Predestination Is God's Identification As The true and Living God

[Zaatar71]

and isolate it from the rest of the Bible?? Whatever suits your argument the best, I suppose.

I did not say isolate it from the rest of the bible did I? I am being open with you, but perhaps you have trouble dealing with that openess? We had a good discussion going on, but this looks like where you are attempting to get out fof the discussion without following through? let's see where you go here!

You have biased the question intentionally. You have already decided that the two options you gave are opposed to each other. What if the text informs us that all men ever born, are the objects of this text?

That is what we are trying to iron out.

You have excluded this possibility and before we argue the point, let's assume it is the right position. you will miss it because for you, it is not an option.
Let's start on an even plane to be honest with ourselves.
I'll rephrase your question for you.
What does this text say, and who are the objects of this text, does the text inform us as to who it is? Is it all men ever born, or not?

LET'S LOOK- (absolutely)


rom51-5

Absolutely, the first five verses in the first paragraph talk about believers. ok, we agree here, good.

Ro 5:6 ¶

The "we," who are believers, are added into a different group. Believers are not the ungodly.

Here we differ. Ben all the elect sinners were ungodly before salvation came to them. Notice he still uses the term ..WE...1. jUST read again from verse 1, down through vs.11....... we and us, are the justified elect, who were dead in Sins, but now are made alive by new birth.

This clearly is talking about believers when they were not believers. The real question is, are these exclusively unbelieving future believers or are they included in the unbelieving ungodly?

Yes, it is. We see that before and after this chapter, but let's stay right here for now.

The question remains at this point. Let's keep going.

Ro 5:7 ,8

Yes, the letter is addressed "To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints," (Rom.1:7).

Yes, it is!

That Jesus died for believers is not in question.

okay, we both agree on that. Anyone who believes shows that Jesus died for them.

Who is described as ungodly(v.6), and sinners (v.8) is the question.

I will suggest to you that it does not jump from elect sinners, to all men, and back to elect sinners. It is one smooth thought. The "we" and "us"are the saints.

 

[Zaatar71]

There is still nothing new added in this. The question remains.

Ro 5:9

8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

The we and us, is right on in this context. It is the saints, who used to be ungodly sinners, who are saved from Sin by God.
Ben even if you do not believe this yet, I just want to show that I have no need to jump out of the context. Before you object, just take note, that I and most of the calvinists you find here, will basically see and say the same things. The idea that we force it, is mistaken, We read it in context. of chap.5, as well as the whole book, and bible.

I agree that not all people are justified.

Okay, we agree on another big point, this is good.

Scripture is clear that there are unbelievers who are judged

Yes, and yet some try and deny judgment is coming.

the people that are justified are not all people.
The question remains.

Ro 5:10,11

Here is that other group of people again. Enemies. Now has Christ died for all the enemies or just the enemies who He selected?
Again, nothing extra is added. there is still the possibility that while "we" were the enemies, "we" were offered reconciliation with the rest of the enemies, or is this invitation exclusive to the selected?

We were all enemies by birth .Rom:8:7

Ro 5:12

The Calvinist mut break from His definition of all in this verse. If he does not, He merely believes that

have sinned and are under the penalty of death. It would be glaringly wrong for the Calvinist not to break from his adopted definition imposed on the text at this point. My question is why does the Calvinist have to carry two definitions for the word all?

Ben there are two circles, or groups in view. All who remain in Adam, by physical birth, then in the second circle or group who have been translated by new birth, to now be found In Christ, as was ordained by God before the world was.
So two groups, All in Adam, All in the last Adam.

Ro 5:13 ,14

These verses include both the "future believer" and the "never believer" into the same group. Death reigned means that all were under the same condemnation and without hope

yes, it does mean that.

Ro 5:15,16

Here is a difference made between salvation and sin. "Not as." This means that sin and salvation have different effects. Sin and death are on all men because all sin. Because we have sinned, we are judged. We reap what we sow. Salvation on the other hand is a gift and we reap it where we don't sow. They are different.
But there are similarities at the same time. Many were made sinners and many were made righteous. Surely, it could have said all were made sinners but many made righteous, especially since few there be that go in thereat and not many. There is a bit of poetry of words here. Many are sinners and many are righteous tells us that the gift applies to the group and not merely a selection out of the group. the application of the gift is dependent rather on acceptance of the gift over just being included in a group by description.
Many=Many. Sin affects many, gift affects the same group of many. Qualifiers follow in the next verses.

Among ALL men,,,many are saved in Jesus, many remain in the realm of death. One word many, two groups of people...do you see it a little bit now?

Ro 5:17

The saved are described as they which receive and not described as they which are elect. (election is for adoption see Romans 8 for adoption context with election)(Romans 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.)

Ro 5:18

This passage gives no statement of "Not as." Again, all=all. Judgement came to all (each and every, not "All men, rich, poor, young, old, jew/ gentile...all men , all nations, but not every single person born") men. In the same way, all=all, the righteousness of one is able to affect all (each and every, not "All men, rich, poor, young, old, jew/ gentile...all men , all nations, but not every single person born") men.
The question is answered. Christ's offer of salvation extends as far as the offense.
You would need to finish the paragraph to understand this answer.

