[jezusfrk]

I believe that the church has become far too divided. How can this be remedied? What can we change in ourselves that can reverse this process?


In the first days of the church, the only division was geographical. Even then, they still communicated regularly. Today, churches that are three blocks away never speak. I think we put too much emphasis on the differences in cultural dogma than the love of Christ. Doesn't He deserve ONE bride?

[Elizabeth]

I think a mod should move this to GP or Theol.

[Travis]

Originally posted by jezusfrk
I believe that the church has become far too divided. How can this be remedied? What can we change in ourselves that can reverse this process?

What do you mean, divided? As far as doctrine you mean? In that case, people who are wrong can all change their views to the right ones, and everyone can agree, or the division will always be there... It's not Biblical to overlook false teachings for the sake of "unity."

Originally posted by jezusfrk
In the first days of the church, the only division was geographical.

Cite proof or evidence of that claim please. I think it's incorrect. There were disagreements over doctrine in the early church. Why else do you think Paul wrote the epistles? He wrote them partly to address false doctrine among other things that certain churches were doing wrong.

Originally posted by jezusfrk
I think we put too much emphasis on the differences in cultural dogma than the love of Christ. Doesn't He deserve ONE bride?

Here are some verses concerning what to do when someone teaches false doctrine:

For the overseer must be above reproach as God's steward, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not addicted to wine, not pugnacious, not fond of sordid gain, but hospitable, loving what is good, sensible, just, devout, self-controlled, holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, so that he will be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict. For there are many rebellious men, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision, who must be silenced because they are upsetting whole families, teaching things they should not teach for the sake of sordid gain.
(Titus 1:7-11 NASB, emphasis mine)

Here Paul talks about silencing and refuting those who teach false doctrine. It's clear that unity is important, but truth is even more important.

And what do you mean by "cultural dogma?"

[frostydv]

People need to be rooted in sound doctrine and then they will not sway with every wind that comes along... Taht why cults exist cuz we were not grounded in sound doctrine... People do not even like the word doctrine--But that is the way that will keep from dividing if you Know correct doctrine and it is made as your foundation in Christ

[hananiel]

I do not know a lot about church history but I beleive that in every denomination there are true believers who together constute the body of Jesus christ.

Some calvanists (what I learnt in debating some of them) have a wrong understanding of predestination. I understand predestination like what it says. we have been predestined to be confirmed into the likeness of God. That is God determined long ago before we were born that, those who beleive in Him will be changed into his likeness. Changing into his likeness was not automatic, it has become so only because he destined it to be so. Same with chosen. But calvanists claim that God doesnt love everyone and such unimaginable things. I suppose they witness to other calvinists to "do their part" for God.

But anyway probably some of them, understand predestination like it is but, fidelity to God's word and His will is more important any false unity. Clearly some of them are not of God, God doesnt deserve a prostitute.

I am hoping in the wake of posts to stop misrepresenting the reformed position to educate myself on it

Hananiel

[Luke]

What do we need for full unity within the body? Well, if you want complete unity, we all need to be sinless (note: all sinless people would also be Calvinists ). If you want reasonable unity, then we just need to constantly be willing to be reformed to Scripture. Of course, such an attitude would also make one capital-R Reformed the majority of the time.

[Luke]

(hananiel)
some calvanists (what I learnt in debating some of them) have a wrong understanding of predestination. I understand predestination like what it says. we have been predestined to be confirmed into the likeness of God. That is God determined long ago before we were born that, those who beleive in Him will be changed into his likeness.

(Luke)
Taking Ephesians 1 by itself, one could almost come to that conclusion. But this makes no sense in light of Romans 8:29-30, which state that predestination is to salvation (predestination -> called -> justified) or Romans 9, a thesis on how salvation depends on God's will alone.

(hananiel)
same with chosen.

(Luke)
Yes, yes, what does "chosen" mean in your mind?

(hananiel)
But calvanists claim that God doesnt love everyone and such unimaginable things.

(Luke)
God does love everyone. God does not love everyone the same way.

(hananiel)
I suppose they witness to other calvinists to "do their part" for God.

(Luke)
What is this supposed to mean?

(hananiel)
Clearly some of them are not of God, God doesnt deserve a prostitute.

(Luke)
While I agree that not all Calvinists are saved, that holds true for any classification. Why single Calvinists out?

(hananiel)
I am hoping in the wake of posts to stop misrepresenting the reformed position to educate myself on it

(Luke)
Why don't you NOT POST about Reformed theology if you know you're misrepresenting it. (category: bleeding obvious)

[hananiel]

(Luke)
Yes, yes, what does "chosen" mean in your mind?

(hananiel)
NKJV Romans 8
28 And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.

> those who are called are none but those who love God.

29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren

> These who he fore knew (anyone of those who loved him) , they are the ones who have been predestined to be conformed to his likeness.

>Who are the ones who love him?

John 14:15 (NIV from here on)
"If you love me, you will obey what I command.

>What was his command ?
John 6
28Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"
29Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."

>So those who believe in his Son, are the ones who love him.
These he foreknew and predestined them to be transformed into the likeness of Christ.

Clearly nothing here says he made them beleive. They had to do that act of making a choice a decision to believe in His son. It also indicates free will.


Interpretation of Romans 9
First of all Romans 9 was talking about israelites.
God's election stands. The older will serve the younger. Here he was not talking about salvation. And also, God Chose Jacob because he knew His heart. Not by his works, but by his heart. we are also saved not by works but by our heart.Esau was not prevented from knowing God, but God knew his heart. Jacob and Esau are nations ofcourse here.

I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy. It was even if gentiles had the (according to calvinists extremely onerous) job of believing in Him, it is because of His mercy, in coming down as flesh to do the work of grace.

I will harden those I harden, the israelites have been allowed to be hardened by their circumstance. When God raised pharaoh, he foreknew the deeds of his heart and allowed him to remain in darkness, even glorified himself through him. When God glorifies himself before men, its an act of grace and mercy. Yet he is not unjust in those "he hardens". Even if he had not, they would have taken a similar course to perish.

God calls everyone, gives every one a chance. Those who believe are the ones who love Him.

1 peter 4 : 6 For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to men in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit.
where is judgement based on if it is not based on choices, actions you make?

It cannot be twisted to mean some people cannot accept christ because their hearts have been hardened by christ or God.

He was differentiating works and faith (of heart).

Ephesians 2:8
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith–and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God–

this doesnt mean, you believe because you were helpless to do other wise. Faith is a gift from God, like reason, like your leg.
This does not indicate a lack of free will.

Romans 11: 7 talks about a spirit of stupor.
Again see the previous verses. Its a grace / works differentiation again.
There is the man who loves God but fails to keep his holy requirements. There is pardon for them in Jesus. The blessedness that david speaks about in righteousness that comes by faith. There is the man who tries to keep the requirements to save himself, to them there is condemnation and a blindness that they cannot be saved by grace. What is the guarantee that it is so?
The guarantee is that God is a just God. And remember he was talking about israelites here again.

So you CANNOT twist it to mean, God predetermined who will be saved and who wont.

See the prayer of hannah in 1 samuel 2: 3

for the LORD is a God who knows,
and by him deeds are weighed.

He know the inner most deeds of our hearts.

Another point some one made in another topic was :

Matthew 8:10
When Jesus heard this, he was astonished ...
Why was he astonished if he was the one who softened/did not fasten. I see some smart alec saying the Father knew, the Son did not. But its interesting to consider this point - I havent seen anyone in all israel with this. Faith is credited as righteousness. It is an action of volition (freewill) of your heart.

Finally, another verse I see available,

John 15:16
You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit–fruit that will last. Then the Father will give you whatever you ask in my name.

Jesus was speaking to those who loved him. Who decided to believe in their hearts that Jesus was the Son of God. These people who believed and were saved, God chose them to be friends (of the son), co heirs with Him, in this context to go and bear fruit.

They did not chose him before he did the work of redemption on the cross. Not until Jesus made the choice to die for the sins of men. When God chose men It need not have been. he was justified in letting us perish.

And a very very relevant verse is this (I know I am repeating):

28Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"
29Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."

That is what you ( anyone of all the people in the world) need to do to be saved. Those who do not understand stand condemned (not for lack of understanding) but for the lack of love of their hearts.

(Luke)
God does love everyone. God does not love everyone the same way.

(Hananiel) God loved every one to death( of his one and only son). Though effectively he died only for those who believed in him. these wasted his sacrifice and consequently ( as a consequence of their disbelief) it was powerless and they trampled the blood under their feet. Yes God loves his saints and hates his sinners. But it begins whether in your heart you love him or not. He will reveal himself to all people to make available that decision. For this reason the Gospel ..... he is not unjust or arbitrary. For this reason, we take the gospel of jesus, not sparing any effort.

(Luke)
Why don't you NOT POST about Reformed theology if you know you're misrepresenting it. (category: bleeding obvious)

(Hananiel)
I only said some one will say I misrepresented the reformed position.That is false ofcourse. When ever I make a logical deduction from a reformed position I get screamed at with that standard refrain: stop misrepresenting. I believe the position as has been explained to me is wrong. If there was misunderstanding about your position, hopefull you will agree that scripture as I have interpreted is same (more or less) as what you believe. Anyway lets see what we get here.

[WooTang]

(jezusfrk)
I believe that the church has become far too divided. How can this be remedied? What can we change in ourselves that can reverse this process?

(Wootang)
WE can't do anything about it. However, God can change our hearts through his Word. Heb 4:12-13
One day, Jesus will set us all down and set us straight. Until then we should each just let Christ impact our hearts to have a greater desire for the truth!

(hananiel)
Clearly nothing here says he made them beleive. They had to do that act of making a choice a decision to believe in His son. It also indicates free will.

(hananiel)
this doesnt mean, you believe because you were helpless to do other wise. Faith is a gift from God, like reason, like your leg.
This does not indicate a lack of free will.

(John Calvin)
Free will is not sufficient to enable man to do good works, unless he be helped by grace*...Therefore, man will then be spoken of as having this sort of free decision, not because he has free choice equally of good and evil, but because he acts wickedly by will, not by compulsion...But how few men are then, I ask, who when they hear free will attributed to man do not immediately conceive him to be master of both his own mind and will, able of his own power to turn himself toward either good or evil...If anyone, then, can use this word without understanding it in a bad sense, I shall not trouble him on this account...I'd prefer not to use it myself, and I should like others, if they seek my advice, to avoid it.**
*Institutes 1:262 (2.2.6)
**Institutes 1:264, 266 (2.2.7-8)

(Wootang)
Couldn't have said it better myself.

[Luke]

(hananiel)
NKJV Romans 8
28 And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.

> those who are called are none but those who love God.

(Luke)
On what basis? Where does it say in the Bible that those who are called are called because they love God as opposed to vice versa?

(hananiel)
29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren

> These who he fore knew (anyone of those who loved him) , they are the ones who have been predestined to be conformed to his likeness.

(Luke)
What did God foreknow? Events? No. God foreknows people, and the word "know" here (ginosko) does not refer to factual knowledge as you suppose, but rather to a kind of intimacy or love. IOW, those on whom God placed a special intimate love before the beginning of time...

BTW, the same word "know" (well, in the Septuiagant) is used in Genesis 4:1. This word does not refer to factual knowledge.

(hananiel)
>Who are the ones who love him?

John 14:15 (NIV from here on)
"If you love me, you will obey what I command.

>What was his command ?
John 6
28Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"
29Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."

