Is Double Predestination Biblical?

[Eternally-Grateful]

I disagree, the remnant is the election of grace which is salvation Rom 11:5-7

Kind of hard to disagree when we agree

The remnant are the eternally saved Jews who were born again and have eternal life

5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.
Rom 9:27

27 Esaias also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved:

If God is done with Israel completely the term remnant is meaningless

Is there a remnant of edomites of hitites of other nations which once existed. Of course not they would he be called members of the family of God

 

[Hazelelponi]

..

 

[Rescued One]

Hmm.


Some of elect Israel believed what Moses and the prophets wrote, some of elect Israel did not believe.
Being "elect" was no assurance they would all be believers.

If a person believes because God gave that person faith, that person is saved, not lost. Does God save and unsave?

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

1 John shows that they were never of us who claimed to be a part of us and now reject Christ. Called antichrists

 

[brightfame52]

Kind of hard to disagree when we agree

The remnant are the eternally saved Jews who were born again and have eternal life

If God is done with Israel completely the term remnant is meaningless

Is there a remnant of edomites of hitites of other nations which once existed. Of course not they would he be called members of the family of God

Theres a remnant in all ethnicities

 

[Tambora]

Call it what you want —as long as it doesn't imply that, or as long as you don't conclude that, God intended for something to happen that did not, or did not intend for something to happen that did. That is, frankly, heretical.

That is your opinion.
And differing opinions is OK by me because I think differing perspectives are needed to make a more informed conclusion, and anyone can perceive that something is heretical to them.
But let me ask you this ...... who is it on this site that you give authority to declare what is heretical and what is not??????

 

[Tambora]

A child of God who is born of god can not fall away.

Scripture does tell us of believers that do fall away, are cut off, apostatize, are blotted out, are kicked out of the kingdom, etc.

 

[Tambora]

Isreal was given land and specific promises

Eternal salvation was not one of these promises

Was the covenant make not said to be everlasting???

 

[Rescued One]

Scripture does tell us of believers that do fall away, are cut off, apostatize, are blotted out, are kicked out of the kingdom,

That is not true. We have shown you God's truth.

 

[Rescued One]

Was the covenant make not said to be everlasting???

If you are referring to the law, it had to be kept perfectly if one wanted eternal life.

 

[Tambora]

Hi Tambora

Hi Dave

One of the evidences of a genuine faith is perseverance in that faith. If you don't persevere in faith, then what have you lost? Understanding this, we have the correct context for the next part.

That doesn't mean they NEVER had faith, it means they lost the faith they once had.

The *not* blotting out of names was a promise to believers that it would never happen if they overcame, meaning, if their faith was genuine (James 1:12), and not a threat to those same people that one day they could be blotted out.

The letters to the churches in Revelation warn those church members of things that will cause them to lose their place.
So yes, they can lose their standing.

And it happens to be same warning that the OT warns about.

Psalms 69:28
(28) Let them be blotted out of the book of the living; let them not be enrolled among the righteous.

Which means they were once in the book of the living.

Amazing how much the NT agrees wholeheartedly with the OT.

OT saints were not in the Kingdom to be kicked out, but rather, in Abrahams bosom until Christs death, resurrection, and ascension. So OT writers...

Both the OT and the NT speaks of people being removed from being God's people, which can only mean that they were once God's people but are no longer.

And Jesus said that He would not lose any of the believers given to Him by the Father. This includes both OT saints, and every believer in the NT also. (John 6:37, 39, 10:28-29.)

Dave

One could believe He did not lose any if they only read part of scripture, but we see that He did lose one if we use all of scripture.

John 17:12
(12) While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled.

Couple that with all the other OT and NT scriptures that tell of those that were once called God people but then were not called God's people, kicked out of the kingdom, broken off, fell away, blotted out, did not stand firm, etc. and you just cannot conclude that all of God's people always remained God's people.

 

[makesends]

That is your opinion.
And differing opinions is OK by me because I think differing perspectives are needed to make a more informed conclusion, and anyone can perceive that something is heretical to them.
But let me ask you this ...... who is it on this site that you give authority to declare what is heretical and what is not??????

Scripture. Only Scripture

 

[Dave]

Hi Dave


That doesn't mean they NEVER had faith, it means they lost the faith they once had.

Hi @Tambora

It means the faith they had was not a saving faith. It wasn't genuine. As someone already noted, 'if they were of us, they would have remained with us, but they went out from us, to manifest (evidence), that they were never with us.'

The letters to the churches in Revelation warn those church members of things that will cause them to lose their place.
So yes, they can lose their standing.

And it happens to be same warning that the OT warns about.

