# Were People Saved & Marked for Heaven BEFORE Christ's Death and Resurrection?



## GunnSmokeer (Sep 12, 2021)

The other day I was listening to a famous and popular conservative Baptist preacher talk about the death and resurrection of Christ as AN ABSOLUTE NECESSITY for salvation, and NOT just because God said so or because that's a rule he made, but that it HAD to be that way, it was always that way, it could never possibly be any other way. God CANNOT forgive sins just because HE is kind and generous or forgiving, but ONLY though his Son's sacrifice is it even possible. There ARE things God can't do, and one is to overlook sin, and sin can only be paid for one way.

So, that immediately had me wondering about the righteous prophets of the Old Testament, and even the contrite thief on the cross, who Jesus said would "this day" go to heaven with Him. 
Or the paralyzed man that had to be lowered through the roof of a house to get close to Jesus. The Lord publicly announced his sins were forgiven and that he would be healed. Some of the witnesses thought to themselves, "how can this man forgive sin? Only God can do that!"

So, it doesn't seem "impossible" for a Holy God to forgive sin at times before Jesus came to Earth, or before Jesus died on the cross as payment for our sins.


----------



## Madman (Sep 12, 2021)

1 Peter 3:19

One of several verses speaking of Christ and the Harrowing of he11.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 12, 2021)

Eternal Grace!

Ephesians 1:3-6
2 Timothy 1:9-10
Romans 8:28-30

“This people have I formed for myself; they shall show forth my praise.” Isaiah 43:21


----------



## RegularJoe (Sep 13, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> Eternal Grace!
> Ephesians 1:3-6
> 2 Timothy 1:9-10
> Romans 8:28-30
> “This people have I formed for myself; they shall show forth my praise.” Isaiah 43:21


And, sort of 'conversely,' in support of the above 
(watching for where Scripture can be helpful in interpreting Scripture : ) ~
Romans 9:22-23 - 
_"What if God, choosing to show His wrath and make His power known, 
bore with great patience the objects of His wrath - prepared for destruction?
What 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....?"_  (NIV-1985).


----------



## flintlock hunter (Sep 13, 2021)

What about ritual sacrifice  of the unblemmished lamb?


----------



## j_seph (Sep 13, 2021)

What was payment for sin in the old testament?

Who was payment for sin in the New Testament?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 13, 2021)

The OP said "saved and marked" not "marked and saved." Meaning perhaps wanting to know how man was saved before the Cross more than being marked for salvation.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 13, 2021)

I think the way it worked was they were saved by having faith in the future of the coming Messiah and in God. Maybe they had to soul sleep until the resurrection.
The Lamb was slain before the foundation of the world so the actual time of the event was gonna happen just as it was foretold and foreseen by God.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 13, 2021)

Didn't Jesus forgive the sin of two individuals before his redemptive work on the Cross?


----------



## StriperAddict (Sep 14, 2021)

By grace thru faith is the context in the Old and New. 

Before the cross, before the law: Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness. 

After the cross and resurrection: Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved. 

Keep it simple Sparkey ?


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 14, 2021)

StriperAddict said:


> By grace thru faith is the context in the Old and New.
> 
> Before the cross, before the law: Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness.
> 
> ...


While we can agree on your statement, to what have we agreed?  The Tritheist, the Sabellian, and the Semi-Pelagian, can also agree with us. Which begs the question, "if we stop there, and teach the same and no more, have we taught the truth, or a half-truth?" 

Ultimately, we can only supply the materials which we have received, and the building is by the Spirit.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 14, 2021)

StriperAddict said:


> By grace thru faith is the context in the Old and New.
> 
> Before the cross, before the law: Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness.
> 
> ...


Yet Jesus has always been the only way.


----------



## GunnSmokeer (Sep 14, 2021)

StriperAddict said:


> By grace thru faith is the context in the Old and New.
> 
> Before the cross, before the law: Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him for righteousness.
> 
> ...




Nice quip but it doesn't address what I said in the original post about a well respected pastor saying that it has always been *absolutely impossible *to have salvation without personally knowing Jesus Christ as your savior and accepting that he *died* on the cross for your sins. Died = past tense.

So, how were people saved in the O.T. days, or while Jesus walked the earth, when these people had no idea that Jesus would die as a sinless perfect sacrifice, and would be raised again in three days?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 14, 2021)

Ephesians 2:12-13
remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world.
13But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ.

Was there a time that a whole group were without God? I think Paul is addressing the Gentiles but were the Jews not also separate from Christ just like the Gentiles?
The only difference being the Jews had God. They had hope. They had the covenants of the promise. But did they have Jesus?

It almost reads like the Jews had God but the Gentiles had to wait for the atoning blood of Christ to be grafted in after the wall of hostility came down.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 14, 2021)

Ephesians 2:17-19
He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18 For through Him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.
19 Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household,

This reads like it took Jesus who had always existed as Son to incarnate as man for the Gentiles to become citizens with God's people.
Not sure if any of this has anything to do with salvation before or after Jesus came, died, or resurrected.

Were they really without God and hope? If so then it did take the moment in time Son incarnate as man.


----------



## Madman (Sep 14, 2021)

GunnSmokeer said:


> Nice quip but it doesn't address what I said in the original post about a well respected pastor saying that it has always been *absolutely impossible *to have salvation without personally knowing Jesus Christ as your savior and accepting that he *died* on the cross for your sins. Died = past tense.


According to the Church he is mistaken.

That makes absolutely no sense, that God would condemn a person who has never had the opportunity.   Several Biblical references on this topic, start with 1 Peter 3:18-20.

Then find another preacher to listen too.


----------



## StriperAddict (Sep 14, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> While we can agree on your statement, to what have we agreed?  The Tritheist, the Sabellian, and the Semi-Pelagian, can also agree with us. Which begs the question, "if we stop there, and teach the same and no more, have we taught the truth, or a half-truth?"
> 
> Ultimately, we can only supply the materials which we have received, and the building is by the Spirit.



Yes, growth by the Spirit, growing in the grace and knowledge of the Life of Christ within.  I'd add that because His grace is relational we are growing up in the Spirit always.  
Potter - Clay, 
Master builder - building of God in the Spirit,
 Vine - branches. 

Trust, 
Dependence, 
walk, 
repeat. 

The author and perfector of our faith gets the glory.  Selah


----------



## StriperAddict (Sep 14, 2021)

GunnSmokeer said:


> Nice quip but it doesn't address what I said in the original post about a well respected pastor saying that it has always been *absolutely impossible *to have salvation without personally knowing Jesus Christ as your savior and accepting that he *died* on the cross for your sins. Died = past tense.
> 
> So, how were people saved in the O.T. days, or while Jesus walked the earth, when these people had no idea that Jesus would die as a sinless perfect sacrifice, and would be raised again in three days?



Hebrews 11 lists just a handful of those in the OT that scripture testified of concerning faith. Where the bible talks about the children of God being more numerous than the sand on the seashore is additional reference to many more whom God redeemed. Job even spoke of God as he said, my redeemer liveth.

Heb 11:13
13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but _having seen them afar off were assured of them, embraced them_ and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. 14 For those who say such things (Y)declare plainly that they seek a homeland.

_Emphasis mine _


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 14, 2021)

Having only second hand knowledge (not having heard).



GunnSmokeer said:


> The other day I was listening to a famous and popular conservative Baptist preacher talk about the death and resurrection of Christ as AN ABSOLUTE NECESSITY for salvation,



Yes eternally necessary, but no indication of temporal, or spiritual, revelation >>{being necessary]<<



> and NOT just because God said so or because that's a rule he made, but that it HAD to be that way, it was always that way, it could never possibly be any other way. God CANNOT forgive sins just because HE is kind and generous or forgiving, but ONLY though his Son's sacrifice is it even possible. There ARE things God can't do, and one is to overlook sin, and sin can only be paid for one way.



His holiness requires that satisfaction be made ..>>[for sin]<<(propitiation) prior to association/relationship.  Not an indication of knowledge or acceptance by the recipient of the gracious substitutionary gift  of satisfaction >>[for transgressions]<<.



> So, that immediately had me wondering about the righteous prophets of the Old Testament, and even the contrite thief on the cross, who Jesus said would "this day" go to heaven with Him.
> Or the paralyzed man that had to be lowered through the roof of a house to get close to Jesus. The Lord publicly announced his sins were forgiven and that he would be healed. Some of the witnesses thought to themselves, "how can this man forgive sin? Only God can do that!"
> 
> So, it doesn't seem "impossible" for a Holy God to forgive sin at times before Jesus came to Earth, or before Jesus died on the cross as payment for our sins.



God reveals Himself to creation >>[through His economy]<< as it best satisfies His purpose.

*In only three days that morphed into*




GunnSmokeer said:


> Nice quip but it doesn't address what I said in the original post about a well respected pastor saying that it has always been *absolutely impossible *to have salvation without personally knowing Jesus Christ as your savior and accepting that he *died* on the cross for your sins. Died = past tense.



Personal knowledge required ... not in OP
Accept required ..... not in OP
Temporal action >>[or actualization]<< required ..... not in OP



> So, how were people saved in the O.T. days, or while Jesus walked the earth, when these people had no idea that Jesus would die as a sinless perfect sacrifice, and would be raised again in three days?



The implication that temporal revelation is prerequisite to eternal action appears to be unsupported >>[especially in light of the opposite being indicated in Scripture]<<; and certainly absent from the OP.

As the guitar player said, in reference to the bango picker, in the introductory sequence of the movie Deliverance, "I'm lost".


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 14, 2021)

StriperAddict said:


> Yes, growth by the Spirit, growing in the grace and knowledge of the Life of Christ within.  I'd add that because His grace is relational we are growing up in the Spirit always.
> Potter - Clay,
> Master builder - building of God in the Spirit,
> Vine - branches.
> ...


Although "His grace is relational" has been used by many to insert the influence of men into the Providence of God, I take it from your following examples that your implication is not that.


----------



## gordon 2 (Sep 15, 2021)

From the OP:

Quote( So, it doesn't seem "impossible" for a Holy God to forgive sin at times before Jesus came to Earth, or before Jesus died on the cross as payment for our sins. )


I'm going to rewrite this:

So, it doesn't seem "impossible" for God to give eternal life  before Jesus came to Earth and before Jesus died on the cross.

Or, it doesn't seem "impossible" for God to "open up the heavens" before Jesus came to Earth and before Jesus died on the cross.
................


Jesus says this to a Samaritan woman, ( before the cross) "But whoever drinks the water I give him will never thirst. Indeed, the water I give him will become in him a fount of water springing up to eternal life.”…

Before saying this to the woman he had said this:



“If you knew the gift of God and who is asking you for a drink, you would have asked Him, and He would have given you living water.”

I somehow think or understand now that the gift of God here is eternal life or the opening up of heaven to an individual and that it does not require the cross.

"I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things?"

"No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man."

"Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up,[f] 15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.”

It seems to me that some were born twice before the cross. At least I can infer this by Jesus' statements to Nicodemus. And that some were not born again especially those in religious-spiritual authority over the people was the problem being addressed which remedy was Jesus' ministry,  ie; cross, resurrection, Pentecost "that everyone who believes may have eternal life...." regardless that some spiritual leaders had or have it not.

If you knew the gift of God you would know what to ask for. It seems evident to me that King David knew the gift of God, that Mary the mother of God and her family ( relatives) knew it also. We as Christian ( especially from gentile stock) know this gift because for us Jesus was lifted up.


----------



## StriperAddict (Sep 15, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> Although "His grace is relational" has been used by many to insert the influence of men into the Providence of God, I take it from your following examples that your implication is not that.


Yes. The relational aspect I emphasize has more to do with encouragement for those that might believe some ladder climbing or religious self effort & sufficiency is necessary to bridge the God/man gap. The cross and resurrection are often veiled in such teaching. 
I know,  I did the Pharisee rig for years and it burned me right out.


----------



## M80 (Sep 15, 2021)

As I have been led by the Spirit in studying the Word I’m come to see that the OT folks lived by faith looking unto the coming messiah. I can almost here the thief on the cross saying in paradise “He is coming, he was right behind me” in paradise(abrahams bosom). We see in scripture that Jesus descended and led the captive free to heaven or a heaven. Ephesians 4 says “
8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men.9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?10 He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)”
  He presented himself to the ones in Abraham’s bosom, got the keys to he11 and death, and led the captives to where he ascended.


----------



## StriperAddict (Sep 15, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> I somehow think or understand now that the gift of God here is eternal life or the opening up of heaven to an individual and that it does not require the cross.


You can't have eternal life without a resurrection and you can't have a resurrection without a cross. 

1 Cor 15:17-18
17 and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. 18 Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 

And you once called me a heretic, LOL.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 15, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Yet Jesus has always been the only way.


"Nothing that has it's being in time, can be the cause of that which is eternal". ~ William Eyre

Salvation is of the Lord.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Sep 15, 2021)

If predestination is true, God is evil.


----------



## gordon 2 (Sep 15, 2021)

StriperAddict said:


> You can't have eternal life without a resurrection and you can't have a resurrection without a cross.
> 
> 1 Cor 15:17-18
> 17 and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless; you are still in your sins. 18 Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished.
> ...




There is only one problem with our view:

Mary was full of grace before her son had been raised.

"And in the sixth month, the angel Gabriel was sent from God into a city of Galilee, called Nazareth,

27 To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name was Mary.

28 And the angel being come in, said unto her: Hail, full of grace, the Lord is with thee: blessed art thou among women."

If the Lord is with Mary for real here, I'm not a hairy tick. But maybe this Gabriel was "just grooming" Mary, in which case I'm a hairy tick.

I don't know? Why would Moses and Elie just show up at the transfiguration like they had some claim to kinship with Jesus?

Are my inferences demonic to you?

How about his inference:

"There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the priestly course of Abijah; and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth.

6 And they were both righteous before God, walking blameless in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord."

Both husband and wife were righteous before God and walking blameless?... Yea right!

Yea right. Who ever wrote this was really selling snake oil right? Before the cross a husband and a wife were able to walk blameless? Nope, this is an exaggeration right?  A literary device? The writer got carried away with his too good to be true narrative characters?


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 16, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> If predestination is true, God is evil.


Predestination is true. It even applies to stupid statements.


----------



## RegularJoe (Sep 16, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> If predestination is true, God is evil.


I am in no manner trying to be argumentative...
my completely earnest and objective interest is in...
what, Sir, is your definition of 'evil?' - Thanks.


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 16, 2021)

It's only one man's understanding vs. another man's understanding, but for this man:



NCHillbilly said:


> If predestination is true, God is evil.



show's a failure to understand both predestination and evil.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 16, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> It's only one man's understanding vs. another man's understanding, but for this man:
> 
> 
> 
> show's a failure to understand both predestination and evil.


After centuries of philosophical and theological debate, this is as far as the Atheist/Agnostic has gotten.


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 16, 2021)

StriperAddict said:


> Yes. The relational aspect I emphasize has more to do with encouragement for those that might believe some ladder climbing or religious self effort & sufficiency is necessary to bridge the God/man gap. The cross and resurrection are often veiled in such teaching.
> I know,  I did the Pharisee rig for years and it burned me right out.



Two things here; both just opinions.

From my perspective, the teaching of "ladder climbing" can only be viewed as a Strawman, because the only thing I can relate it to, from my experience, is a couple of sermons I have heard that were based in sociology, psychology, and/or anthropology and therefore not to be taken seriously.

Second is that your statement above supports what I have been noticing for the last few weeks: that being that there is a distinction between what you express in your own words and that which is expressed in the posts which you make quoting others.  That distinction being that your statements appear to me to come from a heart that love's God; and those that you quote appear to me to come from the anthropocentric constructs of Relational Theology, Open Theology, and Process Theology; all of which deny certain substantial attributes of God, such as Omniscience, Omnipotence, Infinity, and others.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Sep 16, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> After centuries of philosophical and theological debate, this is as far as the Atheist/Agnostic has gotten.


I'm not an athiest. 
So, explain to me the joy of creating large numbers of people who are predestined to burn in Hades for eternity, just because you want them to? I'm failing to see the benefits of this arrangement.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Sep 16, 2021)

RegularJoe said:


> I am in no manner trying to be argumentative...
> my completely earnest and objective interest is in...
> what, Sir, is your definition of 'evil?' - Thanks.


Causing intentional and deliberate harm to others. As in, you will be cast into Hades no matter what you do, because that is what I created as your ultimate fate.

You may be interpreting the term predestination differently than me. I am going by the way I heard it explained by various fundamentalist preachers in my youth who believed that only a certain number of people were ordained to be saved and go to heaven, everybody else was bound for Hades. From the moment you were born, your fate was already sealed. If you don't inherently see why that is wrong if you a being who has the power of a creator, then I have no further explanation for you.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 16, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> Causing intentional and deliberate harm to others. As in, you will be cast into Hades no matter what you do, because that is what I created as your ultimate fate.
> 
> You may be interpreting the term predestination differently than me. I am going by the way I heard it explained by various fundamentalist preachers in my youth who believed that only a certain number of people were ordained to be saved and go to heaven, everybody else was bound for Hades. From the moment you were born, your fate was already sealed. If you don't inherently see why that is wrong if you a being who has the power of a creator, then I have no further explanation for you.


I wished those fundamentalists would explain why the Lord was grieved in Genesis and why  He repented of the evil he was going to do to Nineveh until Nineveh turned from their wicked ways. He certainly didn’t grieve / plan to do evil in judgment to them because man / Nineveh acted according to design and His Will. And why they ignore over half the Bible about man following after his own desires.


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 16, 2021)

The 3 previous posts, #33, #34, #35, presuppose far too much of man and far too little of God; something no man can change.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Sep 16, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I wished those fundamentalists would explain why the Lord was grieved in Genesis and why  He repented of the evil he was going to do to Nineveh until Nineveh turned from their wicked ways. He certainly didn’t grieve / plan to do evil in judgment to them because man / Nineveh acted according to design and His Will. And why they ignore over half the Bible about man following after his own desires.


I don't understand a lot of their ideas or beliefs.


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 16, 2021)

You appear to be using "fundamentalist" as synonymous with "reformed", which I believe to be incorrect.

However, if you are using that relationship between the two words, does not 


NCHillbilly said:


> I don't understand a lot of their ideas or beliefs.


mean that you are drawing conclusions from you lack of understanding.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Sep 16, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> You appear to be using "fundamentalist" as synonymous with "reformed", which I believe to be incorrect.
> 
> However, if you are using that relationship between the two words, does not
> 
> mean that you are drawing conclusions from you lack of understanding.


When I was growing up around here, there were two main sets of what I would call fundamentalist preachers. One set believed in predestination, and the other set believed in free will. They argued about it with each other all the time and both sets said the other set was going to Hades. Both sides spent most of their time hollering at people all the reasons they were going to Hades.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> When I was growing up around here, there were two main sets of what I would call fundamentalist preachers. One set believed in predestination, and the other set believed in free will. They argued about it with each other all the time and both sets said the other set was going to Hades. Both sides spent most of their time hollering at people all the reasons they were going to Hades.


It's weird that the predestination/election preachers preached fire and brimstone to folks as to why they were going to Hades.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> If predestination is true, God is evil.


I don't know I guess it's all in how you look at it. An all seeing and knowing God allowing free will seems just as evil. Leaving salvation up to Man? Many who died never hearing? Not stopping cancer or car wrecks? Not steering hurricanes away from crowded cities? That seems way more evil.


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 16, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> When I was growing up around here, there were two main sets of what I would call fundamentalist preachers. One set believed in predestination, and the other set believed in free will. They argued about it with each other all the time and both sets said the other set was going to Hades. Both sides spent most of their time hollering at people all the reasons they were going to Hades.



Not failing to recognize that the meaning of "fundamentalism" is a red herring leading away from the point of the required criteria for drawing conclusions, and only mentioned as an aside by me as a point of clarity.

What "[You] would call fundamentalist preachers" does not communicate what you want it to communicate.  Fundamentalist, is actually a term which started out meaning anti-modernism and, in the way of the world, developed from there.  I think that, although prior to your time, this statement made in turning down an appointment as president of a university, while acknowledging other meanings, expresses the generally accepted meaning:

 'I never call myself a "Fundamentalist." There is indeed, no inherent objection to the term; and if the disjunction is between "Fundamentalism" and "Modernism," then I am willing to call myself a Fundamentalist of the most pronounced type. But after all, what I prefer to call myself is not a "Fundamentalist" but a "Calvinist"—that is, an adherent of the Reformed Faith. As such I regard myself as standing in the great central current of the Church's life—the current which flows down from the Word of God through Augustine and Calvin, and which has found noteworthy expression in America in the great tradition represented by Charles Hodge and Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield and the other representatives of the "Princeton School".' 
Fundamentalism | Theopedia 

BTW, I would never call myself a Calvinist, as the author does but would sometimes accept Reformed; that being a more general term; as Machen describes it "flowing down from the Word of God"


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 16, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> It's weird that the predestination/election preachers preached fire and brimstone to folks as to why they were going to Hades.



Why "weird"?  Are not God's People used by Him for edification. To recognize ourselves is part of recognizing who God is.

However, if you mean that "fire and brimstone" is meant to bring people to Christ for fear of he11, to the exclusion of recognition of ourselves, it's not weird, it's just wrong.  That is because it is self centered, not God centered.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 16, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> The 3 previous posts, #33, #34, #35, presuppose far too much of man and far too little of God; something no man can change.


It’s man that’s determined what God did by saying He’s predestined your every move when Bible is clear such as in Jonah 3 that God planned to do evil but he repented because Nineveh turned from their evil works. And, there’s numerous places where “if” you do this, this will happen.

An all knowing God knows every situation and knows if you go this way, this is your reward, if you go this way, this is your judgment.

God doesn’t need a “YOU” for His plan to work, He can make it work with any willing vessel.

It’s that man that seems to put boundaries on God and make it appear to depend on YOU.

But go ahead and explain why God grieved in Genesis and repented in Jonah if people were acting to their designed actions.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 16, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> Not failing to recognize that the meaning of "fundamentalism" is a red herring leading away from the point of the required criteria for drawing conclusions, and only mentioned as an aside by me as a point of clarity.
> 
> What "[You] would call fundamentalist preachers" does not communicate what you want it to communicate.  Fundamentalist, is actually a term which started out meaning anti-modernism and, in the way of the world, developed from there.  I think that, although prior to your time, this statement made in turning down an appointment as president of a university, while acknowledging other meanings, expresses the generally accepted meaning:
> 
> ...


Fundamental or not, it is the John Calvin Doctrine.


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 16, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> It’s man that’s determined what God did by saying He’s predestined your every move when Bible is clear such as in Jonah 3 that God planned to do evil but he repented because Nineveh turned from their evil works. And, there’s numerous places where “if” you do this, this will happen.
> 
> An all knowing God knows every situation and knows if you go this way, this is your reward, if you go this way, this is your judgment.
> 
> ...





> It’s man that’s determined what God did ...



Hmmm, do I need to read further?

O.k., I will, this one time.



> And, there’s numerous places where “if” you do this, this will happen.


Ahh yes, the Doctrine of "IF"; which ignores cause.



> But go ahead and explain why God grieved in Genesis and repented in Jonah if people were acting to their designed actions.



For the umpteenth time .... Anthropopathy


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 16, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Fundamental or not, it is the John Calvin Doctrine.



If YOU arbitrarily stop where YOU want, not where the investigation leads.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 16, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> Hmmm, do I need to read further?
> 
> O.k., I will, this one time.
> 
> ...


There’s no Doctrine of “IF” in If my people……..

But, I will take your answer for why God grieved and repented as in “I don’t know”.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Sep 16, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> Not failing to recognize that the meaning of "fundamentalism" is a red herring leading away from the point of the required criteria for drawing conclusions, and only mentioned as an aside by me as a point of clarity.
> 
> What "[You] would call fundamentalist preachers" does not communicate what you want it to communicate.  Fundamentalist, is actually a term which started out meaning anti-modernism and, in the way of the world, developed from there.  I think that, although prior to your time, this statement made in turning down an appointment as president of a university, while acknowledging other meanings, expresses the generally accepted meaning:
> 
> ...


I don't have a doctorate in theology, so I don't know all the correct terminology, nor do I really want to or care what anything is called. I was just talking about a certain type of preacher who jumps up and down a lot, runs up and down the aisles, screams and hollers while he's preaching, believes in a very rudimentary set of doctrines, and takes everything in the Bible at literal face value. Usually completely uneducated, has has a fixation about everybody going to Hades, and uses that topic as the main topic of almost every sermon. My God is an angry vengeful God mentality. And thinks that anything on earth that's enjoyable is a sin. Whatever you call those folks. 

I have no idea why I'm in here anyhow, I think I'll leave now.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Sep 16, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> I don't know I guess it's all in how you look at it. An all seeing and knowing God allowing free will seems just as evil. Leaving salvation up to Man? Many who died never hearing? Not stopping cancer or car wrecks? Not steering hurricanes away from crowded cities? That seems way more evil.


Why not just create people to be good and how you want them, instead of punishing them for acting the way you designed them to? And don't create cancer and hurricanes? 



Artfuldodger said:


> It's weird that the predestination/election preachers preached fire and brimstone to folks as to why they were going to Hades.


I reckon they didn't know anything else to preach about.


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 16, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> There’s no Doctrine of “IF” in If my people……..


That could be true, and I suppose is true, when the focus was "people"




> But, I will take your answer for why God grieved and repented as in “I don’t know”.


You will take it as you will.
Whether you acknowledge all of the causes or not.


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 16, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> I don't have a doctorate in theology, so I don't know all the correct terminology, nor do I really want to or care what anything is called. I was just talking about a certain type of preacher who jumps up and down a lot, runs up and down the aisles, screams and hollers while he's preaching, believes in a very rudimentary set of doctrines, and takes everything in the Bible at literal face value. Usually completely uneducated, has has a fixation about everybody going to Hades, and uses that topic as the main topic of almost every sermon. My God is an angry vengeful God mentality. And thinks that anything on earth that's enjoyable is a sin. Whatever you call those folks.
> 
> I have no idea why I'm in here anyhow, I think I'll leave now.



I think you have a good idea, if I were closer I would ask where I could buy you one.


----------



## StriperAddict (Sep 16, 2021)

gordon 2 said:


> Are my inferences demonic to you?


No.
Grace thru faith were the way of salvation for the righteous Old Testament saints and those whom Jesus walked with in His time. Salvation during both covenants is and was God's doing and while the message of the cross was veiled before His arrival, it was part of the whole package to man since man began. 
Why its veiling? That is a mystery now fully revealed.  
Jesus: Moses spoke of me; 
David did too in Isaiah 53,

The law and the prophets all do as well. 

As the scriptures said, 
If righteousness comes by the law then Christ died in vain. 

Moses and Elijah were justified by faith, hence a welcomed place at the transfiguration with Christ - not unlike what believers posses in the Spirit by faith in the work of God. 

Without the cross at a specific time of God's choosing then NO person could be saved throughout ALL of history.


----------



## StriperAddict (Sep 16, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> Two things here; both just opinions.
> 
> From my perspective, the teaching of "ladder climbing" can only be viewed as a Strawman, because the only thing I can relate it to, from my experience, is a couple of sermons I have heard that were based in sociology, psychology, and/or anthropology and therefore not to be taken seriously.
> 
> Second is that your statement above supports what I have been noticing for the last few weeks: that being that there is a distinction between what you express in your own words and that which is expressed in the posts which you make quoting others.  That distinction being that your statements appear to me to come from a heart that love's God; and those that you quote appear to me to come from the anthropocentric constructs of Relational Theology, Open Theology, and Process Theology; all of which deny certain substantial attributes of God, such as Omniscience, Omnipotence, Infinity, and others.


Indirectly I understand from the post copies and especially the authors that they are speaking of grace in a way that still doesn't complicate the gospel.  You may assign some man centered ideas from such, but as one who has been thru the fodder of the self sufficient gospel I am content in the context of their writings.  
I also do not see an argument in the texts on the omniscience or omnipotence of Providence as you do. Far enough then, that the grace of God is not limited in our understanding.  My choice in all - is the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ, of which we believers are all partakers.

As this thread has now morphed into the predestination subject I'll now take leave. I often keep in mind that there are other viewers who would be too intimidated to tag along to structural discussions of doctrine that don't touch the invitation part of Christ who says, Come to me all who labor and are heavy burdened. They have the same right to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and be saved, as we have. Ok, sorry, there's my dig at the pick or not pick predestination foolishness.  And our receiving Christ is not a 'work' unto HIS work of the cross and resurrection.  

Ridiculously graced,
- Walter


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> Why "weird"?  Are not God's People used by Him for edification. To recognize ourselves is part of recognizing who God is.
> 
> However, if you mean that "fire and brimstone" is meant to bring people to Christ for fear of he11, to the exclusion of recognition of ourselves, it's not weird, it's just wrong.  That is because it is self centered, not God centered.


Yes to the second part of your post. It would be wrong and therefore weird for an election believing preacher to preach to a crowd that they were gonna go to He11 because of their evil ways if in a sense he was trying to lead them to salvation.

I'm having a hard time wording this. I'm trying to picture an election believing preacher teaching this concept without sounding prideful about his own salvation. Something like "because God elected us, we are all going to Heaven but all you other evil sinners are going to He11 and there is really not anything you can do about it." It would really depend on how he worded his teachings. Even if true, is would sound a bit condescending to even preach it to that deep of a subject matter to a mass audience.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Sep 16, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> I'm not an athiest.
> So, explain to me the joy of creating large numbers of people who are predestined to burn in Hades for eternity, just because you want them to? I'm failing to see the benefits of this arrangement.



your definition of predestination seems to be flawed.

God predestined all of us to become sons of God.  Some choose not to.  God knows which will choose to become children, and which will not.  He isn't forcing them to choose one way or the other, He just knows in advance what they will choose.

I have a grand daugther that I know hates chocolate.  ( I know, females are suppose to adore the stuff).  So, If I offer her a Hersey Kiss or a peppermint, I know before hand that she is going to chose the peppermint.  That is her choice.  I didn't force her to choose, and if she said she wanted the Hersey, I would be happy to give it to her.  It just isn't in her makeup to eat chocolate though

Some folks will choose not to follow Christ.  Isn't it a great thing that we are offered a choice, rather than a mandate from on high?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

NCHillbilly said:


> Why not just create people to be good and how you want them, instead of punishing them for acting the way you designed them to? And don't create cancer and hurricanes?
> 
> 
> I reckon they didn't know anything else to preach about.


In other words don't create a free will world. Doing so would allow cancer, hurricanes, and car wrecks.

A predestined Creation of a perfect design with no chances of any evil or bad natural things that we think are bad. No earthquakes, hurricanes, or evolution that can go terribly wrong and allow evil mutations.

I think a predestined plan sounds better if that predestined plan did not include any free will. Freewill not only for humans but for every animal and the planets too. No asterroids, etc. unless God wills them.

A world where God is in total control would not be as evil.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

NE GA Pappy said:


> your definition of predestination seems to be flawed.
> 
> God predestined all of us to become sons of God.  Some choose not to.  God knows which will choose to become children, and which will not.  He isn't forcing them to choose one way or the other, He just knows in advance what they will choose.
> 
> ...



Yet since God has already seen that they would not choose Him, how is that any different from predestination? One can't undo what God has already seen. Since God knew this before time, it's really about the same as predestination under the guise of free will.

You can call it what you want to but it's really the same thing because even though God didn't cause it, He foresaw it.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Sep 16, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Yet since God has already seen that they would not choose Him, how is that any different from predestination? One can't undo what God has already seen. Since God knew this before time, it's really about the same as predestination under the guise of free will.
> 
> You can call it what you want to but it's really the same thing because even though God didn't cause it, He foresaw it.



Foreknowledge is not equal to condemning someone.   

How do you go from ' I knew you were going to do that'  being equal to ' I forced you to do that'


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

NE GA Pappy said:


> Foreknowledge is not equal to condemning someone.
> 
> How do you go from ' I knew you were going to do that'  being equal to ' I forced you to do that'


I think because it lies in still letting someone do that. If I somehow had foreknowledge that my child was going to burn in a house fire and didn't go burn the house down earlier it would be evil.
We're talking about an eternity in He11, not chocolate candy choices.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

I have foreknowledge that my daughters are not very good using their free will to perform car maintenance. Therefore as a caring father, I do it for them. Check their tires, oil, etc. Tell them to go buy tires.

I can't foresee them having accidents. If I could, I would not let them get in a car on the day that I foresaw the accident. All I can do is use my foreknowledge about their lack of preventive maintenance to help them as best as I know how.

My foreknowledge does not equal that of God. If it did, and I could foresee accidents, then I would be forced to stop their foreseen choices. Otherwise me seeing there choices beforehand would be equal to condemning them.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

Regardless of God causing or foreseeing, the results of eternal death are the same. I think we somehow feel better about it thinking God not causing it vs just foreseeing it somehow make God more Just.

The free will approach is another way we see God as being more Just than God always being in total control. God would not purposely blind a whole nation to allow salvation to be given to all the nations. God would not raise up Pharoah to be a part of His plan. God would not have mercy on whom He wants to have mercy. A just God would not choose someone based on only grace unless he foresaw that they deserved it.

We can't fathom that so our answer is that God used foreknowledge that Pharoah was formed by the Potter to be a vessel of wrath because God foresaw that Pharoah was already a vessel of wrath.
God would not choose a remnant out of Israel based on just grace and blind the rest unless he foresaw that some were worthy and the others were not.


----------



## NCHillbilly (Sep 16, 2021)

NE GA Pappy said:


> your definition of predestination seems to be flawed.
> 
> God predestined all of us to become sons of God.  Some choose not to.  God knows which will choose to become children, and which will not.  He isn't forcing them to choose one way or the other, He just knows in advance what they will choose.
> 
> ...


I got my definition of predestination directly from preachers and believers in it proselytizing it to me and listening to them and the non-predestination believers, including my non-predestination preacher dad  argue about it back in my younger days. I agree that it's a flawed theory, but there are a lot of people who believe exactly what I defined. Or did at that time, I don't know how prevalent the belief still is around here.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 16, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Yet since God has already seen that they would not choose Him, how is that any different from predestination? One can't undo what God has already seen. Since God knew this before time, it's really about the same as predestination under the guise of free will.
> 
> You can call it what you want to but it's really the same thing because even though God didn't cause it, He foresaw it.


The difference - knowing is just that, knowing. Predestination the way it’s being used is saying those 3 are designed to be saved, those 2 are designed for the burn pit.

When used correctly, predestined means exactly what pappy said, God predestined all of us, all of mankind to live for him, he died for all, not a “select”. He knows the ones that will come to him and the ones who will not, but it’s biblical that a man’s unbelief causes him to fail - not “not chosen”


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> The difference - knowing is just that, knowing. Predestination the way it’s being used is saying those 3 are designed to be saved, those 2 are designed for the burn pit.
> 
> When used correctly, predestined means exactly what pappy said, God predestined all of us, all of mankind to live for him, he died for all, not a “select”. He knows the ones that will come to him and the ones who will not, but it’s not biblical to say that anything other than a man’s unbelief causes him to fail.


I'd rather leave the salvation of man up to God instead of man. If left up to the free will of man, he sure didn't do a good job of reaching the masses. God electing folks on all those small islands and jungle villages is a way more just plan than us reaching them. God reaching them is way more just than their eternal fate being in the hands of man.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> The difference - knowing is just that, knowing. Predestination the way it’s being used is saying those 3 are designed to be saved, those 2 are designed for the burn pit.
> 
> When used correctly, predestined means exactly what pappy said, God predestined all of us, all of mankind to live for him, he died for all, not a “select”. He knows the ones that will come to him and the ones who will not, but it’s biblical that a man’s unbelief causes him to fail - not “not chosen”


What's your take on  what Paul said in Ephesians pertaining to the Gentiles being without God and without hope? Where was their free will choice to choose God? Or Paul in Romans 11, where he said the Jews failure allowed salvation to go to the Gentiles? Where was their free will choice before that?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 16, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> I'd rather leave the salvation of man up to God instead of man. If left up to the free will of man, he sure didn't do a good job of reaching the masses. God electing folks on all those small islands and jungle villages is a way more just plan than us reaching them. God reaching them is way more just than their eternal fate being in the hands of man.


Who said God would be hindered from those people?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Who said God would be hindered from those people?


I guess their dead could be in prison awaiting a chance at a choice for salvation.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

I think a lot of people believe God predestined the events in the Bible to make His plan for salvation happen the way He wanted it to but then after the resurrection switched to freewill.

That or they see God using predestination for His plan but not for individual salvation. Like God is in total control of everything that goes on except salvation.
Like God made everything happen to ensure His salvation plan would happen the way He wanted it to, but not the actual individual salvation of each person.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Sep 16, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> I think because it lies in still letting someone do that. If I somehow had foreknowledge that my child was going to burn in a house fire and didn't go burn the house down earlier it would be evil.
> We're talking about an eternity in He11, not chocolate candy choices.



but if you did that, you would have just eliminated free will.

I have talked to my children about decisions they were making, and advised them not to go down the path they were headed, but they chose to do differently.  If I was going to let them make the decision, then I have to be willing to see them get hurt by their decision


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 16, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> What's your take on  what Paul said in Ephesians pertaining to the Gentiles being without God and without hope? Where was their free will choice to choose God? Or Paul in Romans 11, where he said the Jews failure allowed salvation to go to the Gentiles? Where was their free will choice before that?


Did He or did He not provide a way of escape?

Gentiles were not and are not part of “Israel” except through being grafted in through Jesus.

Look at what you're saying - in one sentence you’re acknowledging that the Gentiles were without hope and saying they had no free will, in the other you acknowledged the failure of Israel.

Before the cross - God was grieved by man in Genesis. Why was that? Was man not acting according to His plan?

Why did God repent of the evil he planned to do to Nineveh in Jonah 3? If Nineveh was acting according to His plan, why did God plan to do evil to them? After they turned from their evil ways - God repented.

How does this happen in Isaiah?
“But they rebelled
And grieved His Holy Spirit; Therefore He turned Himself to become their enemy” The Spirit was grieved because they rebelled???

For the rest - Jesus went to the cross for all, he didn’t die for the sins for most of the world - it was for all of the world. If any man will follow me….


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Sep 16, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> I have foreknowledge that my daughters are not very good using their free will to perform car maintenance. Therefore as a caring father, I do it for them. Check their tires, oil, etc. Tell them to go buy tires.
> 
> I can't foresee them having accidents. If I could, I would not let them get in a car on the day that I foresaw the accident. All I can do is use my foreknowledge about their lack of preventive maintenance to help them as best as I know how.
> 
> My foreknowledge does not equal that of God. If it did, and I could foresee accidents, then I would be forced to stop their foreseen choices. Otherwise me seeing there choices beforehand would be equal to condemning them.



that reasoning is all kinds of flawed.

You are willing to let them have free will up to a certain point.  So, in reality, you are not giving them the option to chose anything that you don't approve.  That is not free will.

And, if you did know what was going to happen before hand, how is that condemning them?  I know we are talking about extremes here, life and death.  But you know, to God, it is always life.  Either life here on earth, or eternal life somewhere else.  You are free to chose your future address.

As it says in Deut, 30:19  
This day I call the heavens and the earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 16, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> I guess their dead could be in prison awaiting a chance at a choice for salvation.





Artfuldodger said:


> I think a lot of people believe God predestined the events in the Bible to make His plan for salvation happen the way He wanted it to but then after the resurrection switched to freewill.
> 
> That or they see God using predestination for His plan but not for individual salvation. Like God is in total control of everything that goes on except salvation.
> Like God made everything happen to ensure His salvation plan would happen the way He wanted it to, but not the actual individual salvation of each person.


Or how about they’re in the hands of a Just God? And being all knowing, what’s the odds that He knew these you’re talking about will not come to him? 

He knew Judas would betray. You think Judas could have repented after that? You think he was too far gone for God to deliver? It does say it repented Judas. Isn’t that the spirit reaching for Judas? Knowing Judas would fail and creating him to fail aren’t the same.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Sep 16, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> If left up to the free will of man, he sure didn't do a good job of reaching the masses. .




gee... an imperfect man judging that a perfect God is in error.

How do that work?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

NE GA Pappy said:


> but if you did that, you would have just eliminated free will.
> 
> I have talked to my children about decisions they were making, and advised them not to go down the path they were headed, but they chose to do differently.  If I was going to let them make the decision, then I have to be willing to see them get hurt by their decision


But not everything bad that happens to them is based on their actions or choices. Not everything about our fate is based on our free will choices. It so then I would be OK with them learning from their decisions.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Did He or did He not provide a way of escape?
> 
> Gentiles were not and are not part of “Israel” except through being grafted in through Jesus.
> 
> ...



Did the Gentiles have a free will choice to choose God before God chose a remnant out of Israel(based on grace alone) and blinded the rest? Or were they as Paul said, without God and without hope? Read Romans 11 and tell me how it all went down using free will as a basis. Was it God's plan to just see if the free will way would make him blind Israel so the Gentiles could be grafted in? Is that really what Paul is saying in Romans 11?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Did He or did He not provide a way of escape?
> 
> Gentiles were not and are not part of “Israel” except through being grafted in through Jesus.
> 
> ...


I'm saying Israel's failure was God's predestined plan for His way for the Messiah to come and grant salvation to the world(gentiles). God chose Israel for this very purpose. He chose the genealogy of Jesus. It was His plan from before eternity. The Word was with God. The plan is eternal.

God did not leave his plan for salvation up to free will or foreknowledge.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

NE GA Pappy said:


> that reasoning is all kinds of flawed.
> 
> You are willing to let them have free will up to a certain point.  So, in reality, you are not giving them the option to chose anything that you don't approve.  That is not free will.
> 
> ...


I think the difference is in what we see as evil vs what God does. Did not the Potter make vessels purposely for wrath? Regardless of free will or predestination, I no longer have to figure out of God's ways are Just. Reading Romans 11 about 200 times has taught me that God will have mercy on whom he will have mercy.
That and animals are not evil nor are hurricanes.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 16, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> I'm saying Israel's failure was God's predestined plan for His way for the Messiah to come and grant salvation to the world(gentiles). God chose Israel for this very purpose. He chose the genealogy of Jesus. It was His plan from before eternity. The Word was with God. The plan is eternal.
> 
> God did not leave his plan for salvation up to free will or foreknowledge.



Free will is just a man made term - the Bible does speak of man forgetting God, not retaining the knowledge of God, following after his own lust, desire, heart.  So I’m not really a fan of terminology, but you know what I mean when I say free will.

Foreknowledge - no His salvation doesn’t rely on foreknowledge. He just knows who will and who will not. That’s knowledge.

I can see most of your point with Israel, where we differ is I don’t believe God predestined Israel to fall, I believe he knew they would and he used that people for His plan. My reasoning is God does  not tempt with evil. 

Now, can you address the questions I asked you in regards to why did God grieve, repent, etc?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Or how about they’re in the hands of a Just God? And being all knowing, what’s the odds that He knew these you’re talking about will not come to him?
> 
> He knew Judas would betray. You think Judas could have repented after that? You think he was too far gone for God to deliver? It does say it repented Judas. Isn’t that the spirit reaching for Judas? Knowing Judas would fail and creating him to fail aren’t the same.


Yet God used Judas for his salvation plan before time eternal. Again the foreknowledge was the same as predestination. Judas had no choice but to do what God had already foreseen. His free will was useless.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 16, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Yet God used Judas for his salvation plan before time eternal. Again the foreknowledge was the same as predestination. Judas had no choice but to do what God had already foreseen. His free will was useless.


I think that’s where we differ - knowing, foreseen doesn’t mean predestined.

Does predestined mean your destiny has been determined?


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Sep 16, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Yet God used Judas for his salvation plan before time eternal. Again the foreknowledge was the same as predestination. Judas had no choice but to do what God had already foreseen. His free will was useless.



dude... you are twisting thing around here.

Just because God KNEW what would be decided, does not mean that Judas did not have a choice.  He did choose.  Not a wise decision, but he still chose.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Free will is just a man made term - the Bible does speak of man forgetting God, not retaining the knowledge of God, following after his own lust, desire, heart.  So I’m not really a fan of terminology, but you know what I mean when I say free will.
> 
> Foreknowledge - no His salvation doesn’t rely on foreknowledge. He just knows who will and who will not. That’s knowledge.
> 
> ...


I don't really have a good answer for that last question. Why did God ask Adam where he was at. Some of it is to put God in perspective to things we can understand. Just like the eyes of God or God's hands.

I do agree with you about labels. I guess I'm somewhere in between a free will believer and predestination. I can see a bit of both and perhaps names are bad like a Calvinist, etc. Not one likes labels put on them but we do like to use labels. Like music, when we here a song we want to put a label on it.

Truthfully though how could an all seeing God have human qualities like not seeing Adam or getting angry about something he foresaw before time.

I still don't see the difference in God using His foreknowledge to make His plan happen or Him making His plan happen. It really doesn't change it much to me. Except God using the foreseen free will of man to make it happen seems odd for an all powerful God. I've rather think it was a plan that He orchestrated. Like God gave us His only Son. Seems like He'd just make that whole plan happen the way that He wanted it to. Not going to plan B when plan A fails.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

NE GA Pappy said:


> dude... you are twisting thing around here.
> 
> Just because God KNEW what would be decided, does not mean that Judas did not have a choice.  He did choose.  Not a wise decision, but he still chose.


How could he have another choice than what God had already seen? How can any amount of free will change what the prophets already saw? I'm not saying free will doesn't exist, just that it doesn't matter. God had already seen it and that's the only way it can happen.

Back to Judas, if some way, even though God already saw what Judas would do, God would also have seen any change in the actions of Judas. Therefore, God would have already chosen another vessel of wrath. God needed that vessel to make His plan happen. Jesus had to die. There was no other way around it. Free will or predestination.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

In order for God's plan to happen Adam had to sin, Israel had to be blinded, and Judas had to betray. 
Unless God had a plan be and used Bill, China, and Wong. I really don't think God had a plan B,


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 16, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> I don't really have a good answer for that last question. Why did God ask Adam where he was at. Some of it is to put God in perspective to things we can understand. Just like the eyes of God or God's hands.
> 
> I do agree with you about labels. I guess I'm somewhere in between a free will believer and predestination. I can see a bit of both and perhaps names are bad like a Calvinist, etc. Not one likes labels put on them but we do like to use labels. Like music, when we here a song we want to put a label on it.
> 
> ...



The biblical predestination is we are predestined to be Sons of God. He died for all. It’s not His Will that any perish. He wants all to come to repentance. He hadn’t Willed anyone to perish. It’s through unbelief that people are blinded, not predestination. The “free will” part is if we……..And I’ve heard the “if” doctrine comment but that opinion doesn’t change truth / scripture. 

You have to ask yourself why you’re told that no man comes to Him unless he is drawn by the Father (the Spirit draws) and why you’re told quench not the Spirit. 

I don’t think there’s a plan B. His plan is still accomplished, he just doesn’t need a you or me to accomplish it. He knows all things, he knows who will serve him and who will not. That’s not predestination, that’s just being omniscient. 

 If you’re predestined to be saved - How can you fail to retain the knowledge of Jesus? How can you be overcome by Satan? Why do you even need to be sober and vigilant? 

“The backslider in heart shall be filled with his own ways: and a good man shall be satisfied from himself.”

 “But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not”


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 16, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> In order for God's plan to happen Adam had to sin, Israel had to be blinded, and Judas had to betray.
> Unless God had a plan be and used Bill, China, and Wong. I really don't think God had a plan B,


That makes God dependent on those men.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 16, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> How could he have another choice than what God had already seen? How can any amount of free will change what the prophets already saw? I'm not saying free will doesn't exist, just that it doesn't matter. God had already seen it and that's the only way it can happen.
> 
> Back to Judas, if some way, even though God already saw what Judas would do, God would also have seen any change in the actions of Judas. Therefore, God would have already chosen another vessel of wrath. God needed that vessel to make His plan happen. Jesus had to die. There was no other way around it. Free will or predestination.






