That wasn't the claim. The claim was that God would not let His elect sin SUCH THAT salvation would be lost. The claim is that we can reasonably infer this from scripture, as I have posted. No one says that the elect stop sinning after they are saved.
There were 11 remaining disciples, not of all whom believed, at the the Great Commission. Jesus gave it to them (presumably the believing ones) and they gave it to those whom they made their successors.
I think Jesus knew what would happen a scant few weeks later. The command was to all of them, as well as all of us. Again, the Apostolic view makes no sense. On the one hand, you say that God wants all to be saved. But on the other hand you say that only a tiny minority of people (clergy) are directed by God to carry the message. Many more would be reached and saved if the attitude was that Jesus was speaking to the laity as well.
It seems to me that the "Bible-believeing Christians" believe something that's not in the Bible, namely that the Great Commission applied to every Tom, Dick and Harry who decided to preach.
No, I've not seen any of us post anything like that. Bible-believing Christians believe that the Great Commission applies to everyone with true faith. That leaves out some who decide to preach.
Jesus never taught that Israel included Gentiles to any of His disciples. It was a dire necessity for the Church to survive that led to the idea that the Gentiles are in the "club."
Then either God erred or God needed Paul's help. I mean, if the Church had folded, would God have said "Oh well"? This is why it is so dangerous to presume that man is autonomous, as many Christians do. Man is always built up AT THE EXPENSE of God.
FK: "The elect are predestined to be saved (remember the different uses of the word "saved" within time?) which IS AS GOOD AS BEING saved."
Then, how come Paul says "Let no one in any way deceive you" [2 Thes 2:3] and "[T]he Spirit explicitly says that in later times some will fall away from the faith, paying attention to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons." [1 Tim 4]?
Being deceived in no way means that one loses his salvation. I still sin so from time to time I am deceived. During the end times, many will "fall away from the faith", but that does not refer to individual believers. Rather, it refers to non-believers who are otherwise "good" people. We all know them. They appear to be moral people, appear to be "in the faith", who act similarly to us, but they do not in fact have faith. They are the ones who will turn to "deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons". Otherwise, God is a liar and His seal means nothing.
How can anyone "let" himself be deceived if he is predestined to be deceived? Is this not as good as being deceived? And how would you know either way?
It is an outward calling/teaching to instill proper attitude. "Watch out so that you don't sin", etc. These are all over the place. By following these we conform ourselves to the image of Christ. In no way do these mean that God is not in control.
And who will do the deceiving according to Paul? Well, it seems to me he pulls the OT card and says—God! "For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false" [2 Thes 2:11]! Deluding influence is "different" from deception—how?
Paul is just saying that God will leave them to themselves. For instance:
Rom 1:26-27 : 26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
We are all born into total depravity, so by observation we can see that God provides "some" measure of protection to all men, or all lost people would act in a totally depraved manner. If that protection is withdrawn, permanently or temporarily, then any sort of horrible thing can happen. Without God, men are incapable of seeing the light, so if God turns away then men WILL believe what is false.
FK: "Whenever I hear complaining like this I am forced to ask if you would prefer a God who treated us as we deserved to be treated?"
How can you "deserve" to be treated either way if you are predestined to be pardoned or condemned before you even existed and "deserved" anything???
All men are sinners and deserve hell. Period. God has predestined to save some, but not all, despite what they deserve.
No, the Christians believe God intercedes on our behalf and rewards those whose will is in harmony with His will and their intentions are pure. We don't believe He forces us to commit acts by predestination and has already pronounced our sentence based on none of our doing.
In what form does this intercession take without interference? I mean, if I and a non-believer were up for the same job, and God decided to reward me, then the other guy (who was more qualified) was interfered with. Or, does God never do something like this, thus making prayers of supplication moot? Or, does God just not interfere with salvation, but He interferes with everything else?
FK: "Of course God planned the Flood, He said so in no uncertain terms and planned for its aftermath."
Of course He did, but it doesn't match the Reformed God formula because the Book says He was "sorry" for having made man. Did He not make man and predestined him to be wicked? So, why was He "sorry?" or "surprised?"
We don't interpret that verse the way you do because it has God admitting a mistake. We don't think God makes mistakes, therefore the verse cannot mean what you assert it means. He meant "sorry" in the sense of "it's a shame that happened". It was nevertheless part of His plan. I'm sure He was "sorry" about the crucifixion too, but that was also a part of His plan.
You then must also believe that God would not let His reporbates do enough good in this world in order to lose their perdition!
That's because you believe things such as Prov 16:4. Septuaging doesn't have that vers (or 1, 3, or 6). We don't have the same scriptures and we don't believe the same thing.
I think Jesus knew what would happen a scant few weeks later. The command was to all of them, as well as all of us.
The Bible is clear about the eleven. You don't like what it says, so you say it's nto true.
you say that God wants all to be saved
I don't; the NT does, but you don't like that so you "give" it to me.
Many more would be reached and saved if the attitude was that Jesus was speaking to the laity as well.
Conjecture. The Bible is clear that he was addresisng the eleven.
Bible-believing Christians believe that the Great Commission applies to everyone with true faith
That's fine with me, but it's not what the Bible says.
Then either God erred or God needed Paul's help
The disciples didn't fully grasp Chris's role until afer He left.
I mean, if the Church had folded, would God have said "Oh well"?
Jesus specifically told the disciples not to go to Samaria and where Gentiles live. He also stated that He was sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, and in Math 18:17 He make sit clear that the Gentles are not the same as the Jews.
How can people who appear to have faith fall away from faith? Besides, Paul is saying "Let no one in any way deceive you" [2 Thes 2:3]." If you are "protected" (if God won't let you fall away) who can deceive you? Only believers can fall away from faith. Nowhere does it say it applies to those who "appear" to be faithful.
If the Reformed theology holds any water, then those who are predestined to be deceived WILL be deceived and it is not a matter of anyone LETTING themselves be deceived! Ergo, the Reformed theology holds no water. It's full of holes.
Kosta: "For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false" [2 Thes 2:11]!
FK: Paul is just saying that God will leave them to themselves
NO HE IS NOT! It clearly says that GOD will SEND deluding spirits to DECEIVE them. Which part of this don't you understand? Or is it that you must rationalize and deny everything and anything in order not to admit what is absolutely unambiguous????
Your own example that follows only confirms that God is INVOLVED in all this (accoridng to Paul), my emphases:
How is it THEIR perversion when God "gave them to shameful lusts"??? Paul is saying that we have no control over what we believe OR do, which includes with whom we want to share "shameful lusts," yet is is somehow OUR responsibility!
False.
Without God, men are incapable of seeing the light, so if God turns away then men WILL believe what is false.
The Bible also says that God inscribed his laws in our hearts. It's like saying God put money in our pockets. What we do with it, is our decision—to our benefit or perdition.
Read Hebrews 8. The end says (never mind that this only pertains to the Jews), with my emphases:
11 No longer will a man teach his neighbor, nor a man his brother, saying, 'Know the Lord,' because they will all know me from the least of them to the greatest.
12 For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more. [Heb 8:10-12]
It tells us (verse 10) that there will be NO NEED for PREACHING because men will KNOW God in their MINDS and will have His laws in their HEARTS.
What they do after that will be either their blessing (obeying the Lord) or their downfall (abusing the blesisngs He gave), because He has forgiven the sins of ALL.
False! Hell was not created for men but for the devil and his angels. (cf Mat 25:41). That some men will end up there is because they will decide to follow the devil (by choice). It's their decision, not God's. We have been freed by Christ, who is the New Covenant, to either come to Him or not.
I mean, if I and a non-believer were up for the same job, and God decided to reward me, then the other guy who was more qualified) was interfered with
What makes you think a believer is any better than the non-believer? How prideful of you!
God does intercede if our will is in harmony with His and our intentions are pure.
FK: Then either God erred or God needed Paul's help.
You can word it any way you want: the Church was dying in Israel and it actually died. The Christians were kicked out of the synagogues (as Jesus said they would) and persecuted by Romans and Jews. Paul tried at first the Jews in diaspora but when that didn't work he turned to the Gentiles.
There is nothing, absolutely nothing, in the Bible that even suggests the Gentiles are to be included as a (second-class) "branch." The Jews do not proselytize. And Hebrews 8 is clear that there will be no need for preaching and teaching. But then again this runs into conflict with other NT authors. Nothing new.
We don't interpret that verse [Gen 6:6] the way you do because it has God admitting a mistake.
No you DON't interpret the verse at all! You can't because you are locked in this theology of a man-made "church" that doesn't allow you to read what it says. And it says in no uncertain terms "God regretted/was sorry/repented (take whichever version), or 'God took it to heart' (Septuagint) for having made man."
He meant "sorry" in the sense of "it's a shame that happened". It was nevertheless part of His plan. I'm sure He was "sorry" about the crucifixion too, but that was also a part of His plan.
Oh boy! This just keeps getting deeper and deeper. Now God was sorry this happened even though it was His plan to happen!?! How can you believe this? How can you not see the Reformed error that God is held captive of His own "plan?" That the "plan" is the highest authority to which even God is subject and has no control over? That's childish, naive and silly.
In dealing with rleigion on these forums, I have come to see great wisdom in Albert Einstein's take on the whole religion business: "the Bible [is] a collection of honorable but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."
And "[T]the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions."
To which I would add mixed with some moral truths.
I am sorry, FK. We don't see eye to eye. This has been an interesting eye opener but I don't see any reason to continue this. Nothing personal.