Originally Posted by KentDMc
Originally Posted by Pilgrim
God's sovereignty and man's responsibility and involvement is seen in the crucifixion of the Lord Christ, Acts 2:22-24; 3:18; 4:26-28. Are you familiar with these inspired words of Peter?

Yes, of course. Such great verses. They are pertaining to God's grand design of reconciling mankind to Himself through the shed blood of Jesus Christ. This relates to whether God has any plans for the future at all and whether Jesus just happened to fulfill all 109 prophesies by luck.
Since we are not arguing Open Theism, we'll both agree with what these verses are saying.
[Linked Image] We are most certainly not agreeing on what those passages are saying. What they are saying is that God predestined ALL that occurred concerning the crucifixion and ALL that happened beforehand, e.g., the prophesies given to the men of old which foretold the coming of Christ, His life, death and resurrection. And pray tell how is it that all those prophecies came to pass exactly as predicted if God had not foreordained ALL things? I suppose we could reduce all possible answers to three groups:

1. God decree all things according to His eternal determinate council without reference to anything in any man.
2. God somehow foresaw these things happening by 'looking into the future', which results in POST-destination.
3. God, as well as men, was amazed that they happened due to the infinite possibilities which were necessary for them to actually occur.

So, where do you stand? scratchchin

Originally Posted by KentDMc
Originally Posted by Pilgrim
To put it in a polemic fashion, God didn't "look down the corridors of time" or "peer into the future" to see who would believe on Christ and thus predestinate and elect them. Likewise, God did not consider any individual's character, alleged good deeds, desires, etc., etc., which somehow influenced God to choose them because of what He allegedly saw. I have thoroughly shown any such notions as being a denial of the biblical God elsewhere and myriad times on this board.

I don't know of any theology that adheres to that concept of God's sovereignty, unless it is some form of pseudo-Calvinism that you have come across. I would be interested in your other posts, if you would please link them here.
Actually, this view does not originate with some 'pseudo-Calvinism' but rather from historic classic Arminianism. You can read this for yourself in the Canons of Dordt, Article 1 in the section: "Rejections of Errors".

Originally Posted by KentDMc
Regarding A and B, we are going back and forth on this. I'm going to break down the logic a little simpler for you, then I think I'm going to solve the problem for you. I'll expect a gift card or something for it. smile

My argument is

(A) No action by any man will have any bearing on the salvation of any man.

(B) The minister sharing the gospel is an action.

(C) The minister sharing the gospel will have no bearing on the salvation of the dying man.

By this logic, you might be tempted to accept A. B is basic and undeniable. C is thus irrefutably concluded.

The only way out of this is to deny A, which I think you actually don't believe anyway. I think your defense to this line of argument is to restate premise A.

(A) No choice by any man will have any bearing on the salvation of any man.

(B) If the minister's witness is the divinely ordained means for the sinner's salvation, his action of witnessing will not be a choice, but will be mandated by God.

(C) The minister sharing the gospel will have bearing on the salvation of the dying man.
Unfortunately, you aren't comprehending what I have written several times on this matter.

1. Man DOES have a 'choice' and is wholly responsible to make that choice.
2. That choice does have a definite bearing upon one's salvation.
3. The bringing of the Gospel and a person's response to it are certainly to be considered "actions".
4. But the instrument (minister's bearing witness to Christ in the Gospel) and the exercise of the sinner's will (the making of a choice) are the ordained means of God to save each and every individual He has presdestinated and elected to salvation in Christ.

All these things are done most freely, i.e., without a forcing of man's will, but they would have never occurred without the Spirit's influence and working in man.

As you can plainly see, and which history and logic shows, you cannot bifurcate the doctrine of predestination from the doctrine of the Fall and Original Sin, aka: Total Depravity. Nevertheless, the topic for discussion in this particular thread is Predestination. Therefore, I must ask you a couple of questions:

1. Do you believe that God has predestined some of Adam's fallen race to salvation and some to damnation?
2. If your answer to #1 is yes, even in part, then upon what basis did God base that predestination?

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]