How To Get To Heaven When You Die

[Right Divider]

Post 195

https://theologyonline.com/threads/how-to-get-to-heaven-when-you-die.60548/post-1919748

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

Les Feldick was definitely one of the most approachable Bible teachers you could listen to. My aunt watches his show daily, and I’m very happy that she does. Because of his mid-Acts dispensationalism, he got a great deal of doctrine right, especially when it came to daily Christian living. His clear distinction between Israel and the Body of Christ, his emphasis on Paul’s unique apostleship, and his unshakable teaching of salvation by grace through faith give believers a simple, solid foundation for walking with the Lord day by day.

When it came to explaining the gospel in plain terms, Feldick excelled. He had a way of cutting through tradition and making Scripture come alive for everyday life. He even got it right about there being no requirement to be water baptized, which almost no one gets right these days. On these issues there is no disagreement. There’s virtually no daylight at all between what Les taught and what Bob taught and what I personally believe today when it comes to most of what Les talks about on his daily television show. It is definitely worth the time to watch.

There are, however, important areas where I believe he fell short. I will briefly touch on a few of the most significant.

While he rejected Covenant Theology, he still carried over parts of classical theism that, in my view, distort the nature of God. Chief among these is the traditional idea of immutability that goes far beyond God’s moral character and personality, presenting Him as unresponsive and unchanging in every respect. This idea that God cannot change in any way whatsoever is the premise upon which Covenant Theology is built. Indeed, the entire system of Calvinism flows logically from that single premise. He accepted the premise and rejected its natural conclusion. I doubt he was fully aware that he was making such a clean error, but that does not change the fact that he was doing so.

While Les rejected Calvinism generally and Covenant Theology in particular, he did not reject all of the doctrines that are predicated on the belief that God cannot change in any way whatsoever. He held to views on God’s foreknowledge, sovereignty, and relationship to time that are all but indistinguishable from Calvinism’s teaching on these issues and which clearly differ from Enyart’s teaching and my own. Feldick saw God’s foreknowledge as exhaustive and definite in every respect, meaning all future events were fully known as fixed before they occurred. He often spoke of God’s sovereignty in terms of total control over everything that happens, rather than as God being the highest authority who can allow genuine freedom within His rule, which is the biblical teaching. In addition, he taught that God exists outside of time, regarding time as meaningless to Him. These positions, while common in evangelical teaching, blur God’s relational engagement with His creation and make it impossible to take the biblical record of His interactions at face value. Whole swaths of Scripture are rendered almost meaningless, transformed into lengthy “figures of speech” that must be taken to mean the opposite of what they plainly say.

Feldick also accepted the standard evangelical view of original sin, teaching that all humanity is spiritually dead because of Adam’s transgression. I believe this misses the mark in a couple of different ways. First, it ignores the whole of Ezekiel 18, which emphatically teaches that God does not hold people guilty because of the sin of their ancestors. Second, it overlooks the universal effect of Christ’s work at Calvary, which resolved the impact Adam’s sin had on his race and allowed God to act toward mankind in a manner consistent with justice, holding people responsible only for the sins they commit themselves. In this understanding, people are spiritually alive until they personally sin, and it is at that point they become in need of salvation through union with Christ. That difference changes how we think about the state of humanity and the way we present the gospel.

His view of faith leaned toward the common evangelical definition, trusting God’s word without necessarily seeking full rational grounding. I see it differently. True biblical faith is reasoned trust, rooted in objective truth and sound logic. Faith that is not anchored in reality as God has revealed it can drift into superstition or mysticism.

And then there is Logos in John 1:1. Feldick followed the usual translation of “Word” without digging into the depth of the term. I believe Logos is best understood as “Logic,” or “Reason,” not merely as an abstract idea but as the living rational principle at the heart of God’s being. This understanding of John’s use of the word Logos changes the way we understand both the passage and the Person it describes, as well as the role sound reason should play in our doctrine and in our daily lives. It may seem like a small issue, but it has an enormous doctrinal impact.

So, I can recommend Les Feldick in many areas, particularly where his mid-Acts perspective shines, which happens to be the vast majority of his content. Yet it is wise to study his work with discernment, as with anyone’s teaching. His strengths are real, and they are substantial. So much so that I will say again what I said in a previous post: Les Feldick is much better than any other person who airs on Christian television, by a rural Oklahoma country mile!

Clete

P.S. I made a LOT of claims in this post that might be trying to make your head explode! For the sake be brevity, I intentionally made no effort to establish any of those claims but am more than happy to do so. Please feel free to ask me any question that this post generates in your mind. By all means, challenge me to defend anything you wish to challenge me on. That's what I'm here for!

As far as claiming that Les Teaches that God cannot change in any way, Les actually teaches that both the Calvinist view AND the Armenian view are correct at the same time. I have never heard him say that God can never chang His mind. He does however teach that God predertermines what happens AND gives us free will at the same time AND accomplishes His perfect will through our free will choices. That is true and Biblical. So I agree with Les on that. Your conclusion isn't necessarily his conclusion. I don't think Les necessarily believes in irresistible grace. He believes that God fireknows who will be saved and then predestines them to be conformed to the image of Christ as Scripture clearly teaches.

I also agree with Feldick that God foreknows all future events. That doesn’t mean that God fixed them that way or predetermined it that way. God at times intervenes and even changes certain events according to His Sovereign will, but He still knew before hand that it would happen, given the fact that He knows all things as Scripture clearly states. So I agree with him there as well.

John 16:30 KJV
[30] Now are we sure that thou knowest all things, and needest not that any man should ask thee: by this we believe that thou camest forth from God.

John 21:17 KJV
[17] He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

Again, Les Feldick teaches the Biblical view that yes all events are fully known and fixed and His foreknowledge is perfect, while at the same time, allowing for free will and God does exist outside of time.and yes it is meaningless to God as far as His Soveriegn will goes. He does not consider whole areas of Scripture as simply figures of speech. He takes it literally unless the Bible indicates otherwise. There are a couple of areas that he does believe God veils, such as some of the passages in Revelation, but even then, he uses Scripture to show the Scriptural meaning. One example would be the use of the word mountain as describing a Kingdom the passage where it talks about the beast coming out of the sea, which Les says believes is referring to the sea of humanity.

Feldick doesn't teach the Doctrine of original sin. He teaches that all men inherit their sin nature from Adam, as taught in Scripture. Yes we are all held accountable for our own sins, unless washed in the blood of Christ, but we sin because we inherited our sin nature from Adam.

Romans 5:12 KJV
[12] Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

Faith is simply believing/trusting God to the Point of submission to His will. That other stuff you said about logic is not Biblical.

My conclusion regarding your concerns about Les is that his arguments are true and Biblically based and yours are not. I have given you a couple of verses to back up my view. I can give many more. Free will and Predestination happen at the same time. Illogical? Perhaps, but Biblical.

 

[Right Divider]

Illogical? Perhaps, but Biblical.

That is pure insanity.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

That is pure insanity.

God is not a man. God can use human will to accomplish His perfect will. We see it all of the time. Politicians making free will choices that fulfil Biblical Prophecy. Do you really think they planned it that way? Of course not. God in His infinite power fulfills His perfect will through our free will choices. Pharoh was a perfect example. He made the free will choice to reject the Jews freedom and this accomplished the will of God as God could demostrate His mighty power through miracles, sihns and wonders. You can’t put God in a box.

 

[Right Divider]

God is not a man. God can use human will to accomplish His perfect will. We see it all of the time. Politicians making free will choices that fulfil Biblical Prophecy. Do you really think they planned it that way? Of course not. God in His infinite power fulfills His perfect will through our free will choices. Pharoh was a perfect example. He made the free will choice to reject the Jews freedom and this accomplished the will of God as God could demostrate His mighty power through miracles, sihns and wonders. You can’t put God in a box.

God is not illogical in any way, shape or form. God is the very definition of LOGIC.

To claim that God acts illogically in any way is pure blaspheme.

 

[Clete]

As far as claiming that Les Teaches that God cannot change in any way, Les actually teaches that both the Calvinist view AND the Armenian view are correct at the same time.

They are in fact both false at the same time.

I have never heard him say that God can never change His mind. He does however teach that God predertermines what happens AND gives us free will at the same time AND accomplishes His perfect will through our free will choices. That is true and Biblical. So I agree with Les on that.

Well, I don't have access to transcripts of his shows so I can't prove it one way or the other but you can't hold to one without the other and maintain a logically consistent doctrinal system, which most Christian don't even try to do.

And no, it is not "true and biblical". There is, in fact, nothing at all biblical about it. Any passage that you think teaches that God predetermines everything is an example of eisegesis, which is a fancy term that just gives a name to when one reads their doctrine into a text, conforming scripture to the doctrine rather than letting the text say only what it actually says and conforming one's doctrine to that. The latter being call exegesis.

Your conclusion isn't necessarily his conclusion.

Logically it is. Whether he was consistently logical is definitely in question.

That isn't any sort of slight against the man's character. It's just sort of the normal mode for people. Christians, by a large, don't really care or pay any attention to whether a particular doctrine they've chosen to believe is fully integrated into and is fully compatible with the rest of their theology.

I don't think Les necessarily believes in irresistible grace.

It was not my intention to suggest that he was a Calvinist, only that he was Calvinistic.

He believes that God foreknows who will be saved and then predestines them to be conformed to the image of Christ as Scripture clearly teaches.

Well, that Calvinism 101! I mean that is "Irresistible Grace" in a single sentence.

I also agree with Feldick that God foreknows all future events.

Not based on the bible, you don't.

I'm sure that statement comes as a shock but it's totally true. If you believe that, it's because of Augustine (and then Luther and Calvin), who imported such ideas into Christianity from Greek philosophy. The doctrine is predicated on the doctrine of immutability which teaches that God cannot change in ANY WAY whatsoever. Aristotle taught that. Augustine practically worshiped Aristotle and was convinced by his mother's bishop, a guy named Ambrose of Milan, to interpret the bible in the light of Augustine, which he did. The rest is history.

That doesn’t mean that God fixed them that way or predetermined it that way.

Logically it does.

I won't bother to prove that here but am quite willing to do so upon request.

God at times intervenes and even changes certain events according to His Sovereign will, but He still knew before hand that it would happen, given the fact that He knows all things as Scripture clearly states. So I agree with him there as well.

The bible does exactly the opposite of clearly stating that God knows the future in any exhaustive sense. It flatly does not teach that. It teaches that God knows all knowable things that He wants to know.

John 16:30 KJV
[30] Now are we sure that thou knowest all things, and needest not that any man should ask thee: by this we believe that thou camest forth from God.

John 21:17 KJV
[17] He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

"All" pretty nearly never means "every single one".

Genesis 18:21 I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry against it that has come to Me; and if not, I will know.”​

​

Genesis 22:12 And He said, “Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.”​

You see? There are "proof texts" for every position under the sun. Your response at this point is forced to be one of two things....
1. Allow my proof texts to convince you and thereby begin to take your proof texts as the hyperbole they are.
2. Convert my proof texts into figures of speech and insist that "All" means "every single possible thing" even though it almost never does.

In short, one set of passages are figures of speech and the other means what it says. You're forced to choose. Not that YOU are forced to choose but that EVERYONE is forced to choose. I am, you are, everyone who reads the bible is forced to accept one set at face value and the other as some form of figure of speech. That much is inescapable. The question then WHY you'd pick one to take as face value over the other.

Unlike the John passages where we have a good grammatical reason to understand that "all" doesn't mean "every single one", the Genesis passages give no contextual or grammatical reason to think that these are figures of speech. The ONLY reason to do so is doctrinal. So the choice is between eisegesis and exegesis. Do we conform scripture to our doctrine or do we conform our doctrine to scripture?

dAgain, Les Feldick teaches the Biblical view that yes all events are fully known and fixed and His foreknowledge is perfect, while at the same time, allowing for free will and God does exist outside of time.and yes it is meaningless to God as far as His Soveriegn will goes.

You do not believe a single syllable of this because of the bible but because of Augustine's importation of Greek philosophy into Christian doctrine.

He does not consider whole areas of Scripture as simply figures of speech.

Oh yes he does and so do you!

Either "all events are fully known and fixed and His foreknowledge is perfect" or the entire chapter of Genesis 22 is one enormous figure of speech.
Either "all events are fully known and fixed and His foreknowledge is perfect" or the entire book of Jonah is one colossal figure of speech.

And not just "figures of speech" but really weird figures of speech where when God says things like "now I know" or "I will know" or "it never entered my mind" (Jeremiah 19:5), it isn't merely that God doesn't mean precisely what it seems to mean, but rather that is means the absolute opposite of what it says. "Now I know" means, "I always knew", "I will know" means "I know already", "It never entered my mind" means, "I thought of it before time began".

And again, there is no contextual or grammatical reason to think that any of these passages are any sort of figure of speech at all. The only reason to do so is doctrinal (eisegetical).

He takes it literally unless the Bible indicates otherwise.

I'm sure that's his intent. I've seen it a million times over the years. Such claims, as false as they might be, are not outright lies. They believe what they are saying but are unable to see that they're not actually doing what they are claiming they're doing. Indeed, that they are often doing the reverse and not realizing it. It's a doctrinal form of paradigm blindness.

There are a couple of areas that he does believe God veils, such as some of the passages in Revelation, but even then, he uses Scripture to show the Scriptural meaning. One example would be the use of the word mountain as describing a Kingdom the passage where it talks about the beast coming out of the sea, which Les says believes is referring to the sea of humanity.

Feldick doesn't teach the Doctrine of original sin. He teaches that all men inherit their sin nature from Adam, as taught in Scripture. Yes we are all held accountable for our own sins, unless washed in the blood of Christ, but we sin because we inherited our sin nature from Adam.

Romans 5:12 KJV
[12] Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

This is typical Christian doctrine that attempts to have it both ways. Again, I don't have a Les Feldick lexicon (for want of a better term) and so will have to take your word for it here but when you combine what you've said here with what you said above about exhaustive foreknowledge, predestination, etc, the inescapable conclusion is that total equivalent of "Original Sin" whether you choose to call it that or not.

Faith is simply believing/trusting God to the Point of submission to His will. That other stuff you said about logic is not Biblical.

Of course it is entirely biblical. You showing up to declare otherwise has no effect on it whatsoever.

Here's the difference between what you do and what I do....

If you can refute a single syllable of what I've said. I'll hear it gladly!

I MEAN THAT!! If you can demonstrate that I've gotten something wrong I am sitting here, right now, at my computer, BEGGING you to show me.


Prediction: xfrodobagginsx will make NO ATTEMPT to do so - none!

I so desperately hope that I'm wrong!

My conclusion regarding your concerns about Les is that his arguments are true and Biblically based and yours are not.

Prove it.

I have given you a couple of verses to back up my view.

Which I have responded to and shown to be lacking for objectively valid reasons.

I can give many more.

Please do!

Free will and Predestination happen at the same time. Illogical? Perhaps, but Biblical.

If so then the bible is false - by definition.

If the contradictory (i.e. illogical) can be true then why do you even care what Les Feldick taught? Why would you care about what anyone teaches? If logic doesn't work and irrational truths are a thing (which they aren't) then by what means would you ever be able to declare that anything I've said is not biblical or that anything Les said was biblical?

That's a real question! You just told me "that his (Les') arguments are true and Biblically based and mine are not". How do you know that? What did you use, other than logic, to come to the conclusion that my "ARGUMENTS" aren't biblical but that Les' "ARGUMENTS" are?

Please! By all mean, explain it to me!!

You won't be able to! If logic doesn't work, no knowledge is possible. That includes doctrinal knowledge. More than that, no communication is even possible. You can't read, a single syllable of the bible, much less understand, accept as true and integrate what you read, without using logic to do it.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

God is not illogical in any way, shape or form. God is the very definition of LOGIC.

To claim that God acts illogically in any way is pure blaspheme.

God doesn’t act withi your perimeters. You were trying to put God within your own logical abilities. This is your error.

 

[Clete]

God is not a man. God can use human will to accomplish His perfect will. We see it all of the time. Politicians making free will choices that fulfil Biblical Prophecy. Do you really think they planned it that way? Of course not. God in His infinite power fulfills His perfect will through our free will choices. Pharoh was a perfect example. He made the free will choice to reject the Jews freedom and this accomplished the will of God as God could demostrate His mighty power through miracles, sihns and wonders. You can’t put God in a box.

You do not believe this for any biblical reason! You don't!

 

[Clete]

God doesn’t act withi your perimeters. You were trying to put God within your own logical abilities. This is your error.

How do you know this?

 

[Right Divider]

God doesn’t act withi your perimeters.

Nope

You were trying to put God within your own logical abilities.

God is LOGIC.

This is your error.

WRONG!

 

[Clete]

God is not a man.

Yes, He is! His name is Jesus! The Logos of God become flesh.

Ever bothered to do a deep dive into the actual meaning of the Greek word "logos"? It would be relevant to this disagreement.

God can use human will to accomplish His perfect will.

Of course He can but God is just and so to the degree He does so in a fashion were the human will is overcome and forced to do something by God, to that degree it is God who is morally responsible for the human's actions.

We see it all of the time.

Well, no we don't hardly see it ever at all - even biblically.

Politicians making free will choices that fulfil Biblical Prophecy.

You've never witnessed even one such instance.

Do you really think they planned it that way? Of course not.

Who is the they you're referring to and why couldn't they have planned it that way? According to your doctrine, God has somehow predestined everything AND everyone's will is still free and so if you can hold that contradiction in your mind as truth, why not believe that "they planned it that way"? Where's the problem?

