DuckSouth.com

now that all that is over. lets please get back to the discussion about predestination.

...and please dont quote anything that i have previously posted because i can ensure you all that it has nothing to do with predestination...unless in case you believe that everything is already determined.

skywalker wrote:Deep,
Before anyone is 'called out', please read about the life of Peter. Please also look for a 'beam' in your own eye before pointing out a 'speck' in someone else's.

It amazes me that grown men cannot have a civil discussion about biblical doctrine without someone getting personal and pointing out other's so called 'short comings', as we all have them. I was afraid this discussion would take a turn for the worse and now it has, pity.

Yall have a great day!

Hebrews 13:1- Let brotherly love continue.

Luke Bozeman (skywalker)

Not trying to be ugly but……Say what you will…I know what God has done for me and where he has brought me from.

I see the beam in my eye that is why I want to help others out of the same thing I have been delivered from….which if you don’t remember, that is what God does, He delivers people out of their sins ..NOT in them.

I was not raised in a Christian home, my dad was and still is an alcoholic, gambler, womanizer, etc… I remember as a child having to sit covered up in a what blankets we had to keep warm because we had no heat, the bill money had been blown on alcohol and wild women, gambling, etc… I have had a many meal of just crackers, or a few spoons of peanut butter.

When God saved me He delivered me out of the sin that I was in (which was drugs, alcohol, snuff dipping, cussing, going to worldly events, idolatry. I have tatoos on my body that remind me of what an ignorant, heathen fool I was in sin, and also remind me of where God brought me from and what I owe Him.), He delivered me out of the heathen lifestyle, He delivered me out of the bondage of snuff, alcohol, idolatry, worldy ways, worldly events, heathen parties, heathen friends, worldly tv/movies, and such.
He did not give me a ticket to do things of that nature and then ask for grace….NO!!!!! He delivered me, He gave me discernment to know right from wrong, discernment to “abstain from the appearance of evil”, discernment to know to avoid worldly company and worldly places. I have been strung out on drugs, I have been a drunk, I have been a heathen idol worshipper, I have been the one at worldly events, I have been the vulgar mouthed person, I have been the gambler,…etc, etc., etc.,…. So you see….I see the “beam” in my eye, I have been there. God has shown me the “beam” in my eye, I am a worthless, undeserving piece of dirt, that’s why I have given my life to Him in the hope that I will be spared in the day of judgement from the fiery wrath that I deserve, therefore I have no wish to do anything that even looks to be evil, worldly, or displeasing to God.

Sin we may rebuke, but not if we indulge it. We may protest against evil,but not if we willfully practice it.


Seems that maybe you should give that advice to Ordek since the evidence shows he still has his “beam”…huh?

1Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.


We ought to let impenitent sinners know that we consider them out of our fellowship. If they will not hear, we must make them see that we disown them, and count them to be unclean, because they refuse Christ Jesus. How little of this is done by the smooth-tongued preachers of today! Men may refuse their gospel, and still be the bosom friends of those who preach to them. Yea, they try even from the pulpit to cheer them in their impenitence by the dream of a “larger hope.”

Impenitence means not feeling or expressing humble or regretful pain or sorrow for sins or offenses to God.

skywalker wrote:I do not see any reason to publicly humiliate (remember, we are Brothers in Christ) one because you disagree. We can each point out the failures of another man to justify our beliefs and actions. Any theological debate should be able to stand on its own merits without descending into a personal attack. This is the very reason I hesitated to even start posting on this part of the forums.

Titus 1:16 They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate.


1Timothy 5:20 Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.

Titus 1:13 This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith;

Rebuke them sharply Cuttingly, severely; show no indulgence to persons guilty of such crimes.

That they may be sound in the faith That they may receive the incorrupt doctrine, and illustrate it by a holy and useful life.


Jude 1:4 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.

Turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness making the grace and mercy of God a covering for sin; intimating that men might sin safely who believe the Gospel, because in that Gospel grace abounds. Ungodly men

Doc & Nash wrote:I agree and FWIW it is actions like these of "So Called Christians" that lead me to put some distance between me and the church and most deffiantly religion as a whole. It never ceases to amaze me how most people are willing to take something out of context to make them selves look better to the masses....

You are correct here…it is these “so called Christians” that profess to be a Christian but live just like the heathens and unsaved, still doing the same things as the “world”, going to the same heathen events, worldly parties, still cussing, gambling, drinking., living just like the rest of the “world”. The unsaved person looks at those and says to himself “That person claims to be a Christian and they live just like me, they go the same places I go, do the same things I do…hmmm…why should I change?” that sir, is a hypocrite….someone that claims to be something they are not.

Doc & Nash wrote:Since I am a betting man, Deep Woods, I would be willing to bet that your a Southern Baptist, from my experience they are the are the worst at pointing out others shortcomings.....

I am not a southern baptist……affiliation to a denomination has nothing to do with making it to heaven……..Christ is coming back for a peculiar people, zealous of good works. NOT people living in sin, ungodly men or those that are “turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness”


The vulgar language offends my son and I, not to mention there are probably others that it offends also. I would really appreciate it if you would refrain from using that type of language in your post here, thanks.

Have a blessed day.


P.S. I am not Church of Christ either.

GearOut wrote:However, after reading this entire post, I am still confused by what you all think Predestination is.

IMO, Predestination starts with 2 issues. First, whether or not there are "chosen people" predestined to be saved. And this is what I think you are all arguing over. It seems like both sides have valid arguments, and people can choose what they want to believe.

BUT that brings up the real issue of predestination to me. - which is whether or not God has chosen what is going to happen before it happens. That is a definition of predestination to me.

Hey man, welcome to the discussion. I am back in school, so forgive me if I am absent from time to time.

I would say that your understanding of predestination is pretty solid. Most people speak of predestination in regards to salvation, but as you said, the same principles can be applied to any happenings in the world. I would say that you can survey the thinking on this subject by looking at five different theological systems that show the range of ideas. I'll go from one extreme to the other and give a brief explanation of what each believes.

1. Open Theism - Open theists believe that man has free will to do what he wants. But if God knows what a person is going to choose, and God can't be wrong, then God can't know the future, or else man wouldn't have true, free choices. God knows everything there is to know, but he can't know the future because there is no future to know; it's still open. Well known open theists are Clark Pinnock and Gregory Boyd.

2. Arminianism - Arminians believe that man has free will to choose salvation. God offers salvation to all people and knows which ones will, out of their own free will, accept him and which ones will not. In this view, God knows the future, but the future isn't "caused" by God. There are many different ways of explaining how God is sovereign and man is free at the same time, but the most common example is the one of guard rails on a highway. God's will is the highway, pointing to the future God has planned, but humans traveling down that highway have the freedom to move about the two lanes and travel as fast or as slow as they want. God can intervene, symbolized by the guard rails, to keep things on track, but generally does not. Well known Arminians are Jacob Arminius and John Wesley.

3. Middle Knowledge - Middle Knowledge proponents believe that God has given men free will but that God knows what man will do in every possible circumstance. Since man has free will, God cannot influence man directly, but can control the circumstances in a way to determine what people will choose. In this way, God has set the course of history not by overriding human freedom, nor by being subject to human freedom, but by working with human freedom. This view has been known as Molinism after Luis de Molina of the 16th century, but is seeing a rebirth in a slightly nuanced way by a well known Baptist theologian named Bruce Ware.

4. Calvinism - Calvinists believe that man does what he wants, but that man's heart is enslaved to sin, therefore making him unable to choose salvation. In order for a person to come to Christ, God must first do a work in that person's heart making him able to react in faith. Calvinists claim that the decision to follow Christ, and all decisions, are real decisions that people must make, but that those decisions are governed by and predetermined by God. Well known Calvinists are Jean Calvin and John Piper.

5. Hard Determinism - Hard Determinists believe that God has predestined everything and salvation is only for a chosen few. Since man does not have any real choice, there is no use in evangelism, since those God has chosen will come to him. Therefore, the non-elect are not called to repent and since they are not chosen, God has no grace, common or otherwise, towards them. This view has never been very popular, but can be seen in some 18th century writings, mainly by John Brine.

Obviously those are just broad classifications, but they give you an idea of the range of beliefs. Most people will fall somewhere between Arminianism and Calvinism and will have a wide variety of ways to reconcile God's sovereignty and man's freedom.

And even though this discussion has drifted more towards the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints, I think many of the same principles can be applied to the discussion on predestination.

What say you Gear Out?

Chris

PS - And I have said many times that I will be the first to admit to my sinfulness and am willing to discuss my morality with anyone. However, this thread was created to discuss how God's sovereignty and man's freedom are at work in salvation. I'd be interested in hearing what Deep Woods, or anyone else for that matter, has to say on the subject. And if there are flaws with anything I have posted, as Deep Woods seems to believe, then I would love to hear a rebuttal. I am more than willing to admit an error if it is shown to me convincingly.

i say - good reply. thats a lot of important background information.

A couple of questions/thoughts, excuse me if any of them are elementary.

First, how does the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints related to these stated common schools of thought regarding free will versus predestination determined by God.

Second, within this...

Ordek Avci wrote:4. Calvinism - Calvinists believe that man does what he wants, but that man's heart is enslaved to sin, therefore making him unable to choose salvation. In order for a person to come to Christ, God must first do a work in that person's heart making him able to react in faith. Calvinists claim that the decision to follow Christ, and all decisions, are real decisions that people must make, but that those decisions are governed by and predetermined by God. Well known Calvinists are Jean Calvin and John Piper.

how can you have people making "the decision to follow Christ, and all decisions, are real decisions that people must make" and still have "those decisions governed by and predetermined by God". Because that seems to create a paradox in the idea of free will, ie the ability to make a decision on your own, and predestination, ie God has already "predetermined your decisions/actions/fate."

