Predestination

[SeRapH&CheRi]

I'm reading this book that a friend lent to me, it's called "Chosen by God"  by RC Sproul.  Any of you read it or heard of it? Anyways this book is rocking my whole train of thought with regards to the whole issue of predestination, so I'm wondering what your guys' thoughts or stance are on this particular issue.  Any takers?  ;)

[IslandBreeze]

I'll take.

I've always had a problem with predestination. I realize that it exists, but at the same time, why would God let people be born that he knows are going to hell? I understand that He gives us a free will to choose, but still...that doesn't seem very loving to me....I've definitely struggled with this one.

[Help-me-learn]

I feel predestination speaks of the gentiles being pre. with the jews to be one body called the church. I know God uses people He knows will go to hell to serve His purpose, but for God to choose certian people to go to hell then His word would be a lie when he says for all who will come.

[SeRapH&CheRi]

Originally posted by Cammie
I'll take.

I've always had a problem with predestination. I realize that it exists, but at the same time, why would God let people be born that he knows are going to hell? I understand that He gives us a free will to choose, but still...that doesn't seem very loving to me....I've definitely struggled with this one.

I know what you mean because I'm struggling with it too.  I mean, we definitlly need to affirm God's sovereignty over all things; but at the same time God does not do evil or violate human freedom.  Human freedom and evil are under God's sovereignty.  I have also questioned why God let people be born that he knows are going to hell.  I mean God knew in advance that man would fall and he could have intervened to stop it, right?  Or else, he could have chosen not to create us at all.  But the thing is, He knew man would fall and that he went ahead and created us anyway.  The author of the book I'm reading stated this, "He also knew in advance that he was going to implement a plan of redemption for his fallen creation that would include a perfect manifestation of his justice and a perfect expression of his love and mercy." (RC Sproul)  He also goes on to say that it was certainly loving of God to predestine the salvation of his people, those the Bible calls his "elect" or chosen ones. 

That last part disturbs me because if some are not elected unto salvation then it would seem that God is not all that loving toward them.    What do you all think?  :scratch:

[Job_38]

What I believe is commonly misunderstood is that God sends people to Hell. I know in a way it is, but in truth, we all deserve to go to Hell but the elect are given grace.

To Seraph: A good book to read about when we question God is Job-Chapter 38 to the end. Helped me out alot after I questioned God's way of doing things. I believe that God will do what He will do and whatever I feel does not matter. I hope the passage from Job helps.

Now, does this mean not to evangelize? Of course not. Because do we know who is chosen? No. If we did, if say everyone that was chosen to be saved had a mark on their back. Then we would go only to those. But without knowing, this actually increases the want(atleast for me) to evangelize. But at times, I fall into the trap of thinking I have it figured out. I never do. I have seen those saved who I thought could never be brought.

[Hewlett]

Romans 9 (God's Sovereign Choice)

14What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15For he says to Moses,
"I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."[6] 16It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy. 17For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth."[7] 18Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
19One of you will say to me: "Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?" 20But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? "Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, 'Why did you make me like this?' "[8] 21Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?
22What if God, choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath--prepared for destruction? 23What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory-- 24even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles? 25As he says in Hosea:
"I will call them 'my people' who are not my people;
and I will call her 'my loved one' who is not my loved one,"[9] 26and,
"It will happen that in the very place where it was said to them,
'You are not my people,'
they will be called 'sons of the living God.' "[10]
"

:bow:

[SeRapH&CheRi]

Hewlett, please expand on your thoughts.... :)

[Hewlett]

My purpose for putting those verses out there was to present scipture that asked then clearly answered the fairness question. What more could I add to that.

A couple of my thoughts on predestination:

1. God doesn't fit into our box.
2 You should expect to struggle if you trying to understand predestination. We shouldn't expect all answers from scripture to be easy. We are talking God here. Praise His name!!!
3. God is truely soverign.
4. I had a great deal of difficulty with predestination when it was first preached to me. It took a lot of time, but accepting predestination as true has has been a blessing to me. It has led me to a truely better understanding of who God is. I know that anyone can be saved. God has already won against evil. God is holy and should be worshipped.
5. Predestination contradicts nothing else God has promised. It may seem to at first. You just have to think outside of the box.

