Saved Or Predestined ???

[Renniks]

What? Can you even understand your self destructive argument here, that "God preserves the faithful. If they are no more faithful, they are no more his."? Wow! If God preserves them faithful, they will be preserved, that is, kept to be faithful. The preserving is God's responsibility, not them who are being preserved by God.

Further, we are talking about those God reserved for Himself. If God reserved them, what does that mean, but that they have been saved? Why do you not seem to understand any of that?

He preserves the believers. It's that simple. Look at all the promises in scripture. Who are the promises given to? Ultimately, they are for believers. No belief, no promises of being granted eternal life. You are imposing on scripture the idea that God causes us to be faithful, when scripture is full of warnings about remaining in him and not falling away.

In the four Gospels we see the believing remnant in those who “…looked for redemption in Jerusalem” (Luke 2:36-38). These would be those like Simeon, Anna, Zacharias and Elizabeth, Mary, John the Baptist and all those who believed God’s promises. The Lord referred to them as the little flock, for in Luke 12:32 He said, “Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the Kingdom.”

Show me where God promises to preserve anyone who is not a " saint" or " believer"

When God chooses a remnant, they are those who are spiritually undefiled, or righteous according to His standards. There were cases where a remnant survived despite the fact that they were worthy of destruction (Jer 5:10, 18, Jer 8:3) These are exceptions and confirm that God is a merciful God, and will do whatever he needs to to bring redemption to future believers.
The remnant aren't chosen unconditionally.
Zephaniah 3:12–13
12 “But I will leave among you A humble and lowly people, And they will take refuge in the name of YHVH. 13 “The remnant of Israel will do no wrong And tell no lies, Nor will a deceitful tongue Be found in their mouths; For they will feed and lie down With no one to make them tremble.”

In our day, who is preserved? Those who believe and follow Christ.

" My sheep listen to my voice; I know them,and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish;no one will snatch them out of my hand."

The listening and following one is preserved forever.

 

[Renniks]

As I said, you have just refuted your own belief that all man, that is, "everyone", can call on the Lord, when you just admitted that those who call on the Lord are believers, qualifying the word "everyone". Now, not all are believers, is it not

Lol, again you prove incapable of understanding that anyone can choose to believe. Anyone can become a believer. It's circular reasoning to say one has to be a believer to believe..I don't know how anyone can think that way. You can't seem to get past the wrong idea that some are just born to be believers.

 

[Renniks]

I was referring to Renniks. That comment and question goes out to him, not really to you.

Tong
R0622

It's obvious. The thief choose to believe and was saved immediately. In your scenario, he could only believe if God gave him faith and in essence believed for him.

 

[Renniks]

[

 

[Enoch111]

Anyone can become a believer. It's circular reasoning to say one has to be a believer to believe..I don't know how anyone can think that way.

That's called "self-deception". There are many engaged in self-deception, who also turn around and try to deceive others.

"Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God" (Rom 10:17). That's why Paul also says this: For I am not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. (Rom 1:16)

The reason why Christ insisted that the Gospel be preached to "every creature" is because every human being needs to hear the Gospel in order to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. Saving faith is generated through the Gospel, and that is why it is called "the power of Hod unto salvation".

 

[Renniks]

What I claim about faith is not quite what you say I claim there. What I claim is that faith comes from God and not from man. And that faith is given by God to man.

Which is exactly what I said.?

 

[Tong2020]

Illogical. All you are stating is the same old Calvnist form of "free will" that is not really free in any way. It's only an illusion of choice.

Your opinion there does not in any way refute the fact that Saul, before his Damascus road experience, by his own "free will" chose unbelief in Jesus Christ even to the point of persecuting those who believe, and that God did not chose that for him. If there is any erroneous thinking regarding this matter concerning God's election, as I pointed out is the thinking that God's election of people means God making the choice and having made the choice for them.

I find it amusing that you state God did not choose unbelief for Paul, but that God did choose him for salvation. Don't you see the logical conclusion of thinking this way? Paul chose to believe of his own free will, after being chosen for salvation before he was born? What you are talking about here is called capatabilism.

You seem to not comprehend well, and so are amused because of it. God choosing Paul for salvation (meaning ~ God had chosen to save Paul) is very much different from God choosing for him and from God believing for him.

You asked "Don't you see the logical conclusion of thinking this way?" That's your thinking, not mine. So, if there's any logical conclusion you think, those are coming from your thinking, not mine.

You said "Paul chose to believe of his own free will, after being chosen for salvation before he was born?" Paul chose to believe of his own "free will" after God had worked out to convict and convince him that he was persecuting him, who is the Lord. Before that, Paul chose to not belief of his own "free will". And if God had not worked it out on Paul, Paul would have stayed to be unsaved. Again, while all those being saved were chosen by God even before they were born such as Paul, it is not God who chose for them to believe. You can object all you want, but objection without a refutation based on scriptures is of no use and sense.

Logically, in your theology, God did in fact, choose everything for Paul.

That's what you say and think in response to my statement in the quotebox that is, "In fact, Saul, before his Damascus road experience, by his own "free will" chose unbelief in Jesus Christ even to the point of persecuting those who believe. God did not chose that for him." And you are entitled to it. However, it does not refute my statement. It only means that you deny the scriptural fact as stated.

Says who?

You ask that question in response to my statement in the quotebox that is "As revealed now to us, he was among those chosen by God for eternal life." Of course, according to scriptures. I wouldn't invent that. Why....., do you deny that Paul is among the elect? Well, if you believe that Paul is not among those chosen by God for eternal life, then so be it with you. As for me, I'd always listen to what scriptures say.

Now, let's be clear about what you are pushing. It's called Compatibilism.

Compatibilism is the belief that free will and determinism are mutually compatible and that it is possible to believe in both without being logically inconsistent.

Or as Theopedia puts it:
Theopedia
Compatibilism

Compatibilism, sometimes called soft determinism, is a theological term that deals with the topics of free will and predestination. It seeks to show that God's exhaustive sovereignty is compatible with human freedom, or in other words, it claims that determinism and free will are compatible. Rather than limit the exercise of God's sovereignty in order to preserve man's freedom, compatibilists say that there must be a different way to define what freedom really means.

I on the other hand believe in:
Theopedia
Libertarian free will

Libertarian free will means that our choices are free from the determination or constraints of human nature and free from any predetermination by God. All "free will theists" hold that libertarian freedom is essential for moral responsibility, for if our choice is determined or caused by anything, including our own desires, they reason, it cannot properly be called a free choice. Libertarian freedom is, therefore, the freedom to act contrary to one's nature, predisposition and greatest desires. Responsibility, in this view, always means that one could have done otherwise.

Now that we see what is really on the table, perhaps we can quit talking past each other.

You can't have true Free Will if your choice, any choice has already been determined in eternity past.

Call it whatever you want, but that has no bearing to what I believe. Believe what Theopedia says then. I, on the other hand, believe what scriptures says.

Tong
R0623

 

[Tong2020]

Well that's just obvious. Of course being not able to believe is to be against God. Anything not from faith is sin. Case closed.

As I said in my post #1667 which you are responding to, you don't have a refutation to give. And your post here confirms it. It also confirms what many here suspect is the reason why you believe as you believe. It's all over your statements, such as this one here, and I quote, "Well that's just obvious. Of course being not able to believe is to be against God.". When one can't seem to distinguish ability from attitude, sure points to a problem.

You said "Anything not from faith is sin." Yes, scriptures teach that. So what then?

Tong
R0624

 

[Renniks]

You ask that question in response to my statement in the quotebox that is "As revealed now to us, he was among those chosen by God for eternal life." Of course, according to scriptures. I wouldn't invent that. Why....., do you deny that Paul is among the elect? Well, if you believe that Paul is not among those chosen by God for eternal life, then so be it with you. As for me, I'd always listen to what scriptures say.

Where are you getting Paul was chosen for eternal life? Paul was chosen to be the one who brought the gospel to the gentiles and that because of God's foreknowledge. That's quite different from being chosen for salvation. Again, this is a case of God chosing a person for a job. It's not election to salvation.

 

[Renniks]

You said "Anything not from faith is sin."

So if belief is something some are not chosen for, those ones are chosen for sin by default. This of course, makes them anti God, and Antichrist.

 

[Renniks]

Your opinion there does not in any way refute the fact that Saul, before his Damascus road experience, by his own "free will" chose unbelief in Jesus Christ even to the point of persecuting those who believe, and that God did not chose that for him. If there is any erroneous thinking regarding this matter concerning God's election, as I pointed out is the thinking that God's election of people means God making the choice and having made the choice for them.

I guess you really don't get that irresistible grace means one can not resist. At least the admitted Calvinists are usually more consistent about the logical conclusion of belief in individual election. You on the other hand, try to embrace blatant contradictions.

 

[Tong2020]

If one is predestined for damnation, or rather not predestined for salvation, which is exact same thing by default, then one is obviously born incapable of receiving God. He cannot Receive because he's not capable of doing anything but what he was born to do, that is, sin. To punish the one incapable of receiving God is not justice. However, if he is capable, but rebels, his blindness as punishment is just.

I don't believe that God predestined people to damnation, simply because there is no scriptures where I read such. What I believe with regards damnation is that God created Adam and Eve, and when they sinned, judgment came to them, resulting in condemnation. Not only to them, but to their posterity. Obviously, God had allowed that to happen. If in God's plan, God allowed that to happen to Adam and Eve, I don't see that as to mean that God predestined Adam and Eve for condemnation. And it follows that that also does not mean that God predestined Adam's posterity for condemnation.

Now, scriptures says that, all die in Adam. That being the case, take away the salvation of God, all then would eventually be going to hell, not that they were predestined to hell, but that it came to that because of Adam's offense. Now, in the plan of God, as can be learned from scriptures, He had not destroyed and will not destroy mankind, but will save it. Now it is clear in scriptures that it is not mankind, that is, to mean all men, that will be saved. Then what? It is mankind, that is, to mean, the creature kind of Adam, is what God will save. This is somehow made plain and demonstrated in what God had done in the days of Noah, when God could have destroyed all mankind, but did chose a family of 8, Noah's family, to save, making them a remnant of the kind of Adam. It was from the posterity of Noah that, in the salvation of God, that He have chosen a people to be His people. They are them who are, in the unfolding reality, those whom He saves by grace through faith, those who believe in God, those whom the Father had given to the Son, those who believes in the Son. And we know that the story begun with the choosing of Abram and onto Jesus Christ, and that is unfolding to the present time.

Now, many think, even Christians, that the saving of some and not all by election is unfair or unjust, by which they conclude that such therefore could not be true. Well, it is perhaps because they are in the illusion that the thoughts of God are like theirs. But needless to say, the thoughts of God are infinitely different from the thoughts of man, so that, what to man seems unfair or unjust in his thinking, would not necessarily be as it is with God. Regarding His election, it must be understood, as it also can't be denied, that the choices of God are determined by God's nature, and so then, the election of the people whom He saves. And if then that is with His election, we can not insist that we know exactly how that was, for we do not have the same nature as God.

Tong
R0625

 

[Renniks]

And if then that is with His election, we can not insist that we know exactly how that was, for we do not have the same nature as God.

I don't see how appealing to mystery is helpful at all. Because God isn't shy about telling us what kind of God he is. Yes, God chooses to save those who believe in him. He doesn't leave us in the dark as to how he chooses his people, so there's not need to appeal to the mystery of God's nature, when who God is is revealed in Jesus who is the perfect image of the father. And what is revealed is that God died for every person who ever lived.
14"For Christ’s love compels us, because we are convinced that One died for all, therefore all died. 15And He died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died for them and was raised again. 16So from now on we regard no one according to the flesh."

Why do we regard no one according to the flesh? Because Christ died for everyone you will ever meet. Every person is someone who God desires to have a relationship with, if they are only willing to enter into that relationship by belief in Christ.

 

[Tong2020]

He preserves the believers. It's that simple.

Just repeating your arguments does not counter the refutation I made on them.

Simple? You can't even seem to give an honest answer to these simple questions: How does God preserve the believers? What does being preserved by means?

Simple? You haven't even attempt to refute this simple argument: If God preserves them faithful, they will be preserved, that is, kept to be faithful. The preserving is God's responsibility, not them who are being preserved by God.

Look at all the promises in scripture. Who are the promises given to? Ultimately, they are for believers. No belief, no promises of being granted eternal life. You are imposing on scripture the idea that God causes us to be faithful, when scripture is full of warnings about remaining in him and not falling away.

So, you want again to jump to another issue and run away from the issue of God preserving the faithful? Well,....it had always been that way with you.

In Gen. 3:15, when God said "And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, And you shall bruise His heel.", would you say that those scriptures speaks of a promise of salvation? If so, was the promise given to believers?

In Gen. 8:21, when God said, "I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake, although the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done.", would you say that those scriptures speaks of a promise of God? If so, was the promise given to believers?

In Gen. 12:1-3, when God said, "Get out of your country, From your family And from your father’s house, To a land that I will show you. I will make you a great nation; I will bless you And make your name great; And you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, And I will curse him who curses you; And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.", would you say that those scriptures speaks of a promise of God? If so, was the promise given to believers?

You said "You are imposing on scripture the idea that God causes us to be faithful, when scripture is full of warnings about remaining in him and not falling away." No I am not imposing anything on scriptures.

In the four Gospels we see the believing remnant in those who “…looked for redemption in Jerusalem” (Luke 2:36-38). These would be those like Simeon, Anna, Zacharias and Elizabeth, Mary, John the Baptist and all those who believed God’s promises. The Lord referred to them as the little flock, for in Luke 12:32 He said, “Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the Kingdom.”

Show me where God promises to preserve anyone who is not a " saint" or " believer.

Why do you ask me to show you that? Ask your strawman instead.

When God chooses a remnant, they are those who are spiritually undefiled, or righteous according to His standards.

Please tell us, what is God's standard of righteousness?

There were cases where a remnant survived despite the fact that they were worthy of destruction (Jer 5:10, 18, Jer 8:3) These are exceptions and confirm that God is a merciful God, and will do whatever he needs to to bring redemption to future believers.
The remnant aren't chosen unconditionally.
Zephaniah 3:12–13
12 “But I will leave among you A humble and lowly people, And they will take refuge in the name of YHVH. 13 “The remnant of Israel will do no wrong And tell no lies, Nor will a deceitful tongue Be found in their mouths; For they will feed and lie down With no one to make them tremble.”

In our day, who is preserved? Those who believe and follow Christ.

" My sheep listen to my voice; I know them,and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish;no one will snatch them out of my hand."

The listening and following one is preserved forever.

As I said, argue with your strawman about that.

Tong
R0626

 

[Tong2020]

Lol, again you prove incapable of understanding that anyone can choose to believe. Anyone can become a believer. It's circular reasoning to say one has to be a believer to believe..I don't know how anyone can think that way. You can't seem to get past the wrong idea that some are just born to be believers.

Are you incapable of refuting my arguments, and very much capable of running away from them by injecting other issues or making strawmen and lol?

You quoted Romans 10:13 For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.” And in post #1648, you said "Yes, those who call on the Lord are believers... "

So tell us plainly, to whom does the word "everyone" in Romans 10:13 refers to?

Tong
R0627

 

[Tong2020]

Which is exactly what I said.?

Here's exactly what you said "I find it amusing that you say that is is faith that you believe and claim you are among the chosen, when you claim faith itself is all God's doing."

And here's what I said "What I claim is that faith comes from God and not from man. And that faith is given by God to man."

Are they exactly saying the same thing? Nope.

Tong
R0628

 

[Tong2020]

Where are you getting Paul was chosen for eternal life? Paul was chosen to be the one who brought the gospel to the gentiles and that because of God's foreknowledge. That's quite different from being chosen for salvation. Again, this is a case of God chosing a person for a job. It's not election to salvation.

So you don't believe that Paul is among the elect, those chosen for salvation. That's clear now.

While you could see that the unbelieving Saul was chosen by the Lord Jesus Christ to be His witness and apostle and to bring the gospel to the Gentiles, you fail to see what that necessarily meant with regards to his salvation. He can't be a witness and apostle if he remains to be an unbeliever, can he?

Tong
R0629

 

[Tong2020]

So if belief is something some are not chosen for, those ones are chosen for sin by default. This of course, makes them anti God, and Antichrist.

If you insist of it to be that way by default, so be it with you then. That may be your choice, but that's not how it is.

Tong
R0630

 

[Tong2020]

I guess you really don't get that irresistible grace means one can not resist. At least the admitted Calvinists are usually more consistent about the logical conclusion of belief in individual election. You on the other hand, try to embrace blatant contradictions.

I guess you really don't know how to properly refute. Running away from my argument and making strawmen is not a refutation, but an admission of no refutation. And with that, you have effectively closed the case.

So moving on to another issue. You speak of irresistible grace. What irresistible grace are you talking about? I know that there is such thing as irresistible grace. How about you, do you believe that there is such thing as irresistible grace?

By the way, I don't try to embrace blatant contradictions as you say there.

Tong
R0631

 

[Renniks]

Just repeating your arguments does not counter the refutation I made on them.

Simple? You can't even seem to give an honest answer to these simple questions: How does God preserve the believers? What does being preserved by means?

Simple? You haven't even attempt to refute this simple argument: If God preserves them faithful, they will be preserved, that is, kept to be faithful. The preserving is God's responsibility, not them who are being preserved by God.

So, you want again to jump to another issue and run away from the issue of God preserving the faithful? Well,....it had always been that way with you.

Where did I run away from the issue? I have no clue what you are talking about. God preserves believers, not nonbelievers, what is hard to understand about that? In fact, you have not even addressed that fact. You assume this preservation means that God somehow CAUSES them to remain faithful? Where is that in scripture? Look at . Philipians 2:12Therefore, my beloved, just as you have always obeyed, not only in my presence, but now even more in my absence, continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling. 13For it is God who works in you to will and to act on behalf of His good purpose.

There has to be cooperation from us in order for God to work in us. It's not an either/or, it's both. If both elements arent there, both our cooperation and God's work in us, we will not continue in the faith.

In Gen. 3:15, when God said "And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her Seed; He shall bruise your head, And you shall bruise His heel.", would you say that those scriptures speaks of a promise of salvation? If so, was the promise given to believers?

This is not said to people, but to Satan, are you just trying to miss the point or what? And yet, it does contain a promise to believers in the sense that God's Seed (believers") will bruise Satan.

J
In Gen. 8:21, when God said, "I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake, although the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done.", would you say that those scriptures speaks of a promise of God? If so, was the promise given to believers?

It is certainly a promise for believers and for all mankind. Again, you are deliberately missing the point.

In Gen. 12:1-3, when God said, "Get out of your country, From your family And from your father’s house, To a land that I will show you. I will make you a great nation; I will bless you And make your name great; And you shall be a blessing. I will bless those who bless you, And I will curse him who curses you; And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed.", would you say that those scriptures speaks of a promise of God? If so, was the promise given to believers?

It certainly is. First, to Abraham, second to all his spiritual descendants. That's all believers.

You said "You are imposing on scripture the idea that God causes us to be faithful, when scripture is full of warnings about remaining in him and not falling away." No I am not imposing anything on scriptures.

Why do you ask me to show you that? Ask your strawman instead.

Please tell us, what is God's standard of righteousness?

As I said, argue with your strawman about that.

Tong
R0626

God's standard of righteousness is to be found "In him." That is, to be a true believer in the promise of salvation through Christ. I have no idea what strawman you are talking about, perhaps he's only something you made up in your mind.