-
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.
J
This isn't intended as criticism... rather CLARIFICATION.
It is more accurate to say "GOD is HOLY and JUST--- and therefore HE is LOVE"... when I read your <above> statement MPW I personally get the impression that "LOVE" comes before HOLY and JUST and that is not so... the character and nature of God is HOLY and JUST and <may I add merciful and gracious>... which is how he conveys HIS love.
God also HATES, he gets angry, you can grieve and offend him.... giving emphasis to "LOVE" when humanity as a whole has an entirely warped/fallen comprehension of love... being whatever feels good or I perceive as good to ME... is an error.
The beginning of wisdom is to fear God... hmmm, that is a requisite instruction... give REVERENCE to HOLY GOD and then wisdom will be opened for you...
I can't make decisions for others'... but I surely do want wisdom... God's kind of wisdom... isn't it GOOD and GRACIOUS of him to tell us how to get it!
It is more accurate to say "GOD is HOLY and JUST--- and therefore HE is LOVE"... when I read your <above> statement MPW I personally get the impression that "LOVE" comes before HOLY and JUST and that is not so... the character and nature of God is HOLY and JUST and <may I add merciful and gracious>... which is how he conveys HIS love.
God also HATES, he gets angry, you can grieve and offend him.... giving emphasis to "LOVE" when humanity as a whole has an entirely warped/fallen comprehension of love... being whatever feels good or I perceive as good to ME... is an error.
The beginning of wisdom is to fear God... hmmm, that is a requisite instruction... give REVERENCE to HOLY GOD and then wisdom will be opened for you...
I can't make decisions for others'... but I surely do want wisdom... God's kind of wisdom... isn't it GOOD and GRACIOUS of him to tell us how to get it!
"The Bible says that God is love. The Bible does not say that love is God."
His point was that we need to read the entire Bible to have the entire character of God revealed unto us and then and only then can we properly understand what love truly is because God is love. The major error which many make, of course, was addressed when he said that the Bible does not say that love is God. IOW, we're never to approach the Bible with a preconceived notion of what love is or else we run the risk of fashioning a "god" to meet the definition of love which we already bring to the table.
Anyhow, none of that was meant for MPW because I have no idea whether or not she agrees with what you just said. I'm simply making a general statement based upon what you said about God and love.
Pray that you may know God personally, intimately, unmistakably. It is promised in Scripture that those who seek diligently shall find, and that if you pray according to the will of God, your prayers will be answered, that God reveals Himself to those He loves, those He loves being those who do as He commands, to love Him and your neighbor as yourself. Then when you experience Him, you can say you know Him; it is not just head knowledge, or something you read in a book, but something you know in your heart of hearts, something that is True and that you will defend with your life because the purity of the love contained in that knowledge surpasses anything you have ever known or will ever know.
J
Don't sweat it. The guy is only showing just how deceived he actually is. He's the one in league with Satan and such is evidenced by the many erroneous statements that he made on this thread. It's scary how he regularly projects his own condition unto others, but what can one do to stop him? He's already accused all of the Old Testament saints and prophets of not even knowing about Christ, so why should it surprise anybody here to see him go after me in the same manner? The guy is like a runaway train headed for derailment if not destruction. Hopefully, somewhere down the line, he'll come to his senses and repent before it is too late. At my end, I'll certainly be praying for him even as I already have been. As far as him turning me over to Satan is concerned, I literally laughed.
B
What does that mean? In truth... some people ARE ahead of others in their knowledge, that does not mean they are "holier than thou"... just means they have more knowledge.
IF somebody decides to take an "oppositional" stance toward others who attempt to "open" the scriptures for people who lack understanding... then there is a biblical word for that condition... and it isn't a very nice one.
IF somebody decides to take an "oppositional" stance toward others who attempt to "open" the scriptures for people who lack understanding... then there is a biblical word for that condition... and it isn't a very nice one.
