Are some people predestined for hell no matter what they do.

[Butch5]

.

 

[Butch5]

v. 3 blessed "us" (Christians)
v. 4 chose "us" (Christians)
v. 5 predestined "us" (Christians)

v. 13 And "you" (Ephesian Christians)

v. 14 guaranteeing "our" (all Christians)

You haven't shown that from the grammar.

 

[Butch5]

Predestination isn't taught only in Ephesians.

You have not chosen me, but I have chosen you.
he also did predestinate
from the beginning chosen you

In fact, every verse containing the words "elect" and "election" teaches it.

Predestination concerns Israel.

 

[Sue D.]

Butch5 -- are you by chance Jewish?

 

[Sue D.]

I have to disagree. There isn't Scripture that says both. I would submit that Scripture says neither. That's the point. Many have taken this verse from It's context and created a doctrine which is argued over. However, that doctrine isn't even found in Scripture. The doctrine has divided Christians into different groups. Jesus' prayer was that His disciples would be one. So, the misunderstanding of this passage has caused division in the Church and leaves Christians divided rather than one as Jesus prayed.

I would also submit that salvation isn't guaranteed. Jesus Himself said some believe for a while yet fall away. I would also submit that we do in fact know who the elect are. The elect is Israel. Some Christians have taken this term out of context too, and applied it to the Gentiles. Can you see how people's beliefs influence their reading of Scripture?

I find it interesting that you say it helps to have a Bible dictionary to look up words. Those dictionaries are written by men. Often the same men who write commentaries. You say were should just read the Bible and not rely of commentaries because they are the thoughts of men. So are dictionaries. You're not being consistent. Why would one be OK and not the other? Taking it a step further, the translation you read also comes from the thoughts of men. They have to read the original texts and filter it through their beliefs to translate it. Since you think we shouldn't bother with commentaries because they are the thoughts of men, shouldn't we reject Bible dictionaries for the same reason? After all, they're the thoughts of men and as such could be wrong. Let's look at an example.

NKJ Matthew 13:49 "So it will be at the end of the age. The angels will come forth, separate the wicked from among the just, (Matt. 13:49 NKJ)

"The enemy who sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the angels. (Matt. 13:39 NKJ)

"The enemy who sowed them is the devil, the harvest is the end of the age, and the reapers are the angels. (Matt. 13:39 NKJ)

In each of these passages the word age is the Greek word "aion" which is sometimes translated eternal.


45 "Then He will answer them, saying,`Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.'
46 "And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life." (Matt. 25:45-46 NKJ)

In this passage Jesus uses the word "aion" twice. Once it's translated everlasting and once it's translated eternal. In the first three verses above Jesus speaks of the end of the age, or aion. However, in this last passage the translators have translated the same word as eternal. The English words, everlasting and eternal, by definition, mean unending. So, the translators have translated the same word as eternal and not eternal, unending and ending. Either an age ends or it doesn't, it can't be both. So, Jesus said that the age ends, the translators say it doesn't. Since it's your position that we should reject commentaries because they are the thoughts of men shouldn't you reject the idea that aion mean eternal because it's the thoughts of men? Since you say we should just read the Scriptures shouldn't you accept what Jesus said over what men say? Jesus spoke quite a few times of the end of the aion. Since the aion can't be both eternal and end, someone is wrong. Who do you think it right, Jesus or the translators?

You're free to 'submit' anything you feel led to.

This 'age' / dispensation / is that of grace. Prior to That -- the Old Testament was the law. But no, I'm not really a dispensationalist / that's way too involved for me.

You're taking the words "eternal' and 'everlasting' and saying they don't mean the same thing?!

Isn't that kind of like in the Genesis creation -- the word used as a 'day' can be translated as an eon of time or a 24-hr day. The context with other passages indicates it means a 24-hr day. But there Are those who equate that with the verse that says that one day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day. But That leaves room for theistic evolution but Not for Gods' power To speak this world into creation and a day being a 24-hr day just like we have Today.
And 'the evening and the morning were the 1st day.

Sounds like you like to split hairs and potentially cause a division amongst the brethren. To study Scripture is fine -- but what is the desired result? Is it in an effort to prove some point or another? or to actually learn. And that Could be 'back at ya' by you to me.

And I'm choosing to ignore some of your comments, This isn't a college credit course -- it's a discussion and we don't really agree on some of this. But I"m not going to get into a theological discussion any more than I already have.

I Am assuming you're probably Jewish, though.

 

[Butch5]

Butch5 -- are you by chance Jewish?

Not least bit.

 

[David1954]

You haven't shown that from the grammar.

Verse 13: And you, too, have believed, and been sealed by the Holy Spirit, which is the earnest of our inheritance.

(Just trying to help you understand the grammar and the context.)

 

[Butch5]

Verse 13: And you, too, have believed, and been sealed by the Holy Spirit, which is the earnest of our inheritance.

(Just trying to help you understand the grammar and the context.)

"And you, too" indicates someone other than we/us. I'm beginning to think you don't understand the grammar or the context. I'm also starting to wonder about your statement of being at the top of the heap.

 

[Sue D.]

Predestination concerns Israel.

At the risk of repeating myself -- You're equating Israel with the elect because they are God's chosen people. But they also saw fit to reject Jesus Christ as their Promised Messiah. So salvation was extended to the Gentiles ie the rest of the world.

You're Assuming this -- God is the Only One who has that knowledge -- He alone knows who will either accept or reject His only way of salvation. We Also have John 3:16 -- who so ever believeth on Him

 

[Butch5]

You're free to 'submit' anything you feel led to.

This 'age' / dispensation / is that of grace. Prior to That -- the Old Testament was the law. But no, I'm not really a dispensationalist / that's way too involved for me.

You're taking the words "eternal' and 'everlasting' and saying they don't mean the same thing?!

Isn't that kind of like in the Genesis creation -- the word used as a 'day' can be translated as an eon of time or a 24-hr day. The context with other passages indicates it means a 24-hr day. But there Are those who equate that with the verse that says that one day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day. But That leaves room for theistic evolution but Not for Gods' power To speak this world into creation and a day being a 24-hr day just like we have Today.
And 'the evening and the morning were the 1st day.

Sounds like you like to split hairs and potentially cause a division amongst the brethren. To study Scripture is fine -- but what is the desired result? Is it in an effort to prove some point or another? or to actually learn. And that Could be 'back at ya' by you to me.

And I'm choosing to ignore some of your comments, This isn't a college credit course -- it's a discussion and we don't really agree on some of this. But I"m not going to get into a theological discussion any more than I already have.

I Am assuming you're probably Jewish, though.

They're not the same. The day spoken of in Genesis is a period of time. The thousand years as a day is figurative. It's from God's perspective. The passage says a day is as thousand years. It doesn't say a day is a thousand years. But either way, it's not a contradiction. To say a word mean eternal and not eternal is contradictory. Logic dictates that two opposing things cannot both be true at the same time. Thus a word cannot have two opposing meanings at the same to time and make sense.

If splitting hairs means the difference between understanding the Scriptures or not, then splitting hairs it is. You spoke about the conclusion. Well, if we don't understand correctly what is being said, it's highly unlikely that we will come to a proper conclusion. Case in point, you said the Bible teaches both, that God chose who will be saved of nothing they did and that He looked down through time and and chose those who would believe. It can't be both, they are contradictory. Unless you believe the Bible contradicts itself it can't be both. It has to be one or the other or none of the above. The conclusion you've come to is that it is both. Thus because you have misunderstood the passage you have come to the wrong conclusion. This is the point I've been making all along. Not only is the passage not talking about Christians, it's not even talking about being saved. It's simply been ripped from it's context and applied to a preconceived idea.

If you're ignore some of my comments, there's no need to address any of them as they tie together. If you skip over some you won't understand what I'm saying.

 

[Butch5]

At the risk of repeating myself -- You're equating Israel with the elect because they are God's chosen people. But they also saw fit to reject Jesus Christ as their Promised Messiah. So salvation was extended to the Gentiles ie the rest of the world.

You're Assuming this -- God is the Only One who has that knowledge -- He alone knows who will either accept or reject His only way of salvation. We Also have John 3:16 -- who so ever believeth on Him

This doesn't change who the elect are. The Scriptures state in several places that Israel is God's elect.

This is one of the reasons many don't understand the Bible. People just randomly apply passages of Scripture however they see fit. The Bible isn't just a collection of one liners. It's a history that needs to understood in context.

 

[David1954]

"And you, too" indicates someone other than we/us. I beginning to think you don't understand the grammar or the context. I'm also starting to wonder about your statement of being at the top of the heap.

Verse 13: And you, too, just like we/us, have believed, and been sealed by the Holy Spirit, which is the earnest of our inheritance.

 

[Sue D.]

Butch5 -- you are 'arguing' a particular theological position -- there Are other positions.

The Children of Israel Are God's chosen people -- but being Jewish as a nationality does not equate being Jewish by religious belief. There are Messianic Jews and there are those who don't accept Christ as their Messiah.
Being one of the elect simply means that during that person's lifetime, they Will end up accepting Jesus Christ as their personal Savior. It might be when they are 6 yrs. old or not until they are on their death bed at 99.

Part of the controversy had been trying to combine physical circumcision with salvation. And that does not work. Part of being Jewish Was physical circumcision. But it was never meant to save them.

 

[Sue D.]

They're not the same. The day spoken of in Genesis is a period of time. The thousand years as a day is figurative. It's from God's perspective. The passage says a day is as thousand years. It doesn't say a day is a thousand years. But either way, it's not a contradiction. To say a word mean eternal and not eternal is contradictory. Logic dictates that two opposing things cannot both be true at the same time. Thus a word cannot have two opposing meanings at the same to time and make sense.

If splitting hairs means the difference between understanding the Scriptures or not, then splitting hairs it is. You spoke about the conclusion. Well, if we don't understand correctly what is being said, it's highly unlikely that we will come to a proper conclusion. Case in point, you said the Bible teaches both, that God chose who will be saved of nothing they did and that He looked down through time and and chose those who would believe. It can't be both, they are contradictory. Unless you believe the Bible contradicts itself it can't be both. It has to be one or the other or none of the above. The conclusion you've come to is that it is both. Thus because you have misunderstood the passage you have come to the wrong conclusion. This is the point I've been making all along. Not only is the passage not talking about Christians, it's not even talking about being saved. It's simply been ripped from it's context and applied to a preconceived idea.

If you're ignore some of my comments, there's no need to address any of them as they tie together. If you skip over some you won't understand what I'm saying.

Not trying to derail the subject -- But -- what period of time Is being talked about in the Genesis creation? By the way -- You misquoted the verse that I'd quoted correctly about a day and a thousand years.

You seem to be not understanding what I was saying -- God does Not look down at people during a space of time and pick and choose who will or won't be saved. He IS omniscient = He has all knowledge of who will and who won't. And He alone has That knowledge. His chosen people rejected Him - for the most part. Which means that 'we' Do have freedom of choice. God already knows What our choice will be. He Will be giving the Jewish people another chance To accept Him as their Messiah -- that will be during the 7 years of tribulation After the Church has been taken up and out of this present world.

You are picking apart Scripture -- Why? Sounds like you Don't want the Gentile part of the world to be saved. You said you're Not Jewish -- so why are you working Against your own salvation.

You brought up 'logic' -- well -- some of Scripture Isn't logical. The virgin birth of Jesus Christ isn't logically possible. Neither is the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ 'logical'. But - did they take place? they certainly did or we would not Have salvation. Seems I've had this conversation either with you or someone else on Forum.

 

[Butch5]

Butch5 -- you are 'arguing' a particular theological position -- there Are other positions.

The Children of Israel Are God's chosen people -- but being Jewish as a nationality does not equate being Jewish by religious belief. There are Messianic Jews and there are those who don't accept Christ as their Messiah.
Being one of the elect simply means that during that person's lifetime, they Will end up accepting Jesus Christ as their personal Savior. It might be when they are 6 yrs. old or not until they are on their death bed at 99.

Part of the controversy had been trying to combine physical circumcision with salvation. And that does not work. Part of being Jewish Was physical circumcision. But it was never meant to save them.

No, Being of the elect is to be a Jew. You're equating being saved with being elect. This again goes to my point that people impose their beliefs onto the text. Israel was chosen to be holy and blameless before God.

 

[Sue D.]

You're free to believe anything you want to.

I'll be out of this particular conversation.

 

[Butch5]

Not trying to derail the subject -- But -- what period of time Is being talked about in the Genesis creation? By the way -- You misquoted the verse that I'd quoted correctly about a day and a thousand years.

You seem to be not understanding what I was saying -- God does Not look down at people during a space of time and pick and choose who will or won't be saved. He IS omniscient = He has all knowledge of who will and who won't. And He alone has That knowledge. His chosen people rejected Him - for the most part. Which means that 'we' Do have freedom of choice. God already knows What our choice will be. He Will be giving the Jewish people another chance To accept Him as their Messiah -- that will be during the 7 years of tribulation After the Church has been taken up and out of this present world.

You are picking apart Scripture -- Why? Sounds like you Don't want the Gentile part of the world to be saved. You said you're Not Jewish -- so why are you working Against your own salvation.

You brought up 'logic' -- well -- some of Scripture Isn't logical. The virgin birth of Jesus Christ isn't logically possible. Neither is the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ 'logical'. But - did they take place? they certainly did or we would not Have salvation. Seems I've had this conversation either with you or someone else on Forum.

I didn't quote the passage, I alluded to it. The point is the same. It doesn't contradict. To say a word means eternal and not eternal contradicts. I understand what you're saying. You're giving your opinion. There is nothing in the Scriptures that says God knows what people will choose in the future. That is a theological position, not a Biblical one. However, it is a moot point because the Scriptures give us the answer. Whosoever will let him take of the water of life freely.

We're getting back again into the realm of imposing on the Scriptures. Whether people say God's choice was not based on anything man does, or that God looked down through time, or that God already knows the entire future choices of man, it's irrelevant because the Scriptures DON'T say that God chooses or chose anyone to be saved. That whole concept comes from misunderstanding Ephesians 1. It's not about God choosing who will be saved. It's about God choosing Israel as His people to be holy and blameless before Him in love.

For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth. (Deut. 7:6 KJV)

For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God, and the LORD hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth. (Deut. 14:2 KJV)

My sons, be not now negligent: for the LORD hath chosen you to stand before him, to serve him, and that ye should minister unto him, and burn incense.1 (2 Chr. 29:11 KJV)

These are the elect of God. It's not talking about being saved, It's talking about a people chosen by God.

 

[David1954]

You haven't shown that from the grammar.

Verse 13: And you Ephesian Christian, too, just like we/us Christians, have believed, and been sealed by the Holy Spirit, which is the earnest of our inheritance.

Some Jews are predestined, and some Gentiles are predestined.

Together they are the elect.

 

[David1954]

You think Ephesian 1 describes what it is to be a Jew?

Romans 7 describes what it is to be a Jew.

 

[David1954]

You haven't shown that from the grammar.

If you've read the rest of the Bible, you can see that Romans 1:3-12 is describing Christianity.

The one Christianity.

You must be confused about Jews being the chosen people.