Featured The doctrine of Election

I know he mentioned that Evan but the point he didn't state was Ephesians 1:4 According as he has chosen us in him before the foundation of the world... According to my belief we were chosen in Christ in the halls of eternity before the fall of Adam!... Brother Glen

 

Agreed, to utilyan I will add, the moment "by grace" is taken out of the focus one has helped make the point of the opposition that you have the belief that one must earn his redemption, which they will in turn use against your view of free will and toward supporting their view of predestination/pre-determinism of individual election.

There is but one condition that must be met to receive the promise of God's free gift of grace and the necessity of truth in this matter should not be taken lightly. Some attempt to uphold a doctrine which strives to declare inability and predestination rather than acknowledge the true volitional nature of God's creatures, which by Divine design and in truth of His influence in all the world, gives the genuine ability to all for a response to Him of faith to come from one's own heart.

There is no need to sacrifice "by God's grace alone" to uphold the responsibility of man (you) through free will:

(Rom 10:9) If you declare with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

Doctrines of Predestination of individual election are not hard to refute by drawing attention to the individual's responsibility (you/ye) within the temporal design and biblically given order of things:

(Eph 1:13) In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise,

 

I was going to mention this as well.

Sent from my Motorola Droid Turbo

 

I will tell you one more do not include me in your little posts. I should never have been mentioned to start with. I have better things to do than play your little ignorant games Move on.

 

Agreed, however, I feel I need to clarify my position, which is neither Arminian nor Calvinistic: the singular condition of man that is without controversy is that man is born separated from God, and there is nothing within that fallen nature that can understand or receive that which is spiritual, the GOspel heading the list of spiritual truth.

The singular aspect of salvation that is not, in my view, fully recognized by both sides is that we are saved by grace through faith, rather than the position the debate between these two groups generates, that we are saved by faith through grace.

And this is not a condition "met by man," it is, as you say...the Gift of God.

And the singular event that brings man to a point where he can exercise choice is the enlightening ministry of the Holy Ghost. In the Old Testament we see Him minister to men those truths revealed in that/those days. In the New Testament we see the Comforter ministering the very Gospel of Christ, which was not revealed to men in prior Ages. Some distinctions between those two ministries would be the Eternal Indwelling as opposed to the external ministry (empowerment of the Saint), the Indwelling of the Godhead, Eternal Remission (as opposed to that achieved by the previous provision, vicarious animal death), the revelation of the Mystery of the Gospel (as opposed to general faith in God), and the believer placed into God in Eternal Union through the establishment of the New Covenant (which contained the Promise of the Spirit).

All ability of man is directly related to the revelation provided them, and that which results from that revelation has to be carefully determined.

I do not endorse Prevenient Grace, though we do see that Grace without controversy precedes man's entrance to relationship to God through enlightenment. Nor do I endorse the doctrine that teaches God regenerates men in order for them to have faith, for if that were the case, then we must equally conclude that salvation can be lost. For example, 2 Peter 20-22 speaks of false teachers who, if we compare the parallel passage of Jude, are men destined for eternal separation...who had been shown the way of truth and rejected it. These men turned away of their own will, which is not surprising seeing they were fallen men with an inclination for rebellion against God. Hebrews 10:26-29 is a solemn warning to Jews, who had been introduced to the truth, yet are compared with those who rejected the Covennat of Law, and will face a more severe punishment because they "trod under foot the Son of God, counted the Blood by which He was sanctified and unholy thing (and based on the general theme of Hebrews this was exalting Levitical Service over the Priesthood and Offering of Christ), and...

...done despite to the Spirit of Grace.

That Spirit of Grace is the Promised Spirit that had enlightened these Hebrews, who choose to reject the New Covenant even as those who rejected the First Covenant (Covenant of Law, called Moses' Law).

So while I reject Calvin teaching concerning regeneration, I do acknowledge that men are saved according to God's choosing, and this is something that is a settled matter in Eternity Past. He does not choose based on merit of the believer, nor do I see it simply as a matter of foreknowledge, but it is based on one simple principle: God is Sovereign in salvation.

While we cannot divorce man's role in salvation entirely, we still have to deal with the natural man's inability. We will not find an singular Saint in Scripture that did not first benefit from the intervention of God. Just wanted to clarify that I fully affirm man's inability in regards to the spiritual things of God, and do not endorse a view that allows man in his fallen state to understand spiritual truth apart from the Ministry of the Holy Ghost.

Ben, I don't know if you are a Baptist or not, but I do have a thread concerning Infant Death in other denominations if you are not, and would love to have you give your thoughts there. This topic helps, I think, for us to center our attention on salvation in regards to regeneration, which I hold to the position that men were not regenerated in the Old Testament, but that regeneration is a result of man being reconciled to God through Christ. I distinguish the ministries performed by God in men's lives under Old Testament Economies, and view Eternal Redemption as first being bestowed in completion at the time of the Cross, at which time the Old Testament Saints were made "perfect," or, complete in regards to their salvation.

So always glad to get some new people into this discussion, so hope to see you there.


God bless.

 

This may be true, but it is better to directly confront him, rather than mentioning him in threads he is not involved in.

I agree with this. It amounts to talking about people behind their back, and since there is no indicator to the one being talked about, they are not always aware that they are being talked about.

It almost has a "stalking" quality to it.

Why wouldn't he respond? If you are going to mention someone, at least affix the @ so they are made aware of it, and can face their accusers. And if someone has asked you to leave him out of your conversation, then I do not see that as too much to ask.

You are never going to be a successful evangelist by trying to elevate yourself or your doctrine on a platform of degrading another or their doctrine. Successful evangelism is always a matter of competently conveying Gospel Truth. We do not, for example, give credit to the Mormon that degrades the Jehovah's Witness, right?


