If God's will is to save all His people

[Guest shiloh357]

By your reasoning then Jesus never had any knowledge of those that came to him claiming to be His followers. That is absurd because He is God and knows everything. It is the same root word gninosko.

Of course Jesus knows. I am saying that He does not choose who does or does not get saved

Predestination as it is used in Scripture NEVER deals with sinners, but rather only with those who have already been saved and what God has predestined for Christians AFTER having accepted Christ.

You have a knack of changing the subject by your predestination statements.

I am simply pointing out what Predestination in the Bible actually speaks to. It always deals with God ultimately has planned for the believer; never with who will or will not get saved.

Mt 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Different context, different subject and different usage of the word.

[larryt]

By your reasoning then Jesus never had any knowledge of those that came to him claiming to be His followers. That is absurd because He is God and knows everything. It is the same root word gninosko.

Of course Jesus knows. I am saying that He does not choose who does or does not get saved

Who does choose?

Predestination as it is used in Scripture NEVER deals with sinners, but rather only with those who have already been saved and what God has predestined for Christians AFTER having accepted Christ.

You have a knack of changing the subject by your predestination statements.

I am simply pointing out what Predestination in the Bible actually speaks to. It always deals with God ultimately has planned for the believer; never with who will or will not get saved.

Mt 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Different context, different subject and different usage of the word.

Again you have a habit of changing the subject to work your own angle. The OP is about whether or not God will in fact succeed in what He set out to do from the beginning. Everything that has and will happen is according to the plan and purpose of God. I never said not did I imply that predestination deals with sinners. You inserted that just to argue, to bring your own agenda. Why not go back to the original post and reread it.

Your comment on Mt 7:23 does not find agreement with any of the godly men of the past. Instead of summarily dismissing their comment you could point out where they are in error. Until you can do such your statement "I'm right and they are wrong" won't cut it.

LT

[Guest shiloh357]

QUOTE (shiloh357 @ Dec 8 2008, 08:22 PM)

QUOTE

By your reasoning then Jesus never had any knowledge of those that came to him claiming to be His followers. That is absurd because He is God and knows everything. It is the same root word gninosko.

Of course Jesus knows. I am saying that He does not choose who does or does not get saved

Who does choose?

God has opened the door of grace. It is up to every person to decide if they will walk through.

QUOTE

Mt 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Different context, different subject and different usage of the word.

Again you have a habit of changing the subject to work your own angle.

No, I am not changing the subject. I am pointing out that the same word can be used a variety of ways depending on the context.

Even in English we take the word "love" and use it a variety of ways. I would not "love" my wife the same way "love" icecream. Just because a word is used in one manner in one part of the Bible, it does not give you license to use it that way every time it occurs in the biblical text.

The OP is about whether or not God will in fact succeed in what He set out to do from the beginning.

The OP is about making a predestination argument and that is so transparent, it would be dishonest of you to suggest otherwise.

Everything that has and will happen is according to the plan and purpose of God.

I agree.

I never said not did I imply that predestination deals with sinners.

Yet that is what the OP is dealing with, the salvation of sinners. Plus you have inidicated that in other threads, so I already know where you are coming from.

Your comment on Mt 7:23 does not find agreement with any of the godly men of the past

Actually, I have Gill open in front of me as well as Barnes, Clarke and others I don't see where they disagree. Matt. 7:23 has a different word for knew than is used for "foreknew" in Romans 8:29. That fact that they come from the same root has absolutely nothing to do with it. That doesn't suddenly, and magically make the two words mean the same thing. My primary concern is not what others think, but human authors of Scripture were trying to convey. It is the object THEY have in view, that is my concern. That is what good hermeneutics tries to determine.

[Jeremiah Joel]

Hello Shiloh

I noticed this statement (in part) that you had made recently.

Predestination as it is used in Scripture NEVER deals with sinners, but rather only with those who have already been saved and what God has predestined for Christians AFTER having accepted Christ.

You have a knack of changing the subject by your predestination statements.

I am simply pointing out what Predestination in the Bible actually speaks to. It always deals with God ultimately has planned for the believer; never with who will or will not get saved.

In Rev 17:15-18 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.

And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled. And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

This is in reference to the unsaved... the unbelievers. You had said that predestination never deals with the unsaved. It is clear here that God puts in the heart of the unbelievers to do his (God's) will.