J
Well, I'd imagine that you view me as one of those "people", but I came here solely to attempt to address your OP and consequently to defend the integrity of both God and His Word. My simple advice to you, which you're certainly not obligated to take, would be the following:
Forget about WHO said what and just concentrate instead on what was actually said. IOW, there have been arguments given here from both sides, arguments which simply cannot both be correct in that they're in great opposition to one another, so look at the arguments themselves and see if you can discern by the Spirit of God where the truth actually lies. If none of the aforementioned people whom you deem to be holier than thou or puffed up with knowledge had ever been born, then God's Word would still be here and we'd still each be in need of rightly dividing it. Some of the things which have been presented here are so patently false in that they fly directly in the face of things which have been plainly revealed and stated in scripture that I hope that you're at least taking personal note of the same. I say that "I hope" because your comments seem to be more related to the people involved here than to what any of us have actually said. Basically, I'm just suggesting that you don't throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater. IOW, I get that you don't like the infighting and what you've described as "testosterone flying around" (or something to that effect) and I get that the BDF gets heated at times, but this doesn't mean that we still cannot learn anything in the midst of such an environment. I'd hate to even think that everything that transpired on this thread over the last few days was in vain or just a giant waste of time and effort, but I suppose that some might view it that way. I certainly don't.
Forget about WHO said what and just concentrate instead on what was actually said. IOW, there have been arguments given here from both sides, arguments which simply cannot both be correct in that they're in great opposition to one another, so look at the arguments themselves and see if you can discern by the Spirit of God where the truth actually lies. If none of the aforementioned people whom you deem to be holier than thou or puffed up with knowledge had ever been born, then God's Word would still be here and we'd still each be in need of rightly dividing it. Some of the things which have been presented here are so patently false in that they fly directly in the face of things which have been plainly revealed and stated in scripture that I hope that you're at least taking personal note of the same. I say that "I hope" because your comments seem to be more related to the people involved here than to what any of us have actually said. Basically, I'm just suggesting that you don't throw the proverbial baby out with the bathwater. IOW, I get that you don't like the infighting and what you've described as "testosterone flying around" (or something to that effect) and I get that the BDF gets heated at times, but this doesn't mean that we still cannot learn anything in the midst of such an environment. I'd hate to even think that everything that transpired on this thread over the last few days was in vain or just a giant waste of time and effort, but I suppose that some might view it that way. I certainly don't.
M
I'm trying not to be personal - that comment was not aimed at any particular person, it's just the way the thread has become.
What does "IOW" mean???
In my own opinion the best response and the one I'm inclined to believe is Angela's response on page 4. Read it and tell me your thoughts? Some of the best comments on my original question were on the first couple of pages but now the whole thing has deteriorated into a "I have to be right" frenzy - even my post on God's attributes which I apparently stated in the wrong order! Yes there does appear to be testosterone flying about in the main but women are jumping on-board too now. You are correct, prayer is needed for discernment.
What does "IOW" mean???
In my own opinion the best response and the one I'm inclined to believe is Angela's response on page 4. Read it and tell me your thoughts? Some of the best comments on my original question were on the first couple of pages but now the whole thing has deteriorated into a "I have to be right" frenzy - even my post on God's attributes which I apparently stated in the wrong order! Yes there does appear to be testosterone flying about in the main but women are jumping on-board too now. You are correct, prayer is needed for discernment.
B
IOW= shorthand for "in other words"
I STILL think you are missing that... "I HAVE TO BE RIGHT" is not the stance being taken. FOR EXAMPLE, you mention my comment of your comment in the above comment... MPW, I SPECIFICALLY said "this is not intended as criticism but for clarification". But apparently you did not read it that way... rather the opposite. WHEN a person says... "I gather the meaning for your post to be this..<whatever>, but I think the scripture illustrates this <whatever> then there is a issue of WHAT the scripture says vs what a comment implied.
INSTEAD of being defensive... you could think about how my comment "adjusts" the implications I personally perceived in reading YOUR comment. WE <as in you and I> are not the only people here or who will ever be influenced by what has been posted and I do TRY to always keep that in consideration when I make comments <like right now>... so IOW... I was not criticizing you... I was clarifying what I understood from your post... and adjusting it to more closely align with scripture.
Some people will appreciate that "adjustment" for their own understanding... it will be an AH_HA for them.
I STILL think you are missing that... "I HAVE TO BE RIGHT" is not the stance being taken. FOR EXAMPLE, you mention my comment of your comment in the above comment... MPW, I SPECIFICALLY said "this is not intended as criticism but for clarification". But apparently you did not read it that way... rather the opposite. WHEN a person says... "I gather the meaning for your post to be this..<whatever>, but I think the scripture illustrates this <whatever> then there is a issue of WHAT the scripture says vs what a comment implied.
INSTEAD of being defensive... you could think about how my comment "adjusts" the implications I personally perceived in reading YOUR comment. WE <as in you and I> are not the only people here or who will ever be influenced by what has been posted and I do TRY to always keep that in consideration when I make comments <like right now>... so IOW... I was not criticizing you... I was clarifying what I understood from your post... and adjusting it to more closely align with scripture.
