C
Cap
Guest
You only have the free will God gave you.
-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Torah vs Grace?
- Thread starter Pacman
- Start date
Your, my or anyone else's will is not the issue; it's what God wills that no one can defeat.
Eph. 1:3-6 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love, having predestined us to adoption as sons by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will, to the praise of the glory of His grace, by which He has made us accepted in the Beloved.
Freewill is free or it is not freewill. God's desire is not for robots or to even have total control, else the very existance of sin is either a sham or God not only allows but desires the existance of evil. That is not good or righteous pr holy.
Perhaps, but I was once where you are going until it became clear, through the systematic study and expository teaching of the Bible, that it was incorrect. Who God is makes it impossible for anyone to defeat His sovereign exercise of His will. No mortal sinner can overcome His super-abundant grace through the substitutionary sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Cheers
C
Cap
Guest
The thing that is hard to overcome is the idea from a loving God, is one day after your dead, believer or not, you will bow and confess in Christ, and then you go straight to hell if you are not.
Not much compassion.
Why did the thief on the cross fare better, he was as good as dead. Or maybe it's just a timing issue.
Not much compassion.
Why did the thief on the cross fare better, he was as good as dead. Or maybe it's just a timing issue.
Universal reconciliation?
I have a hard time seeing how anyone will be able to outsmart Him or thwart His will. We as parents can certainly cause a young child to "decide" what we want him to.
There are verses in Daniel that talk about when Michael shall stand up for his people, and the dead being raised.....some to glory and some to shame. Then too those who teach contrary to the commandments will be called least ....in the kingdom.
It is interesting food for thought...and faith.
I have a hard time seeing how anyone will be able to outsmart Him or thwart His will. We as parents can certainly cause a young child to "decide" what we want him to.
There are verses in Daniel that talk about when Michael shall stand up for his people, and the dead being raised.....some to glory and some to shame. Then too those who teach contrary to the commandments will be called least ....in the kingdom.
It is interesting food for thought...and faith.
C
Cap
Guest
"Many are called but few chose"
All are was saved through fire. The 'through fire' is the hard part to figure out.
To me, it's really about who is the guests and who are the bride/chosen.
All are was saved through fire. The 'through fire' is the hard part to figure out.
To me, it's really about who is the guests and who are the bride/chosen.
That’s great reasoning. I’m not being facetious or sarcastic. And if that’s all the scriptures that were available it would be very conclusive.
But it’s not.
For example re Judas. John 17:12. While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.
Judas was one of those given to Christ by the Father and yet Christ acknowledged that Judas was lost/no longer of the group.
This is not an accidental “lost” but the result of a conscious decision on Judas’ part to walk away while still pretending to be part of the group.
There are many deflections used to undermine the plain language and message of this particular text. All of them I’ve been acquainted with are a product of either logical fallacies, or confirmation bias or a self serving preferential projection affirmed by cherry picked passages that ignore plain language in many passages.
My friend, Jesus say He gives eternal life to His sheep! He says they will never perish! Since your examples are of those who perished, there are only two possibilities. First possibility; Jesus was wrong. Second possibility; they never were His sheep in the first place. Again, I encourage you to start with a clear understanding of who God is and to draw your conclusions from that foundation. If you ascribe more power/ability to man than to God, you will fall into error. I would remind you, God does the impossible.
C
Cap
Guest
1 Timothy 4:10 That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe.
1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
Romans 5:18 Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.
1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
Romans 5:18 Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people.
Last edited by a moderator:
And that is the simple resolution of the whole thing.
Those who are chosen, will be saved, guaranteed. Those who are not chosen, will not be saved. Also guaranteed.
Which means that those who are chosen will endure in their faith, and those who fall away were never chosen in the first place.
But as you or I don't know who is chosen and who is not, this makes no difference to our day-to-day life at all. In practice, we're operating entirely on free will. The fact that the end result of that free will is predetermined is irrelevant, because we don't know the answer until we decide it for ourselves.
Or you could selectively quote the verse just before that one: For if, because of one man's trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ. Universal salvation appears to be supported by certain proof-texts, but disagrees with the overall thrust of the message.
How does this reconcile with John 17:12? Judas was one that God had given Christ. It doesn’t get much plainer than that.
This is Christ himself acknowledging that Judas was a sheep (to use your analogy) that God had given to his care and he was the only one of a group that was lost.
Under the current paradigm, unexplainable. Which means that the two choices listed as the only possible choices = a false dichotomy.
Was Jesus wrong that God had given Judas to Christ? Or wrong that he was lost? Or wrong that Judas was the only one lost?
None of the above.
Or Judas was never the recipient of the gift of eternal life which Jesus gives to His sheep(?) I'll trust that Jesus Christ keeps His word otherwise there is NO assurance for anything God says.
John 17:12 describes Judas as the "the son of destruction" or "the one doomed to destruction". Therefore, he was predestined to be lost, not to be saved. He was never given to Christ in order to save him, that's what the verse says. He was given to him as a companion, but for a different purpose entirely, and that was known from the start.
C
Cap
Guest
I don't believe in the universal salvation idea based on Calvinism. But what I do question is the understanding of what hell is. The Lake of Fire is a real thing but not eternal, therefore once judgment is complete then comes restoration. It's a universal theme of God.
Deuteronomy 25:1When people have a dispute, they are to take it to court and the judges will decide the case, acquitting the innocent and condemning the guilty. 2If the guilty person deserves to be beaten, the judge shall make them lie down and have them flogged in his presence with the number of lashes the crime deserves, 3but the judge must not impose more than forty lashes. If the guilty party is flogged more than that, your fellow Israelite will be degraded in your eyes.
How can God, the ultimate judge, punish someone for eternity and be just by His own Laws?
Sorry brother, we don't' get to define words ourselves; especially when we are looking at a translation, then it becomes 2 steps removed from the inspired text.
Here's our verse:
νόμον οὖν καταργοῦμεν διὰ τῆς πίστεως; μὴ γένοιτο·* ἀλλὰ νόμον ἱστάνομεν.
The word in bold is the one you you guys were discussing.
So instead of guessing what it means, let's look at the actual definition from the premier scholarly lexicon for 1st century christian literature.
ἵστημι
① to cause to be in a place or position, set, place, bring
② to propose someone for an obligation, put forward, propose
③ to set up or put into force, establish
④ to validate something that is in force or in practice, reinforce validity of, uphold, maintain, validate τὶsomething fig. ext. of 1 (1 Macc 2:27 τὴν διαθήκην) τὴν παράδοσιν ὑμῶν validate or maintain your own tradition Mk 7:9. νόμον ἱστάνομεν we uphold (the) law Ro 3:31 (s. καταργέω 2).
⑤ to cause to be steadfast, make someone stand
⑥ to specify contractually
Arndt, W., Danker, F. W., & Bauer, W. (2000). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament and other early Christian literature (3rd ed., p. 482). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Note the lexicon recommends meaning #4 for this passage as it even lists our passage in question.
So the recommended meaning is "Validate something that is in force or in practice, reinforce validity of, uphold, maintain". We don't need to wonder the sense in which "uphold" is to be understood here any more. Even if they are wrong with their recommendation, all the other listings look pretty good as well
Anyone interested in the most popular lexicon for the Greek New Testament among scholars across denominations, you can get it here on Amazon: BDAG
Last edited:
Nice point, this is something I realized in the past couple of years only as well; not to mention the level of absolute Legalism in many denominational traditions
Last edited: