I wanted to start this thread because the thread on prayer became about predestination instead of the original topic.

I would like to present this passage of Scripture for comment by the forum members. Let's keep it civil and objective as possible.

Also, try to approach this text and discussion with as little presupposition as possible.

And with that, I give you Romans 9. I'm using the NIV since it has looser copyright rules which allow me to post it here.

Let's unpack it together.:buddies:

1 I speak the truth in Christ—I am not lying, my conscience confirms it in the Holy Spirit— 2 I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race, 4 the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption as sons; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. 5 Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen.

6 It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.” 8 In other words, it is not the natural children who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring. 9 For this was how the promise was stated: “At the appointed time I will return, and Sarah will have a son.”

10 Not only that, but Rebekah’s children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses,

“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

16 It does not, therefore, depend on man’s desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who resists his will?” 20 But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

22 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? 23 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— 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles? 25 As he says in Hosea:

“I will call them ‘my people’ who are not my people;
and I will call her ‘my loved one’ who is not my loved one,”

26 and,

“It will happen that in the very place where it was said to them,
‘You are not my people,’
they will be called ‘sons of the living God.’”

27 Isaiah cries out concerning Israel:

“Though the number of the Israelites be like the sand by the sea,
only the remnant will be saved.
28 For the Lord will carry out
his sentence on earth with speed and finality.”

29 It is just as Isaiah said previously:

“Unless the Lord Almighty
had left us descendants,
we would have become like Sodom,
we would have been like Gomorrah.”
Israel’s Unbelief
30 What then shall we say? That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but Israel, who pursued a law of righteousness, has not attained it. 32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the “stumbling stone.” 33 As it is written:

“See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes men to stumble
and a rock that makes them fall,
and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame.”

Romans 9 is about Israel's past, and is one of the key sections on God's sovereign election status.

However, Romans 9 is nicely segued into Romans 10, with the same enthusiasm and vigorous defense by Paul - the responsibility of man to accept the Gospel of Christ and be saved.

10 balances out 9 very nicely, in other words.

Romans 10:9-10, 13 are key in man's personal responsibility. Chapter 10 also points out the importance of man to believe, accept, and consequently be saved, and then spread, or preach, the Gospel to others so they may also come to believe.

This topic is just a continuation of the end of the "Prayer" thread that, as stated, morphed into predestination.

Do you see this topic morphing into something else? Just curious.

Back to how one is saved:

Romans 9:

32 Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the “stumbling stone.” 33 As it is written:

“See, I lay in Zion a stone that causes men to stumble
and a rock that makes them fall,
and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame.”


The context comes back to placing Faith in Christ for Salvation. The cited verses from Roman 9 also indicate how people were caught up in placing more faith in their "religious doctrines and traditions" to attain their salvation rather than simple trust and faith in Christ alone. Jesus became the "stumblingblock" especially to the Orthodox Jews who trusted in following Moses, The Law, and Traditions.

Back to how one is saved:



The context comes back to placing Faith in Christ for Salvation. The cited verses from Roman 9 also indicate how people were caught up in placing more faith in their "religious doctrines and traditions" to attain their salvation rather than simple trust and faith in Christ alone. Jesus became the "stumblingblock" especially to the Orthodox Jews who trusted in following Moses, The Law, and Traditions.

Jesus was, for sure, the stumbling block to the Pharisees. No matter how hard they tried, lied, connived, the Jewish religious law and the priests just could not get around the Lord. The harder they tried to bring down the Word, the harder they crashed and burned themselves.

That stumbling block still lives today - and millions in other religions, a vast part of the media, intellectuals, etc., try and try, but cannot keep from falling over Him.

Back to how one is saved:



The context comes back to placing Faith in Christ for Salvation. The cited verses from Roman 9 also indicate how people were caught up in placing more faith in their "religious doctrines and traditions" to attain their salvation rather than simple trust and faith in Christ alone. Jesus became the "stumblingblock" especially to the Orthodox Jews who trusted in following Moses, The Law, and Traditions.
You know, I think sometimes the Pharisee's get treated a little too harsh by us today. Undoubtedly they were in error, but if you ever notice they are the one's that always seem to be around Jesus the most. They are the Conservative Right of their day. Like lots of bad things, they started with good intentions. I had a professor say it this way:

The Pharisees read the OT and said "going through that door is a sin." So, let's put a mat in front of it that reminds us of it. If we don't cross the mat, we'll never go through the door. But that's not enough, let's build a fence around the mat and the door. Don't ever go past the fence and you'll never cross the mat or the threshold of the door and you won't sin. The fence became as authoritative as the door itself.

You know, I think sometimes the Pharisee's get treated a little too harsh by us today. Undoubtedly they were in error, but if you ever notice they are the one's that always seem to be around Jesus the most. They are the Conservative Right of their day. Like lots of bad things, they started with good intentions. I had a professor say it this way:

The Pharisees read the OT and said "going through that door is a sin." So, let's put a mat in front of it that reminds us of it. If we don't cross the mat, we'll never go through the door. But that's not enough, let's build a fence around the mat and the door. Don't ever go past the fence and you'll never cross the mat or the threshold of the door and you won't sin. The fence became as authoritative as the door itself.

Um... the only time the Pharisees were around Jesus was to challenge His claim of being their awaited Messiah and to turn people against Christ. They denied the Divine Authority of Jesus, called Him a blasphemer and were the ones who had the Roman government crucify Christ, not on the grounds of religious heresy to their way of thinking but on the grounds of the false implication of "sedition" against the Roman government. Even then, the Pharisees clamored for a Jewish criminal to be freed from the death penalty in place of another convicted man through Jewish Law (Jesus) as was Jewish custom in certain trials.

The "conservative right" does not deny Christ - at least not that I am aware of. :coffee:

Um... the only time the Pharisees were around Jesus was to challenge His claim to be their awaited Messiah and to turn people against Christ. They denied the Divine Authority of Jesus, called Him a blasphemer and were the ones who had the Roman government crucify Christ, not on the grounds of religious heresy to their way of thinking but on the grounds of sedition against the Roman government. Even then, the Pharisees clamored for a criminal to be free in place rather than an innocent man (Jesus) as was Jewish custom in certain trials.I think you confuse them with the Sadducees and Herodians in many cases. Although that does not mean they didn't do some of those things.

If you remember, Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea were Pharisees, while Caiaphas was a Sadducee.

It's a minor point and really not worth arguing over though.
The "conservative right" does not deny Christ - at least not that I am aware of. :coffee:Mitt Romney? :popcorn:

Anyway, that was not the comparison I was drawing, but rather how the Right often falls into enforcing rules and laws in order to prevent people from breaking God's laws.

Mitt Romney? :popcorn:

Romney's claim to be a true Conservative Right is questionable by many.
(Perhaps a RINO) ?

Anyway, got your point. Yes, the Pharisees were legalistic dudes.

:buddies:

..
Mitt Romney? :popcorn:

....

Not conservative or on the right. Romney is the Republican Obama.

But this is the wrong forum for this.

Check this out. http://forums.somd.com/politics/241001-truth-hurts.html

Those that want global rule are intimidating and eliminating. And a discussion of the one world government is germane to this forum.

Zguy; Do you have a particular part of Romans 9 that you want to discuss? You posted the entire chapter with no indication of what your point is unless it's about predestination.

Zguy; Do you have a particular part of Romans 9 that you want to discuss? You posted the entire chapter with no indication of what your point is unless it's about predestination.Yes, I did want to talk Election.

Ironic how it got to Mitt Romney...

But yeah, it was about Election. I posted the whole chapter to help with the context. I thought I would have more time today since I was on holiday, but alas, the old honey-do got me. :coffee:

By the way, you guys can call me Wayne. That's my name.

Yes, I did want to talk Election.

Ironic how it got to Mitt Romney...

But yeah, it was about Election. I posted the whole chapter to help with the context. I thought I would have more time today since I was on holiday, but alas, the old honey-do got me. :coffee:

By the way, you guys can call me Wayne. That's my name.

Federal or government holiday for Presidents Day?

Since retiring from the feds, about the only thing I miss about my old job is that I don't get holiday pay anymore.

Doggone it.:yahoo:

But yeah, it was about Election...
God knew everything that Jacob & Esau would do before they were born (as Paul said) so He could easily call Jacob one of His "elect". There is a progression to salvation: The Father draws us to Jesus, Jesus saves us and the Holy Spirit seals us BUT only because we made the choice to say yes and "open the door" to accept God's call (Rev 3:20).

The Bible doesn't say that God chooses who He wants saved regardless of if they want to be saved or not. As with Jacob & Esau, God knew (before anything was created) who would accept Him and who wouldn't. From that He:

Predestined us - Pre-determined our entire lives so that nothing would interfere with our day of salvation and His plans for us

Called us - Our induction into Gods army

Justified us - Made righteous by the blood of Christ when we get saved

Glorified us - An event that happens when we get to Heaven

So the "election" of Gods "elect" comes from Him knowing who would say yes & who would say no to His calling. I believe He calls every "accountable" person but not every one of them says yes ("many are called but few are chosen"). So, if it isn't OUR choice and God makes people follow Him, then Rev 3:20 would be incorrect.

Romans 11:26, 28: "Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in"...and as far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies but as far as election is concerned, they are loved..." Paul shows that Israel refused the gospel (at first) but eventually came around to God's calling. Unfortunately not all Israel, though (Romans 9:27).

2 Peter 1 :14 says: "to be all the more eager to make your calling and election sure. If God forced us to follow Him, we wouldn't need to do this. He's saying to make sure we're saved; that we "pass the test" for salvation.

Rather than repeat, see http://forums.somd.com/religion/240348-prayer-5.html#post4763487 and http://forums.somd.com/religion/240348-prayer-5.html#post4763488.

Rather than repeat, see http://forums.somd.com/religion/240348-prayer-5.html#post4763487 and http://forums.somd.com/religion/240348-prayer-5.html#post4763488.

Right. This thread is just a rehash of how the thread on prayer ended up....

We make the final determination on our individual eternity. Just because God knew our choice in advance does not change that simple fact.:evil:

God knew everything that Jacob & Esau would do before they were born (as Paul said) so He could easily call Jacob one of His "elect". There is a progression to salvation: The Father draws us to Jesus, Jesus saves us and the Holy Spirit seals us BUT only because we made the choice to say yes and "open the door" to accept God's call (Rev 3:20).

The Bible doesn't say that God chooses who He wants saved regardless of if they want to be saved or not. As with Jacob & Esau, God knew (before anything was created) who would accept Him and who wouldn't. From that He:

Predestined us - Pre-determined our entire lives so that nothing would interfere with our day of salvation and His plans for us

Called us - Our induction into Gods army

Justified us - Made righteous by the blood of Christ when we get saved

Glorified us - An event that happens when we get to Heaven

So the "election" of Gods "elect" comes from Him knowing who would say yes & who would say no to His calling. I believe He calls every "accountable" person but not every one of them says yes ("many are called but few are chosen"). So, if it isn't OUR choice and God makes people follow Him, then Rev 3:20 would be incorrect.

Romans 11:26, 28: "Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in"...and as far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies but as far as election is concerned, they are loved..." Paul shows that Israel refused the gospel (at first) but eventually came around to God's calling. Unfortunately not all Israel, though (Romans 9:27).

2 Peter 1 :14 says: "to be all the more eager to make your calling and election sure. If God forced us to follow Him, we wouldn't need to do this. He's saying to make sure we're saved; that we "pass the test" for salvation.
What if Revelation 3:20 isn't about conversion of the sinner?

Who does Jesus speak to in that verse, the unconverted sinner or the church that has backslidden?

What if Revelation 3:20 isn't about conversion of the sinner? Who does Jesus speak to in that verse, the unconverted sinner or the church that has backslidden?
It doesn't matter. God is speaking about those in the church of Laodicea who are sitting on the fence (so to speak) and are "lukewarm" because of their pride in their wealth. Whether they are unsaved or backslidden they need to choose, and Jesus tells them that.

He doesn't tell them that He's going to force them into believing against their will. He says "whoever hears my voice and opens the door", so a Calvinist perspective doesn't fit. There's a clear indication of an option that the people are in control of. If they don't choose Him, Jesus said (v 16) I'll spit you out of my mouth. They DO have a choice.

It doesn't matter. God is speaking about those in the church of Laodicea who are sitting on the fence (so to speak) and are "lukewarm" because of their pride in their wealth. Whether they are unsaved or backslidden they need to choose, and Jesus tells them that.

He doesn't tell them that He's going to force them into believing against their will. He says "whoever hears my voice and opens the door", so a Calvinist perspective doesn't fit. There's a clear indication of an option that the people are in control of. If they don't choose Him, Jesus said (v 16) I'll spit you out of my mouth. They DO have a choice.
I don't believe God "forces" anybody. He enables those whom He chooses and doesn't enable those whom He doesn't choose.

Again, none of this negates unconditional election, since people are the chosen instruments for delivery of God's grace through the gospel.

I don't believe God "forces" anybody. He enables those whom He chooses and doesn't enable those whom He doesn't choose.
Again, none of this negates unconditional election, since people are the chosen instruments for delivery of God's grace through the gospel.
You're really confusing me now. You said that God chooses who He wants saved, then changes their hearts so they'll follow Him? Please explain the word "choose" in your first statement.

Do you believe that God chooses who HE wants to be saved regardless of the persons' desires OR does God choose those who He knew would say yes to His call at some point in their life? (If you believe the first statement, free will goes out the window along with God saying that He wants ALL people to be saved and none to perish).

You're really confusing me now. You said that God chooses who He wants saved, then changes their hearts so they'll follow Him? Please explain the word "choose" in your first statement.

Do you believe that God chooses who HE wants to be saved regardless of the persons' desires OR does God choose those who He knew would say yes to His call at some point in their life?I do believe God chooses, selects, elects, etc.

I hate linking again, but here is a great article (from one of Starman's favorite sites no less!) that explains EXACTLY what I believe. It will take less than 5 minutes to read.

Unconditional election - is it biblical? (http://www.gotquestions.org/unconditional-election.html)


(If you believe the first statement, free will goes out the window along with God saying that He wants ALL people to be saved and none to perish).I assume this is a reference to 2 Peter 3:9?

If you think that verse refers to every individual person in the world, you are misinterpreting it.

Look at the context of Peter's writing:

1 Simeon Peter, a servant and apostle of Jesus Christ,

To those who have obtained a faith of equal standing with ours by the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ:

2 May grace and peace be multiplied to you in the knowledge of God and of Jesus our Lord.

3 His divine power has granted to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of him who called us to his own glory and excellence, 4 by which he has granted to us his precious and very great promises, so that through them you may become partakers of the divine nature, having escaped from the corruption that is in the world because of sinful desire.

Peter writes to the elect church!

Now the elect audience whom he writes to were concerned that nothing has changed in the world, but Peter is assuring them that God's promises WILL be fulfilled and they will be saved, and the world will be re-created.



8But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

9The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

"All" is a reference to those whom God elected to salvation. And it really doesn't matter either way, whether it was unconditional or conditional. It only applies to those whom God saves.

I do believe God chooses. I hate linking again, but here is a great article (from one of Starman's favorite sites no less!) that explains EXACTLY what I believe. It will take less than 5 minutes to read.
I only need the Bible...

I assume this is a reference to 2 Peter 3:9?
If you think that verse refers to every individual person in the world, you are misinterpreting it.
No; all means all.

Peter writes to the elect church!
9The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
"All" is a reference to those whom God elected to salvation. And it really doesn't matter either way, whether it was unconditional or conditional. It only applies to those whom God saves.
That's crazy Zguy. There's no doubt that all believers will be saved. Peter doesn't need to state that. God doesn't want ANYONE to perish and EVERYONE to come to repentance. There's no way to miss that. Peter speaks about Judgment Day in v 3-8 so you can't say that the context is for believers only...

God knew everything that Jacob & Esau would do before they were born (as Paul said) so He could easily call Jacob one of His "elect"...As with Jacob & Esau, God knew (before anything was created) who would accept Him and who wouldn't. I would like to return to this for a minute.

Can you show me the bible passage that states that God conditionally elected Jacob over Esau based on knowledge of what actions Jacob would take in his life?

If that is indeed the case, you are saying that Jacob is retroactively saved by works of faith through foreknowledge. So, salvation is no longer of God, at least not completely, but a synergy with man as well. That's what Onel and Libby believe. Do you agree with them on this?

I only need the Bible...You asked for clarification; I gave it to you. Answering that way only makes you look silly and is disappointing.

I am really enjoying the dialog with you and Starman on these secondary doctrines.

No; all means all.Not when it doesn't fit the context.
You (along with many others) are guilty of taking a passage out of context to suit your own theology.