Apply what we have discussed to this section...All men divided into two groups

Ro 5:19

Many =many. The obedience reaches as far as the disobedience. Again, verse 17 gives a qualifier. the grace must be received, not like the curse of a punch in the face that you didn't ask for, or like the blessing of the shower given to the college roommate forced into the shower because he does not know what soap is. It is offered as a gift. Revelation 21:6 And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.

Ro 5:20 ,21

Yes disobedience spread to all men born in Adam, that is all natural men ever born. The All In Christ, are those who of the Spirit. That is not those who remain dead in sin, dead in Adam.

We are given once more the extent of the reach of God's Grace. "As sin reigned." It came on all men. in the same way, as sin reigned, grace "might" reign through righteousness. Note that it does not say that grace will reign. it says it can. if it can, it is for all (each and every, not "All men, rich, poor, young, old, jew/ gentile...all men , all nations, but not every single person born")

God is able to save to the uttermost ,them that come to God by him...Heb.7:22-25

Do you believe Scripture?

Of course I do.

or do you have your own "Calvinist glasses" interpretation?

No, I just find that many of who you call Calvinists, read the bible with correct lens on,

can you read Scripture without doing this thing you say you do?

Can you drop Calvin and read Scripture?

Can you find any post where I quoted Calvin? I do not recall one post that does this.

I ask you to apply the same logic to yourself.

I do

I will let the above discourse on the chapter answer this. I recommend finishing the paragraph (in and of Scripture) before answering.
Please read and reread the whole two paragraphs in chapter 5. Do it as many times as you have to. Pray about it and ask God to show you what are the limits of His mercy and grace.

I have outlined this chapter over 35 years ago, and still work through it.

I have done this before. I stop when Calvin begins to say "The Holy Spirit used the wrong word, like usual."

There are too many things that Calvinists cannot explain. Using Scripture,

Start a thread on that, and let's see if the Calvinists use scripture or Calvin.

I cannot be honest with myself and the text and claim to see the same things.
Let's not pull a bit out of one paragraph and a bit out of another paragraph and change the meanings of what is said by merging two thoughts into the same.

Show where I went outside chapter 5...???

 

[Ben1445]

I did not say isolate it from the rest of the bible did I?

You only wanted to use the first 11 verses of the chapter. You told me to read verses 5-6 which are parts of different paragraphs. you are breaking up the context not finding it.

I am being open with you, but perhaps you have trouble dealing with that openess?

I have no trouble dealing with it. You said that the verses are not isolated from the rest of the Bible and then said let's just look at this text. Yes, my comment was a little tongue in cheek. No I am not having an anxiety attack.

We had a good discussion going on, but this looks like where you are attempting to get out fof the discussion without following through? let's see where you go here!

I am not trying to get out of it. I followed through and went beyond the few verses you didn't address. I included the entire second paragraph for context. I would like to have left the verses quoted in the post but I ran out of characters.
I don't think you answered me very well.
I thought it was pretty clear in this chapter that the grace of God goes as far as the sin of man. You don't seem to address this inconvenient truth.

Here we differ. Ben all the elect sinners were ungodly before salvation came to them. Notice he still uses the term ..WE...1. jUST read again from verse 1, down through vs.11....... we and us, are the justified elect, who were dead in Sins, but now are made alive by new birth.

I think you are confused about what I said. I don't think we disagree on this point.
First of all, "elect sinners" is the problem. Please for the sake of argument refrain from using the terms in context as if they were established.
Election is as you will remember, the redemption of our bodies.(Romans 8)
Future believers were ungodly, no question. (while were yet sinners Christ died for us.) It is a non sequitur that Christ only died for the believer.
believers are then included in the group called the ungodly. I can see where you misunderstood what I meant. It could be read both ways.
I said, "The "we," who are believers, are added into a different group. Believers are not the ungodly." Because we were the ungodly, we are included in that group of ungodly. I am not trying to say that there is a separate group for the future believers. that is the exact opposite of what I intend to convey. We were no more than the ungodly and had nothing to differentiate us.

Yes, it is. We see that before and after this chapter, but let's stay right here for now.

You are too quick to jump to conclusions here, i think. you impose calvinism on the text by ignoring the context of this paragraph and cramming the text addressed to believers as believers into this chapter, which talks to the believers about when they were not believers.

I will suggest to you that it does not jump from elect sinners, to all men, and back to elect sinners. It is one smooth thought. The "we" and "us"are the saints.

Here we do disagree. We were all sinners. it is all the same people that Jesus died for. You believe God has determined that some believe. If it is determined and there is no choice, they are forced to be believers whether you like it or not.
You also must then believe that God has determined that the sinners remain sinners. These also have no choice but are doomed to be sinners. Any invitation is then, not an invitation at all but a mockery of a witness, a lie.
I don't disagree that the we are the saints the letter is addressed to.
Follow me here. We were in the ungodly. Christ died for the sinners.
Ro 5:6 ¶ For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.
Ro 5:7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.
Ro 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
Notice what is being said in verse 7. the comparison is made for good and bad people and who is worth saving. emphasis is made that we were not worth saving, but Christ died for sinners. the purpose of these statements is not to say that "elect" people were died for. It is to say that we were sinners just like everyone else. To draw any more than that is to impose calvinism on the text.

 

[Zaatar71]

You only wanted to use the first 11 verses of the chapter. You told me to read verses 5-6 which are parts of different paragraphs. you are breaking up the context not finding it.

