ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 1

[Jerry Shugart]

No....Scripture teaches that from the beginning of eternity God decided to become a man and die for a specific number of people...

ChristisKing,

You finally got something right.The specific number of people which receive the free gift of reconciliation is "all men":

"And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world"(1Jn.2:2).

You do know what the words "whole world" mean,don't you?

"But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man"(Heb.2:9).

You do know what "every man" means,don't you?

In His grace,--Jerry
"Dispensationalism Made Easy"
http://midacts.net/studies/shugart-dispensationalism_made_easy.html

 

[Jerry Shugart]

They (Calvinists) actually believe God is not in time at all! Thus the decrees did not happen in the past, so to speak.

Lee,

They are correct when they say that God is not in time at all.And the Apostles understood that,and that is why they talk about His actions as being before the foundation of the world.

For instance,from man's perspective the Lord Jesus was not crucified until the first century.But from God's perspective it could be said that He was crucified from the foundations of the world:

"And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world"(Rev.13:8).

The following verse speaks from both God's perspective and man's perspective:

"But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth"(2Thess.2:13).

From God's perspective it can be said that the Lord chose us to salvation from the beginning.From man's perspective the sinner is not saved until he believes the truth.

But the Calvinists take the verses that are in regard to the perspective of God and make them apply to man's perspective.And by making this mistake they fall further into confusion by assuming that the Lord died only for those who were chosen from the beginning of time.However,the writers of the Scriptures were not confused,and they made it as plain as possible that the Lord Jesus tasted death for every man:

"But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man"(Heb.2:9).

In His grace,--Jerry
"Dispensationalism Made Easy"
http://midacts.net/studies/shugart-dispensationalism_made_easy.html

 

[godrulz]

ROM 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth)

Hmmm...I wonder who to believe here, godrulz or Paul?

This is about a calling to ministry (the older will serve the younger) and represents nations. It is not about individual salvation. I wonder who to believe? Paul, the Bible interpreted in context, or CIKs subjective eisegesis to support a preconceived theology. The election was also proximal before birth. It has nothing to do with eternal decrees before they even existed. There are also times where God's election/intentions are not fulfilled due to the rejection by the one called. God's sovereign choices of nations for ministry is the context of this passage. It is sheer eisegesis to build a deductive, Calvinistic doctrine (TULIP) from these chapters.

 

[lee_merrill]

Hi Jerry,

Jerry: … but these verses are speaking about "service" and not salvation.

Is Paul not talking about salvation in the very first verses of Romans 9, though? And in the first verse of chapter 10, which continues in a similar vein, he even mentions salvation specifically, praying "that they may be saved."

Jerry: And by making this mistake they fall further into confusion by assuming that the Lord died only for those who were chosen from the beginning of time.

I agree that Jesus' death was for every person, without exception, I am only a four-point Calvinist, and do not hold to limited atonement.

Godrulz: There are also times where God's election/intentions are not fulfilled due to the rejection by the one called.

I think not, though!

Romans 11:29 for God's gifts and his call are irrevocable.

Godrulz: God's sovereign choices of nations for ministry is the context of this passage.

What nation does Isaac represent, though, I wonder? And Pharaoh was not a nation, nor were all of his people hardened ("Let them go already! Egypt is ruined," said his officials), and some even went with Israel.

But really now! And after chiding about eisigesis...

Romans 9:3 For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers...

How is this speaking of Paul's service? No, it clearly refers to his salvation.

Romans 9:7 Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham's children.

This is not talking about service! It's speaking of belonging, and really belonging to Abraham means salvation.

Romans 9:9 "At the appointed time I will return, and Sarah will have a son."

Not a servant!

Romans 9:15 For he says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion."

This must also mean salvation, how could compassion refer to a choice for service?

Romans 9:17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: "I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth."

Pharaoh is serving God's purpose! Though he was hardened, and not chosen.

Romans 9:21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

All these vessels are for a purpose, they are serving, but again, some are not chosen for belonging:

Romans 9:25 As he says in Hosea: "I will call them 'my people' who are not my people."

Not "I will call them 'my servants' etc."

Romans 9:23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory--

For glory! Not for service.

Romans 9:31 but Israel, who pursued a law of righteousness, has not attained it.

Service? No, they did not attain righteousness, which means ... salvation.

Blessings,
Lee

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Is Paul not talking about salvation in the very first verses of Romans 9, though? And in the first verse of chapter 10, which continues in a similar vein, he even mentions salvation specifically, praying "that they may be saved."

Lee,

If we examine the immediate context there can be no doubt whatsoever that the "purpose of God according to election" was that the elder would serve the younger:
"For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger"(Ro.9:11,12).

