Challenge - The Golden Chain of Salvation

[sandusky]

Philthy:

Hi Sandusky -

Im not sure what you meant to imply here, but it seems that you are saying that someone cannot convert from believing the cross “to be foolishness” to believing it to be God’s means for salvation. That contention, I think we all recognize to be flatly false. In fact, the writer of the letter, Paul, once considered the cross to be foolishness - or worse. The cross is foolishness and remains foolishness when viewed exclusively through reason. It only becomes wisdom by the grace of God. So the answer to your question, “how could someone be drawn to something they consider foolish?” is that they can only be drawn by grace.

That they must be drawn by grace is not an issue.

The issue is, does God call some men to Christ because He intends to save them; or, does He call all men to Christ because He intends to give them the choice of saving themselves, or not saving themselves.

My study concludes the latter is true, and the former is false.

1 Cor 1:18 raises the question: why does the general call of the gospel—the message of the cross—result in some finding it foolish, and some finding it the power of God to glorification?

Only two types of people are mentioned—the perishing, and the ones being saved. The Greek word translated “perishing” literally means “to destroy,” and the syntax inserts the emphatic particle, “men" between the definite article and the verb so that the literal rendering is, “to the indeed ones being destroyed.” To them the cross is foolish; but to the “ones being saved,” it is not. I’ll leave you to consider that in light of Rom 9:13-24.

But, the very simple answer to the question raised in v18 is found in v30: it is God’s doing that results in belief; therefore, it is God’s not doing that results in continued unbelief, or viewing the Cross as foolishness; that disproves the idea of an intent on the part of God, by the use of a “prevenient, or antecedant” grace, to allow the sinner to choose this way, or that way: If it is by God’s doing that one is in Christ; it is by God’s not doing that one is not in Christ.

This is seen in other verses as well, for instance:Matthew 22:14
“For many are called, but few are chosen.”Notice, "out of the many, few are chosen."

Not, "out of the many, few, by the use of their own free will, choose", which is your position; but, "few are chosen". By whom?

John 17:9
“I ask on their behalf; I do not ask on behalf of the world, but of those whom You have given Me; for they are Yours;Those foreknown by the Father are chosen by Him for glorification (Rom 8:29-30), they are the elect of the Father (v33), and they belong to Him. He gives them to Jesus, and they are the only ones with whom Jesus is concerned; Jesus is not concerned with the world (cf v9 above). They include not only the apostles, but those in the future who by God’s will, will believe in Him through the apostles’ word—the scripture.John 17:20
“I do not ask on behalf of these [the apostles] alone, but for those also who [in the future] believe in Me through their word;

So those who will come to Jesus are limited to the Father’s choice, and their coming is further dependent upon the Father’s drawing them to Jesus. The rest do not come, because they do not have the ability to do so. (IOW, they “don’t want to,” [cf Rom 3:10ff]; fallen mans inability is a “moral” inability; he is morally corrupted.)John 6:44
“No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day.Jesus further states that those given to Him by the Father (cf Jn 17:9, 20) will certainly
come to Him:John 6:37
“All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out.And so there is no doubt as to their final disposition, Jesus assumes full, and final responsibility for losing none of those given Him by the Father, and for raising up in the last day, all of those given to Him by the Father.

Jesus says He will do that because it is the Father’s will that He lose none, but
raise them up:John 6:39
“This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day.
Jesus does the will of the Father perfectly.

(continued)

 

[sandusky]

(continued from post #240)

But, back to the point of my post concerning Jn 12:32 (#234); it demonstrates that “all men” in that passage does not mean “all mankind,” or all men without exception, as mikeledes asserts; but it means all men without distinction as to Jew, or Gentile; rich, or poor; healthy, or sick, etc.

 

[sandusky]

I need to correct the conclusion of the statement from my post #240 which I mis-typed.

The statement:

That they must be drawn by grace is not an issue.

The issue is, does God call some men to Christ because He intends to save them; or, does He call all men to Christ because He intends to give them the choice of saving themselves, or not saving themselves.

The mis-typed conclusion:

My study concludes the latter is true, and the former is false.

