Bible Contradictions 2.0

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
The fallacy of Unconditional Election:
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
[/quote]I’m just about done with this. I’ve got other things to do. I haven’t heard a new argument against the Godhood of God in over 20 years. Myopically focusing on the nationalistic element of actually the whole book of Romans tragically misses the point, which IS the infallible sovereignty of almighty God, but I have feeling that’s what’s coming.

Romans 9-10:4 ESV

[quote]I am speaking the truth in Christ, I am not lying; my conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit 2 that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh. 4 They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises. 5 To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.

6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, 7 and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” 8 This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. 9 For this is what the promise said: “About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.” 10 And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, 11 though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls 12 she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! 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. 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

19 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory 24 even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles? 25 As indeed he says in Hosea,

“Those who were not my people I will call my people,
and her who was not beloved I will call beloved.”
26 “And in the very place where it was said to them, You are not my people,
there they will be called sons of the living God.”

27 And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: “Though the number of the sons of Israel [3] be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will be saved, 28 for the Lord will carry out his sentence upon the earth fully and without delay.” 29 And as Isaiah predicted,

“If the Lord of hosts had not left us offspring,
we would have been like Sodom
and become like Gomorrah.”
Israel’s Unbelief

30 What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness [4] did not succeed in reaching that law. 32 Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone, 33 as it is written,

“Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense;
and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”

10:1 Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved. 2 For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. 3 For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. >>>[/quote]

[/quote]

You need to consider the entire new testament, rather than cherry picking words from Paul. Paul and Peter were known to disagree. Peter specifically said that Paul was hard to understand, and people would twist his words to their destruction (2 Peter 3):

Why would Jesus weep over Jerusalem, saying that he desired to gather them as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, BUT THEY WOULD NOT? The entire message of the new testament is to repent, willingly embrace the gospel of Christ, and be saved.

I know of no doctrine more reprehensible than this Calvanistic crap that turns men into nothing more than puppets, with no free will and no control over their fate. If there is any truth to the bible, this twisted mockery of Jesus’ message ain’t it.

42

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

The unmoved-mover[/quote]

[/quote]

The universe can’t move itself, we already established this. Even if the universe was eternal (which it is not it is only 13.5 billion years), it would have slowed down already.

43

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

The unmoved-mover[/quote]

[/quote]

The universe can’t move itself, we already established this. Even if the universe was eternal (which it is not it is only 13.5 billion years), it would have slowed down already.[/quote]

It may have been 13.5 billion years since the latest expansion, but that doesn’t mean matter and energy were magically created 13.5 billion years ago. Gravity causes movement, would you consider that to be the “universe moving itself”?

44

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

The unmoved-mover[/quote]

[/quote]

The dude does not understand the argument. Filling gaps is not what the argument does. It solves an ‘equation’. It does not fill gaps. If the universe is eternal it still does not disassemble or invalidate the argument. It is a necessary being, not an excuse for what we don’t know. We don’t have to know everything for cosmology to be true…Please read the link:
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/cosmological-argument/
It’s got arguments and counter arguments, it’s fairly brief and it will save you the heart ache of regurgitating century old refuted counter arguments.

45

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

The unmoved-mover[/quote]

[/quote]

The universe can’t move itself, we already established this. Even if the universe was eternal (which it is not it is only 13.5 billion years), it would have slowed down already.[/quote]

It may have been 13.5 billion years since the latest expansion, but that doesn’t mean matter and energy were magically created 13.5 billion years ago. Gravity causes movement, would you consider that to be the “universe moving itself”?[/quote]

No, if gravity causes movement then gravity is the cause and movement is the effect. But the explosion and the fact that the universe is actually accelerating it’s expansion is certainly puzzling.

46

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
The fallacy of Unconditional Election:
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
[/quote]I’m just about done with this. I’ve got other things to do. I haven’t heard a new argument against the Godhood of God in over 20 years. Myopically focusing on the nationalistic element of actually the whole book of Romans tragically misses the point, which IS the infallible sovereignty of almighty God, but I have feeling that’s what’s coming.

