Posted on 01/01/2006 4:48:03 PM PST by HarleyD
OK. That is absolutely consistent with what you have said before, I agree.
Since we can do NOTHING to achieve heaven by ourselves, we are born in a state where we cannot achieve heaven - which many will say is a state of sin. It is not personal sin, but it is sin just the same, because anything without God is sin.
If I understand your use of the phrase "personal sin" correctly, I'd say we're singing the same tune.
We CAN choose good, sometimes, as God has placed His Law into all men's hearts - with sufficient grace to obey it. Most men, though, without knowledge of Christ, will not obey this law.
Before I even attempt a guess ---- His Law in our hearts?
Scripture points to also being sorry for involuntary or unknown sins. We are urged to examine ourselves, but to also be sorry for any ways in which we offended God, intentionally or not.
That's a good point. I know for sure this idea is in the OT. Is it also in the NT?
God bless.
Thanks, Harley! I heartily agree.
Rev. 13:8 - "8 All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast—all whose names have not been written in the book of life belonging to the Lamb that was slain from the creation of the world."
I think this is further supported in:
Rev. 17:8 - "8 The beast, which you saw, once was, now is not, and will come up out of the Abyss and go to his destruction. The inhabitants of the earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the creation of the world will be astonished when they see the beast, because he once was, now is not, and yet will come.
It seems to me again to come down to the power and sovereignty of God. Does God work His plan around us or through us?
Like I said, God got pretty lucky that there was someone around who lacked faith, had greed, and was willing to go through the incredibly elaborate charade that Judas performed in order to betray the Son of Man. Judas was accepted and mingled with the others all the way through. It must have taken quite a performance. God didn't cause it of course, but you have to admit that God caught a pretty decent break with this Judas guy.
The error of the Protestant mindset is that all the blame goes to God!
I believe you seriously misunderstand us. We do not blame God for anything. Instead, we celebrate as God's plan is revealed and fulfilled before us. We do not delight that Judas betrayed Jesus, but we do recognize that this was in accordance with God's plan, and led to what is the reason our salvation is possible. There is absolute glory in that, and it all belongs to God.
Also, it is not true that everything is the way it was meant to be. God has unlimited options and can change His mind as He pleases. Thus, in 2 Kings 20: 1-5 it is obvious that God did change King Hezekia's predistined death, ...
If you believe that God actually changed His mind then you must also believe that when God called out to Adam in the Garden: "Where are you?", it was because God did not know. You might further believe that Abraham got the best of God during their "bargaining" in Gen. 18:20-33 over Sodom because Abraham was a superior negotiator. This is hilarious to me because it is you guys who attack us for humanizing God. Unlike you, we say that God knows what He is doing.
I can liken it to our first birth. We could not refuse that .
God ordained the time and boundaries of our birth and we had no choice in the event.
I believe it was a gift of God that I was born in the USA and not Iraq.
I agree that repentance is not accomplished via suicide. LOL! Whether Judas was compelled by God goes back to my point that God must have caught a nice break to accomplish His plan. I think you're saying that God foreknew it and worked His divine plan around it. I would say that God both foreknew it and caused it in accordance with His divine plan.
It is a difficult and life-defining moment to repent of something. Unfortunately, people take it very lightly -- it's a lot more than saying "I'm sorry."
On this we certainly agree!
My point is this: if everything is set in stone, and everything has been predetermined by His foreknowledge (Protestant error), then we are on a set of tracks that allow no deviation and nothing will change what destination we arrive at.
Except for the error part :), I would say that you correctly lay out our position from God's point of view. Of course from our human point of view it is much different. We feel like we have free will because we make our choices and we don't know what even we will do next. This "freedom" makes us feel powerful and in control of our lives. We Protestants believe that God is in control of our lives, as we are His slaves to righteousness.
Protestants believe that God actually puts us either on the train destined to hell or to paradise! You don't see anything wrong with that teaching? I wish you would.
We certainly wouldn't put it like that. We would say that all of us deserve to spend eternity outside the presence of God. Pure justice determines this. It is not a matter of what we think is fair, it is a matter of God's demonstrated justice. But all is not lost of course. Via His love and mercy, He decided that some would be saved, though none deserve it. For this we should give glory and honor to God that the elect are saved.
HD-“Are you saying God runs the universe based upon OUR determined will”
Cronos-“No, that's not what we are saying Harley, you're willfully distorting our words.....”
It would be far more helpful if instead of saying that I’m “willfully distorting your position” that you simply post the clarification and where I have erred. It would require just about as many words. I still see no other interpretation than what I have stated from your perspective. I will say:
is a rather interesting statement from which my comments are based. There are only two ways to read this statement. If one were to read it with the emphasis in different places you come up with entirely two different meanings. For example, if I were to say:
I would come up with the Calvinist view of things. Everything is decreed by God, fixed and unchangeable including our salvation. On the other hand if I were to say:
Then I would have the Arminian perspective that would say what we do influences God’s behavior.
