I've converted to Calvinism!

[Sozo]

That's right, folks!

Jim Hilston has convinced me of the error of my ways, and I can no longer reject the fact that I am special!! :bannana:

The instant it happened, I was overwhelmed with new revelation and insight! :idea:


Most importantly, I now know that Calvinism is one letter short, in our TULIP acrostic. It should be TULIPS.

The S referring to Specific Locations.

As the writer of Acts so clearly points out...

"...but now commandeth all men every where to repent"


Now that I know, that "all men" only refers to us (the elect), I see that the "every where" only refers to where we are (specific location). So God is not really every where, but only where we are, and the rest of the world is lost, because they are no where.

WOW!! This is so amazing (and logical) !!

[Lucky]

:darwinsm:

[Lovejoy]

Cool! All=some and everywhere=select locations! It is just like a used car ad! Reform theologians must watch alot of commercials.

[Delmar]

Originally posted by Sozo

That's right, folks!

Jim Hilston has convinced me of the error of my ways, and I can no longer reject the fact that I am special!! :bannana:

The instant it happened, I was overwhelmed with new revelation and insight! :idea:


Most importantly, I now know that Calvinism is one letter short, in our TULIP acrostic. It should be TULIPS.

The S referring to Specific Locations.

As the writer of Acts so clearly points out...

"...but now commandeth all men every where to repent"


Now that I know, that "all men" only refers to us (the elect), I see that the "every where" only refers to where we are (specific location). So God is not really every where, but only where we are, and the rest of the world is lost, because they are no where.

WOW!! This is so amazing (and logical) !! may I assume your tong is firmly placed in your cheek

[Sozo]

Originally posted by deardelmar

may I assume your tong is firmly placed in your cheek

I hope that is a typo, and I hope that you didn't intend to say thong?

[Delmar]

Originally posted by Sozo

I hope that is a typo, and I hope that you didn't intend to say thong? :o I guess I really should spell check

[Sozo]

Originally posted by deardelmar

:o I guess I really should spell check Just for the record, I have no thong firmly placed in my cheek.

[Jabez]

Originally posted by Sozo

Just for the record, I have no thong firmly placed in my cheek.

Lets hope not!

[Delmar]

Originally posted by Sozo

Just for the record, I have no thong firmly placed in my cheek. tongue you dinger! but thanks for the info about your lack of thongs. Which I never said by the way!

[Lighthouse]

I love you, Sozo!:darwinsm:

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by Sozo

Just for the record, I have no thong firmly placed in my cheek.
:shut:

[the Sibbie]

Originally posted by Sozo

That's right, folks!

Jim Hilston has convinced me of the error of my ways, and I can no longer reject the fact that I am special!! :bannana:

The instant it happened, I was overwhelmed with new revelation and insight! :idea:


Most importantly, I now know that Calvinism is one letter short, in our TULIP acrostic. It should be TULIPS.

The S referring to Specific Locations.

As the writer of Acts so clearly points out...

"...but now commandeth all men every where to repent"


Now that I know, that "all men" only refers to us (the elect), I see that the "every where" only refers to where we are (specific location). So God is not really every where, but only where we are, and the rest of the world is lost, because they are no where.

WOW!! This is so amazing (and logical) !! Wow, Sozo! That is an amazing insight! Thanks for pointing that out! :noway:

[BillyBob]

Originally posted by Sozo
I've converted to Calvinism!


Me too.

[Lighthouse]

I'm a firm believer in Hobbesism.

[geralduk]

I thought men were converted from GODLESSNESS to God?
Thouth our Lord Jesus Christ?

Those who boast more in being CALVINISTS than CHRISTians need to look to WHERE thier faith is.
Those who reject the doctrins of Calvin found in the scriptures need also to look to where thier faith is.

t.u.l.i.p is a 'chatachism' for many but knowing what TULIP means does NOT mean you may UNDERSTAND the scriptures!
Some justyfythemselves by thier REJECTION of CALVINISM.
Some by thier adherence to 'tulip'

But in truth we are justyfied by JESUS CHRIST.

We get saved ONLY when we RECOGNISE the TRUTH that we ,that is each and every individual is a hell deserving sinner of the DEEPEST hue.

That WITHOUT Christ there IS no hope!

For like the sparks that fly upward so is man's propensity to sin .
Man sinning is as natural to him as breathing.


Let not then those who boast in being 'elected' forget that you MUST "MAKE YOUR ELECTION SURE"!
and that if it was possible "even the VERY elect would be deceived"!

In who then do we BOAST!?

Some on their OPPOSITION to calvinism.
Some in thier opposition to those who oppose them!

But our boast should be in Christ.

We should be gald then not in our ability if any in overcomeing the devil but "that our names are written(if it is) in the lambs book of life"

[On Fire]

This was funny thread until geralduk showed up.

[BillyBob]

:chuckle:

Now it's funny again.....

[On Fire]

Is geralduk related to Geraldmailsorter?

[BillyBob]

Originally posted by On Fire

Is geralduk related to Geraldmailsorter?

Do they have mail in the UK? I know they don't have teeth.....

[On Fire]

Originally posted by BillyBob

Do they have mail in the UK? I know they don't have teeth.....

Oh...they have teeth, they just don't have dentists:

[Sozo]

On Fire...

Would you please stop showing us photos of wickwoman? I'm getting sick to my stomach. :vomit:

[Jefferson]

Originally posted by lighthouse

I love you, Sozo!:darwinsm: BillyBob was right! lighthouse IS gay!

[philosophizer]

No, Sozo. April Fools Day is in April, but I guess it would be made for Calvinists. :chuckle:

[Sozo]

Originally posted by Jefferson

BillyBob was right! lighthouse IS gay!

I had intended to renew my TOL subscription today, but it appears that Jefferson has made the desicion NOT to, much easier.

[Jefferson]

Originally posted by Sozo

I had intended to renew my TOL subscription today, but it appears that Jefferson has made the desicion NOT to, much easier. Oh, come on Sozo. It was a joke.

[godrulz]

Originally posted by lighthouse

I love you, Sozo!:darwinsm:

I love you sozo and lighthouse, in the brotherly, non-gay sorta way (and especially love the Jesus we serve).

ism=schism (I just made that up).

[Knight]

Originally posted by Sozo

That's right, folks!

Jim Hilston has convinced me of the error of my ways, and I can no longer reject the fact that I am special!! :bannana:
Funny post Sozo!

But to be accurate.....

According Jim he couldn't convince you of anything! It was God who decreed some time in the past that you would appear to be convinced by Jim.

According to Jim the following instruction from Jesus (through Paul) is a meaningless concept that is impossible for us to acutally accomplish....Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. - 2 Timothy 4:2

[the Sibbie]

Nice Moses avatar, Knight!! :thumb:

[Knight]

Originally posted by the Sibbie

Nice Moses avatar, Knight!! :thumb: Thanks!

[Sozo]

Originally posted by Knight


But to be accurate.....

According Jim he couldn't convince you of anything! It was God who decreed some time in the past that you would appear to be convinced by Jim.

According to Jim the following instruction from Jesus (through Paul) is a meaningless concept that is impossible for us to acutally accomplish....

Well... that's just because you are really nowhere, man.

[Knight]

Originally posted by Sozo

Well... that's just because you are really nowhere, man. Can you convince me of that? :freak:

[Sozo]

Originally posted by Knight

Can you convince me of that? :freak: Those of us, who are everywhere, cannot go nowhere... just as those who are nowhere cannot go everywhere.

Don't you understand basic logic?

[natewood3]

Sozo,

The need to repent is NOT an offer, as you would say it is, right? God is not simply offering salvation to us, but He commands it and we are obligated to do it, right?

[Lovejoy]

Originally posted by Sozo

Well... that's just because you are really nowhere, man.

[Sozo]

Originally posted by natewood3

Sozo,

The need to repent is NOT an offer, as you would say it is, right? God is not simply offering salvation to us, but He commands it and we are obligated to do it, right? Are you saying that men cannot say no to a command?

[godrulz]

Originally posted by natewood3

Sozo,

The need to repent is NOT an offer, as you would say it is, right? God is not simply offering salvation to us, but He commands it and we are obligated to do it, right?

You must be born again. This is a command/ imperative made to all. He has a right to rule His creation since He is the most qualified to do so and the most valuable being in the universe.

The command of any lawgiver can be disobeyed or rejected. It does not undermine His authority or the law. Those who break the law will be broken as a consequence.

The command is not a coercive one where God forces compliance. "Repent or you will perish" (Luke). There are sanctions for breaking the command. The command does not have inherent power to cause change.

[godrulz]

Originally posted by natewood3

Sozo,

The need to repent is NOT an offer, as you would say it is, right? God is not simply offering salvation to us, but He commands it and we are obligated to do it, right?

You must be born again. This is a command/ imperative made to all. He has a right to rule His creation since He is the most qualified to do so and the most valuable being in the universe.

The command of any lawgiver can be disobeyed or rejected. It does not undermine His authority or the law. Those who break the law will be broken as a consequence.

The command is not a coercive one where God forces compliance. "Repent or you will perish" (Luke). There are sanctions for breaking the command. The command does not have inherent power to cause change.

Salvation is freely offered, but can be volitionally received or rejected. The Spirit and His ambassadors convict and convince with the Law and truth. This is persuasive, not obligatory with no possibility of resisting the influence.

This does not make man more powerful than God, but just stupider in his puny rebellion. It is the nature of the type of free moral agency creation God chose in His sovereignty.

[Clete]

Originally posted by Sozo

That's right, folks!

Jim Hilston has convinced me of the error of my ways, and I can no longer reject the fact that I am special!! :bannana:

The instant it happened, I was overwhelmed with new revelation and insight! :idea:


Most importantly, I now know that Calvinism is one letter short, in our TULIP acrostic. It should be TULIPS.

The S referring to Specific Locations.

As the writer of Acts so clearly points out...

"...but now commandeth all men every where to repent"


Now that I know, that "all men" only refers to us (the elect), I see that the "every where" only refers to where we are (specific location). So God is not really every where, but only where we are, and the rest of the world is lost, because they are no where.

WOW!! This is so amazing (and logical) !!
Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant! :thumb:

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by Sozo

I had intended to renew my TOL subscription today, but it appears that Jefferson has made the desicion NOT to, much easier.
You should totally renew your subscription! You rock!

[natewood3]

Sozo,

Where did you get that? I was simply asking a couple questions...is it really that hard to answer them?

[natewood3]

godrulz,

You must be born again. This is a command/ imperative made to all. He has a right to rule His creation since He is the most qualified to do so and the most valuable being in the universe.

I agree.

The command of any lawgiver can be disobeyed or rejected. It does not undermine His authority or the law. Those who break the law will be broken as a consequence.

The command is not a coercive one where God forces compliance. "Repent or you will perish" (Luke). There are sanctions for breaking the command. The command does not have inherent power to cause change.

I agree.

Salvation is freely offered, but can be volitionally received or rejected. The Spirit and His ambassadors convict and convince with the Law and truth. This is persuasive, not obligatory with no possibility of resisting the influence.

Hold up. I thought you said "You must be born again. This is a command/ imperative made to all." How is it now an "offer"? I don't think it can be commanded and just be an offer from God at the same time. It is one or the other, is it not?

If you are implying by " not obligatory with no possibility of resisting the influence" that men are forced to be saved against their wills, I agree. If you mean that when people see Christ as beautiful and delightful, then they cannot help but trust Him and embrace Him as their Treasure, then I would have to disagree with you, for that is consistent with volition and human responsibility.

This does not make man more powerful than God, but just stupider in his puny rebellion. It is the nature of the type of free moral agency creation God chose in His sovereignty.

So, if man rejects God's commands and chooses to disobey, then he is "stupid in his puny rebellion." What does that make him if he chooses to obey? Smarter than the rest...God has not set up a world in which man is able to boast and be proud for choosing Christ while other, stupid as they may be, did not...

[godrulz]

God commends obedience (involves will, intellect, and emotions) and rebukes disobedience. Rebellion is stupid and foolish. The Hebrew word for 'fool' is a moral, not intellectual fool. Many simple, non-academic people trust Christ as do brilliant intellectuals. Many simple people believe atheism as do great intellectuals. The issue is more the heart than the brain. We all must come with child-like faith whether simple or brilliant academically.

Jer. 9:23 ff. Let not the wise man boast...let him who boasts...that he understands and knows me...

We are in the image of God and are able to understand God and revelation (Rom. 1) as the Spirit opens our eyes. This does not preclude remaining selfish and rebellious, suppressing the truth by our wickedness (love darkness vs light...moral vs intellectual issue = Jn. 3).

A policeman can command someone to stop in the name of the law with great authority. It is still possible to disobey the command with negative consequences. This does not make the command a mere 'offer'. Morals involve free will. Jesus commanded Lazarus to come out of the grave (metaphysics vs morals). This is not the same as commanding men to repent (chose today whom you will serve...it may be the devil/self, it may be the Lord, but your gonna have to serve somebody- Dylan). God commanded creation into existence by His power. The area of morals and destiny are not the same cause-effect command.

The 10 commandments are commands and not suggestions or offers. This does not preclude the possibility of disobeying the commands (this is self-evident). The giving of the command does not mean everyone is compelled to obey the commands. This is a volitional, heart issue (many understand and see the wisdom and beauty of the command, but still disobey).

Adam walked with God and saw His beauty and glory. This did not keep him from falling. Just because people see Jesus (cf. his earthly ministry), does not mean they will follow or continue to follow Him.

Those who respond to His command are not 'smarter'. Everyone has the ability to come in child-like faith, including those with Down's Syndrome. This is not grounds for boasting, since coming to Him involves humility vs prideful rebellion, not a mastery of apologetics and intellectual facts. Those who do not come to Him are moral fools, not intellectual dolts.

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by natewood3

...when people see Christ as beautiful and delightful, then they cannot help but trust Him and embrace Him as their Treasure..,
This is what I believe.


So, if man rejects God's commands and chooses to disobey, then he is "stupid in his puny rebellion." What does that make him if he chooses to obey? Smarter than the rest..?
Yes.

[godrulz]

If they cannot help but trust Him, it is not free, volitional, or love. It is coerced. There is a difference between cannot (physically impossible) and will not (can, but chose not to). I can see the most beautiful woman in the world, and spurn her. I can have food placed before me and not eat. Some who saw the grace and glory of Jesus in the first century still did not follow Him or turned back because His words were too hard.

Those of us who are true believers did see the greatness of God and trusted and embraced Him. It is circular reasoning to say all those who see His beauty must believe because the first sentence is true. This does not mean that it would have been impossible not to do so. Many have had clear presentations of the Gospel and rejected it by apathy, procrastination, or sheer selfishness.

Regeneration preceding repentant faith is an assumption by many.

I think it is more biblical to say that repentant faith precedes regeneration.

God initiates, but man responds. God does not initiate AND cause us to believe.

There is no reason to believe that God only reveals Himself to the elect and that irresistible grace makes them believe. There is no good reason to think God witholds revelation from the so-called non-elect and it is His fault that they do not or cannot believe ('cannot' makes God arbitrary).

[Lighthouse]

Do you really believe that those who reject Him are seeing His beauty?:think:

[godrulz]

Originally posted by lighthouse

Do you really believe that those who reject Him are seeing His beauty?:think:

Not in His glory and majesty. If they really knew Him, they would love Him. At least, they should love Him. This still does not mean they had no choice but to love despite great light. Men can and do reject great revelation (creation, Word, Jesus, resurrection, etc....they do so and are without excuse...they should know better...God has made it plain..His power and glory, etc. Romans 1). The question is do we have freedom to receive and reject Christ, or does He force some to believe and does not allow others to believe ('elect vs non-elect')?

Lucifer and Adam intimately knew God in His beauty and lived for Him for a time. Even this did not negate their ability to go their own way. So, if these creatures actually knew God and fell, why do you think those who do not know Him but have a glimpse of His glory have to love Him? They may or may not reject Him despite seeing His beauty. Most will love Him, but even one in a million who do not would undermine your thesis.

If you believe in free moral agency, you cannot defend a position that says a person must believe or continue to believe. If you deny freedom, you undermine the Word of God and the self-evident nature of being in the image of God (includes will, intellect, emotions, spirit, morals).

[natewood3]

godrulz,

The area of morals and destiny are not the same cause-effect command.

What does these verses mean?

2Co 4:3 And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled only to those who are perishing.
2Co 4:4 In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.
2Co 4:5 For what we proclaim is not ourselves, but Jesus Christ as Lord, with ourselves as your servants for Jesus' sake.
2Co 4:6 For God, who said, "Let light shine out of darkness," has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

Did God command light to shine in our hearts? Does that have to do with destinies?

[natewood3]

lighthouse,

I said:

So, if man rejects God's commands and chooses to disobey, then he is "stupid in his puny rebellion." What does that make him if he chooses to obey? Smarter than the rest..?

You said:

Yes.

Is that what you meant? People who choose Christ are smarter than the rest who didn't?

[natewood3]

godrulz,

If they cannot help but trust Him, it is not free, volitional, or love. It is coerced. There is a difference between cannot (physically impossible) and will not (can, but chose not to). I can see the most beautiful woman in the world, and spurn her. I can have food placed before me and not eat. Some who saw the grace and glory of Jesus in the first century still did not follow Him or turned back because His words were too hard.

Irresistable grace does not negate volition and a response by the individual as you suppose it does. When I say, "A person who sees Christ will not reject him," does that suit you better? If you really want to say it, I suppose you can: They could reject if they wanted to, but God will so change a person's heart when he is drawn and has his eyes opened that he will not reject Christ.

Those of us who are true believers did see the greatness of God and trusted and embraced Him. It is circular reasoning to say all those who see His beauty must believe because the first sentence is true. This does not mean that it would have been impossible not to do so. Many have had clear presentations of the Gospel and rejected it by apathy, procrastination, or sheer selfishness.

Those who reject have never seen Him for who He really is. I don't mean a physical seeing or just hearing the Gospel. There is a difference between hearing the Gospel and actually hearing the Gospel. You know that. You probably heard the Gospel a lot before you were saved. Why did you wait to accept until that one time and not another? Well, I say it was because of God....

I think it is more biblical to say that repentant faith precedes regeneration.

God initiates, but man responds. God does not initiate AND cause us to believe.

Does this involve "giving your heart to Jesus"??? LOL! I hate that phrase, for it implies that we give our heart of "stone" to Christ and that makes us a Christian...

Why does someone inclined to evil and sin, blind, and deaf, ever have "faith" in something they still see as foolishness? Unless God opens the eyes and the ears and gives us a new heart, we will never appreciate or love the Gospel. We only come to love and appreciate the Gospel AFTER we believe in it? Sounds like a leap into the dark....

There is no reason to believe that God only reveals Himself to the elect and that irresistible grace makes them believe. There is no good reason to think God witholds revelation from the so-called non-elect and it is His fault that they do not or cannot believe ('cannot' makes God arbitrary).

"Cannot" show their moral inability because they love darkness and not light. It does not mean they are physically unable; it means they morally do not want to or have a desire to.

I only good reason I have seen is the Bible. I think God shows us He must draw us and open up our hearts to give heed to the Gospel. We believe through grace. It is given to us to believe and to also suffer for His sake. It depends on God that shows mercy, not our willing or running. We are blind and deaf and see the Gospel as foolishness. If we see Christ as He really is throught the Father's drawing and Spirit's conviction and do not believe, then Christ must be less than infinitely glorious and beautiful or we must not have really seen Him.

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by godrulz

Not in His glory and majesty. If they really knew Him, they would love Him. At least, they should love Him. This still does not mean they had no choice but to love despite great light. Men can and do reject great revelation (creation, Word, Jesus, resurrection, etc....they do so and are without excuse...they should know better...God has made it plain..His power and glory, etc. Romans 1). The question is do we have freedom to receive and reject Christ, or does He force some to believe and does not allow others to believe ('elect vs non-elect')?
If they actually know Him, they will not reject Him.:doh:

Lucifer and Adam intimately knew God in His beauty and lived for Him for a time. Even this did not negate their ability to go their own way. So, if these creatures actually knew God and fell, why do you think those who do not know Him but have a glimpse of His glory have to love Him? They may or may not reject Him despite seeing His beauty. Most will love Him, but even one in a million who do not would undermine your thesis.
1] Lucifer has no access to grace!
2] Are you saying that Adam is in hell?!:shocked:

If you believe in free moral agency, you cannot defend a position that says a person must believe or continue to believe. If you deny freedom, you undermine the Word of God and the self-evident nature of being in the image of God (includes will, intellect, emotions, spirit, morals).
I don't say they must, I say they will!

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by natewood3

lighthouse,

I said:

So, if man rejects God's commands and chooses to disobey, then he is "stupid in his puny rebellion." What does that make him if he chooses to obey? Smarter than the rest..?

You said:



Is that what you meant? People who choose Christ are smarter than the rest who didn't?
Yes. Those who choose Christ are smarter than those who reject Him.

[godrulz]

I do not think Adam is in hell based on the provision of coverings for his nakedness. He seems to have repented and walked again with God though suffering many consequences of disobedience.

[Lighthouse]

So, you admit that Adam did not leave God?

[godrulz]

Originally posted by lighthouse

So, you admit that Adam did not leave God?

In the end, I do not think so. His relationship seemed to have been restored reasonably soon, but not without consequences. He responded to God's redemptive work.

This is one out of billions of humans who have existed. You cannot argue from the specific to the general and make a big doctrine of the perseverance of the saints based on Adam's unique experience.

Some will respond to God's conviction and redemptive work with repentance and renewed obedience, while others like Judas and Charles Templeton (former Billy Graham era evangelist who died reprobate), persist in their sin, selfishness, and rebellion.

It is a case by case issue. This brings us back to the theology: Is TULIP coherent (including OSAS), or is a more Arminian world view and libertarian freedom more consistent with revelation?

[natewood3]

lighthouse,

Yes. Those who choose Christ are smarter than those who reject Him.

In other words, in your view, men have grounds for boasting when they stand before God.

God: "Why did you choose Christ while your neighbor did not?"
Believer: "Well, I guess I was just smarter and more spiritual than him."
God: "I suppose your right. You are a pretty smart guy after all..."

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by godrulz

In the end, I do not think so. His relationship seemed to have been restored reasonably soon, but not without consequences. He responded to God's redemptive work.
WHat I have a problem wiht is that you believe that the relationship between the two needed restoration. Where do you get that from? Is the wage of sin a distanced, or severed relationship from God? Or is it death?

This is one out of billions of humans who have existed. You cannot argue from the specific to the general and make a big doctrine of the perseverance of the saints based on Adam's unique experience.
Yup. That's what I've done.:rolleyes:

I am not basing this on anyone's unique experience!:doh:

Some will respond to God's conviction and redemptive work with repentance and renewed obedience, while others like Judas and Charles Templeton (former Billy Graham era evangelist who died reprobate), persist in their sin, selfishness, and rebellion.
So, do you think Charles Templeton knew Christ, ever?

It is a case by case issue. This brings us back to the theology: Is TULIP coherent (including OSAS), or is a more Arminian world view and libertarian freedom more consistent with revelation?
Neither. I am not Calvinist, or Arminianist. OSAS is coherent. So are other parts of TULIP, but election/predestination unto salvation is not one of them.

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by natewood3

lighthouse,



In other words, in your view, men have grounds for boasting when they stand before God.

God: "Why did you choose Christ while your neighbor did not?"
Believer: "Well, I guess I was just smarter and more spiritual than him."
God: "I suppose your right. You are a pretty smart guy after all..."
I never said anything about being more spiritual. And when I said they were smarter, I didn't mean more intelligent. We were more responsive to Christ's calling than others are. I have nothing to boast about, for I did nothing. God initiated, I only responded to Him, instead of away from Him.

[godrulz]

I just met a preacher who debated Charles Templeton years ago. In private conversation, he was convinced that Charles was a genuine, converted believer for years and very effective at proclaiming the gospel with much anointing and fruit. It is a sad thing that he began to doubt Christianity (who knows what triggered this turn) and died hard-hearted despite the attempts of Christian leaders to reach out to him.

[Lighthouse]

People are easily deceived.

[godrulz]

Originally posted by lighthouse

People are easily deceived.

You do not know the heart and salvation status of any man at any point in their life. God alone is the Judge. Your preconceived theology states it is impossible to have genuinely been saved if one is not trusting Christ at the end of their race or life. This is true of many people, but Scripture and life are replete with examples of those who once loved God, but apostasized or did not run the race to the end. OSAS negates free will and the essence of salvation, which is a love relationship that must be freely entered into and continued in until the end (the role and relationship of God's keeping power to man's freedom and responsibility is another debate). The only way for OSAS to be true is for salvation to be a passive, irreversible, physical change that is outside the realms of love, freedom, relationship, morals. TULIP is problematic as you rightly conclude. However, it is self-consistent and logical on the inter-related points. You want the P and to modify the rest. I do not think this is consistent.

If we can say "Yes, Lord, take me as I am. Have mercy on me, a sinner, I will trust you and live for you as Lord and Savior, for the rest of my life", then why can we not later say: "Buzz off, I changed my mind. I think I will live for the pleasures of sin, and hope you are merciful in the end."?

[Lighthouse]

You ask some really stupid questions.

[godrulz]

How about a stupid answer then?

If I can tell my wife I love you for 50 years, why cannot I say I hate you and want a divorce so I can go with another woman? Millions of people, including Christians have done this very thing. Marriage is a relationship. Salvation is a relationship (or is it just a ritualistic religion to you?). You do the math.

[natewood3]

I believe in OSAC:

"Once saved, always changed."

I think OSAS gives the idea that salvation is a decision sometime back, and it matters not what you do after that "decision." Read Romans 6. Salvation is a process whereby the old man dies and we live to Christ. We put to death sin, and if we don't, we were probably never saved in the first place. Salvation=changed life. God is powerful enough to save me, and He is definitely powerful enough to give me the grace to persevere. God's work is ultimate, and my work is dependent upon His work...

[natewood3]

lighthouse,

I never said anything about being more spiritual. And when I said they were smarter, I didn't mean more intelligent. We were more responsive to Christ's calling than others are. I have nothing to boast about, for I did nothing. God initiated, I only responded to Him, instead of away from Him.

So you have reason to boast before God: you were smarter than those who did no accept Him. How smart you are! Maybe everyone will be as smart as you, and if they were, they would all accept Him.

You say God is taking the initiative; is He not doing that on every single person in the world? What, in the end, makes you person be saved from another?

[God_Is_Truth]

Originally posted by natewood3

lighthouse,



So you have reason to boast before God: you were smarter than those who did no accept Him. How smart you are! Maybe everyone will be as smart as you, and if they were, they would all accept Him.

You say God is taking the initiative; is He not doing that on every single person in the world? What, in the end, makes you person be saved from another?

Nate, there are 2 reasons you are overlooking in regards to why we can't boast.

the first is that salvation is from the Lord. it is HE who saves us, it was HE who died for us and it is HE who gives us eternal life. faith only has value because of his works. we could have faith the size of an elephant (compared to a mustard seed ;) ) but without Jesus dying and rising again, it is no good. that is why we can only boast in what God has done for us.

the second is what the definition of fatih is. faith is the self denial of any works of your own and the turning of your hope and trust to Jesus and his finishing work on the cross. in other words, you are denying anything you did on your own as merit towards salvation and are relying on the works on another, namely Christ. that being the case, how could one boast in denying one's own works? what left is there to boast in? there is only Christ, and he is the only thing we can boast in.

[natewood3]

GIT,

I agree with what you have said. However, if Christ did this for everybody, then what makes me be saved from another person? Why?

Lighthouse's answer is that he was smarter, and you were smarter, and I was smarter than the rest of the people who haven't responded or won't respond. That is grounds for boasting. This is why I stress that faith is a gift; it was given to us to believe; we believed THROUGH grace.

I believed for one reason:

Act 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.

