I meant it in the mode of von Goethe … paraphrasing…behavior is the mirror where people display their beliefs.

I certainly believe in what I state.

Colossians 2:23

"Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh."

Zobel said:

---

I meant it in the mode of von Goethe … paraphrasing…behavior is the mirror where people display their beliefs.

---

I know exactly what you meant. And I meant that I really like it when you drop in on threads - even if you are a synergistic Antiochian Origenian

Grimey said:

---

Since this is basically a predestination thread, I wanted to bring up a question/conundrum that I've thought about on and off for years.

0) God has certain unalterable attributes.
1) God is love
2) Perfect love cannot be forced upon another
3) Free will must exist to receive perfect love
4) Likewise, free will must exist to accept salvation (which is perfect love expressed through the Blood etc. )

5) God has perfect knowledge (omniscient)
6) God exists beyond time because he created it
7) God exists in all time simultaneously and experiences all time simultaneously
8) Therefore God has all knowledge of eternity before creation
9) If God has knowledge of all eternity before creation, he knows the eternal fate of each individual (as chosen through free will)
10) This means that God created people he knew would not choose to accept salvation

This logical progression of attributes of God lead to two seemingly disparate outcomes: free will and predestination. Any input or discussion would be appreciated.

---

As far as I can tell, taking things to their logical conclusions leads you to one of two options. Either God is limited in some way and men have free will, or God is absolute in all things and men don't have free will. No other views are self-consistent and make sense, not that God necessarily has to make logical sense.

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

Grimey said:

---

Since this is basically a predestination thread, I wanted to bring up a question/conundrum that I've thought about on and off for years.

0) God has certain unalterable attributes.
1) God is love
2) Perfect love cannot be forced upon another
3) Free will must exist to receive perfect love
4) Likewise, free will must exist to accept salvation (which is perfect love expressed through the Blood etc. )

5) God has perfect knowledge (omniscient)
6) God exists beyond time because he created it
7) God exists in all time simultaneously and experiences all time simultaneously
8) Therefore God has all knowledge of eternity before creation
9) If God has knowledge of all eternity before creation, he knows the eternal fate of each individual (as chosen through free will)
10) This means that God created people he knew would not choose to accept salvation

This logical progression of attributes of God lead to two seemingly disparate outcomes: free will and predestination. Any input or discussion would be appreciated.

---

As far as I can tell, taking things to their logical conclusions leads you to one of two options. Either God is limited in some way and men have free will, or God is absolute in all things and men don't have free will. No other views are self-consistent and make sense, not that God necessarily has to make logical sense.

---

God is omnipresent, omnipotent (all powerful), and omniscient (all knowing). God knows the end from the beginning .

Wakesurfer817 said:

---

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

Quote:

---

OSAS is a one and done thing that occurs at the moment of faith in Jesus

---

Strongly disagree. That's sort of the whole point of the parable of the sower. Only those that take goodness, internalize it, and produce good works until the end are saved. So no one's salvation is assured until they are dead. Thus the high value placed on martyrs by Christianity. Dying for your faith is as good a guarantee about someone's salvation status as you are ever going to get.

---

Interesting. So it seems like it's all up to us? I need to take goodness (what does this mean exactly?), I need to internalize it, and I need to produce good works or else. Forgive me - but this sounds hard and scary. Impossible even.

I always liked this from Jesus:

"Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light."

How would you incorporate his statement into yours?

---

I used "goodness" because I feel it best encapsulates the essence of God, Christianity, and the Gospel. Goodness breaks down into a lot of categories such as love, hope, faith, kindness, compassion, fairness, humility, and more, but none of those express the totality of goodness except for perhaps love. But the word love carries a lot of baggage in English so qualifiers like selfless and sacrificial have to be added.

To respond to your thought of impossibility of goodness: perfection is impossible, but goodness is at hand. It's not always easy, but it's never impossible to do good. Even if it's just a small amount of good. When Jesus was commending his people, he didn't thank them for saving the entire world or curing cancer. He thanked them for giving hungry people food, shelter to strangers, clothes to the naked and comfort to the sick. There's nothing impossible or daunting about any of thay

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

Wakesurfer817 said:

---

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

Quote:

---

OSAS is a one and done thing that occurs at the moment of faith in Jesus

---

Strongly disagree. That's sort of the whole point of the parable of the sower. Only those that take goodness, internalize it, and produce good works until the end are saved. So no one's salvation is assured until they are dead. Thus the high value placed on martyrs by Christianity. Dying for your faith is as good a guarantee about someone's salvation status as you are ever going to get.