Some people will appreciate that "adjustment" for their own understanding... it will be an AH_HA for them.
J
MPW, I'm going to address Angela's post that you referred to in parts:
This part I totally agree with. The only part that I'd be cautious about though is in attributing these beliefs totally to Calvin or to Calvinism. IOW, although Calvin has certainly greatly influenced people throughout the ages along certain lines, there were some "early church fathers" (ECF's) who believed somewhat in his brand of "predestination" as well. Even then, however, there were even "earlier church fathers" who totally rejected any such thoughts of that type of "predestination". In either case, "early church fathers" or not, we still ultimately need to prove everything according to scripture because there were apostates even back in those days as well.
I agree, but this only speaks to God's "foreknowledge" and does not in any way even suggest that God arbitrarily hand-picked certain people unto eternal life and others unto eternal damnation. There is a world of difference between "foreknowledge" and "predestination". Again, I go back to my example of Noah's Ark:
Noah's Ark was "predestined" to rise above the flood waters and to eventually come to rest upon the mountains of Ararat. God, in His "foreknowledge", knew who would get aboard the ark, but He still strove with everybody by His Spirit for 120 years and He still ordained Noah to be a preacher of righteousness. IOW, God genuinely gave everybody an opportunity to hear and to get aboard the ark and whoever boarded the ark was "predestined" to go where the ark went, but this is not the type of "predestination" that some here are preaching. No, instead, they're insisting that multitudes will have never even had the chance to come aboard the ark or to come to Christ by analogy in that God allegedly "predestined" them to hell. That is a heresy of the worst kind.
If you've been reading my responses here, then you ought not be surprised by what I am about to say. Yes, God does know Who is "predestined" and in the same manner in which Noah's Ark was "predestined" to rise above the flood waters and to eventually rest upon the mountains of Ararat, JESUS CHRIST was "predestined" to rise from the dead and to be seated at the right hand of the Father in heaven. In the same manner in which those who boarded Noah's Ark were "predestined" to go where the ark went, Christians or those who are "in Christ" are "predestined" to go where Jesus went. We are, according to scripture, seated in heavenly places in Christ, spiritually speaking, and we will also receive glorified bodies like He has one day.
I agree, but what does this mean? He doesn't just "save us" apart from our wills. He saves us when we submit our wills to His will for our lives and when we are truly found to be "in Christ". Again, once we're truly "in Christ", we're "predestined" to go where He's been "predestined" to go.
Please consider what I'm about to say very closely. Look at the Ephesians 1:5 quote which speaks of how we've been "predestined for adoption". I don't know if you're aware of this or not, but the word which is translated as "adoption" in the New Testament doesn't really mean what our modern day English word "adoption" means. This word basically means "to place as an adult son" and it has everything to do with a Greco-Roman custom of Paul's day and Paul actually described it in his epistle to the Galatians:
"Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father. Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ." (Galatians 4:1-7)
If a man had a son in those days and in that culture, although his son would one day be his heir, he was placed under tutors and governors until the day of his "adoption" came or until the day came that he received adult status. Different togas were worn in those days to mark what stage of life a son was at and when he reached the age of "adoption", he donned what is called a "toga virilis" or the "toga of manhood":
Toga Virilis | Definition of toga virilis by Merriam-Webster
How does any of this relate to what we're discussing? Well, Paul's point was that in the same way that a boy in that culture was under tutors or governors until the time of his "adoption" came, so, too, were people under the tutor of the law until the time came that they reached the status of adult sons IN CHRIST and God sent "the spirit of adoption" or "the Spirit of His Son" into their hearts. THIS is exactly the type of "adoption" that we were "predestined" to in Ephesians 1:5. And? Well, Paul himself lamented over the unsaved Jews in the following manner:
"I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed." (Romans 9:1-8)
Paul understood that this "adoption" or that this status of adult sons in Christ pertained to all of Israel, yet they are not all Israel who are of Israel. Why? Because God allegedly "predestined" some of them to the "adoption" and others to hell? No! They were missing out on the very "adoption" that they were "predestined" to as well because of their rejection of Christ and because they were not truly a part of Abraham's seed. If they repented, which is what Paul was after, then they would be partakers of the very "adoption" IN CHRIST that God had "predestined" all willful believers to be a part of. I know that I'm giving you somewhat of a brainful....if I need to further elaborate later, then I most certainly will.