Romans 9-10:4 ESV

[quote]I am speaking the truth in Christ, I am not lying; my conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit 2 that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh. 4 They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises. 5 To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.

6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, 7 and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” 8 This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. 9 For this is what the promise said: “About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.” 10 And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, 11 though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls 12 she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! 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. 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

19 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory 24 even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles? 25 As indeed he says in Hosea,

“Those who were not my people I will call my people,
and her who was not beloved I will call beloved.”
26 “And in the very place where it was said to them, You are not my people,
there they will be called sons of the living God.”

27 And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: “Though the number of the sons of Israel [3] be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will be saved, 28 for the Lord will carry out his sentence upon the earth fully and without delay.” 29 And as Isaiah predicted,

“If the Lord of hosts had not left us offspring,
we would have been like Sodom
and become like Gomorrah.”
Israel’s Unbelief

30 What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness [4] did not succeed in reaching that law. 32 Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone, 33 as it is written,

“Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense;
and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”

10:1 Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved. 2 For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. 3 For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. >>>[/quote]

[/quote]
Your cherry picking scripture to make a point a fallicious point. I can cherry pick Joshua to justify murder too, but that doesn’t make it right. The “elect” are those who were given the word and the responsibility to spread it and do right by God. They are to bring the good news to all people and spread God’s word and mercy…Not just keep it and jump up and down at how special you are.
You can be done as done. I am not I will continue to destroy the fallacious self serving tenets of John Calvin, who created a man made doctrine of exclusivity and exclusion; heresy and lies about God.
Notice I am not just saying he’s wrong, I am proving it…Something you have not been able to do about Catholicism.

47

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

Logically it’s not possible. I can argue freewill but not with the existence of foreknowledge. If I know you are going to go to the store and get strawberry ice cream, you simply could not do otherwise. My foreknowledge prevents you from doing that.
There are only a few ways to resolve the conflict.

  • Accept it’s a paradox and move on.
  • Take time out of the equation. Which makes sense to a point because choice is a metaphysical construct and metaphysical constructs do not exist in time, but we do. However, if you take time and stand it on it’s end, everything happens simultaneously. Perhaps God looks at it this way.
  • Or God could simply choose not to know. He decided to give us freewill, he can decide against having foreknowledge.

The third one actually solves the problem, but we simply don’t know. I not sure it’s knowable. God doesn’t give us much clue into internal workings of his mind.

The unmoved-mover was Aristotle’s concept, which is actually more interesting because he was scarcely aware of hebrews or monotheism. Kant took the ontological form and made a cosmological argument from the point of ontology (he would deny it). Hume was fabulous. He spent most of his time trying to debunk cosmology, while he failed at doing that, he did succeed in bringing a far greater and more detailed of causation than anybody before him.

P.S. Tirib, ^ this is how you make a counter arguement. Ironsmithy not only disagreed with me, but managed to make an actaul arguement and managed not to insult me at the same time…Learn from him[/quote]

Your knowledge of someone going to the store to get strawberry ice cream has nothing to do with them making the choice. They would do so regardless of whether you knew about it or not. Your knowledge is completely irrelevant.
[/quote]

If I had said foreknowledge, could you choose to do otherwise? If so, explain how?[/quote]

If you had foreknowledge, I wouldn’t choose otherwise.

If you lacked foreknowledge, I wouldn’t choose otherwise.

Hence, foreknowledge is irrelevant.
[/quote]

Not correct, foreknowledge constricts freewill. If I knew everything you would ever do in life before you did it or knew about it, you could not break the bonds.

If you had foreknowledge, you could not choose otherwise. If I lacked it, you could…Whether you would is not relevant, it’s could that matters.

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/freewill/

[/quote]

Your foreknowledge, or the lack of it, has nothing whatsoever to do with what I could or couldn’t do. Knowing that I’m going to make a certain choice doesn’t mean I wasn’t free to make that choice. I was perfectly free to make it, you just knew me so well that you understood what choice I would make. Step back for a second and think about it logically. How in the world could your foreknowledge impact my choice? It’s impossible.

If I’m omniscient, and I know for a fact that the sun will rise tomorrow, does my knowledge influence the rising of the sun? Obviously not. I simply know the sun is going to rise. Whether I know it or not, it is a fact that the sun will rise.

Don’t confuse omniscience with predestination. Knowing all things doesn’t imply responsibility for all things.

[/quote]

Look it up, it is a paradox, you cannot foreknow and have choice to do otherwise. It’s simply impossible.

48

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
The fallacy of Unconditional Election:
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
[/quote]I’m just about done with this. I’ve got other things to do. I haven’t heard a new argument against the Godhood of God in over 20 years. Myopically focusing on the nationalistic element of actually the whole book of Romans tragically misses the point, which IS the infallible sovereignty of almighty God, but I have feeling that’s what’s coming.

Romans 9-10:4 ESV

[quote]I am speaking the truth in Christ, I am not lying; my conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit 2 that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh. 4 They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises. 5 To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.

6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, 7 and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” 8 This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. 9 For this is what the promise said: “About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.” 10 And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, 11 though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls 12 she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! 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. 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

19 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory 24 even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles? 25 As indeed he says in Hosea,

“Those who were not my people I will call my people,
and her who was not beloved I will call beloved.”
26 “And in the very place where it was said to them, You are not my people,
there they will be called sons of the living God.”

27 And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: “Though the number of the sons of Israel [3] be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will be saved, 28 for the Lord will carry out his sentence upon the earth fully and without delay.” 29 And as Isaiah predicted,

“If the Lord of hosts had not left us offspring,
we would have been like Sodom
and become like Gomorrah.”
Israel’s Unbelief

30 What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness [4] did not succeed in reaching that law. 32 Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone, 33 as it is written,

“Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense;
and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”

10:1 Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved. 2 For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. 3 For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. >>>[/quote]

[/quote]

You need to consider the entire new testament, rather than cherry picking words from Paul. Paul and Peter were known to disagree. Peter specifically said that Paul was hard to understand, and people would twist his words to their destruction (2 Peter 3):

Why would Jesus weep over Jerusalem, saying that he desired to gather them as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, BUT THEY WOULD NOT? The entire message of the new testament is to repent, willingly embrace the gospel of Christ, and be saved.

I know of no doctrine more reprehensible than this Calvanistic crap that turns men into nothing more than puppets, with no free will and no control over their fate. If there is any truth to the bible, this twisted mockery of Jesus’ message ain’t it.
[/quote]

Word.

49

Absolute theo-centric statements govern non absolute anthro-centric statements every time. This is what I’m talkin about. When there arises an apparent conflict between what God says about Himself. I.E. He has mercy on who He pleases and hardens who He pleases even pre answering the insolent objection of His arrogant creation with “who are you oh man who answers back to God”?

Once we have statements like that (and there’s plenty more) those CANNOT be brought into subjection to statements declaring the nature of man without exalting man over God which is exactly what is being predictably done here by the usual suspects. It’s exactly as it should be. Forlife, if it’s puppetry you fear don’t look now as you are dancing hand in hand with Pat to God’s divine tune of providence all the while proclaiming your autonomy.

You’re the one who calls it puppetry. God simply asks you who you think you are to answer back to him. Repent, worship your creator and live.

50

[quote]forlife wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]CappedAndPlanIt wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

The unmoved-mover[/quote]

[/quote]

The universe can’t move itself, we already established this. Even if the universe was eternal (which it is not it is only 13.5 billion years), it would have slowed down already.[/quote]

It may have been 13.5 billion years since the latest expansion, but that doesn’t mean matter and energy were magically created 13.5 billion years ago. Gravity causes movement, would you consider that to be the “universe moving itself”?[/quote]

Gravity weakens. So, eventually it would slow to a stand still.

51

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:
The fallacy of Unconditional Election:
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
[/quote]I’m just about done with this. I’ve got other things to do. I haven’t heard a new argument against the Godhood of God in over 20 years. Myopically focusing on the nationalistic element of actually the whole book of Romans tragically misses the point, which IS the infallible sovereignty of almighty God, but I have feeling that’s what’s coming.

Romans 9-10:4 ESV

[quote]I am speaking the truth in Christ, I am not lying; my conscience bears me witness in the Holy Spirit 2 that I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. 3 For I could wish that I myself were accursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, my kinsmen according to the flesh. 4 They are Israelites, and to them belong the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the worship, and the promises. 5 To them belong the patriarchs, and from their race, according to the flesh, is the Christ who is God over all, blessed forever. Amen.

6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, 7 and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” 8 This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring. 9 For this is what the promise said: “About this time next year I will return, and Sarah shall have a son.” 10 And not only so, but also when Rebekah had conceived children by one man, our forefather Isaac, 11 though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad in order that God’s purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls 12 she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13 As it is written, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

14 What shall we say then? Is there injustice on God’s part? By no means! 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. 16 So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I might show my power in you, and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18 So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.

19 You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” 20 But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” 21 Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? 22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory 24 even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles? 25 As indeed he says in Hosea,

“Those who were not my people I will call my people,
and her who was not beloved I will call beloved.”
26 “And in the very place where it was said to them, You are not my people,
there they will be called sons of the living God.”

27 And Isaiah cries out concerning Israel: “Though the number of the sons of Israel [3] be as the sand of the sea, only a remnant of them will be saved, 28 for the Lord will carry out his sentence upon the earth fully and without delay.” 29 And as Isaiah predicted,

“If the Lord of hosts had not left us offspring,
we would have been like Sodom
and become like Gomorrah.”
Israel’s Unbelief

30 What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness [4] did not succeed in reaching that law. 32 Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works. They have stumbled over the stumbling stone, 33 as it is written,

“Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offense;
and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame.”

10:1 Brothers, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for them is that they may be saved. 2 For I bear them witness that they have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge. 3 For, being ignorant of the righteousness of God, and seeking to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. >>>[/quote]

[/quote]
Your cherry picking scripture to make a point a fallicious point. I can cherry pick Joshua to justify murder too, but that doesn’t make it right. The “elect” are those who were given the word and the responsibility to spread it and do right by God. They are to bring the good news to all people and spread God’s word and mercy…Not just keep it and jump up and down at how special you are.
You can be done as done. I am not I will continue to destroy the fallacious self serving tenets of John Calvin, who created a man made doctrine of exclusivity and exclusion; heresy and lies about God.
Notice I am not just saying he’s wrong, I am proving it…Something you have not been able to do about Catholicism.
[/quote]

I would say the elect are those that make it to heaven (God may know this because he is not bound by Heaven and as well give them graces because he already knows they are going to heaven, or he may not), but the elect are made up of those that repent and are baptized and persevere to the end (a lot of doing works by the grace of God). Those that do not make it to Heaven are not predestined to Hell, they just choose by their own free will to not accept initial grace, or not to persevere to the end by not meriting their salvation by the grace of God.

52

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Absolute theo-centric statements govern non absolute anthro-centric statements every time. This is what I’m talkin about. When there arises an apparent conflict between what God says about Himself. I.E. He has mercy on who He pleases and hardens who He pleases even pre answering the insolent objection of His arrogant creation with “who are you oh man who answers back to God”?

Once we have statements like that (and there’s plenty more) those CANNOT be brought into subjection to statements declaring the nature of man without exalting man over God which is exactly what is being predictably done here by the usual suspects. It’s exactly as it should be. Forlife, if it’s puppetry you fear don’t look now as you are dancing hand in hand with Pat to God’s divine tune of providence all the while proclaiming your autonomy.

