hmbld Posted January 5, 2016 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 4 Topic Count: 48 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 2,491 Content Per Day: 0.55 Reputation: 1,457 Days Won: 1 Joined: 10/23/2011 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/02/1971 Share Posted January 5, 2016 32 minutes ago, enoob57 said: no one has! We are to stand upon election based on God's foreknowledge undefined and individual choice based on faith created in the individual from intake of God's Word both creative and written... thanks for the welcome brother of mine!!! Love, Steven Thanks noob! Now this time I understand you, maybe i just need the practice. You have a way with words, there is really quite a lot expressed in your second sentence here, it would take me much effort and several paragraphs to adequately state the same, lol! Let me just offer you encouragement in that I find your expressions very interesting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoob57 Posted January 5, 2016 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 35 Topic Count: 100 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 41,171 Content Per Day: 7.98 Reputation: 21,445 Days Won: 76 Joined: 03/13/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/27/1957 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Every kindness is rewarded by God for the obedience to His Word and the other -most just say what and go on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omegaman 3.0 Posted January 5, 2016 Group: Graduated to Heaven Followers: 57 Topic Count: 1,546 Topics Per Day: 0.21 Content Count: 10,320 Content Per Day: 1.41 Reputation: 12,323 Days Won: 9 Joined: 04/15/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/05/1951 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Not sure how this will go, if there is a gift of succintness, I lack it. Enoob, Okay so, I said something, and you replied to that with no explanation or further comment: "If it were simple you wouldn't have to be changing the words of the Bible to fit your simple...." Can you see why I would think that you were accusing me of changing the words of the Bible? Try to be more clear. or, were you accusing me of that? So I remarked: "Also, if you could explain or show me, how I am changing the words of the Bible." So, then you come along and show me, how some other guy (Hunt) accuses other, unnamed people of redefining words, and yet does not quote an example of one person or occasion where that was done. A stetement of how others understand words differently in contexts than Hunt's understanding, hardly is the same as changing the Bible. If that is a valid criticism, then why doesn't that same priciple apply, to people who have two second comings of Christ, dispensations invented that are not in the Bible, or in the area of this topic, redefining things like "according to foreknowledge" to sound as though God had to get out his notebook of things that would happen, to determine who he was going to save? When you add complicatations like that, it does nothing to clarify what the Bible teaches. Stretching a context and words to fit ones predjudices, to use as evidence to contradict the verses which are clear, just forces the Bible to seem to contradict itself, no wonder people get confused. So, what you, or some like-minded people seam to be saying is, God did not pre-ordain, did not predestine, did not chose before the foundations of the world, does not choose based on His own, soveriegn choice and pleasure. If we insist that we have free will, it strikes me that we are saying that God does not have free will. What kind of all powerful being is it, who desires that all men be saved, yet, He is unable or unwilling, to save them? Are all saved? No. Is that Gods desire? Sounds like it. So either God does not really want all saved, or He is incapable of doing so. An Arminian takes the position, that God wants all saved, but letting man have free will, is more important that saving him from eternal damnation. An arminian might also suggest, that God does not send anyone to Hell, they chose it for themselves. There is this theological term I employ at such notions: "poppycock". They have earned for themselves, sure, because they have sinned, and the wages of sin is death? Who determined what the wages are (who made the rules)? It is God who destroys people in Hell, do we really suppose that He has no choiice, that someone or something is twisting His arm? As hard as it is to accept, I beleive that God has revealed Himself as holy, and willing to destroy sinners. it is what we deserve. The remarkable thing is that He chooses to save any of us. Well, I was not as longwinded as I imagined I would be, but I would still appreciate an answer to the question: Are you accusing me of changing the words of the Bible, or was that just a comment about the points of Calvinistic doctrine. It is important to me, to see where I have done that, if I have done that. If all you really mean to say is, we disagree, I can live with that in contentment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Littlelambseativy Posted January 5, 2016 Group: Royal Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 230 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 4,941 Content Per Day: 0.95 Reputation: 2,003 Days Won: 14 Joined: 02/08/2010 Status: Offline Share Posted January 5, 2016 This appears in many respects to be which came first ..the chicken or the egg. We must remember that in the beginning, God. He