Can some be predestined and others have free will

[Roman57]

As we all know, Calvinists believe that everyone is predestined, while Arminians believe that everyone have free will. I propose a theory when "some" are predestined and "some" have free will. So lets put it this way:

Arminianism: There is one group of people, mankind as a whole, all have free will. Jesus atoned for all the mankind (total atonement).

Calvinism: There are two groups of people: 1) people that are predestined for salvation 2) people that are predestined for damnation. Jesus attoned for group 1 but not group 2 (partial atonement)

My view: There are three groups of people: 1) people that are predestined for salvation 2) people that are predestined for damnation 3) people that have free will. Jesus attoned for groups 1 and 3. So it is also partial attonement but a different kind. It is partial because it didn't include group 2. But it is not irresistable because group 3 is free to either accept it or reject it. At the same time, it is irresistable for group 1. I would further say that groups 1 and 2 can only be limitted to select few (such as biblical figures and politicians) while group 3 can be the majority of the mankind. Examples of people in group 1 would be apostles and prophets. Examples of people in group 2 would be Pharaoh, Judas Escariot, first century Jews, antichrist, some goverment figures. Examples of people in group 3 are ordinary people like you and me. Incidentally, I think Cain was in group 3, because God told Cain "if you do well, will you not be accepted?"

The way my view makes sense in terms of Romans 9 is that this chapter talks about specific people and specific groups of people: namely, the Pharaoh and also the Jewish people (except for the remnant) in church's age. In particular, the question was posed about Jewish people, as in God might not be fair towards them by hardening their hearts, and then that question was answered by saying that God did the same with Pharaoh. So it never said that it applies to everyone who ever goes to hell. It only said it applies to those specific people. And yes, even if it applies to only a minority of people, one can still be bothered by it. So one can still ask questions such as the ones Romans 9 was trying to answer.

One interesting thing about Romans 9 is that it used an analogy of a potter and a clay. Now, when a potter makes stuff, it usually has a purpose: to teach people a lesson. But what is the point of teaching a lesson if nobody has free will? On the other hand, the point becomes apparent if only some people (namely, the characters of that story) don't have free will, while other people (the readers of the story) do. So maybe God used a clay to make Groups 1 and 2, who don't have a free will, in order to teach some lessons to Group 3, who has free will, and who is watching them?

As far as the verse "who is resisted His will?" that verse is still true: Group 3 didn't resist God's will, since God's will was to give that group free will. So God didn't will for group 3 to either go to heaven or hell, hence it didn't resist its will. On the other hand, God "did" will heaven for group 1 and hell for group 2, and those two groups didn't resist His will either.

As far as "who are you to reply against God", that has to do with people that feel bad for group 2. This doesn't change the fact that group 3 still has free will.

 

[Teresa W.]

I believe it is God's will for all to be saved.

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not willing for any to perish, but for all to come to repentance. NASB​

​

1 Timothy 2:3-4 This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. NASB​

​

John 1:12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name, NASB​

​

I think if God hardened someone's heart, it was to use them in a certain way and He already knew they weren't going to be saved anyway.

 

[FutureAndAHope]

As we all know, Calvinists believe that everyone is predestined, while Arminians believe that everyone have free will. I propose a theory when "some" are predestined and "some" have free will. So lets put it this way:

Arminianism: There is one group of people, mankind as a whole, all have free will. Jesus atoned for all the mankind (total atonement).

Calvinism: There are two groups of people: 1) people that are predestined for salvation 2) people that are predestined for damnation. Jesus attoned for group 1 but not group 2 (partial atonement)

My view: There are three groups of people: 1) people that are predestined for salvation 2) people that are predestined for damnation 3) people that have free will. Jesus attoned for groups 1 and 3. So it is also partial attonement but a different kind. It is partial because it didn't include group 2. But it is not irresistable because group 3 is free to either accept it or reject it. At the same time, it is irresistable for group 1. I would further say that groups 1 and 2 can only be limitted to select few (such as biblical figures and politicians) while group 3 can be the majority of the mankind. Examples of people in group 1 would be apostles and prophets. Examples of people in group 2 would be Pharaoh, Judas Escariot, first century Jews, antichrist, some goverment figures. Examples of people in group 3 are ordinary people like you and me. Incidentally, I think Cain was in group 3, because God told Cain "if you do well, will you not be accepted?"

The way my view makes sense in terms of Romans 9 is that this chapter talks about specific people and specific groups of people: namely, the Pharaoh and also the Jewish people (except for the remnant) in church's age. In particular, the question was posed about Jewish people, as in God might not be fair towards them by hardening their hearts, and then that question was answered by saying that God did the same with Pharaoh. So it never said that it applies to everyone who ever goes to hell. It only said it applies to those specific people. And yes, even if it applies to only a minority of people, one can still be bothered by it. So one can still ask questions such as the ones Romans 9 was trying to answer.

One interesting thing about Romans 9 is that it used an analogy of a potter and a clay. Now, when a potter makes stuff, it usually has a purpose: to teach people a lesson. But what is the point of teaching a lesson if nobody has free will? On the other hand, the point becomes apparent if only some people (namely, the characters of that story) don't have free will, while other people (the readers of the story) do. So maybe God used a clay to make Groups 1 and 2, who don't have a free will, in order to teach some lessons to Group 3, who has free will, and who is watching them?

As far as the verse "who is resisted His will?" that verse is still true: Group 3 didn't resist God's will, since God's will was to give that group free will. So God didn't will for group 3 to either go to heaven or hell, hence it didn't resist its will. On the other hand, God "did" will heaven for group 1 and hell for group 2, and those two groups didn't resist His will either.

As far as "who are you to reply against God", that has to do with people that feel bad for group 2. This doesn't change the fact that group 3 still has free will.

There are only one group of people, all are given God's good will, but not everybody chooses it.

Luke 13:34 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, but you were not willing!

God has a willingness to save all. Even Judas could have been saved. The Bible shows us that God gives His knowledge to all, but people can resist that knowledge then God uses them for a negative purpose, as He did Judas.

See the following link for info on Judas:

The Way and Free Will

An online book on Free Will Salvation in man. A counterargument to Predestination.

www.everybodymattersministry.com

The following section lists how the Early Church Father's saw Pharoah's hardening (part way through the chapter on Romans 9)

The Way and Free Will

An online book on Free Will Salvation in man. A counterargument to Predestination.

www.everybodymattersministry.com

 

[Roman57]

God has a willingness to save all. Even Judas could have been saved. The Bible shows us that God gives His knowledge to all, but people can resist that knowledge then God uses them for a negative purpose, as He did Judas.

Thats an interesting thought. It also reminds me of something else. The common thinking is that Jewish rejection of Jesus was part of God's plan. Allegedly, if Jews didn't reject Jesus, this would have prevented gentiles from getting the Gospel. However, there is one verse that suggests otherwise:

Romans 11: 15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?

Now, its true that the above verse refers to the future event, not the past. But, if you look at the structure of that verse, it seems like it portrays said future event as a corollary of a general principle. Well, if we apply that principle to "what would have happened if Jews didn't reject Jesus in the past", it would have implied that there would have been some other plan of bringing gentiles in, that would have been even greater than the plan that took place. But we would never know what that plan would have been, since that situation didn't happen. This is also in harmony with the Luke 13:34 verse that you quoted.

In other words, God might have had two separate plans of converting gentiles: one in case Jews accept Jesus on His first coming, and the other in the event that they don't. Each plan was there from the foundation of the world, but then based on people's free will decision God decides which of those plans to activate.

That same principle can be applicable not just to Jews but to others also. So even if we are talking about some totally different event (some non-jewish person living several centuries after Christ, or some Jewish person living several centuries before), then its also possible God has plans on how to use their choices for good, whatever their choices happen to be.

Nevertheless, what I proposed in the OP stands. I still think its possible to have three groups of people, with Groups 1 and 2 being predestined. The only thing I said right now is that Group 3 could expand and Groups 1 and 2 can shrink. But as they shrink they would still have some people in them, just fewer. What I just said elaborates on how some other people (who would normally be perceived to be in Groups 1 and 2) can actually belong to Group 3 after all. But its still logically possible to have some other people in Groups 1 and 2.