This thought goes farther into the idea of "having faith" in general. Because if you believe in free will that seems to contradict with the idea of having faith, because if you have fatih that God will lead you, or show you the way, or protect you, and then accept graciously everything that happens to you because God can work in mysterious ways, then it seems you have conceeded the idea of making all those decision on your own. Moreover, when something good happens to you, do you thank God?, because that seems to imply that it was predetermined. Or do you think back on all the decision that you made to get to that point of making that final good decision and thank youself, because that seems to contradict believing in God and having faith. On the other hand, maybe God could good also have predetermined all those decision leading up to ensure that you made that last said final good decision.

I hope my confusion makes sense to y'all.

thanks

my head starts spinning when i start thinking about this, but enjoy hearing others educated, cogent, and direct response to the issue.

GearOut wrote:A couple of questions/thoughts, excuse me if any of them are elementary.

First, how does the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints related to these stated common schools of thought regarding free will versus predestination determined by God.

The elementary questions are the most important. It's the elementary questions that bind us together as brothers in Christ, allowing us to have the discussions and disagreements we have without breaking fellowship.

In regards to your question, I think it stands to reason that if you see your salvation as being a free choice of your own, then you losing that salvation is as equally possible. On the opposite extreme, if your salvation is entirely in God's hands, then there is nothing you can do, even if you wanted to, to lose that salvation. The progression from one extreme to the other would follow just as the predestination progression did, from the most extreme example of God having no say whatsoever to the other extreme of man having no say whatsoever. Again, I'd say that most people would fall somewhere near the middle. I think in this thread you can see a strong Arminian argument coming from Deep Woods and a strong Calvinist argument coming from myself. Most people will fall either in or somewhere between those two camps.

GearOut wrote:how can you have people making "the decision to follow Christ, and all decisions, are real decisions that people must make" and still have "those decisions governed by and predetermined by God". Because that seems to create a paradox in the idea of free will, ie the ability to make a decision on your own, and predestination, ie God has already "predetermined your decisions/actions/fate."

.
First, I'd respond with a simple question of my own. Simply, do you believe the Bible is true? I'm going to assume you would answer yes, and if so, then you have to let God's Word define reality for you, even if what you can see or what you think is contrary to it. We have to interpret our experiences by God's Word, and not the other way around. With that in mind, the Bible is rife with commands to choose God. One of the most well known is Joshua 24:15, "Choose this day." The Bible is also full of examples of people choosing to do things, either good or evil, and people being held responsible for those things. The two big ones that come to mind are Joseph speaking to his brothers in Genesis 45 and 50, telling them that they did evil by selling him into slavery, and Peter's sermon in Acts 2 and prayer in Acts 4, blaming those in Jerusalem for killing Jesus. In both these examples the people are said to have made real choices that led to real actions that they are held responsible for. The Bible is not apologetic about their role in these events.

But also, in both of these instances, the people who willfully chose to do what they wanted are shown to be acting according to the definite, predetermined, plan of God.

Genesis 45:5 says, "And now do not be distressed or angry with yourselves because you sold me here, for God sent me before you to preserve life." In the span of just a few words, Joseph switches between "you sold me here" and "God sent me." He continues the same train of thought in v.7, telling them that God sent him. And again in v.8, he reiterates that, "it was not you who sent me here, but God." An amazing statement considering that his brothers obviously sold him into slavery, a fact that Joseph himself had stated just a few sentences earlier. The same sort of exchange takes place in ch. 50, v.20, when he goes a step further. He says, "As for you, you meant evil against me, but God meant it for good, to bring it about that many people should be kept alive, as they are today." So it wasn't just that the brothers made an evil choice and God made good come of it, but that God was actually involved in the brothers choosing evil.

The sermon by Peter is just as striking. Peter is speaking to the men of Jerusalem in Acts 2:23 when he says, "this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men." In one sentence Peter says that God not only foreknew that Jesus would be delivered, but it was according to God's definite plan that it was so. And yet, despite Peter's strong affirmation of God's control over Jesus' death, he places full blame on his audience for Jesus' murder.

The believers as a group echoed the same sentiment in their prayer in Acts 4:27-28 when they said, "for truly in this city there were gathered together against your holy servant Jesus, whom you anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, to do whatever your hand and your plan had predestined to take place." They are very specific in naming who is to blame, basically indicting everyone in Jesus' murder, and yet can say in the same sentence that it was all according to what God had predestined to take place. And it wasn't just a plan that God put in place and passively watched happen, but "your hand" shows that God was actively involved in bringing his will to pass. But, the blame is laid squarely and unapologetically at the feet of people.

