Calvin vs. Arminius

[EricH]

In 2 Samuel 24:1 it says that the Lord stirred up David. In 1 Chronicles 21:1 it says Satan incited David. In the Hebrew both these words are the same. So it seems quite likely that Satan tempted David and God permitted it. 1 Cor. 10:13 says No temptation has overtaken you except such as is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of escape, that you may be able to bear it. [1CO 10:13]

James 1:13 says that God tempts no man. There are some verses in the Bible that seem to really challenge this.

To incite really means to tempt. Satan was tempting David, a regular occurence for Satan. That is why David takes direct responsibility for his actions. He could have resisted the temptation. David was incited or stirred up to do evil. But he was not forced to or made to do it.

However according to James 1:13 God tempts no man. So God could have merely allowed the temptation. James 4:7 says Therefore submit to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you. [JAM 4:7] It may be that in this case God did not take steps to make Satan flee. Regarding 1 Cor 10:13 God may have not made a way of escape since God was looking for a reason to punish Israel. God did not need a reason but He chose to have a specific reason for punishing Israel.

So to conclude. According to James 1:13 God tempts no man. Then according to 1 Cor. 10:13 God does not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able to bear and He makes a way of escape when temptation happens. James 4:7 says that if you submit yourselves to God then the devil will flee. In Job's case this did not happen. So God may have made an exception and not make a way of escape for David or to put it another way God in this case allowed David to be tempted beyond what he was able to bear. The exception was done only because God was looking for a way to punish Israel. He could have just judged Israel but He chose to have David have a choice which punishment to give Israel.

Now you may say that when you start saying that God makes exceptions then you can make the Bible fit any theology you want it to. However Scripture should never contradict Scripture. In Job's case, Job submitted to God and the devil did not flee from him.

The text does not say that God merely allowed it. It says God incited or inticed David. it is an active sense, not a passive sense. In addition, there is no possible way the word could be interpreted as allowed. This is actually a great example of what I talked about earlier. A passage is encountered that gives ones theology a challenge. To resolve the tension a word is given a meaning that the grammar does not allow. The result is that it fits neatly in our theology, but it is not faithful to the text.

You are absolutely right that scripture cannot contradict itself. A contradiction is where something is A and not A at the same time, in the same sense, and in the same relationship. The scriptures are however full of paradoxes. A paradox is something that appears to be a contradiction until examined more deeply.

When we encounter a paradox, it is probably not the best approach to assign lexical meanings to words to remove the apparent contradiction. It is probably better to admit that the paradox exists, and we cannot as of yet resolve it in a way that is faithful to the text grammatically.

[Rhonda Lou]

RCA, Again, this is getting too lengthy to keep copying the whole thread between each of us. Did you read what ErichH had to say about paradoxes, and what I quoted from Romans 11:33? Let me ask you, if you were to read the following verses, from a neutral position, without any views which need to be maintained, what would be your understanding of them?

1. "And He has made from one blood every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, and has determined their preappointed times and the boundaries of their dwellings." (Acts 17:26)
   
2. "Your eyes saw my substance being yet unformed, and in Your book they all were written, the days fashioned for me when as yet there were none of them." [/b](Psalm 139:16)
   
3. "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them." (Ephesians 2:10)
   
4. "For I say, through the grace given to me, to everyone who is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think soberly, as God has dealt to each one a measure of faith...Having then gifts differing according to the gracte that was given to us, let us use them, if prophecy, let us prophesy, in proportion to our faith..." (Romans 12:3, 6)
   
5. "Who says of Cyrus, 'He is My shepherd, and he shall perform all My pleasure, saying to Jerusalem, 'You shall be built." And to the temple, "Your foundation shall be laid." Thus says the Lord to His anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand I have held -- to subdue nations before him and loose the armor of kings, to open before him the double doors, so that the gates will not be shut..." (Isaiah 44:28, 45:1)[/i]..."Now in the first year of Cyrus, king of Persia, that the word of the Lord, by the mouth of Jeremiah might be fulfilled, the Lord stirred up the spirit of Cyrus king of Persia, so that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and also put it in writing, saying, "Thus says Cyrus king of Persia: All the kingdoms of the earth the Lord God of heaven has given me. And He has commanded me to build Him a house at Jerusalem which is in Judah." [/b](Ezra 2:1-2) Isaiah wrote his words a century and a half before Cyrus lived, and it is doubtful that Cyrus ever heard of it before he fulfilled it.
   
6. "Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; before you were born I sanctified you; I ORDAINED you a prophet to the nations." (Jeremiah 1:5) Time prohibits my going through the whole list of Old Testament prophets.
   
7. "So the Lord said to him, "Arise and go to the street called Straight, and inquire at the house of Judas for one called Saul of Tarsus, for behold, he is praying..." "But the Lord said to him. "Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel. For I will show him how many things he must suffer for My name's sake." (Acts 9:11; 15-16)
   

Now, would you not say that God had sovereign control over not only special prophets, but also over every person to decide when they would live, what nation they would belong to, which tasks He prepared beforehand for them to do, how much faith they would have, and which gifts to give them? In fact, according to many people, God has control over everything except our decision for or against Christ. Nobody even really quibbles about anything else. Yet, at the same time, did not every single one of those people, including Cyrus, operate out of free will? Cyrus had NO CLUE that this is what God wanted him to du until Daniel told him. That is why it can say one place that God hardened Pharaoh's heart, and in another place that Pharaoh had a hard heart.

Now, I quoted that web-site because of all of the passages in that web-site. As you read those passages, what do they mean to you? Can you read them from a neutral position without trying to see how they can fall into free will or predestination? What do they honestly SAY? For instance, what does the following passages mean?

1. "The Lord has made all for Himself, yes, even the wicked for the day of doom." (Proverbs 16:4)
   
2. "For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ORDAINED to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ." (Jude 4)
   
3. "What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath, PREPARED FOR DESTRUCTION." (Romans 9:22)
   
4. "I form the light and create darkness, I make peace and create calamity. I, the Lord, do all these things." (Isaiah 45:7)
   

Finally, a word on paradoxes in the Bible: I'll just pick one passage, but I'll just pick two: "KEEP YOURSELVES in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life...Now to HIM who is able to KEEP YOU from stumbling and to present you faultless before the presence of His glory with exceeding joy." (Jude 20, 24) and quoted from the NLT: "Dearest friends, you were always so careful to follow my instructions when I was with you. And now that I am away you must be even more careful to put into action God's saving work in your lives, obeying God with deep reverence and fear. For GOd is working in you, giving you the desire to obey him, and the power to do what pleases Him." (Philippians 2:12-13) So, obedience in the Christian walk: is it God's work or ours? Answer: both. Is there predestination and free will. Answer: both.

I told you the way I get my head around it is looking at it from God's perspective and from the human perspective. The Bible does not make that distinction, it is just how I understand it. But the Bible clearly teaches both.

I would leave you with one last thing: I do not decide who is chosen or not chosen; God does that. Nor can I say that just because a person does not believe now, that they never will -- the timing may not be right. Some plant, and some water. I've had plenty of mentors in my own life. So, I do not believe it is ever, EVER a good idea to tell another that the reason they don't believe is that God did not call them. PLUS, God still tells us to go and teach all nations, so a belief in predestination does not exempt me from spreading the gospel, which is all Christ. Predestination is an issue for believers to discuss; the gospel is the same regardless of whether one believes in predestination or free will -- and it is that gospel which is to be preached. The results are left up to God and the other person, but I am not exempted from preaching. Neither was Charles Spurgeon, by the way, who was a bigger believer in predestination than I am.

Again, I am out of time, and do not have time to proof this, but I hope it answers some of your questions.

[rca]

In 2 Samuel 24:1 it says that the Lord stirred up David. In 1 Chronicles 21:1 it says Satan incited David. In the Hebrew both these words are the same. So it seems quite likely that Satan tempted David and God permitted it. 1 Cor. 10:13 says No temptation has overtaken you except such as is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of escape, that you may be able to bear it. [1CO 10:13]

James 1:13 says that God tempts no man. There are some verses in the Bible that seem to really challenge this.

To incite really means to tempt. Satan was tempting David, a regular occurence for Satan. That is why David takes direct responsibility for his actions. He could have resisted the temptation. David was incited or stirred up to do evil. But he was not forced to or made to do it.

However according to James 1:13 God tempts no man. So God could have merely allowed the temptation. James 4:7 says Therefore submit to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you. [JAM 4:7] It may be that in this case God did not take steps to make Satan flee. Regarding 1 Cor 10:13 God may have not made a way of escape since God was looking for a reason to punish Israel. God did not need a reason but He chose to have a specific reason for punishing Israel.

So to conclude. According to James 1:13 God tempts no man. Then according to 1 Cor. 10:13 God does not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able to bear and He makes a way of escape when temptation happens. James 4:7 says that if you submit yourselves to God then the devil will flee. In Job's case this did not happen. So God may have made an exception and not make a way of escape for David or to put it another way God in this case allowed David to be tempted beyond what he was able to bear. The exception was done only because God was looking for a way to punish Israel. He could have just judged Israel but He chose to have David have a choice which punishment to give Israel.

Now you may say that when you start saying that God makes exceptions then you can make the Bible fit any theology you want it to. However Scripture should never contradict Scripture. In Job's case, Job submitted to God and the devil did not flee from him.

The text does not say that God merely allowed it. It says God incited or inticed David. it is an active sense, not a passive sense. In addition, there is no possible way the word could be interpreted as allowed. This is actually a great example of what I talked about earlier. A passage is encountered that gives ones theology a challenge. To resolve the tension a word is given a meaning that the grammar does not allow. The result is that it fits neatly in our theology, but it is not faithful to the text.

You are absolutely right that scripture cannot contradict itself. A contradiction is where something is A and not A at the same time, in the same sense, and in the same relationship. The scriptures are however full of paradoxes. A paradox is something that appears to be a contradiction until examined more deeply.

When we encounter a paradox, it is probably not the best approach to assign lexical meanings to words to remove the apparent contradiction. It is probably better to admit that the paradox exists, and we cannot as of yet resolve it in a way that is faithful to the text grammatically.

You gave the following interpretation of 1 Chron. 21:1,8; 2 Sam. 24:1 in post 960. I have copied and pasted it here. The original has nothing in bold. The bold was put in by me to emphasize certain points:

Now we see that the direct agent used to incite David was Satan. Are these three perspectives on the same even contradictory? Hardly! We can see that David made a real decision, for which God held him accountable. We also see that David's decision was not made in a vacuum. God's purposes were in play so that the writer could say that it was God who moved David to act the way he did (with out violating David's volition, yet preserving God's absolute sovereignty and purposes in the matter). We also see that the agent God used was Satan (affirming that although God is not the author of evil, He is sovereign over it). Notice David takes personal responsibility for his actions (and God allows him to do so), yet this in no way interferes with God's sovereignty in the matter. Scripture never explains how these three things operated together in the event. It just says that they did.

2 Sam. 24:1a says that the Lord's anger burned against Israel. This is what started God to act. You say that Satan was the direct agent and that God used the agent Satan. So I am trying to understand your way of thinking. I see it happening in 1 of only 2 scenarios.

Scenario 1

God: Satan, can you incite David to do a census and sin against me.

Satan: Yes OK I will.

Scenario 2

Satan: I would like to incite David to do a census and sin.

God: OK Yes you may.

Scenario 2 is definitely God permitting or allowing Satan to incite David. Scenario 1 is very similiar. The only difference is that God asks Satan to incite David. He lets him incite David. So I do not see your way of thinking as being much different than mine.

Also as far as David taking responsibility for his sin. There is no problem with that. He was only moved or incited to sin. He was never forced to sin.

You also say that God is not the author of evil. Isaiah 45:7 says: I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things. This verse does not support that viewpoint.

I would say that God wanted free choice. God is good. He wanted people to love Him by choice. So He had to create another choice. So He created evil. Then to get the ball rolling He created the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. God told Adam not to eat of the fruit of this tree. Thus Adam (and then Eve) had free choice.

[rca]

The problem with those that hold both the pure Arminian position and the pure Calvinist position is that they are both typically guilty of a logical error known as duality reductionalism. Typically this occurs where there is a paradox (not a contradiction) in scripture. Scripture affirms 2 things:

1. God is absolutely sovereign over every thing that occurs (including the process of salvation)

2. Human beings make real decisions for which God holds them morally accountable and that have real consequences

The problem comes when holders of one position or the other raise one of these statements of scripture to the status of prime datum and force the other statement to fit underneath it. Arminian theologians typically do this with the concept of human choice. They make this the prime datum (even though the scriptures do not) and force all passages dealing with sovereignty to fit the prime datum or they are ignored all together (as was the Acts passage folks asked about earlier). Calvinist theologians do the same thing with sovereignty. They raise it up and force passages that describe human choice to fit under the prime datum.

The odd thing is that scipture in no place explains the metaphysics behind the paradox of human choice and divine soveriegnty. But holders of both theologies have attempted to do so, and that is exactly the space in which most of the arguments ensue. Both sides have scriptures to back up ther claims. Both have created logical explanations of how the pardox can be resolved (even though scripture does not fully explain it). So in my view, both theologies fall short in some way, because the attempt to explain things scripture itself does not explain

The most we can say is that there is no contradiction. A contradiction is where something is A and not A at the same time, in the same sense,and in the same relationship. A paradox is something that can appear at first glance to be a contradiciton, but is not when examined further. The tension between human choice and divine sovereignty is a paradox. Scripture does not say God is soveriegn, but not soveriegn. Scripture does not say people make choices, but do not make them.

The most we can say is that God's sovereignty over all things and peoples ability to make real decisions interact in such a way as to not negate each other. We do not however have the full explanation. So the most we can do is affirm both, but be careful of defining them too stringently so as to create an apparent contradiction, or to lessen one or the other so that they no longer fit what the Bible actually says.

You have a prime datum as well. Your prime datum is both points 1 and 2. You admit that your position has paradoxes as well. You say that whereas Calvinists and Arminians will try to explain paradoxes you do not even try to explain when Scripture does not fully explain. This is my understanding of what you are saying.

Now regarding the 2 points, I agree with point 2. Regarding point 1, I would modify that. I certainly believe that God is sovereign but not absolute sovereign. When God created free choice He gave up absolute soverignty. Man and God cannot always choose the same thing. They are too different. If God was absolute sovereign, man would be a robot. With no choice directly his.

My prime datum would be:

1. God is sovereign but not absolute.

2. Human beings make real decisions for which God holds them morally accountable and that have real choices.

3. Sometimes God will lead or draw man to make certain choices.

Regarding point 3 God, God's punishment on earth can involve other people to do evil to the one He punishes. Examples are when God sends other nations to make war on Isreal and even to bring them in exile. Then there is 2 Samuel 24:1 and 2 Samuel 12:11. The last verse is God's punishment to David for his Bathsheba sin. When God uses unbelievers to inflict the evil it is easy to understand since they have already made themselves vessels of wrath. But in the 2nd example God raises up evil from David's own household. I would think that the ones God raised up were already evil by their own choice.

Anyways the problem with God being absolutely sovereign are numerous.

The closest thing I can use as a parable would be a movie producer. A movie producer has absolute choice of every scene in the movie. Everything that happens in the movie is because the movie producer wanted it in there. When you look at the finished movie, you can tell certain things about the producer. Things like what he likes, what he dislikes, what mindset does he have, what he believes in. For instance if a movie was full of bloodshed, violence, betrayal, pornography and adultery, then you would not think that he is a very good person. The movie of life that God produced that is still playing with us all as actors is filled with such scenes.

How can God make choices that are an abomination to Him? God hates sin so much. So why would He choose sinful events?

If God decrees everything that happens, then God also decrees temptation. Yet James 1:13 says that God tempts no one. How can God decree temptation but not tempt anyone?

Then there is judgment. How can the God that decreed you to do all things also be your judge? Romans 1:18-19 leaves man with no excuse for God's wrath or hell. If God decreed every action man does, then how could man be without excuse? Some people use the excuse, the devil made me do it. Now we can use the excuse, God made me do this evil.

Absolute sovereignty would make man a robot. I cannot see how God can be absolutely sovereign and make choices for man while at the same time man also makes free choice. To say that God is absolute sovereign while at the same time man has free choice is like saying hot snow or small crowd. That is an oxymoron. If God is absolutely sovereign then man cannot have free choice. You cannot have both. That would be an oxymoron.

Edited November 21, 2009 by rca

[rca]

The problem with those that hold both the pure Arminian position and the pure Calvinist position is that they are both typically guilty of a logical error known as duality reductionalism. Typically this occurs where there is a paradox (not a contradiction) in scripture. Scripture affirms 2 things:

1. God is absolutely sovereign over every thing that occurs (including the process of salvation)

2. Human beings make real decisions for which God holds them morally accountable and that have real consequences

If God is absolutely sovereign over everything then why does He decree a believer to sometimes do good and sometimes sin? Why is it called spiritual warfare if God decrees all we do?

In Isaiah 5:1-7 God tries to build the vineyard Israel and fails, He cannot do it. He laments "What more could I have done that I have not done" God never lies. If He decreed this to happen then He could not ask what more could I have done for obviously He could easy have done something to make the vineyard suceed. And how can God be absolutely sovereign and still fail?

For the creation was subjected to futility, not willingly, but because of Him who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage and decay and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God (Rom 8:20-21). Why does the God who decrees all things hope? If you control all events then there is no need to hope for anything to happen.

Why does God only elect some? Is it because there is not enough room in heaven for all? To put this in a parable this would mean that the kingdom of God is like a lottery. There are losers and winners. According to Mat. 7:14 then there are more losers than winners, the same as a lottery. If we get saved then we have luck or blessedness. If we never get saved and die then we lucked out. God is no different than Hitler who made a race suffer immensely and tried to kill them all just because they were not members of his chosen race or people. If man is totally depraved and unable to come to God unless God chooses them and then they get sent to hell to suffer torment for eternity then God is the worst tyrant that can ever be. And if you say that He loves the elect, Hitler also favored his chosen race, the so called Arayans.

If you say that Scripture affirms these 2 points then please show me where it does this. I believe that God is sovereign but absolute sovereign over everything that occurs then you cannot have free will. And we need free will to be rightly judged as to where our ultimate destination is, heaven or hell.

Edited November 21, 2009 by rca

[rca]

rca, thanks for your response. On John 1:12-13. I have agreed with you that as many as receive, or believe in God, He gives them the right to become children. I have always agreed that this proves that our will is required. However, verse 13 says that being born of God is NOT our will, NOT the will of the flesh, but of GOD. It does not God's working in our response to Him because the will is not of man, nor of flesh, but of God. Reading the passage in context, that is exactly what it says. You say that because I render this verse this way, I believe:

I am dead -- I still have an old nature. Yes, I believe this.

God draws me. Yes, I believe this.

Once God draws you, it is impossible to say no to God. God has given me a new nature. No. I don't say that.

Once God drawn me, from God's perspective in heaven, I WILL say yes. However, I also have free will. On Earth, I act according to the information I have, and am saved. God has given me enough life by drawing me to allow me to decide for God. In heaven, it is already a done deal. On earth, I still must decide. I do not have a new nature until AFTER I have been saved. The old nature THEN is done away with, but the old man or "flesh" has not been done away with. I have a new mind and a new Spirit, but I still have old flesh.

I agree with you that God leaves a witness for everybody in the world. The true life comes into the world. Romans 1:19-20 makes it clear that God provided creation as a witness. Romans 2:15 mentions that those who do not know God are still able to follow a conscience, and the conscience is a witness of God to the world. Acts 14:17 says that God gives rain, harvest, and filled our hearts with food and gladness. We are told that nobody will be without excuse at the judgment because everybody had facts. The Bible clearly says that, and I agree with you on all of those points. The problem is, as I refer you back to other passages, that men do not seek God, and all of those evidences are foolishness to those who are perishing and they CAN NOT understand them, because God has not drawn them, at least not yet. One need only read as far as the unbelievers who access this site, to see how they refuse to believe in creation -- or refuse to believe in the conscience, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrayr -- not because they are stupid, but because they are spiritually blind, and God has not taken off their blinders. God first has to draw. God first has to open their eyes enough to be able to see. And He does not do that for everybody in the world, though we are never to determine who is or is not among God's chosen people.

Now, in terms of your "world" verses, John 3:16 does say that God loved "the world" (mankind in general, everybody) that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish -- again, as I have stated before, from our perspective, we must believe. However, going back to verse 5-8, we are told that we must be born "of the Spirit" In verse 6, we are told: "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." Again, we are born of the Spirit. In verse 8, it says, "The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit." We can not tell where the Spirit comes or goes, and the Spirit DOES "come or go" at will -- not OUR will, but God's will. In heaven, where God is, the decision has been made. On earth, we must decide. We both agree with that -- that there are two perspectives: God's and ours. Where we disagree is the order of them. I have shown you how I believe that God decides ahead of us, not on the basis of knowing what we will do. If that were true, we would be sovereign over God, and He would be doing OUR bidding. We don't have the right.

Rhonda Lou, you talk about 2 perspectives, heaven and earth. That in heaven the decision that we will decide for God has already been made. You say that on earth we still must decide. You say that God has to decide first, otherwise we would be sovereign over God. If that were true then to be consistent we can only decide what God has decided for us. If we decided otherwise then we would cancel out what God has decided and then we would be sovereign, not God.

So what this really means is that God has first choice and He has last choice. Yet you say that we also have free will. You say that you believe in predestination and free will, both. The way you define predestination is that God chooses first. This is like the old Communist system. They said that they have democratic elections but there is only one candidate on the ballot slip. In other words you have free choice but only one option to choose. That is not free choice.

You say that God decides ahead of us, not on the basis of knowing what we will do. If that were true, then we would be sovereign over God. I disagree, if God chooses based on knowing us then God is still sovereign, He just is not absolute sovereign. God gave up absolute sovereignty when He created free choice. Absolute means that He decides everything including trivial things like scratching our nose.

Also that when you say God chooses ahead of time but not on the basis of knowing what we will do, this contradicts Romans 8:29 where it says that For those He foreknew He also predestined. Now on another occasion you said that the Greek word from which "foreknew" comes from, the same word is translated as "foreordained" in 1 Peter 1:20. So you are trying to make a point that you could use the word "foreordained" in Rom 8:29. The Greek word is "proginosko" and it is a compound word. The first part "pro" means beforehand". "Ginosko" means knowledge. The English word "agnostic" comes from that same Greek word. "Agnostic" means "no knowledge" as "a" means negative. Everytime this Greek word "Ginosko" is used on its own (not part of a compound word) it always is translated "know". So "foreknew" clearly means "foreknew" and nothing else.

In Matthew 7:23 Jesus says "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew (ginosko) you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness". He says "never" which includes before the foundation of the earth. Jesus knows who will be and who will remain believers (John 2:24,25; 6:64). So to paraphrase Romans 8:29a "For those God knew beforehand that they would believe, He destined them beforehand ...". Jesus did not intimately know these people because of what they were doing as the context of Matthew 7 clearly says. God's knowing us intimately is based on our response to God, not on God's decision in the past having nothing to do with foreknowledge.

I think that it is faulty logic to say that by us being able to decide our fate (heaven or hell) then we would become sovereign, not God. All what this would mean is that God is not absolute sovereign. Scripture never says that God is absolute sovereign. Also saying God decides ahead of us not on the basis of knowing what we will do is going against the Scriptures (Rom 8:29).

[Rhonda Lou]

rca, thanks for your response. On John 1:12-13. I have agreed with you that as many as receive, or believe in God, He gives them the right to become children. I have always agreed that this proves that our will is required. However, verse 13 says that being born of God is NOT our will, NOT the will of the flesh, but of GOD. It does not God's working in our response to Him because the will is not of man, nor of flesh, but of God. Reading the passage in context, that is exactly what it says. You say that because I render this verse this way, I believe:

I am dead -- I still have an old nature. Yes, I believe this.

God draws me. Yes, I believe this.

Once God draws you, it is impossible to say no to God. God has given me a new nature. No. I don't say that.

Once God drawn me, from God's perspective in heaven, I WILL say yes. However, I also have free will. On Earth, I act according to the information I have, and am saved. God has given me enough life by drawing me to allow me to decide for God. In heaven, it is already a done deal. On earth, I still must decide. I do not have a new nature until AFTER I have been saved. The old nature THEN is done away with, but the old man or "flesh" has not been done away with. I have a new mind and a new Spirit, but I still have old flesh.

I agree with you that God leaves a witness for everybody in the world. The true life comes into the world. Romans 1:19-20 makes it clear that God provided creation as a witness. Romans 2:15 mentions that those who do not know God are still able to follow a conscience, and the conscience is a witness of God to the world. Acts 14:17 says that God gives rain, harvest, and filled our hearts with food and gladness. We are told that nobody will be without excuse at the judgment because everybody had facts. The Bible clearly says that, and I agree with you on all of those points. The problem is, as I refer you back to other passages, that men do not seek God, and all of those evidences are foolishness to those who are perishing and they CAN NOT understand them, because God has not drawn them, at least not yet. One need only read as far as the unbelievers who access this site, to see how they refuse to believe in creation -- or refuse to believe in the conscience, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrayr -- not because they are stupid, but because they are spiritually blind, and God has not taken off their blinders. God first has to draw. God first has to open their eyes enough to be able to see. And He does not do that for everybody in the world, though we are never to determine who is or is not among God's chosen people.

Now, in terms of your "world" verses, John 3:16 does say that God loved "the world" (mankind in general, everybody) that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish -- again, as I have stated before, from our perspective, we must believe. However, going back to verse 5-8, we are told that we must be born "of the Spirit" In verse 6, we are told: "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." Again, we are born of the Spirit. In verse 8, it says, "The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear the sound of it, but cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes. So is everyone who is born of the Spirit." We can not tell where the Spirit comes or goes, and the Spirit DOES "come or go" at will -- not OUR will, but God's will. In heaven, where God is, the decision has been made. On earth, we must decide. We both agree with that -- that there are two perspectives: God's and ours. Where we disagree is the order of them. I have shown you how I believe that God decides ahead of us, not on the basis of knowing what we will do. If that were true, we would be sovereign over God, and He would be doing OUR bidding. We don't have the right.

Rhonda Lou, you talk about 2 perspectives, heaven and earth. That in heaven the decision that we will decide for God has already been made. You say that on earth we still must decide. You say that God has to decide first, otherwise we would be sovereign over God. If that were true then to be consistent we can only decide what God has decided for us. If we decided otherwise then we would cancel out what God has decided and then we would be sovereign, not God.

So what this really means is that God has first choice and He has last choice. Yet you say that we also have free will. You say that you believe in predestination and free will, both. The way you define predestination is that God chooses first. This is like the old Communist system. They said that they have democratic elections but there is only one candidate on the ballot slip. In other words you have free choice but only one option to choose. That is not free choice.

You say that God decides ahead of us, not on the basis of knowing what we will do. If that were true, then we would be sovereign over God. I disagree, if God chooses based on knowing us then God is still sovereign, He just is not absolute sovereign. God gave up absolute sovereignty when He created free choice. Absolute means that He decides everything including trivial things like scratching our nose.

Also that when you say God chooses ahead of time but not on the basis of knowing what we will do, this contradicts Romans 8:29 where it says that For those He foreknew He also predestined. Now on another occasion you said that the Greek word from which "foreknew" comes from, the same word is translated as "foreordained" in 1 Peter 1:20. So you are trying to make a point that you could use the word "foreordained" in Rom 8:29. The Greek word is "proginosko" and it is a compound word. The first part "pro" means beforehand". "Ginosko" means knowledge. The English word "agnostic" comes from that same Greek word. "Agnostic" means "no knowledge" as "a" means negative. Everytime this Greek word "Ginosko" is used on its own (not part of a compound word) it always is translated "know". So "foreknew" clearly means "foreknew" and nothing else.

In Matthew 7:23 Jesus says "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew (ginosko) you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness". He says "never" which includes before the foundation of the earth. Jesus knows who will be and who will remain believers (John 2:24,25; 6:64). So to paraphrase Romans 8:29a "For those God knew beforehand that they would believe, He destined them beforehand ...". Jesus did not intimately know these people because of what they were doing as the context of Matthew 7 clearly says. God's knowing us intimately is based on our response to God, not on God's decision in the past having nothing to do with foreknowledge.

I think that it is faulty logic to say that by us being able to decide our fate (heaven or hell) then we would become sovereign, not God. All what this would mean is that God is not absolute sovereign. Scripture never says that God is absolute sovereign. Also saying God decides ahead of us not on the basis of knowing what we will do is going against the Scriptures (Rom 8:29).

rca,

I believe we are going around in circles. I still believe that the Bible teaches that God predestined us not based on our will, but His sovereignty. I do not see John 1:13 stating any other thing. I have heard your ideas about the passage, but I am just reading it as straightforward as I can -- we are born not of the will of man, or of the will of flesh, but the will of God. Other passages I have cited state the same thing. I will admit that when I state that if God made the choice based on our desire, that would make us sovereign over God, that is only MY logic, and you are welcome to disagree with me I DO, however, believe in both predestination and in free will. I, and EricH have attempted to explain that though this does not seem to make sense, it is biblical, and it is the same as saying that Jesus is fully God and fully man -- something which seems contradictory, but is true. If you want to put the Bible passages together differently than I do, again, that is your perogative. But, for the last several answers to myself, or EricH, I have noticed that most of your responses have been, 'If...Then" or human logic. I have explained that Paul spent much of Romans 9-11 defending predestination, yet in the middle of chapter 10, he said that we need to confess Jesus as Lord, and believe in our hearts that God raised Him from the dead. He never tried to explain how onw or the other worked, just said both were true, and at the end of chapter 11, he said that God's ways are past finding out. I should have taken a lesson from him, and not tried to explain why I see it as heaven's and earth's perspectives, just stuck with the Scriptures.

I believe with all of my heart that you and I are both trying to please God. But this is not an issue which should divide Christians, and I believe the most loving thing to do at this point is to agree to disagree. God bless you.

[kross]

The results of the pole are very encouraging. Perhaps it is possible we will become doctrinally correct some day. At least the majority lean towards the truth

[kross]

The problem with those that hold both the pure Arminian position and the pure Calvinist position is that they are both typically guilty of a logical error known as duality reductionalism. Typically this occurs where there is a paradox (not a contradiction) in scripture. Scripture affirms 2 things:

1. God is absolutely sovereign over every thing that occurs (including the process of salvation)

2. Human beings make real decisions for which God holds them morally accountable and that have real consequences

While there is a grain of truth in this statement, the reality is that each decission made is based on pre-established understanding and tendancies. These are usually formed by experiences and people that come into our lives. Yet, these things are as much under the control of GOD as the wind.

GOD knows what is required for us to not make or make a choice that comes our way. In this knowledge, HE is able to sway our normal tendancy by a little extra conviction or influence by HIS SPIRIT, or choose not to do so in order that we might make the choice to do something that will result in a lesson learned or a trial passed. GOD doesn't ever have to let Satan near any of us. Yet, if needs be for a season, HE does and will.

To say we have free will is a truth only if you consider free will the ability to make the choices GOD would have us make.

My life is not my own, I am bought with a price. I no longer live, but it is CHRIST who lives in me.

Yet, if I make a decision that results in sin, because it is my nature to sin, and JESUS allows this for a reason, than can I in some way claim that I can not be held responsible since what I have done was what HE wanted or needed me to do? NO! For I am responsible for my actions. Particularly the actions that lead to sin. If there is anything I can do that I can not be held accountable for, it is the good works that I do. For I know that the only good that dwells in me is JESUS.

The problem comes when we try to separate GOD from HIS creation. The truth is, GOD is responsible for what HIS creation is and does. HE forms each and every one of us with the full knowledge of exactly who and what we are going to be and do. If, therefore, GOD didn't want something we are going to do to be done, HE could have made us differently or not at all.

I get that some do not believe GOD is that involved with the workings of HIS creation. Even so, since HE clearly has the power, HE clearly has the authority, and HE clearly is the creator, it cannot be stated that HE is not completely in control of every situation, either by direct intervention or by choosing not to intervene.

Case in point, Judas Escariat, who is accountable for his actions but was ordained by GOD to this very act

[rca]

You mention 2 Peter 3:9 a lot. First of all, reading all of 2 Peter 3, we see that Peter is writing to the church; we know this because He calls them "beloved". Those scoffing Jesus' return are in the church. However, Peter's point is that God is withholding judgment from the world (enduring with longsuffering the vessels of wrath) until all of the believers have been called and are saved. This is the only way this passage may be understood in the light of every other Scripture in the Bible.

As to how God can select chosen ones, and still not want everybody to suffer, I look at it like this: I wanted to retire, but it required that I pay off my pre-paid funeral, or I would not have the money to retire. That cost $500 per month. There were times I wanted to pay much less -- I had no agreement with anybody that I would pay $500, that was WAY over the minimum, but in order to retire I had to pay it off, even though I didn't want to. I was not willing to, yet for the larger picture, i did it. God is not willing to let any suffer. But for the sake of His glory, and for the sake of His purposes, He does. He gives everybody an opportunity to select Him -- but He only chooses certain ones -- vessels of mercy. He chose Jacob over Esau, Isaac over Ismael, Israel over other nations, He kills and makes whole, He hardens hearts, and according to Isaiah 6:9-10; Matthew 13:14-15 and John 12:40, He makes hearts dull, ears heavy, and shuts eyes. God is sovereign.

This would make Him a mean God except for the fact that God is love (1 John 4:8) and God works all things to the good of those who love him, to those who are THE called, according to HIS purpose (Romans 8:28). God does not make any decision out of meanness because He is love and wants only our good. Also, God has given the earth, earth's perspective -- meaning that although He has already pre-determined who will be saved -- not based on anything we've done or that He will know what happens -- He requires that we freely choose it. Some will be unable to choose it because they are not chosen -- but the evidence is there for them. Others will choose it -- but it is not theirs until they DO choose it.

This is how our life works. God tells us to love everybody: feed the poor, help widows and orphans, love our neighbor as ourself. This covers "the world" -- it is general, meaning all mankind. We are to love EVERYBODY!! But, are there not degrees of love? We would both agree that we love friends and families -- and provide more for them, meeting even more of their needs -- than we do for somebody we have never, ever met. How can we be so cruel as to love some more than others, even though we love all? Why can't we give God the same option?

