Saved Or Predestined ???

[Tong2020]

If that were true, you would have a catch 22 situation where no one could be saved. Jesus said the one who seeks will find. He didn't lay any conditions on it and say, that doesn't apply is you happen to have been born a Muslim or a buddist. Do you know that God is revealing himself to Muslims as Jesus even in their dreams? Again, you limit God to only working on people that are like you. God reveals himself to all according to scripture so that men are without excuse. If he never gives them enough knowledge to come to him, they would have the perfect excuse at the judgement.

Yes no one could be saved, if only on their own. But there is one who saves, God.

You keep saying "Jesus said the one who seeks will find." We both agree. But I have already pointed out that one can only seek him that he knows and calls on him whom he believes.

You said "Do you know that God is revealing himself to Muslims as Jesus even in their dreams? ". I heard Muslims who profess to believe in the gospel of Jesus Christ, tell their story over the internet. But that does not make your point nor does it refutes my point that one can only seek him that he knows and calls on him whom he believes.

You said "God reveals himself to all according to scripture so that men are without excuse." Yes, we can read that in Romans 1. And you can read there how man had done with that revelation in that same part of scriptures. And you can read God's testimony about mankind in Genesis.

You said "If he never gives them enough knowledge to come to him, they would have the perfect excuse at the judgement." God is not indebted to any sinner in any way. So, please don't make it appear as though He is. As had just been pointed out, Romans 1 scriptures tells us that men are without excuse, and that, even without special revelation from God, that is, only with the revelation of the things that were made, that is, creation. No sinner at the judgement have an excuse why they should not be cast to hell.

No, he uses it in both senses, first that we were slaves to sin and now are slaves to Christ:Just as you used to offer the parts of your body in slavery to impurity and to escalating wickedness, so now offer them in slavery to righteousness leading to holiness. 20For when you were slaves to sin, you were free of obligation to righteousness. What fruit did you reap at that time from the things of which you are now ashamed? The outcome of those things is death. 22But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves to God, the fruit you reap leads to holiness, and the outcome is eternal life.…

Yes, Paul indeed told us that Christians formerly were slaves to sin, that is referring to the unconverted state. And that Christians are now slaves to Christ, that is referring to the converted state.

If you can still fail to be a perfect slave to Christ as a Born again believer, why would you believe that your slaver to sin previously was so complete that you could not choose Christ? In either case, you can see that our obligation is to do something about the state we are in. If still slaves to sin, our obligation is to cry out to God for rescue. If slaves to righteousness our obligation is to continue in the path he has put before us instead of falling back into sin. God doesn't make the choice for us, otherwise, Paul would not be urging believers to "offer them in slavery to righteousness leading to holiness." To offer ourselves requires something of us. It's not automatic.

Why are you now a slave to Christ? Is it because you believed in Him? Or is it because He had redeemed you from your former slavery, that is, to sin, that now, He is your new master, and He owns you?

You asked "If you can still fail to be a perfect slave to Christ as a Born again believer, why would you believe that your slaver to sin previously was so complete that you could not choose Christ?" Good question. The answer is simple. Why you still fail to be perfectly obedient is because you are still in what Paul call "body of death", in your flesh, where sin dwells. You can read Romans 7 about that. Why I believe that the sinner, unless God quickens him, is not able to choose Christ, simply because scriptures teach that the sinful man is rendered dead in relation to righteousness and God.

Did God hit you over the head and drag you into the kingdom or did you respond to his invitation and grace? We are in a battle between good and evil and that includes all. You see this in unsaved people as well as saved. We all fight with our sinful inclinations. Very rarely, as CS Lewis says will there be a man who just says: " To hell with any standard of right and wrong." (I'm paraphrasing, but only slightly.) Even the unsaved will have some standard of what right and wrong is because we all have a God-given conscience. This is the image of God in men. We get to decide whether we follow the light or succumb to the dark. Good grief, the entire Bible makes this clear over and over again, I don't see how anyone can miss it.

You asked "Did God hit you over the head and drag you into the kingdom or did you respond to his invitation and grace?" God had given me grace and saved me. In God's time, He touched my sinful heart, and revealed Himself to me, at some point in my sinful life. And when He did that, I found myself drawn into Jesus Christ, as one being in love. Now, I believe that you know how it is to fall in love, right?

You said "Even the unsaved will have some standard of what right and wrong is because we all have a God-given conscience. This is the image of God in men." I disagree. The image of God is not anything like what you say there. Jesus Christ is the image of God, even the perfect image of God. If one wants to know what is the image of God in man, he will know it by looking at the man, Jesus Christ.