> How could he have another choice than what God had already seen? I'm not saying free will doesn't exist, just that it doesn't matter. God had already seen it and that's the only way it can happen.



“This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.

For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.”



“I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:”

Is walking in the spirit a choice? It basically says if you do, you won’t fulfill your fleshly lusts. 

Is choosing life a choice? It’s basically saying if you don’t choose life, you’re choosing death. 

Now you know why I get accused of the “if” doctrine.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> That makes God dependent on those men.


Well of course God had to use men to do that. Does it matter if he orchestrated it through those men or used the foreknowledge of those men? 
Either way God accomplished His plan.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

When God intervenes, does that change freewill to predestination? I hear people say "I was about to wreck the car at an intersection but God intervened and made my car go dead."
Didn't at the moment of intervention, free will turned into God's predestination?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

If I had a video monitor and could watch my kids in their cars and the conditions of the road, and could intervene, I would definitely interrupt free will. If I saw an oncoming truck where the driver was falling asleep, I would have him drive into the lake or make my kid's car switch off and coast to safety. 
That's the kind of predestination I would do if I could. I would take away their free will and the earth's free will to save their lives.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 16, 2021)

Maybe some of y'all are confusing predestination with election.

On one end are those who believe in "God the watch maker" — that Deity created the world, wound it up and now simply watches it run.

At the other end are people who believe the fingerprints of God are on every human action and endeavor. He rules through predestination.

Most believers stake out territory somewhere in between.

Maybe He uses intervention and predestination on everything but salvation.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 16, 2021)

He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear _them_ not, because ye are not of God.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 16, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> When God intervenes, does that change freewill to predestination? I hear people say "I was about to wreck the car at an intersection but God intervened and made my car go dead."
> Didn't at the moment of intervention, free will turned into God's predestination?



I’m not sure a possible wreck has anything to do with “free will” but those that believe in predestination will most likely say it was predestined for your car to stall. I don’t know if that’s worth debating because you have faith in God to protect you  - regardless where folks land on agreement / disagreement on those type situations, the hand of God was merciful to you.

I think your other post about salvation being predestined or not is where the debate will happen.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 17, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Well of course God had to use men to do that. Does it matter if he orchestrated it through those men or used the foreknowledge of those men?
> Either way God accomplished His plan.





> Does it matter if he orchestrated it through those men or used the foreknowledge of those men?.


And that’s my point - because he’s all knowing he knew what these men would do in certain situations. 

He’s not going to send an Atheist to preach a tent revival. 

Check out Hebrews 11 - God tested the faith of many. What’s  there to test if predestination was at work?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 17, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> And that’s my point - because he’s all knowing he knew what these men would do in certain situations.
> 
> He’s not going to send an Atheist to preach a tent revival.
> 
> Check out Hebrews 11 - God tested the faith of many. What’s  there to test if predestination was at work?



God is proving to us that our faith is real, He knows the answer already. He tested Abraham even though God had told him, “Isaac is the son through whom your descendants will be counted.”


By testing us, is God trying to see if we have faith and are therefore saved? That would make salvation conditional. Like some type of initiation.

God's foreknowledge, even if it's the free will way, doesn't require God seeking answers for himself. Again God knew where Adam was. His question was for Adam, not for God.

As I said earlier, I do believe in free will and predestination. I don't see where any of these verses you show prove free will over predestination because of God's foreknowledge. I used to think maybe God wore blinders so that He could hide His foreknowledge and that's why he didn't know and see everything.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 17, 2021)

Banjo Picker said:


> And that the destinies of men are in their own power.


Glory to man!

But Christ tells us that all power has been given to Him. This means you ain't got any.


----------



## StriperAddict (Sep 17, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> I think because it lies in still letting someone do that. If I somehow had foreknowledge that my child was going to burn in a house fire and didn't go burn the house down earlier it would be evil.
> We're talking about an eternity in He11, not chocolate candy choices.


Then how can love be love if God forced it on you?  
Look what a "certain mandate" is doing across the country, a segregation the nation cannot endure.  Nor can creation beckoned to come, partake, knock and find God willing that none perish.  No wonder a few over in the agnostic forum hearing this nonsense say they don't have a stone's chance in, well ...

I lied, now I'm done. And there was grace for that, just like Rahab.


The good news of the Gospel of Grace has power in the message of the cross, but clever speech devoid of God's wisdom empties it of its power.
1 Corinthians 1:17


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 17, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Yes to the second part of your post. It would be wrong and therefore weird for an election believing preacher to preach to a crowd that they were gonna go to He11 because of their evil ways if in a sense he was trying to lead them to salvation.
> 
> I'm having a hard time wording this. I'm trying to picture an election believing preacher teaching this concept without sounding prideful about his own salvation. Something like "because God elected us, we are all going to Heaven but all you other evil sinners are going to He11 and there is really not anything you can do about it." It would really depend on how he worded his teachings. Even if true, is would sound a bit condescending to even preach it to that deep of a subject matter to a mass audience.





> I'm trying to picture an election believing preacher teaching this concept without sounding prideful about his own salvation



Although many of us don't have a lot of experience to help our imagination, you might try picturing a teacher who does not talk about men, but talks about God instead.  I think that will solve the problem your having.


----------



## RegularJoe (Sep 17, 2021)

RegularJoe said:


> I am in no manner trying to be argumentative...
> my completely earnest and objective interest is in...
> what, Sir, is your definition of 'evil?' - Thanks.





NCHillbilly said:


> Causing intentional and deliberate harm to others. As in, you will be cast into Hades no matter what you do, because that is what I created as your ultimate fate.


Thank you.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 17, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> God is proving to us that our faith is real, He knows the answer already. He tested Abraham even though God had told him, “Isaac is the son through whom your descendants will be counted.”
> 
> 
> By testing us, is God trying to see if we have faith and are therefore saved? That would make salvation conditional. Like some type of initiation.
> ...


I guess my point is what’s there to prove? He already knows. Why does faith matter if you’re predestined?

Again, biblical predestination is it’s not His Will that any perish. God predestined and chose us / man for him. But, through faith you’re saved, through unbelief you’re not. That’s scripture. 

If you’re in the flesh, you aren’t in the spirit. There’s a ton of scripture dealing with the flesh and following it instead of God, not obeying, not retaining God in your knowledge, etc. 

If one doesn’t think he can deny God, he’s in self denial.

“He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.”

There’s no “glory to man” here, it’s Bible.


----------



## RegularJoe (Sep 17, 2021)

Based on my cover to cover repeated reading of the Bible (not the Roman Catholic bible) is that i, personally, never expect to be able to comprehend how both
pre-determination (i.e., e.g., 'the elect,' predestination) and
'free-will' (aka, self-determination, 'self-will')
can possibly co-exist.
At the same time, I can only accept what my eyes reading the Bible and supporting historical documentation tell me:
1.  The elect are described and referred to voluminously throughout the Bible.
2.  Free-will is described in a few places, though sparsely by comparison.
3.  How i comprehend, or don't comprehend, how all the above works concurrently has _no bearing_ on that which I can only accept as truth as reported in the Bible: _that Jesus was, is, and will be eternally real._
4.  Meanwhile, God tells me in the Bible that my little mind is not His mind.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 17, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I guess my point is what’s there to prove? He already knows. Why does faith matter if you’re predestined?
> 
> Again, biblical predestination is it’s not His Will that any perish. God predestined and chose us / man for him. But, through faith you’re saved, through unbelief you’re not. That’s scripture.
> 
> ...


Yeah one time at work this Holiness preacher in our shop went to speaking and I could feel the Holy Spirit trying to manifest itself in my body. It felt a little embarrassing and I felt like I was gonna talk in tongues or something so I quelled the Spirit.

I had that power or free will over God's spirit. But what about Paul on the road to Damascus? Could he have overcome the Spirit?

Later I felt guilty for quelling the Spirit.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 17, 2021)

RegularJoe said:


> Based on my cover to cover repeated reading of the Bible (not the Roman Catholic bible) is that i, personally, never expect to be able to comprehend how both
> pre-determination (i.e., e.g., 'the elect,' predestination) and
> 'free-will' (aka, self-determination, 'self-will')
> can possibly co-exist.
> ...


I've often thought Romans 9 shows predestination/election, chapter 10 shows free will, and chapter 11 shows predestination/election.

I don't know how the two coincide together either but since God has already seen it, I've come to the conclusion that foreseen free will is the same as predestination. None of those Bible stories or characters could have happened differently that what God had already seen. If they could have then God's prophets are useless.

Plus how would the prophets foretell of the coming of Christ? How did they know the genealogy of Christ? How did they know God's plan to have Israel blinded to allow salvation to go to the Gentiles? I don't think God made all this up later as it unfolded because He had already seen it. He didn't think, well if Israel doesn't accept my Son then I'll send him to the Gentiles. He already knew they would not accept Jesus as the Messiah.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 17, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Yeah one time at work this Holiness preacher in our shop went to speaking and I could feel the Holy Spirit trying to manifest itself in my body. It felt a little embarrassing and I felt like I was gonna talk in tongues or something so I quelled the Spirit.
> 
> I had that power or free will over God's spirit. But what about Paul on the road to Damascus? Could he have overcome the Spirit?
> 
> Later I felt guilty for quelling the Spirit.


That’s the part of “all knowing”, or being omniscient, God chose Paul because He knew what Paul would do. God reveals himself to many that walk away. He already knows who will follow Him or they’re own flesh. It’s not like he’s going to be surprised and say “hey he believes in me” but just because He knows doesn’t mean He created a person to deny Him. 

Your flesh can most certainly quench the Spirit.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 17, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> That’s the part of “all knowing”, or being omniscient, God chose Paul because He knew what Paul would do. God reveals himself to many that walk away. He already knows who will follow Him or they’re own flesh. It’s not like he’s going to be surprised and say “hey he believes in me” but just because He knows doesn’t mean He created a person to deny Him.
> 
> Your flesh can most certainly quench the Spirit.



What you are saying is Paul, Pharoah, Israel, etc. were all chosen by the Potter for vessels of honor or dishonor based on God's foreknowledge of what God knew they were before he formed them for that purpose.
Where in scripture are you getting this concept? Read Romans 9, it does not explain it as foreknowledge. Not about Pharoah or the Great Potter.

I don't recall any verse that says Paul's conversion was based on God's foreknowledge that Paul changed on account of a foreseen freewill event.

To me how could God raise up Pharoah or Paul to do what they did based on God using foreknowledge that they would be honorable or dishonorable? If that were the case scripture would say that.

Scripture would also say that we were saved by those foreknowledge works and not grace alone.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 17, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> That’s the part of “all knowing”, or being omniscient, God chose Paul because He knew what Paul would do. God reveals himself to many that walk away. He already knows who will follow Him or they’re own flesh. It’s not like he’s going to be surprised and say “hey he believes in me” but just because He knows doesn’t mean He created a person to deny Him.
> 
> Your flesh can most certainly quench the Spirit.


Why would God waste his time revealing himself to those who He already knew would not accept Him?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 17, 2021)

Romans 9:14-18.
_"What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be! For He says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion." So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I raised you up, to demonstrate My power in you, and that My name might be proclaimed throughout the whole earth." So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires."_

Paul used Pharoah for explaining the whole concept of an all powerful God having mercy on whom he will have mercy. Paul knew that people would see it as God not being just in doing so. If it was based on foreknowledge then Paul, being an apostle, would have explained that way as to show why God was not unjust.

Something like _"What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? _May it never be, God used His foreknowledge to harden Pharaoh's heart."

Paul didn't say that and therefore had to explain, a few time really, that God can do what he wants to because he is God.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 17, 2021)

Read the last few verses in Romans 11 as it explains how Israel was blinded to allow the full number of Gentiles to come in and then all of Israel will be saved.

Again Paul knew that we would not understand this and would think it makes God out to be an unjust control freak. Paul never mentions that God did all this according to how he foresaw anything. Paul explains that God chose a remnant and blinded the rest based of grace and not works. God did not use foreknowledge to see the works of men. He chose a remnant based on Grace.

Again the same as in Romans 9 but this time using nations instead of individuals.

Romans 30-34
30Just as you who formerly disobeyed God have now received mercy through their disobedience, 31 so they too have now disobeyed, in order that they too may now receive mercy through the mercy shown to you   32For God has consigned everyone to disobedience so that He may have mercy on everyone.
33 O, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments, and untraceable His ways!
34“Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been His counselor?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 17, 2021)

If God based his call on Paul and Pharoah based on foreknowledge then would that not mean he chooses us based on foreseen works instead of grace alone which is not based on works?

In other words if God looked ahead and chose Paul because he knew he would become honorable then that would mean God based that call on Paul's works and not grace.


----------



## StriperAddict (Sep 17, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Why would God waste his time revealing himself to those who He already knew would not accept Him?


Because that's what Love does.

Rom 1 says the works of God and His attributes are clearly seen in creation. 

And Love wept for the family of Lazarus, even moments before Love raised Him from the dead. 

If our hearts don't "hear" Father beckoning, calling the lost of this world with His compassion then its likely we'll not also be ready to give an account of the joy (Source of Love) living in us.  That is being led of His Spirit with the joy of bearing His fruit.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 17, 2021)

StriperAddict said:


> Because that's what Love does.
> 
> Rom 1 says the works of God and His attributes are clearly seen in creation.
> 
> ...


You think that group in Romans 1 was the whole world? If so then why do we send out missionaries? The group in Romans 1 knew God. Yet they chose not to worship him.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 17, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> If you’re in the flesh, you aren’t in the spirit. There’s a ton of scripture dealing with the flesh and following it instead of God, not obeying, not retaining God in your knowledge, etc.


Who has the power over all flesh?

If you continue to get your understanding from yourself, who will you worship?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 17, 2021)

Before the twins were born. Before they could do anything good or bad one them was elected.
One view is Jacob was chosen by foreknowledge. God, from all eternity, looks down through time, knows in advance what people will do, and then chooses people on the basis of that foreknowledge. 
Paul does not say that was how God chose Jacob. If this were the case, this would have been the perfect time for Paul to do so. Paul even went so far to add before the twins had done anything good or evil. Why would he include that if Jacob was chosen for his foreseen works?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 17, 2021)

I think what a lot of people struggle with is that giving God that kind of power makes Him appear unjust. So they've come up with this un-biblical justification in their own minds as a way to force their vision of justice on God. They have to force a human's view of justice on an all powerful God.
Read Romans 9-11, Paul says God does what He does because he wants to and the we can't fathom this. Paul knew man would have a hard time and try to paint God as being just by human standards of justice.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 17, 2021)

Paul more or less asked the question; Does God choosing Jacob over Esau make Him unjust? He answers "Absolutely not." Again he doesn't add anything about God using foreknowledge of what Jacob would do in God choosing Jacob. Paul knew people were gonna think God unjust for doing that. Again Paul didn't say "absolutely not because God used His foreknowledge to look ahead and that is why He chose Jacob."


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Sep 17, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> I think what a lot of people struggle with is that giving God that kind of power makes Him appear unjust.



LOL   People giving God power.  Now that is a hoot.

Like God would depend on mud puppets to bestow power to him, after he created them.   LOL


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 17, 2021)

NE GA Pappy said:


> LOL   People giving God power.  Now that is a hoot.
> 
> Like God would depend on mud puppets to bestow power to him, after he created them.   LOL


I agree but that's what some people do, they have to give God that power to make him just.

You and me know that it's impossible to do. They try to limit God's power.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 17, 2021)

Some folks can't fathom an all powerful God who can choose based on that power. Therefore in order to reconcile in their minds or justify God, they say God chooses by using his foreknowledge to see what people's future works are or to see if they will become honorable or dishonorable.

In doing so they have lessened God's power but only in their own thinking.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> Who has the power over all flesh?
> 
> If you continue to get your understanding from yourself, who will you worship?