Does all mean "all" in these passages too?

"Since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus and of your love for all the saints; because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel, which has come to you, as it has also in all the world, and is bringing forth fruit, as it is also among you since the day you heard and knew the grace of God in truth" (Colossians 1:4-6).

"If indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister" (Colossians 1:23).

"But I say, have they not heard? Yes indeed: "Their sound has gone out to all the earth, And their words to the ends of the world"" (Romans 10:18).

Do you believe the Greek word pas always means "all" as in absolute?

But that's minor, what really kills me is that Peter clearly is not only writing to discouraged Christians who are doubting God's promises, but he clearly addresses them in the clause immediately prior. The imperative is for the believer to not doubt just because Jesus has not come back yet.

2 Peter 3:8-9
8 But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day.
9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.




That's crazy Zguy. There's no doubt that all believers will be saved. Peter doesn't need to state that. God doesn't want ANYONE to perish and EVERYONE to come to repentance. There's no way to miss that. Really? Wesleyans and Methodists do.

I wonder how someone can believe God can have the power to stop a person from losing salvation, even if they turn their back on Him, but cannot save a person unless they do something first?

I wonder how someone can believe God can have the power to stop a person from losing salvation, even if they turn their back on Him, but cannot save a person unless they do something first?

Just because God has the power to do something doesn’t mean He does it. I’ve pointed it out before that John the Baptist said God has the power make sons of Abraham out of stones. But He doesn’t do this. He allows us to choose whether we accept Him or not. If God wanted followers why doesn’t He just turn stones into aimless followers? Because He gave us free will to choose.

JTB and Jesus told us to DO something… repent and believe. It makes no sense to send these guys to earth to tell us to do all these things only to find out God already did it for us.

From another angle… do you believe God dictates every word we post in here? If that’s the case, why does He dictate to me to post one thing, and for you to post something completely different? Do we have free will at any level at all? If so, please define for us which things we do have free will over and which we don’t?

Just because God has the power to do something doesn’t mean He does it. I’ve pointed it out before that John the Baptist said God has the power make sons of Abraham out of stones. But He doesn’t do this. He allows us to choose whether we accept Him or not. If God wanted followers why doesn’t He just turn stones into aimless followers? Because He gave us free will to choose.Do you believe a person can lose salvation?

JTB and Jesus told us to DO something… repent and believe. It makes no sense to send these guys to earth to tell us to do all these things only to find out God already did it for us.We've already been through this, the bible teaches that:

1. God could not have shown us the greatest love if Christ did not come and die.
2. God uses people as His chosen instrument to exercise His grace.

From another angle… do you believe God dictates every word we post in here? If that’s the case, why does He dictate to me to post one thing, and for you to post something completely different? Do we have free will at any level at all? If so, please define for us which things we do have free will over and which we don’t?That's not for me to say. But let me say this, I believe man has free will. But I believe also in Matt. 19 and that salvation is impossible for man because man is dead spiritually, and dead men don't repent, let alone have faith in God.

23 And Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly, I say to you, only with difficulty will a rich person enter the kingdom of heaven. 24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.” 25 When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished, saying, “Who then can be saved?” 26 But Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” 27 Then Peter said in reply, “See, we have left everything and followed you. What then will we have?” 28 Jesus said to them, “Truly, I say to you, in the new world, when the Son of Man will sit on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 29 And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or children or lands, for my name's sake, will receive a hundredfold and will inherit eternal life. 30 But many who are first will be last, and the last first.

I do believe God chooses, selects, elects, etc.

I hate linking again, but here is a great article (from one of Starman's favorite sites no less!) that explains EXACTLY what I believe. It will take less than 5 minutes to read.

Yes, Zguy28, I have read that article before as well, but like I mentioned about RC Sproul, there are many things that these men can write, preach and teach that are without a doubt true to the context of Biblical teaching for the primary essentials of Salvation. However, the free-will vs pre-destination debate is a secondary issue that should not affect a person's Salvation if it is genuinely wrought in Biblical faith in the New Testament Jesus Christ. One is saved by faith through repentance, placing faith in Christ and becoming "born-again" as Jesus stated one must be when the Holy Spirit is sent to make him/her a new creation in Christ. I think the whole debate about how we got saved (free-will / pre-destination) takes away from rejoicing in the fact that we are saved by the Atoning Blood of Christ.

However, if you have read my testimony of how God saved my marriage, you will find that my Atheist wife was literally confronted with the awareness of having to make a decision on whether to believe that Jesus was the Son of God. She had instant comprehension that she was being given a choice. You can re-read our testimony at the following link and by the way, Diana and I celebrated our 39th wedding anniversary this month Praise Almighty God!

Testimony of Mike Ramirez | Christian Faith Site (http://www.christian-faith.com/testimonies/mike-ramirez.html)

Yes, Zguy28, I have read that article before as well, but like I mentioned about RC Sproul, there are many things that these men can write, preach and teach that are without a doubt true to the context of Biblical teaching for the primary essentials of Salvation. However, the free-will vs pre-destination debate is a secondary issue that should not affect a person's Salvation if it is genuinely wrought in Biblical faith in the New Testament Jesus Christ. One is saved by faith through repentance, placing faith in Christ and becoming "born-again" as Jesus stated one must be when the Holy Spirit is sent to make him/her a new creation in Christ. I think the whole debate about how we got saved (free-will / pre-destination) takes away from rejoicing in the fact that we are saved by the Atoning Blood of Christ.I think it can, if the spirit of the debate is not right.

