GOD DOES NOT PREDESTINATE ANY PARTICULAR PERSON TO BE SAVED OR LOST

Jonah Hex

Senior Member
MAN IS A FREE MORAL AGENT

If man is not a free moral agent, THEN GOD CAN BE HELD ENTIRELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL SIN, REBELLION, SICKNESS, AND ALL THE EFFECTS OF SIN AS WELL AS FOR THE DA-MNATION OF MEN AND ANGELS, as unconditional security men teach.

One of these teachers says, " No man is an absolutely free moral agent, for he is either led away by the devil against his will or he is a servant of Christ. I do not simply choose to keep myself in a place where I am secure. God has chosen me, and I am secure in His choice."

Another says, "Ownership means lordship. That which is owned has no right of will contrary to the will of the owner. . . . Adam was the only true free moral agent. When he sinned, he lost free moral agency. No man ever wills to be born in the human race, and equally impotent is he to will to separate himself from the human race. . . . Yet it is argued that man can be separate himself from God. . . . It was not his own will to be born again, but the will of God (Jn. 1:13) . . . Man has little to do with that as he had to do with the physical birth.

As it is impossible for man to separate himself from the human race, so it is equally impossible for him, by free act, to separate himself from God's kingdom. There is no such thing as free moral agency in the kingdom of God. . . . To say that a man can will to go away from God and be lost is to make the sovereign grace of God subject to the will of man.

These statements simply mean that MAN HAS NO POWER TO CHOOSE TO SERVE GOD AND CONSEQUENTLY NO RESPONSIBILITY IN ANY SENSE IN SERVING GOD OR SATAN OR IN BEING SAVED OR LOST, that it is up to God to choose each one or not, that those God sees fit to choose are secure by His own choice and not by man having anything to do with it, that God is a respecter of persons in not choosing some and in not making all men secure and in saving all men alike, that God is responsible for the sins and ****ation of the lost as well as for the security of the few pets some say He delights in choosing, that some men can never be saved due to the fact God has not chosen them to be saved and to as secure as the others, and that God is responsible for all the sins and sufferings and curses of the universe.

If Adam was responsible for his fall from grace or favor with God, if he chose to fall from his former state, if grace and divine nature did not keep him saved and holy, AND IF GOD LEFT IT UP TO THE FREE WILL OF MAN IN THE BEGINNING, THEN IT IS THE SAME WITH ALL MEN TODAY. There is no passage, and no one has ever given one, that proves that man is not a free moral agent all the days of his life, whether he is saved or unsaved.
 
Last edited:

gemcgrew

Senior Member
If man is not a free moral agent, THEN GOD CAN BE HELD ENTIRELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL SIN, REBELLION, SICKNESS, AND ALL THE EFFECTS OF SIN AS WELL AS FOR THE ****ATION OF MEN AND ANGELS, as unconditional security men teach.
This only indicates a very low opinion of the God of the Bible, and an attempt to impose your standard upon Him.

There is no other power in existence, that God is accountable to.

"He doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?"

Paul addressed all of your silly notions in Romans 9.
 

Big7

Senior Member
This only indicates a very low opinion of the God of the Bible, and an attempt to impose your standard upon Him.

There is no other power in existence, that God is accountable to.

"He doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?"

Paul addressed all of your silly notions in Romans 9.
He reads and discerns The Bible- all by himself.
 

Artfuldodger

Senior Member
"And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS."

I don't think you can get any more predestinate than that.
 

Jonah Hex

Senior Member
Man is absolutely a free moral agent and serves the devil or God as he freely chooses. If man wants to turn to God from the devil he is always free to do so, and if he wants to turn from God to the devil he is always fee to do so. Neither master can force man to obey him if man does not freely choose to do so. Man has the free choice until death, of serving either.

Man is morally obligated by his moral make-up to serve righteousness, live holy, and consecrate himself to the same end that God is consecrated the highest good of all. Man is not forced to live holy. He is free to consecrate to the end that the devil is consecrated a life of self-gratification. He is free to choose either end and to use the means of attaining to the end he chooses. He is not forced to choose either end or the means of attaining to that end.

A saved man has the same power of choice as he had before salvation. His desires are changed in salvation, but he can again permit the same old desires to take hold of him again and the flesh can gain ascendency over him again and he can choose to live in the old sins again. If he chooses to sin again he incurs the same death penalty and will be da-mned as much as if he had never been saved (Ezek. 18:4; Rom. 6:14-13; 8:1-13; Gal. 6:7, 8; Jas. 5:19, 20).