This is not about “power”. You will serve a master and can only serve one. This is about God allowing you……

God isn’t going to make you love him, He said if you love me keep my commandments.

You pretend to be exempt from scripture warning you as if God has you on an untouchable hill top and it’s impossible for you to be one of the following examples in Galatians 5.

Galatians isn’t the only place warning you about your flesh, but more examples here below from Galatians concerning walking in the flesh:

“This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.

17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.”


Another example from Galatians 5 -

“And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts.”

This isn’t about “power” either, your strength is in God. When you follow flesh, you’re not in God. You think you’re not going to be guilty of Adultery if you commit it? You honestly think God is going to get you by the ear and make you leave the room? God will allow you to jump right in there if that’s what you want.

What about something easier to get in your flesh with - strife? (Discord, bitter conflict, etc) Or in other scripture - lying?

“Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,

Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,

Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like:……”

You read too much into my posts trying to make it about man when it’s not. It’s nothing more than being obedient to God. 


Artfuldodger said:


> Why would God waste his time revealing himself to those who He already knew would not accept Him?


Who said it’s a waste of time? Every knee will bow and every tongue will confess. Those that denied will realize they goofed up. Can you imagine God saying “remember when I knocked on your door?” when he laughs at their calamity?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> What you are saying is Paul, Pharoah, Israel, etc. were all chosen by the Potter for vessels of honor or dishonor based on God's foreknowledge of what God knew they were before he formed them for that purpose.
> Where in scripture are you getting this concept? Read Romans 9, it does not explain it as foreknowledge. Not about Pharoah or the Great Potter.
> 
> I don't recall any verse that says Paul's conversion was based on God's foreknowledge that Paul changed on account of a foreseen freewill event.
> ...


It isn’t based on foreknowledge. It just means He knows. He knew before you were formed if you would serve Him or not. Paul’s conversion is important - God knew exactly what it would take to wake Paul up.

He didn’t create the Atheist, He created the clay that became Atheist due to unbelief.

Paul’s conversion does not mean Paul had no choice, if that were the case He’d zap Atheist into believing. Temptation and unbelief wouldn’t exist.

The story of Thomas is also important. Thomas required something physical for him to believe. If God has to zap folks into believing, show physical signs, and has already picked the ones to be saved then this whole faith thing would mean nil.

“We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.”

“Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:

But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.”


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 18, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> This is not about “power”. You will serve a master and can only serve one. This is about God allowing you……


Who has the power over all flesh?

Say it.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> Who has the power over all flesh?
> 
> Say it.



God has the power. It was never about power. Never will be. It’s about what God will allow you to do - will He or will He not turn you over to reprobate mind? And why will He do that? Are you exempt?


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 18, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> God has the power.


Yes.
"As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him." John 17:2


Spotlite said:


> It was never about power. Never will be. It’s about what God will allow you to do


Unintelligible


Spotlite said:


> will He or will He not turn you over to reprobate mind?


Determined by Him.


Spotlite said:


> And why will He do that?


His glory.


Spotlite said:


> Are you exempt?


No, but its not about me.

To God be the glory!


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> Yes.
> "As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him." John 17:2
> 
> Unintelligible
> ...


Ok, I’m not hung up who it’s about. 

Coming from a 10 year old age group Sunday school lesson:

1. Spare the rod, spoil the child….. 
2. Train up a child in the way he should go……

According to what you’re saying - a child is spoiled and goes the wrong way because that’s the way the Potter made him?

Has nothing to do with the parents not being obedient and responsible for the things God has given them?

So in a real life situation it’s already determined that one can be an adulterer? Their flesh, lust, desire has nothing to do with it? 

Let’s say a preacher that preaches the Gospel for 75 years and millions are saved through his ministry has an affair the week he retired. At what point in that preachers life did God step out of the picture or was He ever there?


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 18, 2021)

Sometimes an example is the best definition:

hubris —* I *can most certainly quench the Spirit.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 18, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> So in a real life situation it’s already determined that one can be an adulterer? Their flesh, lust, desire has nothing to do with it?


Who has the power over all flesh?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 18, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> He didn’t create the Atheist, He created the clay that became Atheist due to unbelief.



Does not the Potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?
What if He did this to make the riches of His glory known to the vessels of His mercy, whom He prepared in advance for glory?

Think about what Paul is saying. God "created: some people to be vessels of dishonor to show the vessels of mercy His Glory. Think about who the Potter is in this passage. Think about the power that Potter has. Never does Paul say the Potter created the clay that became Atheist due to unbelief.

I can help you find some better verses to show Free Will if you need me to but you aren't going to find it in this passage.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Does not the Potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?
> What if He did this to make the riches of His glory known to the vessels of His mercy, whom He prepared in advance for glory?
> 
> Think about what Paul is saying. God "created: some people to be vessels of dishonor to show the vessels of mercy His Glory. Think about who the Potter is in this passage. Think about the power that Potter has. Never does Paul say the Potter created the clay that became Atheist due to unbelief.
> ...


Paul asked “what if”.

The statement was the Potter made both. 

I’m not NOT convinced that doesn’t have free will to follow his own desires.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 18, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> It isn’t based on foreknowledge. It just means He knows. He knew before you were formed if you would serve Him or not.


 
Isn't "He knows" the same as foreknowledge?" 

Think about the twins, neither had done any evil or good. If God chose Jacob base on "knowing" then by God choosing Jacob, he changed the very future existence of what Jacob would have been.

The same with Pharoah or Paul. Once God used his foreknowledge to see who was honorable or not, by God choosing them for good or evil, erased that path of whom they would have been.

In other words God couldn't look ahead and see because by God choosing them they never had the existence the would of had without God choosing them.
By God choosing them, they only had the future life that God created for them.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 18, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Paul asked “what if”.
> 
> The statement was the Potter made both.
> 
> I’m not NOT convinced that doesn’t have free will to follow his own desires.


"What if" bad translation.
And [He did so] to make known

He does this to
in order to make known


Paul knows but ask it in one of those questions like Jesus uses about the power of his Father.

Can't God also reveal the riches of his glory to people who are objects of his mercy and who he had already prepared for glory?

If Paul thought the Potter didn't have the power to do this, he would have said it differently. Paul went to various extremes to show that the Potter did have this power and that man would think it's not just.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> Who has the power over all flesh?


You’re still stuck in the mud dude. 

If you’re convinced that God won’t allow you to pursue that which you shouldn’t, fine. Then this isn’t applicable to the handpicked - “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:”

God allowing you doesn’t give power to you, it just means ok you think you want that, go after it.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 18, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Paul asked “what if”.
> 
> The statement was the Potter made both.
> 
> I’m not NOT convinced that doesn’t have free will to follow his own desires.


I can tell by many of your posts that you can't fathom a just God doing certain things.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Isn't "He knows" the same as foreknowledge?"
> 
> Think about the twins, neither had done any evil or good. If God chose Jacob base on "knowing" then by God choosing Jacob, he changed the very future existence of what Jacob would have been.
> 
> ...


All knowing, he knows and foreknowledge are all the same and none mean “predestined”. 

God qualifies who He calls. Choosing “their work” and choosing salvation aren’t the same. To believe that Judas couldn’t repent is denying the Power of God. When Judas “repented” that was the Spirit of God drawing him.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> I can tell by many of your posts that you can't fathom a just God doing certain things.


Ditto


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> "What if" bad translation.
> And [He did so] to make known
> 
> He does this to
> ...


I never said that God can’t and won’t do anything He wants, when He wants.

I’m saying He isn’t a liar, He sent Jesus to die for ALL, not just the cherry picked ones. I’m also saying that He says if you want to follow you’re own desires, here ya go buddy, go for it. He will allow you to do that. He’s not going to make you love Him.

Why do you need to resist Satan?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 18, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I never said that God can’t and won’t do anything He wants, when He wants.
> 
> I’m saying He isn’t a liar, He sent Jesus to die for ALL, not just the cherry picked ones. I’m also saying that He says if you want to follow you’re own desires, here ya go buddy, go for it. He will allow you to do that. He’s not going to make you love Him.
> 
> Why do you need to resist Satan?


Maybe God can predestine everything but salvation.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 18, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I never said that God can’t and won’t do anything He wants, when He wants.
> 
> I’m saying He isn’t a liar, He sent Jesus to die for ALL, not just the cherry picked ones. I’m also saying that He says if you want to follow you’re own desires, here ya go buddy, go for it. He will allow you to do that. He’s not going to make you love Him.
> 
> Why do you need to resist Satan?


Who were the all the people that were without God and hope of the covenants of the promises Paul mentions in Ephesians?

“I will make you jealous by those who are not a nation; I will make you angry by a nation without understanding.”

“Those who were not my people, I will now call my people. And I will love those whom I did not love before.”

Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Who were the all the people that were without God and hope of the covenants of the promises Paul mentions in Ephesians?


Hasn’t it been mentioned that He made a way of escape for them? Everything non Jew was without hope until the cross.

There’s a lot more Bible besides Paul, ALL of had to be used.

People kill me hanging their hat on a couple scriptures while ignoring 75 more - they’re getting truth, but not the full truth. It’s like the two kids that went to the store and stole the candy saying they went to the store. That’s true, but not the full truth.

What’s everything else say about resisting the devil, being sober minded, obeying, etc.?

How can you be a stumbling block if it’s already destined for the Brother to fall? Basically, you don’t send your Brother that battled alcohol into a bar so he can ask for directions to the next town. You don’t hire him to run your cash register if he battled stealing or gambling.


Why is all that? Could it possibly be so that he’s not “beguiled” by Satan?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 18, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I never said that God can’t and won’t do anything He wants, when He wants.
> 
> I’m saying He isn’t a liar, He sent Jesus to die for ALL, not just the cherry picked ones. I’m also saying that He says if you want to follow you’re own desires, here ya go buddy, go for it. He will allow you to do that. He’s not going to make you love Him.
> 
> Why do you need to resist Satan?



Their trespass is the _riches_ of the world, and their failure is the _riches_ of the _Gentiles_.

Paul said this in Romans. God chose a Remnant out of Israel, based on grace and grace alone. The rest of Israel was hardened. This to allow salvation to go out to the Gentile world. Until the full number of Gentiles come in and then "all Israel" will be saved. Paul also knew that man would not see this as a just God.

Paul also said how can anyone hear if they haven't heard? Paul also said God revealed to him a mystery/secret. That being to deliver the gospel to the Gentile nations.

True some individual Gentiles did hear and receive but most had never heard before Paul and were therefore denied. They were without God and without hope until the Cross removed the "Wall of Hostility."

Since many were denied, does this make God unjust? Or do you think they or anyone that hasn't been previously called or elected will get a chance after death. Such as all of those Gentiles before Paul's revelation?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 18, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Hasn’t it been mentioned that He made a way of escape for them? Everything non Jew was without hope until the cross.
> 
> There’s a lot more Bible besides Paul, ALL of had to be used.
> 
> ...


A few scriptures? Have you read the Epistles of Paul? If the Cross was the way revealed to Paul for the Gentiles, then what was the way for them before the Cross? Why would Paul go to such a great extent in revealing his God given revelation to the Gentiles?

Now lets add all the Gentiles that died never receiving an effectual calling but only a general revelation provided by nature.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 18, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Hasn’t it been mentioned that He made a way of escape for them? Everything non Jew was without hope until the cross.
> 
> There’s a lot more Bible besides Paul, ALL of had to be used.
> 
> ...


Can you show me some scripture of how the world was saved before the Cross removed the Wall of Hostility and allowed the grafting in of the Gentiles to the nourishing root of Israel. Regardless of it you view that Israel as physical Israel, spiritual Israel, or the Church.

Romans 11:12
I ask then, did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Certainly not! However, because of their trespass, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel jealous.

I'm not denying the Free will in any of this, just pointing out the predestination in it as well. Go all the way back to what Moses said about salvation eventually going out to the Gentiles to make Israel jealous. You'd have to have free will to stumble or to be jealous.
Paul has hope to provoke the Jews, more free will. etc. etc.

Yet God hardening or the Potter making vessels of wrath for His purpose does not make God unjust. The Gentiles before the Cross not having God or hope doesn't make God unjust. Killing babies in the Great Flood does not make God unjust. etc, etc.


----------



## M80 (Sep 18, 2021)

I started a thread in here years ago with the debate of the elect. If God has chosen ones for heaven and ones for hades then “God murdered his son”. What that means is God made sin and made his Son die. That’s premeditated murder. Jesus had a choice and I’m thankful he chose to take my place on the cross. When there was no one worthy we found in Revelations that there was one “the lion of Judah”. He could have called a legion of angels and not died but because he loves me so much he was willing to drink the bitter cup of death for me and for the world. As far as “who has power over the flesh” it is God. He can kill me, bring sickness or suffering like Job endured. Yet he can not make one believe. The Bible teaches in Romans it’s the goodness of God that leadeth the to repentance. Moses chose, Joshua asked “choose you this day whom you will serve”. The Lord said “it’s hard for thee to kick against the pricks” to Paul. I’m glad the Holy Spirit pricks our hearts and shows us his goodness that leads us unto salvation. Yet I’ve preached many a times and seen folks under conviction and yet still walk away. Those same have died since and God didn’t make them get born again. The Bible also teaches us about foreknowledge and that 
     Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.  
    Seems pretty clear it’s obedience for salvation. Obedience in calling on the name of the Lord for salvation. 
    My main issue with the Calvinist belief is their short answers and treat others as though we are so dumb who believe free will. I have yet to see explanations of Bible backing what they say. It’s always some short answer trying to confuse man into making one think they have it all figured out.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 18, 2021)

This is the thread that keeps on giving...

To man be the glory!


----------



## M80 (Sep 18, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> This is the thread that keeps on giving...
> 
> To man be the glory!


This is exactly as what I stated. Short answers with no explanations. If you think I glory in man and not give God all the glory you have it all wrong. God gets all the glory yet may I add. Jesus has given us his glory according to John 17
“22 And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one”
glory definition 
GLO'RY, _noun_ [Latin gloria; planus; hence, bright, shining. _glory_ then, is brightness, splendor. The Latin floreo, to blossom, to flower, to flourish, is probably of the same family.]
1. Brightness; luster; splendor.
GLO'RY, _verb intransitive_ [Latin glorior, from gloria.]
To exult with joy; to rejoice.
Glory ye in his holy name. Psalm 105:3. 1 Chronicles 16:10.
1. To boast; to be proud of.


So I know his glory and that’s why I praise him. So thankful he has given me his glory. So I am proud that I’m a peculiar person. I’m proud and I boast in the Lord that I am a child of God. I don’t  bow my chest out and thump my chest thinking I’m better than anyone else but I will not allow satan to run me down and tell me I’m nothing. The Lord has given me his glory so I will glory in the Lord. 
Now you can come back with a little simple quote again and think highly of yourself. How about some explanation on the stand of the no free will elect theory.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 18, 2021)

M80 said:


> How about some explanation on the stand of the no free will elect theory.


Never heard of it.


----------



## M80 (Sep 18, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> Never heard of it.


You don’t believe we have free will. I do


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 18, 2021)

M80 said:


> You don’t believe we have free will. I do


Congrats!


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Can you show me some scripture of how the world was saved before the Cross removed the Wall of Hostility and allowed the grafting in of the Gentiles to the nourishing root of Israel. Regardless of it you view that Israel as physical Israel, spiritual Israel, or the Church.
> 
> Romans 11:12
> I ask then, did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Certainly not! However, because of their trespass, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel jealous.
> ...


Faith.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2021)

M80 said:


> You don’t believe we have free will. I do


The no replies, short answers, and lack of explanation is very telling isn’t it lol.

I’ve asked about the flesh before, obviously some are untouchable and don’t have to be concerned about it.