God in His infinite power fulfills His perfect will through our free will choices.

That is pure Calvinism. If God "powers" your will, then it's His will, not yours. If God punishes people for things He made them do, He is unjust.

God is just, therefore, Calvinism is false.

Pharoh was a perfect example.

Pharaoh hardened his own heart. Note that this biblical episode starts with Pharaoh hardening his own heart twice in Genesis chapter 8...

Exodus 8:15 But when Pharaoh saw that there was relief, he hardened his heart and did not heed them, as the Lord had said.​

​

Exodus 8:32 But Pharaoh hardened his heart at this time also; neither would he let the people go.​

The text does indeed say in the next few chapters that God hardened his heart as well, but how was that done?
It wasn't by overtaking Pharaoh's will. God didn't sprinkle some sort of heart hardening agent in Pharaoh's favorite Kool-Aid.

God hardened Pharaoh's heart by performing obvious miracles! Miracles that Pharaoh, who fancied himself to be a god, couldn't replicate or stop or do anything about.

He made the free will choice to reject the Jews freedom and this accomplished the will of God as God could demostrate His mighty power through miracles, sihns and wonders.

Precisely! But can't you see that Pharaoh could have repented? Pharaoh didn't have to refuse. He could have let Israel go and everything would have worked out for everyone, including the Jews and God Himself. There was no prophecy that had to be fulfilled by Pharaoh being a stubborn fool.

Further, there are several prophecies in the bible that did not come to pass! How do you deal with those?

Here's a partial list...

• Nineveh – “Yet forty days, and Nineveh will be overthrown” (Jonah 3:4). The city repented, and God spared it (Jonah 3:10).
• Hezekiah – “Set your house in order, for you shall die, and not live” (Isaiah 38:1). He prayed, and God added 15 years to his life (Isaiah 38:5).
• Ahab – Judgment was declared on his house (I Kings 21:21–24). Because he humbled himself, God delayed it until his son’s days (I Kings 21:29).
• Eli’s House – God said Eli’s house would walk before Him forever (I Samuel 2:30). Later revoked because of their sin (I Samuel 2:31–36).
• Moses – Though promised entry with Israel (Exodus 6:8), God barred him from the land because of his disobedience (Deuteronomy 32:52).
• Jesus – “Assuredly, I say to you, there are some standing here who will not taste death till they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.”
  (Matthew 16:28). Didn't happen because Israel was cut off due to unbelief.

You can’t put God in a box.

Of course you can! The "box" is called "reality"! The box is "Righteousness"! The box is "Justice"!

Sound reason and proper logic is nothing more than conforming your mind to the limits of reality. Reality exists. It is what it is. Reality does not contradict itself and a claim cannot be both true and false in the same context. In short, a truth cannot be false and a falsehood cannot be true (in the same context). That's all sound reason is!

To say that God is not constrained by such things is to say that God is not real! More than that, if you'd actually do that deep dive into the Greek word "Logos" that I mentioned above, you'll discover that Jesus is the incarnation of Reason itself. To be rational is to be Godly and God certainly cannot deny Himself, Mr. Frodo!

As I've said to you repeatedly at this point, you do not believe these things you espouse because of the bible. If the bible actually taught such things, it would be false by its own standard (i.e. because God would be unjust - among other reasons). You believe these things because men, mostly well meaning men, have taught them to you. They were likewise taught them by other men, most all of whom loved God and thought they were teaching the truth, all the way back to Augustine of Hippo himself! Their motives, however, have no effect on the correctness of their doctrine or the lack thereof. The simple fact of history is that Augustine, by his own unambiguous statement, got these notions from Socrates, Aristotle and Plato, NOT FROM SCRIPTURE! He then set upon the greatest feat of eisegetical theology the world has ever seen. His whole life's work was dedicated to the activity of overlaying the bible with Neo-Platonic philosophy. The result being that you believe that God cannot change in anyway whatsoever and that He predestined everything that happens along with a whole list of corollary doctrines, none of which are taught by God's word but that have been read into it.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

You do not believe this for any biblical reason! You don't!

All of biblical prophecy confirms it. The prophecy in Daniel of the four World kingdoms. These are secular rulers who did exactly what prophecy said they would. Do you think that they were trying to make these prophecies happen? Or do you think they were acting on their own free will? And yet they fulfilled God's prophecy and purpose and plan. There you go.

Christ created all things and holds all things together. It is IMPOSSIBLE that He does not know all things, else they wouldn't exist or even continue to exist. You just plain wrong when you say that the Lord does not know all things. He knows everything.