The corrected conclusion:

**My study concludes the former is true, and the latter is false.



**:tiphat:

 

[Philthy]

I need to correct the conclusion of the statement from my post #240 which I mis-typed.

The statement:

The mis-typed conclusion:

The corrected conclusion:

My study concludes the former is true, and the latter is false.

** **

:tiphat:

Again, Sandusky, thank you for your lengthy post. I think, though, that I have had enough of this topic for now! There is no clear end in sight, and that is not my biggest complaint. The biggest problem I have is that (regardless of which view of predestination one takes) I don’t find it particularly edifying, motivational, spriritually enriching, etc, nor do I find it particularly glorifying to God.
In the final analysis regardless of which view of predestination you hold, what good is it, really? Perhaps this should be a separate thread?

 

[Pax]

That they must be drawn by grace is not an issue.

The issue is, does God call some men to Christ because He intends to save them; or, does He call all men to Christ because He intends to give them the choice of saving themselves, or not saving themselves.

My study concludes the former is true, and the latter is false.

…
…
perfectly.

(continued)

Your synopsis of the “issue” is well stated from what I understand of your point of view. My difficulty with your synopsis, however, is that you have set up a false dichotomy. Your first and second statements are put forth in such a way that you make it appear that there are no other possibilities. You know very well that Catholics do not teach that we save ourselves. This has been demonstrated over and over.

You are attempting to force something on Catholic teaching that does not exist. Try as you may this will not work. Catholic teaching conforms to scripture and Catholic teaching in no way conforms to the idea that “we somehow save ourselves.”

The simplest way to appreciate this without going into a lengthy explanation and use of scripture is to simply recognize that Catholics firmly believe that Jesus saves us. Without the passion, death, and resurrection of Jesus there is absolutely no salvation. We do not save ourselves.

 

[mikeledes]

I know you believe that.

John continues with his narrative stating this, that, and the other, and then we come to vv37-40:37 But though **He had performed so many signs before them, YET, they were not believing in Him.**Jesus had healed the lame, the blind, the sick, and raised others from the dead, and yet, they were still not believing in Him.

The words of Abraham to the rich man in Lk 16, are pressed upon us once again, “…they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.”

Drawing “all men” in 12:32, does not mean “all mankind.”

Continuing in v38:38 This was to fulfill the word of Isaiah the prophet which he spoke: “Lord, who has believed our report? And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?”

39 For this reason they could not believe, for Isaiah said again,

40 **“He has blinded their eyes and He hardened their heart, so that they would not see with their eyes and perceive with their heart, and be converted and I heal them.”*****They will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead ***(let alone be lifted up).

The Jews would not be drawn to Christ because God determined that, at that time, they would reject their messiah, and He would bring in the Gentiles; as Paul says, from the standpoint of the gospel, the Jews were enemies for the Church’s sake (Rom 11:28)—the Jews, in the national sense, were not drawn to Christ—individual Jews? Yes. All Jews, without exception? No.

Furthermore, the Jews considered Christ to be “cursed” because of the mode of His death by crucifixion:Galatians 3:13

Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us—for it is written, ***“Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree”—***They would not be drawn to one they believed was cursed by God (cf Dt 21:23).

Moreover, the drawing is said to occur at the lifting up of Christ; we are told that the lifting up of Christ is foolishness to all but the ones being saved (1 Cor 1:18ff); how could one be drawn to something they consider foolish?

You will say, *“it is because God gave them prevenient grace, *SO THAT by the power of their own free will they call it foolish.” Isn’t that correct?

I say they call it foolish because they have been graced, neither with the truth, nor with the understanding of the significance of the lifting up of Christ (cf Rom 9:18).

I do understand your position, Mike; I’m an ex-Catholic.

Those points should dispel your idea that “all men” in 12:32, does not mean “all mankind“ without exception,” but all men without distinction, as to Jew or Gentile (cf Rev 7:9); but it probably won’t.