Take Peter - in one verse Jesus said the Father has revealed this to you, a few verses later he calls Peter sin. These folks pretend their beyond that and even greater than Peter, the rock that the church was built on, the man that received the keys to the kingdom. Peter got in the flesh.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Sep 18, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> The no replies, short answers, and lack of explanation is very telling isn’t it lol.
> 
> I’ve asked about the flesh before, obviously some are untouchable and don’t have to be concerned about it.
> 
> Take Peter - in one verse Jesus said the Father has revealed this to you, a few verses later he calls Peter sin. These folks pretend their beyond that and even greater than Peter, the rock that the church was built on, the man that received the keys to the kingdom. Peter got in the flesh.



why do people believe that Peter is the rock the church was built upon?  It seems to me that Jesus clearly meant that the revelation that Jesus is the Christ was the rock that the church was to be built upon.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2021)

NE GA Pappy said:


> why do people believe that Peter is the rock the church was built upon?  It seems to me that Jesus clearly meant that the revelation that Jesus is the Christ was the rock that the church was to be built upon.


It’s not so much Peter (the man himself) it is the act - the Father revealed Jesus to Peter, as you’ve said. I’m not very detailed sometimes.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 18, 2021)

Banjo Picker said:


> nothing on my post to do with Glory, Was about power of freedom of choice !


There is no glory in that.

Thanks


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 18, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> The no replies, short answers, and lack of explanation is very telling isn’t it lol.


I am not compelled to spend much time on the notion of free-will(freedom relative to God). None of us have the freedom to bridge the gap between our understanding.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> I am not compelled to spend much time on the notion of free-will(freedom relative to God). None of us have the freedom to bridge the gap between our understanding.


That’s fair enough.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 18, 2021)

Banjo Picker said:


> Then you need to go back and read your post # 98 & # 145 of this thread on your reply's and not lie !


Post 98 and 145 pointed out the homocentric theme of the posts responded to. It applies just as much now as then.

I'll not apologize for that. I may, however, utilize a different arrangement of words the next time. I don't think you'll like them much either.


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 18, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> The no replies, short answers, and lack of explanation is very telling isn’t it lol.


When longer, carefully thought out, answers are responded to with "crickets"
"fool me once" kicks in.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 18, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> Post 98 and 145 pointed out the homocentric theme of the posts responded to. It applies just as much now as then.
> 
> I'll not apologize for that. I may, however, utilize a different arrangement of words the next time. I don't think you'll like them much either.





> I'll not apologize for that. I may, however, utilize a different arrangement of words the next time


But but but……..how? You can’t decide that, can you?


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 18, 2021)

Banjo Picker said:


> That's ok I don't have to give account for it !


None of us do, if we have freedom relative to God.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 18, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> But but but……..how? You can’t decide that, can you?


That is determined by God. I do not know if He has determined a next time.

This is a Biblical principle. James 4:14-15


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 19, 2021)

M80 said:


> You don’t believe we have free will. I do


Does God's foreknowledge see your free will choices? 
Did God foresee from all eternity that you would choose Him and that Bill down the street wouldn't?
If God has foreseen your free will choices, how can you then, on that later designated day that God has foreseen, make any other choice?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 19, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> The no replies, short answers, and lack of explanation is very telling isn’t it lol.



I don't think you can really accuse me of giving you a short answer in this thread.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 19, 2021)

M80 said:


> You don’t believe we have free will. I do


Did God use His foreknowledge to choose Jacob, Pharoah, Paul, and Israel based on seeing their free will choices concerning their honor or dishonor?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 19, 2021)

How can a judge let one prisoner go and not another? This happens all the time? Is it fair? They are both guilty, don't they both deserve justice? Maybe they should both be let go. Like Universal Salvation. That would really make the judge fair and equal.

Romans 9:15
So it is God who decides to show mercy. We can neither choose it nor work for it.

Why does Paul keep trying to explain God's mercy in Romans?


----------



## Madman (Sep 19, 2021)

So what is the answer to the OP?


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 19, 2021)

Madman said:


> So what is the answer to the OP?



That nothing was discernibly changed by anything discussed.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 19, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> I don't think you can really accuse me of giving you a short answer in this thread.


No Sir, you’re correct.


----------



## RegularJoe (Sep 19, 2021)

Art - You posted one of the more important Scriptural realities for me ... and, as i know you know, it is Paul quoting Exodus 33:19, more specifically, "I (i.e, God) will show mercy on who I will show mercy."


Artfuldodger said:


> Romans 9:15
> So it is God who decides to show mercy.


Should i be able to make sense of this with my silly little mortal mind?
.... i keep _wanting_ to do so;
& while i have spent years edeavorin' to do so from a 'fairness' perspective i repeatedly arrived at 1 &/or the other of 2 places.
A.  The most frequently stated by many view - If God were actually fair all of mankind would be heading to hades.
&/or
B.  i need not think beyond the statement in view of my accepted reality that He is the Creator.  i am simply the clay.  i am not the potter.   i am just glad to have been given a opportunity to fog a mirror for a while.  I am just a mist that appears for a little while as posted by Gem... (i thank Gem for prompting me with his reminder : )))


gemcgrew said:


> This is a Biblical principle. James 4:14-15


One day while thinking i was continuing to believe that one day i was going to succeed in systematically tying the whole Bible together (even more completely than some of the great 'confessions,' e.g. "Westminster Confession of Faith") and was beginning to wonder if i would ever actually do so, i happily most timed-ly crossed paths with Proverbs 3:5 ... the portion that paraphrased-ly says to me, _'hey boy, do not lean on your own understanding.' _ And i did not miss the preceding part instructing me to 'Trust in The Lord.' 
With this in mind i finally tapped the brakes on my quest to ever get it all comprehended.
This resulted in pushing me to my next step, which was to focus on the the truth of Jesus and His perishing for me on the cross ...


Madman said:


> The cross is our only hope


In the end, for me, did that event actually occur - yes.
Is Jesus who He (& others : ) say He actually is - Nothing else makes sense, yes.
All of Scripture is supportive of this truth.
And YOUR great thought prompting questions are helpful to me in keeping my brain & heart calibrated to that reality, for which i thank you.


----------



## M80 (Sep 19, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Does God's foreknowledge see your free will choices?
> Did God foresee from all eternity that you would choose Him and that Bill down the street wouldn't?
> If God has foreseen your free will choices, how can you then, on that later designated day that God has foreseen, make any other choice?


That’s correct. God has foreseen all. He knows what decision “we” make. He don’t make us make the decision, we choose.


----------



## M80 (Sep 19, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Did God use His foreknowledge to choose Jacob, Pharoah, Paul, and Israel based on seeing their free will choices concerning their honor or dishonor?


Yes


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 19, 2021)

To man be the power!


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 19, 2021)

Perhaps we should hear about God.

Job. 33
12 “Behold, let me tell you, you are not right in this,
For God is greater than man.

13 “Why do you complain against Him
That He does not give an account of all His doings?
14 “Indeed God speaks once,
Or twice, yet no one notices it.

Job 34
10 “Therefore, listen to me, you men of understanding.
Far be it from God to do wickedness,
And from the Almighty to do wrong.
11 “For He pays a man according to his work,
And makes him find it according to his way.
12 “Surely, God will not act wickedly,
And the Almighty will not pervert justice.
13 “Who gave Him authority over the earth?
And who has laid on Him the whole world?
14 “If He should determine to do so,
If He should gather to Himself His spirit and His breath,
15 All flesh would perish together,
And man would return to dust.

Job 38
1 Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind and said,
2 “Who is this that darkens counsel
By words without knowledge?
3 “Now gird up your loins like a man,
And I will ask you, and you instruct Me!
4 “Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding, .......
Continue thru 41:34

And, although the lead-in and the follow-up have been reference in this thread, I do not recall this being mentioned:
Rm 9
19 You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?” 20 On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, “Why did you make me like this,” will it?

Rev. 15
3 And they sang the song of Moses, the bond-servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying,

“Great and marvelous are Your works,
O Lord God, the Almighty;
Righteous and true are Your ways,
King of the nations!
4 “Who will not fear, O Lord, and glorify Your name?
For You alone are holy;
For all the nations will come and worship before You,
For Your righteous acts have been revealed.”
[The righteous acts of God will be revealed in Eternity]


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 19, 2021)

M80 said:


> That’s correct. God has foreseen all. He knows what decision “we” make. He don’t make us make the decision, we choose.


Let's say God did not make Pharoah or Paul for His purpose but chose them based on this foreknowledge.
I get it, they used their own free will to choose God or not choose God. This let's God off the hook for being the meanie.

Yet, how can either man change from the course that God foresaw? Could the clay at some point change from what God foresaw, even if God didn't form the clay for that purpose?
In other words could Pharoah have at some point converted and believed in God or could Paul have not converted and stayed against God?

Keep in mind that God would have also seen those changes as well. Then since God knows and see all, even if he doesn't have the power to actually form it all, the outcome is the same. We can't undo what God has already seen, even with free will.


----------



## M80 (Sep 19, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> Perhaps we should hear about God.
> 
> Job. 33
> 12 “Behold, let me tell you, you are not right in this,
> ...


That’s good but keep reading the through Romans and you’ll see that was for the old covenant. We are of the new covenant through the cross of Calvary. Keep reading Romans.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 19, 2021)

Banjo Picker said:


> Man is a free moral agent and makes his choices in life !
> For if man is not a free moral agent and to make his choices, then God can be held entirely responsible for all sin, rebellion, sickness, and all the effects of sin, as well as for the ****ation of men and angels, as unconditional security men teach. Every one of us that has been saved had to make a choice to go to our knees and pray to Him to get saved, He didn't twist our arms behind our backs and make us, so we had to make that choice or stay lost.


But God has already foreseen our choices. That let's God off the hook so to speak. That justifies God as being just. Man is bad, man has free will.

How does it really change what we can do now since God has already seen those free will choice that we made today, before time begin?
I'm not denying free will, just that it don't make any difference. What God has foreseen, we can't change.


----------



## M80 (Sep 19, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Let's say God did not make Pharoah or Paul for His purpose but chose them based on this foreknowledge.
> I get it, they used their own free will to choose God or not choose God. This let's God off the hook for being the meanie.
> 
> Yet, how can either man change from the course that God foresaw? Could the clay at some point change from what God foresaw, even if God didn't form the clay for that purpose?
> ...


Why do we pray?  If God has made all the decisions then why pray. This all goes along with his foreknowledge. We have not because we ask not. God has seen our decision whether to pray for his healing power or we didn’t.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 19, 2021)

Romans 11:32-
32For God has consigned everyone to disobedience so that He may have mercy on everyone. 33 O, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments, and untraceable His ways! 34 “Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been His counselor?” 35 “Who has first given to God, that God should repay him?” 36 For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever! Amen. 

What was Paul's purpose for this spill? What was it in reference to man not understanding?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 19, 2021)

M80 said:


> Why do we pray?  If God has made all the decisions then why pray. This all goes along with his foreknowledge. We have not because we ask not. God has seen our decision whether to pray for his healing power or we didn’t.


I used to pray for my will to be done. It sounds like that is what scripture tells us to do, ask and you shall receive.
Like if I was sick and God was calling me home, I would ask God to change his mind and heal me.
Now I'm not so sure, plus why do  people always end a prayer with "If thy will be done?" What we are really asking for is "our will be done."

Plus would not God have already heard my prayer before time and already changed my destiny according to hearing my prayer? Therefore could I still pray for God to change His will to mine?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 19, 2021)

M80 said:


> That’s good but keep reading the through Romans and you’ll see that was for the old covenant. We are of the new covenant through the cross of Calvary. Keep reading Romans.


What's your take on Romans 11? Also I've often wondered how we are suppose to use passages that are about nations and convert them to individuals. I read a lot of passages and say, well God is talking about nations. He is making things happen about these nations using His power and knowledge. Like blessing or punishing Israel, etc.

Can we take a passage that is about a nation and change it to mean about an individual? Aren't some verses about salvation more in line with a nation? Aren't some verses about God choosing or electing about a nation?
Yet nations are really just people. Oh, and some verses about predestination and election seems to be more about the Jews and Gentiles(nations), especially in Romans.

Is this about the salvation of individuals or nations?
Ephesians 2:12
remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world.
13 But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near through the blood of Christ.

Were there really individuals without God or does this mean there were whole nations that didn't have God or hope, nor the covenants of the promises?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 19, 2021)

But one has to ask, didn't God form individuals to make it all go down according to His plan?
Let's just pick a random starting point in Romans;
"it is the children of the promise who are regarded as offspring."
"Rebecca’s children were conceived by one man, our father Isaac."
"Before her twins were even born  “The older will serve the younger."
Then Paul explains that this doesn't make God unjust. He doesn't say it was foreknowledge. He just says God will have mercy on whom he will have mercy.
To me this is the start of salvation going out to the Gentiles, is it not? That not all of His children are from Abraham?

Pharoah was also given as an example. Did God not use an individual to show that he has the power to form men to make His salvation plan go out to the Gentile nations?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 19, 2021)

Romans 9:16                                                                                          So then, it does not depend on man’s desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.

It's like the more I read this, it doesn't seem like God based His worldly salvation plan of the actions of men. If so Paul never says God used his foreknowledge to do all of this stuff in Romans 9-11. Paul says quite the opposite, that God didn't, he uses His power and has mercy on whom he has mercy.

I used to think all of this meant that God would have mercy on the Gentiles and not the Jews. Like God based His precious salvation plan on the actions of men. Now the more I read it, it doesn't sound like God depended on man's past or future actions to make all go down the way that he wanted it to.
I think His plan has always been for Salvation to go to all the nations, and not just Israel.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 19, 2021)

It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.

Oh and Pharoah was the example Paul used for this passage. Which lead to men questioning God's justice in doing this.  Paul then uses the Potter passage to explain God's power is justice. Paul knew  man would question God's justice and thus added the Potter passage.
Again Paul never once used God's foreknowledge as a reason for being just. He went to a great effort to show that it wasn't for that reason.

Shall what is formed say to Him who formed it, “Why did You make me like this?”

Was Paul's answer ever, "because the Potter foresaw the type of person you would become." If that were the case would that not have been an easier way for Paul to show God's justice?

It would have been so much easier on Paul if he would have said over and over again. "Look guys, God is just, not because he is God, but because He used his foreknowledge and saw the future works of these individuals as honorable and dishonorable. God knew what their choices would be and formed them for missions based on those future choices."


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 19, 2021)

Let's fast forward to Romans 11 and stay with Paul's thought process that man would not follow God's power as being just.
summary;
All Israel will be saved. This is my covenant when I take away their sins.
Regarding election, they are loved on account of the patriarchs.
For God’s gifts and his call can never be withdrawn. 
Just as you who formerly disobeyed God have now received mercy through their disobedience, so they too have now disobeyed, in order that they too may now receive mercy through the mercy shown to you. For God has consigned everyone to disobedience so that He may have mercy on everyone. 

And Paul knowing we would not see the justice in that said;

O, the depth of the riches of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments, and untraceable His ways! “Who has known the mind of the Lord? Or who has been His counselor?” 
“Who has first given to God, that God should repay him?” 
For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever! Amen. 

To me and I've come to the same conclusion as Regular Joe on trying to figure all this out. Just reading what I just posted about Romans 11. To me even if we don't understand what it all means, we should at least get one message out of it all. 
That message is and repeated by Paul, we don't have to keep trying to justify God's actions and mercy, and grace. We don't even have to know if God is going to save all of Israel because he previously blinded them.


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 19, 2021)

M80 said:


> That’s good but keep reading the through Romans and you’ll see that was for the old covenant. We are of the new covenant through the cross of Calvary. Keep reading Romans.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 19, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


>


That was God 1.0. We have God 2.0 now. All of our hope is in the soon to be released Beta version.

Atheism is more sensible.


----------



## M80 (Sep 19, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> That was God 1.0. We have God 2.0 now. All of our hope is in the soon to be released Beta version.
> 
> Atheism is more sensible.


Hebrews 9
1 ¶ Then verily the first _covenant_ had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
2 For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein _was_ the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.
3 And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;
4 Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein _was_ the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;
5 And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly.
6 ¶ Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service _of God_.
7 But into the second _went_ the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and _for_ the errors of the people:
8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:
9 Which _was_ a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
10 _Which stood_ only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed _on them_ until the time of reformation.
11 ¶ But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption _for us_.
13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:
14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions _that were_ under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
16 ¶ For where a testament _is_, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
17 For a testament _is_ of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
18 Whereupon neither the first _testament_was dedicated without blood.
19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,
20 Saying, This _is_ the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.
21 Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.
22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.
23 ¶ _It was_ therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, _which are_ the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.


You do understand this being the Word of God I do hope. A new covenant plainly stated. Romans 9 teaches us that Israel had rejected God, chapter 10 teaches us that Christ is the end of the law and for everyone that believe. Vrs 13 “whosever”. Then the hope is in chapter 11 that Israel through jealousy will turn back to The Lord for he went to the Gentile.
   I not amused by your smart Alec answers.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 19, 2021)

M80 said:


> You do understand this being the Word of God I do hope.


I do. It is also how and why I understand how you are using it.


M80 said:


> I not amused by your smart Alec answers.


Good to hear. That was never my intent for you.


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 19, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> I do. It is also how and why I understand how you are using it.
> 
> Good to hear. That was never my intent for you.



Do you suppose that there is anything that God has mercifully revealed to us of Himself that has not, by someone, at some time, been denied through Dispensation Tjheology.


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 20, 2021)

M80 said:


> Hebrews 9
> 1 ¶ Then verily the first _covenant_ had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.
> 2 For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein _was_ the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.
> 3 And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;
> ...



Vss. 23-28 explain how we are to understand vs s 1-22.  The eternal, which is atemporal (without time) and real in Spiritual terms is reflected/demonstrated/revealed by what is played out in creation so that we, who are created beings can relate to and understand it.  The Abrahamic Promises, the Mosaic Law, the incarnate life of Christ  and all of Scripture is God telling us about Himself (vs 23ff).


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 20, 2021)

M80 said:


> Why do we pray?  If God has made all the decisions then why pray. This all goes along with his foreknowledge. We have not because we ask not. God has seen our decision whether to pray for his healing power or we didn’t.


That ^^^^^is just one fallacy of the predestination doctrine.

"But they hearkened not, nor inclined their ear, but walked in the counsels _and_ in the imagination of their evil heart, and went backward, and not forward."

"I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God."

How can that ^^^^^ happen????

They are so hung up on it being about "empowering men" slogans from their how to respond seminars. There is nothing about empowering man, it is all about what God allows.

God did not desire for sin to enter the world through the fall of Adam and Eve, He allowed it. God did not desire His only begotten Son to be betrayed, tortured and hung on a cross, He allowed it. God does not desire anyone to perish, He allows it. At the same time, God recognizes that not everyone will come to repentance. He allows them to fall, following their own lusts.

We are all predestined, He desires all to come to repentance - the way John Calvin misinterpreted predestined to reform / create his own doctrine is an insult to the cross and ignores the necessity of faith.

"But every man is tempted, *when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed*.”


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 20, 2021)

John Calvin *(1509-1564)*

The Council of Orange *(529 A.D.)*


CANON 4. If anyone maintains that God awaits our will to be cleansed from 

sin, but does not confess that even our will to be cleansed comes to us 

through the infusion and working of the Holy Spirit, he resists the Holy 

Spirit himself who says through Solomon, "The will is prepared by the Lord" 

(Prov. 8:35, LXX), and the salutary word of the Apostle, "For God is at 

work in you, both to will and to work for his good pleasure" (Phil. 2:13).



CANON 5. If anyone says that not only the increase of faith but also its 

beginning and the very desire for faith, by which we believe in Him who 

justifies the ungodly and comes to the regeneration of holy baptism -- if 

anyone says that this belongs to us by nature and not by a gift of grace, 

that is, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit amending our will and 

turning it from unbelief to faith and from godlessness to godliness, it is 

proof that he is opposed to the teaching of the Apostles, for blessed Paul 

says, "And I am sure that he who began a good work in you will bring it to 

completion at the day of Jesus Christ" (Phil. 1:6). And again, "For by 

grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it 

is the gift of God" (Eph. 2:8). For those who state that the faith by 

which we believe in God is natural make all who are separated from the 

Church of Christ by definition in some measure believers.



CANON 6. If anyone says that God has mercy upon us when, apart from his 

grace, we believe, will, desire, strive, labor, pray, watch, study, seek, 

ask, or knock, but does not confess that it is by the infusion and 

inspiration of the Holy Spirit within us that we have the faith, the will, 

or the strength to do all these things as we ought; or if anyone makes the 

assistance of grace depend on the humility or obedience of man and does not 

agree that it is a gift of grace itself that we are obedient and humble, he 

contradicts the Apostle who says, "What have you that you did not receive?" 

(1 Cor. 4:7), and, "But by the grace of God I am what I am" (1 Cor. 15:10).



CANON 7. If anyone affirms that we can form any right opinion or make any 

right choice which relates to the salvation of eternal life, as is 

expedient for us, or that we can be saved, that is, assent to the preaching 

of the gospel through our natural powers without the illumination and 

inspiration of the Holy Spirit, who makes all men gladly assent to and 

believe in the truth, he is led astray by a heretical spirit, and does not 

understand the voice of God who says in the Gospel, "For apart from me you 

can do nothing" (John 15:5), and the word of the Apostle, "Not that we are 

competent of ourselves to claim anything as coming from us; our competence 

is from God" (2 Cor. 3:5).



CANON 8. If anyone maintains that some are able to come to the grace of 

baptism by mercy but others through free will, which has manifestly been 

corrupted in all those who have been born after the transgression of the 

first man, it is proof that he has no place in the true faith. For he 

denies that the free will of all men has been weakened through the sin of 

the first man, or at least holds that it has been affected in such a way 

that they have still the ability to seek the mystery of eternal salvation 

by themselves without the revelation of God. The Lord himself shows how 

contradictory this is by declaring that no one is able to come to him 

"unless the Father who sent me draws him" (John 6:44), as he also says to 

Peter, "Blessed are you, Simon Bar-Jona! For flesh and blood has not 

revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven" (Matt. 16:17), and as 

the Apostle says, "No one can say 'Jesus is Lord' except by the Holy 

Spirit" (1 Cor. 12:3).

https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/basis/orange.txt


----------



## RegularJoe (Sep 20, 2021)

M80 said:


> _Why do we pray?_  If God has made all the decisions then why pray.


Your point is certainly well taken .... 
why pray if not only does God already know all in advance, 
but He even tells me that His knowledge includes knowing, of course,
what i am going to pray!?!?
In light of this, for me, i can only conclude that 
_i am to pray because i am commanded by Him to do so._


----------



## M80 (Sep 20, 2021)

RegularJoe said:


> Your point is certainly well taken ....
> why pray if not only does God already know all in advance,
> but He even tells me that His knowledge includes knowing, of course,
> what i am going to pray!?!?
> ...


He does know before we ask. Just like we know what our children want before they ask at times. We don’t do it for them unless they ask. God gives us the decision whether we ask or not. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.


----------



## RegularJoe (Sep 20, 2021)

M80 said:


> .... Just like we know what our children want before they ask at times. We don’t do it for them unless they ask. God gives us the decision whether we ask or not. ....


Please allow me to offer a couple thoughts that are, _for me_, distinguishing contrasts?
1.  While _my_ father to children relationship does assist me in grasping _some_ elements of understanding God's relationship _to me_,
i am not in complete control of my children's current environment,
let alone their future ....
and He is in control of both of those dimensions of _my_ life ....
and if He is not in control of those dimensions then,
logically, He is not all-knowing and all-powerful?
2.  It _seems to me_ that
God has done, & is doing, many things _for me_
for which i have not asked &/or made _any_ decisions?


----------



## M80 (Sep 20, 2021)

RegularJoe said:


> Please allow me to offer a couple thoughts that are, _for me_, distinguishing contrasts?
> 1.  While _my_ father to children relationship does assist me in grasping _some_ elements of understanding God's relationship _to me_,
> i am not in complete control of my children's current environment,
> let alone their future ....
> ...


So he makes you sin. That’s interesting


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 20, 2021)

RegularJoe said:


> Your point is certainly well taken ....
> why pray if not only does God already know all in advance,
> but He even tells me that His knowledge includes knowing, of course,
> what i am going to pray!?!?
> ...





> _i am to pray because i am commanded by Him to do so._


Good point - so this is kind of where the majority of this debate hinges. 

“If you love me, keep my commandments”
Can you not pray? Can you not keep His commandments? If you’re made to, is it really love?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 20, 2021)

RegularJoe said:


> Please allow me to offer a couple thoughts that are, _for me_, distinguishing contrasts?
> 1.  While _my_ father to children relationship does assist me in grasping _some_ elements of understanding God's relationship _to me_,
> i am not in complete control of my children's current environment,
> let alone their future ....
> ...


In control and making decisions for you aren’t the same. He allowed David and Bethsheba, the situation, the temptation, etc.

He knew what they’d do, He knew the outcome if they did do it or if they resisted their flesh. He allowed it.

The one thing He didn’t do is ordain it, He didn’t “script” it - God cannot tempt with evil. 

God gives you a conscious for a reason, conviction can’t happen without a conscience.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 20, 2021)

I wonder if some free will believers also believe in OSAS? Seems like the two wouldn't go together. At least perhaps after conversion one would think they loose their free will and gain the Holy Spirit's will. 
Otherwise, free will should allow someone to denounce God.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 20, 2021)

I've often wondered if God used predestination up to the Cross and then switched to free will until the end times, and thus will return to predestination.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 20, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> In control and making decisions for you aren’t the same. He allowed David and Bethsheba, the situation, the temptation, etc.
> 
> He knew what they’d do, He knew the outcome if they did do it or if they resisted their flesh. He allowed it.
> 
> ...


In what way does God allowing through foreknowledge any different in the final outcome than ordaining it?
Let's say God did use the future knowledge of our free will and allow things to come based on that knowledge.
How is the final outcome any different than God actually ordaining it?

The only difference I see is the allowing plan does make God look more just than the actual ordaining plan.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 20, 2021)

Perhaps God did look ahead at Pharoah, the twins, Israel's rejection, Paul's conversion, and salvation going to the Gentiles as revealed by Paul.
Maybe he didn't cause any of it. Maybe he did only use it all. I can see that. Yet, it still played out exactly the way God saw it before all time.

God still got the plan he wanted and really didn't have to predestine anything.


----------



## RegularJoe (Sep 20, 2021)

M80 said:


> So he makes you sin. That’s interesting


Sir ... with all respect, and then some : ), due... 
that is your conclusion .... 
permit me to simply go on the record to post that it is clearly not mine.


----------



## RegularJoe (Sep 20, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> ...If you’re made to, is it really love?


You ask a reasonable question for which i am not qualified to answer.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 20, 2021)

Is it really love if the whole world is condemned but not everyone in the world has been reached? Think about it, God loved every one of those lost souls but then left it up to Paul and us to reach them.
How shall they hear without a preacher?

I'd rather let God elect all that is His. That seems more like love than having man reach them the ones He loves. But either way, God is still just.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 20, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> In what way does God allowing through foreknowledge any different in the final outcome than ordaining it?
> Let's say God did use the future knowledge of our free will and allow things to come based on that knowledge.
> How is the final outcome any different than God actually ordaining it?
> 
> The only difference I see is the allowing plan does make God look more just than the actual ordaining plan.


Foreknowledge only means He knows, it does not mean anything other than knowledge.

Ordaining means to order.

God cannot tempt with evil, the flesh and the Spirit are contrary to one another - stating that God orders sin is contradictory to scripture.

It is not about making God more Just, it is recognizing His omniscience.

To narrow down your question - 



> In what way does God allowing through foreknowledge any different in the final outcome than ordaining it



Ordaining the "adulterous act" is contradictory to - God cannot tempt with evil, the flesh and the Spirit are contrary to one another.

Allowing it agrees with - I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:

"And when the mourning was past, David sent and fetched her to his house, and she became his wife, and bare him a son. But the thing that David had done displeased the Lord."

WHY would it be displeasing to the Lord if he ordained it?

The difference is life / death / blessing / curse. It cost David a price.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 20, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Foreknowledge only means He knows, it does not mean anything other than knowledge.
> 
> Ordaining means to order.
> 
> ...


I'm not disagreeing but you never answered my question. I'm saying perhaps God didn't ordain it. Maybe he just used what He foresaw to His advantage and therefore used it for His plan. If so wouldn't the end results be the same as if God did ordain it all.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 20, 2021)

Let's say that God foresaw Israel's rejection, He didn't cause it. It even angered Him. But could he not say before time, "Hey, I'll use what they did to allow Paul to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles. Their trespasses will bring riches to the world."


----------



## M80 (Sep 20, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Let's say that God foresaw Israel's rejection, He didn't cause it. It even angered Him. But could he not say before time, "Hey, I'll use what they did to allow Paul to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles. Their trespasses will bring riches to the world."


I agree with this because he knew Paul would submit to his will.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 20, 2021)

M80 said:


> I agree with this because he knew Paul would submit to his will.


Do you think Paul knew that his will would determine the council of God's own will? If so, why did he teach otherwise?


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 20, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> I'm not disagreeing but you never answered my question. I'm saying perhaps God didn't ordain it. Maybe he just used what He foresaw to His advantage and therefore used it for His plan. If so wouldn't the end results be the same as if God did ordain it all.



I would agree, yes on "used what He foresaw to His advantage and therefore used it for His plan"

Ordaining it, no. 

Allowing, yes. 

I would have a hard time thinking He would ordain sin. I might be splitting hairs with terminology, but for me the difference in ordaining and allowing is I might watch my Son to see if he reaches for his phone to text while driving, and I might not stop him from picking it up. But I am not going to tell him to pick it up. 




Artfuldodger said:


> Let's say that God foresaw Israel's rejection, He didn't cause it. It even angered Him. But could he not say before time, "Hey, I'll use what they did to allow Paul to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles. Their trespasses will bring riches to the world."


I can agree here.

The difference is I believe it was already part of God`s plan to reach the Gentiles and the "reaching" of them was not circumstantial upon Israel`s obedience / disobedience. 

Maybe the timing of the reaching the Gentiles was? Take your statement; "Hey, I'll use what they did to allow Paul to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles." and change it to "Hey, I`ll use what they did to allow Paul to go ahead and preach the Gospel to the Gentiles while I have Israel in time out"

The Church has not replaced Israel and God is not finished with Israel. Due to pride and disobedience, Israel were set aside for a season.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 20, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> The difference is I believe it was already part of God`s plan to reach the Gentiles and the "reaching" of them was not circumstantial upon Israel`s obedience / disobedience.



It was circumstantial in that God had already fore seen it. He didn't already have another plan to reach the Gentiles. It's not like God says to himself "I'm gonna let Salvation go out to the Gentiles before the Jew's reject my plan." Oh, wait, I just foresaw Israel rejecting Jesus, let me let Paul put out salvation to the Gentiles then to make Israel jealous. In other words God didn't need to wait and see what Israel would do because He had already saw it.

Again it matters not whether God caused it or used it using His foreknowledge. It doesn't change the event(Israel's rejection) being used by God in the time frame that God foresaw it happening.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 20, 2021)

My point is does it really matter if God caused it or used foreseen knowledge to His advantage to present His plan? You can't say God did not use sin, even if he didn't cause sin. Pharoah, Judas, Israel's rejection. Not all of our teachers and lessons are from good and/or saints. So even if the Potter didn't make the clay for that purpose, he used His foreknowledge to see that He could use their sins.

Even if God didn't predestine the sin of  Pharoah, Judas, Israel's rejection, isn't God using it, the same as using sin? He still used it all for His plan to happen using foreknowledge. It really doesn't change the time the event happened. It really doesn't change anything.

Foreseen Free will has the same eventual outcome as Predestination.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 20, 2021)

One other aspect to look at is the prophesy in the Old Testament. Plus the Types and Mirrors that would become future events.
Regardless of if God caused them or saw them, he still was able to use them to show future events. Causing or seeing didn't change whether the events in the future were gonna happen or not.

Let's start with the Flood and the Ark. The Ark is Jesus and represents Salvation. Can you think of any more?

Has fulfillment ever changed from prophesy? No it can't it has to happen just like it was seen. Therefore predestiny or free will matters not on the time of the future events happening. It all has to go down exactly as it was seen and foretold.


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Sep 20, 2021)

there are so many 'mirrors' as you call them

Blood sacrifice in Genesis = Jesus death

all the feasts = future event fulfilled by Jesus, still 2 to be fulfilled

Jonah in fish = Jesus in ground 3 days and nights

there is a multitude of thing like this in the Bible.  

Most people wouldn't believe the message in Gen 1:1 in the pictorial writing of the Jews.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 20, 2021)

NE GA Pappy said:


> there are so many 'mirrors' as you call them
> 
> Blood sacrifice in Genesis = Jesus death
> 
> ...


I've heard people call prophetical types; mirrors. I didn't know it was the wrong terminology.


----------



## Madman (Sep 20, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Let's start with the Flood and the Ark. The Ark is Jesus and represents Salvation. Can you think of any more?


 
Mary = the ark of the New covenant 
Mary= the new Eve
Jesus= the new Adam
Serpent on staff = prefigures Christ’s crucifixion
Passover lamb= Prefigures  the sacrifice of Christ


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 20, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> I would agree, yes on "used what He foresaw to His advantage and therefore used it for His plan"
> 
> Ordaining it, no.
> 
> ...





> for me the difference in ordaining and allowing is I might watch my Son to see if he reaches for his phone to text while driving, and I might not stop him from picking it up. But I am not going to tell him to pick it up.



That's because you are not God, and you do not know that the incoming text is from his girlfriend, the mother of your future grandchildren, who is about to end her life, and only he can prevent that.

In your hypothetical, God ordained it before creation.  What you don't know, He does.


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 20, 2021)

Hypothetical:
You, the Cocktail Waitress, the Bartender, and the Bouncer allow your buddy, who is stumbling mumbling drunk, to get in his car and head home; resulting in two children loosing their young lives.

What is the difference between that and God allowing the same thing?  Omniscience.  God knows, in our hypothetical, that the resulting criminal charges will have the precedent setting outcome of jail time for all five involved parties.  Further, the judgment, in the subsequent precedent setting civil suit, causes a major change in standard protocol for underwriting auto liability insurance throughout the nation making it impossible for anyone found guilty of DUI to ever legally drive again.  Even further, the two children are bound for eternity praising God.  As a result of these events 7000 lives are saved every year.

Privately (you, your God given conscience, and the Holy Spirit) with no possible social or peer pressure later, confront the question: does the distinction between allowed or ordained really matter.  Those who see God as always just, always good, and always absolutely sovereign, lose nothing when they think of Him as ordaining all acts, temporal and eternal, because only their self image could be at risk, and for them the image of God is supreme. (Rm. 8:28-32).


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 20, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> That's because you are not God, and you do not know that the incoming text is from his girlfriend, the mother of your future grandchildren, who is about to end her life, and only he can prevent that.
> 
> In your hypothetical, God ordained it before creation.


Yes so God ordained the adultery of David and Bethsheba so He could be displeased.

God ordained the sin of man in Genesis so He could grieve.

God ordained the wickedness in Nineveh so He could repent of the evil He planned to do if they didn’t turn from their evil ways.

Makes sense to me.

I think God has enough knowledge to know in my hypothetical that if he’s going to ordain that, He already knows I’m going to take the phone away after he picks it up and prevent my son from reading a text while driving if I’m in the truck with him, so if He knows a text needs to get there, He is in enough control to put that text through to my phone.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 20, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Yes so God ordained the adultery of David and Bethsheba so He could be displeased.
> 
> God ordained the sin of man in Genesis so He could grieve.
> 
> ...


Then your only choice is to to grab the phone as already foreseen. It matters not if God made you grab it or caused you to grab it. God still got the same results.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 20, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Yes so God ordained the adultery of David and Bethsheba so He could be displeased.
> 
> God ordained the sin of man in Genesis so He could grieve.
> 
> ...


The Word was already with God. The world was made through the Word. The Word was slain before time even begin. 
Was this due to predestination or foreknowledge? Does it really matter? God's plan for salvation(the Word) was already in place before Creation.


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 20, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> Yes so God ordained the adultery of David and Bethsheba so He could be displeased.
> 
> God ordained the sin of man in Genesis so He could grieve.
> 
> ...



Honestly, in that last paragraph, I don't know how you could sound more like Bullet.  The difference being that he knows where he is.

You really just don't get it; but I will continue to pray for you, even though I don't know that I qualify to have James 5:16 apply, or to whom, or how, "availeth much" is properly applied, it seems like a worthwhile effort.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 20, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> He is in enough control to put that text through to my phone.



Oh no I missed that part. Would you say barely enough control? Just confused by your use of "enough."


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> Honestly, in that last paragraph, I don't know how you could sound more like Bullet.  The difference being that he knows where he is.
> 
> You really just don't get it; but I will continue to pray for you, even though I don't know that I qualify to have James 5:16 apply, or to whom, or how, "availeth much" is properly applied, it seems like a worthwhile effort.


And when all else fails, the self righteous judgmental rocks are thrown and 3rd parties are dragged into the equation lol .

Glad you got that finally off your chest? But, you can’t drag me into “keyboard warrior” mode. Have a nice day, Sir.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Oh no I missed that part. Would you say barely enough control? Just confused by your use of "enough."


Meaning whatever it takes.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Then your only choice is to to grab the phone as already foreseen. It matters not if God made you grab it or caused you to grab it. God still got the same results.



I don’t recall saying it mattered. It was just a hypothetical story to show the difference in how I am using ordaining and allowing. I might allow something in order to correct it, but I’m not going to order it so that I can correct it. If you want them both to mean the same thing, fine. 

We fight a spiritual warfare. The flesh and spirit are contrary to one another. You can’t be in both at the same time. Unbelief leads to blinded eyes. We learned with Peter that doubt can cause you to take your eyes off Jesus. The Spirit revealed Jesus to Peter, a few verses later Peter gets in his flesh and Jesus calls him Satan and an offence. The predestined folks are above that, they think they can’t get in their flesh.

God cannot be tempted and he cannot tempt with evil - therefore God does not ordain evil.

He saw His creation was good, it was the deception of Satan that caused man to fail and sin entered the world. It grieved God and repented Him for creating man.

So, you’re telling me that even though scripture says God cannot tempt with evil that He did in fact ordain the temptation of Eve, or did He allow it?

And no, ordain and allow are not and never will be the same.


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 21, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> And when all else fails, the self righteous judgmental rocks are thrown and 3rd parties are dragged into the equation lol .
> 
> Glad you got that finally off your chest? But, you can’t drag me into “keyboard warrior” mode. Have a nice day, Sir.



I freely acknowledge that your failure to respond to documented historical fact, your thinly vailed ad hominem attacks, your failure to respond to reasoned argument,  your refusal to see, or even look, beyond carnal reciprocity, your obvious refusal to recognize that anything is beyond elementary conception, and insistence that God must be subject to His creation are frustrating, and that I have responded to those things, which is highly questionable in light of Scripture.


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 21, 2021)

To allow or to permit is to cause.

Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! _Let_ the potsherd _strive_ with the potsherds of the earth.


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 21, 2021)

gemcgrew said:


> To allow or to permit is to cause.
> 
> Woe unto him that striveth with his Maker! _Let_ the potsherd _strive_ with the potsherds of the earth.



Your brevity amazes me.
Lord, help me to that end.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 21, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> And no, ordain and allow are not and never will be the same.



It doesn't matter,  God causes it by allowing it. God uses it for predestination. Maybe some things he causes, some he allows, and some are just happenstance. I don't think he ever forms His plans off of our plans though. He may use us for His plans but again is that causing or allowing?

Concerning Peter I was drawn to this thread; Can a Man be saved or born again more than once.
While I don't agree with the OP, some think being "born again" is the same in ever sense as a physical birth, and much false teaching is based upon this assumption. It is a spiritual birth of a new creation.

Concerning Peter, he was told by Jesus that Satan wanted him and that he would deny Him. But when did Peter re-convert as the OP of that thread says?
"He went out immediately and repented and was converted again, fulfilling the prophecy of Jesus of his backsliding and conversion."

God held off Peter's second conversion until after Peter fulfilled prophesy. That's quite a manipulation of Peter's free will. But you want to see it as Peter causing it instead of God.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 21, 2021)

What about God using trials and tribulations? Does he cause them or just allow them to be used as teaching aids to show us Christ and our faith? If God wants to put one on us, where in His arsenal of power does he find it? Does He grab one he foresaw so as to make Himself conform to the justice view of man?


And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast.


And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> If it doesn't matter,  God causes it by allowing it. God uses it for predestination. Maybe some things he causes, some he allows, and some are just happenstance. I don't think he ever forms His plans of of our plans though.
> 
> Concerning Peter I was drawn to this thread; Can a Man be saved or born again more than once.
> While I don't agree with the OP, some think being "born again" is the same in ever sense as a physical birth, and much false teaching is based upon this assumption. It is a spiritual birth of a new creation.
> ...


k


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2021)

hummerpoo said:


> I freely acknowledge that your failure to respond to documented historical fact, your thinly vailed ad hominem attacks, your failure to respond to reasoned argument,  your refusal to see, or even look, beyond carnal reciprocity, your obvious refusal to recognize that anything is beyond elementary conception, and insistence that God must be subject to His creation are frustrating, and that I have responded to those things, which is highly questionable in light of Scripture.






> and insistence that God must be subject to His creation are frustrating,




If THAT is what you perceive then you’re programmed to respond with predetermined answers. Just be careful, at times one might be talking about cutting pizza and you’re response will be about cutting grass.

I think I’ve made my position known more than enough that an elementary student would know God has all power and authority. 

When this topic is debated there are a couple with all “their” wisdom they refuse to discuss the topic with maturity, they don’t have time for it. They prefer to throw the “judgmental rocks” and blow smoke at each other indulging in delight of one another’s cow trailing. 

“At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth,because thou hast hid these thingsfrom the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes”

Peace my friend, I won’t go into discussion of this with you any longer


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 21, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> If THAT is what you perceive then you’re programmed to respond with predetermined answers. Just be careful, at times one might be talking about cutting pizza and you’re response will be about cutting grass.
> 
> I think I’ve made my position known more than enough that an elementary student would know God has all power and authority.
> 
> ...


I think that's the case in a lot of these discussions. That or some turn into those types of discussions. We have to ask at some point are we trying to learn and teach or has pride taken over?

I don't see that happening any more in the predestination vs free will discussions that say a Trinity vs Oneness or a OSAS vs losing salvation thread though.
It appears to be more of a personalty trait of some individuals more than the personality of a whole group of believers.

At some point it does become my team winning and your team losing. Example; "we really show old Bill last night, he couldn't even respond." Not that we say that but do we think it? Pride perhaps?


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 21, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> And no, ordain and allow are not and never will be the same.



One thought I had this morning is exactly how different is God allowing than ordaining such as letting Peter deny Christ before He restored him.

1Peter 5:10
And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 21, 2021)

Then I got to thinking about all of our physical deaths. How is God just and fair if He knows we are gonna die in a terrible house fire or drown in our own lung fluids and only snatch some of those from death?

I do realize that it's just my human thoughts on justice. Why is that fair that people pray and  some get to live while others die on the day they were appointed?
It's all related to God knowing yet still allowing more than causing. But the outcome is still the same and God is still just.  

Using cars, children, and phones is not a good analogy nor can we come up with one that is. Why? Because we don't have foreknowledge to the point God does. 
How many are suppose to die yet God intervenes using foreknowledge? Any of this type questioning is of no value when you really think about it. 

Have  you ever been in a hospital ICU waiting room where each hour or two they take another back for surgery. All the various family members are anxiously awaiting to see if God calls their family member home or decides to answer their prayers and change His mind. Happy people when they hear the good news, sad people when they hear the bad news. Yet it's really just news.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 21, 2021)

Is it not from the mouth of the Most High that good and bad come?

The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the Lord.

Shall we receive good from God, and shall we not receive evil?

I form light and create darkness; I make well-being and create calamity; I am the Lord, who does all these things.

Does disaster come to a city, unless the Lord has done it?

The king’s heart is a stream of water in the hand of the Lord;
he turns it wherever he will.

Then the Lord said to him, “Who has made man’s mouth? Who makes him mute, or deaf, or seeing, or blind? Is it not I, the Lord? 

And the Lord afflicted the child that Uriah’s wife bore to David, and he became sick.

Let those who suffer according to God’s will entrust their souls to a faithful Creator while doing good. 

The Lord kills and brings to life; he brings down to Sheol and raises up.

We really have no concept of what it's like to be God. No real feel for what is good nor evil in His eyes. No idea what or how he uses, allows, nor ordains other than what scripture tells us.
We do have an idea of how good and evil pertain to us but we can't paint God with that same brush. We can't paint God as not being just and not granting equality in anything he does.


----------



## hummerpoo (Sep 21, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> If THAT is what you perceive then you’re programmed to respond with predetermined answers.


So you do recognize God's sovereignty in an elementary way, although it doesn't apply to you.




> Just be careful, at times one might be talking about cutting pizza and you’re response will be about cutting grass.



Although I don't know which of the 50 examples we are given in Ezekiel, or the hundreds given elsewhere, might best apply, I am fully confident that my perceptions, and yours, are being competently managed to the glory of God, and that's all that really matters.



> I think I’ve made my position known more than enough that an elementary student would know God has all power and authority.



And, I am confident that those with eyes and ears recognize the
*but, however, even though, and yet, etc. *that have been applied to God's power and authority.



> When this topic is debated there are a couple with all “their” wisdom they refuse to discuss the topic with maturity, they don’t have time for it.



And it has been demonstrated that eyes to see and ears to hear are required for fruitful communication.


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> One thought I had this morning is exactly how different is God allowing than ordaining such as letting Peter deny Christ before He restored him.
> 
> 1Peter 5:10
> And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ, after you have suffered a little while, will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast.


The main focus that gets lost - God cannot tempt with evil. Period.

Doubt leads to unbelief - unbelief is how this Gospel is hid.

Satan is the one going about seeking whom he may devour and has to have permission to attack you. The evil he wants to do, God has to say "you may".

Ultimately - did God create everything? Yes He did. But he doesn’t ordain sin, He allows Satan to attack you, that’s why you’re supposed to be sober minded.


----------



## Artfuldodger (Sep 21, 2021)

Ordaining versus Allowing? This is really getting interesting.

Like God sending out lying spirits to deceive Ahab or Jesus speaking in parables to hide the truth from them, least they be converted and their sins forgiven.

Some believe the allowing thing because God becomes much more unjust if He ordains all events, and that all events that He ordains are ordained for the sole purpose of glorifying Himself.

"The LORD has made everything for its purpose, even the wicked for the day of trouble"


----------



## Spotlite (Sep 21, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> Ordaining versus Allowing? This is really getting interesting.
> 
> Like God sending out lying spirits to deceive Ahab or Jesus speaking in parables to hide the truth from them, least they be converted and their sins forgiven.
> 
> ...


This doesn’t have anything to do with making Him “just” or “unjust”.

It’s designed to illustrate that you can’t walk in the Spirit and the flesh at the same time - they’re contrary one to the other.

The only way is staying in Christ. Just as with Peter, he was in the Spirit and the Father revealed Jesus to him, few verses later he was in his flesh and was called Satan and an offence. Some think they’re above Peter and can’t get in their flesh. Jesus was even tempted in the flesh.

What some are doing is blaming their sin on God as if it’s a way to be ordained so it’s all good. God is not in your adultery, that’s walking in the lust of the flesh.

God is not the author of confusion - yet some says He ordained it.

No need in getting hung up on allowing and ordained - they’re not the same. Allowing means you give it permission. Ordaining means your the source of it.

“Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.”


----------



## NE GA Pappy (Sep 21, 2021)

Artfuldodger said:


> The Word was slain before time even begin.


ain't that freaky...


----------



## gemcgrew (Sep 21, 2021)

Spotlite said:


> The main focus that gets lost - God cannot tempt with evil. Period.


Are you concluding this from James 1:13?


----------