:bow: :bow:

[Reformationist]

Job_38 and Hewlett, wonderful posts. 

SeRapH&CheRi, That is a great book by a great man.  The works of Mr. Sproul are the most insightful and accurate books I've ever had the privelege of reading.

If I may, I would urge you to also read Sovereignty of God, by A.W. Pink (http://www.reformed.org/books/index.html).  It is a gripping book that explains this difficult issue in a very readable way.

God bless.

[MizDoulos]

Originally posted by Reformationist
Job_38 and Hewlett, wonderful posts. 

If I may, I would urge you to also read Sovereignty of God, by A.W. Pink (http://www.reformed.org/books/index.html).  It is a gripping book that explains this difficult issue in a very readable way.

God bless.


Amen! Pink is one of my favorite authors, and his book, "Sovereignty of God," is one of the best written books on the subject. I also would recommend reading Pink's book, "The Attributes of God," an excellent expose of God's nature.

Great suggestion, Reformationist! :)

[Sky]

I don't believe in predestination. The Bible says Jesus died for ALL, not just a select few. The Bible also says that God gave us a free will to choose, predestination is the idea that we have no free will and God decides whether we are going to hell or not before we were born and there's nothing we can do about it. Predestination must be false, as there is so much Biblical evidence against it.

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by Sky
The Bible says Jesus died for ALL, not just a select few.

Where does it say this?

The Bible also says that God gave us a free will to choose

Where does it say this?

predestination is the idea that we have no free will and God decides whether we are going to hell or not before we were born and there's nothing we can do about it.

And you think differently?  Why is that?

Predestination must be false, as there is so much Biblical evidence against it.

If there is so much evidence against predestination that you can see it so clearly why is it that this has been a topic of controversy for so many years?

Thanks for your answers,

God bless

[SeRapH&CheRi]

Reformationist, Mizdoulos and Hewlett (any relation to Hewlett Packard?  ;) ), Thanks for your thoughts and insight on the subject.  Ever since that first conversation with my friend regarding predestination and as I read through Sproul's book, it has honestly rocked my whole view of free will and how God works.  It's actually been challenging me and my whole mindset on the whole concept of predestination.  Please pray for me as I work through this and as I read through scripture on the subject. I will definitely be picking up A.W. Pink's literature!  Thanks!

S&C

[paulewog]

We can't understand how God can predestine us and give us a free will at the same time (yes I believe in predestination).

how is it God can be 3 in 1? How is it God can exist outside of time? How is it God has no beginning? How is it God could be a man, yet be God... fully, completely, at the same time? How could God be God at the same time and be constricted to time? How is it God could know EVERYTHING, pastmpresent and future?

I don't know! We *can't* know =)

Predestination is in Scripture, many places. "For whom He foreknew, He also predestined..." Ephesians somewhere, I forget where. It's probably been brought up before, hehe :)

I could make this really long, but it gets so tedious to read through long posts.

By the way - Jesus died for all. "For God so loved the WORLD ...." :) But He DID predestine. Yet we have a free will. Contradiction? No. We can't comprehend it.

Really, I can't comprehend eternity either. (sarcasm) Guess I can't believei n that either! :P

:)

[Project 86]

"Where does it say this? "

1Ti 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

He WILLS all human beings to be saved. That's his desire. If it's his desire it would be stupid of him to pick and choose.

"Where does it say this? "

Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the FREE GIFT came upon all men unto justification of life.

and another

Rom 6:22 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.

Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the GIFT of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
It's a gift. You can CHOOSE to accept it.

Here are some more. Somewhat related.

Act 16:30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, WHAT MUST I DO TO BE SAVED?
Act 16:31 And they said, BELIEVE ON THE Lord Jesus Christ, and THOU SHALT BE SAVED, and thy house.

and

Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Rom 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
Rom 10:11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
Rom 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.
Rom 10:13 For WHOSOEVER SHALL CALL upon the name of the Lord SHALL BE SAVED.

"If there is so much evidence against predestination that you can see it so clearly why is it that this has been a topic of controversy for so many years? "

Why have some people not believe in God for so many years? Why now a days do so many believe all ways lead to Heaven? See where I am going?