You said "We get to decide whether we follow the light or succumb to the dark." But this can not apply to the dead, unless they first be quickened, for this can only apply to the those who are able to see the light.

Tong
R0368

 

[Tong2020]

You are setting up some kind of strawman argument here, it seems. Why would I question what God has done in the past? God is perfectly just. What he did was obviously in response to what he knew men would do. He gave men plenty of time to repent before the flood, so that is not an issue. I'm not questioning his actions pertaining to salvation, I am trying to explain them to you. And again, you misinterpret what sovereignty is. It's not controlling or planning all of the actions of the creation beforehand. Sovereignty is having ultimate power and authority, it's has nothing to do with ordaining everything beforehand.

No sir, I am not. It's what it seemed to me that you do, that's why.

You said "What he did was obviously in response to what he knew men would do." Don't forget, God is the creator. And God did not create anything that He does not know, rather God perfectly knows what He had created, what capabilities He gave them and what they will be doing. I'd say, in the Creator's standpoint, that it is not God who respond to what man does, rather it is man who responds to what God does. God does not respond to your love with His love, rather you respond to His love, either love Him back or not. And for every choice there is that you could possibly make and do, God already have in plan what will happen as He had purpose, for His pleasure and glory, affecting His creatures individually and collectively.

You said "I'm not questioning his actions pertaining to salvation, I am trying to explain them to you." Perhaps. But in doing so, you seem to be questioning His actions pertaining to His salvation.

You said "And again, you misinterpret what sovereignty is. It's not controlling or planning all of the actions of the creation beforehand. Sovereignty is having ultimate power and authority, it's has nothing to do with ordaining everything beforehand." I already gave my counter to that thought of yours by giving you scriptures that speak of the sovereignty of God, so I will not repeat myself here. I will only add this. If we speak of God's ordaining or any work for that matter, you can't separate or take out His sovereignty in any of that. For His sovereignty is inherent in Him and saying that it has nothing to do in any of His doing such as that you say there, is diminishing God. Everything that God does, no matter how insignificant it may seem to you or is in your opinion does not need His sovereignty, is coming from all of Him.

Tong
R0369

 

[Tong2020]

For hundreds of years we had the King James Bible as our primary source in English. Yet, not one time did the King James call God "Sovereign." I would ask any theologian how they could build an entire system of belief, making everything hinge on Sovereignty, when the Bible never said such a thing?

Now, later versions go out of their way to include Sovereignty, mostly to sell Bibles to Fatalists.... I do not deny that God is sovereign, yet I would not have the audacity to dictate to God what He does, or does not do in His sovereignty!

(S)overeignty has become an Idol for many.

Well, then apparently the King James didn't want to call God "sovereign". Though the king James called God the "only Potentate".

Psalm 115:3 But our God is in the heavens: he hath done whatsoever he hath pleased.

Romans 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

Romans 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. 19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? 20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

Psalm 135:6 Whatsoever the Lord pleased, that did he in heaven, and in earth, in the seas, and all deep places.

Daniel 4:35 And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?

Proverbs 16:4 The Lord hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil.

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.

You said "I do not deny that God is sovereign, yet I would not have the audacity to dictate to God what He does, or does not do in His sovereignty!" The scriptures quoted above, among others, tells us of God's sovereignty, and what He does in His sovereignty. So, it is scriptures that dictate what God does in His sovereignty, not any man.

Tong
R0370

 

[Tong2020]

This has nothing to do with infants. Where are you getting that from what Paul says about being born of flesh or the spirit? We don't decide to be physically born. But we must believe to be born again.

Or as Jesus says:
" flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit."
In other words;"
Humans can reproduce only human life, but the Holy Spirit gives birth to spiritual life."

But what are the conditions for one to be born again?"Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up,
so that everyone who believes in him will have eternal life."

Your statement do have something to do with infants, for it touches on the matter of making a choice, which the infants does not have the ability to do. And that is part of what makes your statement erroneous and false.

You contend "We don't decide to be physically born. But we must believe to be born again." What do you even mean physically born? That when you were born into existence, that that was only you physically? But a man is not only body or only physical, and you know that. You were not born just a human body, but was born a man, with the material and spiritual parts that make up and defines the human being. When scriptures speaks of being born according to the flesh, it does not concern only the physical part of man, but of course the whole of what man is. To be born of the flesh means birth by blood, or of the will of the flesh, or of the will of man. In contrast, to be born according to the Spirit means birth by the will of the Spirit, or of the will of God. The two births are contrasted in scriptures in those terms, that is, one is of the will of man and the other is of the will of God.

