Predestination is misunderstood...

[studier]

Many today are pursuing the lie of Christian Nationalism which has its foundation in Postmil Theonomy and a very good article which I highly recommend and argues against this eschatology while defending Amillennialism is found below.

A defense of Amillennialism against Postmillennialism

I let Christian Nationalists define what they mean by it. As with any such identifiers, there are variations. I was keeping up on Theonomy when it was being more widely discussed and was involved in several discussions when American Vision had a forum on their site.

Thanks. Will take a look at the article. I am watching some of the discussions within Preterism, which I think I mentioned. Do you pay attention to anyone in particular and/or do your own study?

 

[reneweddaybyday]

apologies for the delay in responding, studier ... I was away visiting family and returned to work having piled up in my absence ...

Actually, I have considered everything I've posted to you

ok ... so now you've had an opportunity to consider the articles you submitted.

• The Harmony of the Gospels book I linked for you disagrees with your belief that the Luke 11 event is the same one stated in Matthew and Mark. The author's footnotes provide an explanation of his reasoning, which make sense to me. I have considered and am not satisfied that Matthew and Mark and Luke are all dealing with the same event. I have seen some others that also disagree with you and some that agree with you but I've not seen their reasoning explained and you have not provided any reasoning that convinces me to believe as you do.

for the record, I am not trying to convince anyone to believe as I do. I am merely discussing what I read in Scripture.

• The excerpt from the article referenced in the NET Bible clearly disagrees with you in regard to who "your sons" are in Luke 11:19, and the NET Bible translators clearly consider the article writer's conclusion as worthy of consideration. So do many other publications as the same footnote shows up in many resources. To be clear, I would have read through the rest of the article if I was able to obtain it apart from paying for it, which as I recall ranged from $30 to a $few hundred. It's not available in the resources I do pay or have paid for and I looked through them all. Since the point re: "your sons" is clear from the NET Bible Notes, I saw no need to take this further than posting the Notes for your consideration as it's clear there are some solid resources that conclude you are or could be wrong in what you believe re: who "your sons" are. I have considered this point and I remain open to different views re: who "your sons" are. I currently see three possibilities for their identity.

Both Matthew and Luke record the same statement (which does not appear in Mark):

Matthew 12:27 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? therefore they shall be your judges.

Luke 11:19 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your sons cast them out? therefore shall they be your judges.

The words "your children" in Matthew and "your sons" in Luke are translated from the Greek words hymōn huios.

I do not find any record wherein Jesus referred to His disciples as His sons. He did refer to them as "My disciples" [Greek mou mathētēs in Matt 26:18, Mark 14:14, Luke 22:11, John 8:31].

However, if Jesus was referring to His disciples as His children, the Greek text would be mou huios [my sons]; however, in both Matthew and Luke the Greek text is hymōn huios [your sons].

At one point you stated "Maybe who the "sons" are is not really that important to Jesus' argument." I do not believe these are idle words.

Jesus stated that the sons of the pharisees (in Matt) ... or the sons of whoever He was speaking to in Luke ... would be their judge.

If the sons of the pharisees (or whoever) agreed with the pharisees (or whoever) that Jesus cast out devils by beelzebub, they would condemn themselves.

If they judged the claim to be false, they would condemn the pharisees (or whoever) for making a false claim.

• I have mentioned other differences in Luke compared to Matthew and Mark. I have considered and have concluded that the differences are worthy of more study.
• I have looked many times at and have considered the logic of what Jesus says in the event to be challenging - actually quite challenging once I start posing many questions to the logic to understand what He means.

yes, the record is challenging.

I believe one statement I discussed related to Jesus speaking to the pharisees and I indicated that when Jesus used the term the finger of God, the pharisees would have known Jesus recalled the record in Exodus.

