ANALYSIS OF MATTHEW 24:12-13 - WHY IT DISPROVES OSAS

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

mjrhealth

Well-Known Member
Mar 15, 2009
11,810
4,090
113
Australia
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
To predestine means to destine/determine something beforehand.
Well lets start with Abraham, since we all know about Him.

Gen 17:1 And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect.
Gen 17:2 And I will make my covenant between me and thee, and will multiply thee exceedingly.
Gen 17:3 And Abram fell on his face: and God talked with him, saying,
Gen 17:4 As for me, behold, my covenant is with thee, and thou shalt be a father of many nations.
Gen 17:5 Neither shall thy name any more be called Abram, but thy name shall be Abraham; for a father of many nations have I made thee.
Gen 17:6 And I will make thee exceeding fruitful, and I will make nations of thee, and kings shall come out of thee.
Gen 17:7 And I will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee.

Now was Abraham perfect

Seems he feared man more than God, so He was not perfect.

Gen 20:1 And Abraham journeyed from thence toward the south country, and dwelled between Kadesh and Shur, and sojourned in Gerar.
Gen 20:2 And Abraham said of Sarah his wife, She is my sister: and Abimelech king of Gerar sent, and took Sarah.

Oh nad His wife gave Him her servant Girl becuase she didnt believe she would have her own child, so here we see Abrham again, not perfect

Gen 21:9 And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, which she had born unto Abraham, mocking.
Gen 21:10 Wherefore she said unto Abraham, Cast out this bondwoman and her son: for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac.
Gen 21:11 And the thing was very grievous in Abraham's sight because of his son.
Gen 21:12 And God said unto Abraham, Let it not be grievous in thy sight because of the lad, and because of thy bondwoman; in all that Sarah hath said unto thee, hearken unto her voice; for in Isaac shall thy seed be called.
Gen 21:13 And also of the son of the bondwoman will I make a nation, because he is thy seed

See Abraham was predestined to be the father of many nations, God gave Him choice and He messed up, how many countless times we dont know, yet God who is faithfull still Kept His promse. Than one can look at david and all he did, yet even He still found favour with God and God still kept His promise. Why do people have no faith in God, is that not what Christanity is all about.
 

Wormwood

Chaps
Apr 9, 2013
2,346
332
83
47
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Well, that went south quick. I thought we were having a productive discussion on the issue. Oh well.
 

Dcopymope

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2016
2,650
800
113
36
Motor City
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
tom55 said:
Thank you. I love you too!

Are you angry because scripture destroys your theory?

PS....I am not mad at you for your hateful words!

This is the typical response of the Calvinist ilk, the debate, or 'discussion', always ends in a ball of fire.
 

FHII

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2011
4,833
2,494
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Wormwood said:
Well, that went south quick. I thought we were having a productive discussion on the issue. Oh well.

Might've been ne being a little grumpy.... But the thread isn't going anywhere. And its pretty easy to lose interest when folks blatently make errors I've already spent a long time pointing out.
 

tom55

Love your neighbor as yourself
Sep 9, 2013
1,199
18
0
FHII said:
Might've been ne being a little grumpy.... But the thread isn't going anywhere. And its pretty easy to lose interest when folks blatently make errors I've already spent a long time pointing out.
Luke 6: 41-42
 

tom55

Love your neighbor as yourself
Sep 9, 2013
1,199
18
0
Wormwood said:
Well, that went south quick. I thought we were having a productive discussion on the issue. Oh well.
I apologize. I was the catalyst for destroying your productive discussion. This whole predestination theory just baffles me and I am concerned for the souls of the people who believe it.

Respectfully...Tom55
 

Wormwood

Chaps
Apr 9, 2013
2,346
332
83
47
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
tom55 said:
I apologize. I was the catalyst for destroying your productive discussion. This whole predestination theory just baffles me and I am concerned for the souls of the people who believe it.

Respectfully...Tom55
Well we all believe in predestination (unless you are a proponent of Open Theology). The question is "What is predestined and what is that predestination based upon?" Catholic and Arminian theology would argue that what is predetermined is the rewards of the faithful and those individuals are known based upon God's foreknowledge of their free-will choices. Reformed theology would argue that individuals are predetermined to heaven or hell and it is based upon God's unilateral plan before creation to save elect people while condemning the rest. I dont find any biblical basis for the latter, but I know there are Christ-loving people who feel that is what the Bible teaches.
 