Psalms 69:28
(28) Let them be blotted out of the book of the living; let them not be enrolled among the righteous.

Which means they were once in the book of the living.

Amazing how much the NT agrees wholeheartedly with the OT.

The "book of the living" in Psalm 69:28 and the "book of life" in Revelation 3:5 are not the same. While both refer to God's record-keeping, the "book of the living" in the Old Testament is a broader record of those currently alive, while the "book of life" in the New Testament specifically refers to those who have believed in Jesus Christ for salvation and are destined for eternal life in heaven.

What is the Book of Life and the Book of the Living?

This Q&A explains what difference between the Book of Life and the Book of the Living. The purpose and meaning of both books is given.

www.neverthirsty.org

Both the OT and the NT speaks of people being removed from being God's people, which can only mean that they were once God's people but are no longer.

We should be careful to understand the context of those statement. Interpreted on an island, they can say just about anything.

One could believe He did not lose any if they only read part of scripture, but we see that He did lose one if we use all of scripture.

John 17:12
(12) While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled.

Couple that with all the other OT and NT scriptures that tell of those that were once called God people but then were not called God's people, kicked out of the kingdom, broken off, fell away, blotted out, did not stand firm, etc. and you just cannot conclude that all of God's people always remained God's people.

Yes, Tambora, but that's a double edged sword, because it also says that he was the only one that this happened to, to fulfill scripture. So you would have to conceded that this only happened to Judas as that passage states.

Dave

 

[Hazelelponi]

Scripture does tell us of believers that do fall away, are cut off, apostatize, are blotted out, are kicked out of the kingdom, etc.

These are ways to express to the physical nation of Israel and their todescendants that those who are Israel are not all Israel. (Romans 9:6-7)

We and our children will serve the Lord (Joshua 24:14-28) but we don't know from mere physical inclusion into the Covenant (parental birth) if it will be a positive expression of God's mercy in salvation, or a negative exclusion (which still shows God's Glory) so we need to do all we can to be found in Christ

This doesn't contradict the elect from the foundation of the world being actually elected to salvation (Ephesians 1:4) and given perseverance in the faith, but it does remind us that mere physical birth and/or physical practice alone doesn't save, but rather, we worship God in Spirit and in Truth. (John 4:24)

 

[makesends]

Tambora said:
One could believe He did not lose any if they only read part of scripture, but we see that He did lose one if we use all of scripture.

John 17:12
(12) While I was with them, I kept them in your name, which you have given me. I have guarded them, and not one of them has been lost except the son of destruction, that the Scripture might be fulfilled.

Couple that with all the other OT and NT scriptures that tell of those that were once called God people but then were not called God's people, kicked out of the kingdom, broken off, fell away, blotted out, did not stand firm, etc. and you just cannot conclude that all of God's people always remained God's people

Hi @Tambora

It means the faith they had was not a saving faith. It wasn't genuine. As someone already noted, 'if they were of us, they would have remained with us, but they went out from us, to manifest (evidence), that they were never with us.'



The "book of the living" in Psalm 69:28 and the "book of life" in Revelation 3:5 are not the same. While both refer to God's record-keeping, the "book of the living" in the Old Testament is a broader record of those currently alive, while the "book of life" in the New Testament specifically refers to those who have believed in Jesus Christ for salvation and are destined for eternal life in heaven.

What is the Book of Life and the Book of the Living?

This Q&A explains what difference between the Book of Life and the Book of the Living. The purpose and meaning of both books is given.

www.neverthirsty.org

We should be careful to understand the context of those statement. Interpreted on an island, they can say just about anything.




Yes, Tambora, but that's a double edged sword, because it also says that he was the only one that this happened to, to fulfill scripture. So you would have to conceded that this only happened to Judas as that passage states.

Dave

The argument @Tambora pursues here depends on Judas being chosen the same way and for the same purpose as the others —but it is rather obviously not so! It's a bad argument from that perspective alone, not to mention the other reasons to say so.

 

[Rescued One]

What a glorious day to celebrate our blessing of eternal life in Jesus! HE IS RISEN!

 

[brightfame52]

What a glorious day to celebrate our blessing of eternal life in Jesus! HE IS RISEN!

Exactly what does that mean ? He has risen ? Care to elaborate?

 

[makesends]

Exactly what does that mean ? He has risen ? Care to elaborate?

Huh? Exactly what does WHAT mean? Care to elaborate?

 

[brightfame52]

Huh? Exactly what does WHAT mean? Care to elaborate?

What you mean what ? Read his comment and read mine

 

[Hazelelponi]

What a glorious day to celebrate our blessing of eternal life in Jesus! HE IS RISEN!

He is Risen indeed!