There are only two ways to interpret this. One with the emphasis on God's work and one with the emphasis on our work. I don’t think I distorted anything. If you could provide me with a third alternative I'd love to hear it.
Doesn't seem to me refusing intelligence would be intelligent. ;O)
My (Dion) comment: I'd be cautious with claiming logic for your position, dear HarleyD. The very nature of a gift is that it can be refused. You left out the fourth point: God can give a gift but a gift is not truly a gift until a recipient accepts it. If someone forces something on you it ceases to be a gift. If the Bible truly means "gift" then it has to mean a refusable offer.
You feel that a "gift is not a gift unless people can freely accept it". I've pointed out illustrations in scripture where this is not the case. God gives everyone the gift of life and substains us each day and not one of us ever asked to be born. If you had to "freely accept" everything that God gave you, you would be a very busy person.
Once we have faith we don't lose it simply because the nature of faith is precisely what it states: faith. If you "cease" having faith then you couldn't have had it to begin with. You will always be faithful (relatively speaking) simply because you have the gift of faith.
It's like intelligence. If God has given someone intelligence why would they want to refuse that intelligence? It goes against the very nature of the thing they now have.
But, according to you, men (like you) understand predestination?
That's really consistent!
FK I give God much more credit concerning His sovereignty and power. I don't think God's divine plan works around us, I say that it works through us
What's with you guys? Did I ever say that God doesn't work through us?
The plain and simple logic tells us that our free choice affects us and not God. We cannot affect God, change His plan, etc. God, however, loves us and accommodates us as He sees fit.
Take, fop example the case of king Hezekiah who was destined to die and was commanded by God to set his house in order "for thou shalt die, and not live." The king pleaded with God through prayer, and cried, saying:
"I beseech thee, O LORD, remember now how I have walked before thee in truth and with a perfect heart, and have done that which is good in thy sight."
And the Lord responded:
"I have heard thy prayer, I have seen thy tears: behold, I will heal thee: on the third day thou shalt go up unto the house of the LORD. And I will add unto thy days fifteen years..." (from 2 Kings 20:3-6)
Obviously God's plan is not set in stone, as God retains perfect freedom to adjust things as He sees fit. The final destination is known, but the route which God takes to steer Creation to the conclusion of His plan -- of which all options are known and available to Him -- is up to Him to decide. Thus, if He decides to spare one of us for His purpose, He shall do so.
The message of this chapter is that the king lived for another 15 years because the Lord heard his prayers and seen his tears and changed His mind, and not because the date of the king's death was an absolute certainty. God simply responded to the king's choice. God did not force the king to cry and pray. That was the king's decision and God foreknew that if he didn't pray and cry he would die, but He also foreknew that if He cried and prayed he would live.
Do you honestly think that God's plan would have failed if the king were too proud to beg for his life? I doubt it! God does things for us because He loves us, and not because He needs us to accomplish His plan.
The Protestants take this rigid outlook on Predestination as something that binds even God to stay on course no matter what, thus subordaining God (how ironic!) to His own will. God is infinitely free to do as He pleases, and He does.
And he obviously can incorporate our free will in His plan whiteout affecting the outcome of that Plan. Saying that our free will can somehow deter God from accomplishing His plan is giving humans way too much credit.
You are forgetting that our freedom of choice is also God's gift.
Men's "good will" has little to do with God's sovereign election.
You haven't answered my question. How do you know your point of view is correct?
Regards
You are misinterpretating Paul. To understand what he is saying, read Psalm 5, where he is quoting from. Note, he is speaking of the WICKED, not ALL men. The wicked are so blinded that they will not turn to God - while the righteous DO seek out God.
Regards
I agree with that, but that was not my point. As a result of God instilling within us faith, we are not instantly converted to righteous Christians. We still sin. I ask you again to look at Romans 7. Paul, of all people, says HE has difficulties following the Spirit. Again, all the faith in the world is worthless without love. God instilling within us some modicum of faith won't get us to heaven. We must WALK in faith through deeds of love. If we are judged based on what we do, then faith alone doesn't save us, but faith working in love.
Regards
You receive faith when you believe, neither before nor after. You receive it when you receive it. How hard is that to understand? Faith is believing. To believe is to have faith. It's a gift. You have the gift when you receive the gift. If you refuse the gift you don't have the gift. You don't have the gift unless and until you receive it.
You yourself used the language of "receive" in your silly question. I didn't answer your question not because I cannot but because I hoped you'd realize that you answered your question when you asked it and you answered it according to my position, not yours. You stated in your question that we receive faith and asked whether belief occurs before or after the reception. You believe in reception. If reception cannot be refused then there is no reception, only one-sided imposition.
If someone shoves a burning torch into my clenched fist I am not receiving it, I am being forced to hold it.
Your problem is that you don't stop to think about what certain words mean and imply and how they relate to other words. You have a procrustean bed of assumptions and you force words into your system even though the words themselves refute your claims.
