Theology Club: Predestination and freedom

[Nang]

Prove it.

Without a doubt, Jesus Christ is revealed as being the "Lamb of God" in eternity. Revelation 5:6-13, 15:3

This "Lamb" is glorified as God in the heavenly realm. Jesus confirmed this was His divine position in glory before the world was in John 17:5.

Why would the Son of God be defined as a Lamb, except it was foreordained before creation that He would be a sacrificial offering?

Was it not His sacrificial and substitutional death on the cross that proved Him worthy of all glory?

All that was foreordained, foreknown, decreed, and established in the everlasting covenant amongst the Godhead (Genesis 9:16) was determined as fait accompli prior to creation.

Faulty views denying time as being part of the temporal creation, is what causes much difficulty understanding these lofty and eternal truths.

 

[Tambora]

1 Peter 1 KJV
(19) But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
(20) Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

That's not what you said. You said He was slain before the foundation of the world.

Oh, you thought I meant that the event of the Lamb slain actually happened then?
No, that's not what I meant.
The conversation was about whether we could know that something was presdestined without that exact word (predestined) being used.
I was using "the lamb slain before the foundation of the world" as an example of something we know was predestined without atually using that exact word.

Why would that particular exact word have to be used each time the message of something predestined is spoken of?

We know that the lamb was slain before the foundation of the world.
The particular exact word "predestined" does not have to be used to speak about that message.

​

 

[Lighthouse]

Without a doubt, Jesus Christ is revealed as being the "Lamb of God" in eternity. Revelation 5:6-13, 15:3

This "Lamb" is glorified as God in the heavenly realm. Jesus confirmed this was His divine position in glory before the world was in John 17:5.

Why would the Son of God be defined as a Lamb, except it was foreordained before creation that He would be a sacrificial offering?

Was it not His sacrificial and substitutional death on the cross that proved Him worthy of all glory?

All that was foreordained, foreknown, decreed, and established in the everlasting covenant amongst the Godhead (Genesis 9:16) was determined as fait accompli prior to creation.

Faulty views denying time as being part of the temporal creation, is what causes much difficulty understanding these lofty and eternal truths.

1. That's not the issue.
2. He wasn't called the Lamb of God from before the foundation of the world; He was called that only after it was ordained, which was after the Fall.

Oh, you thought I meant that the event of the Lamb slain actually happened then?
No, that's not what I meant.
The conversation was about whether we could know that something was presdestined without that exact word (predestined) being used.
I was using "the lamb slain before the foundation of the world" as an example of something we know was predestined without atually using that exact word.

Except the verse you are using isn't actually saying that.

 

[Lee52]

Lee,

Since you are using John 12 to argue, you should read the rest of the chapter, particularly vss 37-41 that quotes Isaiah's revelation (Isaiah 6:9-10) that it is God who determines who will believe and who will not.

Nang

Nice try Nang, but: BUZZZZZ, Wrong answer.

That was a specific reference to a specific people at a specific time during Jesus' walk on the earth. It was the fulfilment of a prophecy, i.e. done, fulfilled, no longer applicable upon its fulfilment.

"When Jesus had said these things, he departed and hid himself from them. Though he had done so many signs before them, they still did not believe in him, so that the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled:" John 12:36-38 ESV

Blessings,

Lee

 

[Lee52]

No we don't.

Yes we do!

Nang

No, no we do not.

Please provide you exact Scripture reference.........

Blessings,
Lee

 

[Lee52]

Wow,
Mark this thread.

Lighthouse and I are in agreement on these issues with Nang and Tambora......

Very remarkable indeed!

Blessings to all,

Lee

 

[Dialogos]

"Come to me ALL who are tired and heavy laden and I will give you rest for your souls." The word in Greek means all of humanity, not specific as in "all of a specific group". The same is true of John 3 throughout the entire Chapter. Neither are restricted to gender either.

πας in Greek does not always mean "all of humanity" or even "all of a specific group." It can, and often does mean, "of every kind" or "of every sort" as it demonstrably does in the Matthew 4:23 (for example).

(sigh) Once again, "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in him may have eternal life." John 3:14-15 ESV "whoever" in the Greek is all inclusive, not restrictive.

Are there Calvinists running around teaching that there will be those who believe in Him but not have eternal life?



Nevertheless, even your point bring up some good questions.

Did everyone get a chance to see the bronze serpent? Did the Canaanite priests of Baal get the chance to come and look upon the serpent lifted up? Did God draw them to the lifted up serpent?

Or was it only those of the tribe of Israel that were drawn?

Those questions are pretty pertinent given what you say here.

Jesus seems to disagree with you here:
Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out. And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself.” John 12:31-32 ESV And again, the Greek word is inclusive, not exclusive.

You have overstated your case,oversold your understanding of Greek, and under-utilized the context.

Here is the verse in Greek:

"κἀγὼ ἐὰν ὑψωθῶ ἐκ τῆς γῆς, πάντας ἑλκύσω πρὸς ἐμαυτόν. (John 12:32)

If you notice, the word for "people" (ανθροποι" or "λαοι") isn't in the text. It just says (παντες) with no referent. That makes it pretty hard to be dogmatic about saying that Jesus is drawing every single person on the globe to Himself.

Second, since πας can mean "every kind" or "all sorts of" I have yet to hear an argument that proves it can't mean "every kind" or "all sorts of" here.

Third, if we actually look to the immediate context we will find that Jesus points out that some can't believe and this fact fulfills prophecy.

37 Though he had done so many signs before them, they still did not believe in him, 38 so that the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled: "Lord, who has believed what he heard from us, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?" 39 Therefore they could not believe. For again Isaiah said, 40 "He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and turn, and I would heal them." 41 Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory and spoke of him. (Joh 12:37-41 ESV)

Finally, if we pan out a bit, we find that the cross isn't a draw for everyone, in fact, for many it is an offense (1 Cor 1:23-24) and many stumble over that rock of offense because they were destined to do so (1 Peter 2:7-8).

 

[Nang]

πας in Greek does not always mean "all of humanity" or even "all of a specific group." It can, and often does mean, "of every kind" or "of every sort" as it demonstrably does in the Matthew 4:23 (for example).



Are there Calvinists running around teaching that there will be those who believe in Him but not have eternal life?



Nevertheless, even your point bring up some good questions.

Did everyone get a chance to see the bronze serpent? Did the Canaanite priests of Baal get the chance to come and look upon the serpent lifted up? Did God draw them to the lifted up serpent?

Or was it only those of the tribe of Israel that were drawn?

Those questions are pretty pertinent given what you say here.


You have overstated your case,oversold your understanding of Greek, and under-utilized the context.

Here is the verse in Greek:

"κἀγὼ ἐὰν ὑψωθῶ ἐκ τῆς γῆς, πάντας ἑλκύσω πρὸς ἐμαυτόν. (John 12:32)

If you notice, the word for "people" (ανθροποι" or "λαοι") isn't in the text. It just says (παντες) with no referent. That makes it pretty hard to be dogmatic about saying that Jesus is drawing every single person on the globe to Himself.

Second, since πας can mean "every kind" or "all sorts of" I have yet to hear an argument that proves it can't mean "every kind" or "all sorts of" here.

Third, if we actually look to the immediate context we will find that Jesus points out that some can't believe and this fact fulfills prophecy.

37 Though he had done so many signs before them, they still did not believe in him, 38 so that the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled: "Lord, who has believed what he heard from us, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?" 39 Therefore they could not believe. For again Isaiah said, 40 "He has blinded their eyes and hardened their heart, lest they see with their eyes, and understand with their heart, and turn, and I would heal them." 41 Isaiah said these things because he saw his glory and spoke of him. (Joh 12:37-41 ESV)

Finally, if we pan out a bit, we find that the cross isn't a draw for everyone, in fact, for many it is an offense (1 Cor 1:23-24) and many stumble over that rock of offense because they were destined to do so (1 Peter 2:7-8).

Exactly correct.

John 12:32 is often quoted out of context to propagate a universal view, but the fact that Jesus' audience included some Greeks amongst the usual Jews, explains the "all" to be inclusive of them.

And most often vss 37-41 are never mentioned. However, these verses quoting Isaiah, qualify and quantify Jesus' teaching, reminding his hearers that God determines who will believe the gospel as well as who will not.

Isaiah 6:9-10 and 43:8 is at the core of sound theology for this revelation is quoted by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and Paul . . just as recorded by John. Matthew 13:14-17; Mark 4:12; Luke 8:10; Acts 26-28; Romans 11:8-10; II Corinthians 4:3-4

Nang

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

One can predestine without individually choosing who will be included in the final result.

For example:
The serpent on the pole was lifted up to heal those bitten by serpents.
(Numbers 21:8-9)

It was predestined that whosoever looked upon it would be healed, but it was not predestined which individuals would do so.

Then your position is that God is not Sovereign, correct? Because how could God be Sovereign and not know who was going to be bitten by serpents and who wasn't?

 

[Shasta]

Incidently I believe Calvin himself was an incalculable blessing to the church and to the world, just for the record since he gets so much flak. Europe under his leadership was heaven on earth to the godly during the 16th century. Geneva was a safe harbour for those fleeing the persecutors and it was there that the bible was translated for the first time for EVERYONE to read in their own tongue. Although I have never been led to study Calvin and although I vehemently oppose his double predestiny yet I salute him and give thanks for him.

"The godly" meaning that particular subset of Christians who held strictly to Calvin's doctrines. It was a less hospitable environment for dissenters even if they were orthodox by the standards of the creeds (men like Sebastian Castellio). For heretics Calvin's Genevan Theocracy could be considerably hotter than heaven (e.g., Miguel Servetus). Were Calvin and his government to be in power today I imagine many of us here would be on the hit list.

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

"The godly" meaning that particular subset of Christians who held strictly to Calvin's doctrines. It was a less hospitable environment for dissenters even if they were orthodox by the standards of the creeds (men like Sebastian Castellio). For heretics Calvin's Genevan Theocracy could be considerably hotter than heaven (e.g., Miguel Servetus). Were Calvin and his government to be in power today I imagine many of us here would be on the hit list.

Calvinism is nothing more than the Bible. Period.

 

[Nanja]

Calvinism is nothing more than the Bible. Period.

:thumb:

 

[Totton Linnet]

"The godly" meaning that particular subset of Christians who held strictly to Calvin's doctrines. It was a less hospitable environment for dissenters even if they were orthodox by the standards of the creeds (men like Sebastian Castellio). For heretics Calvin's Genevan Theocracy could be considerably hotter than heaven (e.g., Miguel Servetus). Were Calvin and his government to be in power today I imagine many of us here would be on the hit list.

I am not a Calvinist I am a believer in the doctrines of Free Grace and opposed to the doctrines of Freewill.

However you can hardly call the Calvinists of 16th century Geneva a subset. What a haven Geneva was in those days for the godly, for the persecuted of the various European nations including Britain. The first printings of the bible in English come from Geneva including that forerunner of all sound biblical texts Tynedall.

Geneva must have been heaven on earth for the godly. The protestant movement was nurtured and grew strong there. It was hardly in opposition to the general consensus of popular opinion that the civil laws were passed. I believe in the division between civil law and church laws and yet when the people ARE godly they may well pass civil laws which are in agreement with the common conception of godliness.

Servetus for example [we are sure he roused the not inconsiderable ire of Calvin] and yet he was in transgression of the civil law.

In short Calvin was of the overwhelming consensus and cannot be portrayed as despotic.

 

[Desert Reign]

Calvinism is nothing more than the Bible. Period.

I thought this was a debate forum.

 

[Desert Reign]

I am not a Calvinist I am a believer in the doctrines of Free Grace and opposed to the doctrines of Freewill.

However you can hardly call the Calvinists of 16th century Geneva a subset. What a haven Geneva was in those days for the godly, for the persecuted of the various European nations including Britain. The first printings of the bible in English come from Geneva including that forerunner of all sound biblical texts Tynedall.

Geneva must have been heaven on earth for the godly. The protestant movement was nurtured and grew strong there. It was hardly in opposition to the general consensus of popular opinion that the civil laws were passed. I believe in the division between civil law and church laws and yet when the people ARE godly they may well pass civil laws which are in agreement with the common conception of godliness.

Servetus for example [we are sure he roused the not inconsiderable ire of Calvin] and yet he was in transgression of the civil law.

In short Calvin was of the overwhelming consensus and cannot be portrayed as despotic.

So what you are saying is 'Calvin wasn't a bad guy, therefore I am right'?

 

[Totton Linnet]

I think Calvin was wrong in the matter of predestination unto damnation, he was a man, not an apostle but he was certainly responsible for a great work.

As you know I am ALWAYS right.

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

I think Calvin was wrong in the matter of predestination unto damnation, he was a man, not an apostle but he was certainly responsible for a great work.

As you know I am ALWAYS right.

Well Calvin the man is certainly different than Calvinism. The way I look at it, we are all sinners deserving of damnation. But from eternity past, God has chosen or elected some to be recipients of His grace and mercy. I believe God chose me.

Posted from the TOL App!

 

[Desert Reign]

Well Calvin the man is certainly different than Calvinism.

Another great logical argument there.
Does this mean that you condemn Calvin's actions? Give me a straight answer!

The way I look at it,

You sound like a man of authority.

we are all sinners deserving of damnation. But from eternity past, God has chosen or elected some to be recipients of His grace and mercy. I believe God chose me.

You don't sound all that sure. Has God chosen me?

 

[Totton Linnet]

Well Calvin the man is certainly different than Calvinism. The way I look at it, we are all sinners deserving of damnation. But from eternity past, God has chosen or elected some to be recipients of His grace and mercy. I believe God chose me.

Posted from the TOL App!

I hate to sound so simple, but to me it IS simple.

Adam sinned, God did not predestine that, He foreknew it and so predestined salvation. It is predestined in the way He has created man, placing both the righteous and the wicked together in the loins of one man Adam....history played out what was always so. Cain was wicked and Abel righteous.

What Calvin was not always good at seeing was God's mercy...in that by placing man in families the WHOLE race is benefitted, the wicked and the righteous together so far as this earthly life is concerned.

The saved will certainly be saved, for they were righteous and declared to be so from the founding of the world and found to be so in fact...all others will be judged with equity.

This judgement with equity points to a wider mercy.

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

I hate to sound so simple, but to me it IS simple.

Adam sinned, God did not predestine that, He foreknew it and so predestined salvation. It is predestined in the way He has created man, placing both the righteous and the wicked together in the loins of one man Adam....history played out what was always so. Cain was wicked and Abel righteous.

What Calvin was not always good at seeing was God's mercy...in that by placing man in families the WHOLE race is benefitted, the wicked and the righteous together so far as this earthly life is concerned.

The saved will certainly be saved, for they were righteous and declared to be so from the founding of the world and found to be so in fact...all others will be judged with equity.

This judgement with equity points to a wider mercy.

You seemed to have forgotten that the path is wide that leads to destruction. If anyone is to be judged by their works, they have already joined those on the wide path. You've attempted to recreate God as you want Him to be, not who He is. He will have mercy on whom He elects to have mercy on. Nothing you can do can change that.