I have no trouble dealing with it. You said that the verses are not isolated from the rest of the Bible and then said let's just look at this text. Yes, my comment was a little tongue in cheek. No I am not having an anxiety attack.

I am not trying to get out of it. I followed through and went beyond the few verses you didn't address. I included the entire second paragraph for context. I would like to have left the verses quoted in the post but I ran out of characters.
I don't think you answered me very well.
I thought it was pretty clear in this chapter that the grace of God goes as far as the sin of man. You don't seem to address this inconvenient truth.

I think you are confused about what I said. I don't think we disagree on this point.
First of all, "elect sinners" is the problem. Please for the sake of argument refrain from using the terms in context as if they were established.
Election is as you will remember, the redemption of our bodies.(Romans 8)
Future believers were ungodly, no question. (while were yet sinners Christ died for us.) It is a non sequitur that Christ only died for the believer.
believers are then included in the group called the ungodly. I can see where you misunderstood what I meant. It could be read both ways.
I said, "The "we," who are believers, are added into a different group. Believers are not the ungodly." Because we were the ungodly, we are included in that group of ungodly. I am not trying to say that there is a separate group for the future believers. that is the exact opposite of what I intend to convey. We were no more than the ungodly and had nothing to differentiate us.


You are too quick to jump to conclusions here, i think. you impose calvinism on the text by ignoring the context of this paragraph and cramming the text addressed to believers as believers into this chapter, which talks to the believers about when they were not believers.

Here we do disagree. We were all sinners. it is all the same people that Jesus died for. You believe God has determined that some believe. If it is determined and there is no choice, they are forced to be believers whether you like it or not.
You also must then believe that God has determined that the sinners remain sinners. These also have no choice but are doomed to be sinners. Any invitation is then, not an invitation at all but a mockery of a witness, a lie.
I don't disagree that the we are the saints the letter is addressed to.
Follow me here. We were in the ungodly. Christ died for the sinners.
Ro 5:6 ¶ For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.
Ro 5:7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.
Ro 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
Notice what is being said in verse 7. the comparison is made for good and bad people and who is worth saving. emphasis is made that we were not worth saving, but Christ died for sinners. the purpose of these statements is not to say that "elect" people were died for. It is to say that we were sinners just like everyone else. To draw any more than that is to impose calvinism on the text.

Okay Ben. We have both had our say. Thanks for your attempted responses.

 

[Ben1445]

8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.

The we and us, is right on in this context. It is the saints, who used to be ungodly sinners, who are saved from Sin by God.

Because we are talking to believers yes. But it was the sinners that Jesus died for.

Ben even if you do not believe this yet, I just want to show that I have no need to jump out of the context. Before you object, just take note, that I and most of the calvinists you find here, will basically see and say the same things. The idea that we force it, is mistaken, We read it in context. of chap.5, as well as the whole book, and bible.

I hear you. I can even believe that your intentions are good. But you do look though your calvinist glasses and they darken your understanding of how far the Grace of God reaches.

Okay, we agree on another big point, this is good.

Yes, and yet some try and deny judgment is coming.

Wishful thinking is all I can say. I don't understand them either.

We were all enemies by birth .Rom:8:7

Which all? (tongue in cheek)
All means every person.

Ben there are two circles, or groups in view. All who remain in Adam, by physical birth, then in the second circle or group who have been translated by new birth, to now be found In Christ, as was ordained by God before the world was.
So two groups, All in Adam, All in the last Adam.

Like I said, you pick your definition of all based on the context you need to impose.
I can see those different groups. you defined them right here.
I don't see those definitions in Romans 5. you have imposed them.
You keep saying that believers were picked before the world began, but that doesn't make it so. It is very distracting to the conversation for you to introduce these glaringly obvious disagreements that are not brought out in the text by any stretch.

yes, it does mean that.

Among ALL men,,,many are saved in Jesus, many remain in the realm of death. One word many, two groups of people...do you see it a little bit now?

Where did you see the word among? or was that the calvinism imposing itself again? yes, of course it is.
Look at each statement. He opens with many and answers with many. he opens with all and he answers with all. they are the same groups. Many = Many. All=All. Please try to see what point is being made. this is important.
I have known and seen before I joined the BB what you are saying. I watch you overlay it onto the Scripture. I see very clearly what you are saying. I promise, I do. I wholly disagree with you right here.
Many does equal many. All does equal all.

Apply what we have discussed to this section...All men divided into two groups

I read this as avoiding having to answer. that may not be what you mean, or what you think you are thinking.
Go back over it and look at it again. look at the full meaning of each word. (try it from my side ) Notice the correlations between the words used and understand the extent of the reach of the grace of God.

Yes disobedience spread to all men born in Adam, that is all natural men ever born. The All In Christ, are those who of the Spirit. That is not those who remain dead in sin, dead in Adam.

You are comprehending the reading backwards. look at what the verse says and then what i said. Don't turn what I said around. read the verse. (try it again from my point of view, please.) The obedience of Christ can and does reach the extent of the disobedience of men. Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.

God is able to save to the uttermost ,them that come to God by him...Heb.7:22-25

Absolutely! Amen! This could apply to any of the sinners that Christ died for. All the ungodly that Christ died for.

Of course I do.

I knew you would say that. I wouldn't expect you to say anything different

No, I just find that many of who you call Calvinists, read the bible with correct lens on,

So your answer is both. You have claimed to be calvinist. I did not award you the title.

