Featured Who is responsible?

No. Unmerited speaks for itself. If I walk up to someone and give them $10, they did nothing to merit me giving to them, I just gave it to them. That’s the same with election. There was nothing they said, did, or did not do, that merited God saving His elect sheep.

 

You keep bringing up these verses in this thread THAT YOU STARTED. If you think our responses are off topic, then don’t posit these verses into this thread.

 

So they merited His choosing them? You cannot have it both ways. They either merited election or they didn’t. And if they merited it, they earned it.

 

This makes as much sense as a football bat. If they did not merit it, then there was no condition to being elected.

 

But what makes you think the Kingdom of God is limited to the new Heaven and Earth?

 

Not even close.

 

You are hung up on a word, not the actual doctrine.

 

It is like this...you do not understand....there are many such ideas;
Unatoned atonement
nonpropitiation propitiation
unredeemed redemption
lost saved persons
nonreconciled reconciliation

candidate number2

 

Look at the significance of the words in the passages I've given...
They clearly show God working, or being fully responsible, with men then acting as a result of God's actions when it comes to the matter of salvation.

Because if only a certain group, chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world, believe on Christ,
then that makes the Lord the one who decides their fate, and not men....See Romans 9, where some are created as vessels of wrath, and others created as vessels of mercy.

Also, see this:

" Blessed [is the man whom] thou choosest, and causest to approach [unto thee, that] he may dwell in thy courts: we shall be satisfied with the goodness of thy house, even of thy holy temple." ( Psalms 65:4 )

Scripture tells us the cause of a person coming to God and believing, and it wasn't their belief.
Their salvation is a work of God alone, not a cooperative work between them and God that relies on something that they did.
The difference between works and grace is the difference between east and west.
Either the Lord is the author and finisher of faith, or He "gets the ball rolling" and then leaves it to us to keep it rolling.

"Monergism" versus "synergism", to put it in mechanical terms, my friend.


We are responsible for our sins because God's word says so.
He is responsible for our salvation, again, because His word says so.


Good afternoon to you.

 

It is plain to the understanding that the responsibility of man for sin proves the reality of his own free will.

A person without free will is not a moral agent, because he cannot freely choose to obey or disobey his conscience. And if by the same lack of free will, he cannot accept or reject the gospel, then how can God hold him accountable for rejecting it? A person who has not chosen to reject the gospel has not rejected the gospel, because in order to reject something, you must choose to reject it.

It is self-evident that rejection implies choice, and without the choice of a person's own free will, it cannot be said that they rejected something. Otherwise, if rejection is not a choice, then neither is acceptance, and everyone is forcing everyone else to do things all the time, because no one can choose contrary to the other. And if the case be, that no one can force anyone by the same logic, then no one can sin, for if one sins, and he who has committed one sin has committed every sin, no one can commit any sin. Therefore, if there is no free will, then no one ever sins.

 

It is not a question of freedom, it is a question of desire. Everyone is free to choose and they always choose what they desire. None desire God in their natural state. None.

 

I don't think making a false equivalency is going to prove your point - it's just lazy.