---

Interesting. So it seems like it's all up to us? I need to take goodness (what does this mean exactly?), I need to internalize it, and I need to produce good works or else. Forgive me - but this sounds hard and scary. Impossible even.

I always liked this from Jesus:

"Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light."

How would you incorporate his statement into yours?

---

I used "goodness" because I feel it best encapsulates the essence of God, Christianity, and the Gospel. Goodness breaks down into a lot of categories such as love, hope, faith, kindness, compassion, fairness, humility, and more, but none of those express the totality of goodness except for perhaps love. But the word love carries a lot of baggage in English so qualifiers like selfless and sacrificial have to be added.

To respond to your thought of impossibility of goodness: perfection is impossible, but goodness is at hand. It's not always easy, but it's never impossible to do good. Even if it's just a small amount of good. When Jesus was commending his people, he didn't thank them for saving the entire world or curing cancer. He thanked them for giving hungry people food, shelter to strangers, clothes to the naked and comfort to the sick. There's nothing impossible or daunting about any of thay

---

The holiness of God is His highest attribute.

Good eye. I'm a proponent of open theism. I think God is maximally loving, and that's where that road leads. If you want to say God is maximally great, then that road leads to Calvinism.

Again, I strongly disagree. If holiness was God's highest priority and attribute, then He wouldn't have created the universe or men in the first place. Maximal holiness was already achieved before creation, when only God existed. Doesn't get much more holy than just God and nothing else

Gotcha. God is the alpha and Omega. He knows the ends from the beginning. He has perfect foreknowledge.

Behold the golden chain.

Romans 8:29-30 (ESV)

29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

Wakesurfer817 said:

---

Zobel said:

---

By recognizing that everyone is given sufficient grace for salvation, and sufficient opportunities for repentance.

---

What do you think prompts "OSAS" believing Protestants to repent and do good works? Why would they? Have a look at this from Catholic Answers:

"When the collection basket comes around, Catholics give half of what Evangelical Protestants give and less than half of what mainline Protestants give. According to a study by the Presbyterian Church (USA), the average Catholic gives $727 annually, the average Evangelical $1,448, and the average mainline Protestant $1,627.

Why the disparity? Some people immediately say it's because so many Catholics are poor, and that pulls down the average. Actually, in the U.S., the average Catholic is wealthier than the average Protestant, when all Protestants are lumped together, so an appeal to relative poverty doesn't work."

Reformed Protestants are firmly in "Perseverance of the Saints" territory after all. If we're in "His Grip" - why bother to sacrifice? Jesus said "For where your treasure is there will your heart be also".

My point here is not to brag - rather it's to say that empirically, something must be going on to inspire "OSAS" believers to do good works. What do you think it is?

---

Do you know where they get this information from?

On similar note, there are wealthier parishes and poorer parishes all within the same diocese. A quick internet search will yield some more statistical information about the ethnic makeup of religious institutions and it appears that in the United States the Roman Catholic Church has a larger percentage of Hispanics than the next two denominations combined.

Further, a study by the Federal Reserve (link) shows that Black and Hispanic families have considerably less wealth than White families so it would stand to reason that their charitable contributions would be less. So unless the study was more precise in which parishes were analyzed it is not a good sample and inconclusive.

TheGreatEscape said:

---

PabloSerna said:

---

Does man have free will?

---

We are definitely choosing beings. God overcomes us with His attractive grace and leads us into salvation.

As the hymn says, "I once was lost but now I'm found…was blind but now I see."

---

For us (RCC) we understand God's grace differently.

First, I think we can agree that God loves his creation and desires greatly to reconcile man through the loving sacrifice of Jesus Christ and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. So we see God's grace as a gift and not as something forced, but accepted. Offered to all, but not all accept. That is why the RCC rejects the notion of the "elect" and see those references in the bible not as a literal number, but rather a symbolic reference to the 12 tribes, 12 apostles, etc.

This grace, given by God for my salvation, is just the start of my faith journey. We strive to receive the sacraments as often as possible, daily mass, daily prayer, to order our life as closely to God's will. It is not something automatic, sometimes a struggle to say the Daily Office every day. However, with God's grace, all things are possible. So we see grace as sustaining, but not final.

That is how we reconcile God's will with Man's will - and why we pray as Jesus taught us, "thy will be done."

TheGreatEscape said:

---

Behold the golden chain.

Romans 8:29-30 (ESV)

29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

---

Not meant to be a hostile question, but I often wonder why Calvin interpreted and emphasized those verses differently than they had been interpreted historically? Those verses were there before.

And I understand the need for the Reformation due to the corruption in the Catholic Church.

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

Grimey said:

---

Since this is basically a predestination thread, I wanted to bring up a question/conundrum that I've thought about on and off for years.

0) God has certain unalterable attributes.
1) God is love
2) Perfect love cannot be forced upon another
3) Free will must exist to receive perfect love
4) Likewise, free will must exist to accept salvation (which is perfect love expressed through the Blood etc. )

5) God has perfect knowledge (omniscient)
6) God exists beyond time because he created it
7) God exists in all time simultaneously and experiences all time simultaneously
8) Therefore God has all knowledge of eternity before creation
9) If God has knowledge of all eternity before creation, he knows the eternal fate of each individual (as chosen through free will)
10) This means that God created people he knew would not choose to accept salvation

This logical progression of attributes of God lead to two seemingly disparate outcomes: free will and predestination. Any input or discussion would be appreciated.

---

As far as I can tell, taking things to their logical conclusions leads you to one of two options. Either God is limited in some way and men have free will, or God is absolute in all things and men don't have free will. No other views are self-consistent and make sense, not that God necessarily has to make logical sense.

---

I do not think God is limited. I believe He loves us so much that He gave us free will to allow us to ether choose or reject Him.

And this was in my morning Bible readings and seemed appropriate

1 Corinthians 1:10-13

I appeal to you brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another with what you say and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly united in mind and thought. My brothers and sisters, some from Chloe's household have informed me that there are quarrels among you.

What I mean is this: One of you says "I follow Paul"; another "I follow Apollos"; another "I follow Cephas"; still another "I follow Christ".

Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul?

I could go back and forth with you on this verse and the 4 or 5 others that Calvinists point to for their whole theology, but it probably wouldn't be a fruitful exercise.

Some thoughts: If a person were to pick up the scriptures and read them all, would they in any way, shape, or form come to the conclusion (without any outside influence) that the theology of Calvinists is the essence of the scriptures? Do you personally share Christ with others and tell them that Christ loves them and died for them and urge them to repent? Are you and your immediate family members all part of the elect? What about your close friends? How is it that response to the gospel message, and therefore spread of Christianity, is where there is active evangelism taking place? Why is God rejecting/leaving out vast swaths of people/ethnic groups from being elect/chosen?

dermdoc said:

---

TheGreatEscape said:

---

Behold the golden chain.

Romans 8:29-30 (ESV)

29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

---

Not meant to be a hostile question, but I often wonder why Calvin interpreted and emphasized those verses differently than they had been interpreted historically? Those verses were there before.

And I understand the need for the Reformation due to the corruption in the Catholic Church.

---

If you read some of St. Augustine - particularly his later stuff - you'll see a very "Calvinistic" (I use quotes because it was of course the other way around - Calvin was greatly influenced by Augustine) view of this passage. We're talking mid-5th century. Augustine was also - arguably - the first guy (after Jesus and the Apostles of course) to really hammer out a "grace focused" sotierology, as required by his battles with Palegianism.

I think most Protestants would be surprised at the extent to which they'd feel very comfortable in one of Augustine's sermons - here's an example:

"And so, my brothers, we had no good works, for all our works were evil. Yet although men's actions were such, God in his mercy did not abandon men. He sent his Son to redeem us, not with gold or silver but at the price of his blood poured out for us. Christ, the spotless lamb, became the sacrificial victim, led to the slaughter for the sheep that were blemished if indeed one can say that they were blemished and not entirely corrupt. Such is the grace we have received! Let us live so as to be worthy of that great grace, and not do injury to it. So mighty is the physician who has come to us that he has healed all our sins! If we choose to be sick once again, we will not only harm ourselves, but show ingratitude to the physician as well."