Dcopymope

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2016
2,650
800
113
36
Motor City
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Wormwood said:
Well we all believe in predestination (unless you are a proponent of Open Theology). The question is "What is predestined and what is that predestination based upon?" Catholic and Arminian theology would argue that what is predetermined is the rewards of the faithful and those individuals are known based upon God's foreknowledge of their free-will choices. Reformed theology would argue that individuals are predetermined to heaven or hell and it is based upon God's unilateral plan before creation to save elect people while condemning the rest. I dont find any biblical basis for the latter, but I know there are Christ-loving people who feel that is what the Bible teaches.
If the latter is true, then it makes the Gospel null and void. If the latter is true, then it makes spreading the Gospel message pointless. Why preach about redemption through Jesus to someone God already decided before the events of Genesis 1 was destined to the lake of fire anyway? How do you the individual concerned isn't one of them? If the latter is true, how can anybody be sure that they are saved by the blood of Christ at all? The only purpose false doctrines like the latter serves is to cast doubt on the word of God.
 

FHII

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2011
4,833
2,494
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Dcopymope said:
If the latter is true, then it makes the Gospel null and void. If the latter is true, then it makes spreading the Gospel message pointless. Why preach about redemption through Jesus to someone God already decided before the events of Genesis 1 was destined to the lake of fire anyway? How do you the individual concerned isn't one of them? If the latter is true, how can anybody be sure that they are saved by the blood of Christ at all? The only purpose false doctrines like the latter serves is to cast doubt on the word of God.
No Dcopymope. It doesn't do anything you said. You have no scripture that says otherwise. But you and Wormwood win.

Goodbye.
 

tom55

Love your neighbor as yourself
Sep 9, 2013
1,199
18
0
Wormwood said:
Well we all believe in predestination (unless you are a proponent of Open Theology). The question is "What is predestined and what is that predestination based upon?" Catholic and Arminian theology would argue that what is predetermined is the rewards of the faithful and those individuals are known based upon God's foreknowledge of their free-will choices. Reformed theology would argue that individuals are predetermined to heaven or hell and it is based upon God's unilateral plan before creation to save elect people while condemning the rest. I dont find any biblical basis for the latter, but I know there are Christ-loving people who feel that is what the Bible teaches.
I am so confused. I don't understand how you are defining "predestination".

'Predetermined rewards of the faithful' is not the same as being predestined. (I think that is what you are saying?)

The predetermined reward of the lottery does not mean the faithful players of the lottery will win it.

Foreknowledge is not the same as predestined.

I have foreknowledge that if my child places his hand on a hot stove he will get burned. That does not mean he is predestined to touch the hot stove.

I have tried to read the Catholic definition of predestination and it confused me.

I am not disagreeing with you.....I just don't understand what you are saying and I am confused.
 

tom55

Love your neighbor as yourself
Sep 9, 2013
1,199
18
0
Dcopymope said:
If the latter is true, then it makes the Gospel null and void. If the latter is true, then it makes spreading the Gospel message pointless. Why preach about redemption through Jesus to someone God already decided before the events of Genesis 1 was destined to the lake of fire anyway? How do you the individual concerned isn't one of them? If the latter is true, how can anybody be sure that they are saved by the blood of Christ at all? The only purpose false doctrines like the latter serves is to cast doubt on the word of God.
I generally agree with you.
 

Phoneman777

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2015
7,184
2,534
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Dcopymope said:
If the latter is true, then it makes the Gospel null and void. If the latter is true, then it makes spreading the Gospel message pointless. Why preach about redemption through Jesus to someone God already decided before the events of Genesis 1 was destined to the lake of fire anyway? How do you the individual concerned isn't one of them? If the latter is true, how can anybody be sure that they are saved by the blood of Christ at all? The only purpose false doctrines like the latter serves is to cast doubt on the word of God.
I recently presented a message against Calvin's TULIP, with emphasis on "Unconditional Election". I agree wholeheartedly that if it has already been determined who is to be saved, what reason is there for the commission to spread the Gospel or the countless warnings that we delay not and make haste to accept it? "God hardened Pharaoh", "beasts made to be taken and destroyed", "I loved Jacob and hated Esau" are easily shown by comparison to other texts to mean otherwise than what these Calvinists interpret them to mean. In light of Jesus' condemnation in Matthew 15 against neglecting our parents, would Calvinists argue that Jesus literally meant that we are to "hate" them?
 