Can you find any post where I quoted Calvin? I do not recall one post that does this.

You have claimed his teachings. When I said Calvin, I was in that spot referring to Calvinism. I will try not to confuse the two again. It was my lazy abbreviation that hadn't quite gotten to "cal" yet.

I do

I have outlined this chapter over 35 years ago, and still work through it.

Start a thread on that, and let's see if the Calvinists use scripture or Calvin.

It is easier for me to spot your calvinism because i am watching for it. you are 35+ yrs accustomed to it.

Show where I went outside chapter 5...???

i did not say you went outside of chapter five. there are two complete paragraphs that make up chapter 5. You pulled some from the first which addresses believers as believers and used that to explain part of the second, when he is talking about believers before they were believers.

 

[Zaatar71]

Because we are talking to believers yes. But it was the sinners that Jesus died for.

I have concluded my interaction with Ben for now. Here are some reasons why. I have already pointed out from the text that all those saved , are saved from their sins. They were ungodly, before God saved them. All believers were born in sin. This poster ignores this and suggests otherwise.

I hear you. I can even believe that your intentions are good.

okay

But you do look though your calvinist glasses and they darken your understanding of how far the Grace of God reaches.

Again, this poster has a skewed view against large parts of scripture and seeks to hide them under what he defines as Calvinist glasses. It looks as if this is a deflection from the verses being discussed.

Wishful thinking is all I can say. I don't understand them either.

Which all? (tongue in cheek)
All means every person.

Whatever the poster means, it is now clear he has disengaged from the text and the discussion. The term All being used, is used to describe two groups of people in the context. ALL in Adam, All in Christ. All men are born natural in the first Adam. Only those born in The last Adam by new birth are the All in Christ. It cannot be written any clearer than it is. When someone does not like the clear teaching, they can only disengage from the text, or admit to the truth. At this .point, meaningful interaction has ceased

Like I said, you pick your definition of all based on the context you need to impose.

Here a failed argument is reheated. It did not succeed the first time, it will not succeed now. Let's see why it fails.

I can see those different groups. you defined them right here.
I don't see those definitions in Romans 5. you have imposed them.

Here, the poster goes into the ...I do not see them here defense! There are many things we do not see in each verse. For example, Romans does not use the term born again! Does that mean the truth of the new birth ceases when we get to Romans 5? Romans 5 does not discuss the Lord's supper, Or water baptism. Does that mean they disappear? Truth does not vanish because it is not repeated in each verse. Truth once established remains. When someone tries to employ this , they have withdrawn from meaningful discussion!

You keep saying that believers were picked before the world began, but that doesn't make it so.

I believe what scripture declares, that is what makes it so! Your denial does not cancel it out! This verse does not vanish because you and others deny it;2 tim.1:
9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

10 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:

It is very distracting to the conversation for you to introduce these glaringly obvious disagreements that are not brought out in the text by any stretch.

here is the faulty escape clause being employed. The whole bible outside of Romans 5 has ceased to exist, or have relavance according to this position. truth will not be found this way. So, the interaction has ceased.

Where did you see the word among? or was that the calvinism imposing itself again? yes, of course it is.

Here, missing the forest for the trees yet again. This will not do.

Look at each statement. He opens with many and answers with many. he opens with all and he answers with all. they are the same groups. Many = Many. All=All.

Here is direct error, because the poster does not want to admit the same word being used, to describe two groups, not one. This is the error of universalism. The interaction has ceased here.

Please try to see what point is being made. this is important.

I see what is being denied. The texts are very clear to any who follow it.

I have known and seen before I joined the BB what you are saying. I watch you overlay it onto the Scripture. I see very clearly what you are saying. I promise, I do. I wholly disagree with you right here.

You have a right to disagree with the truth as it is found in scripture. I and others cannot be of help to you once you go down that path.

Many does equal many. All does equal all.

You can say what you want about it ,of course! But there can be no agreement on that.

I read this as avoiding having to answer.

I think those who read these posts, and follow the text, will see right away, what is true and what is error, and why it is so. WE see which position avoids the text.

that may not be what you mean, or what you think you are thinking.
Go back over it and look at it again. look at the full meaning of each word. (try it from my side ) Notice the correlations between the words used and understand the extent of the reach of the grace of God.

God will save All He has purposed to save. The earlier texts prove that God has a complete plan and purpose. That is what Isaiah challenged those who made and followed Idols.

You are comprehending the reading backwards.

When people do not agree they have different viewpoints.

look at what the verse says and then what i said. Don't turn what I said around. read the verse. (try it again from my point of view, please.)

When a person comes to truth, error is easy to spot. I understand what you are offering and why it is has to be left behind.

The obedience of Christ can and does reach the extent of the disobedience of men. Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound.

Absolutely! Amen! This could apply to any of the sinners that Christ died for. All the ungodly that Christ died for.

That group is known as the Elect sheep. No more, no less. He died for ALL that were given to him.

I knew you would say that. I wouldn't expect you to say anything different

So your answer is both. You have claimed to be calvinist. I did not award you the title.

Those things I believe have been known and understood by that term. The term gets abused by those who fail to understand that the teaching is derived from scripture.

You have claimed his teachings.

My friend, I claim the bibles teaching. That Calvin and the reformers lived before me, and saw the same things, does not mean that i follow them rather than scripture. This should be obvious to any who are not hiding from truth and speaking of Calvin as a way to avoid the texts.
If you want to discuss calvin and His teaching start a thread on it. Stop using this excuse as a cover all.

When I said Calvin, I was in that spot referring to Calvinism. I will try not to confuse the two again. It was my lazy abbreviation that hadn't quite gotten to "cal" yet.

It is easier for me to spot your calvinism because i am watching for it. you are 35+ yrs accustomed to it.

labels can be helpful , but can also be abused.

i did not say you went outside of chapter five. there are two complete paragraphs that make up chapter 5.

The first 11 verses are dealing with those Justified persons. 12-21 show the two groups, what theologians call Federal headship. Google that term and you will find an avalanche of teaching on it. You will find that it supports the position I have put forth. The position did not originate with me, but rather scripture itself. Seeking to suggest these truths are fragmented, rather than complimentary, will not get itdone. That is why our interaction came to an end.

You pulled some from the first which addresses believers as believers and used that to explain part of the second, when he is talking about believers before they were believers.

Here you fragment what are two parts of the same teaching. This thread is about what Isaiah taught contrasting the God who ordains whatsoever comes to pass, and has complete knowledge of all things, because he is God indeed.

 

[Ben1445]

I have concluded my interaction with Ben for now. Here are some reasons why. I have already pointed out from the text that all those saved , are saved from their sins. They were ungodly, before God saved them. All believers were born in sin. This poster ignores this and suggests otherwise.

Enter the “Calvinist holier than thou” finish.
I did not suggest otherwise. You misread what I wrote. I clarified it and you don’t listen.
I will say it again very clearly.
Of course believers are all born in sin. It is foolish to believe that they were not. They do have to be saved from something, after all.
“All have sinned” means all.
But the original poster doesn’t pay attention to the words I use and what I have told him they mean. I have explained the chapter enough to shake his understanding of Calvinism and now he must ascribe any false doctrine that he can in order to persevere in his faith in Calvinism.

okay

Again, this poster has a skewed view against large parts of scripture and seeks to hide them under what he defines as Calvinist glasses. It looks as if this is a deflection from the verses being discussed.

The Calvinist has a skewed view against Scripture. My view is skewed against Calvinism.

Whatever the poster means,

It is clear to me that the original poster doesn’t follow the conversation.

it is now clear he has disengaged from the text and the discussion.

I have not been successfully indoctrinated is what he means. This is an evasion tactic to not answer questions that he cannot.

The term All being used, is used to describe two groups of people in the context. ALL in Adam, All in Christ. All men are born natural in the first Adam. Only those born in The last Adam by new birth are the All in Christ. It cannot be written any clearer than it is. When someone does not like the clear teaching, they can only disengage from the text, or admit to the truth. At this .point, meaningful interaction has ceased

The verse beging discussed, which by now the OPer has lost, is Rom. 5.12
So he would have me believe that
Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men in the first Adam, for that all men in the Last Adam have sinned:

This is clearly not what he means, but since he doesn’t follow the thread, he thinks that it don’t listen to him.
He is spouting Calvinism automatically and has stopped having a conversation. Default Calvinist movement.

Here a failed argument is reheated. It did not succeed the first time, it will not succeed now. Let's see why it fails.

He doesn’t believe that the Bible says what it means. I didn’t convince him. Let’s see why I failed.
(Yes, I keep handing back to him all his underhanded tricks)

Here, the poster goes into the ...I do not see them here defense!

Here the the original poster mocks and can’t answer.

There are many things we do not see in each verse. For example, Romans does not use the term born again!

We have not been using that term. The terms we were using were sufficient.

Does that mean the truth of the new birth ceases when we get to Romans 5?

Believers are born again. I assumed that we both knew that and didn’t think that was a problem.

Romans 5 does not discuss the Lord's supper, Or water baptism.

Well, we were talking about salvation. I don’t think your rabbit trails have anything to do with discussion only distraction.
And you have disengaged posting with me several times in your posts. So you don’t really care to stay on topic.

Does that mean they disappear? Truth does not vanish because it is not repeated in each verse.

Truth once established remains.

I said several times that you are using terms and beliefs that are Calvinist and not established truths. You are using terminology that can be used when you show the result of your arguments to be true. You put the end in the middle when you have not established it in the mind of the person who you are talking to. In other words you use your false endings to prove your false endings. They have no other basis in the argument.

When someone tries to employ this , they have withdrawn from meaningful discussion!

Running away while attempting to look like he won the argument.
Didn’t address the issue in the text. Just said that it is not a legitimate question.
Withdrawn from meaningful discussion means that the conversation is not going his way. It is pouting.

I believe what scripture declares,

You say it but you have not shown it to me.

that is what makes it so! Your denial does not cancel it out! This verse does not vanish because you and others deny it;2 tim.1:
9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,
10 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:

I don’t deny the verse. I deny your interpretation of it.
God gave the blessing to us in Christ.
Allow me an illustration,
John 10:9
I am the door: by me if any man enter in, he shall be saved, and shall go in and out, and find pasture.

(Although the word any is there and includes every possible person the Calvinist will deny it)
Illustration: in some old game shows, prizes were put behind different doors. The door you choose determines the outcome. The prizes are not owned by the contestants in the parking lot before they come in and play. The gifts are in the door.
Jesus is the door. The purpose and grace of God is in Him. When we are offered the choice, we don’t do it blindly or as victims of circumstance. We obtain all the gifts in Him.
In 2 Tim. 1.9, I deny your interpretation of it. We were not in Him before the world began. The grace of God for us was in Him. In this verse, you come closer than I do to teaching that believers are not sinners.

here is the faulty escape clause being employed. The whole bible outside of Romans 5 has ceased to exist, or have relavance according to this position. truth will not be found this way. So, the interaction has ceased.

It’s stopping again?
Truth must only be revealed through Calvin. If not by Calvin, there is no other way.
But my Bible says differently than yours. Jesus is the way in my Bible. Jesus was the propitiation for the whole world.

Here, missing the forest for the trees yet again. This will not do.

He inserted a word in the text and I caught him. This will never do. I will never make Calvinists cult member. (This disclaimer is to differentiate between those Calvinists who don’t mutilate the text by adding in words, and those who do)

Here is direct error, because the poster does not want to admit the same word being used, to describe two groups, not one. This is the error of universalism. The interaction has ceased here.

I have said many times that I am not a universalist. Statements I have made show that I am not a universalist. In an attempt to discredit me and not answer me, I am called a universalist.
We are going to stop talking again?

I see what is being denied. The texts are very clear to any who follow it.

The ones with your words or the words in Scripture?

You have a right to disagree with the truth as it is found in scripture. I and others cannot be of help to you once you go down that path.

I have tried to draw you back from your erring from the truth. Your heart is hardened and you remain stiff-necked in your mind that the grace of God is limited to some sinners and not any sinners.

You can say what you want about it ,of course! But there can be no agreement on that.

My point is that the Scripture says that the grace of God can reach every sinner. This is what you cannot accept. Why are Calvinist so intent on hating the people Jesus died for. I don’t understand this club mentality when it comes to salvation.

 

[Ben1445]

I think those who read these posts, and follow the text, will see right away, what is true and what is error, and why it is so.

I would agree but Calvinists so rarely come to a conversation without a deep seated bias.

WE see which position avoids the text.

Pat yourself on the back. But you are miles away from the group behind you that you call we.

God will save All He has purposed to save. The earlier texts prove that God has a complete plan and purpose. That is what Isaiah challenged those who made and followed Idols.

Acts 7:51
Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

This is an interaction was Stephen preaching to the people who stoned him. He must have been wrong about the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit didn’t want those people who resist Him. He only wants those he intends to save.
And you must deny this verse or make it sound foolish.
1 Timothy 2:4
Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

Calvinist interpretation. God wants all men in Christ to be saved. If we are in Christ we are saved.
God really means all men.

When people do not agree they have different viewpoints.

This is why you should explain from common ground.

When a person comes to truth, error is easy to spot. I understand what you are offering and why it is has to be left behind.

Then you would not be a persevering Calvinist and you might lose your salvation or find out that you are one of the ones who God hates.

That group is known as the Elect sheep. No more, no less. He died for ALL that were given to him.

In Calvinist circles.
For sure no less. This verse says more.
1 John 2:2
And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

Those things I believe have been known and understood by that term. The term gets abused by those who fail to understand that the teaching is derived from scripture.

You can claim knowledge of truth but that doesn’t make it your by saying it.

My friend, I claim the bibles teaching. That Calvin and the reformers lived before me, and saw the same things, does not mean that i follow them rather than scripture. This should be obvious to any who are not hiding from truth and speaking of Calvin as a way to avoid the texts.

Calvinism is not the text. They are different. That is why I talk about Calvinism and the texts as if they are different.

If you want to discuss calvin and His teaching start a thread on it. Stop using this excuse as a cover all.

It’s not a cover all. You claim his teachings. You are a Calvinist.

labels can be helpful , but can also be abused.

When you claimed Calvinism, I knew what you believed. When I confronted what you believed, you don’t like being called a Calvinist any more.

The first 11 verses

Are portions of two separate paragraphs that you keep pulling out of context

are dealing with those Justified persons.

5:6 “without strength” - not justified people.
5:6 “ungodly” - not justified people.
5:8 “yet sinners” - not justified people
5:10 “enemies” - not justified people

12-21 show the two groups, what theologians call Federal headship. Google that term and you will find an avalanche of teaching on it. You will find that it supports the position I have put forth. The position did not originate with me, but rather scripture itself. Seeking to suggest these truths are fragmented, rather than complimentary, will not get itdone. That is why our interaction came to an end.

Here you fragment what are two parts of the same teaching.

Calvinists teaching. Your teaching.

This thread is about what Isaiah taught contrasting the God who ordains whatsoever comes to pass, and has complete knowledge of all things, because he is God indeed.

God has knowledge of what I decide to do with the free will that He has given me. If I choose one thing God knows. If I choose another, God knows. It isn’t set in stone because God knows. God knows what has not happened. God knows what is not set in stone.
I am not a determinist. God is not either. He gives men a choice.

 

[Mikoo]

This has been a very informative discussion for me. Thank you both.
I have a question for Ben1445. How is that you heard the gospel and believed and another heard the same gospel but did not believe?

 

[Zaatar71]

This has been a very informative discussion for me. Thank you both.
I have a question for Ben1445. How is that you heard the gospel and believed and another heard the same gospel but did not believe?

Hello Mikoo,
Often a discussion can be helpful especially when truth is posted next to error. This thread started out with the premise from Isaiah, that the true and living God has ordained all things, and knows the end from the beginning, whereas the false gods, cannot know the future.
A person with correct theology, believes in the God who ordains and is in control of all things including the salvation of all the Sheep.

People who struggle with these truths, struggle with God Himself. They say they have a god, but their god does not do what the biblical God does.

Isa.41:11 Behold, all they that were incensed against thee shall be ashamed and confounded: they shall be as nothing; and they that strive with thee shall perish.

28 For I beheld, and there was no man; even among them, and there was no counsellor, that, when I asked of them, could answer a word.

29 Behold, they are all vanity; their works are nothing: their molten images are wind and confusion.

Isa.42:17 They shall be turned back, they shall be greatly ashamed, that trust in graven images, that say to the molten images, Ye are our gods.

When people turn from the True God, and suppress the truth, all that is left is error.
We know unsaved people deny these truths, but it is more sad when professed believers become unbelievers concerning truth.

 

[Mikoo]

Hello Mikoo,
Often a discussion can be helpful especially when truth is posted next to error. This thread started out with the premise from Isaiah, that the true and living God has ordained all things, and knows the end from the beginning, whereas the false gods, cannot know the future.
A person with correct theology, believes in the God who ordains and is in control of all things including the salvation of all the Sheep.

People who struggle with these truths, struggle with God Himself. They say they have a god, but their god does not do what the biblical God does.

Isa.41:11 Behold, all they that were incensed against thee shall be ashamed and confounded: they shall be as nothing; and they that strive with thee shall perish.

28 For I beheld, and there was no man; even among them, and there was no counsellor, that, when I asked of them, could answer a word.

29 Behold, they are all vanity; their works are nothing: their molten images are wind and confusion.

Isa.42:17 They shall be turned back, they shall be greatly ashamed, that trust in graven images, that say to the molten images, Ye are our gods.

When people turn from the True God, and suppress the truth, all that is left is error.
We know unsaved people deny these truths, but it is more sad when professed believers become unbelievers concerning truth.

Thank you for your response.

 

[Mikoo]

I would agree but Calvinists so rarely come to a conversation without a deep seated bias.


Pat yourself on the back. But you are miles away from the group behind you that you call we.

Acts 7:51
Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

This is an interaction was Stephen preaching to the people who stoned him. He must have been wrong about the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit didn’t want those people who resist Him. He only wants those he intends to save.
And you must deny this verse or make it sound foolish.
1 Timothy 2:4
Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

Calvinist interpretation. God wants all men in Christ to be saved. If we are in Christ we are saved.
God really means all men.

This is why you should explain from common ground.

Then you would not be a persevering Calvinist and you might lose your salvation or find out that you are one of the ones who God hates.

In Calvinist circles.
For sure no less. This verse says more.
1 John 2:2
And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

You can claim knowledge of truth but that doesn’t make it your by saying it.

Calvinism is not the text. They are different. That is why I talk about Calvinism and the texts as if they are different.

It’s not a cover all. You claim his teachings. You are a Calvinist.

When you claimed Calvinism, I knew what you believed. When I confronted what you believed, you don’t like being called a Calvinist any more.

Are portions of two separate paragraphs that you keep pulling out of context

5:6 “without strength” - not justified people.
5:6 “ungodly” - not justified people.
5:8 “yet sinners” - not justified people
5:10 “enemies” - not justified people



Calvinists teaching. Your teaching.


God has knowledge of what I decide to do with the free will that He has given me. If I choose one thing God knows. If I choose another, God knows. It isn’t set in stone because God knows. God knows what has not happened. God knows what is not set in stone.
I am not a determinist. God is not either. He gives men a choice.

This has been a very informative discussion for me. Thank you both.
I have a question. How is that you heard the gospel and believed and another heard the same gospel but did not believe?

 

[Dr. Bob]

This has been a very informative discussion for me. Thank you both.
I have a question. How is that you heard the gospel and believed and another heard the same gospel but did not believe?

Simple. NO HUMAN BEING will repent and believe UNLESS a change happens first. NNE.

God sovereignly choses to give such supernatural repentance and saving faith to those He elected. Salvation is of the Lord, not man.

I stood on the ruins of Antioch in Pisidia (central Turkey today) and preached the text of Acts 13. The Apostle Paul preached to the Jews there and none believed. Then he proclaimed salvation to non-Jews.

Acts 13:48 tells what happened. "And when the Gentiles heard that salvation was for anyone, Jew or non-jew, they rejoiced and glorified the Word of the Lord. As many of them that had been chosen for eternal life, believed."

God does the choosing of souls since without this, no one would repent and believe. God uses His Word (glory!) to proclaim the Gospel to all humanity through us. We do our best to present the truth, but GOD works invisibly in hearts to change them. Nicodemus, a leading pharisee, had a hard time with this since he figured salvation was "automatic" if you were a good Jew.

I heard the Gospel time and time again. Nothing. I heard the Gospel on March 17, 1957, and wept in repentance and cried out in faith for salvation. Why? God changed me. It was not ME doing anything different on the 17th than on the 15th or 16th. I was regenerated!

 

[37818]

John 17:3, And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent.

 

[Ben1445]

This has been a very informative discussion for me. Thank you both.
I have a question for Ben1445. How is that you heard the gospel and believed and another heard the same gospel but did not believe?

