Originally posted by The Remonstrant
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
Conditional or Unconditional Election?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by apostoli View PostJust as a matter of clarification: When you guys use the idea "God", who do you mean - the Father, Son, Holy Spirit or all three? If you attend to scripture your only answer can be the Father, who sent his Son to be the saviour of the world (nb: note A.John quoting Jesus testifies that the Son did not come as a result of his own volition)...Originally posted by dacristoy View PostGod, The Father; God, The Son & God, The Holy Spirit. One God. God Is Spirit. The three persons of the trinity; GodOriginally posted by The Remonstrant View PostYes, well, even granting the doctrine of the trinity, the fact remains: the New Testament authors almost exclusively refer to the Father by the simple designation "God" (theos).Originally posted by apostoli View PostAs any literate fool can easily discern!!!Last edited by The Remonstrant; 03-09-2014, 01:59 AM.For Neo-Remonstration (Arminian/Remonstrant ruminations): <https://theremonstrant.blogspot.com>
Comment
-
Originally posted by The Remonstrant View Post[SIZE=3]The other error to stay away from is tri-theism. We do not believe in three distinct gods.
Comment
-
Originally posted by apostoli View PostVery true!!! Modalism is so easy to trip into when discussing the Tri-unity (Trinity) as is tri-theism. That is why all valid Christians (the majority orthodox church) recite the Nicene Creed at each service, and include the homoousious (consubstantial) clause...The Creed begins "I (we) believe in one God the Father..." Anyone who challengers such a declaration has been considered heretical since the early four century...
Postscript: For whatever the reason, I seem to get along better with non-American Christians (unfortunately I am a native to "the States").For Neo-Remonstration (Arminian/Remonstrant ruminations): <https://theremonstrant.blogspot.com>
Comment
-
Originally posted by The Remonstrant View PostPostscript: For whatever the reason, I seem to get along better with non-American Christians (unfortunately I am a native to "the States").
Comment
-
It occurred to me that I and others are heading away from the thread's topic = "Conditional or Unconditional Election?" Personally, on the basis of the scriptural witness, I hold all things conditional, particularly immortality...In short I reject the protestant idea of predetermination...Last edited by apostoli; 03-11-2014, 07:43 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by apostoli View PostIt occurred to me that I and others are heading away from the thread's topic = "Conditional or Unconditional Election?" Personally, on the basis of the scriptural witness, I hold all things conditional, particularly immortality...In short I reject the protestant idea of predetermination...
I hold that election is in Christ, meaning conditional upon our choosing to have faith in Christ when we are called.The fact that science cannot make any pronouncement about ethical principles has been misinterpreted as indicating that there are no such principles; while in fact the search for truth presupposes ethics. - Karl Popper, 1987
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dante View PostThe idea of predetermination is not uniquely Protestant, since Augustine also held to it. Not all Protestants hold to the idea of predetermination either. But, to be sure, predestination is in the Bible, yet the dispute is in its extent. To dispute predestination is to deny Scripture.
I hold that election is in Christ, meaning conditional upon our choosing to have faith in Christ when we are called.
IMO, most peopel are told what predestination means (individual unconditional election to salvation) and then when they read the word 'predestine' in scripture, they go 'Aha! The Bible teaches individual unconditional election to salvation)'. Of course, most people don't realize that they have been theologically preprogrammed in a sense as to what the Bible teaches and what words mean Biblically before even encountering the text and context in which the words are used.
Comment
-
Originally posted by phat8594 View PostThe issue really is what does 'predestine' mean, Biblically speaking. In other words, "Who is predestined to what?"
IMO, most peopel are told what predestination means (individual unconditional election to salvation) and then when they read the word 'predestine' in scripture, they go 'Aha! The Bible teaches individual unconditional election to salvation)'. Of course, most people don't realize that they have been theologically preprogrammed in a sense as to what the Bible teaches and what words mean Biblically before even encountering the text and context in which the words are used.
Comment
-
Originally posted by RBerman View PostIn my experience, most people have heard that predestine = Calvinism = bad, and they get confused when you show them that "predestine" is a word in the Bible. They haven't really been taught the doctrinal issues involved even for their own side, let alone the other side.
But in either case, your experience backs up what I was saying in that people are taught about a word, before even reading the text. Whether its good or bad and what the meaning of the word is. So in this case, it seems that the theological implication prior to reading the text (whether pro or con) seems to be that 'predestine' = Calvinism (i.e. individual unconditional election to salvation).
But I am sure that you know me well enough by now to know that I don't believe that definition is what is meant with regards to its usage in the text.
Comment
-
The fact that science cannot make any pronouncement about ethical principles has been misinterpreted as indicating that there are no such principles; while in fact the search for truth presupposes ethics. - Karl Popper, 1987
Comment
widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Comment