Predestination is misunderstood...

[Genez]

it wasn't just what he said about the wages. it was many other things.

Anyone with half a brain can work out Adam did not sin in arrogance.

Not only that he started his sermon with the intimidating hell speech towards people who haven't even started to believe in Christ yet.

Then his intimidating remarks of human emotions also got intimidating.

Then he went on as if he knew it all.

There was plenty other remarks he said which was questionable.

If.you can't see an ignorant person when you see one God help you.

For those who may be wondering what Thunderrr M is talking about?

Here it is again..

Do you see what Thunderrr what TM sees?

I don't...

 

[Cameron143]

I don’t think you are understanding my point. Why would God bother with inspiring Scripture to ensure it was entirely accurate if it humanity was blind to it and they had to be enlightened to understand it in the first place? It would seem to me that the very purpose of inspiration and ensuring the accuracy of God’s Word is because it is understandable to everyone who reads or hears it.

Put another way: If it has to be decoded by the Spirit for people to understand it, then why would the Spirit bother with inspiration of the original authors in its transmission?

I understood your point. And the problem has nothing to do with the word itself. The fault lies in fallen man. So no decoding is necessary. Enlightenment is what is necessary. Imagine being in a completely dark room with an open book before you. You can't read the book. If a light is turned on, anyone can read the book. But men love darkness and not the light.

 

[Chaps]

I understood your point. And the problem has nothing to do with the word itself. The fault lies in fallen man. So no decoding is necessary. Enlightenment is what is necessary. Imagine being in a completely dark room with an open book before you. You can't read the book. If a light is turned on, anyone can read the book. But men love darkness and not the light.

I like that analogy…and it helps explain my question. Why would the Holy Spirit bother ensuring the text of the inspired when men are in a dark room and can’t read it? It would seem that if illumination is required, inspiration is not necessary. I think the fact that the Scriptures are inspired indicates that they were written to be understood by both believers and unbelievers.

IMO, the Word has the power to change lives because it is inspired, true and from God. Anyone who hears/reads it can be impacted by the truth and power of the Gospel and be saved. Otherwise, the historical accuracy or inspiration of the original texts means very little as the primary factor in any revelation or enlightenment is a direct activity of the Holy Spirit on the eyes of someone who is stuck in the dark.

I guess another way of putting it is this…

Is the message of the Gospel inspired so that dead men can hear it and receive life, or…
Do men receive life by intervention of an illuminating Spirit and then read/hear the Gospel and such their response is merely a reflection of the quickening the Spirit has already provided.

In the first case, it would seem the Gospel is the power of God to save people (as Scripture indicates to me), whereas in the second case, the quickening of the Spirit saves people and the understanding/accepting of the Gospel is the after effect of God’s selection of the person. I hope this makes sense

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

For those who may be wondering what Thunderrr M is talking about?

Here it is again..

Do you see what Thunderrr what TM sees?

I don't...

Is he your idol

 

[John146]

I have already supplied that for you (Eph 2:5)

5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved

Who is the "us" referring to in this verse? Let's go back a few...

1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.

And then Paul gives us the specific order in the very next verse:

1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

1. Heard the word of truth
2. Believed the word of truth
3. Sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise

You have it backwards my friend.

 

[Cameron143]

I like that analogy…and it helps explain my question. Why would the Holy Spirit bother ensuring the text of the inspired when men are in a dark room and can’t read it? It would seem that if illumination is required, inspiration is not necessary. I think the fact that the Scriptures are inspired indicates that they were written to be understood by both believers and unbelievers.

IMO, the Word has the power to change lives because it is inspired, true and from God. Anyone who hears/reads it can be impacted by the truth and power of the Gospel and be saved. Otherwise, the historical accuracy or inspiration of the original texts means very little as the primary factor in any revelation or enlightenment is a direct activity of the Holy Spirit on the eyes of someone who is stuck in the dark.

I guess another way of putting it is this…

Is the message of the Gospel inspired so that dead men can hear it and receive life, or…
Do men receive life by intervention of an illuminating Spirit and then read/hear the Gospel and such their response is merely a reflection of the quickening the Spirit has already provided.

In the first case, it would seem the Gospel is the power of God to save people (as Scripture indicates to me), whereas in the second case, the quickening of the Spirit saves people and the understanding/accepting of the Gospel is the after effect of God’s selection of the person. I hope this makes sense

I think this matches well with Colossians 1:12-13 where it says God made us meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light because He delivered us from the power of darkness and translated us into the kingdom of His Son.
We may part at this point because I believe this making someone meet and translating them are activities of God before someone believes.
It's not that I don't believe unbelievers can understand the Gospel because I do. It's that I believe one's estate determines their response. 1 Corinthians 1:23-24 evidence this. For the Greeks the gospel was foolishness. For the Jews it was a stumblingblock. But to the called, regardless of the group they are in, it is wisdom. We find similar results in the parable of the sower.

 

[Chaps]

I appreciate the discussion and your use of Scripture to validate your position even though I may disagree. I think, however, Paul’s point in saying that the Gospel was a stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the Greeks was not that God was not permitting them to understand/believe it, but because they the Jews demand signs and the Greeks loved wisdom. Thus, the unwillingness to believe had more to do with what these folks loved rather than a determination of which ones God loved or had chosen.

I think Paul’s emphasis here is in how he begins this discussion: “It pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe.” Thus the called are those who are saved by responding to God’s message with belief. I would imagine that if your view was what he meant, it the statement would read something like: “It pleased God to reveal His chosen by causing them to believe a message of folly.” Rather, it seems the response of belief, both here and elsewhere in Paul’s writing, is the responsibilty of the hearer and determines who is called. Refusal to believe is treated by Paul in his writings and in Acts to be a rejection of God’s grace rather than a display that God has not provided that grace (cf. Acts 13:46).

 

[sawdust]

For those who may be wondering what Thunderrr M is talking about?

Here it is again..

Do you see what Thunderrr what TM sees?

I don't...

I don't think anyone sees what TM sees.

But in respect to the video, the pastor said Rom.6:23 refers to Adam's sin which it does. The references to both the sin and the gift is in the singular and is comparing the legacy of Adam's sin to the legacy of God's free gift of life Christ.

Romans 6:23
For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

 

[sawdust]

Paul left Timothy with the church at Ephesus to charge some in the church that they teach no other doctrine (1 Tim 1:3).

Paul further states that they should pray for those that have authority over the city of Ephesus that the church may lead a good and peaceable life in all goodness and honesty (1 Tim 2:1-2).

For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; who will have all men, who are teaching another doctrine, to be saved=delivered, and to come unto a knowledge of the truth.

This scripture also harmonizes with Rom 10:1-3.

I take it you're saying the "all men" in 1Tim.2:1 is not all men but a specific group of men who are teaching false doctrine?

If I have understood that correctly, I disagree. If you look at chapter one, Paul's charge to Timothy is based on the backdrop of his own experience of salvation. Paul, who recognises himself as the "chief of sinners" (1Tim.1:15), realises that no-one is beyond the possibility of salvation hence, the call to pray for all men in 1Tim.2:1.

 

[cv5]

I appreciate the discussion and your use of Scripture to validate your position even though I may disagree. I think, however, Paul’s point in saying that the Gospel was a stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the Greeks was not that God was not permitting them to understand/believe it, but because they the Jews demand signs and the Greeks loved wisdom. Thus, the unwillingness to believe had more to do with what these folks loved rather than a determination of which ones God loved or had chosen.

I think Paul’s emphasis here is in how he begins this discussion: “It pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe.” Thus the called are those who are saved by responding to God’s message with belief. I would imagine that if your view was what he meant, it the statement would read something like: “It pleased God to reveal His chosen by causing them to believe a message of folly.” Rather, it seems the response of belief, both here and elsewhere in Paul’s writing, is the responsibilty of the hearer and determines who is called. Refusal to believe is treated by Paul in his writings and in Acts to be a rejection of God’s grace rather than a display that God has not provided that grace (cf. Acts 13:46).

Well spoken friend.

 

[HeIsHere]

I understood your point. And the problem has nothing to do with the word itself. The fault lies in fallen man. So no decoding is necessary. Enlightenment is what is necessary. Imagine being in a completely dark room with an open book before you. You can't read the book. If a light is turned on, anyone can read the book. But men love darkness and not the light.

Gnosticism is what this is, sorry but true.

 

[Cameron143]

I appreciate the discussion and your use of Scripture to validate your position even though I may disagree. I think, however, Paul’s point in saying that the Gospel was a stumbling block to the Jews and foolishness to the Greeks was not that God was not permitting them to understand/believe it, but because they the Jews demand signs and the Greeks loved wisdom. Thus, the unwillingness to believe had more to do with what these folks loved rather than a determination of which ones God loved or had chosen.

I think Paul’s emphasis here is in how he begins this discussion: “It pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe.” Thus the called are those who are saved by responding to God’s message with belief. I would imagine that if your view was what he meant, it the statement would read something like: “It pleased God to reveal His chosen by causing them to believe a message of folly.” Rather, it seems the response of belief, both here and elsewhere in Paul’s writing, is the responsibilty of the hearer and determines who is called. Refusal to believe is treated by Paul in his writings and in Acts to be a rejection of God’s grace rather than a display that God has not provided that grace (cf. Acts 13:46).

From that perspective, there is no need for God in salvation. A person can simply read the Bible and believe and they are saved.

Except, that's not how scripture deals with salvation. Men in their natural estate never seek after God. It is always God who initiates with man.

 

[Genez]

I don't think anyone sees what TM sees.

But in respect to the video, the pastor said Rom.6:23 refers to Adam's sin which it does. The references to both the sin and the gift is in the singular and is comparing the legacy of Adam's sin to the legacy of God's free gift of life Christ.

Romans 6:23
For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Please.... We need to take it easy with someone who's brain was struck with 300 million Volts and about 30,000 Amps....

Just tolerate him, smile, and let others who can still think clearly decide what they want to believe.

And, yes....

If it was not in reference To Adam's 'sin?' Singular.
It would read mote like the wages of sins is death. Plurality.

Subtlety is God's forte that He sometimes used to expose the thoughts and intents of the heart.

For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to ​

the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and able to judge the thoughts ​

and intentions of the heart.." Hebrews 4:12​

Those who are emotionally driven with an agenda tend to skim over the fine essential details.....


grace and peace .................

 

[cv5]

From that perspective, there is no need for God in salvation. A person can simply read the Bible and believe and they are saved.

Except, that's not how scripture deals with salvation. Men in their natural estate never seek after God. It is always God who initiates with man.

Fact that there is a Bible to read at all is proof positive that God is involved with "a person" or any person.

 

[sawdust]

From that perspective, there is no need for God in salvation. A person can simply read the Bible and believe and they are saved.

Not true, but that is how you continue to see it. @Chaps is not saying what you think he is saying.

Not all souls are the same. God has turned the light on for all men to see. There are those who love darkness and scurry back to their darkness and there are those who love righteousness and come to the light. Our response does not save us. Our response reveals who we are, a lover of darkness or a lover of light.

 

[Cameron143]

Fact that there is a Bible to read at all is proof positive that God is involved with "a person" or any person.

God is involved in the life of every person on some level. He alone can open a womb and form the substance in the womb. He also controls rain and sunshine by which all are fed. Psalm 145:9 affirms that the Lord is good to all. So God has always exercised care over His creation. No one is denying this.

 

[Cameron143]

Not true, but that is how you continue to see it. @Chaps is not saying what you think he is saying.

Not all souls are the same. God has turned the light on for all men to see. There are those who love darkness and scurry back to their darkness and there are those who love righteousness and come to the light. Our response does not save us. Our response reveals who we are, a lover of darkness or a lover of light.

I agree there is light. But the natural man remains in darkness because that is his desire. That's what his darkened heart finds delight in. So he will continue to seek it out until something happens to alter that desire. Left to himself, he will not seek God(light). He will continue to make himself meet for destruction.

 

[cv5]

Imagine being in a completely dark room with an open book before you. You can't read the book. If a light is turned on, anyone can read the book. But men love darkness and not the light.

I think the analogy is more like this:
There is a room with a light on, with people reading a book. Anyone may FREELY enter for refuge from the dark and stormy night.

But because of they choose to deny God's love, and to deny worship and thanksgiving due to God, so men abide in darkness rather than light.

 

[sawdust]

I agree there is light. But the natural man remains in darkness because that is his desire. That's what his darkened heart finds delight in. So he will continue to seek it out until something happens to alter that desire. Left to himself, he will not seek God(light). He will continue to make himself meet for destruction.

You need to read beyond "men love darkness". Not everyone does because it goes on to say there are those who come to the light. People are not created evil. They will learn to love the light or they will learn to hate it because the light is shining in the world. We have never been left to ourselves. That's the whole point. If we all naturally loved darkness we would all run from the light, but not all do and it is not because they are alive in Christ.

You can understand how the grace (power) of God can make a man alive but you refuse to see that same grace can free a man temporarily so he can answer to the truth of his own free will. It's like you're saying God can do the impossible but He can't do the near impossible.

 

[Cameron143]

I think the analogy is more like this:
There is a room with a light on, with people reading a book. Anyone may FREELY enter for refuge from the dark and stormy night.

But because of they choose to deny God's love, and to deny worship and thanksgiving due to God, so men abide in darkness rather than light.

I appreciate that. I believe the Bible teaches that men are in darkness. People jumped on the verses in Corinthians, but no one dealt with the verses in Colossians.