You’re the one who calls it puppetry. God simply asks you who you think you are to answer back to him. Repent, worship your creator and live.[/quote]

Repent and worship, sounds like rituals and works to me.

If you look down to 9:22, “made for destruction” the Greek can mean that the vessels of wrath have prepared themselves for doom by rejecting the gospel. Paul is not saying that God has predestined the unbelieves of Israel for damnation; otherwise he would not be praying (10:1) and working (11:14) for their salvation (CCC 1037).

[quote]It is written in CCC 1037:

God predestines no one to go to hell; for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance” (619):

Father, accept this offering
from your whole family.
Grant us your peace in this life,
save us from final damnation,
and count us among those you have chosen.[/quote]

53

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:<<< I would say the elect are those that make it to heaven (God may know this because he is not bound by Heaven and as well give them graces because he already knows they are going to heaven, or he may not), but the elect are made up of those that repent and are baptized and persevere to the end (a lot of doing works by the grace of God). Those that do not make it to Heaven are not predestined to Hell, they just choose by their own free will to not accept initial grace, or not to persevere to the end by not meriting their salvation by the grace of God.[/quote]Uh huh

54

What does this mean?
Proverbs 16:33[quote]The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD.[/quote]

55

Tenet 3 one of my favorites, Limited Atonement
It is stated as:
“Limited Atonement states that Christ’s redeeming work was intended to save the elect only, and actually secured salvation for them. His death was the substitutionary endurance of the penalty of sin in the place of certain specified sinners.”

Oh this is one of my favorites. It places the blame of sin on God himself. It also shows that God is selective and that only the ‘elect’ or those judged ‘worthy’ before even being born. So in this fallacious scenario, God is a real jerk. He makes people be bad or good, but worse that doesn’t matter. If you are elect, you can rape pillage and murder and Christ’s sacrifice is sufficient for you, whether you repent or not. On the other side to the coin, you can live a good life, dedicate you life to God, and his people, pray and read scripture, but if you aren’t elect; you’re screwed.
Of course, it is argued that because chose the elect, he also will make them act right too. It’s how you know you’re special. Never the less, you have no choice, no freewill no amount of good can save you and no amount of evil can condemn you.
How anybody could get that out of the bible I don’t know. Even most protestants cringe at this, it’s so bad. People will be saved or lost but only by their own choice. They can choose God or they can reject God. God doesn’t do the condemning.

The truth is the elect are those who come to him, not those who were chosen by him. God chooses people for certain things and everybody has a role, but everybody has the right and the freedom to tell God ‘No’. God chooses all to follow him, people reject him not because he preordained it, but because of evil.

This very doctrine is a slander against Jesus who went to Calvary so that all may be saved. He realized people would reject him, but he gave it to them none the less. If they choose to reject it, then he did all he could. If you choose to accept it, then you must work hard everyday to accept it and keep it. Faith is delicate and can be lost.
If you are preordained, what’s the point of any of it. Limited Atonement is horrendous lie created by man to suite his own purposes and to shut the kingdom of God from those who otherwise may be faithful.

Scriptures that refute this malicious evil lie:
-Matthew 5:14
-Mark 6:15
-John 1:29
-John 3:* ← the whole chapter
-Acts 2:17
-Romans 1:16
-Romans 3:19
-Romans 5:12
-1 John 2:2
-1 Timothy 4:10
-Acts 13:47

Of course, just to name a few…

56

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
<<< If you look down to 9:22, “made for destruction” the Greek can mean that the vessels of wrath have prepared themselves for doom by rejecting the gospel. Paul is not saying that God has predestined the unbelieves of Israel for damnation; otherwise he would not be praying (10:1) and working (11:14) for their salvation (CCC 1037). >>>[/quote]It can? What was I thinking? Look Chris you’re talking about the fact this is a participle in the perfect tense which can in certain (relatively rare) circumstances be seen as in the middle voice. No way. It’s perfect passive which is demanded by the immediate and further surrounding context. In other words a present state resulting from being acted UPON in the past.

