Free Will and Predestination

[BobTriez]

Ok, well I'll take the initiative here and restart our conversation ( you have free will not to answer me though....right ), because you concern me and I love ya in the Lord.....so, I feel led to point out your error ( or attempt - you much make the choice however ).

I was praying on this issue yesterday and I was doing a little research, and I was led to a few very interesting verses in the book of Revelation. I shared this with a very dear friend of mine to get her thoughts and she pointed out a few things in conjunction with what the Lord led me to see. Have a look -

Revelation 3:19-21

19 Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline. So be earnest, and repent.

20 Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me.

21 To him who overcomes, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I overcame and sat down with my Father on his throne.

Now to me ? This seems like we have a CHOICE in the matter. Jesus doesn't say "I stand at the door and knock. If you don't answer, I kick the door down and force my way in".....rather what does He say ? He says "IF anyone hears my voice AND opens the door". Jesus takes the initiative here and knocks ( remember, He found us; WE were lost, not Him ) but WE are responsible to open the door and let Him in, right ? That is free will. Calvinism can tap dance around this all it wants, but it's still free will.

And it also states that ANYONE who hears His voice and subsequenty opens the door, He will come in. Not just some, not the "elect", but anyone who hears His voice.....and then opens the door - Jesus will come in.

Now please tell me how Unconditional Election can possibly fit into this scripture ?

Your's in Christ,

Bob

[johnP]

Ok, well I'll take the initiative here and restart our conversation

I am sorry about that Bob. Thanks, I got a bit rushed. I am sorry for the lenght of time it has taken me to respond. I have been doing this reply most of the day but that is all right isn't it? There is no rush. We want to get it right

...( you have free will not to answer me though....right  ),...

No!

...because you concern me...

Yea! I concern myself sometimes too.

...and I love ya in the Lord...

Nice ain't it?

...so, I feel led to point out your error...

And so you should. This attitude brings glory to God and us closer together.

( or attempt - you must make the choice however ).

That I must choose there is no doubt. I welcome your attempt and look forward to growing with you and your dear friend regardless of the outcome.

Revelation! Oh no! Don't let us go into Revelation for goodness sake. We have enough trouble already!

Revelation 3:19-21 Addressed to the Christians in Laodicea.

Jesus loves those He rebukes and rebukes those He loves and He disciplines* those He loves and rebukes.

God calls us to repent. To make a choice. To decide not one way or another but repent*. To give serious attention to the matter and use our will to repent. There is still time but be earnest. Don't start well and fade again. They are asleep.

*Repent means; to turn from sin out of penitence for past wrongdoings, abandon sinful or unworthy purposes and values, and dedicate oneself to the amendment of one's life

In this paticular passage I think. Abandon wrong doing. It is not to say sorry but change your ways and not return to them. Repentance means they will not return to the wrong doing. They are connected and going back to them means you did not repent in the first place!

I know I'm saying this. God commands us. God controls our will and we respond. He soften or hardens us. God rewards those people with the reward those actions deserve.I know I am saying this.

This is my belief so the passage shows a cause and effect in operation but does not show free will.

God commands the man the Holy Spirit wills in the man to do His bidding and God rewards the man as the man deserves. I know it sounds stupid but this passage does not deny that.

I stopped tap dancing sometime ago because I kept falling in the sink!

God does indeed pull the strings. I know it annoys people. I know it sounds stupid I am not stupid am I? Am I? Agh! I had not taken that into consideration now I come to think of it! Mind you nobody has called me stupid have they? Just wrong. Sweat.

*Disciplines: training or experience that corrects, molds, strengthens, or perfects especially the mental faculties or moral character

Where is the free will in being corrected : to make or set right : remove the faults or errors from : ?

...how Unconditional Election can possibly fit into this scripture...

The people He is addressing are saved already. They are the Church. It is not about Unconditional Election at all and Unconditional Election does not fit into this scripture at all.

Maybe this is pertinant. Who is it that overcomes, verse 21?

1 John 5:4 for everyone born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world, even our faith.

It does not say might overcome but will overcome. Pereseverance of the Saints.

Now I think I will use those emoticons for the first time. Anything to make Calvinism look a bit better.

Is this ok?

Nothing in paticular.

Have you noticed that the rest of the bible tends to be very sketchy on details, but when I am reading it the pictures that come to mind are vivid. Here in Revelation it is stuffed with detail and I find it hard to form pictures in my head. Just thought I'd say that.

Once upon a time a long time ago I decided to spend two weeks on studying Revelation. I got all the material I could and read and reread the Revelation. At the end of two weeks I knew absolutely nothing except that a dragon was involved in some way.

