Predestination is misunderstood...

I'll have to get back to you on that. But you assume that coming upon someone is the same as being in them. There is a difference between the two.

Actually-and here is our first disagreement-

The statement you presented contains a logical error. While it is true that free moral agents' choices are influenced by their nature and various factors, it is not accurate to say that all choices are limited by their nature. Free will implies the ability to make choices that are not predetermined or solely dictated by one's nature.The Law of Identity in logic states that each thing is the same with itself and different from another. It does not directly address the limitations of free moral agents' choices. While one's nature and circumstances may influence decision-making, the concept of free will allows for the possibility of making choices that go beyond these limitations.In summary, while there are factors that can influence and shape our choices, the idea of free will suggests that individuals have the capacity to make decisions that are not entirely determined by their nature or external influences.


The concept of free moral agency and the ability to make choices is discussed in various passages throughout the Bible. Here are some Scripture references that address free will and moral agency:

Genesis 1:26 - God gave humans free moral agency to choose to follow His way and develop His image in them.

Exodus 4:21 - Describes people who perish because they do not love the truth, emphasizing the consequences of choices.

Joshua 24:15 - Joshua's call for the Israelites to choose whom they will serve, highlighting the freedom to make decisions.

Romans 9:16 - States that it is God who shows mercy, not based solely on human will, suggesting a balance between divine sovereignty and human choice.

2 Corinthians 9:7 - Encourages giving as one has decided in their heart, emphasizing personal choice and responsibility.

These verses reflect the biblical teachings on free moral agency, highlighting the importance of individual decisions and the interaction between human will and divine guidance.

Re are free moral agents' choices are limited by their nature.-

1. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints emphasizes the importance of moral agency, stating that individuals are "free to choose" and "free to act" according to their own will. This freedom to choose between good and evil is seen as a fundamental aspect of human accountability
   
2. The Bible discusses free moral agency and the limits to it, suggesting that God may at times disregard free moral agency to fulfill His purposes. This highlights the balance between human choice and divine sovereignty in shaping events
   
3. Some theological perspectives challenge the notion of complete freedom in moral agency, arguing that man's freedom has narrow limits and that true freedom comes from aligning one's choices with God's will. This view questions the idea of humans being entirely free moral agents
   

In summary, while there are differing views on the extent of human agency and its limitations, the concept of free will and moral agency remains a complex topic within theological discussions, reflecting a balance between individual choice and divine guidance.

And since it is a topic with theological discussions ongoing-I am still learning brother.
J.

But if you have been made alive you are already saved. You are taking the Calvin route with God saving you (regeneration) in order to save you (Gospel). The essence of the Gospel is, in spite of our sin, we can be made alive through Christ.

And I agree, man in his natural state cannot even know God exists but the Lord has never left man to his natural devices. He (God) is and has always been the initiator. If He can make the inexcusable unregenerate man see the truth (Rom.1:19) then He can make those who have learned from Him see the truth that Jesus is the Saviour. (John 6:45)

no it doesn't because all the believers who died before the cross, Christ went down to paradise and resurrected them in him.

Just like the commandment had to be changed for people to baptised in Jesus Christ name after the cross.

There's no getting out of it, which ever way you go scripture has an answer for it, concerning being resurrected in Christ, (baptised).

Your response to deny being baptised was the the thief on the cross.

You where give a credible answer for it, which you don't like and can't accept, which only makes me think you've yet to be baptised.

Well; I'm baptized in Jesus' name- and I think your doctrine is whack; so, it might be something else.

Why can't I just be taking a scriptural point of view? Do you believe I'm incapable of reasoning through the scriptures under the aegis of the Spirit? My ideas are my own. Like us all, my ideas have been formed by many influences and teachers, but what I believe is my best understanding of truth. Calvin would be one of the least of those influences.

Man in his natural state can know of God which is why he is unexcusable. But he cannot know God intimately because he is dead spiritually.

Your last 2 statements are what I previously posited. Once regenerated, and becoming a partaker of the divine nature, the gospel reveals the love of God in Christ. The only reasonable outcome of such divine grace is faith.

Jesus is talking about the "sinner" here and shows the sinner has free will. And by choosing to believe in Jesus saves the sinner.
15 So that every person who believes in him shall not be lost, but shall have eternal life.

You believe that free will is uninhibited?

God "has told me" in the past to do things and I did not. Been times I felt God lead me to witness to someone but I chose not to. Free will is in every decision we choose to make.

Now, I try to do as I feel God lead me. But there was a point where I did not have confidence and chose not to do as God lead me. But because I now try to do what He tells me still is by my choice to do them.

When God gives me the feeling to witness to someone He cannot force me or make me to do it. If I do it it's because I choose to do it.

You say it's my doctrine, which is highly ignorant, scripture says believe and be baptised to be saved, ( two things.

Believe and love ( two things)

Repent and be baptised everyone of you. Two things.

I don't believe you have been baptised yet.

Are there choices beyond your making?

Is there,

,There are people who are moved by the holy spirit and spoke prophecy. There in heaven.

Then there is the holy spirit coming upon someone and changing them.

Tell me Cameron which one sounds more significant.

Because Saul also prophesized, so he was moved by the holy spirit and had the holy spirit change him.

Sorry Cameron but I think your on a rabbit trail, here.

I realize that's what you believe. That's OK. I believe there is more to be understood than you have come to understand.

There's always choices, other options, alternatives. That's why we are "judged" by our decisions. To be judged by our decisions means they're made out of free will.

I'll try another way. There are choices God has made for us. We didn't choose to be born and we can't unborn ourselves. We are made a particular race. We didn't choose it and can't undo it.
Does this mean our wills are inhibited?

Everlasting-Grace said:
Saul was rejected as king. Not salvation

Amen:
Don't overlook "Samuel's salvation", and "from paradise":

not "across the abyss," (Luke 16:19-26-30) but, paradise = salvation,
Correct?

Amen.

Well then he is still saved, He is in heaven today.

Lol

You seem to just look for things you disagree and jab at them

Catholics are the ONLY group that uses private interpretation excuse. So it is logical to ask if he is catholic (since he uses their terms)

Also. When someone says we are born again BEFORE faith. it is a Logical conclusion to ask if they are calvinist. Since this is a calvinist belief

1. Can you tell me where I ever said saul was saved?
2. I am unsure what Heb 6 has to do with the conversation.

If saul was saved, He is still saved

If he was not. He is in hades awaiting Judgment