Again, I believe in "group predestination" in the sense that Christ is the One Who has actually been "predestined" and all those who are found to be in Him (the "group") are therefore "predestined" to the same thing.
Again, Biblical "adoption" isn't really the same type of "adoption" that we commonly refer to today in our society. It had everything to do with one receiving the status of an adult son and no longer being under tutors and governors and, by analogy, that speaks of those who are no longer under the law, but have found the status of adult sons IN CHRIST.
I'm not exactly sure what she means by all of this, but there is no reason whatsoever why God, in His sovereignty, couldn't sovereignly give man the freedom of choice and that is precisely what God has done.
I totally disagree with the doctrine of "once saved, always saved" or OSAS. Again, we just read in Romans chapter 11 how saved Gentiles who had been grafted in could be cut off and how they were supposed to fear lest such a thing came upon them. There are so many other similar examples all throughout the Bible that it literally boggles my mind how people go out of their ways to either ignore them or to somehow seek to explain them away.
Again, there are many examples where those who were clearly "once saved" were not "always saved", but that's another discussion for another day.
Again, I believe in "group predestination" in the sense in which I already described it (we're "predestined" IN CHRIST) and I definitely agree that the Bible says nothing about God allegedly "predestinating" people to hell in the manner in which some teach. God puts before us life and death and He tells us to CHOOSE LIFE. Those who CHOOSE DEATH, CHOOSE HELL as well.
I hope that this answers your questions.
This part I totally agree with. The only part that I'd be cautious about though is in attributing these beliefs totally to Calvin or to Calvinism. IOW, although Calvin has certainly greatly influenced people throughout the ages along certain lines, there were some "early church fathers" (ECF's) who believed somewhat in his brand of "predestination" as well. Even then, however, there were even "earlier church fathers" who totally rejected any such thoughts of that type of "predestination". In either case, "early church fathers" or not, we still ultimately need to prove everything according to scripture because there were apostates even back in those days as well.
I agree, but this only speaks to God's "foreknowledge" and does not in any way even suggest that God arbitrarily hand-picked certain people unto eternal life and others unto eternal damnation. There is a world of difference between "foreknowledge" and "predestination". Again, I go back to my example of Noah's Ark:
Noah's Ark was "predestined" to rise above the flood waters and to eventually come to rest upon the mountains of Ararat. God, in His "foreknowledge", knew who would get aboard the ark, but He still strove with everybody by His Spirit for 120 years and He still ordained Noah to be a preacher of righteousness. IOW, God genuinely gave everybody an opportunity to hear and to get aboard the ark and whoever boarded the ark was "predestined" to go where the ark went, but this is not the type of "predestination" that some here are preaching. No, instead, they're insisting that multitudes will have never even had the chance to come aboard the ark or to come to Christ by analogy in that God allegedly "predestined" them to hell. That is a heresy of the worst kind.
If you've been reading my responses here, then you ought not be surprised by what I am about to say. Yes, God does know Who is "predestined" and in the same manner in which Noah's Ark was "predestined" to rise above the flood waters and to eventually rest upon the mountains of Ararat, JESUS CHRIST was "predestined" to rise from the dead and to be seated at the right hand of the Father in heaven. In the same manner in which those who boarded Noah's Ark were "predestined" to go where the ark went, Christians or those who are "in Christ" are "predestined" to go where Jesus went. We are, according to scripture, seated in heavenly places in Christ, spiritually speaking, and we will also receive glorified bodies like He has one day.
I agree, but what does this mean? He doesn't just "save us" apart from our wills. He saves us when we submit our wills to His will for our lives and when we are truly found to be "in Christ". Again, once we're truly "in Christ", we're "predestined" to go where He's been "predestined" to go.
Please consider what I'm about to say very closely. Look at the Ephesians 1:5 quote which speaks of how we've been "predestined for adoption". I don't know if you're aware of this or not, but the word which is translated as "adoption" in the New Testament doesn't really mean what our modern day English word "adoption" means. This word basically means "to place as an adult son" and it has everything to do with a Greco-Roman custom of Paul's day and Paul actually described it in his epistle to the Galatians:
"Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all; But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father. Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world: But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ." (Galatians 4:1-7)
If a man had a son in those days and in that culture, although his son would one day be his heir, he was placed under tutors and governors until the day of his "adoption" came or until the day came that he received adult status. Different togas were worn in those days to mark what stage of life a son was at and when he reached the age of "adoption", he donned what is called a "toga virilis" or the "toga of manhood":
Toga Virilis | Definition of toga virilis by Merriam-Webster
How does any of this relate to what we're discussing? Well, Paul's point was that in the same way that a boy in that culture was under tutors or governors until the time of his "adoption" came, so, too, were people under the tutor of the law until the time came that they reached the status of adult sons IN CHRIST and God sent "the spirit of adoption" or "the Spirit of His Son" into their hearts. THIS is exactly the type of "adoption" that we were "predestined" to in Ephesians 1:5. And? Well, Paul himself lamented over the unsaved Jews in the following manner:
"I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. Not as though the word of God hath taken none effect. For they are not all Israel, which are of Israel: Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed." (Romans 9:1-8)
Paul understood that this "adoption" or that this status of adult sons in Christ pertained to all of Israel, yet they are not all Israel who are of Israel. Why? Because God allegedly "predestined" some of them to the "adoption" and others to hell? No! They were missing out on the very "adoption" that they were "predestined" to as well because of their rejection of Christ and because they were not truly a part of Abraham's seed. If they repented, which is what Paul was after, then they would be partakers of the very "adoption" IN CHRIST that God had "predestined" all willful believers to be a part of. I know that I'm giving you somewhat of a brainful....if I need to further elaborate later, then I most certainly will.
Again, I believe in "group predestination" in the sense that Christ is the One Who has actually been "predestined" and all those who are found to be in Him (the "group") are therefore "predestined" to the same thing.
Again, Biblical "adoption" isn't really the same type of "adoption" that we commonly refer to today in our society. It had everything to do with one receiving the status of an adult son and no longer being under tutors and governors and, by analogy, that speaks of those who are no longer under the law, but have found the status of adult sons IN CHRIST.
I'm not exactly sure what she means by all of this, but there is no reason whatsoever why God, in His sovereignty, couldn't sovereignly give man the freedom of choice and that is precisely what God has done.
I totally disagree with the doctrine of "once saved, always saved" or OSAS. Again, we just read in Romans chapter 11 how saved Gentiles who had been grafted in could be cut off and how they were supposed to fear lest such a thing came upon them. There are so many other similar examples all throughout the Bible that it literally boggles my mind how people go out of their ways to either ignore them or to somehow seek to explain them away.
Again, there are many examples where those who were clearly "once saved" were not "always saved", but that's another discussion for another day.
Again, I believe in "group predestination" in the sense in which I already described it (we're "predestined" IN CHRIST) and I definitely agree that the Bible says nothing about God allegedly "predestinating" people to hell in the manner in which some teach. God puts before us life and death and He tells us to CHOOSE LIFE. Those who CHOOSE DEATH, CHOOSE HELL as well.
I hope that this answers your questions.
A
If you're asking what anyone's thoughts are on Angela's post. I'll tell you my honest thought.
I kind of agree with her. I mean I do agree with her completely except for the God only predestines some to heaven part. And even in thinking maybe he does predestine some to hell? I honestly lean toward this, but I'm not fully convinced. I can go off and explain why not, but, does it really matter?
Not really. The predestined some to heaven part does matter, because it's in his word. We either trust it completely, or we don't trust him. Ya know? The rest is just slanting to personal opinion.
(By the way, IOW drives me up a wall. It sounds like "I know what it says, but I don't like it, so I'll rephrase it to fit what I do like." If anyone should be able to get his words down right, it ought to be God, so why reword what he said? And that's from a writer, who knows darn well what I mean to say isn't always what it looks like I said. I really could use people with ESP to understand me. God doesn't. lol)
I kind of agree with her. I mean I do agree with her completely except for the God only predestines some to heaven part. And even in thinking maybe he does predestine some to hell? I honestly lean toward this, but I'm not fully convinced. I can go off and explain why not, but, does it really matter?
Not really. The predestined some to heaven part does matter, because it's in his word. We either trust it completely, or we don't trust him. Ya know? The rest is just slanting to personal opinion.
(By the way, IOW drives me up a wall. It sounds like "I know what it says, but I don't like it, so I'll rephrase it to fit what I do like." If anyone should be able to get his words down right, it ought to be God, so why reword what he said? And that's from a writer, who knows darn well what I mean to say isn't always what it looks like I said. I really could use people with ESP to understand me. God doesn't. lol)
B
This portion of your post...
>>>>Again, I believe in "group predestination" in the sense in which I already described it (we're "predestined" IN CHRIST) and I definitely agree that the Bible says nothing about God allegedly "predestinating" people to hell in the manner in which some teach. God puts before us life and death and He tells us to CHOOSE LIFE. Those who CHOOSE DEATH, CHOOSE HELL as well.<<<<
Made me think of the verse that says something about "hell being enlarged"... I will have to look for it... but the jist I get from that is... WHY WOULD GOD HAVE TO ENLARGE HELL if he predestined some for hell... surely he would KNOW how big hell had to be to contain those people... thus HELL was not made for people... yet people are going to end up there.
>>>>Again, I believe in "group predestination" in the sense in which I already described it (we're "predestined" IN CHRIST) and I definitely agree that the Bible says nothing about God allegedly "predestinating" people to hell in the manner in which some teach. God puts before us life and death and He tells us to CHOOSE LIFE. Those who CHOOSE DEATH, CHOOSE HELL as well.<<<<
Made me think of the verse that says something about "hell being enlarged"... I will have to look for it... but the jist I get from that is... WHY WOULD GOD HAVE TO ENLARGE HELL if he predestined some for hell... surely he would KNOW how big hell had to be to contain those people... thus HELL was not made for people... yet people are going to end up there.
J
The verse that you're referring to can be found in Isaiah 5:14:
"Therefore hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it." (Isaiah 5:14)
It actually speaks of "hell enlarging herself" and the word for "hell" is "sheol" and there's, of course, endless debate about that as well. IOW, some view it as merely being the grave and others view it as being a whole lot more. In either case, when it comes to the place of everlasting fire, Jesus did say that it was prepared for the devil and his angels:
"Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:" (Matthew 25:41)
The reason, it seems, that men will wind up there is because they chose to follow the devil instead of God. Again, Jesus said that men will be condemned because they hate the light (Jesus) and because they love darkness. Seeing how the devil is equated with darkness in several places in the Bible, I have no problem believing that their love of darkness includes an underlying love of Satan.
Well, I'm heading out on another 3 day business trip early tomorrow and I'll be staying in a dinky motel without WiFi to cut my travelling costs. As such, if I post at all and if this thread is even still open, then it will only be a short sentence or two from my iPhone.
Good night.
"Therefore hell hath enlarged herself, and opened her mouth without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp, and he that rejoiceth, shall descend into it." (Isaiah 5:14)
It actually speaks of "hell enlarging herself" and the word for "hell" is "sheol" and there's, of course, endless debate about that as well. IOW, some view it as merely being the grave and others view it as being a whole lot more. In either case, when it comes to the place of everlasting fire, Jesus did say that it was prepared for the devil and his angels:
"Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:" (Matthew 25:41)
The reason, it seems, that men will wind up there is because they chose to follow the devil instead of God. Again, Jesus said that men will be condemned because they hate the light (Jesus) and because they love darkness. Seeing how the devil is equated with darkness in several places in the Bible, I have no problem believing that their love of darkness includes an underlying love of Satan.
Well, I'm heading out on another 3 day business trip early tomorrow and I'll be staying in a dinky motel without WiFi to cut my travelling costs. As such, if I post at all and if this thread is even still open, then it will only be a short sentence or two from my iPhone.
Good night.
What you first have to recognise is that in a sense God predestined us all for Hell, for He knew when He created us that we would sin. Thus He created us as 'soon to be' Hell bound sinners.
Going by the arguments some make surely a loving Father figure would only have allowed to live those whom He knew would go to Heaven ? The truth is that the dilemma is unavoidable. God created a world where He knew that the vast majority would go to Hell.
If words mean anything the Scriptures taken at face value leave us in no doubt that those who are saved are those who are chosen by God. Clever devils can wriggle their way out of it, but only by devious methods (I know, I tried).
Obvious examples are John 6.44; Romans 9.15-24; 8.29-30; Eph 1.3-14.
Going by the arguments some make surely a loving Father figure would only have allowed to live those whom He knew would go to Heaven ? The truth is that the dilemma is unavoidable. God created a world where He knew that the vast majority would go to Hell.
If words mean anything the Scriptures taken at face value leave us in no doubt that those who are saved are those who are chosen by God. Clever devils can wriggle their way out of it, but only by devious methods (I know, I tried).
Obvious examples are John 6.44; Romans 9.15-24; 8.29-30; Eph 1.3-14.