Grace comes first. And yes - a little free will in there for you Doc too. Such great stuff. I don't know of a Christian denomination that doesn't love and agree with Augustine.

Then Aquinas came along and watered it all down I'm kidding. I love Thomas too - but not as much as Augustine.

Wakesurfer817 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

TheGreatEscape said:

---

Behold the golden chain.

Romans 8:29-30 (ESV)

29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. 30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

---

Not meant to be a hostile question, but I often wonder why Calvin interpreted and emphasized those verses differently than they had been interpreted historically? Those verses were there before.

And I understand the need for the Reformation due to the corruption in the Catholic Church.

---

If you read some of St. Augustine - particularly his later stuff - you'll see a very "Calvinistic" (I use quotes because it was of course the other way around - Calvin was greatly influenced by Augustine) view of this passage. We're talking mid-5th century. Augustine was also - arguably - the first guy (after Jesus and the Apostles of course) to really hammer out a "grace focused" sotierology, as required by his battles with Palegianism.

I think most Protestants would be surprised at the extent to which they'd feel very comfortable in one of Augustine's sermons - here's an example:

"And so, my brothers, we had no good works, for all our works were evil. Yet although men's actions were such, God in his mercy did not abandon men. He sent his Son to redeem us, not with gold or silver but at the price of his blood poured out for us. Christ, the spotless lamb, became the sacrificial victim, led to the slaughter for the sheep that were blemished if indeed one can say that they were blemished and not entirely corrupt. Such is the grace we have received! Let us live so as to be worthy of that great grace, and not do injury to it. So mighty is the physician who has come to us that he has healed all our sins! If we choose to be sick once again, we will not only harm ourselves, but show ingratitude to the physician as well."

Grace comes first. And yes - a little free will in there for you Doc too. Such great stuff. I don't know of a Christian denomination that doesn't love and agree with Augustine.

Then Aquinas came along and watered it all down I'm kidding. I love Thomas too - but not as much as Augustine.

---

Augustine was also almost single handedly responsible for the double predestination and eternal torment hell theologies. And thought it was okay to use harsh means to get people to "convert".

Interestingly enough, he was a Universal reconciliation guy early on and then changed. He always spoke fondly of the Iniversalists as having soft hearts.

Agilaw said:

---

I could go back and forth with you on this verse and the 4 or 5 others that Calvinists point to for their whole theology, but it probably wouldn't be a fruitful exercise.

Some thoughts: If a person were to pick up the scriptures and read them all, would they in any way, shape, or form come to the conclusion (without any outside influence) that the theology of Calvinists is the essence of the scriptures? Do you personally share Christ with others and tell them that Christ loves them and died for them and urge them to repent? Are you and your immediate family members all part of the elect? What about your close friends? How is it that response to the gospel message, and therefore spread of Christianity, is where there is active evangelism taking place? Why is God rejecting/leaving out vast swaths of people/ethnic groups from being elect/chosen?

---

Agree completely. How could you have children if you thought they could be preordained to hell? And there is nothing you or they could do about It?

https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/350813.htm

You can fall off the horse either way.
As St John says above, "many believing each of these and asserting them more widely than is right are entangled in all kinds of opposite errors."

Quote:

---

I do not think God is limited. I believe He loves us so much that He gave us free will to allow us to ether choose or reject Him.

---

The problem with this thought is that if God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and the creator of all things, then there is no room for free will. At the moment of creation, God knows the entire history of every atom in the universe and all of our choices. He could have changed Creation to lead us to different choices. Maybe God changes the 1 billionth digit of pi from a 2 to a 3 and now I'll have chicken for breakfast instead of eggs, or maybe I'd commit some horrific act instead of going to work.

Now in my thoughts, God isn't inherently limited. However, when He made men in His image He gave us a limited version of His free will. Also in my mind, God's power and knowledge are both downstream effects of His Will. So if God limits His own Will, then He limits His own power and knowledge. And for men to have any measure of free will, then God must refrain from imposing His Will on us.

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

Quote:

---

I do not think God is limited. I believe He loves us so much that He gave us free will to allow us to ether choose or reject Him.

