Bladerunner
Active member
My apologies in that I sometimes jump in when it is not my place to do so.
On the omniscience of God
- Thread starter JudgeRightly
- Start date
Bladerunner
Active member
I don't see that in the Election doctrines but I see it is of no use to debate, in your case (argue)with you....
Bladerunner
Active member
God teaches that everyone is BORN with the Sin Nature. Yet, Jesus tells us little children lead the way to heaven.
Right Divider
Body part
Bladerunner
Active member
"Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:" Rom 5:12.......one of many....The very nature of sin itself instilled into everyone...Yet, Babies according to GOD are innocent and the same for small children.
"The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them." Isa 11:6....The setting for this verse our of many is the Millennium, Kingdom of GOD on earth.
This is not Calvinism, Lon. Calvinists do not believe that the elect are chosen by God based on His foreknowledge. Quite the reverse. They believe God's foreknowledge is based on his predestination.
“… predestination to glory is the cause of predestination to grace, rather than the converse.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 22, Paragraph 9)
“Therefore, those whom God passes over, he condemns; and this he does for no other reason than that he wills to exclude them from the inheritance which he predestines for his own children.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 1)
“We cannot assign any reason for his bestowing mercy on his people, but just as it so pleases him, neither can we have any reason for his reprobating others but his will.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 22, Paragraph 11)
“But since he foresees future events only by reason of the fact that he decreed that they take place, they vainly raise a quarrel over foreknowledge, when it is clear that all things take place rather by his determination and bidding.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 6)
Quite so! I hadn't seen your post before posting what I said above! It's sort of fun when that happens!
Indeed, God Himself, the Calvinists say, determined what they will or will not do.
I completely love it when this happens. It shows that you instinctively think in terms of justice and know intuitively that no child could deserve Hell.
Unfortunately, the sentiment is quite incompatible with the Calvinist worldview precisely because it's premise is justice.
“We cannot assign any reason for his bestowing mercy on his people, but just as it so pleases him, neither can we have any reason for his reprobating others but his will.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 22, Paragraph 11)
Calvinistic predestination has nothing to do with justice. It is arbitrary by definition and, in their mind, it MUST be so. The reason why is because if there is any reason given to God's interactions with mankind (i.e. any interaction, including but not limited to salvation) then that would mean that God is a contingent being rather than a necessary being. A concept that is rather convoluted and eye-glazing but, basically speaking, is derived from the doctrine of absolutely divine immutability and applies not just to God's existence but to His attributes and every conceivable aspect of His being.
There would be no use if the expectation was to defeat me.
What you see or don't see is entirely irrelevant except in regard to the extent to which you are or are not a Calvinist. If you disagree that the "Election doctrines" as you call them, do not include what I have presented then you aren't disagreeing with me, I've just presented the facts, it's Calvinism that you disagree with.
Even more Calvinist doctrine with which you disagree - and rightly so! Keep it up and you'll be agreeing with me all over the place!
The doctrine of Original Sin is an Augustinian doctrine which both Calvinists and Catholics teach and that is flatly false to the point of being blasphemous.
No one will be punished because of the sin of their ancestors. So says God Himself. Indeed, God invokes His own life in His insistence that Israel stop teaching such a thing....
Ezekiel 18:1 The word of the Lord came to me again, saying, 2 “What do you mean when you use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying:
‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes,
And the children’s teeth are set on edge’?
3 “As I live,” says the Lord God, “you shall no longer use this proverb in Israel.
The entire chapter of Ezekiel 18 is specifically about this exact topic. It is summed up in the following verse but I recommend reading the entire chapter. In the honest mind, a single reading of it will permanently dissolve the doctrine of Original Sin....
Ezekiel 18:20 The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.
This passage says that death passed upon all men, not sin, and it says that death so passes because all have sinned (i.e. because of their own sin, not because of Adam's sin).
No one is held guilty because of Adam's sin other than Adam.
Last edited:
I remember a teaching that I heard Bob Enyart talk about many years ago, a couple of decades ago, in fact, that I think I still agree with.
He and Doug McBurney were talking on the radio show, if I'm remembering correctly, about some crazy woman who had murdered her children because she believed them to be below the age of accountability and wanted to guarantee their going to heaven. I don't even know for sure that I'm remembering that correctly. Anyway Bob and Doug were talking about whether it was actually true that all babies go to heaven and neither of them believed that it was necessarily the case. The argument went something like this...
First of all, Bob didn't think that when a child dies that he is instantly matured into an adult version of himself. This is in keeping with his consistent teaching that God is not a magician and that heaven is a real place where normal reality exists and where effects follow causes, etc, etc. He believed that children who die are raised to maturity and are then given the opportunity to choose for themselves whether they will submit themselves to God and live with Him or whether they want to reject God and be removed from His presence.
Now, of course, one wouldn't expect very many to opt for the latter option there, but a third of the angels did just that so it isn't as far fetched as it might sound. In any case, Bob didn't believe that children lose their free will just because they died young and that they aren't going to be forced to live with God forever if they choose not to.
Thoughts?
He and Doug McBurney were talking on the radio show, if I'm remembering correctly, about some crazy woman who had murdered her children because she believed them to be below the age of accountability and wanted to guarantee their going to heaven. I don't even know for sure that I'm remembering that correctly. Anyway Bob and Doug were talking about whether it was actually true that all babies go to heaven and neither of them believed that it was necessarily the case. The argument went something like this...
First of all, Bob didn't think that when a child dies that he is instantly matured into an adult version of himself. This is in keeping with his consistent teaching that God is not a magician and that heaven is a real place where normal reality exists and where effects follow causes, etc, etc. He believed that children who die are raised to maturity and are then given the opportunity to choose for themselves whether they will submit themselves to God and live with Him or whether they want to reject God and be removed from His presence.
Now, of course, one wouldn't expect very many to opt for the latter option there, but a third of the angels did just that so it isn't as far fetched as it might sound. In any case, Bob didn't believe that children lose their free will just because they died young and that they aren't going to be forced to live with God forever if they choose not to.
Thoughts?
Right Divider
Body part
Thanks Clete, I was going to post the same...
Since being introduced to Bob's ministry in 2015, I came to believe that anyone who dies before reaching the age of accountability, whatever age that is, they would be allowed to live in heaven until they reached that age, free from the flesh and demonic influence. I'd argue that the ratio of people who choose to stay over rejecting God is much higher than on earth, perhaps 50%, or even 66.6% (based on the number of angels that fell being only a third in similar circumstances).
And I'm pretty sure it was Bob that convinced me of that position.
Regardless, it's mostly conjecture, though it's a much stronger argument since it's based on God's love and justice rather than what the Calvinist might promote about Him.
Derf
Well-known member
Guilty, yes, I agree. But we still seem to die because of what Adam did.
Romans 5:14 KJV — Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.
I assume there were miscarriages in that time between Adam and Moses, so some of those deaths were not because the individuals sinned.
What do you think it means to be "in Adam" here?
1 Corinthians 15:22 KJV — For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
I agree.