Paul created Calvanism!!!

Simplelogic · Dec 20, 2014

Kolibri said:
Paul himself did not consider himself individually predestined. In Php 3:8-15, Paul talks about "my aim" and says "I am pressing on to see if I may also lay hold on that for which Christ Jesus selected me. Brothers, I do not yet consider myself as having taken hold of it;...I am pressing on toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God by means of Christ Jesus." And he showed concern that if he was not firm with himself, he might be "disapproved (or "disqualified.") somehow." (1 Co 9:27) He did talk about "there being reserved...the crown of righteousness" for him and others, but only when his death was "imminent." (2 Ti:6-8)

So no, Paul did not support the idea that people as individuals are predestined, as to being foreordained to eternal salvation or damnation. But he did support that God foreknew and foreordained that classes of people would exist.

Romans 9

Pegg · Dec 20, 2014

Simplelogic said:
Wow. This is quite a reply!

Paul claims that God hates and loves people before they are born. Paul also claims that He creates "vessels of wrath" whom He has "prepared for destruction". Your only rebuttal to these horrible concepts is that Paul has authority, and we should just believe what he says. Yet the things he says about YHVH have NO PLACE IN THE HEBREW SCRIPTURES.

You misunderstand what Paul is saying.

Of Jacob and Esau, he says:

Romans 9: 10 Not only then but also when Re·bek′ah conceived twins from the one man, Isaac our forefather;+11 for when they had not yet been born and had not practiced anything good or bad, so that God’s purpose respecting the choosing might continue dependent, not on works, but on the One who calls, 12 it was said to her: “The older will be the slave of the younger.”13 Just as it is written: “I loved Jacob, but E′sau I hated.”

Paul is quoting from Malachi 1:2-3 where it says:

Mal 1:2 “I have shown love to you people,”+ says Jehovah. But you say: “How have you shown us love?”

“Was not E′sau the brother of Jacob?”+ declares Jehovah. “But I loved Jacob,3 and E′sau I hated;+ and I made his mountains desolate+ and left his inheritance for the jackals of the wilderness.”

So firstly, Paul is teaching from the writings of the prophets.
Secondly, Paul is talking about the 'wrath of 'God' upon those who disobey and of Gods mercy upon those who are obedient.
He says' “If, now, God, although having the will to demonstrate his wrath and to make his power known, tolerated with much long-suffering vessels of wrath made fit for destruction, in order that he might make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he prepared before hand for glory, namely, us, whom he called not only from among Jews but also from among nations, what of it?”—Romans 9:14-24.
I've underlined the context here... .God tolerates people who are disobedient in order to demonstrate his power and show his mercy toward those who are obedient. God tolerates the wicked... he does not pre-ordain them to act wickedly nor does he interfere with our free-will.

So what Paul is saying does have its founding in the hebrew scriptures

Simplelogic said:
Yet Yeshua himself confirms that there were TWELVE APOSTLES OF THE LAMB in Johns Revelation. Where does that leave Paul then?

Jesus himself revealed that the full number of those who would rule with him in heaven amount to 12x12x12

Rev 7;2 And I saw another angel ascending from the sunrise,* having a seal of the living God; and he called with a loud voice to the four angels to whom it was granted to harm the earth and the sea, 3 saying: “Do not harm the earth or the sea or the trees, until after we have sealed+ the slaves of our God in their foreheads.”+
4 And I heard the number of those who were sealed, 144,000,+ sealed out of every tribe of the sons of Israel:+

Revelation 14:1 Then I saw, and look! the Lamb+ standing on Mount Zion,+ and with him 144,000+ who have his name and the name of his Father+ written on their foreheads.

Paul is one of the 144,000.

Terrywoodenpic · Dec 21, 2014

Simplelogic said:
Very true. However I am convinced that predestination has its origins with Paul ALONE. People then read Paul's disgusting concept back into different sound byte scriptures ripped out of context.

The ultra sovereign picture of a God who controls everything and micromanages free will was completely made up. Neither the Hebrew Scriptures nor the words of Yeshua can be used to make this argument. Thats the point I am trying to make.

The logic of predestination and predetermined salvation is based on the the total knowledge and power of God.
Paul may or may not have been the firsts to promote it. I am not sure the "Who said it first" is important.
But it has been taken up by some of the most powerful thinkers of the christian era..

The error, I feel, is in supposing that what God could do, he must do.

It is like saying that because I am capable of breaking the law, I must be a law breaker.
This a fallacious type of argument.

Kolibri · Dec 21, 2014

Terrywoodenpic said:
The error, I feel, is in supposing that what God could do, he must do.

It is like saying that because I am capable of breaking the law, I must be a law breaker.
This a fallacious type of argument.

I still do not believe Paul/any other bible writer was teaching it as it applies to individuals....at least to the point of salvation or lack there of.

Simplelogic · Dec 21, 2014

Terrywoodenpic said:
The logic of predestination and predetermined salvation is based on the the total knowledge and power of God.
Paul may or may not have been the firsts to promote it. I am not sure the "Who said it first" is important.
But it has been taken up by some of the most powerful thinkers of the christian era..

The error, I feel, is in supposing that what God could do, he must do.

It is like saying that because I am capable of breaking the law, I must be a law breaker.
This a fallacious type of argument.

A man recently put his views on Paul/Predestination like this:

" Its like me with my daughter. If I offered her a bowl of ice cream and a bowl of maggots. I know which one she is going to pick, but I still let her choose."

This logics seems air tight at first, but it is full of wholes:

The truth is the man does NOT know what his daughter is going to choose! He knows his daughter intimately and can make a very educated guess that she will choose the ice cream over the maggots, but still, he does not KNOW. If the man literally know which choice his daughter was going to make, is he really giving her choice??

Muffled · Dec 22, 2014

Simplelogic said:
that God simply knows his creation intimately.He had a plan and a will for those whom he wanted to reach. This is very different than the concept of God determining people's salvation before their birth as Paul suggests.

I have not yet seen you prove that Paul is sugesting this.

Muffled · Dec 22, 2014

Simple logic said "because he chooses US based off of our works and our sincerity of heart. not some preconceived divine election."

I believe God chooses everyone for salvation but that does not make them saved. I believe God can show favor to those who are righteous and I am sure that the Apostles were selected for a reason although righteousness might not hae been the main one and certainly not so for Judas.

Simplelogic · Dec 22, 2014

Muffled said:
Simple logic said "because he chooses US based off of our works and our sincerity of heart. not some preconceived divine election."

I believe God chooses everyone for salvation but that does not make them saved. I believe God can show favor to those who are righteous and I am sure that the Apostles were selected for a reason although righteousness might not hae been the main one and certainly not so for Judas.

"What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom He called"

Muffled · Dec 22, 2014

Pegg said:
Meanwhile, Apostle Paul sits in heaven from his position as a king and priest and awaits for the judgement day.

I don't beleive there is any evidence to support that notion.

Muffled · Dec 22, 2014

Simplelogic said:
"What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom He called"

What is your point? I believe this verse says nothing about predestination of salvation.

Simplelogic · Dec 22, 2014

Muffled said:
What is your point? I believe this verse says nothing about predestination of salvation.

So who are the "vessels of mercy" and the "vessels of destruction" who were prepared beforehand for these tasks?

Muffled · Dec 22, 2014

Simplelogic said:
So who are the "vessels of mercy" and the "vessels of destruction" who were prepared beforehand for these tasks?

I believe I am a vessal of mercy having come down to earth from Heaven. I don't have any doubt that my previous relationship to God prepared me for this life. Notice that it does not say God did the preparing for those of destruction but only those of mercy for Glory.

Sleeppy · Dec 22, 2014

Simplelogic said:
This is what people usually do. They try to minimize the word of YHVH to suggest that the prophet was doing "story telling" when the text says that YHVH Himself was speaking through these men.

"The text says?".. Think about that for a while. -- It's another form of idolatry that you're subjecting yourself to, when you accept something a fellow man says, wholesale and without question. You're elevating the words of a man to God's own words, simply because the man told you to! Think about it.

Sleeppy · Dec 22, 2014

Simplelogic said:
"Psalm 139:16

One of the most common passages you will hear a Calvinist quote is part of Psalm 139. When a Calvinist uses this passage as a proof text for the concept of an ultra-sovereign God, he will almost always use the NIV translation. When the NIV translation first came out years ago, it didn't take much reading for me to quickly come to the conclusion it had a very profound pro-Calvinism spin to it. In spite of the fact that there is no Hebrew, or even Greek word for the English word "sovereign", nor is the word "sovereign" used even once in the KJV or NKJV translations, the NIV translators saw fit to use it 303 times! In almost all of the cases, the Hebrew word translated "sovereign" was "adoni" which means "my Lord". "My Lord" is a title, but the word "sovereign" in the NIV is used as an adjective with the intent to portray a characteristic! This is way out of legitimate lines. Come to find out more recently that the executive secretary of the NIV translation was none other than Edwin H. Palmer... Calvinist extraordinaire, author of other pro-Calvinist books like, The Five Points of Calvinism ! Surprise surprise.

The NIV quote that one will hear from Psalm 139 is:

"All the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be." Psalm 139:16

There's the proof in all its hideous glory! How can anyone argue with this? David clearly said that every day of his life on earth was written out in a book before it ever started! Or was it? The context in which this passage is found is of David describing the wonderful design of his body when it was formed in his mother's womb. Let's look at the context of this statement in the NKJV version.

"For You have formed my inward parts; You have covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Marvelous are Your works, and that my soul knows very well. My frame was not hidden from You When I was made in secret, and skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed." Psalm 139:13-16a

The very next sentence is the one quoted above concerning the days ordained for David. That same sentence in the KJV reads like this;

"And in thy book all my members were written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them." vs. 16b

The NIV translation wants us to believe David was talking about the days of his life being written out in advance. In the KJV version, David is clearly speaking of his body parts being written in a book before they were formed. Which is it? They both can't be right. The context in which this sentence is found is of the wonder and beauty of God's design and engineering when David's body was being formed in his mother's womb. Therefore the context demands that we understand David was referring to his body parts and not his future. Nowhere in this entire Psalm is there any mention of the future.

The sad thing about the NIV version is, not only is it misleading us toward a pro-Calvinist picture, but it is also blinding us to the incredible beauty of the truth that David speaks of. So how can all David's body parts be written out in a book before any of them came into existence? In the DNA of his genetic code! At the moment of conception, when therecombination process of all genetic information is completed, every detail of a person's body is written out and established long before any of the body parts actually begin to form. This is what David was speaking about. Read it again if necessary. Under the influence of the Holy Spirit, David spoke of this incredibly fascinating feat of God's engineering over four thousand years ago! Science hasn't even known about it for 100 years! " The Attributes of Deity part 2

I don't use NIV.. I use Young's Literal Translation more often than not.. and/or Mechon-Mamre.

Mechon-Mamre said:
Thine eyes did see mine unformed substance, and in Thy book they were all written-- {N}
even the days that were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them.

Young's Literal said:
Mine unformed substance Thine eyes saw, And on Thy book all of them are written, The days they were formed -- And not one among them.

Is the word there "days" or "members"? In either case, it's what I've been saying since the beginning of our conversation. God determines the DNA of His creation-- so it doesn't make sense whatsoever to assume that He came along to observe the zygote of Jacob and Esau, for the purpose of a future event. God literally established Jacob and Esau, without the works of either of them being manifest. So to further conclude that God made a prophecy to have the older serve the younger, because of something out of His control, is illogical. And when we put the entire story into context, we either accept that God ordained Esau to sell his birthright, and for Jacob to trick his father, with their mother as Jacob's advocate, or we acknowledge that God's knowledge is whole, and unchanging. In either case, they are actually saying the same thing: God is God.

Sleeppy · Dec 22, 2014

Simplelogic said:
Paul is quoting Malachi in the same breath as Genesis. He is obviously trying to paint the picture that YHVH hated Esau before birth. This is why Paul anticipates an objection! Esau was not cursed in Genesis. He was actually given a significant blessing itself. It was inferior to Jacobs though.

When God is speaking in Malachi He is speaking of Esau the NATION which had become evil and attacked YHVH's people. It had nothing to do with predestination! They had simply become evil!

Paul's quotes are deceptive and misleading. He rips scriptures out of context and pastes them together to make his blasphemous points. It is a clever slight of hand which has led many people down this terrible road of believing YHVH is controlling humanity. It also means that all the evil that goes on in this world is merely part of God's divine plan which He has predetermined before the foundations of the world!! Ughhh! Not wonder so many people reject the god of christianity.

There is no problem whatsoever with saying God hates a person, even you or I, either before or after birth. The fact is, God hates evil.

Matthew 7:11 said:
If, therefore, ye being evil, have known good gifts to give to your children, how much more shall your Father who is in the heavens give good things to those asking him?

Isaiah 45:7 said:
Forming light, and preparing darkness, Making peace, and preparing evil, I am Jehovah, doing all these things.

The only error anyone, including Paul, can make is as I've said before: we cannot create the false dichotomy which says there are righteous and unrighteous, with a clean impassable divide between them. This kind of thinking leads directly to duality, idolatry/autolatry, polytheism, etc. There are many sins which thrive off of these root delusions. -- God is in complete control. It is both a blessing and a curse, love and hate, which have formed the illusion of free will, or ego. We have no claim and no authority.

Claiming that God was speaking of the nation only is not supportable. If that were the case, it would read Edom, not Esau.

Malachi 1:3 said:
Is not Esau Jacob's brother? -- an affirmation of God, And I love Jacob, and Esau I have hated, And I make his mountains a desolation, And his inheritance for dragons of a wilderness.

Because Edom saith, `We have been made poor, And we turn back and we build the wastes,' Thus said God of Hosts: They do build, and I do destroy, And [men] have called to them, `O region of wickedness,' `O people whom God defied to the age.'

Notice that it mentions both Esau and Jacob, as brothers. In verse 4, it expounds upon the curse/hate towards Edom, because of Esau (as evidenced by the ownership attributed to Esau by "his mountains", and "his inheritance".

It's a wonder you accept Christ.. Christ knew that he would suffer and be crucified because of God's will. And Christ tried his best to relay that message to everyone around him. God's will is done.

Simplelogic · Dec 23, 2014

Sleeppy said:
There is no problem whatsoever with saying God hates a person, even you or I, either before or after birth. The fact is, God hates evil.

What??? How can a man be evil before he is born???

Simplelogic · Dec 23, 2014

Sleeppy said:
The only error anyone, including Paul, can make is as I've said before: we cannot create the false dichotomy which says there are righteous and unrighteous, with a clean impassable divide between them. This kind of thinking leads directly to duality, idolatry/autolatry, polytheism, etc. There are many sins which thrive off of these root delusions. -- God is in complete control. It is both a blessing and a curse, love and hate, which have formed the illusion of free will, or ego. We have no claim and no authority.

What on earth are you talking about. Of course people are capable of being righteous and also evil. What on earth do you mean?

Sleeppy · Dec 23, 2014

Simplelogic said:
What??? How can a man be evil before he is born???

Yes.

And Jesus said to him, 'Why me dost thou call good? No one is good, except One -- God.'

Put this into context.

Sleeppy · Dec 23, 2014

Simplelogic said:
What on earth are you talking about. Of course people are capable of being righteous and also evil. What on earth do you mean?

Would you say you are righteous? Or wicked? Or both?

Simplelogic · Dec 24, 2014

Sleeppy said:
Put this into context.

Glad to. The context is referring to God's righteousness, which no man can match. This does not mean that men can't be righteous. The scriptures are clear that YHVH considered many humans righteous because of their actions.

So now I ask you. Can you find the context for this verse?

5There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judaea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth. 6And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless. Luke 1: 5-6

Paul created Calvanism!!!

Well-Known Member

Jehovah our God is One

Oldest Heretic

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jesus in me

Jesus in me

Well-Known Member

Jesus in me

Jesus in me

Well-Known Member

Jesus in me

Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.

Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.

Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.

Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.

Well-Known Member