Paul says God as the potter has the right over the clay to make from the SAME LUMP honorable and dishonorable vessels. He specifically predicts the objection of “how can we be held responsible if everything is His will?” and responds with what amounts to “shaddup, He’s God and you ain’t”. Trust me my friend. This didn’t come easy for me and I have heard every possible attempt at escaping it. I am not lying when I say it’s been a couple decades since I’ve had to research anything in this regard because I hadn’t heard it before.

I will endeavor to keep to the subject matter.

57

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
What does this mean?
Proverbs 16:33[quote]The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD.[/quote][/quote]

What do they mean when they say He who keeps the commandment keeps his life, how can we keep our own life by keeping a commandment? And, when they say work out your own salvation, what do they mean, if final salvation is given to you by faith alone, then what would be the necessity to work for this salvation if you already have it?

58

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
<<< If you look down to 9:22, “made for destruction” the Greek can mean that the vessels of wrath have prepared themselves for doom by rejecting the gospel. Paul is not saying that God has predestined the unbelieves of Israel for damnation; otherwise he would not be praying (10:1) and working (11:14) for their salvation (CCC 1037). >>>[/quote]It can? What was I thinking? Look Chris you’re talking about the fact this is a participle in the perfect tense which can in certain (relatively rare) circumstances be seen as in the middle voice. No way. It’s perfect passive which is demanded by the immediate and further surrounding context. In other words a present state resulting from being acted UPON in the past.
[/quote]

You would have to ignore a large part of scripture to accept this.

So, you admit it you’re closed on all this because you no longer search the truth, because you have the truth and are in fact infallible? Is that part of being part of the elect, and how do you know you are part of the elect, can you show me where infallible is a characteristic of the elect in the Bible?

59

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
What does this mean?
Proverbs 16:33[quote]The lot is cast into the lap, but its every decision is from the LORD.[/quote][/quote]

What do they mean when they say He who keeps the commandment keeps his life, how can we keep our own life by keeping a commandment? And, when they say work out your own salvation, what do they mean, if final salvation is given to you by faith alone, then what would be the necessity to work for this salvation if you already have it?[/quote]So what was your answer?

60

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
<<< If you look down to 9:22, “made for destruction” the Greek can mean that the vessels of wrath have prepared themselves for doom by rejecting the gospel. Paul is not saying that God has predestined the unbelieves of Israel for damnation; otherwise he would not be praying (10:1) and working (11:14) for their salvation (CCC 1037). >>>[/quote]It can? What was I thinking? Look Chris you’re talking about the fact this is a participle in the perfect tense which can in certain (relatively rare) circumstances be seen as in the middle voice. No way. It’s perfect passive which is demanded by the immediate and further surrounding context. In other words a present state resulting from being acted UPON in the past.
[/quote]

You would have to ignore a large part of scripture to accept this.
[/quote]No you do not. You simply allow scripture to define God and then God to define all else in scripture including man and his precious exalted will. I dunno. From where I sit this is just thinking with the mind of Christ which Paul says we’ve been given.

God’s way
Step 1- Who and what is God?
Step 2- Now that that unchangeable and all governing set of attributes is cemented in place we move on to who and what is man.
Step 3- Nothing said about finite and sinful man can in any way alter what we already know about the infinite immutable God.

Your way.
Step 1- Determine who and what God and man are together with equal eminence accorded each.
Step 2- When there arises what appears to be a conflict between the unassailable will of almighty man and the God we defined right along side man, we then adjust our view of God downward so as to never EVER allow all glorious man to have his sovereignty infringed upon by whatever of God might be left.

That is the utterly foundational difference between the breathtakingly awesome God of the bible and the contingent weakling set forth by autonomous man in all his flavors.

I say God defines me. You say you define Him. On and on and on you can go my dearest Christopher, but in the end THAT IS what it comes down to.