---

The problem with this thought is that if God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent and the creator of all things, then there is no room for free will. At the moment of creation, God knows the entire history of every atom in the universe and all of our choices. He could have changed Creation to lead us to different choices. Maybe God changes the 1 billionth digit of pi from a 2 to a 3 and now I'll have chicken for breakfast instead of eggs, or maybe I'd commit some horrific act instead of going to work.

Now in my thoughts, God isn't inherently limited. However, when He made men in His image He gave us a limited version of His free will. Also in my mind, God's power and knowledge are both downstream effects of His Will. So if God limits His own Will, then He limits His own power and knowledge. And for men to have any measure of free will, then God must refrain from imposing His Will on us.

---

I guess I would say I believe God limits Himself out of love.

That is my thought as well. It's possible and entirely likely that God in no way conforms to our own logic, but I don't have any other way to think about these things

Maybe rather than using the language of limitation, we use the language of sharing. He shares His freedom with us.

Zobel said:

---

Maybe rather than using the language of limitation, we use the language of sharing. He shares His freedom with us.

---

I like your phrasing better

Zobel said:

---

Maybe rather than using the language of limitation, we use the language of sharing. He shares His freedom with us.

---

I like that. Thanks.

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

Quote:

---

OSAS is a one and done thing that occurs at the moment of faith in Jesus

---

Strongly disagree. That's sort of the whole point of the parable of the sower. Only those that take goodness, internalize it, and produce good works until the end are saved. So no one's salvation is assured until they are dead. Thus the high value placed on martyrs by Christianity. Dying for your faith is as good a guarantee about someone's salvation status as you are ever going to get.

---

I strongly disagree for many reasons.

1. Look at Jesus' explanation of the parable of the sower according to Luke.

Luke 8:11-15

11 "Now the parable is this: the seed is the word of God. 12 Those beside the road are those who have heard; then the devil comes and takes away the word from their heart, so that they will not believe and be saved. 13 Those on the rocky soil are those who, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no firm root; they believe for a while, and in time of temptation fall away. 14 The seed which fell among the thorns, these are the ones who have heard, and as they go on their way they are choked with worries and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to maturity. 15 But the seed in the good soil, these are the ones who have heard the word in an honest and good heart, and hold it fast, and bear fruit with perseverance.

Road = not saved
Rocky soil = believe, fall away during temptation (which happens to believers OT and NT all through the scriptures)
Seed among thorns = saved but not walking with God and not bearing fruit.
Good soil = fruit bearing.

2. No one's salvation is assured until they are dead? You are correct if salvation depends upon your obedience.

Look at what 1 John says about eternal life and assurance.

11 And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. 12 He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life. 13 These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.

The question is: Do you have the Son?

John 1:11 He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. 12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

3. Look at this passage.

13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvationhaving also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God's own possession, to the praise of His glory.

Key words:

• Listening to the message of truth specifically related to salvation
• Having believed
• one is sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit
• to the praise of His glory

4. For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.

5. Abraham example: His moment of faith equals a one point in time credit of righteousness.

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness." 4 Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. 5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, 6 just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:
7 "Blessed are those whose lawless deeds have been forgiven,
And whose sins have been covered.
8 "Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will not take into account."

Quote:

---

As far as I can tell, taking things to their logical conclusions leads you to one of two options. Either God is limited in some way and men have free will, or God is absolute in all things and men don't have free will. No other views are self-consistent and make sense, not that God necessarily has to make logical sense.

---

Quote:

---

I do not think God is limited. I believe He loves us so much that He gave us free will to allow us to ether choose or reject Him.

---

Forgive me if I'm repeating some of the conclusions above but I think there's a difference between saying:

1. God is limited
2. God is chooses to limit His power
and then a kicker
3. God is limited by His nature (Hebrews 6:18 - so that by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie)

To tackle the last one. I don't think God being limited by His nature is a weakness. His fundamental character quality seems to be Holiness and He cannot sin or tempt others to sin.

God choosing to limit His powers at time is also not a sign of weakness nor does His mean He character or nature is limited. I've heard it said that God chose to limit His powers and give us free will. He's not making our choices for us. That is evidenced in that fact that He doesn't sin or tempt others to sin. We choose to sin.

We have examples of God limiting His power...

51 And behold, one of those who were with Jesus reached and drew out his sword, and struck the slave of the high priest and cut off his ear. 52 Then Jesus *said to him, "Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword. 53 Or do you think that I cannot appeal to My Father, and He will at once put at My disposal more than twelve legions of angels?

Namely in Jesus....

5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

DirtDiver said:

---

Quote:

---

As far as I can tell, taking things to their logical conclusions leads you to one of two options. Either God is limited in some way and men have free will, or God is absolute in all things and men don't have free will. No other views are self-consistent and make sense, not that God necessarily has to make logical sense.

---

Quote:

---

I do not think God is limited. I believe He loves us so much that He gave us free will to allow us to ether choose or reject Him.

---

Forgive me if I'm repeating some of the conclusions above but I think there's a difference between saying:

1. God is limited
2. God is chooses to limit His power
and then a kicker
3. God is limited by His nature (Hebrews 6:18 - so that by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie)

To tackle the last one. I don't think God being limited by His nature is a weakness. His fundamental character quality seems to be Holiness and He cannot sin or tempt others to sin.

God choosing to limit His powers at time is also not a sign of weakness nor does His mean He character or nature is limited. I've heard it said that God chose to limit His powers and give us free will. He's not making our choices for us. That is evidenced in that fact that He doesn't sin or tempt others to sin. We choose to sin.

We have examples of God limiting His power...

51 And behold, one of those who were with Jesus reached and drew out his sword, and struck the slave of the high priest and cut off his ear. 52 Then Jesus *said to him, "Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword. 53 Or do you think that I cannot appeal to My Father, and He will at once put at My disposal more than twelve legions of angels?

Namely in Jesus....

5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

---

Almost sounds like Universal reconciliation. I can cherry pick Scriptures also.

dermdoc said:

---

DirtDiver said:

---

Quote:

---

As far as I can tell, taking things to their logical conclusions leads you to one of two options. Either God is limited in some way and men have free will, or God is absolute in all things and men don't have free will. No other views are self-consistent and make sense, not that God necessarily has to make logical sense.

---

Quote:

---

I do not think God is limited. I believe He loves us so much that He gave us free will to allow us to ether choose or reject Him.

---

Forgive me if I'm repeating some of the conclusions above but I think there's a difference between saying:

1. God is limited
2. God is chooses to limit His power
and then a kicker
3. God is limited by His nature (Hebrews 6:18 - so that by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie)

To tackle the last one. I don't think God being limited by His nature is a weakness. His fundamental character quality seems to be Holiness and He cannot sin or tempt others to sin.

God choosing to limit His powers at time is also not a sign of weakness nor does His mean He character or nature is limited. I've heard it said that God chose to limit His powers and give us free will. He's not making our choices for us. That is evidenced in that fact that He doesn't sin or tempt others to sin. We choose to sin.

We have examples of God limiting His power...

51 And behold, one of those who were with Jesus reached and drew out his sword, and struck the slave of the high priest and cut off his ear. 52 Then Jesus *said to him, "Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword. 53 Or do you think that I cannot appeal to My Father, and He will at once put at My disposal more than twelve legions of angels?

Namely in Jesus....

5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

---

Almost sounds like Universal reconciliation. I can cherry pick Scriptures also.

---

Other than lack of scriptural support for universal reconciliation, it sounds almost exactly the same

Quote:

---

Road = not saved
Rocky soil = believe, fall away during temptation (which happens to believers OT and NT all through the scriptures)
Seed among thorns = saved but not walking with God and not bearing fruit.
Good soil = fruit bearing.

---

So according to salvation at the moment of belief, only the road is unsaved. Even the rocky soil is saved because those people had an instant of true belief. I think that runs contrary to the point of the parable. Using the terminology of "saved/not saved" I would say only the seed that landed in good soil and produced much fruit is saved.

In regards to your other quoted scripture, it gets a bit tricky. After all, Romans 6:4 literally says that we die at the moment of baptism and have a new life in Christ. But we don't actually die and we don't yet have our new life. However, we are supposed to act like we do. So the NT gets a bit confusing on that point. After all, we think of ourselves as saved, but we are only saved to the extent that we are actually dead to the world and living in the kingdom of God. Since we are not actually dead, we can return to the world and negate any of that until the point of death.

Let me use the example of Julian the Apostate. He was the nephew of Constantine and raised Christian and held the office of lector as a teen. So there is no reason to doubt his sincere belief. However, in his early adulthood he left the faith and became aggressively pagan. He promoted paganism throughout his reign as emperor. He never persecuted Christians directly to my knowledge, but he would actively discriminate against them for important positions and argue against Christian belief. According to your model, Julian the Apostate was saved. According to mine he was not, putting aside for a moment my general notions of God's grace toward non-Christians.

Zobel said:

---

Maybe rather than using the language of limitation, we use the language of sharing. He shares His freedom with us.

---

Nicely put!

AgLiving06 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

DirtDiver said:

---

Quote:

---

As far as I can tell, taking things to their logical conclusions leads you to one of two options. Either God is limited in some way and men have free will, or God is absolute in all things and men don't have free will. No other views are self-consistent and make sense, not that God necessarily has to make logical sense.

---

Quote:

---

I do not think God is limited. I believe He loves us so much that He gave us free will to allow us to ether choose or reject Him.

---

Forgive me if I'm repeating some of the conclusions above but I think there's a difference between saying:

1. God is limited
2. God is chooses to limit His power
and then a kicker
3. God is limited by His nature (Hebrews 6:18 - so that by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie)

To tackle the last one. I don't think God being limited by His nature is a weakness. His fundamental character quality seems to be Holiness and He cannot sin or tempt others to sin.

God choosing to limit His powers at time is also not a sign of weakness nor does His mean He character or nature is limited. I've heard it said that God chose to limit His powers and give us free will. He's not making our choices for us. That is evidenced in that fact that He doesn't sin or tempt others to sin. We choose to sin.

We have examples of God limiting His power...

51 And behold, one of those who were with Jesus reached and drew out his sword, and struck the slave of the high priest and cut off his ear. 52 Then Jesus *said to him, "Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword. 53 Or do you think that I cannot appeal to My Father, and He will at once put at My disposal more than twelve legions of angels?

Namely in Jesus....

5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

---

Almost sounds like Universal reconciliation. I can cherry pick Scriptures also.

---

Other than lack of scriptural support for universal reconciliation, it sounds almost exactly the same

---

There is a whole lot more than you think.

Happy to give some very good books on Universal reconciliation. And all very Scripturally based. And you do realize some saints like Gregory believed in universal reconciliation

Augustine even did early on and after changing his theology had a solar place in his heart for universal reconciliation.

Have you read much on it? Trust me, there is just as much or more Scriptural backing of universal reconciliation than say Calvinism.

AgLiving06 said:

---

dermdoc said:

---

DirtDiver said:

---

Quote:

---

As far as I can tell, taking things to their logical conclusions leads you to one of two options. Either God is limited in some way and men have free will, or God is absolute in all things and men don't have free will. No other views are self-consistent and make sense, not that God necessarily has to make logical sense.

---

Quote:

---

I do not think God is limited. I believe He loves us so much that He gave us free will to allow us to ether choose or reject Him.

---

Forgive me if I'm repeating some of the conclusions above but I think there's a difference between saying:

1. God is limited
2. God is chooses to limit His power
and then a kicker
3. God is limited by His nature (Hebrews 6:18 - so that by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie)

To tackle the last one. I don't think God being limited by His nature is a weakness. His fundamental character quality seems to be Holiness and He cannot sin or tempt others to sin.

God choosing to limit His powers at time is also not a sign of weakness nor does His mean He character or nature is limited. I've heard it said that God chose to limit His powers and give us free will. He's not making our choices for us. That is evidenced in that fact that He doesn't sin or tempt others to sin. We choose to sin.

We have examples of God limiting His power...

51 And behold, one of those who were with Jesus reached and drew out his sword, and struck the slave of the high priest and cut off his ear. 52 Then Jesus *said to him, "Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword. 53 Or do you think that I cannot appeal to My Father, and He will at once put at My disposal more than twelve legions of angels?

Namely in Jesus....

5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8 Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

---

Almost sounds like Universal reconciliation. I can cherry pick Scriptures also.

---

Other than lack of scriptural support for universal reconciliation, it sounds almost exactly the same

---

I in no way believe in universal reconciliation. Please inform me what led you to connect these 2 dots?