ARCHIVE: Open Theism part 2

[lee_merrill]

Read it in context, cake brain.

What context, though? Just saying "context!" is not an argument.

Jesus knew it on the spot.
In fact, I'll bet they all knew it about each other, but like Peter, they didn't dare ... couldn't believe it about themselves.

So how is there always hope of repentance, if they were set to sin? and could not do otherwise.

And how can God know only a remnant will be saved? And this prophecy is not on the spot, with people who are known, this is for thousands of years.

Blessings,
Lee

 

[godrulz]

Never been said any better!

For the English students out there, this is called hyperbole, an exaggeration.

 

[godrulz]

Romans 3:23 - "All ahve sinned and fallen short of the glory of God."

Judas was already a sinner before Jesus called him.

That has nothing to do with whether Judas would betray Christ.

Muz

Jesus did not call Judas as a betrayer, son of perdition, devil. He BECAME (Gr. verb tense used) these things after his initial calling to be an apostle/disciple after Jesus prayed to the Father in chosing him. He was a sinner like the rest of us, but he was not chosen or fatalistically predestined from eternity or before his calling to the inner circle to betray Christ. When his heart went off track, things unfolded differently than God desired or intended when He initially called him.

(this also supports my rejection of OSAS)

 

[Lighthouse]

Jesus did not call Judas as a betrayer, son of perdition, devil. He BECAME (Gr. verb tense used) these things after his initial calling to be an apostle/disciple after Jesus prayed to the Father in chosing him. He was a sinner like the rest of us, but he was not chosen or fatalistically predestined from eternity or before his calling to the inner circle to betray Christ. When his heart went off track, things unfolded differently than God desired or intended when He initially called him.

(this also supports my rejection of OSAS)

No it doesn't. Judas was never saved, you moron.

 

[lee_merrill]

Jesus did not call Judas as a betrayer, son of perdition, devil. He BECAME (Gr. verb tense used) these things after his initial calling ...

I'm not sure what verse you mean here, though.

Blessings,
Lee

P.S. Lighthouse, enough with the insults...

 

[godrulz]

The counter intentions of the opposition to the Gospel as being revealed in Christ Jesus were no mystery or secret. Judas’ downward spiral into the dark side wasn’t a surprise to anyone.

The dipping of the peace of bread and giving it to Judas can be seen as an acknowledgment that Jesus knew (at least at that moment) what was in Judas’ heart and mind. Judas taking it can be seen as resignation to carry out his plans. Such intent most surely opens the door to Satan and made Judas not just a traitor but the traitor.

Luke 6:15 was written in hindsight. It is historical narrative. Which, according to Lon, proves nothing.

Cake,
Philetus

Luke 6:16 Judas was an apostle and BECAME a betrayer, just as Jesus/Word was God and BECAME flesh (Jn. 1:1; Jn. 1:14). Jesus was not always flesh and Judas was not always predestined to betray.

This knocks off Rob's remote vs proximal knowledge issue and the OSAS (falling away/apostasy is possible) guys at the same time...two proverbial birds with one stone.

Ru elz, ru elz, rue lz...do the wave....rue elz (time to start selling fan club memberships again....speaking of which, The Who is selling Wholigan?! fan club memberships for $50...I think I will let my old Who fan club membership lapse).

 

[godrulz]

No it doesn't. Judas was never saved, you moron.

This is pre-cross, so if you mean he was not a born again, evangelical, Protestant Christian, I would agree.

He was a believer, disciple, apostle. Jesus did not call a devil, a son of perdition, to be in His inner circle after a night of prayer to the Father for wisdom. Jesus is not a moron. Are you an Open Theist? Judas became these things (check out the Greek grammar, if you dare). He was not always what he ended up in the end, a son of hell, possessed by Satan (he was not called in this state, but listed as an apostle like the rest of them; believing in Jesus and being 'saved' in a pre-cross sense is the minimum requirement to fulfilling Christ's mission alongside Him and the other disciples/believers).

Your preconceived theology leaves you begging...the question and found wanting.

 

[godrulz]

I'm not sure what verse you mean here, though.

Blessings,
Lee

P.S. Lighthouse, enough with the insults...

Start: Lk. 6:16 (trace all the verses about Judas to get the full picture of his descent from apostle to devil).

Finish: Jn. 17:12

Just as God did not intend or desire for Adam to Fall, so He did not chose Judas to become a son of hell possessed by Satan.

 

[Lighthouse]

This is pre-cross, so if you mean he was not a born again, evangelical, Protestant Christian, I would agree.

He was a believer, disciple, apostle. Jesus did not call a devil, a son of perdition, to be in His inner circle after a night of prayer to the Father for wisdom. Jesus is not a moron. Are you an Open Theist? Judas became these things (check out the Greek grammar, if you dare). He was not always what he ended up in the end, a son of hell, possessed by Satan (he was not called in this state, but listed as an apostle like the rest of them; believing in Jesus and being 'saved' in a pre-cross sense is the minimum requirement to fulfilling Christ's mission alongside Him and the other disciples/believers).

Your preconceived theology leaves you begging...the question and found wanting.

:bang:

I never said that Jesus called Judas as a betrayer, or even to be a betrayer. All I'm saying is that in the belief of eternal security, Judas did not have eternal security. He was never saved. So his rebellion does not disprove OSAS.

 

[themuzicman]

Jesus did not call Judas as a betrayer, son of perdition, devil. He BECAME (Gr. verb tense used) these things after his initial calling to be an apostle/disciple after Jesus prayed to the Father in chosing him. He was a sinner like the rest of us, but he was not chosen or fatalistically predestined from eternity or before his calling to the inner circle to betray Christ. When his heart went off track, things unfolded differently than God desired or intended when He initially called him.

(this also supports my rejection of OSAS)

I would agree with the point that Judas became the betrayer.

I'm not sure I would use this to reject OSAS, in light of how Scripture describes Judas as one who stole from the treasury on a regular basis

Muz

 

[godrulz]

:bang:

I never said that Jesus called Judas as a betrayer, or even to be a betrayer. All I'm saying is that in the belief of eternal security, Judas did not have eternal security. He was never saved. So his rebellion does not disprove OSAS.

Huh? Judas was an unbeliever called to preach the Gospel alongside Jesus and 11 believers? Jesus would not call someone who did not believe in Him and His mission after praying to the Father in making this choice. In your MAD world, were the disciples OSAS or could they be called believers and possibly fall away (most MAD guys say circ, even after cross, were not OSAS, but uncirc were OSAS...too arbitrary in light of redemptive principles...zzzzttttt....next contestant).

His rebellion does disprove OSAS if He was a believer. Believers are secure unless they become apostates by falling from truth.

Topic: OT, not OSAS (other threads)

 

[godrulz]

I would agree with the point that Judas became the betrayer.

I'm not sure I would use this to reject OSAS, in light of how Scripture describes Judas as one who stole from the treasury on a regular basis

Muz

When did he start this practice? From day 1 of his calling or soon after?

Peter also denied Christ. Christians have been known to lie, steal, cheat (on taxes or with employee, etc.), fornicate, etc. It is possible to be a believer, do these things, and maybe even digress to the point of rejecting Christ and becoming an unbeliever (the one sin that cuts us off from Him if persisted in).

 

[themuzicman]

When did he start this practice? From day 1 of his calling or soon after?

We honestly don't know.

Peter also denied Christ. Christians have been known to lie, steal, cheat (on taxes or with employee, etc.), fornicate, etc. It is possible to be a believer, do these things, and maybe even digress to the point of rejecting Christ and becoming an unbeliever (the one sin that cuts us off from Him if persisted in).

I agree that it is possible. I'm just saying that in Judas' case, the way that he (and the other 11) are portrayed, I'm not sure this is a case that can be solidly made.

Muz

 

[Lighthouse]

Huh? Judas was an unbeliever called to preach the Gospel alongside Jesus and 11 believers? Jesus would not call someone who did not believe in Him and His mission after praying to the Father in making this choice. In your MAD world, were the disciples OSAS or could they be called believers and possibly fall away (most MAD guys say circ, even after cross, were not OSAS, but uncirc were OSAS...too arbitrary in light of redemptive principles...zzzzttttt....next contestant).

His rebellion does disprove OSAS if He was a believer. Believers are secure unless they become apostates by falling from truth.

Topic: OT, not OSAS (other threads)

No one was OSAS until after the death and resurrection of Christ. Judas died before either of those happened. So you cannot use him as proof. Please grow a brain.

 

[godrulz]

I suppose we would not have chosen these guys to be friends, business partners, board members, etc. In Open Theism, God can take risks with creation or calling to ministry. He can call, mold, mature people, but not against their wills. Judas was the Black Sheep of the project. God may have seen his weakness, but he did not call Judas in a state of reprobation (he became this way, though it was not certain or fixed that he would).

There is some speculation in these things. I think Rob is proof texting one verse without considering all the relevant verses as to how and when Judas 'fulfilled' Scripture (reviewing John Sander's explanation and understanding of fulfill/illustrate may be in order...I am rereading the new edition of 'God who risks', so it will refresh my understanding).

 

[lee_merrill]

Start: Lk. 6:16 (trace all the verses about Judas to get the full picture of his descent from apostle to devil).

Finish: Jn. 17:12.

But a claim that Judas became a betrayer implies you have something more specific in mind, I am familiar with the accounts, yet I need to know what specifically you base your conclusion on.

Blessings,
Lee

 

[lee_merrill]

And we still need to know how it is God knows only a remnant will be saved, and then all Israel will be saved (though this may refer to most Israelites, and not every last one)--group dynamics does not solve the knot, for insurances companies estimate, they do not prophesy.

Blessings,
Lee

 

[godrulz]

No one was OSAS until after the death and resurrection of Christ. Judas died before either of those happened. So you cannot use him as proof. Please grow a brain.

These are unproven hyper-dispensational assumptions (MAD). I thought you guys say that the circumcision group of Peter, James, John were like pre-cross and not OSAS either. Only Paul's grace/uncirc. group awhile after the cross got the bonus card of OSAS? This is why the falling away passages in Hebrews are rationalized away by MAD as only applying to post-cross circ.? (I think your view differs from Bob Hill?).

Redemptive principles have more continuity than you think. To say there was such divergent principles (faith vs faith + works; osas vs non-osas) after the pivotal, crux of the 'it is finished' work on the cross/resurrection, is going too far with dispensationalism.

 

[Lighthouse]

These are unproven hyper-dispensational assumptions (MAD). I thought you guys say that the circumcision group of Peter, James, John were like pre-cross and not OSAS either.

:maxi:

That's beside the point! Whether or not anyone was OSAS after the cross, be it pre-Acts 9, or post, the fact remains that no one was before the cross. No one! So Judas does not stand as proof of anything when it comes to OSAS.

Only Paul's grace/uncirc. group awhile after the cross got the bonus card of OSAS? This is why the falling away passages in Hebrews are rationalized away by MAD as only applying to post-cross circ.? (I think your view differs from Bob Hill?).

And, fyi, I'm still not convinced that OSAS was not applied to all post-cross. But we've been over that before.

Redemptive principles have more continuity than you think. To say there was such divergent principles (faith vs faith + works; osas vs non-osas) after the pivotal, crux of the 'it is finished' work on the cross/resurrection, is going too far with dispensationalism.

You're an idiot. I seriously don't think I've ever met anyone as stupid as you. I've laid out for you what I believe, as have countless others, in regards to what OSAS is. And the fact that you deny OSAS is not even the issue. The problem is that you still can't get it through that thick skull of yours into that tiny little brain what it is we believe, and how it works. Whether it's true or not is irrelevant. You don't even know what it is.

 

[godrulz]

And we still need to know how it is God knows only a remnant will be saved, and then all Israel will be saved (though this may refer to most Israelites, and not every last one)--group dynamics does not solve the knot, for insurances companies estimate, they do not prophesy.

Blessings,
Lee

I commented on your proof texts a few days ago (Romans). The context of corporate vs individual election is part of the answer.