Both in the OP, and now, I am saying that God's plan doesn't have to be a dichotomy. It can be multifaced. Both in a sense of having Groups 1, 2 and 3 (as described in original post) and in a way of having multiple plans for people belonging to Group 3 (as discussed now).

 

[FutureAndAHope]

Thats an interesting thought. It also reminds me of something else. The common thinking is that Jewish rejection of Jesus was part of God's plan. Allegedly, if Jews didn't reject Jesus, this would have prevented gentiles from getting the Gospel. However, there is one verse that suggests otherwise:

Romans 11: 15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?

Now, its true that the above verse refers to the future event, not the past. But, if you look at the structure of that verse, it seems like it portrays said future event as a corollary of a general principle. Well, if we apply that principle to "what would have happened if Jews didn't reject Jesus in the past", it would have implied that there would have been some other plan of bringing gentiles in, that would have been even greater than the plan that took place. But we would never know what that plan would have been, since that situation didn't happen. This is also in harmony with the Luke 13:34 verse that you quoted.

In other words, God might have had two separate plans of converting gentiles: one in case Jews accept Jesus on His first coming, and the other in the event that they don't. Each plan was there from the foundation of the world, but then based on people's free will decision God decides which of those plans to activate.

That same principle can be applicable not just to Jews but to others also. So even if we are talking about some totally different event (some non-jewish person living several centuries after Christ, or some Jewish person living several centuries before), then its also possible God has plans on how to use their choices for good, whatever their choices happen to be.

Nevertheless, what I proposed in the OP stands. I still think its possible to have three groups of people, with Groups 1 and 2 being predestined. The only thing I said right now is that Group 3 could expand and Groups 1 and 2 can shrink. But as they shrink they would still have some people in them, just fewer. What I just said elaborates on how some other people (who would normally be perceived to be in Groups 1 and 2) can actually belong to Group 3 after all. But its still logically possible to have some other people in Group 2.

Both in the OP, and now, I am saying that God's plan doesn't have to be a dichotomy. It can be multifaced. Both in a sense of having Groups 1, 2 and 3 (as described in original post) and in a way of having multiple plans for people belonging to Group 3 (as discussed now).

I suggest that you look at the following scriptures:

1Pe 1:17 And if you call on the Father, who without partiality judges according to each one's work, conduct yourselves throughout the time of your stay here in fear;

Rom 2:6-11 who "WILL RENDER TO EACH ONE ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS": eternal life to those who by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness—indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek; but glory, honor, and peace to everyone who works what is good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For there is no partiality with God.

They say that God judges without partiality, partiality is to judge different parts differently. He judges everybody the same. All temptation and life is common to man.

1Co 10:13 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.

As for a flexible plan based upon man's choices that is how I believe God's planning works.


As for predestination, it is not how we see it. The Early Church Fathers (within the first and second century) said foreknowledge does not equate to predestination. That man has genuine free will. As examples:

Justin Martyr [A.D. 110-165]​

But lest some suppose, from what has been said by us, that we say that whatever happens, happens by a fatal necessity, because it is foretold as known beforehand, this too we explain. We have learned from the prophets, and we hold it to be true, that punishments, and chastisements, and good rewards, are rendered according to the merit of each man’s actions. Since if it be not so, but all things happen by fate, neither is anything at all in our own power. For if it be fated that this man, e.g., be good, and this other evil, neither is the former meritorious nor the latter to be blamed. And again, unless the human race have the power of avoiding evil and choosing good by free choice, they are not accountable for their actions, of whatever kind they be. But that it is by free choice they both walk uprightly and stumble, we thus demonstrate. We see the same man making a transition to opposite things. Now, if it had been fated that he were to be either good or bad, he could never have been capable of both the opposites, nor of so many transitions. But not even would some be good and others bad, since we thus make fate the cause of evil, and exhibit her as acting in opposition to herself; or that which has been already stated would seem to be true, that neither virtue nor vice is anything, but that things are only reckoned good or evil by opinion; which, as the true word shows, is the greatest impiety and wickedness. But this we assert is inevitable fate, that they who choose the good have worthy rewards, and they who choose the opposite have their merited awards. For not like other things, as trees and quadrupeds, which cannot act by choice, did God make man: for neither would he be worthy of reward or praise did he not of himself choose the good, but were created for this end; nor, if he were evil, would he be worthy of punishment, not being evil of himself, but being able to be nothing else than what he was made (Rev. Dods 1867, Justin Martyr - First Apology - Ch 43)

AND

... Furthermore, I have proved in what has preceded, that those who were foreknown to be unrighteous, whether men or angels, are not made wicked by God’s fault, but each man by his own fault is what he will appear to be... (Rev. Dods 1867, Justin Martyr - Dialoque with Trypho, Ch 140)

AND

I said briefly by anticipation, that God, wishing men and angels to follow His will, resolved to create them free to do righteousness; possessing reason, that they may know by whom they are created, and through whom they, not existing formerly, do now exist; and with a law that they should be judged by Him, if they do anything contrary to right reason: and of ourselves we, men and angels, shall be convicted of having acted sinfully, unless we repent beforehand. But if the word of God foretells that some angels and men shall be certainly punished, it did so because it foreknew that they would be unchangeably [wicked], but not because God had created them so. So that if they repent, all who wish for it can obtain mercy from God: and the Scripture foretells that they shall be blessed, saying, ‘Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not sin;’... (Rev. Dods 1867, Justin Martyr - Dialoque with Trypho, Ch 141)

Irenaeus [A.D. 120-202] Taught Free Will Not Predestination​

1. This expression [of our Lord], “How often would I have gathered thy children together, and thou wouldest not,” (Mat 23:37) set forth the ancient law of human liberty, because God made man a free [agent] from the beginning, possessing his own power, even as he does his own soul, to obey the behests (ad utendum sententia) of God voluntarily, and not by compulsion of God. For there is no coercion with God, but a good will [towards us] is present with Him continually. And therefore does He give good counsel to all. And in man, as well as in angels, He has placed the power of choice (for angels are rational beings), so that those who had yielded obedience might justly possess what is good, given indeed by God, but preserved by themselves. On the other hand, they who have not obeyed shall, with justice, be not found in possession of the good, and shall receive condign punishment: for God did kindly bestow on them what was good; but they themselves did not diligently keep it, nor deem it something precious, but poured contempt upon His super-eminent goodness. (Rev. Rambaut W. H. 1867, Against Heresies - Book 4 Ch 37)

 

[Pekka]

We all have free will. When looked from Gods timeless perspective it seems we don’t but that perspective is quite much more complex and beyond our comprehension. The fact that God can see our future does not mean He intervenes with our free will.

Bible says God is love and love requires free will so that locks it theologically.

 

[trophy33]

We all decide freely, but its always certain how we will decide. Because freedom is not randomness - we decide in the way we decide based on some reasons and causes.

An all-knowing being can know precisely how we will decide and what we will do, because such being knows the whole net and chain of causes and reasons.

And indeed, such being can also predetermine how we will decide, by arranging the causes and reasons in a specific way.

 

[Zenos777]

Do really have free will? Or do we have instead free choice?

Free will is defined as having the ability to make choices, on our own, without any outside influences, including divine. Free choice is the ability to choose a choice that has been presented to you. Such as "I call heaven and earth to record this day against you this day I have set before you life and death, choose life, that both you and your seed may live. (Duet. 30:19)

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Do really have free will? Or do we have instead free choice?

Free will is defined as having the ability to make choices, on our own, without any outside influences, including divine. Free choice is the ability to choose a choice that has been presented to you. Such as "I call heaven and earth to record this day against you this day I have set before you life and death, choose life, that both you and your seed may live. (Duet. 30:19)

Whether it is free will or free choice the operative word is free. As it says in revelation whosever will let him come and drink if the waters of life freely.

It is a heresy to say that God predestines some for hell. God takes no delight in the death of the wicked.
It is better understood by looking at the agony in the Garden of Gethsemane. Why was Jesus sweating blood and pleading with the Father to take this cup away from Him? Was he afraid of crucifixion? No the word says that he freely laid His life down and no one could take it from Him.
The agony was that He had to die for the sins of the whole world, not just those that loved Him, but also those that reject Him. It was for the agony of love, that He sweat great drops of blood.

The pains of love are so great, but rejected love hurts worse. In order to be love, it has to be a free choice. God does not force Himself upon anyone, as it also says in Revelation, Behold I stand at the door and knock, if anyone open the door, I will enter and sup with him and he with me.

If some are predestined to hell, how could the verse whoever calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved be true?

He predestines those that love Him, because He has prepared a place for them, but he does not force that love. His saints love Him and choose Him freely else it is not love

The parable of the seeds shows four groups of peoples, the path, the rocks, the thorns and good soil.

 

[David Lamb]

Whether it is free will or free choice the operative word is free. As it says in revelation whosever will let him come and drink if the waters of life freely.

It is a heresy to say that God predestines some for hell. God takes no delight in the death of the wicked.
It is better understood by looking at the agony in the Garden of Gethsemane. Why was Jesus sweating blood and pleading with the Father to take this cup away from Him? Was he afraid of crucifixion? No the word says that he freely laid His life down and no one could take it from Him.
The agony was that He had to die for the sins of the whole world, not just those that loved Him, but also those that reject Him. It was for the agony of love, that He sweat great drops of blood.

The pains of love are so great, but rejected love hurts worse. In order to be love, it has to be a free choice. God does not force Himself upon anyone, as it also says in Revelation, Behold I stand at the door and knock, if anyone open the door, I will enter and sup with him and he with me.

If some are predestined to hell, how could the verse whoever calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved be true?

He predestines those that love Him, because He has prepared a place for them, but he does not force that love. His saints love Him and choose Him freely else it is not love

The parable of the seeds shows four groups of peoples, the path, the rocks, the thorns and good soil.

If Jesus had died for everybody who has ever existed or will ever exist, in what sense could He "see the travail of His soul and be satisfied"? The whole verse says:

“He shall see the labor of His soul, [and] be satisfied. By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many, For He shall bear their iniquities.” (Isa 53:11 NKJV)

How could He be satisfied if just one for whom He died were not saved? Yes, whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved, but who calls upon the name of the Lord? Jesus Himself said:

“"All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.” (Joh 6:37 NKJV)

“"No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.” (Joh 6:44 NKJV)

 

[boughtwithaprice]

If Jesus had died for everybody who has ever existed or will ever exist, in what sense could He "see the travail of His soul and be satisfied"? The whole verse says:

“He shall see the labor of His soul, [and] be satisfied. By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many, For He shall bear their iniquities.” (Isa 53:11 NKJV)

How could He be satisfied if just one for whom He died were not saved? Yes, whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved, but who calls upon the name of the Lord? Jesus Himself said:

“"All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.” (Joh 6:37 NKJV)

“"No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.” (Joh 6:44 NKJV)

That is the mystery. God has an elect, but we, not being God, do not know who those elect are.
God does tell us their characteristics, and Paul warns us to strive to make our calling and election sure.

No, we cannot be saved by works, but the elect of God will work to study God’s word and conform their lives to God’s will, not out of necessity as if they are buying salvation, but out of love for God.
God has given us the analogy of marriage. When we get married, we don’t completely know our spouse, but out of love we strive to known more and conform ourselves to them. The husband loves his wife and gives himself for her. The wife is subject to her husband and strives to please him and get to know him. It they do, there intercourse is on a much deeper and satisfying level.
The lazy spouse reasons that they are already married and doing anything cannot make them more married, so they carry on with their life as if their spouse does not exist. They will give them lip service but they do not really know to whom they are married. This leaves a man grieved for an ungrateful woman, or a woman heartbroken over a man that ignores her. Being Christians, they know that divorce is not an option, but it is a miserable existence. The marriage supper of the lamb will not be miserable


God gives you the choice, you can make your life about sacrificial love deny yourself and take up your cross and follow Jesus, delight in Him, open the door of your heart and let him in. Study His word, know what he likes, learn from saints snd martyrs that have gone before you, or you can listen to the ones that say you can’t be saved by works so don’t do any. They want God to delight in them while they ignore Him and His word, all the while claiming that they are saved by a legal technicality. How are they different from the wife that ignores her husband and rolls her eyes at his will?

Just because we know there is an elect, does not automatically make us one of them, nor do we know who the damned will be. God’s love and mercy extends to any who ask.
The elect are those that love God, and offer His love and mercy to any who would ask. They feel Christ’s agony in the Garden, they know His blood was shed profusely in the scourging, and flowed forth at the mockery of the crowning of thorns, it poured out on the cross and becomes their Eucharistic drink and refreshment of souls.

Do we love God, and want Him to be with us and sacrifice ourselves out of love for Him? Do we love who He loves? The poor souls who don’t yet know Him? Or do we want him to love only us and send all those others to hell where we think they belong?

Who do you think the elect of God really are?
If Christ had not died for everyone, how can we offer the Gospel to anyone?

 

[Zenos777]

That is the mystery. God has an elect, but we, not being God, do not know who those elect are.
God does tell us their characteristics, and Paul warns us to strive to make our calling and election sure.

No, we cannot be saved by works, but the elect of God will work to study God’s word and conform their lives to God’s will, not out of necessity as if they are buying salvation, but out of love for God.
God has given us the analogy of marriage. When we get married, we don’t completely know our spouse, but out of love we strive to known more and conform ourselves to them. The husband loves his wife and gives himself for her. The wife is subject to her husband and strives to please him and get to know him. It they do, there intercourse is on a much deeper and satisfying level.
The lazy spouse reasons that they are already married and doing anything cannot make them more married, so they carry on with their life as if their spouse does not exist. They will give them lip service but they do not really know to whom they are married. This leaves a man grieved for an ungrateful woman, or a woman heartbroken over a man that ignores her. Being Christians, they know that divorce is not an option, but it is a miserable existence. The marriage supper of the lamb will not be miserable


God gives you the choice, you can make your life about sacrificial love deny yourself and take up your cross and follow Jesus, delight in Him, open the door of your heart and let him in. Study His word, know what he likes, learn from saints snd martyrs that have gone before you, or you can listen to the ones that say you can’t be saved by works so don’t do any. They want God to delight in them while they ignore Him and His word, all the while claiming that they are saved by a legal technicality. How are they different from the wife that ignores her husband and rolls her eyes at his will?

Just because we know there is an elect, does not automatically make us one of them, nor do we know who the damned will be. God’s love and mercy extends to any who ask.
The elect are those that love God, and offer His love and mercy to any who would ask. They feel Christ’s agony in the Garden, they know His blood was shed profusely in the scourging, and flowed forth at the mockery of the crowning of thorns, it poured out on the cross and becomes their Eucharistic drink and refreshment of souls.

Do we love God, and want Him to be with us and sacrifice ourselves out of love for Him? Do we love who He loves? The poor souls who don’t yet know Him? Or do we want him to love only us and send all those others to hell where we think they belong?

Who do you think the elect of God really are?
If Christ had not died for everyone, how can we offer the Gospel to anyone?

Have you ever seen and considered these following scriptures?
Ecclesiastes 1: 9 The things that have been, are the things that will be. And that which was accomplished, shall also be done again. And there is no new thing under the sun. (Good new bible.)

Ecclesiastes 1: 9 What has happened before will happen again. Whatever has been done before will be done again. There is nothing new under the sun. (God’s Word Bible)

Now, that scripture seems to imply that what we see today, as our new technology, already existed before our time.

Bear with me, I am leaning up to something. It will seem farfetched, but I believe you will eventually come to the same conclusion as I have.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Have you ever seen and considered these following scriptures?
Ecclesiastes 1: 9 The things that have been, are the things that will be. And that which was accomplished, shall also be done again. And there is no new thing under the sun. (Good new bible.)

Ecclesiastes 1: 9 What has happened before will happen again. Whatever has been done before will be done again. There is nothing new under the sun. (God’s Word Bible)

Now, that scripture seems to imply that what we see today, as our new technology, already existed before our time.

Bear with me, I am leaning up to something. It will seem farfetched, but I believe you will eventually come to the same conclusion as I have.

Yes I reject modernism. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday today and forever.

We can change, God never changes as He is perfect.
Computers and automobiles and machines have not been created as something new, but merely put eternal laws into practice.

We feel proud as our machines have “evolved” into the modern contraptions we use for convenience, yet the heart of the human race has drifted further into sin than even imagined by Sodom and Gomorrah. We need to repent

 

[johansen]

what the greek actually says in a certain place is:

for all are called but few choose. [to hear the call]

most translations say for many are called but few are chosen. we then take this one verse and invent a doctrin that there are three people:
those called. those not called, those chosen.

 

[OnePlanPeopleDestiny]

As we all know, Calvinists believe that everyone is predestined, while Arminians believe that everyone have free will. I propose a theory when "some" are predestined and "some" have free will. So lets put it this way:

Arminianism: There is one group of people, mankind as a whole, all have free will. Jesus atoned for all the mankind (total atonement).

Calvinism: There are two groups of people: 1) people that are predestined for salvation 2) people that are predestined for damnation. Jesus attoned for group 1 but not group 2 (partial atonement)

My view: There are three groups of people: 1) people that are predestined for salvation 2) people that are predestined for damnation 3) people that have free will. Jesus attoned for groups 1 and 3. So it is also partial attonement but a different kind. It is partial because it didn't include group 2. But it is not irresistable because group 3 is free to either accept it or reject it. At the same time, it is irresistable for group 1. I would further say that groups 1 and 2 can only be limitted to select few (such as biblical figures and politicians) while group 3 can be the majority of the mankind. Examples of people in group 1 would be apostles and prophets. Examples of people in group 2 would be Pharaoh, Judas Escariot, first century Jews, antichrist, some goverment figures. Examples of people in group 3 are ordinary people like you and me. Incidentally, I think Cain was in group 3, because God told Cain "if you do well, will you not be accepted?"

The way my view makes sense in terms of Romans 9 is that this chapter talks about specific people and specific groups of people: namely, the Pharaoh and also the Jewish people (except for the remnant) in church's age. In particular, the question was posed about Jewish people, as in God might not be fair towards them by hardening their hearts, and then that question was answered by saying that God did the same with Pharaoh. So it never said that it applies to everyone who ever goes to hell. It only said it applies to those specific people. And yes, even if it applies to only a minority of people, one can still be bothered by it. So one can still ask questions such as the ones Romans 9 was trying to answer.

One interesting thing about Romans 9 is that it used an analogy of a potter and a clay. Now, when a potter makes stuff, it usually has a purpose: to teach people a lesson. But what is the point of teaching a lesson if nobody has free will? On the other hand, the point becomes apparent if only some people (namely, the characters of that story) don't have free will, while other people (the readers of the story) do. So maybe God used a clay to make Groups 1 and 2, who don't have a free will, in order to teach some lessons to Group 3, who has free will, and who is watching them?

As far as the verse "who is resisted His will?" that verse is still true: Group 3 didn't resist God's will, since God's will was to give that group free will. So God didn't will for group 3 to either go to heaven or hell, hence it didn't resist its will. On the other hand, God "did" will heaven for group 1 and hell for group 2, and those two groups didn't resist His will either.

As far as "who are you to reply against God", that has to do with people that feel bad for group 2. This doesn't change the fact that group 3 still has free will.

I believe we have a free will to do that which our carnal minds are drawn to do. I just dont see how one can freely will to be saved? I think it's an impossibility for one to freely choose God without anything more than a mental assent that desires salvation. There must be more to it.

If we are spiritually dead in our trespasses and sins, and by Jesus's own words we "must be born again", whose will is it that is operation when our dead spirit is regenerated by the Holy Spirit and we are born again: is it our will, or God's will, or both ours and God's?

God commanded that HIS gospel be preached throughout the world. Why, if people can freely will themselves unto salvation? God's word tells us why, and it's because faith comes by hearing God's word. It seems, then, that it is the Sword of the Spirit that cuts into a man that brings regeneration to his once dead spirit, whereby he is born again unto salvation. It is the monergistic work of God that we are saved.

I can attest to my own salvation, having heard the gospel message with such clarity for the first time that I cried out to God to save me, and I know HE did what HE promised to do: I got saved. All I did was hear the gospel and then cry out. I was once devout Roman Catholic, and would never have cried out to God for salvation because I believed I was "good to go." Now I am born again unto salvation, washed clean by the blood of our Lord and Savior and sole mediator JesusChrist. To God be glory forever and ever. Amen amen.

 

[Zenos777]

what the greek actually says in a certain place is:

for all are called but few choose. [to hear the call]

most translations say for many are called but few are chosen. we then take this one verse and invent a doctrin that there are three people:
those called. those not called, those chosen.

What the Greek sys is the word Eklektos = chosen, elect........ not few choose

 

[Zenos777]

Yes I reject modernism. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday today and forever.

We can change, God never changes as He is perfect.
Computers and automobiles and machines have not been created as something new, but merely put eternal laws into practice.

We feel proud as our machines have “evolved” into the modern contraptions we use for convenience, yet the heart of the human race has drifted further into sin than even imagined by Sodom and Gomorrah. We need to repent

There are sites you can find that show technology millions of years old found incrusted in rocks. spark plugs, coiled metal using the golden mean ratio, an upright antenna, south of Africa submersed in water so deep, when found in 1968, we had no machines except cameras that could go to that depth and may other artifacts scientists will not talk about because it does not go along with their theory of evolution.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

I believe we have a free will to do that which our carnal minds are drawn to do. I just dont see how one can freely will to be saved? I think it's an impossibility for one to freely choose God without anything more than a mental assent that desires salvation. There must be more to it.

If we are spiritually dead in our trespasses and sins, and by Jesus's own words we "must be born again", whose will is it that is operation when our dead spirit is regenerated by the Holy Spirit and we are born again: is it our will, or God's will, or both ours and God's?

God commanded that HIS gospel be preached throughout the world. Why, if people can freely will themselves unto salvation? God's word tells us why, and it's because faith comes by hearing God's word. It seems, then, that it is the Sword of the Spirit that cuts into a man that brings regeneration to his once dead spirit, whereby he is born again unto salvation. It is the monergistic work of God that we are saved.

I can attest to my own salvation, having heard the gospel message with such clarity for the first time that I cried out to God to save me, and I know HE did what HE promised to do: I got saved. All I did was hear the gospel and then cry out. I was once devout Roman Catholic, and would never have cried out to God for salvation because I believed I was "good to go." Now I am born again unto salvation, washed clean by the blood of our Lord and Savior and sole mediator JesusChrist. To God be glory forever and ever. Amen amen.

Of what does your salvation consist? No Catholic that is on the path of righteousness believes he is “good to go”. There are some people in the Catholic Church that do, but they need to repent.
If you believe in faith alone, your understanding of salvation is incomplete. Read what 1 Cor 13 says about faith alone. There are three theological virtues that come from God alone and we receive them at the moment of our justification. They are Faith, Hope and Charity, these are instilled at our Baptism, as Christ says he who believes and is baptized will be saved.

Faith in that we know that God is and is a rewarder of those that diligently seek Him, Hope that He will complete the work He began in us, and Charity to love God, deny ourselves, take up our cross and follow Him. It is in charity that we obey all that God has commanded. Once we are born again, we are babes in Christ. To grow and mature we pursue the Cardinal virtues of justice, temperance, prudence and fortitude. These come from human effort cooperating with the grace of God. We do this through penance and mortification of the flesh. It is not done to buy salvation, but out of love of God, to know Him and obey Him, and be with Him for eternity. God has given the seven sacraments to aid us in our spiritual battle, which doesn’t end until we reach heaven

 

[johansen]

There are sites you can find that show technology millions of years old found incrusted in rocks. spark plugs, coiled metal using the golden mean ratio, an upright antenna, south of Africa submersed in water so deep, when found in 1968, we had no machines except cameras that could go to that depth and may other artifacts scientists will not talk about because it does not go a

no.

What the Greek sys is the word Eklektos = chosen, elect........ not few choose

sure. but even if you had looked up what i said, you would clearly see the word "few" is in the greek

my point is the original greek does not support three distinctions to be made. rather, there is one distinction. all are called. few reply.

 

[Zenos777]

no.

sure. but even if you had looked up what i said, you would clearly see the word "few" is in the greek

my point is the original greek does not support three distinctions to be made. rather, there is one distinction. all are called. few reply.

I agree with you on that point