In matters outside the moral realm in which man has no choice, such as the case where man is not free to choose to be born, such has nothing to do with free moral agency which every man has when he is born. He is, as he grows up free to choose his own destiny by the choice of the life, he lives in serving God or Satan. It is only when man becomes a free moral agent that he is held responsible.
 

Jonah Hex

Senior Member
This only indicates a very low opinion of the God of the Bible, and an attempt to impose your standard upon Him.

There is no other power in existence, that God is accountable to.

"He doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?"

Paul addressed all of your silly notions in Romans 9.

Matt. 7:13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go there in:
7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
 

SemperFiDawg

Senior Member
MAN IS A FREE MORAL AGENT

If man is not a free moral agent, THEN GOD CAN BE HELD ENTIRELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL SIN, REBELLION, SICKNESS, AND ALL THE EFFECTS OF SIN AS WELL AS FOR THE ****ATION OF MEN AND ANGELS, as unconditional security men teach.

One of these teachers says, " No man is an absolutely free moral agent, for he is either led away by the devil against his will or he is a servant of Christ. I do not simply choose to keep myself in a place where I am secure. God has chosen me, and I am secure in His choice."

Another says, "Ownership means lordship. That which is owned has no right of will contrary to the will of the owner. . . . Adam was the only true free moral agent. When he sinned, he lost free moral agency. No man ever wills to be born in the human race, and equally impotent is he to will to separate himself from the human race. . . . Yet it is argued that man can be separate himself from God. . . . It was not his own will to be born again, but the will of God (Jn. 1:13) . . . Man has little to do with that as he had to do with the physical birth.

As it is impossible for man to separate himself from the human race, so it is equally impossible for him, by free act, to separate himself from God's kingdom. There is no such thing as free moral agency in the kingdom of God. . . . To say that a man can will to go away from God and be lost is to make the sovereign grace of God subject to the will of man.

These statements simply mean that MAN HAS NO POWER TO CHOOSE TO SERVE GOD AND CONSEQUENTLY NO RESPONSIBILITY IN ANY SENSE IN SERVING GOD OR SATAN OR IN BEING SAVED OR LOST, that it is up to God to choose each one or not, that those God sees fit to choose are secure by His own choice and not by man having anything to do with it, that God is a respecter of persons in not choosing some and in not making all men secure and in saving all men alike, that God is responsible for the sins and ****ation of the lost as well as for the security of the few pets some say He delights in choosing, that some men can never be saved due to the fact God has not chosen them to be saved and to as secure as the others, and that God is responsible for all the sins and sufferings and curses of the universe.

If Adam was responsible for his fall from grace or favor with God, if he chose to fall from his former state, if grace and divine nature did not keep him saved and holy, AND IF GOD LEFT IT UP TO THE FREE WILL OF MAN IN THE BEGINNING, THEN IT IS THE SAME WITH ALL MEN TODAY. There is no passage, and no one has ever given one, that proves that man is not a free moral agent all the days of his life, whether he is saved or unsaved.

Must be Groundhog Day already: same subject, same cast with SURPRISE!!!!, predictably the same arrogant insults. .:yawn:.
 
Last edited:

Jonah Hex

Senior Member
To say that man has no will power when he chooses to go back into sin and becomes overpowered by sin and Satan is to state a falsehood. This does not prove he is not a free moral agent. It proves man is a free agent or he could not have chosen to sin again. When chooses to yield to sin again, Satan can make him captive and can more or less dominate his life, depending on how much the man submits to him. Man can completely submit to demons and become a total slave to them. He can at any moment turn to God by his own free will and defeat the same spirit-rebels by the help of God. If he had no choice power to live right and turn to God, then one might argue he is not a free agent in the moral realm. Because the Allies overcame the Axis nations in the last World War is no proof that the Axis did not have will power. We were stronger than they were, and we were help by God in their defeat. Their resistance as well as their choice in making war and in choosing to surrender proves they had will power.

If man resist sin at all it proves will power on his part. If he is exercising will in the least degree concerning moral things it proves he is a free moral agent. To be a servant of Christ does not do away with will power. It proves that the man does have such power, or he could not have chosen to turn from Satan and sin. To believe as the above men do would make God as unjust tyrant holding slaves in greater bondage than Satan ever did. It is Satan who tries to enslave men and control their choices. God always gives them freedom of action to serve Him. When they voluntarily turn to God then He delivers them from Satan and sin and permits perfect freedom of action as to whether they will continue to serve Him or go back into sin. It is true men are spoken of as servants to God, but it is voluntary service. There is nothing arbitrary about it on God's part.

No freedom of choice to come into existence and no freedom of choice to become nothing again is naturally true, for man is an eternal creature and cannot, will to cease to exist. This does not disprove free moral agency for man, who is always free to choose the highest good for himself and others or to choose selfish ends contrary to the highest good.
 

Ruger#3

RAMBLIN ADMIN
Staff member
If God didn’t send his only son to die on the cross for our sins as predestined in the scripture the rest just doesn’t matter.

19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:

20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,
 

Jonah Hex

Senior Member
If we admit actions have certain effects, we should also admit that these actions are free moral actions. If man had no free actions concerning moral living and God alone had the choice in man's actions, then He would be responsible for all evil and its effects. God would be responsible for sin and could not justly judge man for his actions. He would also be responsible for death, the penalty for sin, and could not rightly execute the sentence of the broken law.
 

hummerpoo

Gone but not forgotten
Man is absolutely a free moral agent and serves the devil or God as he freely chooses. If man wants to turn to God from the devil he is always free to do so, and if he wants to turn from God to the devil he is always fee to do so. Neither master can force man to obey him if man does not freely choose to do so. Man has the free choice until death, of serving either.

Three Masters, the Chief of which is Man Self. :hair:
 
Last edited:

Madman

Senior Member
Most likely a thread killer but I believe a question needs to be asked, what is meant by “predestination”?

Are we predestined for God’s grace, or for for glory?

Why does the doctrine of “election” always seem to be attached to the doctrine of “predestination”?

Even some Calvinist believe free will actions are determined by God applying or withholding saving grace. I see it as a way for man to believe in double predestination without saying so.

Luther held this view, much like man being a horse, his destination being determined by the rider, God, or Satan.

So much talking around each other.
 

bobocat

Senior Member
Only those In Christ are predestined or elected. Leave the Calvinist to believe God so hated the world. A Calvinist must put on his Calvinist goggles before misinterpreting scripture. It's a must.
 

formula1

Daily Bible Verse Organizer
Man cannot know what God can or will do and to try to understand it is foolishness. Perhaps a little proverbial knowledge would help:

Proverbs 3
5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding.
6 In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths.
7 Be not wise in your own eyes; fear the Lord, and turn away from evil.
8 It will be healing to your flesh and refreshment to your bones.
 

gordon 2

Senior Member
Man cannot know what God can or will do and to try to understand it is foolishness. Perhaps a little proverbial knowledge would help:

Proverbs 3
5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not lean on your own understanding.
6 In all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make straight your paths.
7 Be not wise in your own eyes; fear the Lord, and turn away from evil.
8 It will be healing to your flesh and refreshment to your bones.

Your point is very interesting. I note you use verse from the Jewish Talmud to shore it up. Yet the conceptions of God from the Jewish perspective do they apply to the Christian perspective? Or is the God the Christians now know simply is mirror of what the Jews knew? Can Christians prophecy in general now compared to the odd prophets of the Old Testament for example.

For the Jews God's doing was a come and go affair. This God was mostly powerful and distant with the occasional exception. For Christians however is this the case? What does our songs say: "It is no secret ( to us) what God can do what he's done for others he'll do for you." What does the Good News declare but that we know what is God's will (vision) for all? And our trust not now of a blind faith.

The ideas Predestination and Election and non-elect are they not from the the very understanding man has had of God from the perspective of the God revealed by the intellect long before the Reformation. This god is a God of control, of holding all things together in the world and the cosmos, with purpose mysterious understood by the sensing intellect as it tries to do by casting a net on any object or objects and making it fit together to suit reason and to settle the emotions. The god(s) of the Greeks was-were such god(s) God's understood by the intellect which subjects they predestined or subjugated for their purposes which our Paul butted head with for instance.

Somehow I would like to think that the Christian mystic knows what God wills to do by a shared vision and by that I mean that for the witness of God's glory by the deposit of God heart in man the saint who is able to witness of God's vision. The same might apply for someone who is religious and internalizes the benefits of the Church. ( Our reading of Scripture is very different for the witness of the Holy Spirit, or born again experience or the witness of the Glory, or the Born Again experience... what ever it is named.) In any case in all but a few cases God does not minister to man via the intellect, not in the Church nor in the Mystical experience and so nor is the revelation of his will so ministered. It is not assimilated in the Christian by the human intellect for the most part. Which is why I distrust the Greek way of understanding God. I will agree that a man knows by reason that he is not separate from others even though he can understand himself to be an individual and therefore due this can properly interpret some "parables".
 
Last edited:

gordon 2

Senior Member
I don't find it a thread killer.




It's a worthy question, for the apostle didn't shy away from "using" it, and we can only suppose he had some understanding of what he spoke. If we further believe him (that apostle) inspired by God, then...even though he himself is not bodily present for questioning (or is he?), the One from whom his inspiration came is either just as available as ever He has been...or (God forbid!) He has abandoned us to our own understandings. Do you think He knew what we would "come up against" when seeing the apostle's usage...He Himself (the Lord) gave to him?

Is it something we may harbor? A thing that tends to think "God doesn't really know very well "how" man thinks"?

That's funny, cause Jesus knew/knows..."and do not say within yourselves we have Abraham as our Father..."

Men are always getting "cut off at the pass" from the things they comfort themselves, of themselves...with. (A notable source or irritation, Jesus always tearing down idols in His devotion to the one true God)

As to



We might consider our understanding of election and elections. We make our choices to vote...(or not)...and elections are in doubt (unknown) until "the results are in". Whose choice...won?

Is it thus for God? When He chooses (elects a thing...to either do or show...)...is there any doubt in Him? Could there even be? Oh, yes, we may not see or know certain outcomes (of particulars)...but God? Is He not the One who knows the end from the beginning? Or, is He "in suspense"? (Yes, I have held suspended gods no less than any other man)

If even the smallest allowed glimpse of His sovereignty is able to dispel any and all notion of God's abiding in "questionable outcome" (that to us might seem questionable)...we are either left submitting to that truth...and continuing in it...or unable to bear...and fashion a god like ourselves who "ain't quite sure"...yet.

God forbid!

What does a man show who re-erects what he has torn down? Either we are being changed...or we are attempting to change God. The results are in for that choice.

As to the rest, I suppose you would have to ask someone that identifies as a "calvinist"...or confesses to some cultic affiliation with that name.

Paul didn't.


My brother whom I love. " He has abandoned us to our own understandings." That is a mouthful so early in the day. :) Don't forget the Church can be added to a good breakfast. :) Is our understanding individual and to individuality so abandoned and not communal?

As an aside: Do you think that the Apostles naming of Jesus as Lord was due to the way some understand God's sovereignty today? Their notions of a king, most likely from the prophecy of a Messiah and the revelation of who the Savior from their witness was is somewhat different from the ideas we attach to sovereignty today which is an idea older than Christianity?

Why would it matter that a Messiah to the gentiles be of need for them and in turn that they be charged to evangelize the world if God is sovereign with all controls to act on the present and futures? I suggest, perhaps in error, that the Lord of the Apostles was not the Lord of the Jews nor of the Greeks. Their lord was separated from these for making them and us kin to the royal vision and agents of God's sure purpose for all. Maybe. God was no longer distant and if He had such powers and controls as those prior to Christianity knew than those powers and controls were now in his agents...ah you and all others here. We are witness of the resurrection and that's were we are "headed".
 
Last edited:

Madman

Senior Member
the One from whom his inspiration came is either just as available as ever He has been...or (God forbid!) He has abandoned us to our own understandings.
The art of the rhetorical question. To which we all know the proper response, but there is more that must be considered in the answer.

Do you think He knew what we would "come up against" when seeing the apostle's usage...He Himself (the Lord) gave to him?
I believe He "knew", He knows all things, and therefore set in place the perfect one to answer.

"... I will build my Church."

Sometimes I wonder what has happened, G.K. Chesterton makes an observation.

"When a religious scheme is shattered (as
Christianity was shattered at the Reformation), it
is not merely the vices that are let loose. The vices
are, indeed, let loose, and they wander and do dam-
age. But the virtues are let loose also; and the vir-
tues wander more wildly, and the virtues do more
terrible damage. The modern world is full of the
old Christian virtues gone mad. The virtues have
gone mad because they have been isolated from
each other and are wandering alone."
 

brutally honest

Senior Member
Sometimes I wonder what has happened, G.K. Chesterton makes an observation.

"When a religious scheme is shattered (as
Christianity was shattered at the Reformation), it
is not merely the vices that are let loose. The vices
are, indeed, let loose, and they wander and do dam-
age. But the virtues are let loose also; and the vir-
tues wander more wildly, and the virtues do more
terrible damage. The modern world is full of the
old Christian virtues gone mad. The virtues have
gone mad because they have been isolated from
each other and are wandering alone."

Like that Chesterton quote. Never heard it put like that.
 
Top