From Pulpit Commentary (bold mine):​

​

Verse 20. - But if I with the finger of God cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you. Here Jesus points to a fact well known and thoroughly established. There was no question here; the most obstinate cases of possession had yielded to that "finger" be spoke of here; the fiercest of the, alas! (then) great company of the insane, at the bidding of that quiet, humble Rabbi, for ever shook off the spirit of madness, in whatever form of terrible possession it had been dwelling in his body. There was no question here; the only point raised by his enemies how had that quiet Rabbi done these strange, mighty works - Jesus had answered; and now draws a picture of one of these acts of his. The "finger of God" in St. Matthew, where the same or a similar discourse is related, is called the "Spirit of God." The expression is strange, but is one not unusual in ancient Hebrew phraseology. So the Egyptian magicians said to Pharaoh, "This is the finger of God" (Exodus 8:19). The ten commandments are described as written on the two tables of stone with the "finger of God." "You have seen by what power the devils obey me; yea, the kingdom of God, for which you are waiting and looking, lo, it is come upon you." Luke 11:20​

From your side, I don't at the moment recall any major reasoning from you other than you believe something to be true.

Thanks for your time. I'd prefer to move on from where our discussion has headed. If you'd like to actually discuss the content of the Scripture and the logic of Jesus' argument in Luke 11:17-22 in some detail, please let me know.

we can continue to discuss ... or not discuss ... whatever is your preference.
.

 

[studier]

apologies for the delay in responding, studier ... I was away visiting family and returned to work having piled up in my absence ...

Thanks for the apology, but not necessary. We all have lives and things to pay attention to.

I've moved on though. No offense intended.

 

[reneweddaybyday]

I've moved on though. No offense intended.

ok ... no offense taken ... however, next time you say:

Thanks for your time. I'd prefer to move on from where our discussion has headed.

you should not include:

If you'd like to actually discuss the content of the Scripture and the logic of Jesus' argument in Luke 11:17-22 in some detail, please let me know.

... just sayin'


1 Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
.

 

[Genez]

Thanks. I live under caution of what men teach about anything from the Text. Honestly, the more I've learned of the manifold views of men and the more I've studied (and taught) the Text, the more I simply rest on the foundation of being in faith and submission to Jesus who is YHWH's Christ and therefore has, as He said, all authority in Heaven and on earth (let alone all knowledge). This is the basis for what He said in John 4 about the new era that God was instituting - the bowing in obeisance ("worship" is not a great translation) to God in Spirit and Truth.

Wrangling about this or that doctrine or taking part in this or that "...ism" has just been a waste of time and misplaced allegiances among men. The divisions in our day are seemingly endless and everybody thinks their interpretation is correct and fights for it, mostly with fallacious argumentation techniques. Many in the pews fight from an overview of principles they've been taught, but few are very versed in actually using Scripture in context.

In my first-year Greek decades ago I asked the professor what the issue is these 2,000 years later. He calmly and politely said, "eisegesis". Everybody thinks the Spirit is teaching them. He's called the Spirit of Truth. There's a problem with men. Nothing new. As some in some in these forums have rightly said, all in the Church are not necessarily the Church. And that's just one issue among others.

RBT would study the text from the original languages and historical background for about eight hours a day... (he loved to study) ....

And, then get himself into his car and drive to teach in church - 6 evenings a week! Sometimes, twice a day.

He was constantly studying. Yes, he well knew that he would be actually standing before the Lord to give account,
and that God was using him to fill up a dire deficiency of good in depth teaching that we lack almost everywhere today.

It was supernaturally abnormal what he did.

Many pastors would order his lessons for their own private study. That is how I learned about him at a Bible college when I realized that many on staff were well aware of Robert Thieme's teachings. Not everyone would agree with all he taught, but that became a SPRINGBOARD for them to teach with their own thinking.

 

[studier]

ok ... no offense taken ... however, next time you say:





you should not include:



... just sayin'


1 Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
.

You've really not added anything to what you said before. I've read the verses, looked at Jesus' logic, some commentaries, some articles that provide some input beyond what commentary you posted. As I've stated a few times, I think part of the answer to the interpretation may be in the logic Jesus used re: a divided kingdom. There is a simple way to view it and a not so simple way to view it. So, I've moved on after your delay and repetition. I'll take into consideration your suggestion for the future and possibly include the typical disclaimer that this offer will remain open until such and such a date.

 

[studier]

RBT would study the text from the original languages and historical background for about eight hours a day... (he loved to study) ....

And, then get himself into his car and drive to teach in church - 6 evenings a week! Sometimes, twice a day.

He was constantly studying. Yes, he well knew that he would be actually standing before the Lord to give account,
and that God was using him to fill up a dire deficiency of good in depth teaching that we lack almost everywhere today.

It was supernaturally abnormal what he did.

Many pastors would order his lessons for their own private study. That is how I learned about him at a Bible college when I realized that many on staff were well aware of Robert Thieme's teachings. Not everyone would agree with all he taught, but that became a SPRINGBOARD for them to teach with their own thinking.

I'm going to send you a private message as soon as I can get this system to accept a membership to enable me to do so.

 

[studier]

Many today are pursuing the lie of Christian Nationalism which has its foundation in Postmil Theonomy and a very good article which I highly recommend and argues against this eschatology while defending Amillennialism is found below.

A defense of Amillennialism against Postmillennialism

I read it. I've read arguments like it before.

His Amil argument really boils down to his last chapter - spiritual or carnal as he puts it. IMO it would have been a bit cleaner if he'd have more clearly admitted that Amil does share some Premil concepts rather than have the Postmil guys state it for him and frame it as pessimil and defeatist.

I haven't really focused on eschatology - the end of the story anyway - for decades. Knowing it was not going to be my focus and that I had come to reject the DispPremil I was trained under, I read more deeply the other schools of thought while I studied and taught other things. I concluded I could focus on what a Christian is to do to live in God's will and that He would take care of history and let me know what else He wanted of me and when.

Clearly Reconstruction and Theonomy are not in the Amil track, but, if I may ask, how do you view any responsibilities you may have in Australia as a Christian and citizen there? There's more than a small contingency in the US that does not involve itself in the political process in "Satan's world". What is the responsibility of salt and light in the so-called democratic process I routinely label as "experiment" - one among the many in history.

Then I'd ask you how you see the the state of the world in regard to the time of history and how you distance yourself - assuming you do - from the rapture groups and how they see things - or from any school for that matter.

 

[maxamir]

Go away, sir. My Lord says I should have nothing to do with you.

Titus 3:10-11​

​

Warn a divisive person once, and then warn them a second time. ​

After that, have nothing to do with them. You may be sure that such ​

people are warped and sinful; they are self-condemned.​

Its not very nice when you become the brunt of a Christian's obedience....

You might even try to turn the tables on them and tell them they are rude. .....
Gaslighting tends to do things like that.

​

1 Thessalonians 4:15-18​

​

For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain ​

until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those who are asleep. ​

For the Lord Himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of an ​

archangel, and with the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first. ​

Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the ​

clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And thus we shall always be with the Lord. ​

Therefore comfort one another with these words.​

Christians are to comfort one another with the thought of the rapture.
You? Thanks!

Instead are acting like an agent not of God, one who wants to destroy (if he could) a great comfort that you will never know.


You have the problem, sir. I pray you repent before you leave this earth.

I have nothing to prove to you.
You would have to be absolutely too dumb to reason with to want to place yourself in such a position of doing evil.
Bullies are always dumb.

Have a nice Day.

I'm putting you on Ignore.


..................

2Ti 4:1 I do fully testify, then, before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who is about to judge living and dead at his manifestation and his reign—
2Ti 4:2 preach the word; be earnest in season, out of season, convict, rebuke, exhort, in all long-suffering and teaching,
2Ti 4:3 for there shall be a season when the sound teaching they will not suffer, but according to their own desires to themselves they shall heap up teachers—itching in the hearing,
2Ti 4:4 and indeed, from the truth the hearing they shall turn away, and to the fables they shall be turned aside.

 

[maxamir]

Thanks. I live under caution of what men teach about anything from the Text. Honestly, the more I've learned of the manifold views of men and the more I've studied (and taught) the Text, the more I simply rest on the foundation of being in faith and submission to Jesus who is YHWH's Christ and therefore has, as He said, all authority in Heaven and on earth (let alone all knowledge). This is the basis for what He said in John 4 about the new era that God was instituting - the bowing in obeisance ("worship" is not a great translation) to God in Spirit and Truth.

Wrangling about this or that doctrine or taking part in this or that "...ism" has just been a waste of time and misplaced allegiances among men. The divisions in our day are seemingly endless and everybody thinks their interpretation is correct and fights for it, mostly with fallacious argumentation techniques. Many in the pews fight from an overview of principles they've been taught, but few are very versed in actually using Scripture in context.

In my first-year Greek decades ago I asked the professor what the issue is these 2,000 years later. He calmly and politely said, "eisegesis". Everybody thinks the Spirit is teaching them. He's called the Spirit of Truth. There's a problem with men. Nothing new. As some in some in these forums have rightly said, all in the Church are not necessarily the Church. And that's just one issue among others.

I agree but need to mention that God does ordain people to teach truth through the Scriptures He has given, unfortunately many today twist it for their own gain.

A good test is to look at is the Gospel they proclaim. No trust should be given to any who did not proclaim the whole counsel of God.

 

[tribesman]

"For He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world ​

to be holy and blameless in His presence." Ephesians 1:4​

Is Moses saved? Yes.....
Is David saved? Yes.....
Is Isaiah saved? Yes....

Were they chosen to be the body of Christ? To be His Church?
No....

No? Of course they were. You say no because you obviously believe in salvation outside of Christ. Tragic.

 

[maxamir]

I let Christian Nationalists define what they mean by it. As with any such identifiers, there are variations. I was keeping up on Theonomy when it was being more widely discussed and was involved in several discussions when American Vision had a forum on their site.

Thanks. Will take a look at the article. I am watching some of the discussions within Preterism, which I think I mentioned. Do you pay attention to anyone in particular and/or do your own study?

I have followed and read many of Gary DeMar's articles and used to follow American Vision and that is why I recommend you read the article I linked to because it is a direct response to DeMar's attack against Amillennialism.

I have studied eschatology for decades and preached through Revelation and can recommend some books, one of which is by Herman Hoeksema below, who preached through Revelation twice and considered it his favourite book of the Bible.

Behold He Cometh - Rev. Herman Hoeksema

Another book which is on the Olivet Discourse and focuses upon the twofold question answered by Christ, which I thoroughly recommend and is found below where you can read the intro and first chapter for free.

Called to Watch for Christ's Return by Martyn McGeown

 

[Genez]

No? Of course they were. You say no because you obviously believe in salvation outside of Christ. Tragic.

What's tragic is how you miss what is being said... Dogmatically so.

 

[maxamir]

I read it. I've read arguments like it before.

His Amil argument really boils down to his last chapter - spiritual or carnal as he puts it. IMO it would have been a bit cleaner if he'd have more clearly admitted that Amil does share some Premil concepts rather than have the Postmil guys state it for him and frame it as pessimil and defeatist.

I haven't really focused on eschatology - the end of the story anyway - for decades. Knowing it was not going to be my focus and that I had come to reject the DispPremil I was trained under, I read more deeply the other schools of thought while I studied and taught other things. I concluded I could focus on what a Christian is to do to live in God's will and that He would take care of history and let me know what else He wanted of me and when.

Clearly Reconstruction and Theonomy are not in the Amil track, but, if I may ask, how do you view any responsibilities you may have in Australia as a Christian and citizen there? There's more than a small contingency in the US that does not involve itself in the political process in "Satan's world". What is the responsibility of salt and light in the so-called democratic process I routinely label as "experiment" - one among the many in history.

Then I'd ask you how you see the the state of the world in regard to the time of history and how you distance yourself - assuming you do - from the rapture groups and how they see things - or from any school for that matter.

Like many I started off as a Premil and then ignorantly called myself a Panmil for a while until I committed to study Scripture on this most important issue which affects the way a person views the world as is currently clearly seen geopolitically.

I came to reject Postmil Theonomy because I found no evidence for it in the New Testament where Christ confirmed that His kingdom was not of this world. Christians are indeed called to be salt and lights while here but this is not our home as the heroes of the faith testified to in Hebrews 11.

Our duty while here is to make disciples by lovingly proclaiming the Gospel to all nations knowing that it is an aroma of life unto life to some and to others it is an aroma of death unto death. Christians are called to be holy and separate from this evil world which I believe is soon to be destroyed by fire and are commanded to not be friends with it or love it or somehow think that God's plan is to bring about a golden carnal age before His return by getting Christians into positions of power and force nations to submit to OT law.

We are called to herald the great victory that Christ has wrought and that He is ruling right now in His kingdom people who are more than conquerors through Him.

 

[tribesman]

What's tragic is how you miss what is being said... Dogmatically so.

Dogmatically? Your dispensational error is most certainly apparent. How do people get saved outside of Christ? Tell us!

 

[Genez]

Dogmatically? Your dispensational error is most certainly apparent. How do people get saved outside of Christ? Tell us!

OT believers were saved like Abraham was saved. By believing on the Lord God ... later known as the Lord God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
To believe on the Lord Jesus Christ to be saved was to come in a different dispensation.

Not everyone who believed and was saved throughout history is designated the Church.
Only since the Church age began are we now are told to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ.
The Church is the Bride of Christ.
Chosen "in Him."
Just like Eve was hidden in Adam until she was to be revealed.

Not everyone saved throughout history is designated to become the Bride of Christ.

That is dispensational correctness.

 

[studier]

I agree but need to mention that God does ordain people to teach truth through the Scriptures He has given, unfortunately many today twist it for their own gain.

No need to mention. Absolutely true on both counts.

A good test is to look at is the Gospel they proclaim. No trust should be given to any who did not proclaim the whole counsel of God.

The whole counsel of God re: the full scope of the Gospel = the full counsel of God? Yes, even the basics have become oversimplified so as to become distorted IMO. If the foundation is not set in place correctly, there is no solid structure thereafter. I came to the point in many face-to-face discussions where I found it necessary to be checking foundations. What I would find surprised me at first. Many knew the favorite mantras of their respective denominations, which was sufficient in their minds. Few even knew that "Christ" is a title and has meaning that needs to be understood. There was a lot of professed belief, going to certain popular & big churches, and live like unbelievers. It wasn't good to be around.

 

[studier]

I have followed and read many of Gary DeMar's articles and used to follow American Vision and that is why I recommend you read the article I linked to because it is a direct response to DeMar's attack against Amillennialism.

I have studied eschatology for decades and preached through Revelation and can recommend some books, one of which is by Herman Hoeksema below, who preached through Revelation twice and considered it his favourite book of the Bible.

Behold He Cometh - Rev. Herman Hoeksema

Another book which is on the Olivet Discourse and focuses upon the twofold question answered by Christ, which I thoroughly recommend and is found below where you can read the intro and first chapter for free.

Called to Watch for Christ's Return by Martyn McGeown

Thanks again. Maybe it's time for me to focus on eschatology. We'll see. I have not settled into a camp and have been watching and reading them instead. I'm admittedly less read in Amil and really not focused on anyone (like AV) in particular.

I did look in on AV awhile back and De Mar was doing a 25-session series with Kim Burgess which he turned into a book. Burgess in one respect is working to try to settle some of the disputes in Preterism. It was an interesting study more in the line of a Biblical Theology and close focus on some of the language of the NC to grasp the actual flow of what was taking place in the AD30-70 period when the NC was being written. It's the first of 2 parts and hits on several issues, one being the role of the Spirit, which has some correlation to the last part of the article you sent. I appreciated the lack of the normal focus and wrangling over the major eschatological sections of Scripture.

 

[studier]

Like many I started off as a Premil and then ignorantly called myself a Panmil for a while until I committed to study Scripture on this most important issue which affects the way a person views the world as is currently clearly seen geopolitically.

I came to reject Postmil Theonomy because I found no evidence for it in the New Testament where Christ confirmed that His kingdom was not of this world. Christians are indeed called to be salt and lights while here but this is not our home as the heroes of the faith testified to in Hebrews 11.

Our duty while here is to make disciples by lovingly proclaiming the Gospel to all nations knowing that it is an aroma of life unto life to some and to others it is an aroma of death unto death. Christians are called to be holy and separate from this evil world which I believe is soon to be destroyed by fire and are commanded to not be friends with it or love it or somehow think that God's plan is to bring about a golden carnal age before His return by getting Christians into positions of power and force nations to submit to OT law.

We are called to herald the great victory that Christ has wrought and that He is ruling right now in His kingdom people who are more than conquerors through Him.

Unlike your experience in part, while steeped in Premil I'd seen enough and learned enough to ask not to be called a Dispensationalist. With so many variations in all the themes, I did not like the labels. Once a label is applied others think they know everything we think.

The thing about Theonomy that intrigued me was the question it was based upon, By What Standard? I didn't focus on the Postmil goal for the world. I focused on there being a Standard that fractured, denominational Christianity might attain to. Law has been and still is a big problem for Christians. It remains an interest of mine and has been one of the topics of focus that pushed eschatology back.

Your paragraph above re: our duty in proclaiming the Gospel would require much more discussion for me. As you mentioned before re: teaching the whole counsel of God, the Gospel in its full scope is a big topic encompassing the entire NC let alone the rest of Scripture. And when we get into what being holy and separate means and includes, we inevitably deal with Law and many other topics. I've not seen the necessity of taking this instruction into the finality of eschatological matters. I found the scope of the Gospel getting people (including myself) properly founded, growing to maturity, then proceeding from maturity into being more and more conformed to Christ to be enough of a challenge. IMO if all Christians were doing this, however our Lord would use this in the world would be up to Him. Arriving at His Judgement seat and receiving a "Well Done!" would seem a life well lived. Such a life would have the effects on the world that I think He desires.

I think this aligns with your last paragraph. Evidence of His Kingdom in the world is His People, holy as you say, separate or distinct as you say, conformed to His Righteousness, thus saved from sin to whatever experiential degree stemming from their position in Him and union with Him - in Spirit.

Thanks for the discussion.

 

[Genez]

No need to mention. Absolutely true on both counts.



The whole counsel of God re: the full scope of the Gospel = the full counsel of God? Yes, even the basics have become oversimplified so as to become distorted IMO. If the foundation is not set in place correctly, there is no solid structure thereafter. I came to the point in many face-to-face discussions where I found it necessary to be checking foundations. What I would find surprised me at first. Many knew the favorite mantras of their respective denominations, which was sufficient in their minds. Few even knew that "Christ" is a title and has meaning that needs to be understood. There was a lot of professed belief, going to certain popular & big churches, and live like unbelievers. It wasn't good to be around.

Those who teach false doctrine are the first to strongly condemn false teachers.... Irony.
They will leave their trail of irony droppings that one must be careful to keep their own sandals off of.

Why do some feel an affinity for false teachings?
And, God does not stop them?

So, God can weed their intentions.
To be out in the open and clearly seen without denial on their part.

Why?

It makes the Evaluation of the Saints to go smoothly without any more appeals for a retrial.

The reason we see the mess we have been deployed into is because of Satan's Appeal trial that God
granted him. Granted because of the knowledge that needed to first be made known before the sentence
could not be argued any more.

That is why we are presently caught in the spiritual crossfire between the powers of darkness
and our Defense Attorney Jesus Christ.

“If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first." John 15:18

Some will want to attack the teaching of the Rapture because it gives comfort to those who Jesus loves.
Satan hates Jesus, and wants to hurt Jesus by proxy by making those whom the Lord loves to be miserable.

Demons scout out among carnal believers and unbelievers those whom will feel one with their demonic
resentment of the beauty of God's plan. They will become proud agents of spreading false doctrine as to
try to hurt the Lord by proxy.

When anyone defends sound doctrinal thinking? That one will receive hatred they harbor in their hearts for the Lord.
For he became the word of God made flesh!

The more sound doctrine we have in our possession?
And is being lived out in our life?
The more their hatred for the Lord must seep out sent in our direction.....

That negative realty grants us an even greater opportunity for more understanding by grace to become more and more
transformed in our souls to manifest His thinking...

Its the plan. False doctrine is the result as an attempt to thwart the plan they can not stop.

They Hate the Lord because they know they can not win. In spite of that reality?
They will keep trying as a result of developing a form of mental illness that might be classified as spiritual psychosis.

Enjoy the ride! !