of the Information Superhighway. To remain ignorant of the fact that all your questions and arguments have been soundly answered in both ancient and modern times leaves me inclined to believe you are engaging in debate simply to hear the sound of your own voice as it echos in the empty minds of those who share your lackluster love of eternal truth.

Pure question-begging rhetoric. Do you honestly think that people will not see this as a response arising out of an inability to answer questions? I have gone through this with several before you. Their arguments are shown to be dubious and they respond by questioning my motives and integrity. It seems that this is all they've got.....

Too bad, you don't invest your energy in building a plausible case and not in tearing down others.

 

[DivineNames]

Now you are playing games - If I said I had spiritual wisdom then you may have aaccused me spiritual pride :-?

You didn't have to say anything. You chose to say that you didn't have spiritual wisdom.

I was seeking to be sincere and serious and you still mocked my intentions.

Sincere? If that is correct, then you were being genuine when you denied having spiritual wisdom!

Did you even check out the link? I don't expect you to read it all but something there may catch your attention.

Did they have amazing moral teaching or something?

 

[DivineNames]

lol, you didn't read the link...did ya!

Not all of it actually. The last time you sent me to a link, it didn't have an answer.

So if you think there is an answer to this point then please explain.

We aren't psychic. If you have an answer to the point I made, then you need to explain yourself.

 

[thessalonian]

You chose to say that you didn't have spiritual wisdom.

Actually in context that is not what he was trying to say. He was trying in humility to attribute what wisdom he has to God. After Peter proclaimed Jesus the Christ in Matt 16 he said "flesh and blood hath not revealed this to you but your father who is in heaven". Anything that we hold that is true is not of ourselves in truth and so AV is correct though I am not sure he articulated it well. If any part of what we say were to bring someone closer to the truth, but it was of us, then when they became a part of the truth God would not have done it all by his grace. We could claim a part in and of ourselves. He works in and through us and it is ALL by his grace.

 

[DivineNames]

Actually in context that is not what he was trying to say. He was trying in humility to attribute what wisdom he has to God.

I don't think so. That it isn't how it reads to me. Why did he say-

but..... these folks did

??

 

[DivineNames]

I don't remember saying God was the author of sin, I'm asking YOU to prove why it matters.

In response to your challenge, I have twice provided a Biblical argument against determinism. You haven't tried to answer it.

 

[thessalonian]

Actually in context that is not what he was trying to say. He was trying in humility to attribute what wisdom he has to God.

I don't think so. That it isn't how it reads to me. Why did he say-

but..... these folks did

??

Well he provided some links for you to read. I think it safe to assume that he has read them and attributes what wisdom he has from them. If he says he has no wisdom, yet has read them he cannot say that they have wisdom, yet claim he has none. Now if he had whitewashed his brain after reading them you might have a point. In context I don't think he was saying he had no wisdom. In all honesty I don't think he can say that they are the root of their own wisdom either.

 

[DivineNames]

If God is the first cause/first mover, then how did God not decree sin, how did it come into existance?

lol

Read the link.

If I were to respond to the article, would you debate the issues with me? Or would you run away?

 

[DivineNames]

Well he provided some links for you to read. I think it safe to assume that he has read them and attributes what wisdom he has from them. If he says he has no wisdom, yet has read them he cannot say that they have wisdom, yet claim he has none. Now if he had whitewashed his brain after reading them you might have a point. In context I don't think he was saying he had no wisdom. In all honesty I don't think he can say that they are the root of their own wisdom either.

I actually think it is safe to assume that AVBunyan was indulging in false humility.

 

[thessalonian]

Well he provided some links for you to read. I think it safe to assume that he has read them and attributes what wisdom he has from them. If he says he has no wisdom, yet has read them he cannot say that they have wisdom, yet claim he has none. Now if he had whitewashed his brain after reading them you might have a point. In context I don't think he was saying he had no wisdom. In all honesty I don't think he can say that they are the root of their own wisdom either.

I actually think it is safe to assume that AVBunyan was indulging in false humility.

Not Av. :wink:

 

[JM]

If God is the first cause/first mover, then how did God not decree sin, how did it come into existance?

lol

Read the link.

If I were to respond to the article, would you debate the issues with me? Or would you run away?

I consider these doctrines of Grace to be deeper truths of the Christian faith and only debate them with Christians as I posted before.

Thess, the more time goes on, the more you side with the open theist and the unbeliever...isn't that odd?

 

[thessalonian]

If God is the first cause/first mover, then how did God not decree sin, how did it come into existance?

lol

Read the link.

If I were to respond to the article, would you debate the issues with me? Or would you run away?

I consider these doctrines of Grace to be deeper truths of the Christian faith and only debate them with Christians as I posted before.

Thess, the more time goes on, the more you side with the open theist and the unbeliever...isn't that odd?

As time goes on your distort and misconstrue what I say more and more. Open theist? Unbeliver? I actually was siding with AV so I am not sure where you are getting what you say, except out of prejudice toward me. I do agree there may be a little false humility going on. Open Theism is one of the doctrines I am most strongly against.

 

[DivineNames]

I consider these doctrines of Grace to be deeper truths of the Christian faith and only debate them with Christians as I posted before.

