Heaven Prerequisites According to Mike

No, I don't think they are wasting their time as they are one of the means God uses to notify, educate, and or stir the hearts of the elect. Now, certainly God is capable of contacting the elect personally face to face, but for whatever reason He chose to use missionaries instead.I think God's use of servants to accomplish his will is something well documented in scripture. There are additional verses that lead some to believe it is a matter of choice as well. This reminds me of how I used to struggle with trying to determine which scripture verse was true in areas where some appeared to be saying something different or contradictory.Consider John 6:37 and 6:44:John 6:37: "All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away."John 6:44: ""No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day."Some see this contrasted with John 3:16 as a plain contradiction proving the bible to be fallable. Through the work God has done in my life I've come to see them as both being true, therefore the "whosoever believes in him" part must apply only to those that the Father has permitted to come to the Son. In other words I think it means "whosoever has been predestined will come to believe in him" and receive everlasting life.Another important component of this is that of faith. Faith is the mechanism, received by grace, by which the elect come to believe and accept Christ as savior. Ephesians 2:8 notes that faith itself does not come from us, but rather is a gift logically given only to the elect.Ephesians 2:8: "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—"Respectfully

Hi Pogo,You're asking some very difficult questions that cannot be comfortably answered. That said, I do think it important to be truthful about my understanding of the Christian faith. I appreciate your honesty and sentiment, but I think if the God of the bible is real, everyone will have something to do with him whether they want to or not. I would agree that the perspective of an object of wrath is not a desirable one. I'm not sure I follow you entirely here. If Christianity were a matter of free will we already knew that only a few would actually choose it didn't we?Consider Matthew 7:13-14: "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it. "Respectfully[This message has been edited by kevstersmith, 09-16-2003]

I see what you mean, but where is the documentation? Followers are told to go to the byways and the highways to bring the unbelievers in (Matthew 22:9, Luke 14:23). This was told as a parable, but the idea (from what I read) is that believers are compelled to go and bring people to a saving knowledge of Jesus; thus the work of missionaries. However, if the elect are predestined, and it is God that "calls" them, what is the point of missionaries? I am not trying to be rude, but it seems to me that much faith is required
So, the elect will have their collective hearts stirred by the missionaries, only to receive a gift (faith) so that they can believe in God, whom has chosen them regardless of their actions OR belief.
Maybe I'm cynical, but isn't jumping through spiritual hoops?

I'm not sure I understand what you're looking for documentation on. That God uses his servants to accomplish his will in bringing people to himself? I agree, missionaries are called to compel non-believers for the purpose of bringing them to the Christian faith. However, I think the parable of the sower in Mark 4 offers an expectation that not all will accept. And considering missionaries have no idea as to who will accept they are exhorted to share the gospel or compel everyone to Christ. I'm not sure where else to go with this. I think it is reasonable to infer predestination simply holds that some will become Christian as a result of God's work through missionaries. I'm not insulted, I agree. But again, note that biblical faith cannot be self-generated. Rather it is something received.Ephesians 2:8: "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith; and that (faith*) is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; "*My addition. I don't think so personally. Rather, I think it rather sound biblical reasoning. That said, there are a significant number of Christian's that don't subscribe to the doctrine of predestination. I've read a number of commentaries where the authors don't believe in it, but I haven't seen them adequately address some of the verses (John 6:37 & 6:44) that I've relayed to you.There is an Old Testament verse that says something to the effect of "God's word never returns to Him void." In other words, they (words) never leave his mouth without accomplishing what he has stated. Therefore, when God invites someone to himself (as John 6:37 & 6:44 suggest), no one can or does refuse.If there are some additional verses you think argue in favor or free will, feel free to throw them at me. I'd be happy to look at them with you.Respectfully

That is what I believed too, but what of people like me, whom have believed (earnestly) only to end up walking away from the faith? Am I still saved? I do not see how unless it is 100% grace! I do not acknowledge the biblical (or any) god. I do not "witness", pray or in any way practice any form of christianity. If I am truely one of the elect, then it is entirely possible that there are people that really believe they are saved, when in fact they are not.
That would be a horrific realization to the deceived (but as far as they know, saved) christians when they enter eternity based on the bible.

This is certainly a difficult issue as we sometimes see the word "faith" used interchangably with "belief" in scripture. In some cases it appears that the use of the term belief does not constitute saving faith, while in others it does. If my understanding is correct, faith or belief that results in the spiritual birth of John 3 is what determines who is saved and who isn't. If we take the verses of John 10:28-29, that nothing can take a believer out of the Father and Son's hand literally, then nothing, even a person's continued sinfulness, can remove them from God's family.Utlimately I think only God knows for sure as to who is saved (spiritually born) and who isn't. Now I'm not sure if you were actually experienced the spiritual birth, but in my case I did about 12 years ago. The first two years were extremely difficult as I found myself unable keep to some of the basic moral standards the bible intructs Christians to keep. And so for a time (6 years) I fell away from the church because I didn't want to be a hypocrite and pretend nothing was wrong with me between Sundays. Note that during this time I didn't consider myself to be a Christian.Ultimately I think the validity of the spiritual birth brought me back to the faith as the bible and other Christian's were the only sources I found that could explain or sympathize with the inner conflict I was experiencing which Paul describes in Romans 7. This time around I've learned to live by the strength God offers in the person of the Holy Spirit. This has done much to free me from the sins that plagued me early on. All this to say, I think even while I wasn't activitely doing much that the bible exhorts us to do, I was still saved as God viewed me as a new creation of his ever since the spiritual birth.That said I think it is plausable that there are some out there that don't realize they are saved as was the case with me for the first 8 or 9 years of being a Christian. The point being, it is 100% grace. Not only is this possible, I think it is probable.Consider Matthew 7:21-23: "Not everyone who says to Me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. "Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' "And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.' "For some time now I've been mentoring a guy that was part of various churches for close to 40 years. However, by his own testimony, he didn't experience the spiritual birth until 2 years ago even though he considered himself to be a Christian up to that point. He now understands that he wasn't a spirit born Christian intially as he received a different perspective and or conscience that he never had before since the time he prayed to receive Christ two years ago. This new conscience or perspective, I think, is indicative of the spiritual birth. Certainly there are still others out there like he was. Only God knows which of them he'll truly bring to him like he did my friend. I agree, I think somewhere there is a verse indicating how shameful it will be for these, but I can't remember where.Respectfully

quote:

---

I was trying to get them to pray to him, because I know they would get a response.

---

I have prayed to Jesus, but I didn't get a response.

quote:

---

I can appreciate how unfair this may seem as none of us that we're chosen were called into the family of God on merit. The elect we're simply let off the hook for the punishment they were created to deserve since the fall of man. This isn't an easy pill for me to swallow as there are inevitably people I know and care about that share the fate of being damned.

---

Wow, what a nonsensical religion you ascribe to with a cruel and illogical God.However sad you feel, thought, at the notion that your loved ones are going to suffer for all eternity, ou can be assured in your own salvation, so it's not really THAT bad, right? Seems like a smug religion, too.

quote:

---

A friend at my church relayed to me a story that might help illustrate this. The process of her becoming a Christian extended over some period of time. Prior to her being led to pray the sinners prayer and receiving the spiritual birth she recanted the story of trying to read parts of the bible and concluding that she couldn't reconcile or make sense of any of it, thinking my goodness, this is the book I'm supposed to rely on? A short time later she experienced the spiritual birth and not long after tried reading the bible again. This time the words appeared to be leaping off the page to her as she had been given the required spiritual discernment to appreciate it.

​

The point here is that unless you become born of the spirit it is pointless for me to try to prove the validity of scripture to you.

---

quote:

---

I know of many miracles in my church, ranging from some people being freed from substance abuses, sexual sins and addictions, healed marriages, etc. In my case I would submit to you that but for the grace of God freeing my from various sins, I would probably be in jail right now instead of corresponding with you in an internet forum.

---

Sounds like communal reinforcement, self-deception, wishful thinking, reliance on testimonials, confirmation bias to me, which are all irrational ways of thinking.communal reinforcement - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com"Communal reinforcement is the process by which a claim becomes a strong belief through repeated assertion by members of a community."self-deception - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com"Self-deception is the process or fact of misleading ourselves to accept as true or valid what is false or invalid. Self-deception, in short, is a way we justify false beliefs to ourselves.wishful thinking - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com"Wishful thinking is interpreting facts, reports, events, perceptions, etc., according to what one would like to be the case rather than according to the actual evidence."anecdotal (testimonial) evidence - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com"Testimonials and vivid anecdotes are one of the most popular and convincing forms of evidence presented for beliefs in the transcendent, paranormal, and pseudoscientific.

​

The testimonial of personal experience in paranormal or supernatural matters has no scientific value. If others cannot experience the same thing under the same conditions, then there will be no way to verify the experience. If there is no way to test the claims made, then there will be no way to tell if the experience was a delusion or was interpreted correctly. If others can experience the same thing, then it is possible to make a test of the testimonial and determine whether the claim based on it is worthy of belief."confirmation bias - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com"Confirmation bias refers to a type of selective thinking whereby one tends to notice and to look for what confirms one's beliefs, and to ignore, not look for, or undervalue the relevance of what contradicts one's beliefs."Lastly, there is an interesting discussion of miracles on that site, which concludes with the following paragraph:miracle - The Skeptic's Dictionary - Skepdic.com"Of course there is another constant, another product of uniform experience which should not be forgotten: the tendency of people at all times in all ages to desire wondrous events, to be deluded about them, to fabricate them, create them, embellish them, enhance them, and come to believe in the absolute truth of the creations of their own passions and heated imaginations. Does this mean that miracles cannot occur? Of course not. It means, however, that when a miracle is reported the probability will always be greater that the person doing the reporting is mistaken, deluded or a fraud than that the miracle really occurred. To believe in a miracle, as Hume said, is not an act of reason but of faith."------------------
"Evolution is a 'theory', just like gravity. If you don't like it, go jump off a bridge."

Yes, it was as real (at least the perceived experience; it may have been a burp or an estatic reaction to being able to get rid of my problems, rather than face them), and I was sincere; I'm quite sure that many if not most of the members of this forum can briefly document testimonies that share a common thread. That we discovered god wasn't really there.
My 'apostasy' is not in response to a tragic event or a horrifying experience, either. Once I shed the fear of an eternity in hell and just started asking the tough questions, the answers were always evasive.
Like the current question; Brian in post 23 brought up the problem he sees with predestination and I agree with him. How is that we mere mortals can see such obvious problems with christianity (just to be able to get to the point that we can believe), yet Christ asks us to approach him with the faith as a child? In short, why were we created with brains and an inquisitive nature if we are to take what appears to be the most important decision in our lives, on faith?

Schrafinator,You have a real passion for insulting the beliefs that others cherish. First the comment about the justification for suicide bombing, and now all Christians are in the business of self desception. I don't think this is becoming of your intrinsic goodness. Furthermore, while you've raised some interesting points that I would normally be happy to address, I don't think doing so with you would be a valuable use of time.Matthew 7:6: "Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw your pearls before swine, or they will trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces."[This message has been edited by kevstersmith, 09-19-2003]

Forgive me for saying this, but it's that kind of attitude that turns casual skeptics into hostile skeptics. You just dismissed schraf as unworthy of your time because you didn't like some things she said, and quoted a verse where she is clearly described as both a pig and a dog. Think about it.

"but even the dogs under the table eat the children's crumbs."Brian

I can appreciate that and I certainly wouldn't do that to just anyone, but I think, considering the suicide bomber and self deception comments, Schraf may already be hostile. This is unfortunate because he or she does appear somewhat intelligent.Respectfully

The context of the verse I cited is completely different from the verse you're referencing. I think the pearls to pigs verse specifically refers to someone that is being nasty or inconsiderate to what you're trying to share. Whereas the verse you're referring to is talking about someone, a samaritan, that is looking to receive the truth out of humility in regard to their position.Respectfully

Hi,I respectfully disagree.The Matthew verse was specifically for the Jews. This was when Jesus was solely interested in saving the House of Israel.The Mark reference is when the Syrophoenician woman pointed out a flaw in Jesus' thinking, prompting Jesus to change his entire mission.Brian