You’re right, I agree, you have convinced me. What the ramification of that are, remain for me to investigate.
Thanks 
Then what of these statements, are they logical? Were they true in the moment they were said?
Matthew 26:34, "Jesus said to him, ‘Truly I say to you that this very night, before a rooster crows, you will deny Me three times.’ "
I would contend that Peter’s fall was not only foreknown, but predetermined by the influences of our sovereign God. Or how about this statement…
Philippians 2:10, "So that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth,’ "
The reason I am 100% confident that all mankind will be brought to obedient submission and worship of Christ is because God wills it to be. The reason I am a universalist is because God’s promise, will, and purpose cannot be thwarted.
I can hardly believe that you would trust your eternal destiny to your own ability to keep a promise or to reform yourself! Do we depend upon God or ourselves?
If Peter’s fall was predetermined, then Peter had no choice but to fall. Also the ideas that his fall was predetermined implies that God caused him to deny his Master. That makes God the author of sin. I have too high a regard for God’s character to accept that. But to answer your question, no the sentence was not true the moment it was said. Jesus made a prediction. Jesus knew Peter’s character; He knew Peter’s impulsiveness; He knew Peter was likely to cave under pressure. But you ask, how could He predict that it would be three times? Matthew wrote his memoir of Christ many years after the event occurred. I suggest that Matthew knew Peter had denied Christ three times, and so he “remembered” that Jesus said he would deny Him three times. But Jesus may not have said “three times.” Notice that Mark, who probably got his information from Peter, said, "And Jesus said to him, “Truly, I tell you, this very night, before the rooster crows twice, you will deny me three times.” (Mark 14:30). So how many times did the rooster crow before Peter denied Him? Once? Or twice? Either Matthew or Mark had to be mistaken. So it may be that they thought they remembered that our Lord said “deny me three times” when He may not have said so. Then why did both of them say that Jesus said “three times”? Again, I think they thought they remembered Him saying “three times” because Peter actually did deny Him three times.
I regard the sentence as true because God intends that it will happen, and so He will continue to work on everyone to influence them to be reconciled to Him. He will do whatever it takes to see that that happens. However, God doesn’t directly cause each person to submit to the authority of Christ and become His disciple. Rather He influences each person and will continue to do so until they submit. Each person will of his own free will choose to submit or continue to rebel. But God will never give up on the rebels. He will provide love, discomfort, or whatever influence has its effect. He will do His very best for each individual until all repent and bow the knee.
Whatever gave you the idea that I do? I have consistently said that God will not do it unilaterally, and that we cannot do it unilaterally. Monergism won’t work. Rather as Paul said, “Working together with Him (synergism), I entreat you not to accept the grace of God in vain.” (2 Cor 6:1) If we coöperate with the divine grace of God it won’t be in vain. With God’s grace, we will succeed!
I hear you saying that you and God together accomplish your salvation. Sorry can’t go there. For some reason you are avoiding the praise due Christ in Romans 11:36.
Jeff, when you use the term ‘salvation’ - are you referring to the initial act of saving faith, or are you also including sanctification and growth as a Christian?
Jeff, Paul is not talking about salvation in Rom 11:36; he is talking about material things:
Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid? For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen. (Rom 11:35,36)
Nobody can give a material gift to God. It’s no use in trying to give Him a lamb (in sacrifice) or money or anything else, because absolutely every created thing had its origin in Him, even though they were created through His Son.
I agree that we cannot exist without God, but according to Genesis 2:7 God put life into man in the beginning when He breathed into his nostrils the breath of life. I also believe that God gave us (His sons) life in ourselves for the following reasons.
Genesis 1:11 Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to it’s kind, whose seed is in itself on the earth.”, and it was so.
Genesis 5:1 In the day that God created man, He made him in the likeness of God.
If everything on the earth has the seed of it’s kind in itself, then this includes man. We have the seed of God in us.
We are also capable of love, compassion, forgiveness etc.
Luke 8:11 Now the parable is this: the seed is the word of God.
The seed must be watered in order for it to grow. When we follow God’s word, we produce the fruit of the Spirit.
Deuteronomy 30:14-15 But the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may do it. See I have set before you today life and good, death and evil.
From this verse I believe we have a choice.
Deuteronomy 10: 12 And now Israel, what does the Lord your God require of you but to fear the Lord your God, to walk in all His ways and to love Him, to serve the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul, and to keep His commandments.
These people were obviously able to love God.
That is really a kind of simplistic, and perhaps erroneous presentation of an alternate viewpoint you do not understand.
The problem with polarized opposites is that they disregard nuances and possibilities with self enforced limitations of perspective… The relationship of the salvation of all and the workings of God’s sovereign will with man’s will is not so complex. God certainly willed the salvation of all…but there remains a question concerning HOW did he will its fulfillment?
it is not so curious to believe that God, who as you assert, is omnipotent and omiscient, could grant a stewardship of will to a creation destined to be taught the glory of freedom- the freedom of love for God and for one another- the “glorious liberty of the children of God”. For freedom Christ has set you free.
The term “free”, joined to “will” in theological terminology is an unfortunate one, because it implies for some a status of independence from God’s action and intervention that does not exist- but it is nevertheless a necessary term because at some point, because in order to “agree” and to “serve” and to “love” there must be a freedom to choose.
So I believe God is executing the salvation of all by the glory of the revelation of Christ crucified, a universal testimony of His love that is drawing all men unto Him, “If I be lifted up from the earth I will draw all men unto me”…“The Lamb slain from the foundation of the world”. This not happening apart from God who is acting in time and in each life- nor is it occurring in a totally dictated machination. God doesnt work like tghat in my view, He is spirit, wind, water, fire.
The end is not, and never was in doubt,** God knowing all along that the superiority of love so transcends the chaos of self that His one great act of love would inexoranly draw all men into it, out of the bondage of futility(choosing self) into the harmony of choosing the love of God in Christ. This one great act of love being the Logos of God from the beginning**… the source from which all was created and the bosom unto which all creation must return as it learns, as it is revealed and unveiled, the glory of laying down ones life, yielding to God who is an infinte river of joy filled love- not by command, but because the lessons of futility and the answer of grace for the one who is instructed…“For this reason I am determined to know nothing else among you but Christ and Him crucified.”
In my opinion, it is not necessary to hold either view of the Calvinist/Arminian debate to embrace the salvation of all. It makes perfect sense from either view, if thoroughly presented. 
That may be a kind of simplistic, and perhaps erroneous presentation of an alternate viewpoint you may not understand.
The problem with polarized opposites is that they disregard nuances and possibilities with self enforced limitations of perspective… The relationship of the salvation of all and the workings of God’s sovereign will with man’s will is not all that complex. God certainly willed the salvation of all…but there remains an honest question, due valid discussion, as to HOW He has willed its fulfillment.
It is not so curious to believe that God, who as you agree, is omnipotent and omiscient, could grant a stewardship of will to a creation destined to be taught the glory of freedom- the freedom of love for God and for one another- the “glorious liberty of the children of God”. For freedom Christ has set you free.
Certainly anything placed in the hands of man is chaotic, but only until the man/woman is placed in the hands of God, at which point the man/woman becomes a child of God, a steward of the ministry of jesus Christ, inheriting all things in Christ, becoming a part of the reconciliation/restoration of all things. The children of God, having been set free, are destined to walk in and become distributors of the “glorious liberty of the children of God”, into which the whole creation is being set free(Romans 8).
The term “free”, joined to “will” in theological terminology is an unfortunate one, because it implies for some a status of independence from God’s action and intervention that does not exist- but it is nevertheless a necessary term because at some point, in order to “agree” and to “serve” and to “love” there must be a freedom to choose.
So I believe God is executing the salvation of all by the glory of the revelation of Christ crucified, a universal testimony of His love that is drawing all men unto Him, “If I be lifted up from the earth I will draw all men unto me”…“The Lamb slain from the foundation of the world”. This not happening apart from God who is acting in time and in each life- nor is it occurring in a totally dictated machination. God doesnt work like that in my view, He is spirit, wind, water, fire.
The end is not, and never was in doubt,** God knowing all along that the superiority of love so transcends the chaos of self that His one great act of love would inexoranly draw all men into it, out of the bondage of futility(choosing self) into the harmony and freedom of choosing the love of God in Christ. This one great act of love being the Logos of God from the beginning**… the source from which all was created and the bosom unto which all creation must return as it learns, as it is revealed and unveiled, the glory of laying down ones life, yielding to God who is an infinte river of joy filled love- not by command, but because the lessons of futility and the answer of grace for the one who is instructed…“For this reason I am determined to know nothing else among you but Christ and Him crucified.”
In my opinion, it is not necessary to hold either view of the Calvinist/Arminian debate to embrace the salvation of all. It makes perfect sense from either view, if thoroughly presented.
From this perspective, the overall sovereignty of God is meted out within the choices of a learning creation, taught thru chaos to embrace the harmony of light- sacrificial love, bowing the knee of self to Christ and Him crucified; Embracing the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.
IMO you have a nuanced and balanced perspective.
it is not so curious to believe that God, who as you assert, is omnipotent and omiscient, could grant a stewardship of will
Certainly not curious that God could do such a thing. But instead curious that any would hold the position in light of the Scripture’s repeated assertion that we do not have the ability to change our own nature. Why is the good news that God is the heart changer so offensive?
but it is nevertheless a necessary term because at some point, in order to “agree” and to “serve” and to “love” there must be a freedom to choose.
Yes certainly we choose to reciprocate love for God and hopefully pursue it with zeal. However, in you own words you say that this happens when “The children of God, having been set free…”. So do you agree that we are not free until the Holy Spirit sets each individual free from enmity toward God?
The only point I am making is that the great confidence we have that all will be finally saved is because God has determined to make it happen. Without his determination we would all continue hiding from him with our fig leaves.
You suggest that I don’t understand.
Someone once suggested that true free will would be evidenced if the chooser could ultimately choose for or against God. Is that your understanding of whether someones will is truly free? However, I am convinced that, first, God has already decided on the basis of the death of Christ that no one will be lost eternally. Yet our first born will is lost from loving God until we are born again. Thankfully God did not even consider our will as he made payment for our sin. And second no one will be able to resist his overwhelming loving persuasion and pursuit of relationship with us. While we do our best to run from God, he runs the faster to overtake us. Our will is unable to finally resist his effective grace.
As I understand it… freewill means nothing more than “I can make independent choices for myself”. I can choose to jump off this planet, there is however the force of nature that counteracts my choice i.e., gravity. Just because my choice is affected by an outside force it would be a stretch to say gravity nullifies my freewill choice… it simply affects it. Thus there are bounds beyond which my freewill struggles to go… that does not mean I don’t have freewill, it just means there can be parameters wherein my freewill choices work. As a kid I was FREE to roam my back yard at my leisure, there were however fences that at a given point refrained my choices, so I adapted my choices; one day “I CHOSE” to climb over that fence.
Revelation (insight) helps direct our choices… someone might well be an enemy of God “in their mind” (Col 1:21), but come to a rather differing conclusion “about God” upon greater education or revelation of the mind, wherever that may occur.
So if we hold that an individual will never choose to love God apart from a specific heart changed caused by the Holy Spirit, then is their will free? Instead the mind of natural man is fenced in to carnality, a fence he can never climb over, but can only be lifted over by the Holy Spirit. You mention education and revelation. It is an essential point that one cannot be educated to Christianity. Though God may use education, education alone remains in the natural dimension, but the supernatural is needed for conversion. That is the meaning of 1 Corinthians 2:14.
I apologize, but I am saying the same things over and over again and probably not helping anyone. Ironically I am trying to educate others about God’s amazing grace, when supernatural persuasion is needed.
Hi Jeff. That’s one of the problems I have with the concept of ‘no free will’. Everything then becomes God’s responsibility. Whilst some are ‘proud’ to say that it removes any input/responsibility in the process of our own salvation, by the same token, it must also remove any responsibility for our own sin.
I’ve read the thread and I still cannot see any problem with believing in universalism AND the Arminian’s view of freewill.
Hmmm instead the point of grace is that God made a way to forgive what should have been damned. His absolute holiness cannot withstand the least blemish. We are responsible for our sin and in light of God’s holiness ought to be damned because of it. Yet his amazing grace made the way to forgive sin through Christ. He removed our responsibility / penalty for our actions and substituted the responsibility of Christ. The boast of the Christian is not that I am no longer responsible, but a boast and praise that Christ accomplished what we could could not accomplish. He freely willed our salvation.
Ironically IMO it’s the “sin consciousness” of evangelicalism that feels the needs for this to be done… neglectfully forgetting Jesus “put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself” – grace!! Flog (revive/resurrect) ‘sin consciousness’ and there’s always “works” to do… the very thing religion thrives on; but as always to the detriment of God’s free creation.
I do not claim to know where the line is between where God’s sovereign will and whatever degree of autonomy He has given towards man. I just see that it is clear in the language of scripture that man has a choice on some level, even on a daily basis. What I wrote was a paradigm presenting a stewardship of will given unto man by God- so obviously God reigns supreme- but He has left man a choice. Without such a consideration so much of the scripture is just nonsense.
For this reason I tend to reject blanket complete determinism by God or by man, but I reject total determinism by God because I believe He works in another way- not because of any limit upon Him, beyond His own desire to teach us to be His children through stewardship. I don’t think God ever had any doubt as to what every being would eventually choose because He knows the limits of His creation and the overwhelming superiority of light to darkness and love to hate and harmony to chaos. He has set it up this way from the beginning.
My point also, is that making UR dependent on one view or another of the debate about man’s will and God’s will, is unnecessary because universal reconciliation is demonstrable in either paradigm.
When you speak of the assertions of scripture, you have to realize that this particular discussion usually ends in two polarized points of view throwing up scriptures that seem to contradict one another.
Of course sound hermeneutics and exegesis demand that the truth incorporate all the scriptures.
So even if we are to see man’s will as a bubble, maintained by God within an infinitley greater bubble of His own higher will and ways(the scripture definitely asserts that His ways are higher and that no one completely knows His mind) we must acknowledge that our choices are a part of the way God works- or else the scriptures are broken.
His thoughts are higher than our thoughts.
At some points we must simply acknowledge all the assertions of scripture do integrate into a larger, or higher, or deeper paradigm than we presently understand-
But in seeking that understanding we cannot disregard scriptures inconvenient to our view- as if the truth was a matter of a majority of verses. That is just settling short of the peak, making camp below Zion, refusing to take another step through the wilderness, cuttin it outta whole cloth.
As far as suggesting you dont understand… obviously if we disagree there is something one of us doesnt understand- but probably some things both of us dont understand- but my point was that your definition of the view of universalism + free will was incorrect or incomplete, as if perhaps you didnt understand the perspective you were describing.
It is difficult to discuss a difference in viewpoint when your presentation of the other view is inaccurate- so I fleshed it out a bit to give it some visible form as it really exists in my mind- which doesnt make it correct/true… just makes the point of view more legible for another considering the issue.
Can you then show me one Scripture that teaches that man has the ability to love God without the Holy Spirit first changing his nature? I understand the human logic and reasoning above, but can you provide a Scripture?
I have shown you Scriptures above that do teach that regeneration by the Holy Spirit is essential or we remain dead to the things of God. This part of the discussion would naturally lead to the extent of the depravity of man’s nature and how did it become depraved.
Also the word ‘determinism’ misses the beauty of the Holy Spirit’s work in transforming individuals as if God painted check marks in our lives with a paint roller. I am sorry that you use this word. John 3 instead uses the beautiful picture of the wind that blows where it pleases. Of course both the will of a house painter and the will of a fine artist are the reason that paint is applied. However, the house painter is just getting a job done whereas the artist is expressing beauty. I prefer to think of God’s sovereign will in transforming lives and bringing individuals through the new birth as the artistry of the Holy Spirit. Or as John 3 explains, like the wind that blows gently through tree leaves or rips trees from the ground when a hurricane blows. But again the point is that if the wind does not blow, there is no transformation.
Romans 13-15 For not the hearers of the law are just in the sight of God, but the DOERS of the law will be justified. For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, BY NATURE do the things contained in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, who show the work of the law WRITTEN IN THEIR HEARTS, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thought accusing or else excusing them.
It is by the grace of God that He came to give us His word. We can choose to believe it and thus follow it, or we can choose to disregard it and continue on our own path which leads to destruction. There are many people who have gone to their graves, refusing to change in any way, shape or form. If we choose to sit around waiting for some sudden transformation to take place, we may be waiting for a long time because God already showed us the path that leads us to salvation. He said “Follow Me.”