In other words- you are running away.

If you aren't able to debate the issues involved in the article then perhaps you shouldn't waste time by posting the link.

 

[Heidi]

I consider these doctrines of Grace to be deeper truths of the Christian faith and only debate them with Christians as I posted before.

In other words- you are running away.

If you aren't able to debate the issues involved in the article then perhaps you shouldn't waste time by posting the link.

No he's simply agreeing with Jesus not to throw pearls where they'll be trampled on.

 

[Drew]

A Biblical argument has been put forward against determinism-

A true Calvinist teaches that everything that happens has been predestined before the foundation of the world. Thus, according to Calvinism, because I have free agency and no true power to choose contraries (i.e., free will), I do voluntarily what I could never do otherwise. Thus, "My sins last week happened; they were certain to happen; and they were predestined before the foundation of the world. I freely did evil, but I could not have done otherwise."

A true Calvinist admits this. Yet St. Paul teaches that, with every temptation, God has made a way to escape from committing the sinful deed (1 Cor 10:13). Therefore, the question for the true Calvinistis: "Which way did God, in fact, provide for you to escape the temptations to do the sins you committed last week, if indeed you are so inclined? That is, if you have been predestined before the foundation of the world to do it?"

This is a clear hole in the Calvinist position, forcing one to conclude that Calvinism cannot be reconciled with St. Paul. Clearly, if Calvin is right and one is predestined to commit a particular sin before the foundation of the world, God could not have truly provided a way out of that sin for you to take. How could He if you were predestined not to take it? So, either Calvin is wrong or we are dealing with a God Who feigns offers of deliverance from temptation.

This seems to be a pretty solid argument. Let's try to formalize it a bit.

Here is 1 Cor 10:13 from the NASB

No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will provide the way of escape also, so that you will be able to endure it

1. If all human activities are pre-determined then the fact that Fred sinned on Tuesday April 11, 2006 at 9:11 PM by buying a girly magazine was, of course, pre-determined.

2. 1 cor 10:13 strongly (and I mean strongly) implies that for sins that result from temptation(and I suspect we will agree that most, if not all, do so arise), God provides a way of escape.

3. Fred's sin was preceded by temptation (obviously).

4. 1 Cor 10:13 clearly states that Fred had a way of escape factually available to him.

5. But if Fred's sin was pre-determined to occur from the foundation of time, it cannot in any sense be realistically said that a way of escape was indeed open to him. This is because a "way of escape" that cannot be taken because of the necessity that Fred will sin is obviously no way of esape.

Can any who believe that God pre-destines everything please respond to this argument?

 

[mutzrein]

To aid my understanding here may I clarify the position on the following to those who are ‘Christians’ on each side of the debate.

The question is often asked, “Are you saved?†Now those who consider themselves Christians would respond with, ‘yes.’ And this would be common to those who both believe and disbelieve in predestination, would it not?
So what is it they are affirming? ‘Accepting Christ as their saviour?’ with all the connotations of: accepting they are a sinner, believing that Christ died for their sins, repenting, seeking forgiveness and asking Jesus to come into their hearts. And then of course they are assured that they have been born again into the kingdom of God. They are now ‘saved.’

Now I’m not wanting to get into any debates at this point on what I’ve outlined but is there any agreement / disagreement on this bit?

If not, what do you see as the process for this thing called being ‘saved?’

Thanks

 

[JM]

I consider these doctrines of Grace to be deeper truths of the Christian faith and only debate them with Christians as I posted before.

In other words- you are running away.

If you aren't able to debate the issues involved in the article then perhaps you shouldn't waste time by posting the link.

I'm willing to post about fundamentals of the faith, just not the deeper things of the word which you have no hope of grasping.

 

[JM]

If God is the first cause/first mover, then how did God not decree sin, how did it come into existance?

lol

Read the link.

If I were to respond to the article, would you debate the issues with me? Or would you run away?

I consider these doctrines of Grace to be deeper truths of the Christian faith and only debate them with Christians as I posted before.

Thess, the more time goes on, the more you side with the open theist and the unbeliever...isn't that odd?

As time goes on your distort and misconstrue what I say more and more. Open theist? Unbeliver? I actually was siding with AV so I am not sure where you are getting what you say, except out of prejudice toward me. I do agree there may be a little false humility going on. Open Theism is one of the doctrines I am most strongly against.

Then I apologize for the mix up, we're on the same page concerning Open Theism.

Drew, didn't you say Roman Catholic Tradition made more sense then prot Sola Scriptura? Thess, why don't you tell us the position of the RCC on Open Theism?

__________________________________________________________

How is God exalted if Christ took the payment for the sin of everyone in the world and His ultimate goal fails? Why would God take the sins of a people and not send prophets to them, calling them to repentance?

 

[Drew]

Drew, didn't you say Roman Catholic Tradition made more sense then prot Sola Scriptura?

Hi JM:

That was not me. I know diddly about RC tradition......

 

[Heidi]

The word "tradition" in the catholic church is just a smokescreen for the notion that their doctrine is infallible and therefore, cannot be changed. If they could admit they were fallible, then tradition wouldn't matter one iota. Only following the Word of God would be supreme at all times.