Here are just some random salvation scriptures I feel like throw around that may or may not directly relate to topic but since we are talking about salvation...

Act 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

Luk 13:1 There were present at that season some that told him of the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices.
Luk 13:2 And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things?
Luk 13:3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.
Luk 13:4 Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem?
Luk 13:5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

Rom 3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
Rom 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Rom 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
Rom 3:26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.
Rom 3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.
Rom 3:28 Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
Rom 3:29 Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:
Rom 3:30 Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.
Rom 3:31 Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.

Those above referring to laws of the OT and people thinking following them is what gets you into Heaven.

Rom 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

[MizDoulos]

Originally posted by SeRapH&CheRi
Reformationist, Mizdoulos and Hewlett (any relation to Hewlett Packard?  ;) ), Thanks for your thoughts and insight on the subject.  Ever since that first conversation with my friend regarding predestination and as I read through Sproul's book, it has honestly rocked my whole view of free will and how God works.  It's actually been challenging me and my whole mindset on the whole concept of predestination.  Please pray for me as I work through this and as I read through scripture on the subject. I will definitely be picking up A.W. Pink's literature!  Thanks!

S&C


You're welcome, SeRapH&CheRi. :) &nbspDo enjoy your books by Pink! &nbspSproul is another great Christian writer as is John MacArthur, Spurgeon, and many others.

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by Project 86
1Ti 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

Desire, huh?  Why do you suppose that word is used in this context?  Hmmm...So God, the Creator of all things created, the omnipotent Ruler of all things desires something to happen, and it doesn't, right?  You do agree that not all people will be saved, right, even though you think God desires it to be so?  So here's God, sitting on His throne in Heaven, desiring something to happen, and it doesn't.  Do you think when God "desires" something to happen it's the same as when His totally impotent creation desires something?  You see, there's a huge difference between us and God.  When we "desire" something most often we desire it for the wrong reasons and are limited in our ability to bring about that which we desire.  God's desires, however, are always spawned from a totally righteous Being, Himself with no counsel from you or me or anyone else, His motive is always righteous, and His "desires" are always sovereignly carried out exactly as He Wills.  Do you worship a god that is so powerless that he desires one thing to happen and it doesn't?  It seems so.  You say God, in all His glory and omnipotence, desires that all people be saved and yet, not all are.  Are you saying that God cannot bring about His desires (Will)?  Or is it just that you don't think He really desires "all men to be saved?" 

He WILLS all human beings to be saved. That's his desire. If it's his desire it would be stupid of him to pick and choose.

So the Will of the Sovereign, Omnipotent, Righteous, Creating, Controller of all things created "WILLS all human beings to be saved" and it doesn't happen?  Very powerful, sovereign, mighty god you have there. 

Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the FREE GIFT came upon all men unto justification of life.

Rom 6:22 But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.

Are these in response to the "free will" issue or the "dying for all" thing?  They don't seem to have anything to do with "free will" so I'll respond assuming they deal with the "dying for all" belief.

So the free gift of justification of life came upon all men?  That's your belief right?  Do you know what "justification of life" means?  It means eternal salvation.  It means being judged righteous by God.  Do you still think that came upon all men?

Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the GIFT of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
It's a gift. You can CHOOSE to accept it.

Hmmm...really?  That's strange because here in Ephesians 2 it seems to say differently:

Ephesians 2
<SUP>1</SUP> And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins,

Hmm...so, He made someone alive.&nbsp; Does that say He sought their counsel (will) first?&nbsp; What was their salvitic disposition at the time they were "made alive?"&nbsp; Oh that's right!&nbsp; They were dead.&nbsp; Does that mean physically?&nbsp; Or spiritually?&nbsp; So you think a spiritually dead person "turned to God" and "accepted His making them alive?"&nbsp; Well, let's continue:

<SUP>2</SUP>in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience

So, when we were dead, did we do things according to God's Word or according to the "course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobeience?"&nbsp; I think that one's pretty self explanatory.

<SUP>3</SUP>among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others.

