Sentences with phrase «predestination not»

Barth uses the language of predestination not to rethink the relation of matter to spirit but to intervene in debates about Calvinism.

Yet the Protestant partisan and self - styled Calvinist interprets the atoning death of Christ and God's eternal predestining decree in the very teeth of Luther and Calvin: election is the «sum of the Gospel,» for God's election of humanity is a predestination not merely of humanity but of God himself.

Not exact matches

1) The Bible DOES NOT teach predestination 2) The Bible DOES NOT teach that the «wicked» will suffer for all eternity in a hellfire 3) Not all people will go to HeaNOT teach predestination 2) The Bible DOES NOT teach that the «wicked» will suffer for all eternity in a hellfire 3) Not all people will go to HeaNOT teach that the «wicked» will suffer for all eternity in a hellfire 3) Not all people will go to HeaNot all people will go to Heaven

Not only does this idea solve the problem of predestination and free will but is much more in line with the idea of God.

A lot of people who believe in the individual election to eternal life view say they do not believe in double predestination because of how repulsive it is, but to me, it seems the logical conclusion.

Just the other day I came across something by Piper where he was explaining his belief in double predestination, namely that «Just as God chooses whom He will save without regard to any distinctives in the person, so also he decides whom He will not save without regard to any distinctives in the individual.»

And even stranger, God himself can not change the outcome, and is himself trapped in predestination, which means that God is not all - powerful.

I'd like to also include an exclusivist who believes in predestination, so if I can find a Calvinist who I have not totally alienated and who is willing to participate, I'll introduce him or her in the weeks to come.

Four or five nights a week, the septuagenarian Efird can still be found at a church on some godforsaken highway teaching why the rapture is not part of the book of Revelation or showing that Calvin's doctrine of double predestination isn't found in Romans.

Take the issue of predestination, well the Pharisees and Saduccess were divided on this subject but the Essenes affirmed it (not in a proto - Calvinist way but there's similarity).

It's not about TULIP or John Piper or predestination or the Reformation.

These are not perfect examples of the conflicting sides of the theological argument of predestination, but they prove that examples can be found for trying to weigh the religious lessons of the plays in favor of Catholicism or Protestantism.

The metaphysical result was the God who does not suffer, who is unaffected by what happens in time, the God of absolute predestination and unfreedom.

I believe that predestination does not refer to God's choice of which people get to go to heaven, but refers instead to God's determination to bring into glory all those who receive eternal life by faith in Jesus.

Or to put it another way again, discussion about God's predestination should not fall under the category of justification, but under the categories of sanctification and glorification.

You don't choose who you are and what you look like, for example, that's Predestination, but you choose what you do, that's Free Will, which God DOES NOT interfere with (gives and honors,) even though He foreknows everything!

I do not, and never have believed in the Calvinist doctrine of predestination, so that is not an issue for me.

In other words, predestination teaches us about who gets glorified, not who gets justified.

As such, there is absolutely nothing in predestination about God's choice of which people will get justified and which people will not.

As a small contribution to this discussion: One implication of the Calvinistic doctrine of predestination, if it really is what the Bible teaches, is that someone may spend his or her life passionately serving in a full - time church capacity and yet not be one of the elect (and therefore «saved»).

To put it another way, predestination is about the destiny of believers (all will be glorified), not about the destiny of unbelievers (some will get justified and some will get damned).

I definitely do not believe in double predestination, where God predestines some people to go to heaven and predestines others to go to hell.

We can not divorce the Calvinistic sense (i.e. denial) of free will from their predestination doctrine.

Predestination is a discipleship issue; not an evangelism issue.

But it would be a mistake to suppose that an Augustinian emphasis on original sin or predestination (which, oddly, Pagels does not discuss) leads inevitably to a denial of the right of civil protest or to passive submission to authority.

The Calvinistic doctrine of predestination can not survive without the denial of free will — I guess that is a topic to come in this series.

If you are disagreeing, I think maybe you have not understood my perspective on predestination.

It could contain doctrines that were not inherently understandable (such as the doctrine of the trinity), or that seemed to be self - contradictory (such as the full humanity and deity of Jesus), or that were contradicted by other doctrines (as, for example, human freedom by divine predestination, or God's omnipotent goodness by human sin).

Double predestination does not require that everyone start out neutral at all.

The problem with Calvinism (not Calvin) is not that there is some truth in predestination (God is God after all) but that it makes predestination the starting point and framework of its theology.

It does not really seem to support predestination as far as what I see.

Therefore, if we fight about predestination, we are not living according to what we were predestined for, namely, to be conformed to the image of Jesus Christ.

Most Calvinists reject double predestination or reprobation, and instead say that God did not actively choose who to send to heaven and who to send to hell, but simply chose out of everyone who was already headed to hell to save a few for heaven.

However, just based on the in your face predestination (an actual word in the Bible, unlike free will) verses and stories, if my salvation depended on it, and it doesn't, I would have to go with predestination based on Romans 9 and Ephesians 2 specifically, plus many other verses of course.

The Bible teaches that predestination is about our glorification and sanctification; not about justification.

The chapter seems to give very obvious examples of predestination and tells us sternly to not question the matter by saying «Who are you, a mere human being, to argue with God?»

Predestination is a controversial topic, but it need not be.

Though many Calvinists argue that double predestination is the only logical conclusion to the Calvinist position on God's election of some (but not all) to receive eternal life, I am not going to belabor the point or try to refute the idea since most Calvinists claim that they do not teach or believe it... (for more on reprobation and double predestination I recommend this book: Vance: The Other Side of Calvinism, pp, 250 - 333).

If god knows that some people, before they are born, will not accept jesus as a savior (remember the whole predestination / omniscient god thing) but allows them to be born anyway, what does that say about the nature of god?

Presbyterians believed in predestination; Methodists didn't.

Romans 9 - 11 has been used to justify anti-Semitic belief and behavior and has led to all manner of speculation about election and predestination and faith versus works and true religion and who is chosen by God and who is not.

Again, Paul is just reiterating the fact that our predestination was not to eternal life, but to the adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies, the giving of an inheritance to His children.

This is all part of God's predestination; he predestined us not only to be released from an unpleasant predicament, but in order that we might become like his Son.

Some people are scared of predestination, but we should not be — for whatever it is, it begins with the love of God.

[3] Predestination has to do with the believer's future, not with the believer's past.

This promise of predestination is not about God deciding who gets to heaven and who goes to hell; it is about God decided that rather than just one son getting all of His inheritance, all of His children get to share in the inheritance of His family.

As a new generation preparing to tackle the age - old debate about predestination and free will, our positions don't have to change but our attitudes can.

God's predestination is not to [eternal life].

... The idea that God's will to save is accomplished in Christians with their conversion is obviously not connected with the thought of predestination, but rather with that of conferring status (Delling in Kittel, TDNT, 29).

So, in regard to «double predestination,» God does not merely «permit» the «wicked» to perish, but «wills» it.46