Romans 9:21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?

All these vessels are for a purpose, they are serving, but again, some are not chosen for belonging.

Yes,they are made for a purpose.And the contrast that is revealed in regard to their purpose is not between eternal life and spiritual death,but instead between "honor" and "dishonor".

With the same clay the potter may form one vessel for use on the table of a king,while he designs anoher for some base,though equally useful,purpose.But a potter who would make a vessel with the deliberate purpose of destroying it must be some kind of a maniac.

Pharaoh might have found mercy had he repented and confessed his sins.And that is exactly what the following words refer to:

"What if God,willing to show His wrath and to make His power known,endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction"(Ro.9:22).

The words "with much longsuffering" mean the same at Ro.9:22 as they do in the following verse:

"The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance"(2Pet.3:9).

The Lord hardened Pharaoh's heart because he himself had closed it against abundant proofs of His divine power.Toward those who fear Him His mercy is boundless,but no one can despise God with impunity.

So these verses are not teaching that Pharoah was a vessel who was predestined for destruction or that the Lord is a mad potter who would make vessels for the purpose of destroying them.

In His grace,--Jerry
”Dispensationalism Made Easy”
http://midacts.net/studies/shugart-dispensationalism_made_easy.html

 

[lee_merrill]

Hi Jerry,

If we examine the immediate context there can be no doubt whatsoever that the "purpose of God according to election" was that the elder would serve the younger…

Yes, that's one verse, and not even about God choosing Esau to serve him! He was to serve Jacob. And are not all the other verses I quoted to be considered context here? One verse does not a context make, and the other surrounding verses do, and this skips them all. How are my conclusions above about these other verses incorrect? Do they not show that this passage is not about election to service?

Pharaoh might have found mercy had he repented and confessed his sins.And that is exactly what the following words refer to…

That would have caused God's name to not be proclaimed in all the earth, though, which I don't think could happen, for God's purpose here to fail.

So these verses are not teaching that Pharoah was a vessel who was predestined for destruction or that the Lord is a mad potter who would make vessels for the purpose of destroying them.

Isn't that just what "prepared in advance for destruction" means, though?

Jeremiah 19:10 Then break the jar while those who go with you are watching…

Blessings,
Lee

 

[drbrumley]

If man has no "freewill".....why does God ask for a FREEWILL OFFERING 16 times in scripture????

 

[ChristisKing]

If man has no "freewill".....why does God ask for a FREEWILL OFFERING 16 times in scripture????

Notice who He is asking it from......

His people!

When Christ sets us free we are free indeed. After God sets His people free He not only asks for free will offerings but we both want to and now have the ability to give Him free will offerings.....70 times 7!!!!

 

[drbrumley]

Notice who He is asking it from......

His people!

When Christ sets us free we are free indeed. After God sets His people free He not only asks for free will offerings but we both want to and now have the ability to give Him free will offerings.....70 times 7!!!!

So, he predestines only those who are unbelievers? You make no sense.

 

[drbrumley]

ChristisKing neg reps me? :loser:

 

[drbrumley]

Your so right Poly, how dare God say freewill when we have no freewill. Sheesh.

 

[ChristisKing]

So, he predestines only those who are unbelievers? You make no sense.

When God saves someone that is when they are free, not before. There is no free will until we are born again. After we are saved then we are free indeed!

JOH 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

 

[drbrumley]

When God saves someone that is when they are free, not before. There is no free will until we are born again. After we are saved then we are free indeed!

JOH 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

OK, you heard from ChristisKing folks. Any UNBELIEVER who is a CHILD MOLESTER is predetermined by God Himself to molest kids. But if the man was saved, he had the freedom to do that depicable act.

is your theolgy.

 

[ChristisKing]

OK, you heard from ChristisKing folks. Any UNBELIEVER who is a CHILD MOLESTER is predetermined by God Himself to molest kids. But if the man was saved, he had the freedom to do that depicable act.

is your theolgy.

And you wonder why I disapprove of your posts?!?! :chuckle:

 

[drbrumley]

And you wonder why I disapprove of your posts?!?! :chuckle:

Comeon King, this is basically what you are saying. And its sick and twisted.

If its any consolation, I disapprove of your posts as well. :chuckle:

 

[godrulz]

When God saves someone that is when they are free, not before. There is no free will until we are born again. After we are saved then we are free indeed!

JOH 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

It is self evident as free moral agents in the image of God that we have free will. There would be no responsibility/accountability if we were not free. Bondage of the Will is Augustinian and Lutheran. God commands men everywhere to repent and believe. It would be unjust and insincere to command us to do something we are incapable of. We have capacity to make moral and mundane choices. Every time you eat, sleep, work, go to the bathroom, drive a car, type, etc. demonstrates free will.

Jn. 8:36 is not a teaching on free will. It takes free will to sin. This forms habit patterns leading to bondage. The Pharisees misused their free will and rejected God's purposes for them (Lk. 7:30). Jesus Christ alone can set men free from the penalty, power, and presence of sin. We cannot save ourselves, but we do have capacity to receive or reject Him. TULIP is a deterministic, problematic attempt to explain things. If it thinks it supports free will, it is not genuine libertarian free will. It is illusory and makes God responsible for heinous evil and the damnation of many that He could save if He wanted to.

 

[ChristisKing]

It is self evident as free moral agents in the image of God that we have free will. There would be no responsibility/accountability if we were not free. Bondage of the Will is Augustinian and Lutheran. God commands men everywhere to repent and believe. It would be unjust and insincere to command us to do something we are incapable of. We have capacity to make moral and mundane choices. Every time you eat, sleep, work, go to the bathroom, drive a car, type, etc. demonstrates free will.

Jn. 8:36 is not a teaching on free will. It takes free will to sin. This forms habit patterns leading to bondage.

Bondage of the will is Pauline, Augustinian and Lutheran.

It is also the doctrine of Jesus Christ!

Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin....Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. ...(John 8:34,44)

Paul continued this same teaching:

2TI 2:26 And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will.

Before God saves us our wills are enslaved to sin and the devil. We are not free to obey God, we are enslaved! Sure, we are free to choose whether to sin or not, but we will always choose to sin because we don't have the ability to do otherwise. That's not freedom, that's slavery.

When the Holy Spirit awakens us and gives us faith and draws us to Christ then we are born again with a "new will". From that point on we have both the will and the ability not to sin and we are truly free!

PHI 2:13 For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.

God set's our wills free when we are born again, before then our wills are enslaved to sin because of Adam.

 

[godrulz]

The soul that sins is the one who dies (Ezekiel). You cannot blame it on Adam. An innocent baby does not have mental or moral capacity to sin at birth. When we all do sin eventually, we do form a bondage to sin and become slaves to Satan. This does not mean we cannot use our wills to drive a car or respond to the Gospel. Total depravity does not mean total inability. God commands us repent. This is not insincere since we do have the capacity to use our minds and wills to repent. If we could not, God is not just to comand this and to condemn us for not doing what we cannot. Moral capacity implies free moral agency. This is why we are responsible and accountable for what we do or do not do in response to the Spirit. We cannot blame it on Adam. Adam gave the human race physical depravity. We create moral depravity through our choices.

 

[lee_merrill]

Hi everyone,

So, he predestines only those who are unbelievers?

God is in complete control, since real choices can only be made within God's will!

Any UNBELIEVER who is a CHILD MOLESTER is predetermined by God Himself to molest kids. But if the man was saved, he had the freedom to do that depicable act.

No, there is no freedom outside God's will, the freedom is within his will, if a believer sins, then they're in the ditch, until they repent and submit to God again.

Godrulz: It is self evident as free moral agents in the image of God that we have free will. There would be no responsibility/accountability if we were not free.

Why is there accountability for unintentional sins, then?

Leviticus 4:27 If a member of the community sins unintentionally and does what is forbidden in any of the Lord's commands, he is guilty.

And why does God's image include the ability to choose, for unbelievers? Did the fall not affect God's image in man in some way? And how is it that they can be set free, if they are free already?

Godrulz: Adam gave the human race physical depravity. We create moral depravity through our choices.

Then we can do something! But Jesus says we can't…

John 15:5 If a man remains in me and I in him, he will bear much fruit; apart from me you can do nothing.

That's in reference to believers! How much more is this true of unbelievers, then...

Blessings,
Lee

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Isn't that just what "prepared in advance for destruction" means, though?

Lee,

You agree with me that the death of the Lord Jesus was for every man.

And the purpose of that death was so that every man could be saved.Do you think that Pharoah ever had a chance to be saved?

Do you think that the Lord is a mad potter who would make a vessel for the express purpose of destroying it?

I believe that Pharoah had a chance for salvation and it was not until after he rejected God's words that he was fitted for destruction.

God is in complete control, since real choices can only be made within God's will!

Please consider the following words of the Lord Jesus to the Jews:

"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"(Mt.23:37).

So according to you the reason that these Jews would not come to Christ was because it was not in God's will.So the Israelite's cannot be guilty for rejecting the Lord Jesus because it was willed by God that they could not come to Him.

In His grace,--Jerry
"Dispensationalism Made Easy"
http://midacts.net/studies/shugart-dispensationalism_made_easy.html