Asbury "Revival"

Yes, based on the gospel he preached.

Nobody preached limited atonement until the 16th Century (the Scope of Atonement was not a theological issue). So per your description of the gospel, there were no Christians until the 16th Century.

I just can't buy that.

 

The problem is Scripture doesn't actually speak of the "elect" prior to being saved.

"The elect", "His Sheep", "the Bride", ect are (biblically) those who are saved.

Calvinism (I know you are not a Calvinist, but your position here is identical and is ultimately derived from the doctrine of John Calvin filtered through the post-16th century churches) makes assumptions and demands all heed these assumptions as gospel.

But you are still talking about understandings of the gospel without speaking of the gospel itself.

 

No, the statement is true. He chose us (the audience is Christian). Never once does the Bible speak of the unconverted elect.

Much of your position is from the Bible, but much of your position is from Calvinism steeped for a few centuries.

My comment is not nonsense. If one examines your post it does not take long to see that you are demonizing Christ by demonizing Christians for not agreeing with your ideas about the gospel - not for the gospel they hold.

You talk about election - about the scope of the Atonement. But that is not the gospel of Jesus Christ. That is ideas about the gospel.

 

We cannot know the mind of God except what is revealed to us. Scripture never speaks of the elect except they already be true converts.

I apologize if my remark regarding demonizing Christ was extreme. I cannot in all integrity sply withdraw it, BUT I will accompany the remark with an explanation:

What we do to one another we do to Christ. In your posts you have demonized (literally) Christians for not holding the same view of ele tion as you (i.e., for disagreeing with you about the thoughts of God prior to Creation). When we demonize a Christian we demonize Christ.

In today's culture this is done so nonchalantly that any onlooker would assume Christianity exists only in theory as at its core our visable faith (our witness) is measured by our interactions with one another and mankind in general.

I sincerely am sorry you took offense to my remark. I do not mean them to call into question your faith and I have every reason to believe you are my brother in Christ.

I do not share your theology regarding the scope of the Atonement. Your comments include me as being demonic (preaching a satanic gospel for rejecting your position about divine election).

I not offended and ask for no apology (which would be nothing but politeness). The reason is I dont matter snd your accusation speaks nor of me but Christ in me.

Please understand. My remark, although extreme was not overstatement. It is biblical truth that exists in Scripture for this precise reason. What we do to one another we do to Christ.

Christians (myself included) need to be more careful in how we deal with disagreements over theology, doctrine, and Christian philosophy.

 

Having read John Calvin, D.L. Moody, A.W. Tower, and John Wesley I can say they all shared that aim as well (although they ended up holding different views).

I also aim to have all of my positions from Scripture - and to hold those positions which are by necessity not in the text of God's Word as secondary rather than foundational to my faith.

That is why I can no longer affirm the Penal Substitution Theory of Atonement (I believe the issue too important to rest on human extrapolation so I have to rely on what is written in God's Word). But I was no less saved when I believed the theory correct.