Struggling with this principle
- Thread starter DBurrage
- 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.
Was that really a choice?
Joshua with the armies of Israel marshaled about to enter the land, saying choose life or death, implicit that whoever would not fall in with him according to the command of God to enter the land, would be put to death?
What kind of choice is that? It is nothing more than this: yield and obey or be destroyed.
But it's practically the only verse ever used to argue against the sovereign will and predestination of God - which itself has an hundred different scripture references that are all given in support of it.
This passage shows that man has will and agency, for sure, but it doesn't have anything to say about whether God foreordains.
Joshua with the armies of Israel marshaled about to enter the land, saying choose life or death, implicit that whoever would not fall in with him according to the command of God to enter the land, would be put to death?
What kind of choice is that? It is nothing more than this: yield and obey or be destroyed.
But it's practically the only verse ever used to argue against the sovereign will and predestination of God - which itself has an hundred different scripture references that are all given in support of it.
This passage shows that man has will and agency, for sure, but it doesn't have anything to say about whether God foreordains.
Here is free will in the Bible from the beginning: God tells Adam he may freely eat of any of the trees in the garden, but do not eat of the one tree.
Adam can choose to eat or not to eat of all those fruits. But it wasn't Adam's choice to be created or to be put in the garden. It wasn't his choice to be the federal head of mankind. He chose the names of the animals but he didn't choose his wife and he didn't choose whether God would walk with him in the garden or not.
Our will and our choices are limited and our options are chosen by the same God that created and fashioned us according to the manner of His own choosing.
Adam can choose to eat or not to eat of all those fruits. But it wasn't Adam's choice to be created or to be put in the garden. It wasn't his choice to be the federal head of mankind. He chose the names of the animals but he didn't choose his wife and he didn't choose whether God would walk with him in the garden or not.
Our will and our choices are limited and our options are chosen by the same God that created and fashioned us according to the manner of His own choosing.
-
1
- Show all
I understand the scriptures to teach eternal salvation is only by God's sovereign grace, without the help of man. I also believe the scriptures to teach that God gives us deliverance (Greek for salvation) here in this world, when we are tempted to sin, and ask for his forgiveness. The same way that when we ask God for healing of an illness that we have, and he heals us from that illness, he has just saved (delivered) us from that illness.
I believe the difference in your interpretation of the scriptures, and mine, is that I believe God has given mankind a free choice in how he wants to live his life while he sojourns here on earth. but God does not give mankind a choice in his eternal deliverance.
The reason that there is so much confusion, as to "eternal salvation (deliverance) by man's good works, and eternal deliverance (salvation) by God's sovereign grace, is the fact that the scriptures teach a deliverance by man's good works, and, a deliverance eternally by God's grace. The confusion comes in not rightly dividing the salvation (deliverance) scriptures.
I believe the difference in your interpretation of the scriptures, and mine, is that I believe God has given mankind a free choice in how he wants to live his life while he sojourns here on earth. but God does not give mankind a choice in his eternal deliverance.
The reason that there is so much confusion, as to "eternal salvation (deliverance) by man's good works, and eternal deliverance (salvation) by God's sovereign grace, is the fact that the scriptures teach a deliverance by man's good works, and, a deliverance eternally by God's grace. The confusion comes in not rightly dividing the salvation (deliverance) scriptures.
The trouble with your theory is that God did give mankind freedom in choosing how he wants to live his life as he sojourns here on earth, but God did not give mankind the freedom to choose his eternal destination.
By God's foreknowledge, he saw that all mankind would choose not to seek him, Psalms 53:2-3. Because of his foreknowledge is why he choose an elect people out of those that would not seek him, Eph 1, and had Jesus to clean them of all their sins by his crucifiction on the cross. John 6:39.
By God's foreknowledge, he saw that all mankind would choose not to seek him, Psalms 53:2-3. Because of his foreknowledge is why he choose an elect people out of those that would not seek him, Eph 1, and had Jesus to clean them of all their sins by his crucifiction on the cross. John 6:39.
-
1
- Show all
I say that we are all dead in sins when we are born naturally into this world, by Adam's fall, and must be brought to a spiritual life, as stated in Eph 2, while we were yet dead in sins, and unable to choose spiritual life. This makes being born again totally by God's grace, and not by man's choice.
-
1
- Show all
God's process of adoption is the same one that we use when we adopt a child. We go to the adoption home (the world of mankind to God) and elect which child we want to adopt, just as God did in Eph 1. We then have to take care of the legal work, such as "paying the price" (Jesus's sacrifice on the cross) "signing papers to secure the adoption" (John 6:39, Jesus said that he would not lose any)
The final process is that we pick up the child, and bring him home (Matt 24:31, And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other).
The final process is that we pick up the child, and bring him home (Matt 24:31, And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other).
Endeavoring to post only what is "relevant" to the topic at hand, may I offer a post I made some time back (1 of 2, actually... the other one I'm not posting here has to do with the TWO distinct "CALLED" words EACH used in both Rom8:28,30 and Matt22:2-14... but on to the post I will put here, again, hoping it is considered HELPFUL and PERTINENT to the present Subject = ) ):[quoting old post]
Luke 7:29-30 - "29 And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justified God, being baptized with the baptism of John. 30 But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel [G1012 - boulēn] of God against [as to / unto] themselves, being not baptized [having not been baptized] of him."
--G1012 - boulēn - used also in Ephesians 1:11, the verse the Calvinist uses to say "no one can reject/resist" THIS, God's decreed [determined-plan] will [G1012]... yet Luke 7:30 clearly says the Pharisees and lawyers "rejected the boulēn G1012 of God..." (which, for that time then in existence, the decreed-will of God was: "the baptism of John").
The point being, they did indeed "reject the boulēn G1012 of God". Something that Calvinists say is impossible.
From Bible Hub [quoting]:
Definition: counsel, deliberate wisdom, decree.
HELPS Word-studies
1012 boulḗ – properly, a resolved plan, used particularly of the immutable aspect of God's plan – purposefully arranging all physical circumstances, which guarantees every scene of life works to His eternal purpose.
This level of God's plan (1012 /boulḗ) demonstrates He is the Lord of history, i.e. always in charge!
[1012 (boulḗ) is more than God's immutable plan of physical circumstances. It always also includes the Lord's purpose in them – and hence arranging all the physical scenes of history before creation (Ps 139:16; Jn 1:3).]
[and, quoting]
HELPS Word-studies
Cognate: 1014 boúlomai – to plan with full resolve (determination). See 1012 (boulē).
1014 /boúlomai ("resolutely plan") is a strong term that underlines the predetermined (and determined) intention driving the planning (wishing, resolving). In contrast, 2309 (thélō) focuses on the desire ("wishfulness") behind making an offer (cf. TDNT, 1, 629).
[While God's "thelō-offers" can be rejected (see 2309 /thélō), His 1014 /boúlomai ("planning") always works out His purpose, especially in conjunction with presetting the physical scenes of history.]
[end quotes from BibleHub]
They clearly "rejected the boulēn G1012 of God," according to that text (Lk7:30).
One might think to answer, well they are just doing what comes naturally (to natural man), but that is to miss the point. The point is, the Calvinist says that "no one can reject/resist His 'boule / boulen [G1012]' will (that is to say, His 'decreed' will)." But Luke 7:30 says these clearly did so.
And I agree with those saying that "Calvinism" and "Arminianism" are NOT the only options.
[end quoting old post]
____________
Hope that helps you in your endeavor. = )