The promise at the beginning was lived up to though. Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near.

I got answers to many passages in the rest of the bible as I journeyed in that strange place.

johnp

[johnP]

To anyone who cares to know:

Where I stand:

To try to make my position as clear as possible and to help those who do not really understand where this is coming from please see below.

I believe this and I believe this with a certainty that I am not aquainted with elsewhere;

God.

God commands us.

God controls our will and we respond. He soften or hardens us.

God rewards those people with the reward those actions that He willed in them deserve.

Mankind.

Man hears God's commands.

Man is controlled by God for good the *saint and the sinner respond in sin.

The saints sin is **disregarded and is rewarded by God who did the good.

The sinner's sin is not disregarded because he has not been forgiven by Jesus.

* All Christians are saints.

** Disregarded: to treat as unworthy of regard or notice :

I believe this to be the very heart of the gospel.

johnp

[Khristeeanos]

Hey John. Thanks for taking the time to respond to my comments. I will reply to those tomorrow.

But first, I have one more question for you.

Do you believe that the 5 point TULIP is considered to be "domino theology" where if one point is disproven, that all will also fall in the wake?

[Khristeeanos]

Posted by JohnP

Sorry Dime.

This has come as a surprise.

I know I replied but for the life of me I cannot find it.

My apologises, I might have lost it tidying the desktop so here is a new and revised version.

1. No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God's approval.

So it does not mean 'everything' in this sense does it?

I had said, "1. The original church (the one established at Pentecost in AD 33 according to Acts chapter 2) did not disagree on one thing but had, "everything in common" (Acts 2:44)."

It means what it says. The new converts held the Apostles' teaching with the utmost respect and submitted to what they taught. Any difference in opinion on doctrine couldn't have existed.

Acts 2:42 (NIV)

They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer.

These new converts were devoted to the Apostles' teaching, not they argued or debated what their personal intrepretation was.

Posted by JohnP

2. By way of 'goods' do you mean? Because it does not mean doctrine does it? No, but I am sure we give to those in need when we see it.

I had said, "2. At today, those who claim to follow Jesus the Messiah do not have "everything in common."

I must have missed something, I didn't mention "goods" even once there. I was making the point that many/most who profess Christ disagree on many doctrinal issues, including the most important - the doctrine of salvation.

Posted by JohnP

3. False teaching was around as the Apostle Paul was preaching. Jesus said there would be weeds sown and many. Matt 13:24-30

I had said, "3. This means that at some point AFTER the original church, false teachings were introduced into the church." and stand by my statement. I just showed you that the very first gatherings of Christianity didn't disagree on such important issues. The Apostles had just spent 3 years with Jesus and had the Holy Spirit leading them to speak. If such a disagreement arose, it would be quickly attended to and corrected. It is true that while the apostles started a congregation and then left people came in and attempted to cause divisions and enter false doctrine. But this didn't exist at first, thus my original point stands.

4. If you are in doubt as to the scriptural integrity of the thing called Calvinism then bring your scriptures and I will bring mine. All things are decided by the scripture and nothing is decided outside the scripture.

I had said, "4. I have found that with the exception of one man, who was a Roman Catholic, the doctrine that you propose here in this thread did not exist until the man by the name of John Calvin (1509-1564)." and stand by my statement again.

I challenge you to show me anywhere in church history where a person had the exact same doctrinal intrepretation of the verses that are commonly used today to "prove" what is called "Calvinism."

You won't find it anywhere. In fact, you see the early church fathers fighting against this teaching. Look it up. OSAS/Eternal Security/Perseverance of the Saints is nowhere to be found.

Here are a few links that prove this beyond any doubt.

http://eternaldebate.cjb.net/history.htm

http://eternal-truth.org/early_church_writings.htm

5. Calvin was a minister in Geneva. He was not a civil magistrate.

After the arrest of Servetus on the charge of heresy he was given the choice of being extradited to stand trail in Vienna where heresy charges were pending over his book on the denial of the Trinity. He thought his best bet lay in facing a court in Geneva because of the opposition to Calvin there.

Calvin was called as the chief prosecution witness and gave evidence against him.

It would be a strange day when a chief prosecution witness was also the judge, jury and executioner would it not?

We are not discussing Calvin but scripture? And scripture says that we are held responsible for bearing false witness. With respect I suggest you get more infomation on this subject before blindly rushing to judgement. 1 John 3:15. The sword has two edges.

History can't be re-written for any reason, and my original point stands.

5a. This is answered in number 1.

I had said, "5a. How can a doctrine be true when it didn't exist in the church until just a few hundred years ago?"

I must not have understood what you said. I pointed out with the links in this same post that OSAS/ES/POS was not the original teaching handed down by the Apostles.

Here are some quotes:

Clement (30 to 100 AD), appears to have been at Phiippi with Paul (A.D. 57) when that first-born of the Western churches was passing through great trials of faith.

"On account of his hospitality and godliness, Lot was saved out of Sodom when all the country round was punished by means of fire and brimstone, the Lord thus making it manifest that He does not forsake those that hope in Him, but gives up such as depart from Him to punishment and torture. For Lot's wife, who went forth with him, being of a different mind from himself and not continuing in agreement with him [as to the command which had been given them], was made an example of, so as to be a pillar of salt unto this day. This was done that all might know that those who are of a double mind, and who distrust the power of God, bring down judgment on themselves and become a sign to all succeeding generations." (First Epistle Of Clement To The Corinthians, Chapter 11)

"Let us, then not only call Him Lord, for that will not save us.  For He saith, 'Not everyone that saith to Me, Lord, Lord, shall be saved, but he that worketh righteousness.'  Wherefore, brethren, let us confess Him by our works, by loving one another, by not committing adultery, or speaking evil of one another, or cherishing envy, but being continent, compassionate, and good.  We ought also to sympathize with one another, and not be avaricious.  By such works let us confess Him, and not by those that are of an opposite kind.  And it is not fitting that we should fear men, but rather God.  For this reason, if we should do such wicked things, the Lord hath said, 'Even though ye were gathered together to Me in My very bosom, yet if ye were not to keep My commandments, I would cast you off, and say unto you, 'Depart from Me; I know you not whence ye are, ye workers of iniquity.''"  (2 Epistle of Clement, Chapter 4)

Polycarp (65 to 155 AD) is believed to have been instructed by the Apostles.

"I am greatly grieved for Valens, who was once a presbyter among you, because he so little understands the place that was given him (in the Church]. I exhort you, therefore, that ye abstain from covetousness, and that ye be chaste and truthful. 'Abstain from every form of evil.' For if a man cannot govern himself in such matters, how shall he enjoin them on others? If a man does not keep himself from covetousness, he shall be defiled by idolatry, and shall be judged as one of the heathen." (Epistle Of Polycarp To The Philippians, Chapter 11)

Irenaeus (120 to 205 AD), the overseer of the church at Lyons, France, believed that we could only be saved once and if we performed a sinful deed then God would permanently revoke salvation. He is quoted:

"Christ will not die again on behalf of those who now commit sin because death shall no more have dominion over Him...we should beware, lest somehow, after [we have attained] the knowledge of Christ, if we do things displeasing to God, we [will] obtain no further forgiveness of sins, but rather be shut out from His kingdom."

( "Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up: A New Look at Today's Evangelical Church in the Light of Early Christianity" by D.W. Bercot.)

More from Irenaeus:

"And to as many as continue in their love towards God, does He grant communion with Him. But communion with God is life and light, and the enjoyment of all the benefits which He has in store. But on as many as, according to their own choice, depart from God. He inflicts that separation from Himself which they have chosen of their own accord. But separation from God is death, and separation from light is darkness; and separation from God consists in the loss of all the benefits which He has in store. Those, therefore, who cast away by apostasy these forementioned things, being in fact destitute of all good, do experience every kind of punishment. God, however, does not punish them immediately of Himself, but that punishment falls upon them because they are destitute of all that is good. Now, good things are eternal and without end with God, and therefore the loss of these is also eternal and never-ending. It is in this matter just as occurs in the case of a flood of light: those who have blinded themselves, or have been blinded by others, are for ever deprived of the enjoyment of light. It is not, [however], that the light has inflicted upon them the penalty of blindness, but it is that the blindness itself has brought calamity upon them: and therefore the Lord declared, He that believeth in Me is not condemned, that is, is not separated from God, for he is united to God through faith. On the other hand, He says, He that believeth not is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only-begotten Son of God; that is, he separated himself from God of his own accord. For this is the condemnation, that light is come into this world, and men have loved darkness rather than light. For every one who doeth evil hateth the light, and cometh not to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that he has wrought them in God." (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book V, XXVII, 2)

Tertullian (140 to 230 AD), the elder of the church at Carthage, North Africa, taught that we can fall from grace and lose salvation:

"Some people act as though God were under an obligation to bestow even on the unworthy His intended gift...For do not many afterwards fall out of grace? Is not this gift taken away from many?"

("Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up: A New Look at Today's Evangelical Church in the Light of Early Christianity" by D.W. Bercot.)

These quotes are irrefutable proof that the original church did not believe OSAS/ES/POS. They fought adamintly against it! People tried to introduce this false teaching from the beginning, but it was quickly denounced and disproven.

It wasn't until John Calvin that this false teaching came back and was accepted by Christinity.

5b. Do you then seperate Christ from the desciption of Himself in the bible? That's clever.

What doctrine is taught in scripture is what should be believed. How can you have Jesus without doctrine, tell me how? I believe my Jesus is taught in scripture where does yours come from? If you say scripture then bring your proofs and I will show you that you are wrong.

johnp.

I had said, "5b. Is this doctrine more important to you than your personal relationship with Jesus Christ?"

Not only did you misunderstand my question, you proved my point. Thanks.

[johnP]

Hello Dime.

The answer is yes. Calvin's TULIP is a can't have one without the other. Knock one out and it will collapse.

I had said, "1. The original church (the one established at Pentecost in AD 33 according to Acts chapter 2)...

Your first error did not take long to surface did it? The Church did not originate at Pentecost. To a large degree it changed in it's understanding in that we knew how God is the Saviour, what method He was to use to save and did use to save.

He is the head of the body and Abraham is recorded as being the Father of those justified by faith. All those justified are part of the body and as such are members of the Church. Col 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy.

It means what it says. The new converts held the Apostles' teaching with the utmost respect and submitted to what they taught. Any difference in opinion on doctrine couldn't have existed.

That the Church holds Paul's words as Christ's is not in dispute but to think that anyone would submit themselves to Paul is wrong. They submitted themselves to scripture and what that teaches as do I. The Bereans did not except Paul's word, they checked it out to see if it checked out with scripture. Acts 17:11 Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.

...devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching...

Yes the scriptures. Is there some other teaching knocking around that I have not heard of?

These new converts were devoted to the Apostles' teaching, not they argued or debated what their personal intrepretation was.

They did not argue, now that will be the day!

Devotion to the word of God does not argue against arguing does it? In fact argument over scripture shows that you are devoted as a Christian to the word of God. This is our nature. But the idea is wrong because you have a contradiction don't you? You say they all believed everything Paul told them yet Paul himself says there will be disagreements among us doesn't he? 1 Cor 11:19.

Answer this one please.

I must have missed something, I didn't mention "goods" even once there. I was making the point that many/most who profess Christ disagree on many doctrinal issues, including the most important - the doctrine of salvation.

Ok, I agree to the blatantly obvious. You see I am not obstinate.

I had said, "3. This means that at some point AFTER the original church, false teachings were introduced into the church."

Re-examine your idea of when the Church came into existence.

...and attempted to cause divisions and enter false doctrine...

And what were those false doctrine yours or mine? That's the question.

I said;

4. If you are in doubt as to the scriptural integrity of the thing called Calvinism then bring your scriptures and I will bring mine. All things are decided by the scripture and nothing is decided outside the scripture.

You answer;

I had said, "4. I have found that with the exception of one man, who was a Roman Catholic, the doctrine that you propose here in this thread did not exist until the man by the name of John Calvin (1509-1564)." and stand by my statement again

And;

I challenge you to show me anywhere in church history...

Church history, although to some extent it is useful, does not supplant scripture. Back to the word. There is nothing to attend to here but scripture. Is there something wrong with this idea? Have you found some comfort in the fact that you only find one man who thought this and he a Roman Catholic to boot! Spin won't wash.

...did not exist until the man by the name of John Calvin... (1509-1564)...

But how can something not exist until Calvin when it did before Calvin with said Catholic? And you stand by that really?

That is illogical captain.

It wasn't until John Calvin that this false teaching came back and was accepted by Christinity.

There are two points I think need answering. 1. You have said the teaching came back. It is staying like that, that it came back? Do you stand by this? 2. In general this teaching is not held and as not been accepted by Christianity. If it was I would not feel compelled to speak.

I must not have understood what you said. I pointed out with the links in this same post that OSAS/ES/POS was not the original teaching handed down by the Apostles

I did not view these links. I was working from the scriptures and thought it unnecessary to look elsewhere. I'll go and take a look at them when I have a minute.

I had said, "5b. Is this doctrine more important to you than your personal relationship with Jesus Christ?"

Not only did you misunderstand my question, you proved my point. Thanks.

Please enlighten me as to how my world has just ended and I did not know. Also, you might like to rephase your original question since I did not understand it.

As for Clement, Polycarp and company, don't you believe these men were subject to error? The 2 Epistle of Clement, Chapter 4 is as far as I know not accepted into the canon is it? When did that happen? Men prove nothing. Let God be true and every man a liar, Rom 3:4. Not that I am saying anything is wrong with their statements, it is just that their statements need to be explained, not jumped on because you see them supporting you.

One sentence from a long dead man shows nothing, I can't see why you think it does. I cannot understand why you enter it as evidence. What is it, you have stumped me?

I will do this once.

Irenaeus.

we [will] obtain no further forgiveness of sins, but rather be shut out from His kingdom."

Scripture.

John 10:28-30 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one can snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father's hand. I and the Father are one."

Read that and leap!

johnp

[Yahsway]

WoW! Do I feel like an idiot. I never heard of this predestination. Been reading all the posts. I must study up on this John Calvin and his dogma. I did look up the word on the net and came to a site I found interesting that I agree with on the subject.

True, the scriptures do refer to predestination, but check this out. I would be interested to get feeback on this. Thanks Yahsway, not My way!

the site is: members.tripod.com/crossbearer-brian Shalom!!!!

[larryt]

If I might ad a bit of my understanding.

As I understand free will it means we can do anything we desire, which is contrary to many scriptures.

Ge 20:6 And God said unto him in a dream, Yea, I know that thou didst this in the integrity of thy heart; for I also withheld thee from sinning against me: therefore suffered I thee not to touch her.

What we do have is VOLITION which is the ability to choose.

Lt

[johnP]

Greetings Yahsway.

No he is wrong and this is not predestination. He is just using the word in a way that is to his fancy rather than what the word means.

Have a look here.

http://www.reformed.org/calvinism/

The dictionary meaning of predestine is: to destine, decree, determine, appoint, or settle beforehand : foreordain especially by divine decree or eternal purpose.

Are YOU predestined to be saved, or cast into hell? I think not!

This is a denial of scripture. For he chose us in him before the creation of the world.

It's personal. Gal 2:20 ...I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

Eph 1:4-5. For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will--

It is God's choice and it is in accordance with His pleasure and will.

It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. Rom 9:16.

There is nothing we can do to save ourselves.

But if we do NOT remain in Christ, we will be "cut off" from the root and cast into the fire!

This is unbelief!

Why?

Because we must trust that Jesus made a sufficient sacrifice for sin.

Did we have your sins forgiven by Christ or not?

If yes then how can we then go to Hell? For what sin? Did Jesus die for our sins or not? It is that simple.

If we believe that Jesus paid the penalty for our sin then we have faith. If we believe that we can go to Hell after we have our sins forgiven then we do not trust that Jesus made a sufficient payment for our sins and lack faith in Jesus. This is the heart of the gospel.

John 6:28-29 Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"

Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."

Do we believe in Him or not. Believing is faith and faith, believing that Jesus died for our sin, is all that is required.

Rom 4:16 Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all Abraham's offspring--not only to those who are of the law but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham.

Only faith guarantees our salvation. It is a guarantee issued by God to those that have faith. This is Yahsway Yahsway there is no other.

I checked it out and found him wanting.

Have a read of the website I gave you. Let me know what you think.

johnp

[johnP]

Hello larryt.

As I understand free will it means we can do anything we desire, which is contrary to many scriptures.

It is not only contrary to scripture but to reason as well.

Your passage and those below will need to be explained before free will gets a look in.

God is Soveriegn over sin and uses it whenever He is pleased to.

2 Sam 16:10-12 But the king said, "What do you and I have in common, you sons of Zeruiah? If he is cursing because the LORD said to him, `Curse David,' who can ask, `Why do you do this?' "

David then said to Abishai and all his officials, "My son, who is of my own flesh, is trying to take my life. How much more, then, this Benjamite! Leave him alone; let him curse, for the LORD has told him to. It may be that the LORD will see my distress and repay me with good for the cursing I am receiving today."

David knew that!

1 Kings 19-22 Micaiah continued, "Therefore hear the word of the LORD: I saw the LORD sitting on his throne with all the host of heaven standing around him on his right and on his left. And the LORD said, `Who will entice Ahab into attacking Ramoth Gilead and going to his death there?'

"One suggested this, and another that. Finally, a spirit came forward, stood before the LORD and said, `I will entice him.'

" `By what means?' the LORD asked.

" `I will go out and be a lying spirit in the mouths of all his prophets,' he said.

" `You will succeed in enticing him,' said the LORD. `Go and do it.'

God is Soveriegn over lies as well and uses them whenever it pleases Him.

There's loads of this in the bible. It takes a giant intellect to miss them.

johnp