has foreknowledge. He knew us before He created the earth. An awe inspiring concept to say the least. If He knew us and knew our choices would He not know how we would respond to Him? As children choosing who will be on your baseball team you choose those who are the best players because you have seen them in other sports, and know how they will play. If we as humans have the ability to do that with our limited knowledge, is God less able who knows beginning from end to choose or foreordain us when He knew how we would respond to His Son Jesus and thus call us His elect? You have an issue with total depravity....remove God from the hearts of men and what do you have? What will the tribulation be like when the Holy Spirit no longer seals men? Man in his nature without God is depraved, lusting over what he has not and doing everything he can to obtain it. I was brought up in the Calvinist/Presbyterian theology..one and the same.... Calvin to Knox. I see God as knowing our choices and choosing because of them to be His own if we accept Jesus as our Saviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoob57 Posted January 5, 2016 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 35 Topic Count: 100 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 41,171 Content Per Day: 7.98 Reputation: 21,445 Days Won: 76 Joined: 03/13/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/27/1957 Share Posted January 5, 2016 7 hours ago, Omegaman 3.0 said: Not sure how this will go, if there is a gift of succintness, I lack it. Enoob, Okay so, I said something, and you replied to that with no explanation or further comment: "If it were simple you wouldn't have to be changing the words of the Bible to fit your simple...." Can you see why I would think that you were accusing me of changing the words of the Bible? Try to be more clear. or, were you accusing me of that? So I remarked: "Also, if you could explain or show me, how I am changing the words of the Bible." The doctrine you hold to does this... So, then you come along and show me, how some other guy (Hunt) accuses other, unnamed people of redefining words, and yet does not quote an example of one person or occasion where that was done. A stetement of how others understand words differently in contexts than Hunt's understanding, hardly is the same as changing the Bible. If that is a valid criticism, then why doesn't that same priciple apply, to people who have two second comings of Christ, dispensations invented that are not in the Bible, or in the area of this topic, redefining things like "according to foreknowledge" to sound as though God had to get out his notebook of things that would happen, to determine who he was going to save? When you add complicatations like that, it does nothing to clarify what the Bible teaches. Stretching a context and words to fit ones predjudices, to use as evidence to contradict the verses which are clear, just forces the Bible to seem to contradict itself, no wonder people get confused. God's Word succinctly states God's election is based on foreknowledge and then nowhere in Scripture does God define His foreknowledge .... I find this a place of waiting upon God to take us further... To say it is God alone in His Own Person and for no other reason is to go beyond that waiting point of undefined foreknowledge ! So, what you, or some like-minded people seam to be saying is, God did not pre-ordain, did not predestine, did not chose before the foundations of the world, does not choose based on His own, soveriegn choice and pleasure. If we insist that we have free will, it strikes me that we are saying that God does not have free will. What kind of all powerful being is it, who desires that all men be saved, yet, He is unable or unwilling, to save them? Are all saved? No. Is that Gods desire? Sounds like it. So either God does not really want all saved, or He is incapable of doing so. An Arminian takes the position, that God wants all saved, but letting man have free will, is more important that saving him from eternal damnation. An arminian might also suggest, that God does not send anyone to Hell, they chose it for themselves. Your demand within your own heart to define God is of course not my demand within my heart... I am quite settled in my heart in waiting where the Word has taken me thus far and waiting upon Him to enlarge it to take in more- I am not pressed as you to have all the answer and press ahead into wrong thinking such as Calvinist do! Nice little wrapped up bundle of how God does it yet denying the overall theme of Scripture that of choosing... don't forget the mechanical slotting of your doctrine and putting in a nice neat little package for your mind to be settled upon also is The Fathers gift to The Son 'A Bride' ... There is this theological term I employ at such notions: "poppycock". They have earned for themselves, sure, because they have sinned, and the wages of sin is death? Who determined what the wages are (who made the rules)? It is God who destroys people in Hell, do we really suppose that He has no choiice, that someone or something is twisting His arm? As hard as it is to accept, I beleive that God has revealed Himself as holy, and willing to destroy sinners. it is what we deserve. The remarkable thing is that He chooses to save any of us. I have heard this reasoning many times from this camp and find it a little humorous in this way: In the Calvinist doctrine they use the term us which is a misdirected reality to the doctrine as there is only God and no other in