Originally posted by Mountain Man
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Theology 201 Guidelines
This is the forum to discuss the spectrum of views within Christianity on God's foreknowledge and election such as Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Open Theism, Process Theism, Restrictivism, and Inclusivism, Christian Universalism and what these all are about anyway. Who is saved and when is/was their salvation certain? How does God exercise His sovereignty and how powerful is He? Is God timeless and immutable? Does a triune God help better understand God's love for mankind?
While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.
Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.
Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.
Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.
Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Jesus didn't want to save everyone?
Collapse
X
-
Again, it says they did not believe despite Jesus performing miracles right in front of their noses. Active refusal to accept the evidence is clearly implied.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostFalse, because the Bible says that many did, in fact, believe. The ones who didn't refused in spite of the evidence. THAT'S what is very plain in the text.
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostAgain, it says they did not believe despite Jesus performing miracles right in front of their noses. Active refusal to accept the evidence is clearly implied.
If we look at John, 12, 37 it says: "But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him:" In this part we are not told why they did not believe, we are only told that they did not believe. The reasons could be many. If we are only told a man did not see the bird the reasons could be many. He could have refused to see it, he could be blind and so on. We cannot infer anything about that, we need further information. You claim active refusal is involved, but the Bible says absolutely nothing about it. On the contrary if we look at the next verses it clearly says:
That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?
Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.
You are not only ignoring that the Bible says they could not believe. You are trying to come up with an interpretation that actually contradicts what the Bible says.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostFalse, because the Bible says that many did, in fact, believe. The ones who didn't refused in spite of the evidence. THAT'S what is very plain in the text.
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostMany did believe, yes, this must be because God did not blind them. But those who were blinded could not see, and did not see.
Blessings,
LeeSome may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chuckles View PostLet us look further into this because you are clearly not reading it in context.
If we look at John, 12, 37 it says: "But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him:" In this part we are not told why they did not believe, we are only told that they did not believe. The reasons could be many. If we are only told a man did not see the bird the reasons could be many. He could have refused to see it, he could be blind and so on. We cannot infer anything about that, we need further information. You claim active refusal is involved, but the Bible says absolutely nothing about it. On the contrary if we look at the next verses it clearly says:
Once again the text clearly says they could not believe. This is the reason we are given in the text. Why would it say so if active refusal was implied in verse 37. It would lead to a contradiction because at first it would say that they actively refused to believe and shortly after it would say they could not believe. So your interpretation of verse 37 falls apart if you actually read it in context.
You are not only ignoring that the Bible says they could not believe. You are trying to come up with an interpretation that actually contradicts what the Bible says.
In order for your interpretation to be correct, you have to believe that God granted Isaiah the supernatural power to override someone's freewill. Read it: God is clearly telling Isaiah to make the people's ears heavy, etc. Did Isaiah have this power? Of course not. When we take into account Isaiah's warning, it's clear that it's the people who are at fault. Same thing in the John passage which references Isaiah.
But now I'm just repeating myself for someone who is ever seeing but never perceiving, ever hearing but never understanding. I guess that means I have power over your freewill.
At any rate, I'm done here.Last edited by Mountain Man; 01-27-2018, 08:11 AM.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostYour problem, Chuckles, is that you're looking for a contradiction where there is none. The passage in Isaiah is an open warning to people who had become stubborn. The passage in John says that the people had the evidence right in front of them but still did not believe. It then references the warning that Isaiah gave to the people of Israel in which Isaiah told them bluntly that they were stubborn and dull-witted, ignoring what was right before their eyes. John then goes on say that that nevertheless, there were others who did believe.
In order for your interpretation to be correct, you have to believe that God granted Isaiah the supernatural power to override someone's freewill. Read it: God is clearly telling Isaiah to make the people's ears heavy, etc. Did Isaiah have this power? Of course not. When we take into account Isaiah's warning, it's clear that it's the people who are at fault. Same thing in the John passage which references Isaiah.
But now I'm just repeating myself for someone who is ever seeing but never perceiving, ever hearing but never understanding. I guess that means I have power over your freewill.
At any rate, I'm done here.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Charles View PostLet's just repeat. There is no mentioning of active refusal while the text clearly says they could not believe. Why would it say they could not if the truth is they would not? It really makes no sense and I wonder why you need to contradict the actual words of the Bible if you are a Christian.Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostHe is missing the context of Jesus' words - namely, Jesus is referring to Isaiah 6, Isaiah 44, Psalm 115, and Psalm 135. Jesus isn't saying that he's speaking in parables in order that people not understand him. He's saying that the people do not understand because they are like lifeless idols. They do not see/hear/understand because they are spiritually dead - they cannot.
I agree that there is spiritual deadness, but the word, if spoken plainly, could give them life!
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostWell, no, the parables were spoken "to hide the truth from those for whom it was not intended" (Vance Havner).
I agree that there is spiritual deadness, but the word, if spoken plainly, could give them life!
Blessings,
Lee
I disagree that the word, if spoken plainly, could have given them life. When one is forced to confront reality against one's will, the one confronted seldom takes it well.Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
sigpic
I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by One Bad Pig View PostI disagree that the word, if spoken plainly, could have given them life. When one is forced to confront reality against one's will, the one confronted seldom takes it well.
Or as Isaiah said "for how long, oh Lord?"
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Comment