Election Keeps No One Out Of Heaven

2 Peter 1:
5 For this very reason, make every effort to add to your faith goodness; and to goodness, knowledge; 6 and to knowledge, self-control; and to self-control, perseverance; and to perseverance, godliness; 7 and to godliness, mutual affection; and to mutual affection, love. 8 For if you possess these qualities in increasing measure, they will keep you from being ineffective and unproductive in your knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9 But whoever does not have them is nearsighted and blind, forgetting that they have been cleansed from their past sins.

10 Therefore, my brothers and sisters,[The Greek word for brothers and sisters (adelphoi) refers here to believers, both men and women, as part of God’s family.] make every effort to confirm your calling and election. For if you do these things, you will never stumble, 11 and you will receive a rich welcome into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 9:27
No, I strike a blow to my body and make it my slave so that after I have preached to others, I myself will not be disqualified for the prize.

1 Peter 1:
Praise to God for a Living Hope
3 Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 and into an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade. This inheritance is kept in heaven for you, 5 who through faith are shielded by God’s power until the coming of the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time. 6 In all this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials. 7 These have come so that the proven genuineness of your faith—of greater worth than gold, which perishes even though refined by fire—may result in praise, glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed.8 Though you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and are filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy, 9 for you are receiving the end result of your faith, the salvation of your souls.

 

The difference between Cals/Ref and non-Cals/Arm is a different understanding of foreknowledge. The Cal/Ref believes God can only foreknow what he determines must occur. The non-Cal/Arm view of foreknowledge is that God can foreknow all possible contingencies.

 

I am fully comforted that I am saved. Are you? Or, does being elect interfere with this in your mind?

What part of that they also may obtain salvation are you missing?

This refers to the elect/chosen. You are skipping over this part. Paul refers to this here with intention, and the recipients of his epistles recognize this, this is nothing new to them. They know they are elect.

You are straining the "whosoever" portion, and are not implementing a good hermeneutic here.

Paul emphatically refers to the elect, that they also, the elect specifically, may themselves obtain salvation. They then are the "whomsoevers".

 

No, your view perverts the meaning of "whosoever". Whosoever means any person at any time.

You cannot reconcile election with free will because you believe God elected certain persons and this choice determines who is saved.

My view (as I can only speak for myself) is that God foreknows all who will believe. Election is not limited, it is available to all from our perspective.

It is limited from God's perspective, in that in eternity past he already knew each and every person who will of their own free will believe in time and elected them.

Your view has God passing over men, determining their destruction. My view has God offering salvation to all men and not determining that any should perish.

 

from Winman:

Your view also has God passing over men. He passes over those who do not believe. I think non-cals have the same problem that Calvinists have: God does not really want to save everyone.

Cals say God saves those he chooses to save and passes over the rest. (reason not given)

Non-cals say God saves those who turn to him in belief and passes over the rest. (reason: God values honoring their free-will more than he values their salvation)

 

No interference in my mind at all, especially since I don't give it the importance that you do. Rather, I prefer to place emphasis, especially with new Christians, on salvation rather than election. We are not called by the great commission to seek out the elect; but to preach to them that they may become elect.

No part at all. In what context is it being presented is what I need to study more. The pentecostals have taken a single reference in scripture (1 Cor 13:1) and used it to create a whole doctrine about speaking in tongues; would you have me simply accept you at your word, like they do; or would you have me study the matter as fully as I can?

How can you say I'm skipping over this part when I stated that I needed to study it to determine if Paul was referring to existing believers--which you just confirmed that he is?

As I said before: it's not just the "whosoever" portion, but also the other multiple passages that use active verbiage and reference inclusion.

Yes, in this passage, that is correct. Is it also correct for the other passages that talk about the "whomsoevers"? Or is there the possibility that other passages talking about the "whomsoevers" are more ambiguous as to who they're referring to?

 

God will not disown or pass over anyone in Christ, because God cannot disown Himself. We are to remain in Jesus, through trust which is not work, Jesus is the reason we are saved.

 

No, that is very different. God is holy, and a perfect judge, he cannot let sin go unpunished. If men refuse to submit to God and trust in Jesus who is the payment for their sins, there is no other possible way to save them.

God is not passing over them, God is holding out open arms to all men in a sincere offer to save them. Men go to hell because they willingly reject Jesus.

 

The semantics of this are not in question. Whether you present it as "whosoever believes," or "whoever is believing," or "all those that believe" -- the context is still one of an offer, and is not presented as a statement of "only those that were chosen."

Who said this passage had anything to do with seeking? "Seeking" has not been apart of my discussion. You don't have to "seek" to hear the Word and believe.

I need to ponder this some more; John 6:45 by itself doesn't seem to apply to the concept of the elect, but more to those that fit the "offer" of "whosoever." But there's context to consider. More later.

 

If you start at verse 37-45 you will see it clear as day

In vs 37....All The Father gives to Jesus shall come.....

All

....shall come....[no more,no less]

this is an elect multitude. we know this because not everyone comes

and him that comes [believers] I shall in no wise cast out
For.......Jesus declares He came to do the Fathers will....then he tells us what is the Fathers will; that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

Again as long as this is in the bible...all who reject this biblical teaching are
1]untaught
2] wrong
3] mis-lead
4]false teachers
5]heretics
6]apostates
7] any combination of the above.

There is no way to to understand these verses differently and still claim to be a bible believing christian.

Jesus walks everyone through this teaching of God's electing love.
Don....look at how some foolishly try to say the very opposite of the clear teaching of the word. They have their own personal agenda which does not match God's instructions to His church.

 

P4T - I missed your posts on page 13. Suffice to say, my intention is to reason out this subject. If you prefer to insinuate that I'm being less than honest, well, that's your perogative. If you'd care to actually continue discussing the matter, then how about we do it as reasonable adults and leave the childish behavior to the children?

 

Good point 12strings. God passes over people in both ideas. God could have saved everyone. He chose to only save believers. Christ's death is sufficient to save everyone.

 

Actually, there are two parts to the Father's will in this passage; the second being "that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life."

Back later. Some things to do before church this evening.

 

Gotta throw this out before I go: I can't speak for all non-cals, only myself; but this non-cal says that God passes over the rest because they reject Him, thereby valuing sin more than they value God. Not because "God values our free will more than our salvation."

 

A west coast brother...

Sure there are many parts of the same event.....

the Father giving to the Son before the world was

The Son coming in flesh for them

They see the Son

They are drawn by the Father to savingly believe

they continue on believing day by day

The Son loses none of them

The Son raises them up on the last day

 

I would agree on them rejecting God. I believe the point was(at least when I say it) is that God could save them(has the power) but values their free will more than saving them. God could have saved everyone if He had chosen to do so. If one would disagree, then they would be denying the power of God.

 

False. To say God could save those who reject Christ is to deny God's justice. God must punish sin, this is just. Jesus bear our sins for us, if any man rejects Christ he must pay for his own sin.

 

Yes, God must punish sin and Jesus Christ paid for that on the cross as I stated. That doesn't negate anything I said, in fact that was my point. Since Christ paid for it all on the cross, God could have saved everyone.

 

So, are you directly saying God desires that men perish?

 

I can't speak for others, but I am saying that if you believe in an all-powerful God, you have to say that even given man's free will, He could have decided to Make it work like this:

Some choose him willingly and are saved.
Others reject him, but God decides he loves them so much that he turns their will to accept him and applies Jesus sacrifice to their sin (thereby maintaining his justice and holiness).

God could have done this and so saved everyone. He didn't. WHY?

I don't know what the non-cal answer is, but I'm Speculating that it is because they don't think God has chosen to override men's free will. (If the answer is that he CANNOT override their free will, then you are getting into denying some pretty foundational doctrines of God's power).