Finally, God's wrath is not against any individual, it is against SIN. There are "vessels" of wrath -- but He is not angry at the vessel, only the wrath inside that vessel. Ephesians 5:3-8 actually says that fornication, uncleanness, covetous, should not be named among saints, nor foolish talking..., that no one who practices this is fit for the kingdom of heaven, "because of thse things (not people, but THINGS -- the list itself) the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience." The wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience, not because of the "sons" but because of what is IN the "sons". And He goes on to say that is what some of them WERE, but now they are saved. The wages of SIN (not sinners) is death -- but since sin resides in sinners, the sinners need to repent of the sin in them. God allows free choice, but His pre-determination in heaven has already been made. Jesus died to pay the penalty for sin in every single person -- for the SIN, the wages of SIN is death -- that those who forsake their sin nature may have God's nature inside them.

Once again, I have never, nor will you catch me EVER, deny man't will. I just put God's first -- He pre-determines, and then acts in our life, to bring about salvation -- a salvation we must freely accept. It is not an illusion: it is God's perspective and our perspective.

Please forgive any mistakes, I'm out of time to proof.

Rhonda Lou. Thank you for your last post. I agree that we have stated our opinions and we disagree. I do not want to rehash things we have already discussed. This discussion is open to the public and others may read this. So I still would like to discuss things we have not discussed yet. Things one of us has brought up and the other one has not discussed yet. This keeps this topic interesesting and ongoing.

I stated awhile ago that I want to comment on Romans 9-11 the crux of the doctrine that God not man decides who will be saved. I still plan to do this because I have a lot to say about this. But I want to discuss other matters first. So I am skipping the part of the above post dealing with Romans 9-11.

In the first paragraph of the quoted post above regarding 2 Peter 3:9 (God not willing that any should perish) you say This is the only way this passage may be understood in the light of every other Scripture in the Bible.

I would qualify to say that this is the only way this passage can be understood in the light of your prime datum that God chooses who gets saved, not man. And if this is so then what about 1 Timothy 2:4 which says Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

This verse is saying the very same thing and cannot possibly mean only those members of one particular church.

Then the rest of this post you seem to try to defend God, trying to show Him as a God of love, not a mean God. Regarding your retirement decision, God owns the whole world. He is not limited in any way unless there is a maximum capacity for Heaven. Will the ones that have loved ones end up in hell see God's choosing as His glory? They will focus more on their lossa nd grief.

You say He gives everybody an opportunity to select Him -- but He only chooses certain ones. That seems contradictory to me since only those who He chooses can choose God according to your prime datum.

Regarding the hardening verses (Isa. 6:9-10; Mat. 13:14-15) Isaiah 55:6 says "Seek the Lord while He may be found". Romans 1:21 begins with "For although they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks to Him ...". In reference to that and what follows in Romans 1:21-23 God gave up on them. This is stated in Romans 1:24,26 and 28. When God gives up, it is like their hearts become hardened. And when God gives up then the Holy Spirit does not convict (John 16:8-10) them anymore. Using the imagery of Revelation 3:20 God stops knocking at our door. And without God's convicting Spirit they will never choose God. Seek the Lord while He may be found is not limited to the time we have before we die but to the time before God gives up on us. And God only gives up on those that He knows will never follow Him.

Then regarding differing degrees of love. Sure we are limited by time and finances to love our family and choice friends more than others. But God created the whole word. He created man in His own image. Jesus said that whatever you do to the least of these my brethren, you do it to me (Matthew 25:40). God's family is the whole world. John 3:16 says that God so loved the world. It does not say that He loved some of the world.

I would say God's wrath is against individuals that do not obey Him, that commit sins like those mentioned in Ephesians 5:3-8; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; Rev. 21:8. It is people that will go to hell, not sins themselves.

Regarding Romans 1:20 and being without excuse. The Greek word translated as "without excuse" is one word "anapologetos". In Greek "ana" means "against". From the remainder of the Greek word we get the English word "apologetics". Oxford's dictionary defines apologia (a form of that word) as a formal defense of belief or action. If only God could choose who will decide to choose Him then a nonbeliever could have a valid argument or defense for not believing in God. According to what you have beforehand stated, they could say that God did not remove their blinders.

If someone would say to another person "you can go to hell" do we love them? When God says to somebody "You can go to hell" (And God is the only one that can actually make this happen) does God really love Him?

In your second to last paragraph (other than "Please forgive any grammar or spelling mistakes" paragraph) you say that it is not an illusion. I think to be honest you would have to say something like "God chooses (heaven's perspective) but from our perspective (earth) it appears as if we do the choosing". And in my eyes that would be an illusion or deceptive appearance.

You said that God has to decide first. In order for God's decision to stick, God must also decide last. So essentially man has no choice. And when it comes to so contrasting destinations like heaven or hell, God has to be a very mean God to choose hell for many, a choice the hellbound people cannot make for themselves. There is no way to cloak this any other way than to say that God is a very mean God. That is why my prime datum is that man has to be able to choose who He will serve and thereby control his own eternal destination. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.