God bless.

 

First let me start of with I'm not a "Salvation First" type person.

God gives a command and I am not a GOLD DIGGER weighing to see if his command pays salvation.


I LOVE GOD and Love Neighbor for FREE. Would pay and go to hell for God's command. We aren't scared of hell and will monkey stomp the devil. part of that catholic ninja training.
we already took over part of the block and named it purgatory.

I understand the fears of my tiny little bitty Christian brothers and sisters. I suppose they just aren't "regenerated" to the point of putting any value on the command of GOD only worried about what will save their own hide.

We laugh and think your churches are cute. are we saved? are you going to heaven? do you accept Jesus? are you saved? do you think you gonna get heaven?

We got grown up things to worry about not play ground things about whether is God going to be nice or mean to you.

I never stated without God's grace.

Without GOD's grace none of you would be alive right now, I cannot breathe one time , my heart cannot beat a single moment without God's Grace


It is by God's grace I am speaking right now.

I'm pointing out God's COMMAND and Commandments, The obvious desire, what he wants. Which may come off as grating pain to hear from anyone who believes God doesn't love or desire to for all to be saved.

If God calls ANYTHING SIN it is his want and desire that it does not take place.

If God commands us to DO SOMETHING, Love God, Love Neighbor , That is his DECREE, HIS DESIRE, his COMMAND. It is what he wants to happen.

It is God's command that NNE ON EARTH SIN.

Thus its his obvious desire that ALL men be saved.

 

The word "all" is found in the anarthous construct and means "all classes" or "all kinds" or "all kinds without distinction" but never "all without exception."

The term "world" in the Jewish context means all classes, genders and ethnicities in addition to the Jews. It does not mean every human being that has ever lived or will live.

God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked but he is glorified by his justice. All whom God has determined to save he will save and he will save them through the predestined means (preaching of the gospel) but he never purposed to save every fallen man. He will save all who repent and believe in the gospel but none will do that apart from God effectually calling them.

 

It is God's command that ALL to not sin. Because of Adam ALL have fallen. But I suppose "ALL" doesn't mean "all without exception"?

Which ALL is that since its not ALL without exception? The Jews only?

 

Likewise to all being saved.

 

Do you apply
That same type of reasoning to Romans 3:23 where it says all have sinned?

 

I believe there is a number 4.

Don't ask because He won't tell.

HankD

 

No one questions the universality of sin "in Adam" but all of us admit that "all" who are "in Adam" are not "in Christ" and never will be unless none are in hell.

So in Romans 3:23 Paul's contextual point is to prove that all men with the exception of Jesus Christ have sinned, but it is not his point to prove all men without exception will be saved. Do you believe in universal salvation and thus none in hell?

Unless you are a universalist you must admit that not "all" without exception will be saved but only "all" without distinction of class, gender or race will be saved.

 

Hi Benjamin! The Biblical meaning of "grace" when used in redemptive contexts denies conditional election to salvation. For example, in Romans 3:24 the word the modifier "freely" is the word translated "without a cause" when used of those who hated Jesus. That is, they could find no cause in Jesus to justify their hatred. So likewise here in this Romans 3:24 context, we are justified "freely" by grace or without any cause that can be found in us to justify us. The term "grace" is consistently contrasted to "works" in contexts dealing with election. See Romans 9:11; 11:5-6. Election is not salvation but is "to" salvation (2 Thes. 2:13) and it is that salvation one is elected unto that is inclusive of "sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth" rather than vice versa as you are trying to defend.

John 6:44 denies any inherent ability within man to come to Christ by faith. "no man can come to me" is absolute. It is this universal absolute that requires the Father to "draw" in order for anyone to come to Christ by faith. So, the Bible denies any inherent ability to believe or come to Christ by faith. So, you are forced to claim that the Father universally draws all men without exception but the very context of John 6:44-65 denies that the Father draws all men without exception as the text specifically lists some whom Christ knew never GENUINELY believed in him "from the beginning" but were false professors. His explanation of these false professors is that they were never drawn by the Father (Jn. 6:65). Note the word "draw" in verse 44 is dropped in verse 65 and instead Jesus says except it "be given unto him" by the father, and the contextual antecedent ifor "it" s faith in him (v. 64) which is what those in verse 64 did not have "from the beginning" as Jesus knew their heart even though their mouth professed what was never in their heart.

And so you jump out of this carefully defined context which sets for the precedence for defining the drawing of the Father and jump into John 12:32 and make the claim that God draws "all men" without exception when in reality the context has introduced "Greeks" who came to Christ and the anarthrous construct of "pas" (translated) "all men" means all kinds and classes of men or all men without distinction of class, race or gender, thus harmonizing with John 6:64-65.

Yes, election is individual and personal unto salvation as you are demonstrating by the personal pronouns which follow rather than precede election in the context (Eph. 1:4-12) precede Ephesians 1:13-14. Personal faith is the manifestation of election as election is "to salvation" (2 Thes. 2:13) and that salvation is inclusive of "sanctification of the Spirit and BELIEF OF THE TRUTH" and so God has not only elected the persons as shown by the personal pronouns but has elected the MEANS of salvation as well. The sanctification of the Spirit simply means the setting apart by the Spirit in his work of quickening which is manifested in "belief of the truth" which is always effectual unto glory (2 Thes. 2:14).

Election does not ignore the will of man but secures a willing heart through sanctification of the Spirit. Even a saved person's will is inherently without power to serve God apart from God working in us "both TO WILL and TO DO of His good pleasure" (Philip. 2:13) how much more an unregenerate person? The first lesson learned by baby Christians is "without me ye CAN DO nothing" (Jn. 15:5) as the will of a regenerate believer is as powerless as it was prior to his regeneration (Rom. 7:18 "to will is present but how to perform I find not").