So my response is, I don't know how it works, but it seems to me that the Bible teaches that God is sovereign over everything, even sinful decisions of humans, and yet the blame for those decisions is never placed on God. How those two go together, I don't understand. However, I don't have to understand it to acknowledge that it is true. Just the same, I affirm that Jesus was fully God and fully man, though I can't explain it. I affirm that God is a triune God, but still only one God, though I can't explain it. I think you see what I'm getting at.

GearOut wrote:Moreover, when something good happens to you, do you thank God?, because that seems to imply that it was predetermined. Or do you think back on all the decision that you made to get to that point of making that final good decision and thank youself,

This seems to get at what, in my opinion, it all boils down to. No matter which side of this debate you come down on, if you take it to it's "logical" extreme, you pass the bounds of Scripture. Open Theism is wrong. It's clearly not what the Bible teaches and it describes a god that is very different from the one I worship. But, most people will agree that Open Theism is just Arminianism, or the belief in free will, taken to its logical extreme. In the same way, Hard Determinism, or "Hyper-Calvinism" as it's been called, is wrong and does not describe the God of the Bible. But, again, most people will agree that it is taking the idea of a sovereign God to its logical extreme. However, logic does not supersede what is revealed in Scripture. And while both those extreme grow out of sound logic, they ignore a sound reading of Scripture.

So, both sides are charged with having a question that they cannot answer. Arminians can't provide a sound answer for how God can be completely sovereign if man is truly free, and Calvinists can't provide a compelling answer for how man's choices are real and meaningful if God is completely sovereign.

And in the end, as a wise old man once told me, "If that tension [between God's sovereignty and man's free will] is ever lost, then you have gone outside what Scripture reveals. That tension keeps Christians healthy and balanced."

It is just the same as Jesus being 100% God and 100% man..............I believe God is sovereign, but allows us as free 'moral' agents to make our own decisions. How, I can't completely explain, just as I can't explain how Jesus is was 100% man and 100% God. I reference the scripture in Joshua that you used, we each must 'choose' and I am so glad I have a choice. I worship out of a grateful heart, one of love. Why, you may ask......because my Savior died for me....took my place on the cross and brought about an end to the sting of death and the eternal effects of sin. How, you may ask.....believing upon his sacrifice, having his righteous blood wash away my sin.

Keep it up guys...I am enjoying this.

You still checking in Gear Out? Were your questions answered? Or did you have more?

There are very few things that I enjoy more than talking about God's word.

Chris

Ordek Avci,
I like where you are going with the never saved thing. I am now a part of a group starting a church based around exposatory preaching of the bible where we look at the whole book, the context and the audience that it was written to. This has opened my eyes and I have learned so much. I know there will be tons of people to bust Hell wide open because a pastor "made them feel guilty" and the Holy Spirit never moved on them. That is why I believe that in a sence it is predestination because the Holy Spirit moves on you not the other way around.

sorry sorry. out of commission for the next 10 days. but will read and catch back up then...

Ordek Avci wrote:You still checking in Gear Out? Were your questions answered? Or did you have more?

There are very few things that I enjoy more than talking about God's word.

Chris

me too!

I believe the the Holy Spirit moves upon everyone in some fashion as they sit under the gospel being preached. Just as the parable of the sower, the seed is being spread, just finds no ground to take root in.

Just as the children of Israel were God's chosen people, they still individually had to choose to follow his commandments or face judgment. Are all Israelite's in Abraham's bosom or only those that honored the Lord? When Christ came, suffered and died, he brought salvation to the Jews and the Gentiles, but we still must 'choose' to accept his sacrifice on the cross. Yes, the Holy Spirit draws us to him, but we can quench the spirit.

The Parable of the Sower is more of a root concern as I see it not the Holy Spirit but its just a difference of opinion. Most of the time people get so heated from passion it ends up being something thats not even Christian anymore. Ordek, you ever listen to Paul Washer? Get on youtube and check him out sometimes if not.

ronsmith wrote:The Parable of the Sower is more of a root concern as I see it not the Holy Spirit but its just a difference of opinion. Most of the time people get so heated from passion it ends up being something thats not even Christian anymore. Ordek, you ever listen to Paul Washer? Get on youtube and check him out sometimes if not.

I have listened to some Paul Washer. He makes some valid points and brings a lot of inconsistencies to light. However, it is easy and seemingly fashionable these days to be a critic of Christians and of the church.

I look more to guys like John Piper, Tim Keller, and even Mark Driscoll for inspiration and guidance. They're more balanced and pastoral in their ministries.

I just think he is refreshing. Never really learned anything but its good to have your cage rattled every now and then. I am a John Mcarthur guy myself.