Wormwood

Chaps
Apr 9, 2013
2,346
332
83
47
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Dcopymope said:
If the latter is true, then it makes the Gospel null and void. If the latter is true, then it makes spreading the Gospel message pointless. Why preach about redemption through Jesus to someone God already decided before the events of Genesis 1 was destined to the lake of fire anyway? How do you the individual concerned isn't one of them? If the latter is true, how can anybody be sure that they are saved by the blood of Christ at all? The only purpose false doctrines like the latter serves is to cast doubt on the word of God.
I agree, but they would say, "We preach the Gospel because God commands it."
 

Wormwood

Chaps
Apr 9, 2013
2,346
332
83
47
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
tom55 said:
I am so confused. I don't understand how you are defining "predestination".

'Predetermined rewards of the faithful' is not the same as being predestined. (I think that is what you are saying?)

The predetermined reward of the lottery does not mean the faithful players of the lottery will win it.

Foreknowledge is not the same as predestined.

I have foreknowledge that if my child places his hand on a hot stove he will get burned. That does not mean he is predestined to touch the hot stove.

I have tried to read the Catholic definition of predestination and it confused me.

I am not disagreeing with you.....I just don't understand what you are saying and I am confused.
What I am saying is, God knows who will be saved. He has already predetermined the righteousness they would have and the blessings they would receive in Christ. So, yes, God knows exactly which people will be saved and all the rewards those individuals will receive through Christ. Those rewards for those individuals have been determined beforehand. Scripture is very clear on this. But what is the basis for this predetermination of certain people being lavished with love and righteousness while others are punished? God's foreknowledge. God foreknew who would love him and respond in faith to Christ. Thus he has predetermined their glory and reward on the basis of his foreknowledge of their faith in Christ.

This is very different from saying that God predetermined Bob to believe and be blessed whereas he predetermined Joe to act wickedly and be condemned forever... which is the reformed/Calvinist view (although there are various views on Calvinism and not all are quite as strict)

So both believe in predetermination (the word is used in Scripture), but one sees predetermination as God's predetermined reward for individuals based on his foreknowledge of their faith. The other sees predetermination as God's capricious selection of some for life and others for eternal punishment prior to their creation. I think the latter is a very unhealthy doctrine that puts God in a very poor light. I hope that makes it more clear. Let me know if it is still confusing. Im not always the best communicator :)
 

justaname

Disciple of Jesus Christ
Mar 14, 2011
2,348
149
63
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Wormwood said:
What I am saying is, God knows who will be saved. He has already predetermined the righteousness they would have and the blessings they would receive in Christ. So, yes, God knows exactly which people will be saved and all the rewards those individuals will receive through Christ. Those rewards for those individuals have been determined beforehand. Scripture is very clear on this. But what is the basis for this predetermination of certain people being lavished with love and righteousness while others are punished? God's foreknowledge. God foreknew who would love him and respond in faith to Christ. Thus he has predetermined their glory and reward on the basis of his foreknowledge of their faith in Christ.

This is very different from saying that God predetermined Bob to believe and be blessed whereas he predetermined Joe to act wickedly and be condemned forever... which is the reformed/Calvinist view (although there are various views on Calvinism and not all are quite as strict)

So both believe in predetermination (the word is used in Scripture), but one sees predetermination as God's predetermined reward for individuals based on his foreknowledge of their faith. The other sees predetermination as God's capricious selection of some for life and others for eternal punishment prior to their creation. I think the latter is a very unhealthy doctrine that puts God in a very poor light. I hope that makes it more clear. Let me know if it is still confusing. Im not always the best communicator :)
What theologian has ever described God's predetermination as capricious? I really find this an unfairly biased description of the other point of view. This is you putting the point of view in a poor light.

There is nothing unhealthy about the doctrine of God being sovereign over the salvation of individual people. Men are saved for God's glory, not for our good decisions.

2 God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he appeals to God against Israel?
3 "Lord, they have killed your prophets, they have demolished your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life."
4 But what is God's reply to him? "I have kept for myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal."
5 So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace.
6 But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace. - Romans 11:2-6

Do an honest word study of foreknowledge in this context and what do you see?

And then also I ask, who kept these men that did not bend their knee to Baal?

Then also this text says we are chosen by grace, and it is expanded on even in this direct context. Grace is God's unmerited favor. Grace is not given on the basis of our works.

So then I ask is making a decision an act of the will?

Then a furthering of the appeal is given:

7 What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened,
8 as it is written, "God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day."
9 And David says, "Let their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them;
10 let their eyes be darkened so that they cannot see, and bend their backs forever." - Romans 11:7-10

According to your theology did the elect elect themselves with their good decisions? Finally what about those that were hardened?
 

justaname

Disciple of Jesus Christ
Mar 14, 2011
2,348
149
63
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I have already given an appeal to the cause of God's sovereign election. Scripture gives a clear description of this. What I see is man's argument of unfairness speaking against it rather than an exegesis of Scripture.

Case in point and the most convincing evidence:

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 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.
Romans 9


God's mercy is exemplified in His grace. This can not be indicative of prevenient grace because all are not saved. Some never even hear the gospel. God has mercy on whom He choses.

65 And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.”
John 6

Jesus is clear in this context. Some were leaving because of His hard teaching. Most do not accept His teachings and none will unless it is granted by His Father. You can stick your head in the sand. Say I preach a mean God. It still does nothing to change the clear message of Scripture.

11 for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls,
Romans 9

Do not make salvation about men and their choices, an act of their own will, when Scripture clearly states the children of God are selected by God for His purpose because of Him who calls.


So then it was brought up why evangelize? Because this is the vehicle God selected to bring men to Himself. Should we obey our own logic in this or obey God?
 

Phoneman777

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2015
7,184
2,534
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
justaname said:
I have already given an appeal to the cause of God's sovereign election. Scripture gives a clear description of this. What I see is man's argument of unfairness speaking against it rather than an exegesis of Scripture.

Case in point and the most convincing evidence:

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 So then it does not depend on the man who wills or the man who runs, but on God who has mercy.
Romans 9


God's mercy is exemplified in His grace. This can not be indicative of prevenient grace because all are not saved. Some never even hear the gospel. God has mercy on whom He choses.

65 And He was saying, “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.”
John 6

Jesus is clear in this context. Some were leaving because of His hard teaching. Most do not accept His teachings and none will unless it is granted by His Father. You can stick your head in the sand. Say I preach a mean God. It still does nothing to change the clear message of Scripture.

11 for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls,
Romans 9

Do not make salvation about men and their choices, an act of their own will, when Scripture clearly states the children of God are selected by God for His purpose because of Him who calls.


So then it was brought up why evangelize? Because this is the vehicle God selected to bring men to Himself. Should we obey our own logic in this or obey God?
Justaname, you are misinterpreting Scripture by failing to realize that God's foreknowledge of our individual choices is what determines who He predestinates for eternal life or eternal death, NOT some arbitrary celestial lottery. Your desire to rob men of their God-given freedom of choice is no different than that of atheists who claim the same and for the same reason: it is a futile attempt to escape individual responsibility which assigns cause/blame to someone else - a desire that plagues liberals both inside and outside the church.
 

justaname

Disciple of Jesus Christ
Mar 14, 2011
2,348
149
63
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Phoneman777 said:
Justaname, you are misinterpreting Scripture by failing to realize that God's foreknowledge of our individual choices is what determines who He predestinates for eternal life or eternal death, NOT some arbitrary celestial lottery. Your desire to rob men of their God-given freedom of choice is no different than that of atheists who claim the same and for the same reason: it is a futile attempt to escape individual responsibility which assigns cause/blame to someone else - a desire that plagues liberals both inside and outside the church.
You bring false accusations against me. I never claimed a celestial lottery, you did.

I have no desire to rob men of anything. This is another straw-man you have erected. If you desire to have an honest dialogue you need to converse properly, not like you have here.

Please refer to foreknowledge in the context of the Scripture given here then look to your lacking statement concerning it. (Romans 11:2)

Please refer back to the Scriptures I presented and comment on them. That would be an honest dialogue. Thus far you have added nothing constructive in our (mine and your) discussion.

In this response you have affirmed my initial statements.

Here is another verse to ponder...

28 Therefore they said to Him, “What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God?”
29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.”

Take note the Jews asked what are the works of God that we may do them. Jesus answered in the singular "work" of God, that you believe, placing the emphasis on God; it is God's work.

So then faith is a work of man (what you are advocating) or a work of God (what I am advocating). The text suggests it is a work of God. Within the immediate context are these two verses that describe God's sovereign activity concerning those who come to Christ and agree faith is a work of God, not a work of man. (John 6:44,65)

Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Ephesians 2:9

What you advocate defies this Scripture...and many others.
 

Wormwood

Chaps
Apr 9, 2013
2,346
332
83
47
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
justaname said:
What theologian has ever described God's predetermination as capricious? I really find this an unfairly biased description of the other point of view. This is you putting the point of view in a poor light.

There is nothing unhealthy about the doctrine of God being sovereign over the salvation of individual people. Men are saved for God's glory, not for our good decisions.

2 God has not rejected his people whom he foreknew. Do you not know what the Scripture says of Elijah, how he appeals to God against Israel?
3 "Lord, they have killed your prophets, they have demolished your altars, and I alone am left, and they seek my life."
4 But what is God's reply to him? "I have kept for myself seven thousand men who have not bowed the knee to Baal."
5 So too at the present time there is a remnant, chosen by grace.
6 But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace. - Romans 11:2-6

Do an honest word study of foreknowledge in this context and what do you see?

And then also I ask, who kept these men that did not bend their knee to Baal?

Then also this text says we are chosen by grace, and it is expanded on even in this direct context. Grace is God's unmerited favor. Grace is not given on the basis of our works.

So then I ask is making a decision an act of the will?

Then a furthering of the appeal is given:

7 What then? Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened,
8 as it is written, "God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes that would not see and ears that would not hear, down to this very day."
9 And David says, "Let their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them;
10 let their eyes be darkened so that they cannot see, and bend their backs forever." - Romans 11:7-10

According to your theology did the elect elect themselves with their good decisions? Finally what about those that were hardened?
Well, I have read numerous theologians that disagree with Calvinism that uses that exact word as a description of how salvation is painted in that doctrine. Capricious means something based in impulse that is not based on anything but the individual's personal own mood or sudden desire. I, and others I have read, believe that the doctrine that God created some human beings for the purpose of assigning them to eternal hellfire is capricious. It isn't based on their choices, or wickedness. It is simply based on God's foreordained desire to punish them for eternity for his own glory. Personally, I think that capricious is a very fitting term for such a notion. If you find it insulting to your view, perhaps you can explain to me why this word is a poor description. I am sure the person who, after 1,000,000 years of torment as a result of God's unilateral plan to punish them would agree with the term. I imagine they would have wanted God to be in the mood to assign them to heaven in the moment of their creation, don't you?

As for the texts you cited, perhaps you can point out the particular words you find significant. As for me, the text seems to be saying the following...

God foreknew the remnant of Israelites that would trust him. He reserved for himself a group that refused to worship the false god. Thus, this group belonged to God and he has kept them for himself, while he has given up the others who failed to believe. They were not his. So, this text, in my mind, is teaching the exact opposite of what you are suggesting. It is not saying God predetermined the salvation of a chosen group. If that were the case, why 7,000? Why not all Israel? Were not they all the "chosen people?" No, this text is teaching that God has foreknown those who "would not bow the knee." He has protected them and kept their light shining in a dark world of unbelief and false worship. It is not saying he predetermined they would believe and the others would not. It is saying that he has a special knowledge and plan for these people because he has "foreknown" them based on their faithfulness to him and their refusal to worship other gods.

In fact, this is the very point Paul is making to his readers. Many Israelites believed they were "God's chosen" by virtue of their race and the Gentiles were not chosen by virtue of theirs. Paul is showing that "true Israel" and those who belong to and are "known" by God are those who trust him, regardless of whether or not they are the "chosen." God's choosing is based on our response of faith. And just like God chose and protected those who refused to bow the knee to Baal, so God is choosing and preserving a remnant of Israel that trusts in the Messiah. His choice is based on their faith. Just because most of Israel didn't believe does not mean God was faithless to his promise. He knew a remant would believe and his promises belong to that remnant, not to the unbelieving Israelites who bow the knee. God's chosen people are those who choose to trust in Jesus. Being an Israelite means nothing if faith is not involved. Such a person is no different than the Israelite that bowed the knee to Baal. Such a person does not belong to God.

