|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Apr 14, 2007 19:40:47 GMT -5
A very short (95 pages), but a very good read is:Mystery of Christ Revealed by George E. Smock You can read it online or print it off at: www.gospeltruth.net/mystery_of_christ.htmSee how biblical predestination and biblical open theism are completely compatible. Biblical predestination is God pre-destining- nations. God loving Jacob and hating Esau had nothing to do with their individual salvation. It was not that Jacob was automaticly saved and Esau was automaticly condemned. The bible never teaches that, but many have assumed it. Rather, the bible says that God choose Jacob to be the blood line in which the Messiah would come, who would extend salvation to all nations. Just like Isaac was chosen of Ishmael, Jacob was chosen over Esau, because the Messiah would not come from both their decendants. One of them needed to be picked (not for salvation and the other for condemnation, but for the blood line). And God picking one over the other had nothing to do with their own personal works, but rather it was because of God's good pleasure. Romans 9:11God choose Israel (Jacob), in order to bless all nations: Isa 49:6 - And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth. God's plan or determination has always been to extend the offer of salvation to all nations, that anyone from any nation can willingly repent and believe and be saved: Ge 22:18 - And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice. Acts 15:17-18: That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things. Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. Romans 9, 10, and 11 should be read in context of each other, along with having the historical context in mind: the debate on whether or not the jews alone were chosen or if God predestined to extend salvation to the gentiles. Romans 9:24So the bible says that God has eternally decreed: Ro 10:12 - There is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. [whether Jew or Gentile] The eternal decree of God is that anyone who willingly calls upon Him shall be saved, but His eternal decree is not specificly who will be the ones that call upon Him. The forethought of God was to have a holy people, so God predetermined to have a holy people, but He never determined the people. The very fact that he wants a holy people excludes the possibility of zombies, robots and machines. They must be voluntarily or willingly choosing good over evil if they are to be holy. A very short (95 pages), but a very good read is:Mystery of Christ Revealed by George E. Smock You can read it online or print it off at: www.gospeltruth.net/mystery_of_christ.htm
|
|
|
Post by dmatic on Apr 18, 2007 14:46:20 GMT -5
Jesse....Is the print out worth 10 cents per page? probably..... so, I'll try to print it and then respond later this week, Lord willing.
Meanwhile, you wrote: All "gifts" and "works" from God, correct? (The will, repentance, belief, and salvation) Right?
peace, dmatic
|
|
|
Post by dmatic on Jun 12, 2007 14:37:36 GMT -5
Jesse, I'm finally in the process of reading this article but am finding the author to be antinomian...did you too, so find him?
peace, dmatic
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Jun 12, 2007 15:19:07 GMT -5
That's very interesting dmatic. What leads you to those conclusions? I haven't read the book, but I'm somewhat familiar with the author.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Jun 12, 2007 17:30:13 GMT -5
I too find it very interesting that you would think that.
I think I can recall him specificly speaking against antinomianism, which teaches that men under the gospel are no longer under moral obligation to the moral law, which is the law of love.
He does distinguish between the dietary laws, the ceremonial laws, the Nation of Israel's governmental and civil laws, but states that the moral law of love is still obligatory upon every moral agent, those saved or unsaved.
|
|
|
Post by dmatic on Jun 14, 2007 17:56:11 GMT -5
I have not read his whole article yet....but was a bit alarmed by some of his statements in chapter one...such as: While quoting the Acts 15 passage of the Jerusalem Council he inserted "[Some restrictions from the law were put on the Gentiles so as to not unnecesarily offend the Jews...]" , after verse 20. Where did he get that explanation? Then two paragraphs later he quoted Adam Clarke who said: "....freeing the Church from the embarrassments of the law of Moses...." The law of Moses, an embarrassment? May I remind him that the law "of" Moses was actually given to him by God Himself? Then under the heading "Galatians" in the ninth and tenth paragraphs he wrote: "Few Christians are even aware of Jewish holidays(my bold), let alone concerned about their observation." This is in my opinion, a very great problem with anomianism. They declare God's Holy Days as "Jewish", and have not followed Y'Shua's command to teach all nations to observe whatsoever He commanded them! He seems, in paragraph ten to define Jewish Legalism as keeping the commandments of God, and thinks it a bad thing to be concerned with....calling obedeince to God's law as "weak and beggarly". Then in paragraph 11 he reveals that he does not understand God's law when he declares that obedience to the fourth commandment is to keep a "Jewish" sabbath! The keeping of the commandment is to keep God's Sabbath holy! God's Sabbath is not only for "Jews". That is like saying that the command not to murder is only for the "Jews". Maybe I should ask you both what your definition of "anti-nomianism" is....rather than assume that you agree with mine. I believe it is teaching as doctrine, the commandments of men, while making the commandments of God of none effect. I think it involves the teaching of law-less-ness, which I believe to be the biggest "heresy" out there! I have appreciated the zeal with which many on this site have shown for holiness preaching! I agree with encouraging holiness, without which no one will see the LORD. I will continue to work through his article, Lord willing, but I also am trying to get started on the "Third check to antinomianism" by the good, John Fletcher! (Thanks for sharing him, by the way, Jesse! And, your latest recommendation, that I accepted and printed, which I haven't yet started. I copied off the Smock article on 4/18/07 and am finally getting to it! Please be patient with me. There is much work to be done preparing the way for the Lord and making His paths straight! Peace, dmatic
|
|
|
Post by dmatic on Jun 14, 2007 18:02:02 GMT -5
BTW, I am enjoying my time spent on your site, brother. I am encouraged to see the many who are seeking the kingdom of God and His righteousness! thanks for letting me hang out here...but I know that I am probably not finished "ruffling" feathers, so-to-speak....but please be assured that I am not seeking to be deceived, nor do I desire to deceive anybody else! (I know....that's what they all say, right? ) I see where some have called you "heretic" too. ...isn't it "fun" when men say all manner against you falsely? Peace brother....dmatic
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Jun 14, 2007 18:10:16 GMT -5
I agree with Jed on this topic. The bible is plain as could be that Christians do not have to keep the 7th day of the week separate from the others. I dare say you don't understand the new covenant if you think that Christians have to keep Saturday holy.
The bible even says that Christians are dead to the law, and that it has passed away. Does that fit into your theology?
|
|
|
Post by dmatic on Jun 15, 2007 12:51:38 GMT -5
Josh, Thanks...but I may have a different version of the Bible than you have. Because I thought you said: I think this is what I have in mind when I speak of antinomianism. What do you think antinomianism means? Certainly, the Bible does not say that the law has passed away! It says the exact opposite! Check out Jesus' instruction at Mt. 5:17-19. Peace, dmatic
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Jun 15, 2007 13:27:15 GMT -5
Maybe I do. Rom 7:4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, [even] to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
Rom 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not [in] the oldness of the letter.
2Cr 3:7 But if the ministration of death, written [and] engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which [glory] was to be done away: 2Cr 3:8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? 2Cr 3:9 For if the ministration of condemnation [be] glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. 2Cr 3:10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. 2Cr 3:11 For if that which is done away [was] glorious, much more that which remaineth [is] glorious.
Hbr 8:13 In that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old [is] ready to vanish away.
To say that there is no standard or you can do what ever you want and you are still saved. My computer is down and the one I am on now isn't really up to par. It slows me down quite a bit. It may be easier if you want an overview of my view to check this old thread out I started. The Basic Gospel Truth: The Law to Grace
|
|
|
Post by Josh Parsley on Jun 15, 2007 13:28:48 GMT -5
I really don't want to have this thread going on another topic, so this will be my last post on this thread dealing with the topic of law/gospel.
If you want to discuss this you can on the new thread Jesse just posted.
|
|
|
Post by trustandobey on Jun 15, 2007 15:37:25 GMT -5
If the Lord through the New Covenant put away the Law or (1) of the 10 "The Sabbath" Then the Law was not perfect, therefore God is not perfect and created Evil.
The Law is a Mirror to show or reveal Sin!
If you remove or throw away the Mirror - you can not see Sin!
sounds like a human Heart problem, not a Sabbath problem
For if their is no Law "Then No Sin" [Sin is the transgression of the Law 1 John 3:4]
If then no Sin "Then No Death" [Wages of sin is Death - Romans 6:23]
If then no Death "Then we are immortal" Shall mortal man be more just than God? shall a man be more pure than his maker?" Job 4:17 - "No death, live forever"
And if we are immortal "Then we are gods" 1 Timothy 1:17 Now unto the King eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God 1 Timothy 6:16 Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto
That is exactly what the Devil preached in Genesis, tricked Eve to sin, transgress God's unchangeable Law, and said you will never Die if you do. Those who preach the law is done away with, or changed which includes the Sabbath (the 4th Commandment) and that it isn't to be kept, is teaching the Devils lie, and teaching people to transgress God's Law is OK.
Why do I or any Christian have to keep Sunday? Where is the Sunday Commandment. You can not use Paul, for Paul Keep the Sabbath, If you use Paul, then you make him a Hypocrite. For He kept the Commandments of God, out of Love for His Saviour.
Matthew 15:2 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread.
Matthew 15:3 But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?
TrustandObey
|
|
|
Post by dmatic on Jun 17, 2007 16:40:24 GMT -5
Trust and Obey wrote: i agree with you. It does appear that this teaching is the teaching of law-less-ness that is, in my view, the greatest falsehood that antinomians preach...they disagree with Jesus and Paul, but, since they don't understand Paul, they think he agrees with them! An amazing delusion. peace brother...dmatic
|
|
|
Post by darcobedient2jesus on Jun 17, 2007 18:26:01 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by blynn on Jun 17, 2007 18:45:32 GMT -5
My dad just now emailed this to me and it wasn't something that was on my mind at the time but I felt led to share it with you. An excerpt from the www.CrossTV.com video series The Sovereignty of God. Demonstrates how 2 Peter 3:9, which is often used as a proof text against Calvinism, actually helps to prove Calvinism instead. www.godtube.com/view_video.php?viewkey=90bc77c1fed3c94885c8
|
|
|
Post by Paul Mcgrade on Jun 17, 2007 19:06:57 GMT -5
Biblical predestination is God predestining the leaves that fall from the trees, the stream of water flowing, the wind blowing.
|
|
|
Post by trustandobey on Jun 17, 2007 20:13:41 GMT -5
What a perversion of Biblical truth on this website.
I will obey God, than false Shepard's "rather than Man" Acts 5:29
2 Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.
2 Peter 3:16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
Teaching people to transgress one of the 10 commandments is preaching "it is OK to Sin."
The Sabbath was created after Marriage in the Garden of Eden, as an memorial to the 6th day creation, I do not see Christians giving up their partner.
Preaching that God's Law was put away or changed by the Blood of Jesus Christ is Taking the Name of the Lord in vain.
Romans 8:7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
TrustandObey
|
|
|
Post by dmatic on Jun 20, 2007 16:01:20 GMT -5
Josh, Is your computer fixed yet? I was wondering if you'd located that part in the Bible that plainly removes the commandment to keep the sabbath day holy?
Thanks, dmatic
|
|
|
Post by blynn on Jun 23, 2007 7:18:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by matthew7 on Jul 5, 2007 20:16:34 GMT -5
Maybe I do. Rom 7:4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, [even] to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
Rom 7:6 But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not [in] the oldness of the letter.
2Cr 3:7 But if the ministration of death, written [and] engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which [glory] was to be done away: 2Cr 3:8 How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious? 2Cr 3:9 For if the ministration of condemnation [be] glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory. 2Cr 3:10 For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth. 2Cr 3:11 For if that which is done away [was] glorious, much more that which remaineth [is] glorious.
Hbr 8:13 In that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old [is] ready to vanish away.