So here's Paul saying the people who are now changed, that is, those God made alive used to, before being "made alive," walk according to the same spirit of disobedience that those who have not been made alive still walk.&nbsp; We were children of God at that time?&nbsp; Or maybe, just maybe, "children of wrath?"&nbsp; Then Paul says, "just as the others."&nbsp; Who do you think he might have been talking about if "justification of life" (salvation) has "come upon all men?"&nbsp; Who are those "others?"&nbsp; Maybe, just maybe, those are the people whom God has not redeemed.&nbsp; Hmmm...I haven't yet seen where we "accept the gift" yet, but maybe it's further on.&nbsp; Let's continue:

<SUP>4</SUP>But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,<SUP> 5</SUP>even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),

So God made us alive why?&nbsp; You say it's because we "accept the free gift," right?&nbsp; What does it say here?&nbsp; It's because of He is "rich in mercy," because of the "great love with which He loved us," "made us alive WHEN WE WERE DEAD in trespasses."&nbsp; How were we saved?&nbsp; Was it by the "accepting" of the "gift?"&nbsp; Oh that's right, it was God's grace.&nbsp; Hmmm...still haven't seen where we "accept" the "gift" for it to be made manifest.&nbsp; But, maybe it's further on.&nbsp; Let's continue:

<SUP>6</SUP>and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,

He raised us up, He made us sit together.&nbsp; Hmmm...where were you in this?

<SUP>7</SUP>that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.<SUP> 8</SUP>For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,<SUP> 9</SUP>not of works, lest anyone should boast.

So let's see.&nbsp; We were saved by grace, though faith, and not having to do with anything of ourselves (like accepting the gift) and it's God's gift, not your works, so you can't boast.&nbsp; So why were you saved?&nbsp; Did it have anything to do with anything you did?&nbsp; Because, if you say it did, your boasting that your salvation was the result of your own doing, your "acceptance" and that it's not solely by God's grace.

<SUP>10</SUP>For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

So when Paul says "we" who do you think he's talking about?&nbsp; Everyone?&nbsp; Of course you do.&nbsp; However, Paul clarifies who he is talking about.&nbsp; Those who were "created in Christ Jesus for good works."&nbsp; When did God prepare those people to do exactly that which He had created them for?&nbsp; It says "beforehand."&nbsp; Before what?&nbsp; Well, I'll tell ya.&nbsp; I don't know the exact second but I can tell you it was looooooooooong before you think you "accepted the gift."

Here are some more. Somewhat related.

Act 16:30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, WHAT MUST I DO TO BE SAVED?
Act 16:31 And they said, BELIEVE ON THE Lord Jesus Christ, and THOU SHALT BE SAVED, and thy house.

I'm not disputing belief is necessary.&nbsp; I'm&nbsp;clarifying what the source is that enables some to believe, and some not to.&nbsp; Guess what?&nbsp; It's not the creation.&nbsp; It's the Creator.&nbsp;

Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Rom 10:10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
Rom 10:11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
Rom 10:12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

Again, those that will&nbsp;"confess with their mouth" and "believe in their heart unto righteousness" and&nbsp;"call upon him" are those whom He has "prepared beforehand" to do so, His elect.&nbsp; He is sovereign, not us.&nbsp; We are subject to His&nbsp;Will.&nbsp; He is not subject&nbsp;to our will.

Why have some people not believe in God for so many years?

Uhhh...I thought I was just pointing out that very thing.&nbsp; They are fallen and God has not regenerated them yet.&nbsp; He has not "taken out their heart of stone" and replaced it with the heart of flesh" that is able to believe.

Why now a days do so many believe all ways lead to Heaven?

Uhhh...because they're relying on their own fallen beliefs which are erroneous.&nbsp; It is their very nature to do so.&nbsp; They are only acting according to their own demented, fallen nature that acts in accordance to the same spirit of disobedience that compels the prince of the power of the air.

See where I am going?

Not in the least.

Rom 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

And yet you still assume that for the death of God to be made manifest in your life something other than His death is required.&nbsp; So the death of God wasn't enough but it's "your acceptance" that makes the difference.&nbsp; Who is glorified in your position?&nbsp; Oh that's right, you.

God bless

[Loser For Jesus]

Originally posted by Reformationist
So the Will of the Sovereign, Omnipotent, Righteous, Creating, Controller of all things&nbsp;created "WILLS all human beings to be saved" and it doesn't happen?&nbsp; Very powerful, sovereign, mighty god you have there.

Sorry, but this is a rather childish argument.&nbsp;Did God "desire" Adam and Eve to obey Him in the Garden of Eden? Or did God "desire" them to sin? Does God "desire" evil on the earth?

And yet you still assume that for the death of God to be made manifest in your life something other than His death is required.&nbsp; So the death of God wasn't enough but it's "your acceptance" that makes the difference.&nbsp; Who is glorified in your position? Oh that's right, you.

Providing answers to your own questions is certainly one way to "win" an argument!

love in Christ,

Malcolm

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by Loser For Jesus
Sorry, but this is a rather childish argument.&nbsp;Did God "desire" Adam and Eve to obey Him in the Garden of Eden? Or did God "desire" them to sin? Does God "desire" evil on the earth?

Oh no.&nbsp; Of course God desires that&nbsp;there be no evil on earth.&nbsp; Of course God desired that Adam and Eve obey Him in the Garden.&nbsp; Yeah.&nbsp; Right.&nbsp; God doesn't want something to happen, but it&nbsp;happens anyway.&nbsp; Very powerful.&nbsp; Very sovereign.&nbsp; Maybe, just maybe, when you see&nbsp;the little events we experience as only one little speck in time, and since you can't see the purpose for everything that happens you should trust that God, in His Divine sovereignty, has foreordained that that event is the exact thing necessary to bring about the changes in you that He has sovereignly decreed.&nbsp; God - not reacting to the things you or I do, You and I- reacting to everything that comes your way.&nbsp; Who is exalted there?&nbsp; You answer this time.


Providing answers to your own questions is certainly one way to "win" an argument!

I wasn't trying to win anything Malcolm.&nbsp; I was obviously out of line and did not say it in a spirit of love though.&nbsp; I apologize.&nbsp;

God bless

[Loser For Jesus]

Originally posted by Reformationist
Maybe, just maybe, when you see&nbsp;the little events we experience as only one little speck in time, and since you can't see the purpose for everything that happens you should trust that God, in His Divine sovereignty, has foreordained that that event is the exact thing necessary to bring about the changes in you that He has sovereignly decreed.&nbsp; God - not reacting to the things you or I do, You and I- reacting to everything that comes your way.&nbsp; Who is exalted there? You answer this time.

There's no question of belittling God's sovereignty here, nor&nbsp;His glory. You simply need to understand God's sovereignty on a much deeper level.

Obviously God allowed Adam and Eve to sin, obviously He allows evil in the world - because these things are part of His perfect and sovereign plan. The question was, does God actually "desire" these things? God caused the Israelites to eat their own children (Jeremiah 19:9), but did He really want to have to do something like that?

On the one hand, God is a God of love and&nbsp;holiness - therefore, He obviously doesn't desire evil or disobedience or people eating their own children. On the other hand, God is still a God of love and holiness - therefore, He desires to punish sin and disobedience and draw only those who will truly love Him into fellowship with Himself.

This is in no way a question of God reacting to us, or being forced into anything by us. It is a matter of God always acting in accordance&nbsp;with His own divine character.

You can't deal with this issue&nbsp;using human wisdom, or with a neat little package of doctrines. Let God crucify your own opinions and show you His wisdom on this.

love in Christ,

Malcolm

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by Loser For Jesus
There's no question of belittling God's sovereignty here, nor&nbsp;His glory. You simply need to understand God's sovereignty on a much deeper level.

Oh.&nbsp;&nbsp;Well, that makes&nbsp;everything much clearer.&nbsp; I&nbsp;hope that one day I can simply understand God's sovereignty on the much deeper level&nbsp;that you do. :rolleyes:&nbsp;&nbsp;I don't think I have any problem understanding this.&nbsp;

Obviously God allowed Adam and Eve to sin, obviously He allows evil in the world - because these things are part of His perfect and sovereign plan.

So He "allowed" it because it was part of His plan.&nbsp; Tell me, if it was part of God's "perfect and sovereign" plan that Adam and Eve sin and there be evil in the world, why is it you think He needs to allow it be here?&nbsp; I'd say it was more&nbsp;His decree than His allowance.