Hopefully the spirit here is right, and not wrong. Otherwise it is a quarrel, and God's men are not to be about that. :buddies:


However, if you have read my testimony of how God saved my marriage, you will find that my Atheist wife was literally confronted with the awareness of having to make a decision on whether to believe that Jesus was the Son of God. She had instant comprehension that she was being given a choice. You can re-read our testimony at the following link and by the way, Diana and I celebrated our 39th wedding anniversary this month Praise Almighty God!

Testimony of Mike Ramirez | Christian Faith Site (http://www.christian-faith.com/testimonies/mike-ramirez.html)I've read it before, and enjoyed it. I especially love the part when she recounts how God lifted the veil that kept her in darkness. :)

Do you believe a person can lose salvation?

I don't take a position of deciding in my mind who is saved and who isn't. If you tell me you're a christian and live a life that opposite, I could assume so, but it's not for me to decide. So gaining or losing your salvation is not really an issue for me.

We've already been through this, the bible teaches that:

1. God could not have shown us the greatest love if Christ did not come and die. No need to show us anything if God already decided who is saved.
2. God uses people as His chosen instrument to exercise His grace. For what reason if someone is already predestined to not be saved?

That's not for me to say. But let me say this, I believe man has free will. But I believe also in Matt. 19 and that salvation is impossible for man because man is dead spiritually, and dead men don't repent, let alone have faith in God. Yet again Jesus tells us to DO something: Respent and believe. But it's only through God's grace that we are offered this gift (a gift we must DO something to receive it)

:buddies:

...I've read it before, and enjoyed it. I especially love the part when she recounts how God lifted the veil that kept her in darkness. :)

Yes, and that is exactly how God confronts each individual. There will be a certain point in a person's life when God opens their understanding, thus, enabling them to make a choice. The Holy Bible states that some people choose not to believe because they loved the darkness rather than light. How would that happen unless they made a conscious choice after they had been faced with a decision to go to the light or stay in the darkness. :)

The following verse makes it clear that people are given the choice whether to believe the Light of the Gospel proclaiming that Jesus is The Son of God unto Salvation or remain in defiance and rejecting God's Truth that Jesus is the Saviour of mankind thus bringing about their own condemnation:


He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. (John 3:18-20)


BTW: This applies to people deceived by false religions/cults who deny the New Testament Jesus Christ and choose to believe another "Jesus" and another gospel after the Truth has been proclaimed. They choose to follow another Jesus.

Can you show me the bible passage that states that God conditionally elected Jacob over Esau based on knowledge of what actions Jacob would take in his life? If that is indeed the case, you are saying that Jacob is retroactively saved by works of faith through foreknowledge. So, salvation is no longer of God, at least not completely, but a synergy with man as well. That's what Onel and Libby believe. Do you agree with them on this?
Everything God does with humanity is based on His foreknowledge. By that foreknowledge our names were put into the Book of Life BEFORE the world was made (Rev 13 & 17). God foreknew everything about us so, by knowing which of us would say YES to His call, He decided to predestine us. Then one day He would call us and, later, justify us. Why is this soo hard to see?

"Conditionally elected"? "Retroactively saved"? :confused: What's going on in your head here? It seems like you're set against this concept or you're thinking too hard about it. If God forces people to be saved when they don't want to be, we have no reason to pray, witness or worship Him.

Does all mean "all" in these passages too?

"Since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus and of your love for all the saints; because of the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, of which you heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel, which has come to you, as it has also in all the world, and is bringing forth fruit, as it is also among you since the day you heard and knew the grace of God in truth" (Colossians 1:4-6).

"If indeed you continue in the faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the gospel which you heard, which was preached to every creature under heaven, of which I, Paul, became a minister" (Colossians 1:23).

"But I say, have they not heard? Yes indeed: "Their sound has gone out to all the earth, And their words to the ends of the world"" (Romans 10:18). Do you believe the Greek word pas always means "all" as in absolute?
The meaning of a word is determined by the sentence it is used in. In your 3 examples, you need to understand the usage of the word "all" as it applies to each set of verses. Sometimes "all" doesn't mean "every" and sometimes it does even in the same set of verses.

It depends on our common sense sometimes too. You have to ask yourself:
Did God's Word literally go out to ALL the world in Romans 10?
Did everyone literally hear God's Word in Colossians 1?
Sometimes it is literal and sometimes it's a hyperbole (especially with Jesus & Paul).

2 Peter 3:8-9
8 But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day.
9 The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.
The meanings of: "Any" & "All" are very clear in that verse. This is one time when they are both to be taken literally there so why make it difficult?

Do you honestly think that our God wants anyone to end up in Hell? (Lev 18)
Do you honestly think that our God would force anyone into Heaven against their will?

I wonder how someone can believe God can have the power to stop a person from losing salvation, even if they turn their back on Him, but cannot save a person unless they do something first?
FREE WILL Dude! Love is a choice; It can NOT be forced or it isn't love. :shrug:

Everything God does with humanity is based on His foreknowledge. By that foreknowledge our names were put into the Book of Life BEFORE the world was made (Rev 13 & 17). God foreknew everything about us so, by knowing which of us would say YES to His call, He decided to predestine us. Then one day He would call us and, later, justify us. Why is this soo hard to see?Because I want you to prove it. Prove to me that it is according to what God has foreseen we would do. Shouldn't be too hard.

"Conditionally elected"? "Retroactively saved"? :confused: What's going on in your head here? It seems like you're set against this concept or you're thinking too hard about it. If God forces people to be saved when they don't want to be, we have no reason to pray, witness or worship Him.I'm just reading the Scriptures that say God predestined some to be saved and others He left in the darkness like Judas or Pharaoh or Pontius Pilate.