To say that there is no standard or you can do what ever you want and you are still saved. My computer is down and the one I am on now isn't really up to par. It slows me down quite a bit. It may be easier if you want an overview of my view to check this old thread out I started. The Basic Gospel Truth: The Law to GraceHeb 8:13 13 In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away. KJV Heb 9:10 10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. KJV Josh, You quoted Hebrews 8:13 to say the New Covenant does not include the law of God! But what you really did was confirm the fact that the New Covenant contains the Law of God. Let me explain. But first I also want you to show me the command of God repealing the Sabbath and instituting the old pagan day of "Baal" worship, known as Sunday Worship? Anyway, SDA's and 7th day Baptists and hundreds of other Sabbath keeping (obedient) Christians have been waiting a long, long, long, long, long, long, long, long etc... TIME! Just show us one text! If the Sabbath is done away, so is marriage! Please, brother just look at the facts! The Bible is clear! The Sabbath is eternal! Isa 66:22-23 22 For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, saith the LORD, so shall your seed and your name remain. 23 And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before me, saith the LORD. KJV Since you can not do it, and since you can not explain why you worship on a day that scripture does not sanctify, or make holy, I will now show you why Heb 8:13 is taken out of context. Heb 9:11-12 11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. KJV Anybody can see that there is still a TABERNACLE, and that it is made by God! Man did not make it, and therefore it is a heavenly TABERNACLE! Point two, Christ entered that TABERNACLE, and He went into the HOLY PLACE! Question: What is in the heavenly tabernacle? Rev 11:19 19 And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament: and there were lightnings, and voices, and thunderings, and an earthquake, and great hail. KJV Well there you have it! The ark of His testament! The ark of His Testament is the LAW OF GOD, known as the TEN COMMANDMENTS!!!! That is what the Ten C's are called: "The Testament" and His testament is contained in the "ark." The New Testament, is the same exact meaning as New Covenant! The New Covenant is the Law of God restored in man, by better promises that God makes with man! In fact, if a person was paying attention and really trying to "DIG" for truth, he or she would have read the verse in Hebrews that came just 3 verses prior! That verse states that the Law of God is to be applied in the New Covenant! Heb 8:10 10 For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord; I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people: KJV To use Hebrews 8:13 to show there is no law is complete darkness! Isaiah 8:20 20 To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them. KJV You have spoken against the LAW OF GOD! You should consider your texts more carefully! Not only that your use of 2 Cor 3:7&8... is another example of willful neglect of scripture! But by God's grace I will address this in another post! Matthew
|
|
|
Post by dmatic on Jul 6, 2007 14:59:25 GMT -5
Thank you for your post Matthew, but I need to ask you on this thread too, where you have discerned that the Law of God is "only" the Ten Commandments?
It is apparent that "blood sacrifices" can no longer be done, since God had the "temple" removed from where they were to be sacrificed in approx...70A.D.
However, what of the other commandments of God regarding loving one's neighbors, and loving God with more specific instructions? Do you propose that they too have been done away with?
Say, Interest collecting, and God's commandment prohibiting it, as He calls it "Unjust Gain"? Do you not agree that it, too, should be kept today?
Peace, dmatic
|
|
|
Post by runner4jesus on Aug 12, 2007 19:24:22 GMT -5
It is true Jacob was chosen for the bloodline. There is a reason why God hated Esau as the Word says in Romans 9:13. Genesis 25:34 Esau despised his birthright. That is why God hated him. He didn't value his birthright. We better value what we have in Christ. This is one of the gems in God's Word that is valuable in our walk... Proverbs 23:23 Buy the truth, and sell it not; also wisdom, and instruction, and understanding. That is exactly what we're doing on this blog, and God who is faithful will reveal his TRUTH in his word as we search for it with all our heart.
|
|
|
Post by swordsmith on Nov 17, 2007 13:50:28 GMT -5
I am disappointed that this subject got derailed pretty much from the outset. Perhaps the Moderator could diverge posts in this thread to a separate topic, where continued discussion of biblical predestination and open theism could proceed.
Troy
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Nov 17, 2007 20:21:43 GMT -5
I agree. This topic did get off track right from the start. I'll leave those posts here for now but I will pick up the discussion again.
Here is my arguement:
- If the future was not originally open, God cannot have determine it.
- If the future was not originally open, God could never have planned anything. Neither could God change His plans.
- But if God planned something, it must have been unplanned before He planned it. And if it was unplanned, it must have been open.
- The Calvinists says that God has predetermined every iota of the future. The open theist says God has predetermined a great deal about the future. Anything that God has not Himself predetermined, but has left to our own freewill to determine, is still open and uncertain. But anything that God does not allow freewill to determine, but what He Himself determines, is settled and certain.
|
|
rc
Junior Member
May God be glorified 1 Cor 10:31
Posts: 63
|
Post by rc on Aug 12, 2008 23:28:59 GMT -5
According to this view propagated man would be sovereign and God subservient to man's free will. If God limits himself because of man’s free will man would be sovereign and God would cease to be sovereign. However, we know this is not the case we see in the New and Old Testament God is sovereign over his creation including man‘s will. There is so many instances that declare this fact of God‘s Sovereignty in the Word of God. (Here are a few Gen 20:6, Num -22:38;23:12,20, Proverbs 21:1-4:23-23:7)
|
|
|
Post by Kerrigan on Aug 13, 2008 0:00:31 GMT -5
According to this view propagated man would be sovereign and God subservient to man's free will. If God limits himself because of man’s free will man would be sovereign and God would cease to be sovereign. However, we know this is not the case we see in the New and Old Testament God is sovereign over his creation including man‘s will. There is so many instances that declare this fact of God‘s Sovereignty in the Word of God. (Here are a few Gen 20:6, Num -22:38;23:12,20, Proverbs 21:1-4:23-23:7) No, actually, according to this view, God IS Sovereign, it's just not the "Sovereign God" of gnostic calvinism that is the primary cause of all things, including sin. The problem you have, my Gnostic Friend is with your definition of Sovereignty. Sovereignty doesn't mean that God causes all things or that God's will happens in every instance. Sovereignty means that God is the ultimate authority. He either allows things to happen through Free Will or chooses to do things through His Omnipotence and Omniscience.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Aug 13, 2008 11:34:18 GMT -5
Is God's Sovereignty so weak and fail that He cannot allow man to have a free will?
The God of the Bible is Sovereign (He is the ultimate authority) and man has a free will (man can choose to obey God's commandments or not).
|
|
rc
Junior Member
May God be glorified 1 Cor 10:31
Posts: 63
|
Post by rc on Aug 13, 2008 16:45:02 GMT -5
My definition of sovereignty is found in the scriptures not in gnosticism or humanism. Show me were in the scriptures God's sovereignty is defined with the notion of final authority and not also in control of man's will.
|
|
rc
Junior Member
May God be glorified 1 Cor 10:31
Posts: 63
|
Post by rc on Aug 13, 2008 17:29:22 GMT -5
Jesse you must first show me were God's sovereignty is exclusively defined as final authority in scripture. The Bible proclaims God is in control of his creation including man's will.
|
|
|
Post by Jesse Morrell on Aug 13, 2008 17:36:25 GMT -5
Every time the Bible uses the word "sin" it contradicts Calvinistic Sovereignty. If you deny that man is in REBELLION against God, then you deny that mankind is fallen. But if you admit that man is in rebellion against the will of God, then you must deny Calvinistic Sovereignty.
The word "Sovereignty" is a theological word that is not used extensively throughout the Bible. But we do know that God is the Supremely Ruler, and we know that mankind is in rebellion against this supreme Ruler.
"His citizens hated him, and would not have him to REIGN over them" Lk 19:14. In other words, His subjects were in rebellion against His Sovereign rule.
RC,
The burden of proof is on you to prove that God causes EVERY SINGLE SIN that EVER occurs. The Bible never teaches this.
The burden of proof is on you to prove that man NEVER has free will. The Bible clearly says that God, at rare times, takes away man's free will or overrides man's will. But the Bible never says that God ALWAYS controls people like puppets.
|
|