Colossians 1:16-17 KJV
[16] for by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: [17] and he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

The dry bones of Ezekiel are a prophecy of Israel becoming a nation again after being scattered for a very long time which we now know is nearly 2,000 years. Israel became a nation again in 1948 fulfilling the prophecy of the dry bones and ezekiel. Do you think that the world leaders plan that according to the bible? Or did they use Free Will and accomplish God's will? God knows everything which is why prophecy is perfect in the Bible. What possible biblical basis do you have to believe that God doesn't know all things? The whole Bible points to God knowing all things.

 

[Right Divider]

All of biblical prophecy confirms it.

Argument?

The prophecy in Daniel of the four World kingdoms.

Argument?

These are secular rulers who did exactly what prophecy said they would. Do you think that they were trying to make these prophecies happen? Or do you think they were acting on their own free will? And yet they fulfilled God's prophecy and purpose and plan. There you go.

Claimed... where are the supporting arguments?

Christ created all things and holds all things together.

Duh!!

Do you think that we don't believe that?

It is IMPOSSIBLE that He does not know all things, else they wouldn't exist or even continue to exist. You just plain wrong when you say that the Lord does not know all things. He knows everything.

You are very bad at argumentation...

Colossians 1:16-17 KJV
[16] for by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: [17] and he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

Duh!!

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

Argument?

Argument?

Claimed... where are the supporting arguments?

Duh!!

Do you think that we don't believe that?

You are very bad at argumentation...

Duh!!

You are the one who is terrible at argumentation. You are illogical in your reasoning. You cannot create all things and hold all things together and also perfectly prophesy hundreds of future events on into eternity and then not know all things. You lose. Check mate.

You are starting to remind me of one of those cult Jehovah Witness cult types. First you say that an argument is unBiblical, because you say that it's not taking the text literally. Then when you are showing a literal text that can't be interpreted any other way you try to change the interpretation of it into something that it doesn't say. You're not going to bully me and you're not going to intimidate me. Knowledge puffeth up. You are a good example of that.

Admit it, God knows all things and I have proven that through the Word of God.

Duh!

 

[Clete]

All of biblical prophecy confirms it.

No it doesn't. (Explanation to follow...)

The prophecy in Daniel of the four World kingdoms. These are secular rulers who did exactly what prophecy said they would.

It would not have been necessary to predestine everything to bring a prophecy to fulfillment.

God doesn't have to be a puppet master in order to accomplish his goals, especially on the large international scale. Large groups of people are not very difficult even for us mortal human beings to predict and to manipulate. It would be child's play for God even on the largest and longest term scales.

Then there are the prophecies that did not come to pass, of which there are several!

Prophecy very simply is not proof of predestination. Quite the contrary, in fact. More on this in a moment...

Do you think that they were trying to make these prophecies happen? Or do you think they were acting on their own free will? And yet they fulfilled God's prophecy and purpose and plan. There you go.

God works for, with, through, against, around and in spite of all kinds of different people and is wiser than all of them combined with half his mind tide behind his back! It simply isn't necessary for him to predestine everything in advance to defeat His enemies and to bring about events that He decides to bring about.

Who is the better chess player; the one who plays against real opponents and wins every game or the one who plays the other side for his "opponent"?

Christ created all things and holds all things together.

The passage you are referring to simply teaches that God maintains the universe, not that he controls every event that happens.

This is a terrific example of the eisegesis I was talking about. It simply does not teach predestination.

It is IMPOSSIBLE that He does not know all things, else they wouldn't exist or even continue to exist.

That's your doctrine, not what the text says.

You just plain wrong when you say that the Lord does not know all things. He knows everything.

As if I'm the one who wrote the bible!

The bible does not teach that He knows every single detail of every single event that ever occurs. It flat out teaches otherwise!

Jeremiah 19:5 (they have also built the high places of Baal, to burn their sons with fire for burnt offerings to Baal, which I did not command or speak, nor did it come into My mind),

Genesis 18:21 I will go down now and see whether they have done altogether according to the outcry against it that has come to Me; and if not, I will know.”

Genesis 22:12 And He said, “Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.”

Isaiah 5:4 What more could have been done to My vineyard That I have not done in it? Why then, when I expected it to bring forth good grapes, Did it bring forth wild grapes?

Colossians 1:16-17 KJV
[16] for by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: [17] and he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

Verse 17 teaches that God maintains the integrity of His creation. The implication is that without Him, it would eventually all fall to dust. It doesn't mean He controls every detail of every event any more than you putting oil in your car means you know what odometer will read at the end of the car's existence.

The dry bones of Ezekiel are a prophecy of Israel becoming a nation again after being scattered for a very long time which we now know is nearly 2,000 years.

We DO NOT know this. This is YOUR DOCTRINE!

Israel became a nation again in 1948 fulfilling the prophecy of the dry bones and ezekiel.

So says YOUR DOCTRINE - not the text of scripture!

Do you think that the world leaders plan that according to the bible?

Even accepting your premise, they wouldn't have needed to.

Or did they use Free Will and accomplish God's will?

This question contradicts your own doctrine. These events are either predestined or they came about because of the free will choices of those involved. It cannot be both. You don't get to have your cake and eat it too.

God knows everything which is why prophecy is perfect in the Bible.

Except that it isn't! Here's but a few of the biblical prophecies that, by the bible's OWN statement, did not come to pass...

• Nineveh’s Destruction (Jonah 3:4)
  Jonah proclaimed, “Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown!” The city was spared because the people repented, showing God’s willingness to relent from judgment.
• Israel Driving Out the Nations (Joshua 3:10; 23:5; Judges 2:1–3)
  God promised Israel would dispossess all the Canaanite nations “without fail.” Yet Israel failed to drive them out completely, and Judges explicitly records God leaving them as a consequence of Israel’s disobedience.
• Christ’s “Imminent” Return (Matthew 24:34; Matthew 16:28; Revelation 22:20)
  Jesus spoke of His coming as near and even within “this generation.” The apostles likewise expected it soon (I Thessalonians 4:15–17), yet the Second Coming has not occurred in that immediate sense.
• Hezekiah’s Death Prediction (II Kings 20:1–6)
  Isaiah told Hezekiah, “You shall die, and not live.” After Hezekiah’s prayer, God added fifteen years to his life, altering the outcome.

This single point is sufficient by itself to disprove both exhaustive divine foreknowledge and predestination.

What possible biblical basis do you have to believe that God doesn't know all things? The whole Bible points to God knowing all things.

Except that it doesn't do so! You ARE reading that belief into the text!

I am not suggesting that you're doing so intentionally, by the way. It's just confirmation bias. You look for it and so find it. You accept it as fact and so your mind automatically filters out that which would contradict what you "know" to be true. That's how your mind works. That's how everyone's mind works. You have to intentionally guard against such biases. You have to be aware that such biases exist and intentionally pay attention to see if they're present in your own thinking. If you don't realize you have rose colored glasses on, you'd never even suspect, and would refuse to believe, that the sky is actually blue.

 

[xfrodobagginsx]

Yes the Bible does say that God knows all things. Peter declared it and so did the other passage I listed. You want to change the text to fit your false doctrine. Also, the passage that states that Christ Created all things...I think that requires knowing all things to create them....and that by Him all things Consist (Hold togethwr)...I think that also requires God knowing all things. Just further proof that when Peter declared to Christ that He knows all things, he meant that Jesus knows all things. No manipulation of text like you are trying to do.

This goes to show that Les is a much better Bible teacher than you and if your source believes like you, then Les is much better than him also.

 

[Clete]

Yes the Bible does say that God knows all things. Peter declared it and so did the other passage I listed. You want to change the text to fit your false doctrine.

Saying it doesn't make it so, Frodo! Saying it very simply doesn't make it so.

So very disappointing.

Also, the passage that states that Christ Created all things...I think that requires knowing all things to create them....and that by Him all things Consist (Hold togethwr)...I think that also requires God knowing all things.

I don't care what you think. What you think is precisely the problem. It certainly isn't what determines correct doctrine!

Just further proof that when Peter declared to Christ that He knows all things, he meant that Jesus knows all things. No manipulation of text like you are trying to do.

This is how big a deal this issue is...

If your reading of these passages is correct then the bible is false - by its own standard.
If the bible is false, Jesus is not who He claimed to be.
If Jesus is not who He claimed to be then Christianity is false and we are all here wasting our time.

Ideas matter, Frodo! They have real consequences. If the bible contradicts itself then we are all fools.

This goes to show that Les is a much better Bible teacher than you and if your source believes like you, then Les is much better than him also.

How is it that you say you want good bible teaching out of one side of your mouth but out of the other reject purely logical arguments out of hand as if nothing of any substance was said at all? If someone's disagreement with your doctrine is all it takes for you to close your mind to anything they might say, then why do you care who is or isn't a good bible teacher? It means that your definition of "good bible teacher" is "Whoever comes closest to teaching the stuff I already believe."


"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself—and you are the easiest person to fool." —Richard Feynman

Though originally said in a scientific context, this principle has profound theological relevance. After all, getting our doctrine right is at least as important as any scientific endeavor and spiritual truth is not just a matter of intellect, it’s a matter of the heart, which the scripture warns, is deceitful above all things.

We all have a tendency to see what we expect to see, to hold fast to what we’ve long believed, especially when those beliefs feel settled or familiar because everyone around us believes them. But as Feynman put it, we must bend over backward not to fool ourselves. That means we must approach our understanding of God, of Scripture, and of doctrine with humility. Not the kind that weakens conviction, but the kind that keeps us open to correction.

Loving the truth means being willing to ask...

“Is what I believe actually what the text says, or have I possibly imported something into it without realizing it?”​

That question isn't an accusation, it’s a safeguard. It protects us from replacing faithfulness with familiarity.

The call here is not to doubt everything, but to examine everything, to hold fast that which is good (I Thessalonians 5:21). That’s the heart of spiritual integrity: not just believing what is true, but being willing to search for it with the courage to admit if we’ve missed something along the way.

There is no such thing as a GOOD scientist or theologian who doesn't have this mentality, nor any good bible teacher who doesn't exemplify and teach it to his students. I know with certainty that Bob did so, did Les?

Ultimately, whether Les Feldick was a better or worse bible teacher than Bob Enyart comes down to who's doctrine turns out to have been more correct. Time will tell.

And as for you and I, of the two of us, which is more likely to be fooling themselves; the one that makes actual arguments and gives OBJECTIVE reasons for their doctrine or the one who blindly accepts proof-texting as actual proof and blows off anything anyone says to the contrary for no reason other than that they disagree with the conclusion?

 

[Right Divider]

You are the one who is terrible at argumentation.

False.

You are illogical in your reasoning.

It's hilarious when the one that is illogical complains about someone else being illogical.

Do you remember who wrote this?

Illogical? Perhaps, but Biblical.

You're the one that thinks that the Bible is illogical.

You cannot create all things and hold all things together and also perfectly prophesy hundreds of future events on into eternity and then not know all things. You lose. Check mate.

Clete explained your mistake very clearly. You force your beliefs onto the scripture. You have an extreme case of confirmation bias.

 

[Clete]

Clete explained your mistake very clearly. You force your beliefs onto the scripture. You have an extreme case of confirmation bias.

Even more so than I expected when I started this exchange. It makes me wonder whether he's entrenched for reasons that go beyond these beliefs being long held and personally cherished.

I know that formally educated theologiansn and pastors of churches in particular, are just mega-entrenched. It's all but impossible to get them to consider the notion that their doctrine may be the result of faulty premises and/or biases that they've unconsciously imposed on the text of scripture. I mean they won't even entertain the thought of it at all. There's just way too much at stake for them.

 

[Clete]

@xfrodobagginsx,

I'm not ready to give up on you here and I'm curious about something.

You're fully convinced that Jesus must know absolutely every single thing, with no exceptions or gaps in His knowledge at all, based more or less entirely on John 16:30 which has Peter stating that Jesus "knows all things."

Okay then, fine and dandy. Are you likewise convinced that Caesar Augustus literally registered the entire globe?

“And it came to pass in those days that a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be registered.” Luke 2:1 (NKJV)​

Are you convinced that John the Baptist baptized every single person in the Judean region?

“Then Jerusalem, all Judea, and all the region around the Jordan went out to him and were baptized by him in the Jordan, confessing their sins.” Matthew 3:5–6 (NKJV)​

Are you convinced that every single person in Jerusalem and Israel came running to Jesus?

“All are coming to Him!” John 3:26 (NKJV)​

Are you convinced that every individual in Israel, from Korah to Ahab, is going to be saved?

“And so all Israel will be saved...” Romans 11:26 (NKJV)​

If not, then you already know that the word “all” in Scripture doesn’t automatically mean “every single one.” As I told you in a previous post, the fact is that "all" very rarely actually means "every single one". More often than not, it’s a figure of speech, a generalization or a reference to categories rather than headcounts. There are literally dozens of examples throughout the scriptures like the ones I quoted above.

Isn't it at least possible that rather than being the "check mate" you've declared John 16.30 to be, the real truth is that you're reading your doctrine into the text and seeing what you want to see, what you've been taught to see?