The necessary followup to deing drawn, Sandunsky, is believing. Those who reject prevenient grace will not believe. The audience Jesus is addressing had comletely rejected previous illumination from God through the Law and the Prophets and through John the Baptist:

John 5:45-47

**45"Do not think that I will accuse you before the Father; the one who accuses you is Moses, in whom you have set your hope.
46"For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote about Me.
47"But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?" **

Luke 13:34-35

**34"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, just as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not have it!
35"Behold, your house is left to you desolate; and I say to you, you will not see Me until the time comes when you say, ‘BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!’" **

God wanting something and his desire “frustrated” because they “would not have it”? Going back to my original point, however, the Jews had numerous opportunities to respond to God’s prevenient grace and they refused. Hence, God handed them over to their unbelief by withdrawing/withholding His grace. The fact that this unbelief was allowed by God in order to accomplish his purpose does not mean that he completely witheld prevenient grace from the Jews as individuals. Nor does this mean that God did not accomplish His purpose without incorporating free will. Let’s go back to the Fall. In order for their to be a

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

Mike, Pelagius taught that God holds man responsible only for those things that man is
able to do.

I hear that in your notion of prevenient grace.

For example, you say:What I’m hearing undergirding your demands for sincerity, Mike, is,***“how can God hold me responsible if I can’t make the choice He demands because my sin has impaired my decision making abilities?”***I submit that a rejection of a command is a choice. Whether or not the choice is made when one is impaired, is irrelevant, unless one is attempting to skirt their responsibility for the choice.

I assume that you have laws against drunk-driving in your town.

The drunk-driving law, sincerely written, sincerely desires that you don’t drive drunk.

You understand that law, and you go out, and you proceed to get hammered.

Then, in your hammered condition, a condition which you brought on yourself, you get in your car, and you drive, and you get busted.

You go to court. What do you do?

Complain that the law is insincere, if it doesn’t first make you sober, so you could make the right choice before you drove the car drunk?

Man is drunk on sin, Mike; why should God have to sober him up to make a choice
he’s already made? Is he not responsible for his sin?

The problem with this analogy, Sandunsky, is that neither you nor I chose to be born with a sin nature/ concupisence or with original sin. The law does not need to make a person sober because we are, by nature, sober and thus capable of chosing not to be sober (i.e. get hammered). Is there a time when man, apart from grace, was born innocent of sin and could chose to fall into sin or not? Is all manking born like Adam before the fall, totally having self-control? Is man capable of chosing God or repenting apart from the grace of God? The law is not “insincere” because it works under the assumption that man is able to keep himself sober, to chose not to drink. However, if man is incapable of repenting without being given an opportunity to repent through prevenient grace, then how can God’s desire for their repentance be sincere, knowing that without His intervention man is incapable of repentance? Pelagianism believes man can chose to repent without divine aid, simply through their natural powers. You give the impression that the reprobate had a choice, that they were capable of chosing God, but chose sin instead. Do you believe a person can chose God apart from grace?

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

call that “saving grace.”

I hear Pelagius in that Mike, “must be able,” “…only for what he is able to do…”

How is the rejection of the Gospel by a sinner, impaired by Adam’s fall, not a choice?

How is your insistence that, in order for the gospel to be sincere, God must give prevenient grace, not a demand put upon the creator by the creature?

And, you say that after previously saying that God is not obligated to correct the creature’s malady.

I have yet to read anything from you that supports your notion of prevenient grace, other than, you believe it to be so

Can unredeemed sinnder chose to do otherwise? I am not legally obligated to donate my kidney to save a loved one’s life. But if I freely chose to offer my kidney and have signed the requisite paper work, I have now obligated myself to do it. God has stated that He desires the repentance of the wicked:

Ezekiel 33:11

**11"Say to them, ‘As I live!’ declares the Lord GOD, ‘I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked turn from his way and live Turn back, turn back from your evil ways! Why then will you die, O house of Israel?’ **

Now how can you sincerely desire something and withhold the one thing that will potentially accomplish what you desire? I have pointed to verses that discuss the notion of prevenient grace.

John 12:32

**32"And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself." **

Titus 2:11

11For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men,

All men without distinction and all mankind essentially means the same thing. “All men”, Sandunsky, means the whole world:

John 3:16-17

16"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
17"For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.

1 John 2:2

2and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.

1 Timothy 4:10

10For it is for this we labor and strive, because we have fixed (A)our hope on the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers.

The overall testimony of the Bible is that “all men” refers to all mankind. Therefore, Jesus will draw all mankind to Himself, and that “drawing grace” is “prevenient grace.”

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

Mike, everytime I attempt to discuss something with you, you follow this same pattern: you make assertions, and don’t support them. You keep asserting that these verses support your position, but you have yet to explain how they do so.

What do you think that if you say it enough times, people will believe you?

I’m waiting…:coffeeread:

I have consistently shown how thay do. The fact that you reject/ refuse to accept that does not mean I have not explained how they do support my position.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

Dead in sin; he will not come; he will not come, because he cannot come; he cannot come because he is dead to the things of the spirit—a natural man; he must be made alive to spiritual things; he must be created anew (1 Cor 2:14; Eph 2:4-5; 2 Cor 5:17).

He will not come because he cannot come. We agree on that! And yet God desires that he comes but witholds the means to accomplish that fact.

Let’s re-phrase what you say in the above quote, and ask the real question that’s on your mind:How then can God expect one to subject himself to God’s command to repent if he is not able to do so?That’s your real question.

("how can God hold me responsible if I can’t make the choice He demands because my sin has impaired my decision making abilities?")?

:nope: Actually, that is not my real question and you are missing my entire point. My real question is how can God state that he sincerely desires the repentance of the wicked and at the same time withold the means of potentially accomplishing that?

You are being overly literal with “deadness” of spirit. As I said above, the unregenerate is “dead in sin.” He is a “natural man, unable to discern spiritual things.” Man’s problem is a “moral” problem; he has all of his faculties, but they were corrupted in Adam; man still has “reason,” “conscience,” etc., but his whole being, including his spirit, is in rebellion to God; he wants nothing to do with God:Romans 3:10-12

10 as it is written, “There is none righteous, not even one;
11 There is none who understands, There is none who seeks for God;
12 All have turned aside, together they have become useless; There is none who does good, There is not even one.” But, you don’t believe that; do you?

Yes, this is the state of every unregenerated sinner. I do believe that man apart from grace cannot chose God. But God has expressed his desire for the repentance of the wicked and I believe that He always backs up what He says because He is a righteous and all-Holy God in whom there is no deceit or contradiction.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

(continued from post #240)

But, back to the point of my post concerning Jn 12:32 (#234); it demonstrates that “all men” in that passage does not mean “all mankind,” or all men without exception, as mikeledes asserts; but it means all men without distinction as to Jew, or Gentile; rich, or poor; healthy, or sick, etc.

I essence, all mankind. This is demonstrated in post # 247.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

Let me clarify my position on this issue;

1. I believe that election is not determined by free will. Rather, that God incorporates man’s free will in accomplishing the salvation of the elect and in accomplishing His purpose. Its not an either/or situation when it comes to God’s will vs. man’s will, but a both/and. God arranges everything in such a way that man will freely accept His offer. The point of my arguments is to establish that there is free will, not that our free will gets us elected. The word choice inherently means that there is more than one option and that one can select one option over another. The Bible consistently talks about choice and the choice involved is not to chose what kind of sin one wants to commit. The choice is always either serving God or serving sin (Joshua 24:14-23).

Deuteronomy 30:19

19"I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants, "

Proverbs 1:20-26

**20Wisdom shouts in the street,
She lifts her voice in the square;
21At the head of the noisy streets she cries out;
At the entrance of the gates in the city she utters her sayings:
22"How long, O naive ones, will you love being simple-minded?
And scoffers delight themselves in scoffing
And fools hate knowledge?
23"Turn to my reproof,
Behold, I will pour out my spirit on you;
I will make my words known to you.
24"Because I called and you refused,
I stretched out my hand and no one paid attention;
25And you neglected all my counsel
And did not want my reproof;
26I will also laugh at your calamity;
I will mock when your dread comes,
27When your dread comes like a storm
And your calamity comes like a whirlwind,
When distress and anguish come upon you.
28"Then they will call on me, but I will not answer;
They will seek me diligently but they will not find me,
29Because they hated knowledge
And did not choose the fear of the LORD. **

Isaiah 1:18-20

18"Come now, and let us reason together,"
Says the LORD,
"Though your sins are as scarlet,
They will be as white as snow;
Though they are red like crimson,
They will be like wool.
19"If you consent and obey,
You will eat the best of the land;
20"But if you refuse and rebel,
You will be devoured by the sword "
Truly, the mouth of the LORD has spoken

I also believe that removing free will from the picture leads to determinism and determinism makes God directly repsonsible for sin and evil. Predestination to glory ultimately depends on God’s gracious choice.