And if you forget, the literal translation of the Greek phrase translated "born again" in John 3, is "born from above", which denotes that such birth is of heavenly origin.

You asked "what are the conditions for one to be born again?" You ask as if there were. If there be one, that would be, to die or be dead, so that you can be born again. You must try to understand and appreciate the figure, that is, being born again, or re-birth.

Tong
R0371

 

[Tong2020]

“Cursed is the ground because of you;
through painful toil you will eat food from it
all the days of your life.
18 It will produce thorns and thistles for you,
and you will eat the plants of the field.
19 By the sweat of your brow
you will eat your food
until you return to the ground,
since from it you were taken;
for dust you are
and to dust you will return.”

Of course, the curse was the result of man's sin, but the cause of death was God cursing man and the earth because of sin. God said if they ate of the tree they would die, and so they eventually did.

That's right, the curse was coming from the sin of Adam. Whether the cursing of the ground was the cause of death or not, is not the point. The point is that the wages of sin is death, of the whole man, that is, both physical and spiritual, I would here point out. Mankind was not condemned to physical death, as you say in your post #1045, because of the world now being under the curse. Rather, it is as Paul said in 1 Cor. 15:20, "in Adam all die". Besides, concerning the ground as cursed, had God not said in His heart, after the flood, "I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake"? Yes, He did. Now, I know you know what that meant relative to the curse that you here argues as being the cause of man's physical death.

Tong
R0372

 

[Tong2020]

This is just talking in circles. If God is punishing people for their sin, while giving them no other option, then is that not God actually punishing them for what they were born to do? In fact, you have already claimed some are born only to be fleshly, that is, sinful. If God offers all salvation, then, no he is not being unjust by punishing those who refuse his offer.

That's right, so stop repeating saying the same things that you contend over again, which I already have made refutation, so as not to go in circles. Rather, make a counter refutation and not just repeatedly say the same argument. Like what you do here. You just repeat that argument of yours which I have already made refutation. So I will not repeat myself here so as to not go in full circle.

Tong
R0373

 

[Renniks]

Why are you now a slave to Christ? Is it because you believed in Him? Or is it because He had redeemed you from your former slavery, that is, to sin, that now, He is your new master, and He owns you?

You asked "If you can still fail to be a perfect slave to Christ as a Born again believer, why would you believe that your slaver to sin previously was so complete that you could not choose Christ?" Good question. The answer is simple. Why you still fail to be perfectly obedient is because you are still in what Paul call "body of death", in your flesh, where sin dwells. You can read Romans 7 about that. Why I believe that the sinner, unless God quickens him, is not able to choose Christ, simply because scriptures teach that the sinful man is rendered dead in relation to righteousness and God.

It's both because I believed and because he redeemed me.
Yes, and Paul also says that we are now dead to sin. And yet will still sin. Obviously this slavery is not absolute. Obviously we can choose who we listen to and follow.

 

[Renniks]

No sir, I am not. It's what it seemed to me that you do, that's why.

You said "What he did was obviously in response to what he knew men would do." Don't forget, God is the creator. And God did not create anything that He does not know, rather God perfectly knows what He had created, what capabilities He gave them and what they will be doing. I'd say, in the Creator's standpoint, that it is not God who respond to what man does, rather it is man who responds to what God does. God does not respond to your love with His love, rather you respond to His love, either love Him back or not.

Which is what I've been saying all along. God isn't just zapping some with salvation and bypassing others. We either respond to his love or we don't.

And for every choice there is that you could possibly make and do, God already have in plan what will happen as He had purpose, for His pleasure and glory, affecting His creatures individually and collectively.

Well, since God isn't affected by time as far as I know, this is kinda obvious. The question then is what is his purpose and will and we already answered that. His will is that all be saved.

You said "I'm not questioning his actions pertaining to salvation, I am trying to explain them to you." Perhaps. But in doing so, you seem to be questioning His actions pertaining to His salvation.

Nope only from your perspective, and simply because I disagree with your interpretation.

You said "And again, you misinterpret what sovereignty is. It's not controlling or planning all of the actions of the creation beforehand. Sovereignty is having ultimate power and authority, it's has nothing to do with ordaining everything beforehand." I already gave my counter to that thought of yours by giving you scriptures that speak of the sovereignty of God, so I will not repeat myself here. I will only add this. If we speak of God's ordaining or any work for that matter, you can't separate or take out His sovereignty in any of that. For His sovereignty is inherent in Him and saying that it has nothing to do in any of His doing such as that you say there, is diminishing God. Everything that God does, no matter how insignificant it may seem to you or is in your opinion does not need His sovereignty, is coming from all of Him.

Tong
R0369

Everything God does is coming from him, ok, then. That's a no brainer. How is it diminishing God to say he does not have to do something? Is God controlled by his power or does his power controlled by God? Again, you are just claiming God does things he never claims to do. God doesn't have to have meticulous control over everything in order to win in the end. He doesn't have to be a puppet master to be Sovereign, because that's not what sovereignty is.

 

[Renniks]

You asked "what are the conditions for one to be born again?" You ask as if there were. If there be one, that would be, to die or be dead, so that you can be born again. You must try to understand and appreciate the figure, that is, being born again, or re-birth.

I'm not sure what you are getting at, but you didn't address the point, that is, we must first choose to believe before being born again.

 

[Renniks]

That's right, the curse was coming from the sin of Adam. Whether the cursing of the ground was the cause of death or not, is not the point. The point is that the wages of sin is death, of the whole man, that is, both physical and spiritual, I would here point out. Mankind was not condemned to physical death, as you say in your post #1045, because of the world now being under the curse. Rather, it is as Paul said in 1 Cor. 15:20, "in Adam all die". Besides, concerning the ground as cursed, had God not said in His heart, after the flood, "I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake"? Yes, He did. Now, I know you know what that meant relative to the curse that you here argues as being the cause of man's physical death.

Tong
R0372

Not sure what you are trying to say here either.

 

[Tong2020]

It's both because I believed and because he redeemed me.

That may be only if one gets out of the slave metaphor and mix up things in scriptures to confusion. In the slave metaphor, the concept that a slave's believing in the one that redeems him is to be free from his former slavery is nowhere hinted, found, nor applies. In the metaphor, the slave is freed by being bought for a price by another. This one who pays the price is the redeemer, the one who saves him. Now, that is Jesus Christ.

Yes, and Paul also says that we are now dead to sin. And yet will still sin. Obviously this slavery is not absolute. Obviously we can choose who we listen to and follow.

Yes we are dead to sin. And that has nothing to do with our sinning still sir. Here you miss an important truth about the salvation of God. We are dead to sin, not in the sense that we are perfected unto holiness while in the flesh, but in the sense that we are in Jesus Christ. But don't you be impatient, for we shall be made perfect, when the body of death, that is the flesh, shall be done away with, in the resurrection.

You said "Obviously this slavery is not absolute." See? You are mixing the slave metaphor with something else. You won't get to the truth with that.

Tong
R0374

 

[Tong2020]

Which is what I've been saying all along. God isn't just zapping some with salvation and bypassing others. We either respond to his love or we don't.

And "God isn't just zapping some with salvation and bypassing others." is not what I'm saying all along. Another of your strawman apparently.

Well, since God isn't affected by time as far as I know, this is kinda obvious. The question then is what is his purpose and will and we already answered that. His will is that all be saved.

And that must not be understood as though God makes wishes or hopes, like man. For this is God's will concerning that.

John 6: 39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.

Everything God does is coming from him, ok, then. That's a no brainer. How is it diminishing God to say he does not have to do something? Is God controlled by his power or does his power controlled by God? Again, you are just claiming God does things he never claims to do. God doesn't have to have meticulous control over everything in order to win in the end. He doesn't have to be a puppet master to be Sovereign, because that's not what sovereignty is.

And while you acknowledge that everything that God does is coming from Him, you continue to show a lack of understanding of it by your questions there. Also, the rest of what you say there are again a repeat of your strawman creation, the same strawman even. Regarding diminishing God, this is what I said "His sovereignty is inherent in Him and saying that it has nothing to do in any of His doing such as that you say there, is diminishing God."

Scriptures says Jesus Christ is a King, even the King of kings and the Lord of Lords. As all king are, He is sovereign over His kingdom. And His kingdom is not of puppets like what your strawman says. Scriptures used the figure of a potter's power and authority over the clay in speaking of God's sovereignty over man. Try to look into that figure, without mixing it with another figure, and see what it says of the sovereignty of God over man. This statement can get you started, 'Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?”'

Tong
R0375

 

[Renniks]

That may be only if one gets out of the slave metaphor and mix up things in scriptures to confusion. In the slave metaphor, the concept that a slave's believing in the one that redeems him is to be free from his former slavery is nowhere hinted, found, nor applies. In the metaphor, the slave is freed by being bought for a price by another. This one who pays the price is the redeemer, the one who saves him. Now, that is Jesus Christ.

You can't divorce one metophor from the rest of scripture, you have to see how it fits perfectly together. Yes Christ pays for our Ransom, but we have to accept the payment.

 

[Renniks]

And "God isn't just zapping some with salvation and bypassing others." is not what I'm saying all along. Another of your strawman apparently

It's exactly what you have been implying.

 

[Tong2020]

I'm not sure what you are getting at, but you didn't address the point, that is, we must first choose to believe before being born again.

I already addressed that point of yours. As I said, being born or regarding birth, the one being born is not the one who makes the choice and in fact have nothing at all to do with it. Now, if you don't stay with the metaphor, and mix it with another, as you do, then the metaphor collapses.

Regarding the condition that you put up with regards the matter of being born again, to which I said there is none and that if there be one, that would be, to die or be dead, so that you can be born again, I thought you'll see the obvious. For one can only be born again or regenerated when he is dead. One who is not dead cannot be made not dead again, unless he first dies. Or one who is alive cannot be made alive again unless he first dies. So, if there is any condition to be re-born or be born again or be made alive again, is to be dead. Believing is not a condition to be born again. Believing is an act of one who has life and could never be of the dead.

Tong
R0376

 

[Renniks]

And that must not be understood as though God makes wishes or hopes, like man. For this is God's will concerning that.

John 6: 39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day.

Really? Because I prefer to believe all scripture fits together instead of pitting on verse against another. If God says he desires all to be saved, I don't have to explain that away because another verse say he wills that he will lose none. Both are true, but it's also true that many will fall away, because God allows us to be free agents to a point.

Are you trying to say that God's will is always done? Because that's not biblical.

 

[Renniks]

I already addressed that point of yours. As I said, being born or regarding birth, the one being born is not the one who makes the choice and in fact have nothing at all to do with it. Now, if you don't stay with the metaphor, and mix it with another, as you do, then the metaphor collapses.

Regarding the condition that you put up with regards the matter of being born again, to which I said there is none and that if there be one, that would be, to die or be dead, so that you can be born again, I thought you'll see the obvious. For one can only be born again or regenerated when he is dead. One who is not dead cannot be made not dead again, unless he first dies. Or one who is alive cannot be made alive again unless he first dies. So, if there is any condition to be re-born or be born again or be made alive again, is to be dead. Believing is not a condition to be born again. Believing is an act of one who has life and could never be of the dead.

Tong
R0376

What do you mean by being dead? I'm dead to sin, but I still sin? Somebody is dead in thier sins, but they can still be saved?
I still don't know what this is supposed to explain.
Of course belief is a condition for being born again. Jesus said it is. "That whosever believes in him shall have eternal life."
First belief then salvation.

 

[Tong2020]

Not sure what you are trying to say here either.

You argued saying and I quote:

"We are condemned to physical death because of the world now being under the curse."

And in the next post, you supported that by quoting Genesis 3:17-19, speaking of the ground as cursed so that it became the cause of man's physical death.

So, I just pointed out, that even that concerning the ground as cursed, God said in His heart, after the flood, concerning this, "I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake". Don't you understand what God meant by that?

Tong
R0377

 

[Tong2020]

You can't divorce one metaphor from the rest of scripture, you have to see how it fits perfectly together. Yes Christ pays for our Ransom, but we have to accept the payment.

I am not saying you divorce the slave metaphor with the rest of scriptures. What I am saying is that you must not mix the slave metaphor with other metaphors.

You said "but we have to accept the payment." And see? Since you get out of the metaphor, you have this erroneous understanding and reasoning. When a slave is redeemed, he don't have the choice to accept or not.

Tong
R0378

 

[Tong2020]

It's exactly what you have been implying.

Well, that's what it is you think I am implying. But my saying to you over and over in my past posts that such is a strawman you make, clearly tells you that your thoughts are wrong. And why you keep bringing that up and making it appear that it is what I am saying leads to me to think that it is indeed an intentional strawman, if not, a misrepresentation, which is unbecoming of a Christian and I don't expect coming from you.

Tong
R379