Featured Calvinism Fact Sheet #2, by Joel Barnes: Unconditional Election

Your desire to rewrite the scripture is not working except in your own mind.
Your understanding is off at most every point, but you are happy with it.

 

So there is a condition that salvation is without works, without merit by the will of God, John 1:13, Matthew 7:21, 2 Peter 1:10, 2 Corinthians 13:5. That it is a gift, Romans 6:23, Ephesians 2:8.

 

Rewriting scripture is what quoting out of context does, causing it to mean things that it's not actually saying. Which one of us was doing that?

I would be interested to understand from your vast knowledge of Biblical literature exactly where I didn't understand something. From what I can tell, I'm the only one posting in this thread why the full meaning of entire contexts forbids erroneous meanings derived from limited or zero context. Truly, I'm listening.

 

Doesn't change anything, man by nature doesn't seek after God.

 

Friend you sound really confused.

 

In Acts, Paul tells unbelievers that they can.

 

How so? From my point of view God's election is unmerited and conditional for the elect.

 

What does Romans 3:11 say about man?

 

". . . Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience . . . ." Conditional election.

 

Not if they are under sin. Paul knew men under sin dont seek after God Rom 3:11, he wrote it.

 

Thats not something I can help you with friend'

 

1 Peter 1:2.

 

Actually, David wrote it. Paul quotes David. Understanding what David wrote is the key. Psalm 14 is about the category of human called NABAL who devour God's people like bread. Not all "all the sons of men". By implication, that's at least 3 kinds of people in that psalm: Unbelievers who are NABAL; Unbelivers who are not NABAL; and God's people. The NABAL is the same kind of person described in Romans 1. Therefore, it is no accident that Paul quotes Psalm 14. Does Romans 1 claim that all men everywhere exchange the truth revealed to them by God's creation for a lie? No, it doesn't.

The breakdown in understanding seems to be that some think it's okay to proof-text, i.e. find some words in the Bible that say what sounds good in their ears, without respect for its context. All that matters is that the snipped words or phrases support what they like to think.

So when Paul quotes David, only the quoted sentences or phrases are analyzed. Since the proof-texter person thinks it's okay to proof-text, they think Paul is doing exactly that, proof-texting. So they refuse to seek an understanding of what Paul is quoting in its full context. They just look at the quoted text only. This causes the person who thinks proof-texting is okay to misinterpret both passages, the one quoting the other and the other passage as well. In doing this, they are twice-wrong.

 

It says what Psalm 14 says about the category of man called NABAL (fool/worhtless) who claim within themselves, "No God." That's not what all unbelievers think. Some of them think there is a higher power but haven't settled upon who that might be, yet. Some of them never settle upon the answer, to their doom. Some are still searching, per Acts 17:27. Not all unbelievers fit the description of NABAL. Not all unbelievers "devour My people like bread". QED.

 

Romans 3:10-11 and Romans 3:23.

 

Says nothing about conditional election, and its unwise to impose your human reasoning into that scripture friend.

 

Paul wrote it also when he quoted David, but in any case, man naturally under sin doesnt seek after God Rom 3:11.

 

10-11 is still Psalm 14, the NABAL. Not all men are NABAL. Just like Romans 1. Not all men are Romans 1 types.

 

Romans 3:11 is a quote from Psalm 14 which talks about the category of man, NABAL. Not every man is a NABAL. QED.

 

Or Psalms 53
According to Romans 3:10-11 and Romans 3:23-26 everyone is a dinner.