1. I believe that the grace of final perseverance is given to whomever God pleases and will be efficaciously and infallibly granted to the elect. Thus I assert the Catholic Church’s teaching on the unequal distribution of grace and the impossibility of meriting the grace of final perseverance.
2. However, I believed that God offers the grace of repentance to all mankind (elect and reprobate).

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

The necessary followup to deing drawn, Sandunsky, is believing. Those who reject prevenient grace will not believe. The audience Jesus is addressing had comletely rejected previous illumination from God through the Law and the Prophets and through John the Baptist:

John 5:45-47

**45"Do not think that I will accuse you before the Father; the one who accuses you is Moses, in whom you have set your hope.
46"For if you believed Moses, you would believe Me, for he wrote about Me.
47"But if you do not believe his writings, how will you believe My words?" **

Luke 13:34-35

34"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, just as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not have it!
35"Behold, your house is left to you desolate; and I say to you, you will not see Me until the time comes when you say, ‘BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!’"

God wanting something and his desire “frustrated” because they “would not have it”? Going back to my original point, however, the Jews had numerous opportunities to respond to God’s prevenient grace and they refused. Hence, God handed them over to their unbelief by withdrawing/withholding His grace. The fact that this unbelief was allowed by God in order to accomplish his purpose does not mean that he completely witheld prevenient grace from the Jews as individuals. Nor does this mean that God did not accomplish His purpose without incorporating free will. Let’s go back to the Fall. In order for their to be a

God Bless,
Michael

Oops! I just noticed I deleted part of this post. Let me correct that.

Lets’s go back to the Fall. In order for their to be a massa damnata from which God would select His elect, there had to be a Fall. Therefore, Adam had to sin in order for God to accomplish this purpose. Now do you believe Adam had free will? If he had free will, than that demonstrates that God can incorporate man’s free will in accomplishing His purpose. If he did not have free will, then that means that His choice was causally determined by God. If so, God caused Adam to sin and is thus responsible for his sin and, in turn, our sins as well.

Prevenient grace enables man to choose God. Therefore, the motor behind that free choice is grace and hence God. Both Adam and Satan were created in perfection, and yet they both chose rebellion. A man can receive prevenient grace and yet reject it.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

Your synopsis of the “issue” is well stated from what I understand of your point of view. My difficulty with your synopsis, however, is that you have set up a false dichotomy. Your first and second statements are put forth in such a way that you make it appear that there are no other possibilities. You know very well that Catholics do not teach that we save ourselves. This has been demonstrated over and over.

You are attempting to force something on Catholic teaching that does not exist. Try as you may this will not work. Catholic teaching conforms to scripture and Catholic teaching in no way conforms to the idea that “we somehow save ourselves.”

The simplest way to appreciate this without going into a lengthy explanation and use of scripture is to simply recognize that Catholics firmly believe that Jesus saves us. Without the passion, death, and resurrection of Jesus there is absolutely no salvation. We do not save ourselves.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[sandusky]

mikeledes:

Those who reject prevenient grace will not believe.

First of all, you beg the question in assuming that there is such a thing as “prevenient” grace; a thing that you keep asserting exists, but have yet to prove its existence.

Secondly, what purpose is served in God giving this “prevenient grace” to an unbeliever? So that God can be really sure that the unbeliever does not believe? Everyone ever born is born an unbeliever!

mikeledes:

The audience Jesus is addressing had comletely rejected previous illumination from God through the Law and the Prophets and through John the Baptist:

John 12:39-40

39 For this reason they could not believe, for Isaiah said again,

40 “He has blinded their eyes and He hardened their heart, so that
they would not see with their eyes and perceive with their heart, and be
converted and I heal them.” (cf Is 6:10; Mt 13:14ff).

They could not believe, that is, unequivocally, what the Greek says. And why couldn’t they believe (v40)?