The meaning of a word is determined by the sentence it is used in. In your 3 examples, you need to understand the usage of the word "all" as it applies to each set of verses. Sometimes "all" doesn't mean "every" and sometimes it does even in the same set of verses.Apparently you don't grasp this concept because you said "All means all".:howdy:

It depends on our common sense sometimes too. You have to ask yourself:
Did God's Word literally go out to ALL the world in Romans 10?
Did everyone literally hear God's Word in Colossians 1?
Sometimes it is literal and sometimes it's a hyperbole (especially with Jesus & Paul).I agree wholeheartedly.

The meanings of: "Any" & "All" are very clear in that verse. This is one time when they are both to be taken literally there so why make it difficult?Says you.

Are you the infallible authority or is the text and the author?

Tell me Peter is not writing to the church to encourage them. Read the entire letter in one sitting and open your mind.

Let's use the reasoning you use. "The meaning of a word is determined by the sentence it is used in."

8 Dear friends, don’t let this one thing escape you: With the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. 9 The Lord does not delay His promise, as some understand delay, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish but all to come to repentance.

Who is the subject of these two sentences?
Who is the audience of the letter?

Don't cherry pick it to back up a presupposition.

Do you honestly think that our God wants anyone to end up in Hell? (Lev 18)Absolutely not.
Do you honestly think that our God would force anyone into Heaven against their will?Absolutely not. But His grace changes a person. Look at the analogy I posted earlier about matchmaking.


FREE WILL Dude! Love is a choice; It can NOT be forced or it isn't love. :shrug:No kidding.

So I take it you believe somebody has the choice to stop loving and turn away from Christ and so forfeit their salvation and go to Hell?

Because otherwise, God would be holding them against their will, wouldn't He?

...
So I take it you believe somebody has the choice to stop loving and turn away from Christ and so forfeit their salvation and go to Hell?

Because otherwise, God would be holding them against their will, wouldn't He?

The Bible explains the following regarding anyone who appears to be a believer and then turns their back on God in rejection: (These are individuals who had not been born-again)



1 John 2, verses:

18 Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

19 They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us.

20 But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things.

21 I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth.

22 Who is a liar but he that denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist, that denieth the Father and the Son.

23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that acknowledgeth the Son hath the Father also.



When one truly is born again of the Holy Spirit (The Spirit of God's Truth) one is sealed unto the day of redemption.


Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.

And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.

Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice;

And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you. (Ephesians 4:29-32)

My take on Romans 9:

1) One cannot divorce Romans 9 from chapters 10 & 11. These three chapters is one whole discussion about Paul's lament for Israel, which he desires all of Israel to be saved (not saying that chapter 8 has no application, it's just that Paul begins this topic at the beginning of chapter 9 and carrys it through to chapter 11).

2) Having said that, then everything which Paul speaks about in chapter 9 is focused on the nation of Israel as a whole. But in defining Israel, Paul points out that the field of who is included in that group is narrowed by virtue of the decending generations of Abraham. In other words, it is only through Isaac (not Ishmael) that Israel comes from, and it is only through Jacob (not Esau) that Israel comes from. The election being spoken of here has nothing to do with salvation, but the promise to Abraham that through him will come a nation that God bring His will to pass so that all of the nations of the world will be blessed. That promise came from Abraham via Isaac via Jacob and via the twelve tribes of Israel, through whom ultimately would come Christ.

3) So in God's sovereignty, God chose Jacob to pass on that promise, despite the fact that by all rights, Esau should have been the heir, according to the right of the first born. However, it was prophesised to Rebecca by the Lord that, "The elder will serve the younger" (Gen. 25:22-26)

Thus clearly, Romans 9:13, "As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated" isn't speaking of the individuals, Jacob and Esau, for that scripture isn't even found in the Genesis passage I just referenced. Rather it is found in Malachi 1:2-5, wherein it is speaking of the nation of Edom as compared to the nation of Israel. Further evidence that God is speaking about nations here is what God told Rebecca back in Gen. 25, "Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger."

I suppose you could make that case that God chose to save Israel and not Edom, but as I said, I do not believe that this part of Romans 9 is talking about salvation. It is simply contrasting the blessings that God has bestowed Israel in working out His ultimate plan, culminating in Christ. He had to choose somebody. The two nations are merely players on the world's stage. (Personally, I believe that this pictures the contrast of Christ with Adam, "the elder shall serve the younger" (ref. Romans 5:14-19, I Cor 15:45). But that's just me).

One more thing in regards to Jacob and Esau, while we are on the subject. It seems quite pecular that Jacob would win out over Esau, when it was Jacob who did all the deceiving. He first tricked Esau in giving up his birthright after Esau was famished and Jacob too that opportunity to sell the porridge he made for it. And it was Jacob, with the help of Rebecca, to whom the prophesy was told, mind you, in deceiving Isaac in believing that Jacob was Esau. Where is the honor in that? It seems rather despicable that Jacob's crafty actions turn the favor upon himself.

This begs the question, did God sovereignly ordain Jacob’s dubious actions in order that the prophesy in Gen 25:23 be fulfill?.

And to those of you who believe that Esau was eternally "lost", just because of his position in all this, I can make a case of the very opposite, if you would like the time to examine it. (I'll do so on a seperate post, if requested)

4) Those who are vessels of wrath are so because they have chosen so, even after repeated warnings. One's heart only gets hard when one resists the Lord. But then, God only uses these who have refused His will to His advantage, as in the case of Pharoah, whom God hardened only after Pharoah refused initially the first few times in letting Moses' people go. Pharoah became a vessel of wrath of his own accord. God used Pharoah and Egypt to magnify Himself in showing His greatness to Israel in bringing deliverance.

Conversely, vessels of mercy are shown mercy because they were merciful first (Prov. 14:31, Matt. 5:7, James 2:13). Had Pharoah first shown mercy and let the people go, perhaps he wouldn’t have incurred God’s wrath in killing his son. He would have then been a vessel of mercy.

5) Speaking of mercy, we come Romans 9:15, “And He said unto Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.’” If we look back to the OT where this is quoted from, Exodus 33:19, we see that God spoke this well after the Exodus from Egypt. It speaks for to the mercy and compassion upon Israel rather than the unmercy and discompassion to Egypt. For you see this instance comes after Aaron and the people had made and worshiped a golden calf, with God ready to crush Israel for their idolatry in the previous chapter. It is only when Moses “reminds” God of the promise to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob to “multiply your seed as the stars of heaven” that the Lord repents of the evil He would inflict on Israel.

So in this case, the mercy and compassion God has on Israel is because of the promise of Abraham for God’s purpose to bless all nations of the earth in His grand plan for Israel.
Insofar as Pharoah is concerned, God showed His power through Pharoah, who acted as a vessel of dishonor, now that he stubbornly refused to let the people go. But that has nothing to do with whether or nor Pharoah was saved. Only that God used him as a vessel for the purposes He had in bringing Israel out of Egypt.

6) In the same manner as God used Pharoah as a vessel of dishonor, when it comes to reaching the Gentiles, the nation of Israel is used as a vessel of dishonor to bring salvation to the rest of the world. BECAUSE Israel did not seek God’s righteousness by faith. They rejected Christ, so that only a few would bring light to the Gentiles, and the rest were blinded. They became ignorant of God’s righteousness, even though the word went out from among them (Romans 10:18-22).

7) It was for the Gentiles benefit that Israel was blinded so that the gospel of salvation can come to us (Romans 11:11). Gentiles are the wild branches grafted into the olive tree.

8) But the good news is that Israel will be grafted back in. (Romans 11:24). When the fullness of the Gentiles are come in, then all Israel shall be saved (Romans 11:25-26).

Because I want you to prove it. Prove to me that it is according to what God has foreseen we would do. I'm just reading the Scriptures that say God predestined some to be saved and others He left in the darkness like Judas or Pharaoh or Pontius Pilate. Apparently you don't grasp this concept because you said "All means all".:howdy:
I give you Bible passages and you say you want me to prove it? :shrug:
I explain how the meaning of words can change within a passage and you disagree with me. I can give you 4 different definitions of the word "Turkey" so, when the word "All" is used literally or as a hyperbole, why do you argue about it? Maybe you misunderstand what predestined means? From the department of redundancy department:

Before anything was made, God knew everyone who would say yes to His call and everyone who would say no (Psalm 139 v 4, John 21 v 17, 1 John 3 v 20). Those who would say yes got their names written in the Book of Life (Rev 13 & 17) and those who would say no, did not. Because of that knowledge, God orchestrated (predestined) all of our lives so that nothing would change OUR choice.

God knew that Judas, Pharaoh, etc., would say NO so He granted them their choices. He didn't force them to follow Him by changing their minds & hearts to MAKE them be part of the elect.

Are you the infallible authority or is the text and the author?
Please don't waste my time with rhetorical questions, ok? Stick to the subject pleeze :yay:

Tell me Peter is not writing to the church to encourage them:

8 Dear friends, don’t let this one thing escape you: With the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. 9 The Lord does not delay His promise, as some understand delay, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish but all to come to repentance.
Who is the subject of these two sentences?
Who is the audience of the letter?
Verse 8 simply means that God isn't bound by time and sees everything in the present. That is why He is called: "I am".

In verse 9 Peter is writing to believers to encourage them but he is NOT speaking ABOUT current believers. He's speaking about God being patient enough so that every accountable unbelieving person has enough chances to hear the message. Many future believers will take a lot of time to come to repentance and Peter says God will give them ample time. God wants ALL people to come to repentance...but we know that won't happen.

So I take it you believe somebody has the choice to stop loving and turn away from Christ and so forfeit their salvation and go to Hell? Because otherwise, God would be holding them against their will, wouldn't He?
Starman explained what I believe about that. If a person is truly saved, they will not walk away from salvation permanently. They might have moments of anger and backslide but they will always come back.

If a person "tries out" Christianity (Hebrews 6) but later decides to leave it permanently, God did NOT actually save them and they were not regenerated and sealed by the Holy Spirit. This is a BIG misconception in Christian circles. Some Christians actually believe that one can be saved then lost but the Bible never teaches that, Because God will not save anyone against their will.

I give you Bible passages and you say you want me to prove it? :shrug:Bible passages that do not prove anything other than you are not a good exegete at times.


I explain how the meaning of words can change within a passage and you disagree with me. That's not what I disagreed with.

I can give you 4 different definitions of the word "Turkey" so, when the word "All" is used literally or as a hyperbole, why do you argue about it? Because you are wrong and doggedly won't admit it.

Maybe you misunderstand what predestined means? From the department of redundancy department:I understand perfectly what it means.

pre·des·tine (pr-dstn)
tr.v. pre·des·tined, pre·des·tin·ing, pre·des·tines
1. To fix upon, decide, or decree in advance; foreordain.
2. Theology To foreordain or elect by divine will or decree.


Before anything was made, God knew everyone who would say yes to His call and everyone who would say no (Psalm 139 v 4, John 21 v 17, 1 John 3 v 20).


Those who would say yes got their names written in the Book of Life (Rev 13 & 17) and those who would say no, did not. Because of that knowledge, God orchestrated (predestined) all of our lives so that nothing would change OUR choice.
How is that any different since God has made it impossible for you to choose otherwise?