The question was, does God actually "desire" these things? God caused the Israelites to eat their own children (Jeremiah 19:9), but did He really want to have to do something like that?

You speak of God as if there's a difference between what&nbsp;He desires and what He decrees as if He decrees something that is less loving, or less compassionate, or less righteous than that which He desires.&nbsp; You're the one who said God "always acts in accordance&nbsp;with His own divine character."&nbsp; Why would God, who always decrees something for the righteous reason desire something different than that which He decrees?&nbsp; You act as if God can't make up His mind what to do.&nbsp; "Well, there's this righteous thing to do and it's part of My plan, and then there's this thing that I desire to do.&nbsp; Hmmm...what should I do."&nbsp; I don't think so.&nbsp; God's desire for His children is that they be conformed to the image of His son.&nbsp; His desire is that His children be sanctified.&nbsp; Guess what happens?&nbsp; Exactly that.

You can't deal with this issue&nbsp;using human wisdom, or with a neat little package of doctrines. Let God crucify your own opinions and show you His wisdom on this.

So I can't deal with this issue "using human wisdom, or neat little packages of doctrines" but&nbsp;you can?&nbsp; Tell me again who it was that made you the authority on Divine wisdom?

love in Christ

Oh, my bad.&nbsp; Was all that offered in a spirit of "love in Christ?"&nbsp; Yeah, right.:rolleyes:

[Loser For Jesus]

Given your attitude, I'm not even going to bother trying to continue this.

love in Christ,
Malcolm

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by Loser For Jesus
Given your attitude, I'm not even going to bother trying to continue this.

love in Christ,
Malcolm

Right.&nbsp; I understand.&nbsp; It's much easier to look at my shortcomings in this discussion than to focus on your own.&nbsp; It's probably for the best.&nbsp; Hopefully we can address your other thread on sovereignty in a spirit of Christian love and brotherhood.

God bless

[Hewlett]

I am a proponent of the Calvinist view on predestination, but I would like to present the major protestant opposing view. Thought it might be helpful.

What follows is an article by J. Grider who is an important apologist for this opposing view called 'arminiansim'.



http://www.mb-soft.com/believe/txc/arminian.htm
Arminianism
Advanced Information

The theological stance of James Arminius and the movement which stemmed from him. It views Christian doctrine much as the pre - Augustinian fathers did and as did the later John Wesley. In several basic ways it differs from the Augustinian fathers did and as did the later John Wesley. In several basic ways it differs from the Augustine - Luther - Calvin tradition.

This form of Protestanism arose in the United Netherlands shortly after the "alteration" from Roman Catholicism had occurred in that country. It stresses Scripture alone as the highest authority for doctrines. And it teaches that justification is by grace alone, there being no meritoriousness in our faith that occasions justification, since it is only through prevenient grace that fallen humanity can exercise that faith.

Arminianism is a distinct kind of Protestant theology for several reasons. One of its distinctions is its teaching on predestination. It teaches predestination, since the Scripture writers do, but it understands that this predecision on God's part is to save the ones who repent and believe. Thus its view is called conditional predestination, since the predetermination of the destiny of individuals is based on God's foreknowledge of the way in which they will either freely reject Christ or freely accept him.

Arminius defended his view most precisely in his commentary on Romans 9, Examination of Perkins' Pamphlet, and Declaration of Sentiments. He argued against supralapsarianism, popularized by John Calvin's son - in - law and Arminius's teacher at Geneva, Theodore Beza, and vigorously defended at the University of Leiden by Francis Gomarus, a colleague of Arminius. Their view was that before the fall, indeed before man's creation, God had already determined what the eternal destiny of each person was to be. Arminius also believed that the sublapsarian unconditional predestination view of Augustine and Martin Luther is unscriptural.

This is the view that Adam's sin was freely chosen but that, after Adam's fall, the eternal destiny of each person was determined by the absolutely sovereign God. In his Declaration of Sentiments (1608) Arminius gave twenty arguments against supralapsarianism, which he said (not quite correctly) applied also to sublapsarianism. These included such arguments as that the view is void of good news; repugnant to God's wise, just, and good nature, and to man's free nature; "highly dishonorable to Jesus Christ"; "hurtful to the salvation of men"; and that it "inverts the order of the gospel of Jesus Christ" (which is that we are justified after we believe, not prior to our believing). He said the arguments all boil down to one, actually: that unconditional predestination makes God "the author of sin."

Connected with Arminius's view of conditional predestination are other significant teachings of "the quiet Dutchman." One is his emphasis on human freedom. Here he was not Pelagian, as some have thought. He believed profoundly in original sin, understanding that the will of natural fallen man is not only maimed and wounded, but that it is entirely unable, apart from prevenient grace, to do any good thing. Another teaching is that Christ's atonement is unlimited in its benefits. He understood that such texts as "he died for all" (2 Cor. 5:15; cf. 2 Cor. 5:14; Titus 2:11; 1 John 2:2) mean what they say, while Puritans such as John Owen and other Calvinists have understood that the "all" means only all of those previously elected to be saved. A third view is that while God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance (1 Tim. 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9; Matt. 18:14), saving grace is not irresistible, as in classical Calvinism. It can be rejected.

In Arminius's view believers may lose their salvation and be eternally lost. Quoting as support of this position such passages as 1 Pet. 1:10, "Therefore, brethren, be the more zealous to confirm your call and election, for if you do this you will never fall," Arminians still seek to nourish and encourage believers so that they might remain in a saved state. While Arminians feel that they have been rather successful in disinclining many Calvinists from such views as unconditional election, limited atonement, and irresistible grace, they realize that they have not widely succeeded in the area of eternal security. R T Shank's Life in the Son and H O Wiley's 3 - volume Christian Theology make a good scriptural case against eternal security from within the Arminian tradition, but the position has been unconvincing to Calvinists generally.

A spillover from Calvinism into Arminianism has occurred in recent decades. Thus many Arminians whose theology is not very precise say that Christ paid the penalty for our sins. Yet such a view is foreign to Arminianism, which teaches instead that Christ suffered for us. Arminians teach that what Christ did he did for every person; therefore what he did could not have been to pay the penalty, since no one would then ever go into eternal perdition. Arminianism teaches that Christ suffered for everyone so that the Father could forgive the ones who repent and believe; his death is such that all will see that forgiveness is costly and will strive to cease from anarchy in the world God governs. This view is called the governmental theory of the atonement.

Its germinal teachings are in Arminius, but his student, the lawyer - theologian Hugo Grotius, delineated the view. Methodism's John Miley best explicated the theory in his The Atonement in Christ (1879). Arminians who know their theology have problems in such cooperative ministries with Calvinists as the Billy Graham campaigns because the workers are often taught to counsel people that Christ paid the penalty for their sins. But it is an important aspect of the Arminian tradition, from Arminius himself, through John Wesley, to the present, to be of tolerant spirit; so they often cooperate in these ministries without mentioning the matter to the leadership. Arminians feel that the reason Scripture always states that Christ suffered (e.g., Acts 17:3; 26:23; 2 Cor. 1:5; Phil. 3:10; Heb. 2:9 - 10; 13:12; 1 Pet. 1:11; 2:21: 3:18; 4:1, 13), and never that he was punished, is because the Christ who was crucified was guiltless because he was sinless. They also feel that God the Father would not be forgiving us at all if his justice was satisfied by the real thing that justice needs: punishment.

They understand that there can be only punishment or forgiveness, not both, realizing, e.g., that a child is either punished or forgiven, not forgiven after the punishment has been meted out.

A spillover into Arminianism from Baptistic Calvinism is an opposition to infant baptism. Until recently the long Arminian tradition has customarily emphasized infant baptism, as did Arminius and Wesley (Luther and Calvin too, for that matter). It has been considered as the sacrament which helps prevenient grace to be implemented, restraining the child until such time as he becomes evangelically converted. Arminians believe that the several household baptisms mentioned in Acts 16 - 17 and 1 Cor. 1 imply that infants were baptized, and that this act is the NT counterpart of OT circumcision. But the untutored often feel that they should not baptize infants, because so many Baptist - type evangelicals do not.

Biblical inerrancy is another spillover. The Arminian tradition has been a part of the long Protestant tradition which Fuller Seminary's Jack Rogers discusses in his Confessions of a Conservative Evangelical. It is interested in the Bible's authority and infallibility, and expresses confidence that Scripture is inerrant on matters of faith and practice, while remaining open on possible mathematical, historical, or geographical errors. Its scholars in general do not believe that Harold Lindsell correctly interprets the long Christian tradition on Scripture in such works as The Battle for the Bible, when he says that until about 150 years ago Christians in general believed in the total inerrancy of Scripture.

Another spillover is in eschatological matters. Arminianism is not dispensationalist as such, has not committed itself to a given millennial view, and has little interest in specific prophecies (believing God would have us concentrate on what is clear in Scripture: Christ's redemption and a holy life). But many lay Arminians have succumbed to such popular prophetic books as those of Hal Lindsey, which teach unequivocally that present political events and trends fulfill specific biblical prophecies.

A considerable problem to Arminians is that they have often been misrepresented. Some scholars have said that Arminianism is Pelagian, is a form of theological liberalism, and is syncretistic. It is true that one wing of Arminianism picked up Arminius's stress on human freedom and tolerance toward differing theologies, becoming latitudinarian and liberal. Indeed the two denominations in Holland that issued from Arminius are largely such today. But Arminians who promote Arminius's actual teachings and those of the great Arminian John Wesley, whose view and movement have sometimes been called "Arminianism of fire," have disclaimed all those theologically left associations. Such Arminians largely comprise the eight million or so Christians who today constitute the Christian Holiness Association (the Salvation Army, the Church of the Nazarene, the Wesleyan Church, etc.).

This kind of Arminianism strongly defends Christ's virgin birth, miracles, bodily resurrection, and substitutionary atonement (his suffering for the punishment believers would have received); the dynamic inspiration and infallibility of Scripture; justification by grace alone through faith alone; and the final destinies of heaven and hell. It is therefore evangelical, but an evangelicalism which is at certain important points different from evangelical Calvinism.

J K Grider

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by Hewlett
I am a proponent of the Calvinist view on predestination, but I would like to present the major protestant opposing view. Thought it might be helpful.

Hmmm... :scratch: You support the Calvinist view on predestination but you thought it would be helpful to present the Arminian viewpoint on predestination.&nbsp; Sorry bro.&nbsp; That confuses me.

God bless.

[Hewlett]

I figured putting out a different viewpoint other than my own would cause some confusion. But, there is a point. I hope I can make it.

I thought it would help frame the debate we are having here by putting out
the most common logical conclusion to opposition of the Calvinist view on predestination.

The debate over predestination within the Protestant church is old and has already been debated by many scholars much smarter and knowledgable of scripture than me or anybody else in these forums. So the arguments and positions are already there and well known.

If a person is opposed to predestination because they don't like it or think it is non-biblical then where with the spectrum of these two already well defined positions does your position lie?


God bless
:)

[Reformationist]

Originally posted by Hewlett
I figured putting out a different viewpoint other than my own would cause some confusion. But, there is a point. I hope I can make it.

I thought it would help frame the debate we are having here by putting out
the most common logical conclusion to opposition of the Calvinist view on predestination.

The debate over predestination within the Protestant church is old and has already been debated by many scholars much smarter and knowledgable of scripture than me or anybody else in these forums. So the arguments and positions are already there and well known.

If a person is opposed to predestination because they don't like it or think it is non-biblical then where with the spectrum of these two already well defined positions does your position lie?


God bless
:)

Good point.&nbsp; I'd have to say, as a matter of Scriptural support, I am a strong proponant of the Calvinist position.

God bless.

[SeRapH&CheRi]

Okay guys I didn't want to start a big fight here. I just wanted to hear what the different viewpoints were on the subject. I don't think that predestination is something that our faith should boast about, but it definitely is an issue that I, myself have been challenged to research through scripture and books that Godly men have written. I get pretty emotional about it at times.....sometimes even disturbed that God has chosen me and not Joe Shmo next door because I think of the concept of free will. but then, there is also the truth of God's sovereignty....aaahhhhh! I'm probably not making any sense here, and so i'm just gonna voice my thoughts, regardless. Any other thoughts?