(Luke)
Now this passage jumping isn't appropriate. For example, you say that people are called because they love God. However, Romans 8:28-30 does not teach this (as I have already shown). It should be noted that your entire premise falls apart because of the untrue axiom that was the beginning of your thesis.

The question, then, ought to be asked--are we capable of being able to love God apart from being called by Him? The answer to this question is clear.

This is the Word of God:
As it is written, "There is none righteous, not even one; ¹¹There is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God (Romans 3:10-11, NASB)

One who loved God would seek Him (as your citation of John 6 would support...I'll get back to John 6 momentarily). But nobody seeks Him (nobody obeys His commandments...this is also seen in Romans 8:6-8), and therefore that means that nobody loves Him.

So now we're back to where we started. Nobody loves God and thus nobody will be saved.

(hananiel)
>So those who believe in his Son, are the ones who love him.

(Luke)
Which, at the risk of belaboring the point, is nobody.

(hananiel)
These he foreknew and predestined them to be transformed into the likeness of Christ.

(Luke)
It has already been shown logically that you simply cannot base predestination on some kind of factual foreknowledge of events or of man's love for God as you are attempting to do. However, since I'm quite sure the logical rebuttal will be insufficient (not to mention the fact that this method is preferable regardless), it should be noted that the Bible does not teach your logic either.

This is the Word of God:
And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed. (Acts 13:48, NASB)

"But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep." (John 10:26, NASB)

Now, let's look at Acts 13:48, the verse should, under your logic, say that everyone who believed was ordained to eternal life. But it doesn't. It says the converse. People are ordained to eternal life and that is the reason they believe.

John 10:26 is addressing the flip side. Some do not believe. Why, prey tell, is that. Jesus answers, because they are not sheep. The sheep will follow Him (10:27), but those who are not sheep do not believe. This is the answer Christ gives as to why some do not believe.

It should also be noted that your beliefs reduce John 6 into a rubble of foolishness, since when Jesus addresses why some do not accept him (6:44, 6:65), the reason He gives is because they are not called. It does not make sense to say that they are not called because they do not believe because then this would become a circular statement on Christ's part. Therefore, your thesis must be rejected.

(hananiel)
Clearly nothing here says he made them beleive. They had to do that act of making a choice a decision to believe in His son. It also indicates free will.

(Luke)
Nobody said anything about making people believe. And nowhere do these verses require any sort of autonomous will. Man is "free" to choose what he desires, which as we have seen from Scripture--is always sin (Gen. 6:5--others could be offered).

(hananiel)
Interpretation of Romans 9

(Luke)
All the stuff I deleted I will address momentarily in another post. I felt it needed to split your post in half for length reasons.

(Luke) previous
God does love everyone. God does not love everyone the same way.

(hananiel)
God loved every one to death( of his one and only son). Though effectively he died only for those who believed in him. these wasted his sacrifice and consequently ( as a consequence of their disbelief) it was powerless and they trampled the blood under their feet. Yes God loves his saints and hates his sinners. But it begins whether in your heart you love him or not. He will reveal himself to all people to make available that decision. For this reason the Gospel ..... he is not unjust or arbitrary. For this reason, we take the gospel of jesus, not sparing any effort.

(Luke)
Actually, the reason we "take the Gospel of Jesus, not sparing any effort" is because God commanded us to.

It should also be noted that the Bible makes no pretention that the Cross was intended to save everyone. Christ was a ransom for many, not a ransom for all (Mark 10:45). He died specifically for the church (Ephesians 5:25). Certainly He died for all men in some sense (forebearance, etc.), but He did not die to save everyone. This is what 1 Timothy 4:10 means when it says Christ died "especially for believers".

(hananiel)
I only said some one will say I misrepresented the reformed position.That is false ofcourse.

(Luke)
Of course.

(hananiel)
When ever I make a logical deduction from a reformed position I get screamed at with that standard refrain: stop misrepresenting.

(Luke)
Or here's a thought---your deductions are not logical. For example, God does not "force people to choose" as you stated above. Man chooses according to His will, the question is what His desires are--either in His default state (Gen. 6:5, Eph 2:1-3) or his regenerated state (Eph. 2:4f).

[Luke]

(hananiel)
Interpretation of Romans 9
First of all Romans 9 was talking about israelites.
God's election stands. The older will serve the younger. Here he was not talking about salvation.

(Luke)
The question being addressed in Romans 9 is how Israel could be elect and yet fall away. Paul's answer to this question is by contrasting Israel's corporate election to individual election, the latter of which is to salvation. Romans 8:29-30, for example, clearly refers to individuals.

(hananiel)
And also, God Chose Jacob because he knew His heart. Not by his works, but by his heart. we are also saved not by works but by our heart.Esau was not prevented from knowing God, but God knew his heart. Jacob and Esau are nations ofcourse here.

(Luke)
Jacob and Esau cannot be referring to nations for two reasons: one, the terms "Israel" and "Edom" would have been used in the same way as "Israel" was used throughout the rest of the book. Your statement, therefore, is quite arbitrary.

And Jacob's heart, just like everyone else's heart, was dead in sin (Ephesians 2:1), not seeking God (Romans 3:10-11), beyond cure (Jeremiah 17:9), and just in crappy condition. And his works show it ("out of the heart of men proceed..."), because he cheated his brother, he cheated his uncle, he ran from the justice of his father in fleeing--there was nothing good about Jacob's heart to cause God to choose him.

It should also be noted that our works are a result of the condition of our heart (Mark 7:21-23). Your odd attempt to separate the condition of Jacob's heart and his works is not only absurd but the antithesis of frequent Biblical teaching.

And it should be noted that your scheme also has God choosing according to something within the intrinsic condition of the man (in this case, Jacob), which is exactly what Paul is so vehemently arguing against in 9:16 and 9:18.

And finally it should be noted that you cannot have your cake and eat it too. Jacob cannot be both a nation and a person (whom God chose according to His heart). I've effectively refuted both--but seriously--use your brain and don't post arguments that contradict themselves as well as the Bible.

(hananiel)
I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy. It was even if gentiles had the (according to calvinists extremely onerous) job of believing in Him, it is because of His mercy, in coming down as flesh to do the work of grace.

(Luke)
What in the world did the above completely scatter-brained sentence mean?

(hananiel)
I will harden those I harden, the israelites have been allowed to be hardened by their circumstance.

(Luke)
No no no--this verse says nothing about "allowed to be hardened". It says "harden".

(hananiel)
When God raised pharaoh, he foreknew the deeds of his heart

(Luke)
I thought heart condition and works were unrelated according to yout interpretation of the verses on Jacob. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

(hananiel)
and allowed him to remain in darkness, even glorified himself through him. When God glorifies himself before men, its an act of grace and mercy. Yet he is not unjust in those "he hardens". Even if he had not, they would have taken a similar course to perish.

(Luke)
None of this is relevant. God still did the hardening, and He did it of His own volition, not on the basis of factual foreknowledge (a concept absent from this chapter).

(hananiel)
God calls everyone

(Luke)
Not according to John 6:44 which states that all who are called are saved. John 6:65 also wouldn't make sense under that statement. And Romans 8:30 puts calling as part of the Golden Chain of Salvation--again, all who are called are saved (and also note: not all are called--only those foreknown and predestined).

(hananiel)
1 peter 4 : 6 For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to men in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit.
where is judgement based on if it is not based on choices, actions you make?

(Luke)
It is based on our works. Nobody has said otherwise.

(hananiel)
It cannot be twisted to mean some people cannot accept christ because their hearts have been hardened by christ or God.

(Luke)
I didn't say that 1 Peter 4:6 taught that. I never even cited 1 Peter 4:6 at all. I would cite passages like Romans 11:7 that actually do say that. Although it should be noted that nobody accepts Christ anyway (Romans 3:10-11).

(hananiel)
He was differentiating works and faith (of heart).

(Luke)
A and not A cannot simultaneously be true.

(hananiel)
Ephesians 2:8
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith–and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God–

this doesnt mean, you believe because you were helpless to do other wise. Faith is a gift from God, like reason, like your leg.
This does not indicate a lack of free will.

(Luke)
No, this verse doesn't necessarily indiciate a lack of free will. Other verses do that. It does indicate that people are saved because they are given faith by God. Not everyone is given faith. Otherwise, those who used it correctly would be able to boast over those that don't, defeating the entire point of this passage (c.f. 2:9).

Also note that Scripture speaks of repentance as something that is granted to some and, by extension, not to others (2 Timothy 2:25).

(hananiel)
Romans 11: 7 talks about a spirit of stupor.
Again see the previous verses. Its a grace / works differentiation again.
There is the man who loves God but fails to keep his holy requirements. There is pardon for them in Jesus. The blessedness that david speaks about in righteousness that comes by faith. There is the man who tries to keep the requirements to save himself, to them there is condemnation and a blindness that they cannot be saved by grace. What is the guarantee that it is so?
The guarantee is that God is a just God. And remember he was talking about israelites here again.

So you CANNOT twist it to mean, God predetermined who will be saved and who wont.

(Luke)
Read the whole chapter. It is talking about salvation, and those who were trying to be saved via. the Law are lost. 11:7 does refer to salvation.

11:6 is differentiating attempting to be saved by grace through faith plus works from salvation by grace through faith alone. Then it says that Israel, who attempted salvation by works, did not attain it. The elect did, the rest were hardened (11:8 says that they were hardened by God).

(hananiel)
See the prayer of hannah in 1 samuel 2: 3

for the LORD is a God who knows,
and by him deeds are weighed.

He know the inner most deeds of our hearts.

(Luke)
The above is irrelevant.

(hananiel)
Another point some one made in another topic was :

(Luke)
Matthew 8:10
When Jesus heard this, he was astonished ...
Why was he astonished if he was the one who softened/did not fasten. I see some smart alec saying the Father knew, the Son did not. But its interesting to consider this point - I havent seen anyone in all israel with this. Faith is credited as righteousness. It is an action of volition (freewill) of your heart.

(Luke)
How does "faith is credited as righteousness" presuppose "it is an action of free will"? The former does not require the latter in any sense. For that matter, Ephesians 2:9 decries the idea that faith is a product of works.

It should also be noted, although it really isn't relevant since we aren't discussing open theism, that "astonished" isn't a very good translation--"marveled" (NASB, ESV) or "admired" is far better. In other words, He was complementary, impressed, etc. This does not rule out God's foreordination of the event, since after all, "the steps of a man are established by the Lord" (Psalm 37:23).

(hananiel)
Finally, another verse I see available,

John 15:16
You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit–fruit that will last. Then the Father will give you whatever you ask in my name.

Jesus was speaking to those who loved him. Who decided to believe in their hearts that Jesus was the Son of God. These people who believed and were saved, God chose them to be friends (of the son), co heirs with Him, in this context to go and bear fruit.

They did not chose him before he did the work of redemption on the cross. Not until Jesus made the choice to die for the sins of men. When God chose men It need not have been. he was justified in letting us perish.

(Luke)
But Christ had not yet died. Pick an argument that at least attempts to make sense.

(hananiel)
And a very very relevant verse is this (I know I am repeating):

28Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"
29Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."

That is what you ( anyone of all the people in the world) need to do to be saved. Those who do not understand stand condemned (not for lack of understanding) but for the lack of love of their hearts.

(Luke)
Nobdoy is debating that. So what?

[WooTang]

If there's anything I've learned from these last several posts, it's that Arminians should keep on not using scripture to support their ideas. It is a stumbling block. :kroll:

[Luke]

(WooTang)
One day, Jesus will set us all down and set us straight.

(Luke)
At which point everyone will be Presbyterian.

[WooTang]

(Luke)
At which point everyone will be Presbyterian


(Wootang)
LOL! Exactly!

[hananiel]

[[B](hananiel)
NKJV Romans 8
28 And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose.

> those who are called are none but those who love God.

(Luke)
On what basis? Where does it say in the Bible that those who are called are called because they love God as opposed to vice versa?
(Hananiel) I didnt know it was that hard. '>' refers to interpretation of the scripture that comes after it.
And we know all things ... to those that love the Lord -> who are they?
Those who are called according to His purpose.

(hananiel)
29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren

> These who he fore knew (anyone of those who loved him) , they are the ones who have been predestined to be conformed to his likeness.

(Luke)
What did God foreknow? Events? No. God foreknows people, and the word "know" here does not refer to factual knowledge as you suppose, but rather to a kind of intimacy or love. IOW, those on whom God placed a special intimate love before the beginning of time...
(Hananiel) Thats right paste greek and confuse something very obvious. And did I say foreknew facts?
like I said foreknew people who would love him. Ok for those challenged:
verse 28 talks about the subject of verse 28. Those who love God. Yes it was special - the love only God has for all his people.

There is no reason here to beleive that foreknowledge was special love before the begining of time. And you also have to prove this, that God doesnt have foreknowledge of events. So then God couldnt probably know those who would love Him.

(hananiel)
>Who are the ones who love him?

John 14:15 (NIV from here on)
"If you love me, you will obey what I command.

>What was his command ?
John 6
28Then they asked him, "What must we do to do the works God requires?"
29Jesus answered, "The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent."

(Luke)
Now this passage jumping isn't appropriate. For example, you say that people are called because they love God. However, Romans 8:28-30 does not teach this (as I have already shown). It should be noted that your entire premise falls apart because of the untrue axiom that was the beginning of your thesis.
(Hananiel) I hoped to have proved the untrue "axiom". Anyway I just did that again. I didnt jump scriptures either, that "axiom" was proven from the scripture you pointed out. It is very obvious to me.

The question, then, ought to be asked--are we capable of being able to love God apart from being called by Him? The answer to this question is clear.

This is the Word of God:
As it is written, "There is none righteous, not even one; ¹¹There is none who understands, there is none who seeks for God (Romans 3:10-11, NASB)

(hananiel) Yes, then did david seek God or not. I can paste a bunch of scriptural proof that david did, that it was acceptable. Then how can he say there is none righteous? Its not apart from being called by him (where is the proof for that?) but to be able reach him. Sin has seperated man from God, God fixed that in the crucifiction and death of Jesus.

One who loved God would seek Him (as your citation of John 6 would support...I'll get back to John 6 momentarily). But nobody seeks Him (nobody obeys His commandments...this is also seen in Romans 8:6-8), and therefore that means that nobody loves Him.

So now we're back to where we started. Nobody loves God and thus nobody will be saved.

(hananiel) Not so fast. He was talking about those who are controlled by sinful mind. But not those in whom the spirit of God lives. Who does the spirit of God live with? Those who are born again ( John 3) . When are you born again of the spirit of God? , when you believe in your heart and confess with your mouth that He is Lord.

So that is the work that a man needs to do to be saved. To beleive in the son, where by he becomes Justified and the spirit of God can dwell in Him.

(hananiel)
>So those who believe in his Son, are the ones who love him.

(Luke)
Which, at the risk of belaboring the point, is nobody.
(Hananiel) not so, I have clarified.
(hananiel)
These he foreknew and predestined them to be transformed into the likeness of Christ.

(Luke)
It has already been shown logically that you simply cannot base predestination on some kind of factual foreknowledge of events or of man's love for God as you are attempting to do.
(Hananiel) Its as logical as saying calvinism has been rejected by majority of people so I dont have to debate it. Now that we are debating you have to prove that God was incapable to knowing those who would love him. Or show that he was not talking about those who love him. My interpretaton looks straight forward, yours depends on some scripture in some other context that you have to bring to support it.

