Brainwashing? Christianity seems to be taking weird steps, here at least.

[Sigurd]

We are arguing about predestination, but not much else.

Predestination ... that absurd doctrine about fate. Too Viking for my taste.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Predestination ... that absurd doctrine about fate. Too Viking for my taste.

Hah!

Seriously though, I know I said just last week I don't believe in it, certainly not in the "every man has a fate" way it appears in Calvinism or Islam.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Hah!

Seriously though, I know I said just last week I don't believe in it, certainly not in the "every man has a fate" way it appears in Calvinism or Islam.

I have minimal knowledge regarding Islam, but I heard that Muslims believe that all people are created good, and are only corrupted by this world, and its up to the individual to 'stay true'. Whereas of course with Calvinism you believe all people are born sinners, and God saves those who He chooses without conditions, at least regarding what we do in this lifetime.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

I have minimal knowledge regarding Islam, but I heard that Muslims believe that all people are created good, and are only corrupted by this world, and its up to the individual to 'stay true'. Whereas of course with Calvinism you believe all people are born sinners, and God saves those who He chooses without conditions, at least regarding what we do in this lifetime.

Muslims believe that all proceedes acording to God's Will, as do Calvanists, i.e. God makes the choices.

Mainstream Christianity believes that God offers salvation to ALL regardless and that we make an active and very real choice, this is what I believe.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Muslims believe that all proceedes acording to God's Will, as do Calvanists, i.e. God makes the choices.

Mainstream Christianity believes that God offers salvation to ALL regardless and that we make an active and very real choice, this is what I believe.

Everyone could be saved, if they would allow themselves to be.

The idea of limited atonement stems from the fact that God has foreknowledge of who would or would not accept Him, therefore the atonement was suffered for the sins of the elect. If someone else was going to be saved, Christ would have suffered for their sins too, since God's mercy is endless. But since they won't accept God, as He knows to be the case, then Christ would not be punished on their behalf - otherwise their debts would have been paid, when they demand that they are not to be.

So, while some people cannot be saved, it is only since they refused to be saved, and would have refused to be saved regardless of Christ's suffering.

I've been thinking on the matter of unconditional election, and I think that it may be best taken as meaning that the salvation of the elect within their lifetime on earth is unconditional. Since of course no man could accept God without God's grace working through him first, God remains sovereign in salvation, and His grace remains irresistable.

However, all throughout the Bible, (even in the Psalms and other parts of the OT, not just the classic NT predestination quotes) people refer to God choosing them when He made them, long before they were born or conceived on this earth. God sees into the hearts of everyone, and He elects those who He will save based on what He sees, specifically whether they would accept Him. So He predestines those who He elects to accept Him within their lifetime. Coincidentally, this is why I don't agree with double predestination, as God does not work in people's lives to make sure they reject Him.

This is my current theory, my ideas change all the time...

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Everyone could be saved, if they would allow themselves to be.

The idea of limited atonement stems from the fact that God has foreknowledge of who would or would not accept Him, therefore the atonement was suffered for the sins of the elect. If someone else was going to be saved, Christ would have suffered for their sins too, since God's mercy is endless. But since they won't accept God, as He knows to be the case, then Christ would not be punished on their behalf - otherwise their debts would have been paid, when they demand that they are not to be.

This arguement was rejected 1500 years ago by Boethius (sadly now little read). To suggest God has forknowledge restricts God temporally, because it requires him to have knowledge before he acts, since God is timeless there is no before and no after. Therefore God would not have forknowledge, because he acts as he knows, simultaneously.

So, while some people cannot be saved, it is only since they refused to be saved, and would have refused to be saved regardless of Christ's suffering.

If God is irrestistable then you cannot refuse to be saved. To suggest that God chooses based on those who would accept him is to sidestep the problem of those who would resist him. This is to limit Gods power, it's actually saying, "He knows he can't, so he won't try."

I've been thinking on the matter of unconditional election, and I think that it may be best taken as meaning that the salvation of the elect within their lifetime on earth is unconditional. Since of course no man could accept God without God's grace working through him first, God remains sovereign in salvation, and His grace remains irresistable.

However, all throughout the Bible, (even in the Psalms and other parts of the OT, not just the classic NT predestination quotes) people refer to God choosing them when He made them, long before they were born or conceived on this earth. God sees into the hearts of everyone, and He elects those who He will save based on what He sees, specifically whether they would accept Him. So He predestines those who He elects to accept Him within their lifetime. Coincidentally, this is why I don't agree with double predestination, as God does not work in people's lives to make sure they reject Him.

This is my current theory, my ideas change all the time...

I'd like to posit one more question to you regarding this. If the "elect" are God's chosen instruments, not merely those he saves, what effect does that have on those passages, if we take them as referring to those especially made to enact God's Will?

What I am asking you to do is to try to step outside Calvinism.

[Rhyfelwyr]

This arguement was rejected 1500 years ago by Boethius (sadly now little read). To suggest God has forknowledge restricts God temporally, because it requires him to have knowledge before he acts, since God is timeless there is no before and no after. Therefore God would not have forknowledge, because he acts as he knows, simultaneously.

I tend to think of time as a little line floating in space, with God himself filling that entire space; before the beginning of time, beyond the end of time, and all around it in every dimension, all at once. God clearly does have foreknowledge, what about the book of Revelation, all the prophecies of the Bible?

He knows how everything will end (or how it wont), and with everything we do (I believe) we are just carrying out the inevitable.

To us, what seems to be foreknowledge may simply be due to the fact that God is timeless. At all times, He knows all things, according to how they appeared at every point in what we regard as time.

If God is irrestistable then you cannot refuse to be saved. To suggest that God chooses based on those who would accept him is to sidestep the problem of those who would resist him. This is to limit Gods power, it's actually saying, "He knows he can't, so he won't try."

God could easily save us all if He wanted. But God chooses to act as the enabler in salvation - cutting us free from Satan's chains so that those who could have faith will have faith.

Salvation remains unconditional of what we do on this earth, God acts as the enabler for those chosen before they entered this lifetime.

I'd like to posit one more question to you regarding this. If the "elect" are God's chosen instruments, not merely those he saves, what effect does that have on those passages, if we take them as referring to those especially made to enact God's Will?

People can be elected by God for many things. Salvation is only one of them. Take for example Israel, it was chosen by God as a nation, yet not all Jews will be saved (at least not in the conventional way), as we are told precisely 144,000 will be saved at the time of the second coming.

What I am asking you to do is to try to step outside Calvinism.

Well I'm defending Calvinism here because it's currently what I believe in. That's not always been the case - I can't see how any Christian could at first hold Calvinist views, they take a lot of time to come to terms with and understand.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Crikey chaps, do you realise quite how barking that stuff reads?

Here I thought Catholicism was loopy, but "do good stuff, say sorry regular, and don't think too much" is at least an intelligible way to paradise. And you got pretty pictures, great music and the odd awesome cathedral.