I don't expect you to understand it. But since you tauntingly begged me to answer your question, here's your answer. It was already present in the question. For someone so proud of his logic, I would have thought you would have noticed.
Now why don't you just ignore the fact that I've just cleaned your clock logically and silently raise a completely unrelated and irrelevant topic like you always do.
So you also think that good works are necessary for salvation, correct? That's what we were created for, correct?
Regards
As Augustine stated understanding predestination isn't difficult if one start from the premise that everything we are (eg thoughts, attitudes, desires, faith, etc) were all given to us by God. God designed us just as we are. There is nothing we have that hasn't been given to us by God.
What we don't understand is why God designed us like we are.
Again, Pelagianism is NOT about free will, it is about the concept of man coming to God by natural means (as opposed to responding to God's initiative of grace). Pelagius even said that before the regeneration of Baptism, we could make efforts to come to God WITHOUT God's help. The Council of Orange AND Trent refute that position. The Bishop, as far as I can see, does not say anything like that. We understand that free will is not alone, but is guided by God. It is still free, because we make the final choice. For example:
Work out your salvation in fear and trembling, For it is God who works in you, both to will and to accomplish, according to his good will. (Phil 2:12-13)
Catholic theology says, then, that there is an interaction between God and man that is not fully explainable or defined by dogma. For example, what makes grace effective? Man or God? A question not answered by the Church. EITHER idea can be held and still be considered Catholic. But the important point to understand is that WE both work together. God and I are partners. BY MYSELF, I cannot come to God - thus, Pelagianism is refuted.
Regards
Both. How can we say we love the King if we don't obey His commands? If we are to love God with our whole being, what sort of love is it if we just talk? What sort of faith is that? All faith, even to move mountains, is WORTHLESS if it does not have love (1 Cor 13:2). Your faith is not saving faith if it doesn't possess love. But without faith, our good deeds are ALSO not of merit. Thus, we must have both to achieve heaven.
Regards
Works DON'T follow like a caboose (automatically). There are numerous examples of supposed "saved" people who sin grievously, or are indifferent to others and their plight. If love was automatic, then why does Paul say "if I should have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing." (1 Cor 13:2)?
I have asked this question about a dozen times on this thread, but have been ignored every time. Apparently, some people here already have their minds made up and would rather not address what the Scriptures say. If faith automatically led to love, then why does Paul suggest that faith can be had, but not love? What does Paul consider more important in the salvation formula?
Regards
Of course the gift of your birth talents can be refused--not at the time of birth but when one develops the ability to choose (age of reason or age of accountability.
No, you had no choice with regard to the time or place of your birth or who your parents were, at the time of your birth. But we who believe in free will don't claim that people come into the world capable of free choice. We claim that one has to have knowledge of right and wrong before one can have free choice. That comes at the age of 3 or 4 or 7 or 8 or whenever. At that point one has the choice of accepting one's parents, one's talents etc. Initially one doesn't understand that one has talents or even that one has a choice with regard to accepting one's parents. But as one develops, one realizes that one either loves of rejects one's parents. Most people accept but some reject and that's called alienation or dysfunction. And likewise one realizes, as one gains reasoning ability, that one has talents--at which point one can accept or reject them.
Note carefully what a talent is--it is an ability. And able-to-do something. Ref-using to do what the talent en-ables one to do is refusing the talent. Talents are nothing if not exercised. So whatever talents you were born with are meaningless until you exercise them, which you do as you grow and develop. And birth-talents are only a part of one's mature abilities--much of an artist's or a mechanic's talents have to do with the way his parents and teachers teaching and training of him(with his co-operation--he could have refused to be taught). With each tiny step in development he has a choice to cooperate, exerciese his talent or ability or ableness or not to exercise it. He "has" his talents/abilities only insofar as he uses them. And he can ref-use their use, ref-use his talents at each stage in their development, to the degree he understands that he "has" them.
Do you people ever stop to think through what you write? A woman is born with artistic talent. Her parents can refuse that gift for her if they don't raise her to recognize and develop her talents. She can refuse the gift by sitting around smoking pot and fornicating instead of developing her talent. What do you think the poor wretch in the parable was doing when he buried his talent in the ground instead of using it if he was not ref-using it? Did you ever think that ref-use comes from non-use?
Your denials of free will are so utterly at odds with all of our human experience. They simply make no sense at all. The very language you use to deny free will proves the existence of free will as I've pointed out to HarveyD a half-dozen times on this thread. Every breath you guys take, every act you do proves the truth of our free-will position, but you stubbornly insist that you don't act freely but that God imposes his will against your will.
Can't you see that your very stubbornness, your very ref-usal to believe in free will is a crystal clear example of your employing of free will? The truth is obvious to just about everyone else and when presented with the truth you freely choose not to believe it.
I know, I know, you would say that God keeps you from believing it.
Have it your way (have it by your choosing act)--you are free to believe what you believe, even if in believing what you believe you put the lie to what you believe. Everyone else chooses to believe in free choice to believe, you choose to believe that your belief comes to you from outside and against your free choice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.