Search results

And I address OUR PERSPECTIVE of that throughout the rest of my post... Abraham was the Father of the nation of Israel and the Father of the Jews – so I guess 'technically' that is correct as those designations came later (by Jacob and Judah). But that doesn't change the point being addressed...

Who said it wasn't? The biblical authors rarely, if ever, separated salvation from its fruit. I'm not sure why you feel this is an appropriate rebuttal to my comment. As Winman correctly pointed out, acknowledging God's initiative in choosing the apostles doesn't somehow support the concept...

Just as you seemingly believe, there are different aspects of 'election.' Election, as I'm sure you know, simply refers to God's choices. He chose Israel through which to bring the scriptures, prophets, priests, kings, apostolic revelation and ultimately the Messiah. Within Israel there were...

Ok, so in this manner you do acknowledge a type of national election by which God sets a people aside for a redemptive cause and not individualistic salvation, right? Can you explain further what you mean by "Israel is personified as God's elect." I really have no idea what you are saying in...

In those days it would have been customary for the student to choose their rabbi, not the other way around. The apostles were given to Christ by God (John 17)...He chose them. And this type of language establishes their authority as divinely inspired apostles...those reserved from the...

So, it is your view that every individual Jewish person, on the basis that they are JEWISH, will be eternally saved even if they never confess Christ, repent or believe in this life? Or are you saying that the term "Israel" is being used as representative of "the elect ones" from all nations...

Again, this reveals you do not yet understand the distinction being made.

If you study up on our perspective you will quickly find that we do not deny individual election or God's ability to 'foresee.' Our debate however is regarding the intent of the author and that is all about perspective.

Actually, I believe you simply do not understand the difference thus are not willing to acknowledge the distinction. There are thousands of scholars who hold to this view and who equally oppose the foresight faith view. Do you believe they all are simply imagining the difference? Or could it...

Ok, let me try this approach... Most of you would affirm that the nation of Israel was elected by God, correct? Do you believe that to mean that every Israelite during the OT period was certainly saved, or do you believe that God elected for Israel to receive His special revelation, by...

It is very difficult for some to ever really understand a non-individualistic (corporate) interpretation of this issue once they have adopted a system of belief like yours, as is evidenced by your response to me. All I can say is to study up on it with an objective mind and once you understand...

I'm not sure how this relates to what I wrote leading me to believe you are not understanding my position. I never argued, nor do I believe, in 'salvation to election.' I don't even know what that means. Who is predestined? "US" Who is "US?" Those 'in Him.' How do we get to be 'in...

This quote from a noted scholar on the subject may help: Historically, both Calvinists and Arminians have predominantly understood election unto salvation as individual.[25] That is, each individual is elected/selected to enter into a saving relationship with God through Christ.[26] The central...

Because the 'foreseen faith' view makes the same basic hermeneutical error of Calvinism by individualizing the text. For example, God foresaw Joe's response and based on what he foresaw God made a choice. That is not what we believe is the intent of author. The author, according to our view...

I just read this again...I'm confused. How do you conclude that my statement isn't problematic, and yet not agree with it? Either it is agreeable or it isn't, right? If it isn't agreeable then can you specifically point out why?

He elected to save, adopt, sanctify whosoever believes. He predetermined to do this, for both Jew and non-Jew, from the beginning of time. The parable of the wedding banquet lays this out very clearly. He invited the Jews first and then the Gentiles. Those elected to enter were those...

What specifically do you not agree with about my statement? What specifically did I take 'too far?'

So, then may we all conclude you are clamoring for refutation? If what I wrote seemed 'agreeable' then what you wrote must seem to be equally un-agreeable. Are you canidating to be the most despised on this board? You must be? Maybe it makes you feel like the martyr? Is that it?

Understood...maybe a better statement would be that Jesus wants to be MORE than a master...because a servant does not know his master's business. Instead, he wants to be our friends, because he has made known to us his business and has included us in on it. Friendship, like fatherhood, is a...

Can anyone here specifically point out what I've said that is in disagreement with Tozer's quotes above? Only someone denying the servant/master relationship would be in disagreement, and from the beginning of this conversation I have argued for 'both/and' not 'either/or.' Now are you two...