God chose me, not because of anything in me or about me, but it was His good pleasure to do so. I have no grounds of boasting. My faith is from God. My desire for Him is from Him. My grounds of salvation is from Him. My faith today is still from Him. My faith tomorrow will be from Him. My faith on the day I die will be from Him. My good works are from Him. Anything that is good that have ever done or will do will be from God. I cannot say that I was smarter. I was more stupid. I grew up in church, and wasted my life until I was basically 15. I knew about Christ. I knew the Gospel. I was a decently intelligent kid. That made no difference, even though I knew it was complete truth and believed it was truth. THAT did not make me saved. Something more had to happen; God had to change me or I would have never wanted or desired to fully trust and rely on Christ for salvation. I had no desire. I wanted heaven. I wanted good gifts. I wanted blessing. I did not want Christ. I did not desire Christ, but "Whom in Heaven do I have but Thee?"

[God_Is_Truth]

Originally posted by natewood3

GIT,

I agree with what you have said. However, if Christ did this for everybody, then what makes me be saved from another person? Why?

their choice.


Lighthouse's answer is that he was smarter, and you were smarter, and I was smarter than the rest of the people who haven't responded or won't respond. That is grounds for boasting. This is why I stress that faith is a gift; it was given to us to believe; we believed THROUGH grace.

did you even read what i posted? faith is not a "thing". you can't give something that isn't a thing. faith is a self denial of your own works. how can God give that to you? that makes no sense....


I believed for one reason:

Act 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.

that verse does not say WHEN they were appointed. you assume it was before they believed. all it says is that those who believed were appointed to eternal life. to read it as saying that they were appointed to eternal life before they believed is reading into the text.


God chose me, not because of anything in me or about me, but it was His good pleasure to do so. I have no grounds of boasting. My faith is from God. My desire for Him is from Him. My grounds of salvation is from Him. My faith today is still from Him. My faith tomorrow will be from Him. My faith on the day I die will be from Him. My good works are from Him. Anything that is good that have ever done or will do will be from God. I cannot say that I was smarter. I was more stupid. I grew up in church, and wasted my life until I was basically 15. I knew about Christ. I knew the Gospel. I was a decently intelligent kid. That made no difference, even though I knew it was complete truth and believed it was truth. THAT did not make me saved. Something more had to happen; God had to change me or I would have never wanted or desired to fully trust and rely on Christ for salvation. I had no desire. I wanted heaven. I wanted good gifts. I wanted blessing. I did not want Christ. I did not desire Christ, but "Whom in Heaven do I have but Thee?"

yes we all know how calvinists like to think of themselves as "God's special children" :rolleyes:

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by godrulz

How about a stupid answer then?

If I can tell my wife I love you for 50 years, why cannot I say I hate you and want a divorce so I can go with another woman? Millions of people, including Christians have done this very thing. Marriage is a relationship. Salvation is a relationship (or is it just a ritualistic religion to you?). You do the math.
In the words of Skillet:
"There's somethign deep inside that keeps my faith alive."
-Collide

And it isn't me.

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by natewood3

I believe in OSAC:

"Once saved, always changed."

I think OSAS gives the idea that salvation is a decision sometime back, and it matters not what you do after that "decision." Read Romans 6. Salvation is a process whereby the old man dies and we live to Christ. We put to death sin, and if we don't, we were probably never saved in the first place. Salvation=changed life. God is powerful enough to save me, and He is definitely powerful enough to give me the grace to persevere. God's work is ultimate, and my work is dependent upon His work...
Amen!

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by natewood3

lighthouse,



So you have reason to boast before God: you were smarter than those who did no accept Him. How smart you are! Maybe everyone will be as smart as you, and if they were, they would all accept Him.
Ummm...no. I made the smart choice. And I know it was smart, now. And those who end up apart from Him, will know that they made a choice that wasn't smart. They thought themselves to be wise, yet they were fools.

You say God is taking the initiative; is He not doing that on every single person in the world? What, in the end, makes you person be saved from another?
Yes, He initiates, we respond. Not everybody responds in faith. I did. Others don't.

[godrulz]

Originally posted by natewood3

I believe in OSAC:

"Once saved, always changed."

I think OSAS gives the idea that salvation is a decision sometime back, and it matters not what you do after that "decision." Read Romans 6. Salvation is a process whereby the old man dies and we live to Christ. We put to death sin, and if we don't, we were probably never saved in the first place. Salvation=changed life. God is powerful enough to save me, and He is definitely powerful enough to give me the grace to persevere. God's work is ultimate, and my work is dependent upon His work...

This is true, but faith, perseverance, continuance, abiding are all continuous tenses that began in the past and continue into the future. God saves, sanctifies, glorifies us, but it is not absolutely unconditional or passive.

[godrulz]

Originally posted by natewood3


Act 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.

"

Classic prooftext that requires careful exegesis...they believed in the present and were appointed and then were glad...this did not happen in eternity past by the decree of God before people even existed. They became part of the corporate elect when they believed; they did not believe because they were individually elected in eternity past.

[natewood3]

GIT,

I said:

I agree with what you have said. However, if Christ did this for everybody, then what makes me be saved from another person? Why?

You replied:

their choice.QUOTE]

So you admit, at least in your view, salvation is ultimately dependent upon you and not God?

[QUOTE]did you even read what i posted? faith is not a "thing". you can't give something that isn't a thing. faith is a self denial of your own works. how can God give that to you? that makes no sense....

Faith might be a self-denial of your own works and putting your trust and full reliance upon Christ for your salvation, but no man is able to do that apart from the Spirit! You consistently prove that you do not understand total depravity.

Rom 3:11 no one understands; no one seeks [pres. tense--continual action] for God.

Tell me, when does someone decide to seek God? When they "decide" to do so? No. It is when God draws them and shows them their sinfulness and Christ, and they have their eyes opened and their given a heart of flesh and have their deaf ears opened. It is then that they are able to even have the desire for God...before that, they were constantly fulfilling and seeking to fulfill the lusts of their OWN flesh. Unbelievers are the most self-impressed and self-infatuated people in the world! Your telling me that apart from God, though He may influence it is still their "choice" you argue, that they are going to turn away from themselves, the one "B"eing they love the most and turn to the Being they hate the most???

that verse does not say WHEN they were appointed. you assume it was before they believed. all it says is that those who believed were appointed to eternal life. to read it as saying that they were appointed to eternal life before they believed is reading into the text.

I don't think your English Bible tells you when they were appointed to eternal life. However, the verb is a perfect passive participle. The perfect tense describes a past action with ever continuing results. They were appointed in the past and the fruits abide today (one reason I believe in perseverance of the saints). You cannot tell me that verse says, "When they believe they became appointed" or "All who believed were then appointed to eternal life." THAT is not what the text says. It says the ones that believed did so because they had been appointed in the past to do so. So, to say they were appointed before they believed is NOT by any means reading into the text. I hated this verse before I was a Calvinist. I could not do anything to it to change it. I basically ignored it.

yes we all know how calvinists like to think of themselves as "God's special children"

I am not going to comment on such an uneducated sentence, because you have no idea what that sentence even means...you are applying your idea of "special" to that sentence, and it is NOT the correct meaning of the world "special" when used in reference to God's elect people...

[natewood3]

lighthouse,

Ummm...no. I made the smart choice. And I know it was smart, now. And those who end up apart from Him, will know that they made a choice that wasn't smart. They thought themselves to be wise, yet they were fools.

The point is you believe salvation is finally dependent upon man's choice and not God's....

Yes, He initiates, we respond. Not everybody responds in faith. I did. Others don't.

Exactly. God does all He can do. Man has to finish salvation for God so man can be "free." Man has to finish what God started doing. Hence, salvation is not God's work completely; man must put in his little part as well, and just take a little bit of the glory that God deserves...

[God_Is_Truth]

Originally posted by natewood3

GIT,

Faith might be a self-denial of your own works and putting your trust and full reliance upon Christ for your salvation, but no man is able to do that apart from the Spirit! You consistently prove that you do not understand total depravity.

or just that i hold a different understanding of it than you do.


Rom 3:11 no one understands; no one seeks [pres. tense--continual action] for God.

Tell me, when does someone decide to seek God? When they "decide" to do so? No. It is when God draws them and shows them their sinfulness and Christ, and they have their eyes opened and their given a heart of flesh and have their deaf ears opened. It is then that they are able to even have the desire for God...before that, they were constantly fulfilling and seeking to fulfill the lusts of their OWN flesh. Unbelievers are the most self-impressed and self-infatuated people in the world! Your telling me that apart from God, though He may influence it is still their "choice" you argue, that they are going to turn away from themselves, the one "B"eing they love the most and turn to the Being they hate the most???

they seek God when they are convicted of their sins and shown the punishment for those sins. it is the work of the Spirit to convict them and of us to show them.


I don't think your English Bible tells you when they were appointed to eternal life. However, the verb is a perfect passive participle. The perfect tense describes a past action with ever continuing results. They were appointed in the past and the fruits abide today (one reason I believe in perseverance of the saints). You cannot tell me that verse says, "When they believe they became appointed" or "All who believed were then appointed to eternal life." THAT is not what the text says. It says the ones that believed did so because they had been appointed in the past to do so. So, to say they were appointed before they believed is NOT by any means reading into the text. I hated this verse before I was a Calvinist. I could not do anything to it to change it. I basically ignored it.

i don't know the greek that it was written in so i am unable to debate the tenses of the original greek. i rely on the english translations. if you are interested, gred boyd basically says the same thing i did but expands on it here.

http://www.gregboyd.org/gbfront/index.asp?PageID=481

[QUOTE[
I am not going to comment on such an uneducated sentence, because you have no idea what that sentence even means...you are applying your idea of "special" to that sentence, and it is NOT the correct meaning of the world "special" when used in reference to God's elect people... [/QUOTE]

7 entries found for special.
spe·cial ( P ) Pronunciation Key (spshl)
adj.
Surpassing what is common or usual; exceptional: a special occasion; a special treat.

Distinct among others of a kind: a special type of paint; a special medication for arthritis.
Primary: His special satisfaction comes from volunteer work.
Peculiar to a specific person or thing; particular: my own special chair; the special features of a computer.

Having a limited or specific function, application, or scope: a special role in the mission.
Arranged for a particular occasion or purpose: a special visit from her daughter.
Regarded with particular affection and admiration: a special friend.
Additional; extra: a special holiday flight.


what was wrong with my word "special"?

[godrulz]

I contend that Boyd's alternate understanding is plausible, if not probable. It is easy to read a preconceived theology into the text and make it say more than it does (e.g. it is not explicit that they were predestined from eternity past; the state of their hearts would be known to God in the present, not before they were born).

Some of the future is predestined; some of the future is open. These dual motifs clear up supposed conflicts between Calvinistic vs Arminian/Open passages.

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by natewood3

lighthouse,



The point is you believe salvation is finally dependent upon man's choice and not God's....
I believe a relationship with Him is dependent upon man's choice. And I believe that man has to believe that God raised Christ from the dead, as well as confessing Him as Lord, to be saved. So yes, it is dependent upon a response of faith.


Exactly. God does all He can do. Man has to finish salvation for God so man can be "free." Man has to finish what God started doing. Hence, salvation is not God's work completely; man must put in his little part as well, and just take a little bit of the glory that God deserves...
Man only has to believe the truth, in his heart [have faith] to be saved. Nothing more, nothing less.

[1PeaceMaker]

Lighthouse, Sozo was not kidding, and he told Knight he was nowhere.

What do you think?

[godrulz]

God's grace in the person and work of Christ is the grounds (reason for which) of salvation. He alone saves us. We cannot save ourselves.

Conditions of salvation (not without which) are our response with His enablement and our willingness to His truth and conviction (He initiates). These include repentant faith that continues through our lives/relationship with God. We have nothing to boast about, but God will not force us to love or be with Him if we are not willing to give Him back our lives that He rightly deserves. He has a right to rule our lives, but He will not coerce us against our wills. He desires freely chosen love relationships, not a Dictator-robot set up.

So, I agree with lighthouse (though he does not agree with all my ideas in this area).

[natewood3]

GIT,

or just that i hold a different understanding of it than you do.

Maybe, but I don't think so...;)

they seek God when they are convicted of their sins and shown the punishment for those sins. it is the work of the Spirit to convict them and of us to show them.

I realize we keep coming back to this same issue.

I think the disagreement is how you answer this question: Will a spiritually blind person see the Gospel as foolishness and folly, but still choose to accept this "foolish" Savior?

I think not. I knew all my life I was a sinner, needed to be saved, that Christ was the only way to heaven, that hell was real, that Christ died for my sins, etc, etc. You know what? I STILL WASN'T SAVED!!! I still did not want it. I wanted heaven and blessings, but not Christ, which is what heaven is all about and what salvation is all about. Salvation is not getting our sins forgiven mainly; salvation is coming to know the one and only Savior, Jesus Christ.

i don't know the greek that it was written in so i am unable to debate the tenses of the original greek. i rely on the english translations. if you are interested, gred boyd basically says the same thing i did but expands on it here.

I know godrulz said that Boyd tried to keep his pet doctrines out of the exegesis of the text, but I am not so sure he did so. He assumes that God's revealed will is the only will that God has. He assumes free will and predestination are incompatible. Therefore, he interprets the text according to those presuppositions. I honestly don't think he answered what the text said.

The point is that only those who were ordained to eternal life believed. How can you be ordained to eternal life? Would not "being ordained to eternal life" in any sense "take away free will"??? If not, how so?

what was wrong with my word "special"?

Possibly I jumped to a conclusion, but what seemed to be implied when you said it was that we are somehow able to boast or brag about being God's "special" people. That is the complete opposite you will ever hear a true Calvinist say or do. On the contrary, it amazes me that God would choose me. I have no idea why. I deserved hell not heaven. I still don't deserve it. I never will. The fact that He did choose me and call me and save me is a matter of sovereign grace that I cannot explain in any way. That is the most humbling experience in the world...

[natewood3]

lighthouse,

I believe a relationship with Him is dependent upon man's choice. And I believe that man has to believe that God raised Christ from the dead, as well as confessing Him as Lord, to be saved. So yes, it is dependent upon a response of faith.

So, in your view, how is salvation still ALL of God if He must wait for YOU to respond to Him?

I do not deny a response; I deny that we are able in and of ourselves to give the appropriate response. I deny that once we are enabled that it will ever be rejected.

Man only has to believe the truth, in his heart [have faith] to be saved. Nothing more, nothing less.

So are you agreeing that man must finished what God started? Man MUST do his part or else salvation is ineffectual and worthless, right?

[God_Is_Truth]

I realize we keep coming back to this same issue.

I think the disagreement is how you answer this question: Will a spiritually blind person see the Gospel as foolishness and folly, but still choose to accept this "foolish" Savior?


the question is really WHY do they see it as foolishness? the jew sees it as that because of his past and the law. he justifies himself by the law and thus doesn't understand the need for Christ. the gentile sees it as foolishness because he doesn't think he's a bad person period. in both cases the problem is self justification.

the only thing that will show both of them that they need Christ is the law of God. this is why we preach first the law of God which is perfect and works on the soul and then we preach Christ. until they hear the law and see clearly that they are condemned by it they will not see the need for Christ and it will be foolishness to them.


I think not. I knew all my life I was a sinner, needed to be saved, that Christ was the only way to heaven, that hell was real, that Christ died for my sins, etc, etc. You know what? I STILL WASN'T SAVED!!! I still did not want it. I wanted heaven and blessings, but not Christ, which is what heaven is all about and what salvation is all about

had you ever repented and trusted in Christ for your salvation?


Salvation is not getting our sins forgiven mainly; salvation is coming to know the one and only Savior, Jesus Christ.


and here we have a major disagreement. i say salvation IS completely about having our sins forgiven, not about knowing Jesus. when we are saved (sins forgiven) then we are also brought into a right relationship with his Son but it is a result, not the cause.

from what is one saved? lack of fellowship? no, but the punishment of sins. that's what salvation is of and about. fellowship is a benefit of being saved, it is a consequence of having your sins forgiven. but you don't preach that you need to be saved of being out of fellowship with God.....


I know godrulz said that Boyd tried to keep his pet doctrines out of the exegesis of the text, but I am not so sure he did so. He assumes that God's revealed will is the only will that God has. He assumes free will and predestination are incompatible. Therefore, he interprets the text according to those presuppositions. I honestly don't think he answered what the text said.


the main point is that the text simply does not say when the people were ordained to eternal life. it is an assumption to say either way when they were ordained. all it says that those who were ordained to life were the ones who believed.

The point is that only those who were ordained to eternal life believed. How can you be ordained to eternal life? Would not "being ordained to eternal life" in any sense "take away free will"??? If not, how so?


well if it's done after one believes then it's not an issue ;)


Possibly I jumped to a conclusion, but what seemed to be implied when you said it was that we are somehow able to boast or brag about being God's "special" people. That is the complete opposite you will ever hear a true Calvinist say or do. On the contrary, it amazes me that God would choose me. I have no idea why. I deserved hell not heaven. I still don't deserve it. I never will. The fact that He did choose me and call me and save me is a matter of sovereign grace that I cannot explain in any way. That is the most humbling experience in the world...

ah, but even though you won't boast, you are able because you are favored in God's eyes, chosen in his favor and others are not. the ability exists, though i am not saying one ever would. you say i can boast in faith, i say you can boast in your being chosen. neither one of us should ever boast though.

blessings,

GIT

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by 1PeaceMaker

Lighthouse, Sozo was not kidding, and he told Knight he was nowhere.

What do you think?
:darwinsm:
You think Sozo is a Calvinist? You really think he would ever become a calvinist?
:darwinsm:

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by natewood3

lighthouse,



So, in your view, how is salvation still ALL of God if He must wait for YOU to respond to Him?
He doesn't have to wait. If he had to wait then no one would die until they responded positively.

I do not deny a response; I deny that we are able in and of ourselves to give the appropriate response. I deny that once we are enabled that it will ever be rejected.
I agree with the first premise, but I disagree with the second in that I believe not everyone will respond positively, once enabled. But I agree that those who respond positively will ever deny it. Those who eventually deny it were not responding to Christ in the first place.


So are you agreeing that man must finished what God started? Man MUST do his part or else salvation is ineffectual and worthless, right?
We must accept salvation for it to have any bearing upon us. We must have faith, or we are doomed to damnation.

[natewood3]

lighthouse,

He doesn't have to wait. If he had to wait then no one would die until they responded positively.

My point is that God must wait to save you until you respond positively, right?

I agree with the first premise, but I disagree with the second in that I believe not everyone will respond positively, once enabled. But I agree that those who respond positively will ever deny it. Those who eventually deny it were not responding to Christ in the first place.

I do not understand your theology. You tell me God must do it all, but then you turn around and say man is able in and of himself. The point is that man cannot do anything before God! That is the reason it is ALL of God and not any of man.

What you are arguing is that grace is resistable, not irresistable.

Joh 6:40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."

EVERYONE who believes in Christ will be raised up the last day (you can see this by the "AND I will raise him up..."), correct?

Joh 6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.

Why is it not the same with this verse? ALL that the Father draws WILL be raised up the last day. I can only conclude that all that the Father draws will believe and will be raised up the last day. If God can draw me and I not believe, then we should not be so sure that He will raise us up at the last day.

Rom 8:29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.
Rom 8:30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

Do you see the unbreakable chain of events in this passage? ALL He foreknew, He also predestined. ALL that He predestined, He called. ALL that He called, He justified. ALL that He justified, He glorified.

I thought justification was by faith? Pauls says anyone who God called He also justified, no drop outs. It is extremely hard to argue that this verse that any of those called will not respond according to this passage. Just like I don't think it is possible to argue that all those justified will not all be glorified. It does not say that they will be, actually, it says that they ARE glorified. They are already sitting in heaven according to Ephesians. So, if some can be called and not respond, then please enlighten me as to what these verses mean...

We must accept salvation for it to have any bearing upon us. We must have faith, or we are doomed to damnation.

I agree we must have faith or we are doomed for judgment and hell. However, why do we ever have faith?

As I asked before, in your view, must man finished what God started? God initiated in the first place, you say, and then WE must finish His work by trusting Christ as our Savior. Would you agree or disagree?

[godrulz]

Both/and, not either/or.

Isolated proof texts will support one half of the truth, but overlook the other balancing part.

The fact that God initiates and provides does not mean that it is all of of God. We are not passive, but have an ability to perceive truth and make choices. We are in the personal and moral image of God. Hyper-Calvinism reduces us to deterministic robots.

There are explicit Scriptures that show that God's grace and will can be resisted. We are warned not to do so. If we do, there are adverse consequences. Every wrong moral choice (sin) is a resistance of God's will. He did not cause Hitler to kill millions of Jews for His glory?! Every decision to abort a child is a self-determined resistance of God's will and grace. He did not predestine this or determine it. The sinner, not the Holy God, is culpable in every sense.

Determinism is an insult to the true nature and ways of God's awesome being and plans.

[natewood3]

godrulz,

Determinism/compatiblism does not put God as the author of sin. God is not actively causing people to sin; He does not have to do that. We are sinners and do it on our own.

You seem to act as if Calvinists say God is the author of sin and that He actively determines when we sin. I don't think you will find any who say that or imply that.

[godrulz]

Originally posted by natewood3

godrulz,

Determinism/compatiblism does not put God as the author of sin. God is not actively causing people to sin; He does not have to do that. We are sinners and do it on our own.

You seem to act as if Calvinists say God is the author of sin and that He actively determines when we sin. I don't think you will find any who say that or imply that.

I would hope not. I have dialogued with Calvinists who do not bat an eyelash at saying God is responsible for evil. They use proof texts about natural 'evil' like judgments with disasters and do not distinguish it from moral evil. You are not a hyper-Calvinist. I think compatibilism is problematic, and that the Open View is on to something.

[natewood3]

godrulz,

Is not compatibilism incoherent to you because you first deny God can foreknew any future decisions of mankind?

[godrulz]

Originally posted by natewood3

godrulz,

Is not compatibilism incoherent to you because you first deny God can foreknow any future decisions of mankind?

These issues are philosophically connected. I believe exhaustive foreknowledge of future free will contingencies is a logical contradiction or absurdity (in the same vein as God doing logically contradictory things like making rocks too heavy to lift). However, Arminianism and simple foreknowledge (exhaustive as you believe) also rejects compatibilism. Libertarian free will believers lean to incompatibilism. So, perhaps the issue is more about free moral agency rather than foreknowledge. Open Theists are a mediate position and take freedom and foreknowledge to its logical conclusions. The issue is also about how we understand sovereignty. Is it meticulous control of moral and mundane details (decrees, etc.), or is it providential, responsive, creative control? Determinism and libertarian free will are logically incompatible. They are mutually exclusive.

To clarify, Open Theists believe God knows reality as it is. He knows the past and present perfectly, but knows some of the contingent future as possibilities rather than actualities/certainties before the future exists as the now present. It also recognizes that God knows some of the future as settled (Is.). These areas are things that God purposes to bring to pass by His omnicompetence (and not by foreknowledge). This does not mean the future has happened or that God experiences past, present, future as a timeless 'eternal now'. This is another related issue. What is time, eternity, and God's relationship to history? I believe eternity is an endless duration of sequence/succesion='time'. Timelessness or eternal now would negate God's freedom and personality. Time is not a limitation on God, but an aspect of any personal being's experience (will, intellect, emotions, relationships, experience, etc. require duration to be coherent, even for God).

If nothing else, this is a fascinating area of theology and a significant evangelical debate today. I would let it go, but I believe it has practical implications for our understanding of God, His ways, prayer, evangelism, etc. I believe Open Theism resolves Calvinistic-Arminianian problematic areas and allows one to interpret the Bible at face value without resorting to anthropomorphisms whenever classical theology is questioned.

Let us press on to understand God and His ways. It is the glory of a king to search out a matter.

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by natewood3

lighthouse,



My point is that God must wait to save you until you respond positively, right?



I do not understand your theology. You tell me God must do it all, but then you turn around and say man is able in and of himself. The point is that man cannot do anything before God! That is the reason it is ALL of God and not any of man.

What you are arguing is that grace is resistable, not irresistable.

Joh 6:40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day."

EVERYONE who believes in Christ will be raised up the last day (you can see this by the "AND I will raise him up..."), correct?

Joh 6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.

Why is it not the same with this verse? ALL that the Father draws WILL be raised up the last day. I can only conclude that all that the Father draws will believe and will be raised up the last day. If God can draw me and I not believe, then we should not be so sure that He will raise us up at the last day.

Rom 8:29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.
Rom 8:30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

Do you see the unbreakable chain of events in this passage? ALL He foreknew, He also predestined. ALL that He predestined, He called. ALL that He called, He justified. ALL that He justified, He glorified.

I thought justification was by faith? Pauls says anyone who God called He also justified, no drop outs. It is extremely hard to argue that this verse that any of those called will not respond according to this passage. Just like I don't think it is possible to argue that all those justified will not all be glorified. It does not say that they will be, actually, it says that they ARE glorified. They are already sitting in heaven according to Ephesians. So, if some can be called and not respond, then please enlighten me as to what these verses mean...



I agree we must have faith or we are doomed for judgment and hell. However, why do we ever have faith?

As I asked before, in your view, must man finished what God started? God initiated in the first place, you say, and then WE must finish His work by trusting Christ as our Savior. Would you agree or disagree?
You know what...forget it. I've explained myself before. People don't resist the grace, when they find it. But not everyone is open to it. That is all I'm going to say.

[godrulz]

Originally posted by lighthouse

You know what...forget it. I've explained myself before. People don't resist the grace, when they find it. But not everyone is open to it. That is all I'm going to say.

God's sovereign will is not the only factor in the equation. Man's heart and will are also factors. There are two categories of people: those who receive/believe and those who reject/persist in unbelief. To say that God wills some to believe and some to not believe apart from the person's will, intellect, heart, etc. does not deal with all the relevant evidence. Some love darkness and suppress the truth by their wickedness (Jn. 3; Rom. 1). They are fully responsible and condemned. It is not that they were non-elected or predestined to damnation with no possibility to hear and respond to the Gospel. Some do respond to the Gospel. It is not that they happen to be the non-elect, or were predestined before they were even conceived. God's provision and initiation/enablement does not have to be in opposition to man's response of faith or unbelief. There is no good reason to believe God determines destiny by His sovereign will apart from the existence and choices of the individual.

[natewood3]

lighthouse,

All I was doing was trying to figure out your position. You don't seem to go as far as some other OVers on here (I am not sure if you even claim to be an OVer, although I know you believe the future is open). I affirm with you that when people see Christ, they will accept the Gospel. No one in their right mind would reject Him when they see Him. I thought you believed that also, which is why I was asking what I did above...no reason to get upset.

[Knight]

For those interested I made a new thread out of SOTK's post in this thread called What's the problem? (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=624059#post624059)

[Sozo]

Originally posted by Knight

For those interested I made a new thread out of SOTK's post in this thread called What's the problem? (http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=624059#post624059)

Was there a problem? What was it?

[Knight]

Originally posted by Sozo

Was there a problem? What was it? Click-a-da-link and find out silly!

[Lighthouse]

Originally posted by godrulz

God's sovereign will is not the only factor in the equation. Man's heart and will are also factors. There are two categories of people: those who receive/believe and those who reject/persist in unbelief. To say that God wills some to believe and some to not believe apart from the person's will, intellect, heart, etc. does not deal with all the relevant evidence. Some love darkness and suppress the truth by their wickedness (Jn. 3; Rom. 1). They are fully responsible and condemned. It is not that they were non-elected or predestined to damnation with no possibility to hear and respond to the Gospel. Some do respond to the Gospel. It is not that they happen to be the non-elect, or were predestined before they were even conceived. God's provision and initiation/enablement does not have to be in opposition to man's response of faith or unbelief. There is no good reason to believe God determines destiny by His sovereign will apart from the existence and choices of the individual.
I never said God wills anyone to salvation. God's will is that all come to salvation. But not all do. And that's mostly because they have no idea what grace is, or does.

[godrulz]

Originally posted by lighthouse

I never said God wills anyone to salvation. God's will is that all come to salvation. But not all do. And that's mostly because they have no idea what grace is, or does.

I was trying to support and agree with you, lighthouse. My comments relate to nate's ideas which differ from ours in the area of predestination/election:)

[Lighthouse]

Ah...okay.:thumb:

[Sozo]

:noid:

[Lighthouse]

:noid:
Are you scared that I agreed with godrulz on something?

[godrulz]

Are you scared that I agreed with godrulz on something?


Apparently I am not wrong on everything, just most things? ;)