Jeremiah

[EricH]

There is a duality in scripture.

1. God is completely soveriegn over all things (including salvation and who gets saved)

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

How these 2 things work together is a mystery that scripture does not fully explain. We should not favor one over the other, or use one as the standard by which the other is measured and must be altered to fit.

[Dave123]

shiloh357, lets start here first.

Predestination is post-salvation

30 Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.

Also, "whom He predestined, these He also called". Think about it, the order, that is.

No, proginṓskō simply means "foreknew." It does not carry the connotation of "foreloved." I think that is a meaning YOU are supplying to the passage.

This is something you should read...this is the most condenced version of the arguements made that I know of.

-----------------------------------------------------

The Meaning of "FOREKNEW" in Romans 8:29

This is from the Appendix of the book "The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended, Documented" by David N. Steele and Curtis C. Thomas.

THE MEANING OF

Edited December 9, 2008 by Dave123

[Guest shiloh357]

Hello Shiloh

I noticed this statement (in part) that you had made recently.

Predestination as it is used in Scripture NEVER deals with sinners, but rather only with those who have already been saved and what God has predestined for Christians AFTER having accepted Christ.

You have a knack of changing the subject by your predestination statements.

I am simply pointing out what Predestination in the Bible actually speaks to. It always deals with God ultimately has planned for the believer; never with who will or will not get saved.

In Rev 17:15-18 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the whore sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues.

And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled. And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

This is in reference to the unsaved... the unbelievers. You had said that predestination never deals with the unsaved. It is clear here that God puts in the heart of the unbelievers to do his (God's) will.

Jeremiah

That has nothing to do with the doctrine of Predestination.

[Dave123]

shiloh357, consider these points as well.

1. No Libertarian free will theist can consistently say that God foreknew who would be saved and then also teach that God is trying to save every man. Surely if God knows who will be saved and who won't be saved, then how could anyone argue that He is trying to save more? Certainly, it is foolish to assert that God is trying to do something which He knew never could be accomplished. Some embracing the free will or foreseen faith position charge Augustinians that preaching the gospel to the non-elect is mockery since God has not elected them. If there is any validity in that objection, then it equally applies to them as well who preach to those who God knows will never be saved. To the Augustinian, God commands that the Gospel be preached to all, because, when we indiscriminately cast forth the seed of the gospel, the Spirit germinates the seed of those He came to save (1 Thess 1:4, 5 John 6:63-65). People are not saved in a void but under the preaching of the Gospel and the Spirit brings forth life through the word of truth.

2. No Libertarian who embraces the foreseen faith position can consistently say that God foreknew which sinners would be lost and then say it is not within God's will to allow these sinners to be lost. Why did He create them? Let the libertarian freewill theist consider that question. God could have just as easily refrained from creating those that He knew would "freely" choose to go to Hell. He knew where they were going before He created them. Since He went ahead and created them with full knowledge that they would be lost, it is evidently within God's providence that some sinners actually be lost, even in the libertarian scheme. He, therefore, has some purpose in it which human beings cannot fully discern. The libertarian freewill theist can complain against the truth that God chose to allow some men a final destiny of Hell all they want, but it is as much a problem for them as for anyone. As a matter of fact, it is a problem which libertarians must face. If he faces it, he will have to admit either the error of his theology or deny foreknowledge all together. But he might say that God had to create those that perish, even against His will. This would make God subject to Fate.

3. No Libertarian freewiller can consistently say that God foreknew who would be saved and then teach that God punished Christ for the purpose of redeeming every single man that ever lived. Surely we should credit God with having as much sense as a human being. What human being would make a great but useless and needless sacrifice for persons He already knows with certainty would reject Him? Libertarians say that God punished Christ for the sins of those whom He knew would go to Hell. This theory of the atonement--although synergists do not mention this--involves the matter of Christ's suffering exclusively for the purpose of man's salvation--the substitutionary aspect. They fail to have any appreciation for the aspect of propitiation.

4. No Libertarian can consistently say that God foreknew who would be saved and then preach that God the Holy Spirit does all He can do to save every man in the world. The Holy Spirit would be wasting time and effort to endeavor to convert a man who He knew from the beginning would go to Hell. You hear Synergists talk about how the Spirit tries to get men to be saved and if they don't yield to him they will "cross the line" and offend the Spirit so that He will never try to save them again. Bottom line, the Synergist makes a finite creature out of the Divine Godhead. Can God be taken by surprise?

http://www.reformationtheology.com/2006/04...nowled.php#more

For anyone who is wondering what libertarian free will is, read here.

http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/arti...ibertarian.html

Timothy 1:8 Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony of our Lord, nor of me His prisoner, but share with me in the sufferings for the gospel according to the power of God, 9 who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began,

I think that most people naturally start out with the belief that it was all of there own that they came to Christ in faith. But at what time does that belief cross from being ignorance due to the learning curve and step into full fledge rejection of biblical truth? It's for each to ask himself. As was stated and quoted from Romans 11, we are incapable of knowing all that is behind God's righteous judgment. Should we then lay out standards for His judgements and call these judgments unfair based on those standards? I think when we do that we begin to walk on dangerous ground. What people are doing today is taking one of the great truths of God's Word that has offered great comfort to Christians since the Gospel began to be preached and traded it in for a philosophy (libertarian free will) that has nothing to do with God's Word. This freedom of mans will, as the libertarian defines it, is nowhere taught in scripture. To use that philosophy as a starting point and as some kind of grid for all other scripture and doctrines to be tested by, and if they fail this test they are rejected, as I stated earlier, is walking on very dangerous ground.

There is so much more to this than many care to see.

I'll leave you with this thought by Spurgeon.

Edited December 10, 2008 by Dave123

[larryt]

QUOTE (shiloh357 @ Dec 8 2008, 08:22 PM)

QUOTE

By your reasoning then Jesus never had any knowledge of those that came to him claiming to be His followers. That is absurd because He is God and knows everything. It is the same root word gninosko.

Of course Jesus knows. I am saying that He does not choose who does or does not get saved

Who does choose?

God has opened the door of grace. It is up to every person to decide if they will walk through.

So Jesus only made salvation available and so nothing is sure. That means that He could lose some of the sheep.

QUOTE

Mt 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

Different context, different subject and different usage of the word.

Again you have a habit of changing the subject to work your own angle.

No, I am not changing the subject. I am pointing out that the same word can be used a variety of ways depending on the context.

Even in English we take the word "love" and use it a variety of ways. I would not "love" my wife the same way "love" icecream. Just because a word is used in one manner in one part of the Bible, it does not give you license to use it that way every time it occurs in the biblical text.

So in this instance am I correct in assuming that you view "know" in the intimate sense?

The OP is about whether or not God will in fact succeed in what He set out to do from the beginning.

The OP is about making a predestination argument and that is so transparent, it would be dishonest of you to suggest otherwise.

I have already stated what I intended. How can you determine what it is that I intend? Are you god?

Everything that has and will happen is according to the plan and purpose of God.

I agree.

Well we agree on something.

I never said nor did I imply that predestination deals with sinners.

Yet that is what the OP is dealing with, the salvation of sinners. Plus you have inidicated that in other threads, so I already know where you are coming from.

Only because you have it in your mind to divert this thread for your own purposes. But your assumptions are all wrong. I didn't bring any other threads up. Let's deal with this thread. Again it is the Sovereignty of God that is at issue here.

Your comment on Mt 7:23 does not find agreement with any of the godly men of the past

Actually, I have Gill open in front of me as well as Barnes, Clarke and others I don't see where they disagree. Matt. 7:23 has a different word for knew than is used for "foreknew" in Romans 8:29. That fact that they come from the same root has absolutely nothing to do with it. That doesn't suddenly, and magically make the two words mean the same thing. My primary concern is not what others think, but human authors of Scripture were trying to convey. It is the object THEY have in view, that is my concern. That is what good hermeneutics tries to determine.

The commentators I quoted have to deal with Rom. 9:29. Your comment in post #20 addressing My post #18 do not find agreement with those that I cited. The root word ginosko is the same in both Rom. 9:29 and Matt. 7:23. And in Rom. 9:29 the majority of the commentators say that "foreknew" means to know in the intimate sense and not precognition. God has precognition of everyone. Those He had an intimate relationship with from before the foundation of the world He did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son.

Those that Christ did not have an intimate relationship with He commanded out of His presence.

LT

[larryt]

I'll leave you with this thought by Spurgeon.