happenstance or control of exist. Everything is as God has said it should be -yet- This reality exists forever:Rv 4:11 11 Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honour and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created. Eze 33:11 11 Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel? Rv 20:15 15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. KJVGod clearly sets forth His Desire of the wicked to turn from his way and live... yet they do not turn but choose to remain in their way and God judged them... God says all things were created for His pleasure yet clearly in this instance of Biblical record His pleasure was not met for they do not turn! How then did this bring Him pleasure? Well, I was not as longwinded as I imagined I would be, but I would still appreciate an answer to the question: Are you accusing me of changing the words of the Bible, or was that just a comment about the points of Calvinistic doctrine. It is important to me, to see where I have done that, if I have done that. If all you really mean to say is, we disagree, I can live with that in contentment. For God so loved the world yet in your doctrine it is only the (elect) and you see world to be elect but the above is inclusive of even the wicked... Love, Steven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ezra Posted January 5, 2016 Group: Royal Member Followers: 16 Topic Count: 134 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 8,142 Content Per Day: 2.35 Reputation: 6,612 Days Won: 20 Joined: 11/02/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted January 5, 2016 18 hours ago, Omegaman 3.0 said: So, there we are believers in Christ, chosen in him from before the foundations of the world We should take that verse in its entirety to see that election and predestination are NOT for salvation but for perfection. Had this understanding always been the case, we would not have the Calvinistic notion of predestination: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: (Eph 1:4). Please note carefully the reasons for the choosing: (1) holy, (2) without blame, (3) before Him, and (3) in love. No mention of salvation, but everything to do with moral and spiritual perfection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omegaman 3.0 Posted January 5, 2016 Group: Graduated to Heaven Followers: 57 Topic Count: 1,546 Topics Per Day: 0.21 Content Count: 10,320 Content Per Day: 1.41 Reputation: 12,323 Days Won: 9 Joined: 04/15/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/05/1951 Share Posted January 5, 2016 3 minutes ago, Ezra said: We should take that verse in its entirety to see that election and predestination are NOT for salvation but for perfection. Had this understanding always been the case, we would not have the Calvinistic notion of predestination: According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: (Eph 1:4). Please note carefully the reasons for the choosing: (1) holy, (2) without blame, (3) before Him, and (3) in love. No mention of salvation, but everything to do with moral and spiritual perfection. Seriously Ezra? You are way better than that. That is just smoke and mirrors, redirection, distraction. There is of course, nothing wrong with what you said, but it does not change one thing. After all, who are they who shall be holy and without blame, if not the saved. Unless there are perfect people in Hell and and unholy people in Heaven, it is the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ezra Posted January 6, 2016 Group: Royal Member Followers: 16 Topic Count: 134 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 8,142 Content Per Day: 2.35 Reputation: 6,612 Days Won: 20 Joined: 11/02/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted January 6, 2016 8 hours ago, Omegaman 3.0 said: After all, who are they who shall be holy and without blame, if not the saved. Correct. So the proper understanding of Scripture should be: 1. The Gospel is to be preached to every creature (Mk 16:15,16). 2. God desires the salvation of every human being (1 Tim 2:3,4). 3. Only those who repent and believe will be saved. (Acts 2:38; 16:31) 4. Only those who are saved are predestined to be holy and perfect before God (Eph 1:4). This is the proper application of predestination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omegaman 3.0 Posted January 6, 2016 Group: Graduated to Heaven Followers: 57 Topic Count: 1,546 Topics Per Day: 0.21 Content Count: 10,320 Content Per Day: 1.41 Reputation: 12,323 Days Won: 9 Joined: 04/15/2004 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/05/1951 Share Posted January 6, 2016 the application is ok, but no sequence or cause and effect there you could have said, just as easlily God ordains and predestins some to salvation and holiness He desires but does not grant it to all the gospel should be, but won't be, preached to every creature those he did elect for salvation, will repent, and be made holy and be saved Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ezra Posted January 7, 2016 Group: Royal Member Followers: 16 Topic Count: 134 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 8,142 Content Per Day: 2.35 Reputation: 6,612 Days Won: 20 Joined: 11/02/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted January 7, 2016 On 06/01/2016 at 8:59 PM, Omegaman 3.0 said: He desires but does not grant it to all That would indeed be rather strange, would it not? Does that mean that grace and capriciousness can coexist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts