Newsgroups: bit.listserv.christia
Date:         Thu, 5 Nov 1992 08:37:23 CST
From:         Michael Million <MM24681@UAFSYSB.BITNET>
Subject:      Free Will and Predestination

 Dave replies:
 >Obviously you have not been following the posts as of late.  I think
 >you'd find you are in a comfortable majority.

 I have been following the posts lately, Dave, I guess I mistook the
 quiet for agreement (obviously incorrect on my part).  I see that most
 of you feel this is an issue of free will *versus* predestination - I
 am starting to understand and I appreciate your help.  I also know
 why you all are confusing the issues because elements of *both* are
 correct - we'll get to that I'm sure.  Your use of the word
 _comfortable_ seems a bit ironic since, as I understand your position,
 it appears that you 'predestination' folks would be the ones who are
 very comfortable -- since not only does God keep an 'eye' on you, he
 even makes every decision for you - now _that_ is comfortable.  Every
 key stroke, every thought, every decision (i.e. which shampoo to use),
 God shows you the right move... to me, that is comfort.  I, on the
 other hand, must attempt to find the will of God in my personal life
 on a moment by moment basis.  Perhaps you should characterize us as
 the 'uncomfortable majority.' :)

 >> God and the Trinity personalities have created in the early periods
 >> of eternity (granted a difficult concept to grasp) millions upon
 >> millions of *divinely perfect* beings ... [deletion of following
 >>text]

 >Mike, in all seriousness, you got me there -- my sensibility meter
 >went off the scale with that one.

 I have to agree that I probably miswrote when I typed "God and the
 Trinity personalities" - If that is the cause of your consternation
 please forgive this poor brother for typing/thinking too fast.  The
 Trinity personalities are a fascinating topic which I hope we will
 get into some eon soon, but I do realize that I should have said
 something more like 'God _as_ the Trinity personalities' or perhaps
 even better would have been to leave the Trinity out of my statement
 altogether.  I hope your sensibility meter will recover; my point
 was to mention that God has had many an age of satisfaction in the
 pleasure of having surrounded Himself with perfectly created beings.
 This has been done.  The Sons' gift to Him were in creating imperfect
 beings (like ourselves) who can come to recognize and accept the
 Father; in that, there is an extra degree of pleasure for God.
 <The Trinity personalities: the Universal Father, the Eternal Son,
 the Infinite Spirit>.

 No comment on the notions about belief as opposed to faith?

 >Not Paul's words, but God's words.  Paul says nothing that Jesus has
 >not already said (John 8:37-47).  How could he?  If he did, it would
 >be a different gospel.

 I think most scholars attribute the NT to mortal writers; I feel
 certain that if God and/or Jesus had directly dictated the writing of
 this work there would be little doubt.  Your assumption that Paul said
 nothing that Jesus didn't say is part of the problem; you are laying
 odds on a mortal about issues that concern your recognition of eternal
 spiritual values.  I simply cannot do that.  If Jesus had wanted to
 leave a book for us I believe he would have left little doubt about
 his authorship; fact is, Jesus made every effort to leave no writings
 behind - part of the bestowal mandate.  I'm sure the NT is inspired
 but that is far different from direct revelation and while it can be
 claimed to be a 'gospel' - it is not _the Gospel_ of Jesus.  It is
 more _about_ Jesus than _of_ Jesus.  Big difference.

 >And the debate rages: intrinsic righteousness or extrinsic
 >righteousness?  If it's the latter then you have a sound argument.
 >If it's the former then you have a significant problem.

 It is both, and one day you and I will laugh about it together, if
 not here, then somewhere.  The intrinsic righteousness of man lies
 in the indwelling Father fragment, of which you and most others do not
 recognize the importance.  The Father fragment carries the divine
 plan of initial life for each mortal, to be utilized or not depending
 on the degree of the mortal's submission to the will of the Father.
 This divine plan for each mortal is the predestined portion of each of
 us.  Since we are on a planet which has seen rebellion by its celestial
 administrators, we are disadvantaged in some ways (advantaged in
 others) including the loss of the planned genetic uplifting which was
 to have been carried out by Adam and Eve.  The upgrade in mortal
 vehicles (host physical bodies) would have gained us the added
 spiritual receptivity to 'hear' the Father fragment more clearly.
 We have been infused with but a small portion of the 'blood of Adam.'

 >For me, and I think most predestinarians, we are conceived in sin and
 >therefore inherently evil -- there is no righteousness -- none, zero.
 >We are born as slaves to sin, and we do the bidding of our father the
 >devil.  <...some text deleted>  In this new life we are
 >not free to do as we please, but we are free to serve God, our new
 >Father.  Either we serve God or we serve the devil.  The issue is not
 >"freewill," but who is your master.

 We simply disagree.  We are God's children, made in His image and I
 feel certain we are conceived according to His wishes.  We may be
 'slave' to animalistic, nature-of-the-flesh desires, but these are
 transient and even necessary conditions, through which we learn in this
 initial life to recognize the higher spiritual truths and values.  How
 can you say that we are inherently evil? - do you not believe that we
 are made in His image?  Natural urges can be mastered by the mind.

 Please answer:
 What do you have to give to God if it is not the submission of your
 sovereign will? (What are you offering to God if not this most sublime
 attribute of man?) How can you give Him anything if you have no
 part in the decisions in your life.  And lastly, what shampoo is it
 that God chooses for you?

 Your confusion, to sum, lies IMO in the incomplete understanding of
 the following concepts:
         1. the Father fragment indwelling each mortal and the plan
              this entity carries
         2. the ascension plan for mortals on the evolutionary realms
              after this initial life
         3. the divine link of creature and Creator/ the true religious
              experience
         4. acceptance of mortal literature as 'Divine Word'
         5. His request that we submit our will to His
         6. the dual nature of man: flesh and spirit.

    (I'll stop here.)           in brotherhood,  Michael Million
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU