Predestination is misunderstood...

[Cameron143]

God spoke directly to Cain in conversation, and was granted mercy. How can you say he had no relationship with God?

I didn't say he had no relationship. God is in relationship to all of His creation. I said He didn't have faith. Therefore, the grace exercised toward him was not unto salvation.

 

[Charlie_2024]

The only good thing one can do is to lay down your life for your enemies?

That's not the only good thing one can do, but it's the greatest expression of love. So we can say it's not the only good thing we can do, but it's the best thing we can do.

 

[PaulThomson]

I see, but I'm not sure I follow that understanding exactly.

I read "and as many as had been appointed to aeonous life, believed the gospel." I'll reword the declaration without changing the meaning...

"as many as had been appointed" and "believed the gospel" is an identity claim here, that is, a=a, they are one and the same subject. Paul is telling us that, "as many as had believed the gospel had been appointed to aeonous life."

Keep in mind that none of us will wholy realize aeonous life until the last day, when we all stand together in the resurrection. So we are, too, have been "appointed to aeonous life."

You did change the meaning. You moved the object of belief from what Paul had told them from God to something the text did not say Paul said.

For example, in John's gospel, when peter and John came to investigate Mary's theory that the soldiers or the Sanhedrin had taken the body of Jesus, Peter and John and found the tomb empty, It says John believed, but it does not say "John believed the gospel". In fact, the text makes plain that they did not yet understand that Jesus must rise from the dead, so John could not possibly have believe the gospel. The context infers that John believed what Mary had said, that the soldiers or the Sanhedrin had taken the body away.

20 The first day of the week cometh Mary Magdalene early, when it was yet dark, unto the sepulchre, and seeth the stone taken away from the sepulchre.

2 Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.

3 Peter therefore went forth, and that other disciple, and came to the sepulchre.

4 So they ran both together: and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre.

5 And he stooping down, and looking in, saw the linen clothes lying; yet went he not in.

6 Then cometh Simon Peter following him, and went into the sepulchre, and seeth the linen clothes lie,

7 And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself.

8 Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and he saw, and believed.

9 For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.

In this story, we have the same kind of issue. The text says those who had been appointed to aeonous life believed. It does not say they believed the gospel. The immediate context tells us what they believed and were so elated about: it was what Paul had just told them. that He had been commanded to take the gospel to the Gentiles because the Jews had shown themselves unworthy of it.

 

[PaulThomson]

That's not the only good thing one can do, but it's the greatest expression of love. So we can say it's not the only good thing we can do, but it's the best thing we can do.

So, why did you dismiss my visiting my aged grandmother from being good?

 

[PaulThomson]

I didn't say he had no relationship. God is in relationship to all of His creation. I said He didn't have faith. Therefore, the grace exercised toward him was not unto salvation.

You have a very "me-centred" religion. It seems to be all about being one of the elect so as to be saved. The Bible seems to present a much broader plan for creation than your perspective allows for.

 

[PaulThomson]

Sounds like you want a more subjective way to truth?....
One where you can be immersed into a problem that enslaves first, without first gaining truth defined to avoid it.

You will still need the propositions in the end.

You sound like a "resistive" way of thinking. One at work against first learning truth before you can need it...
Its a more curative approach, rather than preventative approach. .

Well then... you want it that way?
Go get scurvy.. and then suck on the limes.
If that's what you want to find truth? Go for it.

The preventative approach is the wise approach because God offers it that way..
The preventative approach is submitting to God by first learning truth before the need may arise.

There is an argument for everything, Mr. Paul Thomson.
Go it your way. Let others go it the way they know best....

The army does not prepare you for battle by thrusting you into battle, and then afterwards give you basic training.

 

[Cameron143]

You have a very "me-centred" religion. It seems to be all about being one of the elect so as to be saved. The Bible seems to present a much broader plan for creation than your perspective allows for.

I have a God centered religion. I never speak of the elect. I speak about God. You always bring the elect into the conversation. I believe it's always about God.

 

[PaulThomson]

Sounds like you want a more subjective way to truth?....
One where you can be immersed into a problem that enslaves first, without first gaining truth defined to avoid it.

You will still need the propositions in the end.

You sound like a "resistive" way of thinking. One at work against first learning truth before you can need it...
Its a more curative approach, rather than preventative approach. .

Well then... you want it that way?
Go get scurvy.. and then suck on the limes.
If that's what you want to find truth? Go for it.

The preventative approach is the wise approach because God offers it that way..
The preventative approach is submitting to God by first learning truth before the need may arise.

There is an argument for everything, Mr. Paul Thomson.
Go it your way. Let others go it the way they know best....

The army does not prepare you for battle by thrusting you into battle, and then afterwards give you basic training.

You are assuming that the medicine you are offering is curative, and you have not been deceived into taking an hallucinogen. I am arguing for a broader range of performance trials to text its efficacy before consuming your potion. Merely reading the bottle label and accepting that as a reliable description of the contents, or reading a few 5 star testimonials and believing them, can be rather fraught.

 

[PaulThomson]

Quoting the King James reveals something about the thinking capacity of the one who uses it.

It does. It is one of the few Bible versions that we have available whose New Testament is based on the Greek Received Text originating from the region of Antioch where believers were first called Christians and upon which the earliest translations into other languages were based. Most modern versions are based on Greek texts versions originating in the gnostic centre of Egypt.

 

[Charlie_2024]

So, why did you dismiss my visiting my aged grandmother from being good?

i didn't say it was not good. I said it appeared good to man as we can only see the outward works. We can't see your heart's intentions and motivation to, conclude that it was a good work. For all we know, you may have been visiting her to persuade her to include you in her will. We just don't know.
Jesus said, "if a man looks upon a woman with lust, he has already committed adultery in his heart". So that man is guilty in Gods view, while the men around him didn't even see his lust.
God did say that there are none righteous, no not one. That tells me our best works are as filthy rags in His sight, let alone our wicked works.

 

[FollowerofShiloh]

It does. It is one of the few Bible versions that we have available whose New Testament is based on the Greek Received Text originating from the region of Antioch where believers were first called Christians and upon which the earliest translations into other languages were based. Most modern versions are based on Greek texts versions originating in the gnostic centre of Egypt.

Received Text, the Textus Receptus?

It goes as far back to the 10th century. It's hardly original.

 

[PaulThomson]

Do you believe that Daniel 4:35 speaks to the sovereignty God? Are you suggesting that there is some entity that exists that can hinder God in any way?

Iran is a sovereign state. England is a sovereign state. Do you think there are any entities within or outside of their jurisdictions that can hinder Iran or England in any way? Why do you think sovereign means unable to be hindered? Does the Bible say anywhere that God gets hindered? I believe it does.

 

[PaulThomson]

i didn't say it was not good. I said it appeared good to man as we can only see the outward works. We can't see your heart's intentions and motivation to, conclude that it was a good work. For all we know, you may have been visiting her to persuade her to include you in her will. We just don't know.
Jesus said, "if a man looks upon a woman with lust, he has already committed adultery in his heart". So that man is guilty in Gods view, while the men around him didn't even see his lust.
God did say that there are none righteous, no not one. That tells me our best works are as filthy rags in His sight, let alone our wicked works.

Your goal-posts are on fast spinning wheels and running on an oil slick.

 

[PaulThomson]

I believe in limited atonement because I believe it is unjust to accept payment for a debt and then demand payment a second time.

If I pay a debt on behalf of someone with the proviso that it will obtain to the debtor if they do X, and the court can keep the money if they don't do X, why would it be unjust for the court to keep the money and yet not pardon the debtor who does not do X?

 

[PaulThomson]

How can anyone continue in anything, in the case the grace of God (which summarizes the gospel), if they hadn't accepted it to begin with?

Exactly. They had been appointed to aeonous life the week before after hearing the Gospel in the synagogue and at some house afterwards. They were the ones who had already been appointed to aeonous life before they believed Paul's announcement the following week.

 

[Genez]

A competent army does not thrust into battle with ONLY the propositional theories of command, and without the infantryman knowing also how to perform the tasks of an infantryman, and how to evaluate situations they will face from the perspective of an infantryman..

That is why God brings some of us here to learn how to "apply" truth that we learned, so it will stop being only theory. ....

Why you keep wanting to interject the term propositional theory .. or, proposition, into the conversation? It will lose many.
Try saying it in a way that shows what it means... please.

 

[PaulThomson]

I didn't say he had no relationship. God is in relationship to all of His creation. I said He didn't have faith. Therefore, the grace exercised toward him was not unto salvation.

Cameron143 said:
Every person you mentioned had a relationship with God except Cain. What were they like before the grace of God came to them?

 

[PaulThomson]

Received Text, the Textus Receptus?

It goes as far back to the 10th century. It's hardly original.

In which region did the manuscript families upon which the TEXTUS RECEPTUS, the Received text, originate? Asia Minor? or Egypt?

 

[Inquisitor]

It does. It is one of the few Bible versions that we have available whose New Testament is based on the Greek Received Text originating from the region of Antioch where believers were first called Christians and upon which the earliest translations into other languages were based. Most modern versions are based on Greek texts versions originating in the gnostic centre of Egypt.

Are you referring to the Latin Vulgate?

How close to the original letters can you get, fourth century?

The Vulgate is not a Catholic Bible.

Those translations that arrived a thousand years later, hmmmmm!

 

[PaulThomson]

That is why God brings some of us here to learn how to "apply" truth that we learned, so it will stop being only theory. ....

Why you keep wanting to interject the term propositional theory .. or, proposition, into the conversation? It will lose many.
Try saying it in a way that shows what it means... please.

Maybe you need to be more interested in increasing your English vocabulary.
Propositions: things asserted to be facts or true.