Of course faith is unmerited favor. Who ever said we are saved by our works? However, my question to you is, "Since when is faith a work???" Paul's whole point here in this section (lets not lose the forest for the trees) is that God has chosen to save Gentiles who trust in Jesus, meanwhile many Israelites are not saved because they refuse to believe. Just as God preserved for himself a remnant who refused to bow the knee to Baal, so also there is a remnant of Israel who trusts in Jesus Christ. Neither of these scenarios are based in works. Faith is NOT a work. Trusting Jesus is not a work. Trusting God and refusing to worship Baals is not a work. To suggest that those Israelites who trusted God and refused to bow their knee to Baal were trying to "earn" their salvation by this "work" is absurd. These people were people of faith and they belonged to God because they trusted God, not because they lived perfect lives. You really need to rethink your understanding of "works" as it relates to salvation. Basically you are attempting to discredit faith as an attempt to work for or earn salvation...which then leaves only God's unilateral, arbitrary will as the only means by which "grace" is truly "grace" and not a work. Faith is not a work.
 

justaname

Disciple of Jesus Christ
Mar 14, 2011
2,348
149
63
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Wormwood,

I have much to say yet I am pressed in dividing my time properly so I must keep this brief.

First:
God's glory is not capricious, and neither are His purposes. Find a better word.

Second:
You neglected doing the word study and instead decided to rely on what you already know and believe. Finding the treasure is by doing the digging. Look to how the word is used in the OT. Foreknown is richer in meaning than what you choose to allow in your interpretation. Honestly I believe you already know this as we have discussed this in the past. You simply chose to avoid it in this discussion now.

Third:
Trust is a virtue. By acting on trust we work that virtue. Faith is a work. (John 6:28-29, 1Thessalonians 1:3) Faith is a conscience act of the will doing trust or trusting and believing.

Your theology states grace is merited through faith. I state grace is unmerited favor. You contend we receive grace when we earn it through our faith, by making the choice and acting on our decision to believe God and trust Him. I say we receive grace when God bestows it. I say if left to my self I would have never come to belief, it took an act of God to remove me from my rebellion. I say God chose me to believe, I didn't chose Him. You say you chose to have faith, you made the conscience decision to believe, thereby you chose Him before He chose you.

There is nothing arbitrary about God's will. God is unilateral in His actions and who can stand against Him? All the Scriptures testify to this. The pottery does not talk back to to potter. God is able to do as He wills concerning His creation. Again all the Scripture testifies to this. In the end all will be responsible for their actions done in this body and must give an account. God's name will be glorified in both the damned and the saved. Salvation is about Him and Him glorified in and through the person of Jesus Christ. Salvation is not about our good decision compared to everyone else's poor decision. The damned are condemned for their sin, and God is just. The elect are saved from their sins through the sacrifice of Jesus, and God is merciful.

Please do not confuse works of the Law which are different than the work of faith. Both are an action, yet faith is given through God's grace. Faith is not something we muster on our own and if we are unable to muster enough and then maintain it we are damned. We trust because God placed it in our heart. (Jeremiah 32:39-40)

Finally:

You continual argument of double predestination has been proven moot previously. First off I do not hold to such a notion. You are not off the hook of explaining to the damned that never heard the gospel why God didn't give them a chance to believe. God sure was able to reach Paul with the gospel even in his zeal to persecute Christians. I suppose the American Indians just were not important enough to reach. Or would you suggest the devil's resistance the the thickness of sin was just too powerful to reach those on the other side of the Atlantic? The reception of the gospel is not a level field not matter how you desire to explain why. Shall we blame God for this? I think not. Then why do you chose to blame God for the damnation of individuals if He unilaterally saves some? He unilaterally acted in Paul's life. I say He does the same for all.

If God were fair all would be damned. All men are born into sin. This is why most men go to hell. God in His mercy choses to pull some from the fire all for His purpose and glory; for His namesake; that Jesus may be glorified. He uses people like you and I to do so, and the gospel is preached.