God knew that Judas, Pharaoh, etc., would say NO so He granted them their choices. He didn't force them to follow Him by changing their minds & hearts to MAKE them be part of the elect.You're right He didn't. So they were doomed to destruction.

Please don't waste my time with rhetorical questions, ok? Stick to the subject pleeze :yay:
You sure can dish it out, but you certainly can't take it. :whistle:
Verse 8 simply means that God isn't bound by time and sees everything in the present. That is why He is called: "I am".

In verse 9 Peter is writing to believers to encourage them but he is NOT speaking ABOUT current believers. He's speaking about God being patient enough so that every accountable unbelieving person has enough chances to hear the message. Many future believers will take a lot of time to come to repentance and Peter says God will give them ample time. God wants ALL people to come to repentance...but we know that won't happen.You see, I don't take as much issue with your belief in this area (I disagree obviously, but it is what it is), but what I take serious issue with is misinterpreting a passage like this in an effort to prove something. It's the same kind of exegetical error that leads men like Rob Bell to teach universalism.

Your view on foreknowledge may be true, and I may be wrong, but this passage does not support you.

How is that any different since God has made it impossible for you to choose otherwise?
How can you say that? You're saying that God forced me to believe in Him and He forced others to not be able to believe in Him? That's awful! God acted upon HIS foreknowledge of MY choice.

You're right He didn't. So they were doomed to destruction.
So then, God shouldn't have created anyone who would do evil? God couldn't have given us free will w/o there being the resultant evil. Even the angels couldn't contain their evil when given the choice to stay in Heaven or leave it...

You see, I don't take as much issue with your belief in this area (I disagree obviously, but it is what it is), but what I take serious issue with is misinterpreting a passage like this in an effort to prove something. It's the same kind of exegetical error that leads men like Rob Bell to teach universalism.
ME misinterpreting it? Ok then, ask someone else what they think it means :shrug:

How can you say that? You're saying that God forced me to believe in Him and He forced others to not be able to believe in Him? That's awful! God acted upon HIS foreknowledge of MY choice. This is what I refer to as the theological self-licking ice cream cone.

God foreknew that you will choose X.
Based on this foreknowledge, God predestined that you must choose X and could not choose Y.
Based on God's predestination He is able to foreknow your choice of X.
Rinse and repeat.

But the bottom line is that you will always choose X and never Y because at the end of the day, God made it that way.

How is that libertarian free-will again if effectively you are locked in to one choice only?


So then, God shouldn't have created anyone who would do evil? God couldn't have given us free will w/o there being the resultant evil. Even the angels couldn't contain their evil when given the choice to stay in Heaven or leave it...God created everything to bring Him glory.


ME misinterpreting it? Ok then, ask someone else what they think it means :shrug:
Here's a couple for your reading pleasure:

‘Any’ and ‘All’ – 2 Peter 3:9 « Providence (http://prussic.wordpress.com/2011/03/11/any-and-all-2-peter-39/)

Does God Want All People Saved? (Part 1, 2 Peter 3:9) « New Creation Person (http://newcreationperson.wordpress.com/2010/06/15/does-god-want-all-people-saved-part-1-2-peter-39/)


By the way, I hope you are not taking anything I am saying personally as insulting or anything. Often electronic media comes off like that. I know I have to watch myself because I can get "worked up" and then later think "you know, he probably didn't really mean it like that..." :buddies:

God foreknew that you will choose X.
Based on this foreknowledge, God predestined that you must choose X and could not choose Y.
Based on God's predestination He is able to foreknow your choice of X.
Rinse and repeat.
But the bottom line is that you will always choose X and never Y because at the end of the day, God made it that way.
How is that libertarian free-will again if effectively you are locked in to one choice only?
:duh: Are you listening to yourself? :jameo: Geezzz dude! "The bottom line...at the end of the day" is: IF I were to change my mind anytime in my life, GOD WOULD HAVE KNOWN IT! He gives me my choice, and my choice is to be locked into that one choice. Do you want out of your salvation?

Here's a couple for your reading pleasure:
‘Any’ and ‘All’ – 2 Peter 3:9 « Providence (http://prussic.wordpress.com/2011/03/11/any-and-all-2-peter-39/)
Does God Want All People Saved? (Part 1, 2 Peter 3:9) « New Creation Person (http://newcreationperson.wordpress.com/2010/06/15/does-god-want-all-people-saved-part-1-2-peter-39/)
Maybe you shouldn't read those other sources soo much? :shrug:

By the way, I hope you are not taking anything I am saying personally as insulting or anything. Often electronic media comes off like that. I know I have to watch myself because I can get "worked up" and then later think "you know, he probably didn't really mean it like that..." :buddies:
You're right; I can't always tell BUT name calling kinda makes it SOUND like more that just "passionate". :cheers:

:duh: Are you listening to yourself? :jameo: Geezzz dude! "The bottom line...at the end of the day" is: IF I were to change my mind anytime in my life, GOD WOULD HAVE KNOWN IT! He gives me my choice, and my choice is to be locked into that one choice.
Perhaps if the Arminian position wasn't so confusing to begin with, it might be easier? :howdy:

Maybe I'm not clear though.

My point was that the Arminian argument basically begs the question.

If free-will involves the potential to choose either way, for or against, left or right, good or bad, then how can you be "locked in" and still freely choose?

You can't. You're "locked in" as you put it. You are no longer free, but pre-determined.

So you can "geez dude" all you want, but your in denial of reality, which is that election is actually not a choice of the free agent, but of God.

Basing the choice on foreknowledge just fails the rules of logic in an attempt to make libertarian free-will (Pelagionism) and predestination compatible.

Do you want out of your salvation?Absolutely not. I'm a Calvinist, how could I? :coffee: