predestination vs freewill
- Thread starter Ivon
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Yes - there is much more that could be said about this often misused verse. Let me point out a few others:
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life.
1) John 3:16 - is not an independent verse stuck in the middle of nowhere. It is within the conversation Jesus was having with Nicodemus. We must now forget about chapter breaks and verse numbers and see the conversation as a whole.
2) Jesus told Nicodemus that believers must be "born Again" before we get to John 3:16 and Nicodemus was criticized by the Lord for not knowing this Truth and calling himself a teacher. (John 3:10). He then continues His conversation with him.
3) John 3:16 - is then book ended by John 3:18 and John 3:21, only then does this conversation end.
John 3:18 He that is believing on him is not judged: he that is believing not hath been judged already, because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God.
John 3:21 But he that doeth the truth cometh to the light, that his works may be made manifest, that they have been wrought in God.
4) John 3:16 - is erroneously used as an "invitation", as if it is speaking in the "future tense". This is not grammatically correct and shows ignorance of the original language. Let's break it down and emphasize the verb tenses.
John 3:16 For God so loved (Aorist.Active.Indicative - past tense action) the world, that he gave (Aorist.Active.Indicative - past tense action) his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth (Present.Active.Participle - present tense action) on (Accusative of cause) him should not perish, (Aorist.middle.Subjunctive - past tense action) but have (Present.Active.Subjunctive - present tense action) eternal life.
Let's break it down further: - There is no invitation or future tense application of this verse. Jesus was stating a FACT to Nicodemus. He said to him - God so loved - somewhere in the past - the world, that He gave - somewhere in the past - His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth - right now, at this very moment is believing - on - because of - Him should not perish, - in themselves, to cause oneself to perish (because of the middle voice) - but have - is presently having - eternal life.
So if we magnify the verb tenses, John 3:16 would read like this:
John 3:16 For God so had loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever is now believing because of him shall not perish for themselves, but is in possession of eternal life.
Took a while to put this together, that's why my response was so slow.
John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life.
1) John 3:16 - is not an independent verse stuck in the middle of nowhere. It is within the conversation Jesus was having with Nicodemus. We must now forget about chapter breaks and verse numbers and see the conversation as a whole.
2) Jesus told Nicodemus that believers must be "born Again" before we get to John 3:16 and Nicodemus was criticized by the Lord for not knowing this Truth and calling himself a teacher. (John 3:10). He then continues His conversation with him.
3) John 3:16 - is then book ended by John 3:18 and John 3:21, only then does this conversation end.
John 3:18 He that is believing on him is not judged: he that is believing not hath been judged already, because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God.
John 3:21 But he that doeth the truth cometh to the light, that his works may be made manifest, that they have been wrought in God.
4) John 3:16 - is erroneously used as an "invitation", as if it is speaking in the "future tense". This is not grammatically correct and shows ignorance of the original language. Let's break it down and emphasize the verb tenses.
John 3:16 For God so loved (Aorist.Active.Indicative - past tense action) the world, that he gave (Aorist.Active.Indicative - past tense action) his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth (Present.Active.Participle - present tense action) on (Accusative of cause) him should not perish, (Aorist.middle.Subjunctive - past tense action) but have (Present.Active.Subjunctive - present tense action) eternal life.
Let's break it down further: - There is no invitation or future tense application of this verse. Jesus was stating a FACT to Nicodemus. He said to him - God so loved - somewhere in the past - the world, that He gave - somewhere in the past - His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth - right now, at this very moment is believing - on - because of - Him should not perish, - in themselves, to cause oneself to perish (because of the middle voice) - but have - is presently having - eternal life.
So if we magnify the verb tenses, John 3:16 would read like this:
John 3:16 For God so had loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever is now believing because of him shall not perish for themselves, but is in possession of eternal life.
Took a while to put this together, that's why my response was so slow.
No. There are not three. There are one.
Jesus said, when you have seen me you have seen the father. Jesus said, I and the father are one. God, in the old testament, said he is the only one and beside him there is no savior.
Tritheism is paganism, not Christianity.
Jesus never taught there are three in heaven. Emmanuel, God with us. Emmanuel was God.
In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God and the word was God.....And the word became flesh and dwelt among us.
That passage alone absolutely without doubt crushes the pagan tritheism myth to powder.
Hear O Israel, our God our God is one.
Not three.
God is the holy spirit. The holy spirit was the word made flesh, Jesus. One. Only one.
Jesus said, when you have seen me you have seen the father. Jesus said, I and the father are one. God, in the old testament, said he is the only one and beside him there is no savior.
Tritheism is paganism, not Christianity.
Jesus never taught there are three in heaven. Emmanuel, God with us. Emmanuel was God.
In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God and the word was God.....And the word became flesh and dwelt among us.
That passage alone absolutely without doubt crushes the pagan tritheism myth to powder.
Hear O Israel, our God our God is one.
Not three.
God is the holy spirit. The holy spirit was the word made flesh, Jesus. One. Only one.
Well He - God - could have been speaking within the God-head. The Father, Son and Holy Spirit having a conversation between themselves.
"LET US...", meaning all three persons of the one God, which I think is more reasonable, than to think God was counseling with His other created beings - the Angels.
"LET US...", meaning all three persons of the one God, which I think is more reasonable, than to think God was counseling with His other created beings - the Angels.
-
1
- Show all
Ohhh, dear - you are a Unitarian!!! That will never hold water in the Scriptures. However, I have known some men, that have created great works, that were Unitarians. Thayer for instance, who wrote a great Greek Lexicon. But in all honesty, Thayer did not let his Unitarian views, get in the way of seeing the possibility of a Triune God. He speaks of this fact in his Greek works but never changed his view, as far as I know. One God in three persons. 1x1x1 = 1.
No, I'm Christian. Which means I'm not one who believes in the pagan Tritheists heresy.
Blaspheming God isn't honest. God repeatedly says he is one and there is no other. Trinitarians are not of God's thinking. That's their shame.
Now I understand why you don't understand the scriptures. You look at them through a skewed lens seeing three acting out in them, when there has only ever been one.
Blaspheming God isn't honest. God repeatedly says he is one and there is no other. Trinitarians are not of God's thinking. That's their shame.
Now I understand why you don't understand the scriptures. You look at them through a skewed lens seeing three acting out in them, when there has only ever been one.
No problem, awelight - great reply and I appreciate it. There is one other thing that always comes to my mind when I read 3:16 & 17
but I'm usually hesitant to mention it because it usually upsets people..... but I'll throw it out now and buckle my seat belt. That is,
the world mentioned in the verses may be the world to come, not this current world. Why? For several reasons but one of the more important ones is that this cosmos is to be destroyed by God so how then could He love it? God makes clear in the Bible that the apple of his eye is the New Holy City and the new Jerusalem, not those of this world but the next. With that in mind, to me, the verses then make sense and harmonize perfectly with other verses. There are other reasons but won't go into them now. Thanks again
but I'm usually hesitant to mention it because it usually upsets people..... but I'll throw it out now and buckle my seat belt. That is,
the world mentioned in the verses may be the world to come, not this current world. Why? For several reasons but one of the more important ones is that this cosmos is to be destroyed by God so how then could He love it? God makes clear in the Bible that the apple of his eye is the New Holy City and the new Jerusalem, not those of this world but the next. With that in mind, to me, the verses then make sense and harmonize perfectly with other verses. There are other reasons but won't go into them now. Thanks again
If you believe that God was talking to the Angels and do not see the Trinity in this conversation:
Gen_1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Then you would cause God to violate His own Holy Word:
Isa_40:13 Who hath directed the Spirit of the LORD, or being his counsellor hath taught him?
Rom 11:34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor?
Additionally, since Scripture teaches that Christ is both fully God and fully man- the Son of the living God - then whom was the Son praying to in John 17? How can Christ say that the Father and the Son are ONE, if there are not two distinct persons? And how can Christ send the Holy Spirit, (The Comforter), if the Spirit is not a distinct person? Also, If the Father and the Son and Holy Spirit are one in the same persons, then why did the Son have to leave in order for the Comforter to come?
Gen_1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
Then you would cause God to violate His own Holy Word:
Isa_40:13 Who hath directed the Spirit of the LORD, or being his counsellor hath taught him?
Rom 11:34 For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor?
Additionally, since Scripture teaches that Christ is both fully God and fully man- the Son of the living God - then whom was the Son praying to in John 17? How can Christ say that the Father and the Son are ONE, if there are not two distinct persons? And how can Christ send the Holy Spirit, (The Comforter), if the Spirit is not a distinct person? Also, If the Father and the Son and Holy Spirit are one in the same persons, then why did the Son have to leave in order for the Comforter to come?
-
1
- Show all
Nonsense.
If you want to defend the Trinity you hold to just prove God said he is three.
That's the mistake many make. They think God is a separate "person'. When the Bible tells us, God is Holy, God is Spirit. God is Holy Spirit.
And when we read John 1, it is impossible to defend that passage is in any wise referring to three.
Believe as you wish. When God's words don't reach you, I stand not a chance.
If you want to defend the Trinity you hold to just prove God said he is three.
That's the mistake many make. They think God is a separate "person'. When the Bible tells us, God is Holy, God is Spirit. God is Holy Spirit.
And when we read John 1, it is impossible to defend that passage is in any wise referring to three.
Believe as you wish. When God's words don't reach you, I stand not a chance.
No, you can't. Because my direction is supported by God's own words.
You should research how the Trinity came into the Bible. Trinity believers empower the Roman Polytheists of old to this day by fracturing the church with their false injection of Tritheism.
You're right. When you ignore God telling you there is only one, and Jesus doing the same, and you don't believe that, it is best to leave it here.
You should research how the Trinity came into the Bible. Trinity believers empower the Roman Polytheists of old to this day by fracturing the church with their false injection of Tritheism.
You're right. When you ignore God telling you there is only one, and Jesus doing the same, and you don't believe that, it is best to leave it here.
Wow, are you going to put me to work on this one. This is a deep subject you have opened. I love the question.
First, I think you are trying to move "world" to the future because of the abuses that some are teaching about these verses. Just an observation. But to the point.
The "world" cannot be future because John 3:16 said: ".. that God so LOVED the world and as I have shown this "love" was past tense and therefore, this world must also be past tense. So what world was this referring too?
Pulling in all of the Scriptures on this subject, I believe it is in reference to the world that God had originally planned to be "upright". As such, the world that was in the mind of God before He created and was marred by sin after creation. This takes us to before the fall of Adam. After all, did not God purpose to send His Son before the foundation of the world? Is not part of Christ's work, the redemption of all creation? (Rom. 8:19-22). Does not creation groan for the redemption of God's people because then it will be redeemed and lifted from the curse?
The word - "world" - has many meanings in Scripture, it can mean: the Earth, all of humanity, a particular group of people and a working system. When Scripture admonishes believers not to be a part of this world, it is referring to the system of this world, it's beliefs, likes and dislikes, (john 17:16; Rom.12:2) God loved, past tense, the world as he intended it, not what the fall made it. In the future, He will make it again, that which was intended through a re-creation of the universe and the removal of sin and the curse.
While it is true, that the judgement of the world is future, the emphasis of "world" in John 3:17, is that the object is the purpose of Christ's first advent. To bring about his redemptive work upon the Earth. In this case, the ones who inhabit the Earth. In this verse, there is no qualifier as to whom they are because that qualification came earlier, (John 3:3-9) and is given again in John 3:18 and 21. Remember, this is one complete conversation with Nicodemus, not individual, standalone comments.
As to your following statement: "..one of the more important ones is that this cosmos is to be destroyed by God...", raises a concern for me. Do you believe that God is going to "destroy" this creation as in permanently destroy it? In other words, wipe it out of existence or totally annihilate it? This goes to those who recently started teaching "Annihilationism". Even men like John MacArthur, are teaching an annihilationist point of view. However, this subject is deep and has become controversial. But in short, I do not believe the Scriptures teach this point of view. This is why?
I will try to keep this short, otherwise I will be all day writing a book.
First, there are two Hebrew words with different meanings. One means, to create something from nothing - this is creation. The other means, to create something from something - this would be recreation or a renewing but not a genuine creation. Interestingly, when in Genesis it talks about the world being made for man in six days, the Hebrew word for "recreation" is used, making something from something else. Just as man was fashioned from the dirt of this world. However, in Gen. 1:1, it is the word for Creation. To bring something into existence from nothing. This raises another topic altogether and we should save that for another time.
There are also Greek words that infer the idea of "recreation" and not "creation". To believe that Scripture teaches Annihilationism, opens the door to other teachings and meanings for the word destruction. For instance, there are those teaching that eternal destruction, means to be eternally wiped out of existence. Thus, they attempt to remove the horror of an eternal punishment. Likewise, those who teach the Annihilationist points, believe the whole Universe will be destroyed in some kind of nuclear implosion. Then God will "create" a new heaven and a new earth, (Rev. 21:1). The Greek word used here: καινὸν, does not mean something from nothing, it means to renew or refresh. See also how it is used in these other verses: Mat. 26:29; Lk. 5:36; Jn. 19:41; Eph. 2:15 & 4:24.
Therefore, the Cosmos will not be destroyed in some kind of annihilation but will be renewed or recreated apart from sin and the curse. It's renewal, will use the existing matter but will be rearranged, yet will still have recognizable features of this Earth. If it was going to be totally destroyed, then what would Christ had meant when He said the following:
Mat_5:5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.
Secondly, creation cannot be wiped out of existence, no more than anything God has created can be wiped out of existence. What God speaks - He brings into creation - and what He creates, are eternal with Him. Once God speaks something into existence, His words are eternal with Him. God cannot un-speak something once He speaks. Since He spoke the Universe into existence, He cannot un-speak it.
However, nothing stops Him from rearranging it. Just as He brought a new arrangement in us by the new birth. We were not wiped out of existence, then born anew, God took what was there and rearranged us; thus, we were born again. We also know, that when we put on the bodies not made by our hands but from God - this body, carries in it, the seed of what we once were, (1 Cor. 15:37, 42-44).
In conclusion, The world of John 3:16, is going back to God's plan and purpose to reveal His Glory to his own creation and how He is going to deal with the sin issue, even before He created anything. In John 17, the first use of the word world, is in the time of the speaker and the second use of the word world, is all three - past, present and future, since it takes in all of the revelation of God at different times. Some of the old writers therefore, call the first use of world -the world of the non-elect and the second use - the world of the Elect.
First, I think you are trying to move "world" to the future because of the abuses that some are teaching about these verses. Just an observation. But to the point.
The "world" cannot be future because John 3:16 said: ".. that God so LOVED the world and as I have shown this "love" was past tense and therefore, this world must also be past tense. So what world was this referring too?
Pulling in all of the Scriptures on this subject, I believe it is in reference to the world that God had originally planned to be "upright". As such, the world that was in the mind of God before He created and was marred by sin after creation. This takes us to before the fall of Adam. After all, did not God purpose to send His Son before the foundation of the world? Is not part of Christ's work, the redemption of all creation? (Rom. 8:19-22). Does not creation groan for the redemption of God's people because then it will be redeemed and lifted from the curse?
The word - "world" - has many meanings in Scripture, it can mean: the Earth, all of humanity, a particular group of people and a working system. When Scripture admonishes believers not to be a part of this world, it is referring to the system of this world, it's beliefs, likes and dislikes, (john 17:16; Rom.12:2) God loved, past tense, the world as he intended it, not what the fall made it. In the future, He will make it again, that which was intended through a re-creation of the universe and the removal of sin and the curse.
While it is true, that the judgement of the world is future, the emphasis of "world" in John 3:17, is that the object is the purpose of Christ's first advent. To bring about his redemptive work upon the Earth. In this case, the ones who inhabit the Earth. In this verse, there is no qualifier as to whom they are because that qualification came earlier, (John 3:3-9) and is given again in John 3:18 and 21. Remember, this is one complete conversation with Nicodemus, not individual, standalone comments.
As to your following statement: "..one of the more important ones is that this cosmos is to be destroyed by God...", raises a concern for me. Do you believe that God is going to "destroy" this creation as in permanently destroy it? In other words, wipe it out of existence or totally annihilate it? This goes to those who recently started teaching "Annihilationism". Even men like John MacArthur, are teaching an annihilationist point of view. However, this subject is deep and has become controversial. But in short, I do not believe the Scriptures teach this point of view. This is why?
I will try to keep this short, otherwise I will be all day writing a book.
First, there are two Hebrew words with different meanings. One means, to create something from nothing - this is creation. The other means, to create something from something - this would be recreation or a renewing but not a genuine creation. Interestingly, when in Genesis it talks about the world being made for man in six days, the Hebrew word for "recreation" is used, making something from something else. Just as man was fashioned from the dirt of this world. However, in Gen. 1:1, it is the word for Creation. To bring something into existence from nothing. This raises another topic altogether and we should save that for another time.
There are also Greek words that infer the idea of "recreation" and not "creation". To believe that Scripture teaches Annihilationism, opens the door to other teachings and meanings for the word destruction. For instance, there are those teaching that eternal destruction, means to be eternally wiped out of existence. Thus, they attempt to remove the horror of an eternal punishment. Likewise, those who teach the Annihilationist points, believe the whole Universe will be destroyed in some kind of nuclear implosion. Then God will "create" a new heaven and a new earth, (Rev. 21:1). The Greek word used here: καινὸν, does not mean something from nothing, it means to renew or refresh. See also how it is used in these other verses: Mat. 26:29; Lk. 5:36; Jn. 19:41; Eph. 2:15 & 4:24.
Therefore, the Cosmos will not be destroyed in some kind of annihilation but will be renewed or recreated apart from sin and the curse. It's renewal, will use the existing matter but will be rearranged, yet will still have recognizable features of this Earth. If it was going to be totally destroyed, then what would Christ had meant when He said the following:
Mat_5:5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.
Secondly, creation cannot be wiped out of existence, no more than anything God has created can be wiped out of existence. What God speaks - He brings into creation - and what He creates, are eternal with Him. Once God speaks something into existence, His words are eternal with Him. God cannot un-speak something once He speaks. Since He spoke the Universe into existence, He cannot un-speak it.
However, nothing stops Him from rearranging it. Just as He brought a new arrangement in us by the new birth. We were not wiped out of existence, then born anew, God took what was there and rearranged us; thus, we were born again. We also know, that when we put on the bodies not made by our hands but from God - this body, carries in it, the seed of what we once were, (1 Cor. 15:37, 42-44).
In conclusion, The world of John 3:16, is going back to God's plan and purpose to reveal His Glory to his own creation and how He is going to deal with the sin issue, even before He created anything. In John 17, the first use of the word world, is in the time of the speaker and the second use of the word world, is all three - past, present and future, since it takes in all of the revelation of God at different times. Some of the old writers therefore, call the first use of world -the world of the non-elect and the second use - the world of the Elect.
-
1
- Show all
I disagree.
Because Jesus was God, as he said many times. That means there was the one and only God with us as Emmanuel and who was God, The Word, made flesh.
You do know that Emmanuel, Jesus, Yeshua, figures prominently in the Old Testament?
Isaiah 7
The Sign of Immanuel
(Matthew 1:18–25)
10Again the LORD spoke to Ahaz, saying, 11“Ask for a sign from the LORD your God, whether from the depths of Sheol or the heights of heaven.”
12But Ahaz replied, “I will not ask; I will not test the LORD.”
13Then Isaiah said, “Hear now, O house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of men? Will you try the patience of my God as well? 14Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call Him Immanuel. 15 By the time He knows enough to reject evil and choose good, He will be eating curds and honey. 16For before the boy knows enough to reject evil and choose good, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste.
Matthew 1:23"Behold, the virgin will hold in womb, and will bring forth a son, and they will call His name Immanuel" which is, being translated, "God with us."
I know someone who thinks the spirit that was allowed to enter the mortal child Jesus was sent by God into the newborn. Because that spirit was God's slave. After Jesus ascension back to the father that image of Jesus took up with God at his right hand. The slave spirit returned into the realm of God's Heaven.
Find that one in the scripture.
They couldn't either but that's what they live and believe.
Why is it so hard to grasp God predestined, predetermined, all things according to his will and plan?
According to some 27% of the Bible is prophecy.
God's informing his chosen of things to come.
What is prophecy save for God's predestinating all things?
Because Jesus was God, as he said many times. That means there was the one and only God with us as Emmanuel and who was God, The Word, made flesh.
You do know that Emmanuel, Jesus, Yeshua, figures prominently in the Old Testament?
Isaiah 7
The Sign of Immanuel
(Matthew 1:18–25)
10Again the LORD spoke to Ahaz, saying, 11“Ask for a sign from the LORD your God, whether from the depths of Sheol or the heights of heaven.”
12But Ahaz replied, “I will not ask; I will not test the LORD.”
13Then Isaiah said, “Hear now, O house of David! Is it not enough to try the patience of men? Will you try the patience of my God as well? 14Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, the virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call Him Immanuel. 15 By the time He knows enough to reject evil and choose good, He will be eating curds and honey. 16For before the boy knows enough to reject evil and choose good, the land of the two kings you dread will be laid waste.
Matthew 1:23"Behold, the virgin will hold in womb, and will bring forth a son, and they will call His name Immanuel" which is, being translated, "God with us."
I know someone who thinks the spirit that was allowed to enter the mortal child Jesus was sent by God into the newborn. Because that spirit was God's slave. After Jesus ascension back to the father that image of Jesus took up with God at his right hand. The slave spirit returned into the realm of God's Heaven.
Find that one in the scripture.
They couldn't either but that's what they live and believe.
Why is it so hard to grasp God predestined, predetermined, all things according to his will and plan?
According to some 27% of the Bible is prophecy.
God's informing his chosen of things to come.
What is prophecy save for God's predestinating all things?
Yes, Jesus's finished work on the cross secured eternal life for all of those that his Father gave to him and none will be lost, but he will raise them up at the last day. Christ's sacrifice on the cross was offered to God, for God;s acceptance, and not to mankind for their acceptance. Only those that Christ died for will believe because at sometime in their natural life God will take their stony heart and exchange it for a fleshy heart by his sovereign grace, without pleading with them to let him do it.
The natural man, before God re-births him, will never repent of breaking God's spiritual laws that he cannot discern, 1 Cor 2:14. Only the born again will repent, not the natural man.
The natural man, before God re-births him, will never repent of breaking God's spiritual laws that he cannot discern, 1 Cor 2:14. Only the born again will repent, not the natural man.
-
1
- Show all