You say it is because ”they had completely rejected previous illumination from God through the Law and the Prophets and through John the Baptist.”

Your reason for their not believing is completely at odds with the reason John gives for their not believing (see Jn 12:39-40 above for John’s reason).

Why is that?

Undergirding all of your statements is your commitment to the notion that the gospel offer can be a sincere offer only if God gives everyone an equal opportunity to believe; something you continue to assert, but have yet to prove.

mikeledes:

God wanting something and his desire “frustrated” because they “would not have it”?

That’s a strawman, Mike.

Within the general will of God are things that God has not revealed, but He has decreed; they are fixed, and will come to pass (Dt 29:29; cf Ps 115:3; Dan 4:17, 25, 32, 35, et al.); one of those fixed things is whom He will save (Rom 8:30ff). Those decrees of God will come to pass; they are never thwarted, or overthrown by man, or anyone, or anything else, for that matter.

Also within the general will of God is His “perceptive” will, or His will of “desire,” a will that He has made known to men in which are contained the things that men “ought to do.” Such as, obey all of the commands of God that He has made known to man; such as, keeping the 10 commandments, loving God, and neighbor, repenting from sin, and unbelief (cf 1 Tim 2:4.) God’s perceptive will, or will of “desire,” is always overthrown by men—God endures this overthrowing of His perceptive will for a reason (cf Rom 9:22).

mikeledes:

Going back to my original point, however, the Jews had numerous opportunities to respond to God’s prevenient grace and they refused. Hence, God handed them over to their unbelief by withdrawing/withholding His grace.

You continue to beg the question by assuming the correctness of your position. John states, ”they could not believe; and, according to John, that was because God kept them from believing. The idea of “prevenient” grace having been given to them is an assertion you have not proven.

mikeledes:

The fact that this unbelief was allowed by God in order to accomplish his purpose does not mean that he completely witheld prevenient grace from the Jews as individuals.

You have yet to prove that there is such a thing as “prevenient grace.” I have acknowledged that God did not reject all of the Jews, but that God Himself, kept for Himself, a remnant—those that He saved (Rom 11:4).

mikeledes:

Nor does this mean that God did not accomplish His purpose without incorporating free will.

What does "I have kept for Myself…a remant" (Rom 11:4), mean to you?

 

[mikeledes]

Man is drunk on sin, Mike; why should God have to sober him up to make a choice
he’s already made? Is he not responsible for his sin?

Do you believe man is born guilty due to original sin? That we are by nature children of wrath. In other words, are we born with the wrath of God upon us?

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

First of all, you beg the question in assuming that there is such a thing as “prevenient” grace; a thing that you keep asserting exists, but have yet to prove its existence.

I have given the verses and I have responded to your rebuttal.

Secondly, what purpose is served in God giving this “prevenient grace” to an unbeliever? So that God can be really sure that the unbeliever does not believe? Everyone ever born is born an unbeliever!

What is the purpose of offering salvation to the reprobate knowing that they will not believe and be saved? Their rejection will testify against them in judgement day.

To be continued…

God bless,
Michael

 

[clmowry]

Find better terminology and you might get somebody to agree with you.

OSAS means so many different things to so many different people that it’s a term who’s use is for all practical purposes intrinsically disagreeable.

Chuck

As Mike has documented, Catholics are required, de fide, to believe in an election to perseverance; it is an election that is fixed in number, and will happen certainly.

It is, for lack of a better word, an OSAS doctrine.

 

[mikeledes]

John 12:39-40

39 For this reason they could not believe, for Isaiah said again,

40 “He has blinded their eyes and He hardened their heart, so that
they would not see with their eyes and perceive with their heart, and be
converted and I heal them.” (cf Is 6:10; Mt 13:14ff).

They could not believe, that is, unequivocally, what the Greek says. And why couldn’t they believe (v40)?

You say it is because ”they had completely rejected previous illumination from God through the Law and the Prophets and through John the Baptist.”

Your reason for their not believing is completely at odds with the reason John gives for their not believing (see Jn 12:39-40 above for John’s reason).

Unbelief and disobedience is not something new to Israel. We just need to read the Old Testament to know that.

Jeremiah 7:23-29

**23"But this is what I commanded them, saying, ‘Obey My voice, and I will be your God, and you will be My people; and you will walk in all the way which I command you, that it may be well with you.’
24"Yet they did not obey or incline their ear, but walked in their own counsels and in the stubbornness of their evil heart, and went backward and not forward.
25"Since the day that your fathers came out of the land of Egypt until this day, I have sent you all My servants the prophets, daily rising early and sending them.
26"Yet they did not listen to Me or incline their ear, but stiffened their neck; they did more evil than their fathers.
27"You shall speak all these words to them, but they will not listen to you; and you shall call to them, but they will not answer you. 28"You shall say to them, ‘This is the nation that did not obey the voice of the LORD their God or accept correction; truth has perished and has been cut off from their mouth.
29’Cut off your hair and cast it away,
And take up a lamentation on the bare heights;
For the LORD has rejected and forsaken
The generation of His wrath.’ **

Those who forsake God will be forsaken by Him:

2 Chronicles 15:2

**2and he went out to meet Asa and said to him, "Listen to me, Asa, and all Judah and Benjamin: the LORD is with you when you are with Him And if you seek Him, He will let you find Him; but if you forsake Him, He will forsake you. **

Prior to the signs Jesus performed (John 12:37) and his public ministry, the Jews had the testimony of Moses (John 5:46-47) and the testimoy of John (John 1:6-8; 5:33-35). God desired that they would come to Christ, but they chose to reject Him:

Luke 13:34-35

**34"O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, just as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you would not have it!
35"Behold, your house is left to you desolate; and I say to you, you will not see Me until the time comes when you say, ‘BLESSED IS HE WHO COMES IN THE NAME OF THE LORD!’" **

They rejected this illumination from God through Moses and John and refused to believe their testimony. Since they forsook God, God forsook them and handed them over to their unbelief by withdrawing/witholding His grace (i.e. “hardening their hearts”), thus completely stopping any further illumination. Thus, without grace, they could not come to faith. Consequently, when Jesus began His public ministry and performed many signs (John 12:37), they could not believe because God had withdrawn His grace. However, this was not without purpose:

Romans 11:30-32

30For just as you once were disobedient to God, but now have been shown mercy because of their disobedience,
31so these also now have been disobedient, that because of the mercy shown to you they also may now be shown mercy.
32For God has shut up all in disobedience so that He may show mercy to all.

The beauty of divine providence. God allowed the Jews to freely reject His illumination and, in turn, handed them over to unbelief in order to extend the scope of His mercy. There is no indication in the text whether those who did not believe Jesus later believed in Him after He was glorified. This “hardening” could have been temporary in the case of individual Jews until God accomplished His purpose.

God Bless,
Michael

 

[mikeledes]

Within the general will of God are things that God has not revealed, but He has decreed; they are fixed, and will come to pass (Dt 29:29; cf Ps 115:3; Dan 4:17, 25, 32, 35, et al.); one of those fixed things is whom He will save (Rom 8:30ff). Those decrees of God will come to pass; they are never thwarted, or overthrown by man, or anyone, or anything else, for that matter.

Also within the general will of God is His “perceptive” will, or His will of “desire,” a will that He has made known to men in which are contained the things that men “ought to do.” Such as, obey all of the commands of God that He has made known to man; such as, keeping the 10 commandments, loving God, and neighbor, repenting from sin, and unbelief (cf 1 Tim 2:4.) God’s perceptive will, or will of “desire,” is always overthrown by men—God endures this overthrowing of His perceptive will for a reason (cf Rom 9:22).

Certainly, man cannot change the number of the elect. We both agree on that. Now you talk about a 'perceptive" will, which contains what man ought to do. I find this too cold to describe the express words of God:

John 3:16

**16"For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.
17"For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. **

Ezekiel 18:23

23"Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked," declares the Lord GOD, "rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?

God is not merely expressing what man ought to do. He is not saying “Man ought to repent” or “I desire that man obey my command to repent.” He is expressing a positive sentiment on what he desires man to do. He is not merely commanding the world to repent, He is expressing His love for the world. This love is expressed in His sincere call and desire for *all *men to come to repentance (John 3:16). And because of this love, He makes the grace of repentance accessible to all.

God Bless,
Michael