We both have a choice. I can’t tell you why someone chooses what they do. I’m not a Calvinist.

1 Corinthians 2:11
For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

 

[Ben1445]

Hello Mikoo,
Often a discussion can be helpful especially when truth is posted next to error. This thread started out with the premise from Isaiah, that the true and living God has ordained all things, and knows the end from the beginning, whereas the false gods, cannot know the future.
A person with correct theology, believes in the God who ordains and is in control of all things including the salvation of all the Sheep.

People who struggle with these truths, struggle with God Himself. They say they have a god, but their god does not do what the biblical God does.

Isa.41:11 Behold, all they that were incensed against thee shall be ashamed and confounded: they shall be as nothing; and they that strive with thee shall perish.

28 For I beheld, and there was no man; even among them, and there was no counsellor, that, when I asked of them, could answer a word.

29 Behold, they are all vanity; their works are nothing: their molten images are wind and confusion.

Isa.42:17 They shall be turned back, they shall be greatly ashamed, that trust in graven images, that say to the molten images, Ye are our gods.

When people turn from the True God, and suppress the truth, all that is left is error.
We know unsaved people deny these truths, but it is more sad when professed believers become unbelievers concerning truth.

It surprises me that you should feel this way since you think that “I have been ordained to believe the way I do.”

 

[Zaatar71]

It surprises me that you should feel this way since you think that “I have been ordained to believe the way I do.”

God has ordained many things to come to pass. Unbelief, apostasy, second death, haters of God. Not just the happy promise verses.

 

[Ben1445]

Simple. NO HUMAN BEING will repent and believe UNLESS a change happens first. NNE.

We are changed when we believe. If any man be in Christ he is a new creature. It is not dependent the other way around. It does not say if any man be a new creature he is in Christ.

God sovereignly choses to give such supernatural repentance and saving faith to those He elected. Salvation is of the Lord, not man.

Salvation is for all men. Election is for the redemption of the body, see Romans 8.

I stood on the ruins of Antioch in Pisidia (central Turkey today) and preached the text of Acts 13. The Apostle Paul preached to the Jews there and none believed. Then he proclaimed salvation to non-Jews.

Rejecting the gospel is not a proof that they were not elected or that election is talking about salvation.

Acts 13:48 tells what happened. "And when the Gentiles heard that salvation was for anyone, Jew or non-jew, they rejoiced and glorified the Word of the Lord. As many of them that had been chosen for eternal life, believed."

The word chosen in your text (which version is this?) is not the same word as I understand the Greek word to mean. I am no Greek scholar. But even the Strongs definition (who’s definitions favor Calvinism, in my opinion) that is being applied applies self consciousness to the word.

1. to appoint, ordain, orderto appoint on one's own responsibility or authority
2. to appoint mutually, i.e. agree upon

I use the KJV which is often despised here on the BB. It uses the word ordained. The word ordain simply means choosing and that can also be done by people. It is particularly done by people when God presents us with a choice.

God does the choosing of souls since without this, no one would repent and believe.

God chose mankind.
1 John 2:2
And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

God uses His Word (glory!) to proclaim the Gospel to all humanity through us. We do our best to present the truth, but GOD works invisibly in hearts to change them. Nicodemus, a leading pharisee, had a hard time with this since he figured salvation was "automatic" if you were a good Jew.

1 Corinthians 3:6
I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.

Certainly we share the gospel, and salvation certainly is of the Lord.

I heard the Gospel time and time again. Nothing. I heard the Gospel on March 17, 1957, and wept in repentance and cried out in faith for salvation. Why? God changed me. It was not ME doing anything different on the 17th than on the 15th or 16th. I was regenerated!

Regeneration is being born again. Life begins at conception. I don’t believe in a 9 month term (or any other term) of incubation for the man to be reborn.
I can say Amen! to your statement.
Why not do something about the gospel before that? There was planting and watering. By your testimony you stopped resisting the Holy Spirit. You stopped quenching the Holy Spirit. You chose to serve God instead of yourself.
Joshua 24:15
And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.

Proverbs 1:29
For that they hated knowledge,
and did not choose the fear of the LORD:

As Stephen preached it is said of his preaching,

Acts 6:10
And they were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake.

So they believed? No. They gathered false witnesses and had him stoned.

Acts 7:51
Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye.

Who can resist God? People.

 

[Ben1445]

God has ordained many things to come to pass. Unbelief, apostasy, second death, haters of God. Not just the happy promise verses.

God does not make people to not believe. God is not the author of unbelief. God is not the author of apostasy. God made people who hate Him. He did not ordain them to hate Him.
Apply the teachings of Jesus to your thoughts.

Luke 11:17
But he, knowing their thoughts, said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth.

If God is choosing the wrong to happen, He is divided against Himself because He is making wrong and right to happen.

 

[Zaatar71]

God does not make people to not believe. God is not the author of unbelief. God is not the author of apostasy. God made people who hate Him. He did not ordain them to hate Him.
Apply the teachings of Jesus to your thoughts.

Luke 11:17
But he, knowing their thoughts, said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth.

If God is choosing the wrong to happen, He is divided against Himself because He is making wrong and right to happen.

Ben does not seem to understand what is at issue here. Look at his responses to Dr,. Bob! He does not have a grasp on the biblical language, He seems to want to blame God for mans sin. This cannot be!