Predestination?

by Zico 63 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  LittleToe

  DDog:

  Forget Calvin, What does it mean to be a vessel "fitted out for destruction"?

  You allude to Rom.9:22, wherein God is described as enduring such "folks" that He might make known the glory of those whom He would be merciful to. We've gone the rounds on this chapter before, having to agree to disagree.

  To reinterate my own opinion, we are the authors of our own evil and decay, thus we "fit out" ourselves. Thus that which was originally dishonourable may be given the greater glory by how it is adorned (or fitted out) 1Cor.12:23, 24.

  When do babies get to make their choice or a chance to choose?

  They don't. Their parents make those choices for them. Your point?

  Dawn:
  Ah the joys of discussing a theology based on just 66 short books. This would be why I prefer to extend the scope to something that seems a little more reasonable.

  If you don't mind, please could you provide the source for this belief:

  Usually I'm not that keen on basing my beliefs on The Apocalypse, however: Rev.5:12; 13:8 and others.

  Are you suggesting that God chooses those who will be "born again" and leaves everyone else to their own devices?

  Paul was of that opinion.

  Is that loving?

  Sure. We love whom we love, and don't love whom we don't love. Isn't that our choice to make? Would we therefore permit God less freedom than we allow ourselves?

  As you know, I do not accept our need for atonement, however assuming we do need it, why isn't it offered to all?

  Allegedly it is. Thus the argument starts over whether or not it is limited to a few or universal in scope.
• 

  LittleToe

  Gumby:We grow through adversity. Maybe "survival of the fittest" is the best method to get us where we eventually need to be...

  Like you, I think the idea that God somehow limits His own foresight is a pretty wierd WTS belief.
• 

  Sirona

  Ross,

  I feel I must press for further clarification.

  If you don't mind, please could you provide the source for this belief:

  Usually I'm not that keen on basing my beliefs on The Apocalypse, however: Rev.5:12; 13:8 and others.

  Ok. I perhaps didn't ask the question clearly enough. You indicated that he was slain somehow prior to it happening in the real world. That was the part I wanted to ask about. Where is that particular idea from? How can you say it happened somewhere other than the real world and then happened in the real world. Does the bible indicate this timeline for events?

  Are you suggesting that God chooses those who will be "born again" and leaves everyone else to their own devices?

  Paul was of that opinion.

  Now that isn't answering my question. I asked if it was YOUR opinion.

  Sure. We love whom we love, and don't love whom we don't love. Isn't that our choice to make? Would we therefore permit God less freedom than we allow ourselves?

  Well for a starter I don't think that loving someone always involves a choice. Just my opinion of course. Also, would we choose not to love our own offspring? Effectively that is what the god of the bible is doing if he chooses not to love some of us.

  I would imagine that the only people who don't love their own offspring are either generally horrible / unloving people, or they have a very very good reason to not love their child as much (e.g. their child was a serial killer). However, an all- knowing God should see the reasons behind actions (e.g. mental illness, effects of extreme abuse by someone else, etc.).

  I read a book recently, I think entitled "we need to talk about Kevin" and it was about a woman whose son committed mass murder at school. He was unrepentant, but clearly mentally ill. Her poignant conclusion was that she still loved him, because he was her child.

  I would not allow God more freedom to be unloving. No.

  Sirona
• 

  gumby

  Paul was of that opinion.

  Is that loving?

  Sure. We love whom we love, and don't love whom we don't love. Isn't that our choice to make? Would we therefore permit God less freedom than we allow ourselves?

  I think the question should be more like......is it just and fair?

  It all goes back to god picking out Abraham as his bestest buddy because he was so close to god. In return, god picks his seed to inherit the finest land around, to be called 'his people", to have his son bore through his line, to have his protection, to make a set of laws for them alone, to foreordain his offspring to be the first heavenly heirs. This all seems to be a handsome gift to give one man for walking with god. Even Enoch, Noah, Moses,Job, and the many other faithful men who walked with god didn't get the blessings Abraham got.

  Regardless of how Abrahams seed turned out, they STILL got the blessing.

  Rewards, it seems, should come to those who deserve them. Noah was spared, job was blessed with material things, Enoch was "taken", Moses had the privledge to free his people and lead them, but Abraham.......his SEED gets the blessing before they were born and then when they WERE born, the majority were losers. WTF?

  Sounds like to me it was a clever way for a small ethnic group to pave the way for aspecial status amoung themselves to have above all others. Tricky bastards!

  Gumby
• 

  LittleToe

  Dawn:
  Sorry if my comments were a little terse. Sometimes I forget that most folks here don't have a grasp on orthodox theology, nor would they likely want to.

  You'll note that I'm expressing what I believe to be the most logical view if you restrict yourself to the canon of 66 books of the Bible. Thus I have to quote people like Paul. My own personal conviction might be quite different, but that's another story and one with little consistent textual support.

  Your argument rests on the supposition that we are all God's chilldren in a human sense. Paul's argument is clearly that we become His children when He adopts us. We are not naturally born as God's children.

  For my personal opinion, I'm currently undergoing another bout of reconsideration involving the purgative affects of reincarnation in bringing a universal salvation, so I'm afraid I cannot be plainer than I have already expressed.

  Ok. I perhaps didn't ask the question clearly enough. You indicated that he was slain somehow prior to it happening in the real world. That was the part I wanted to ask about. Where is that particular idea from? How can you say it happened somewhere other than the real world and then happened in the real world. Does the bible indicate this timeline for events?

  Rev.13:8, as I posted.

  The chain of logic is as follows:

  1. He is the lamb that was slain before the founding of the world Rev.13:8
  2. Since this is likely attempting to describe a point prior to the [world / universe / time] being created, it appears that its an attempt at describing something that [happened / was lined up] in "eternity"
  3. God mysteriously lives in eternity, knowing the end from the beginning, etc, thus either He or His dwelling place possesses some attribute that makes time [as we know it] meaningless Isa.46:10
  4. The "Son of God" enters into our world, into time, as attested in Phil.2:6-8
  5. The crucifixion at Calvary is described as a literal event with spiritual significance
  6. The event allegedly involves a victory over death Isa.25:8
  7. This victory is then able to be distributed to others after his return to "eternity", thus working backwards and forwards from the point of the actual physical events 1Cor.15:54, 55

  I suspect that "eternity" has to have its own rules regarding time, since things are expressed as a logical sequence of events, though that might be anthropomorphising. The Akashic record certainly appears to be in some kind of order and relevance.

  I hope that helps. I'd be glad to discuss it more on the weekend, if you'd like.
• 

  LittleToe

  Gumby:
  You've got a perverse idea of fairness if you're suggesting that I have to share my cookies (even with friends) just because its the "fair" thing to do. To the victor go the spoils
• 

  Sirona

  LT

  Yes thanks, that clarifies.

  I did look up those scriptures, but you know, I might be out of practice.

  Jesus said "all you" "take my yoke upon you". I think I have a basic problem with the idea that God doesn't freely offer the salvation to all. You suggest that he chooses the individuals to save. Thats the bit I'm finding difficult.

  It suggests that people like me are lacking something that people like you are not. That God only adopted you and not me

  I'm being a little flippant, but you do see what I am saying don't you?

  Yes, I suspect a little more discussion at the weekend would be useful. Although I doubt I'll be changing my heathen ways LOL

  Sirona
• 

  Pubsinger

  He is the lamb that was slain before the founding of the world Rev.13:8

  Could that mean "He is the lamb (that was slain) before the founding of the world"

  Retaining his eternity as the lamb but the finite and specific point/event of his sacrifice?

  Pub (of the I've only actually read page 3 of this thread class)
• 

  gumby

  Ross , even if you DID share your cookies with me....I'd still be able to funtion while you just sat there and babbled on about nuthin.

  Gumby, of the I just can't seem to get a buzz class
• 

  LittleToe

  Dawn:

  Jesus said "all you" "take my yoke upon you". I think I have a basic problem with the idea that God doesn't freely offer the salvation to all. You suggest that he chooses the individuals to save.

  So from our perspective of having completely free wills, we have a choice to make, no? In "real life" how is that impinged in our experience by "God's perspective"?

  It suggests that people like me are lacking something that people like you are not.

  Only if you assume that you're not chosen. What are you basing that conclusion on? Some specific spritual experience? Some particular point in "time"?

  Although I doubt I'll be changing my heathen ways LOL

  Nor would I expect you to. But you already know that

  Simon:

  Retaining his eternity as the lamb but the finite and specific point/event of his sacrifice

  A question to answer a question - [before the world did he / does he still] bear the wounds?

  Gumby:Ya got me there, but at least I'm not flatulent