(Luke)
However, since I'm quite sure the logical rebuttal will be insufficient (not to mention the fact that this method is preferable regardless), it should be noted that the Bible does not teach your logic either.
(Hananiel)
Rather than make illogical statements like this, you should try proving something for a change. Most theologians on this forum pompously parade their logic, till they get beaten, then they take refuge in lame arguments like these. A logical rebuttal will be insufficient - interesting...

Anyway, I never talked about factual knowledge. Your greek was quite unnecessary there. It was the knowledge of those who would love him. The actual people yes, who would love him. And you have to prove that God was incapable of that qualification. Of knowing those that would love Him. The bible does teach my logic. I have given scripture deduced each point from another. You have to find a logical error in my deductions before you can say that.

This is the Word of God:
And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed. (Acts 13:48, NASB)

(Hananiel) Again on the pain of repetetion, the ones appointed were the ones who believed. All those who believe are appointed, predestined, elected for eternal life.

"But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep." (John 10:26, NASB)

Now, let's look at Acts 13:48, the verse should, under your logic, say that everyone who believed was ordained to eternal life. But it doesn't. It says the converse. People are ordained to eternal life and that is the reason they believe.

(hananiel) No you are reading it that way. His sheep will listen to his voice not because he defeaned the other sheep. His sheep are the ones who listen to his voice. He knows them. Those who are not his sheep are the ones who do not listen to him. There is no contradiction. It clearly says, I told you but you did not believe. He did not say, I dont you , but I did not elect you. This is a lot more logical than what you are saying. This is what anyone will understand unless blinded.

John 10:26 is addressing the flip side. Some do not believe. Why, prey tell, is that. Jesus answers, because they are not sheep. The sheep will follow Him (10:27), but those who are not sheep do not believe. This is the answer Christ gives as to why some do not believe.

(Hananiel) It is not the reason why some believe, its the reason why some are not his sheep. because they dont believe. you got it backwards.

It should also be noted that your beliefs reduce John 6 into a rubble of foolishness, since when Jesus addresses why some do not accept him (6:44, 6:65), the reason He gives is because they are not called. It does not make sense to say that they are not called because they do not believe because then this would become a circular statement on Christ's part. Therefore, your thesis must be rejected.

(Hananiel) The conversion of the sinner is in response to the drawing of the Holy spirit. God draws them because he knows their heart. But the Gospel will be preached to all to judge by human justice 1 peter 4: 6 ( so no one claims that they didnt hear it on judgement day). But jesus reiterated the truth of the matter. He who believes has everlasting life. God did not draw them because they were not responsive. It was the condition of their heart. It has nothing to do with original sin. It was beyond that.

(hananiel)
Clearly nothing here says he made them beleive. They had to do that act of making a choice a decision to believe in His son. It also indicates free will.

(Luke)
Nobody said anything about making people believe. And nowhere do these verses require any sort of autonomous will. Man is "free" to choose what he desires, which as we have seen from Scripture--is always sin (Gen. 6:5--others could be offered).

Go down from Gen 6:5. But Noah found favor in God's eyes. Before you say God in his sovereign power choses who he wants to, let me point out that " Noah was a righteous man, blameless among the people of his time, and he walked with God.

If every inclination of every man was evil, what was the deal with Noah? So how you read gen 6:5 was wrong. There was justification for those who walked with/ sought repentance from God. Noah wasnt righteous in God's eyes, but his faith (walking with GOd) earned him what he couldnt. God finally justified his holiness by, earning for Noah and all those who repented and walked with Him, the salvation he bought for the sin of all man kind in the death of Jesus Christ.

(hananiel)
Interpretation of Romans 9

(Luke)
All the stuff I deleted I will address momentarily in another post. I felt it needed to split your post in half for length reasons.

See you in the next post...