An articulate well balanced approach. What say you?

[JesusFan]

The Calvinist position is easily proved false by Rom 16:7.

Rom 16:7 Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

No one is "in Christ" before the foundation of the world. You are not "in Christ" until you believe.

Paul shows this in Rom 16:7 when he speaks of Andronicus and Junia whom he says were "in Christ BEFORE ME".

Question....

did God "know' that saul would become the Apostle paul before he was born unto this earth?

was paul already part of the Body of Christ in mind of God before paul experienced being "born again?"

 

[Robert Snow]

Here are the words Archangel has put into my mouth: Second, you have been claiming that Ephesians 1:4 is saying that Christ was chosen. But did I say that? Of course not. Calvinism is defended by misrepresenting the views of others because it cannot be defended on its merits. I said Christ was chosen as Redeemer before the foundation of the world. I base this on the fact He was foreknown as the Lamb before the foundation of the world. Now when He was chosen as Redeemer, then corporately all those He would redeem were also chosen. Hence, Ephesians 1:4 reads He chose us in Him. Now who is being addressed as being chosen? Why us!!!! Pay no attention to Archangel, he simply misrepresents others.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWyCCJ6B2WE

 

[Winman]

Question....

did God "know' that saul would become the Apostle paul before he was born unto this earth?

was paul already part of the Body of Christ in mind of God before paul experienced being "born again?"

Sure, I believe God in his foreknowledge knows all who will believe.

That does not negate the fact that Paul said Andronicus and Junia were in Christ BEFORE him.

This shows that no one is in Christ until he believes and those who teach a person is in Christ before the foundation of the world are in error.

 

[Van]

Now note the effort of the Calvinists, having failed to rebut any of the five, yes five lines of evidence against individual election for salvation before the foundation of the world, they try to change the subject to Omniscience. This is merely an attempt to derail the thread.

He chose us in Him refers to the corporate election of everyone who will be redeemed by the Chosen Redeemer. When we are individually chosen and placed spiritually in Christ, we receive blessings from heaven, the first being we were chosen corporately before the foundation of the world. God's love toward us is from everlasting.

 

[Van]

[
problem with that view is the context/grammer/ and word structuring points to individual election!

God chose us in the beloved before the foundation of the World is from God Himself in the Bible!

God is outside Time, as he has already written down all of those that He has elected out to be written down in lambs Book of Life from Eternity Past...

So far, only think proven is that try as you do, still have NOT proven the DoG as being non bibilical, as you are refusing to heed sound hermeneutics and use of the Greek by Apostles in the NT!

This is a typical Calvinist denial of the evidence without actually addressing the evidence.

God did chose us corporately before the foundation of the world, as those the Redeemer would redeem. Thus everyone individually chosen and placed in Christ, the beloved was chosen corporately before the foundation of the world. This view is consistent with the context, the Greek word meanings and with the Greek grammar.

Next, the reason is given for God writing down the names from rather than before the foundation is God is outside of time. This invents what is not in scripture and replaces what is in scripture. That is Calvinism 101.

These four DoG assertions, total spiritual ability of all mankind, unconditional individual election before the foundation of the world, limited reconciliation, and irresistible grace have all been shown to be unbiblical.

This thread has shown unconditional individual election before the foundation of the world is unbiblical. It is supported by a misunderstanding of Ephesians 1:4. And it is shown to be not valid by more than a dozen verses.

 

[Van]

Jesusfan wrote (in another thread)
"Bottom line" "bad news" is that God considers ALL of us as being "IN Adam" all received the same punishment for sinning against God, in that we ALl are born into Sin,"

So if Jesusfan is correct here and we are in Adam, then we are not elect and in Christ at conception. So Jesusfan has added to the list of lines of evidence against the Calvinists view of Ephesians 1:4. LOL

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Jesusfan wrote (in another thread)
"Bottom line" "bad news" is that God considers ALL of us as being "IN Adam" all received the same punishment for sinning against God, in that we ALl are born into Sin,"

So if Jesusfan is correct here and we are in Adam, then we are not elect and in Christ at conception. So Jesusfan has added to the list of lines of evidence against the Calvinists view of Ephesians 1:4. LOL

"balderdash & Horse feathers" :tongue3::laugh:

 

[Iconoclast]

"balderdash & Horse feathers" :tongue3::laugh:

fiddlesticks, false teaching, and another boondoggle:laugh:

 

[quantumfaith]

fiddlesticks, false teaching, and another boondoggle:laugh:

Would "yall" please quit phillyfarting around.

 

[preacher4truth]

fiddlesticks, false teaching, and another boondoggle:laugh:

:laugh: :thumbsup:

...not to mention the flim-flam and blarney!!!!

 

[convicted1]

With Romans 8:1 you need to look at the preceding passage (since Romans 8:1 begins with "therefore"). Paul is discussing his sinning--how he does, indeed, sin, even as a Christian.

There is not condemnation for those in Christ (e.g. Christians) who, even now, sin. Why? Because Christ has suffered the condemnation for us.



This isn't so. Look, again, at the context of Romans 8.



Very wrong. It is precisely because the elect were in Christ before the foundation of the world that Christ had to die for them.

Christ substituted Himself for those "In Christ" so that while He was on the cross bearing the wrath of God being poured out on Him, it is as if we, the believers, were on the cross bearing the wrath of God. In this way, there is no condemnation for believers--because Christ has borne that condemnation for us.

Now, again, remember Paul's words to the believers in 1 Corinthians 6:

[9] Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, [10] nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. [11] And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. (ESV, emphasis mine)
​

Paul affirms their sinfulness prior to Christ. He never says their sinfulness is or was OK. He affirms the absolute necessity for those "in Christ" to actually respond to the Gospel and show forth the fruit of repentance and faith in their lives.



But that's not what we see in Scripture, is it? We see the mission effort of Acts preaching the Gospel indiscriminately and we see those appointed to eternal life believing. So, those who are "in Christ," at some point, respond to the Gospel.

The "in Christ" part of the equation of salvation is only beneficial because Christ died. Being "in Christ" without His death is absolutely meaningless. There is only salvific force in the term "in Christ" because Christ died (as it was always planned for Him to do).

I really admire how you are trying to put the pieces together. However, I fear that you are taking this verse and that verse without being careful with the context. This taking of many verses without careful regard for context is leading you to make some leaps and jumps that are not proper.

This is why the study of Biblical Theology and Systematic Theology are so vitally important. In Biblical Theology, we do see a tension--referred to as "the already/not yet." For example: Christians are already saved, but not yet saved.

So, we are not saying that those "in Christ" have no condemnation. Properly understood, we are saying the removal of condemnation already took place at the cross (for those who are believers, those who are "in Christ") but the removal of condemnation has not yet taken place for those in Christ--until they respond in repentance and faith. Their response is guaranteed by being "in Christ," but the condemnation is not finally lifted until such time as they actually respond.

There is tension here (as there is throughout the Bible).

The Archangel

Look Brother, I just showed you that no one is in Christ prior to salvation, correct? Then how can the elect be in Christ before the foundation of the world, and ever be lost at any time, because according to Eph. 1:4, they were in Christ before they were ever born. Romans 8:1 says there is therefore no more condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, so the elect are in Christ Jesus before they were ever born. I just showed you the inconsistency of the position y'all hold in regards to the elect.

The elect are placed in Christ at the point of salvation, and not before. So then how are the elect in Christ Jesus before the foundation of this world, and yet in need of saving?

 

[convicted1]

:laugh: :thumbsup:

...not to mention the flim-flam and blarney!!!!

If y'all don't quit speaking in tongues, I am going to report y'all to the mods.....too much pentecostalism going on in here for my tatse.....:laugh:

That goes for Brothers Iconoclast, Quantumfaith, and Preacher4Truth!!!

I have my eyes on you guys.......:

 

[The Archangel]

Look Brother, I just showed you that no one is in Christ prior to salvation, correct?

No, friend, you didn't make your case. As I pointed out, Romans 8:1 is not referring to what you say it is referring to. Remember, the "therefore" in Romans 8:1 is referring to what was written before, which it seems you have ignored.

So, your case is not proven--especially because you want to take a verse (not saying what you want it to say, Romans 8:1) and have that verse "disprove" what Ephesians 1:4 says.

Then how can the elect be in Christ before the foundation of the world, and ever be lost at any time, because according to Eph. 1:4, they were in Christ before they were ever born. Romans 8:1 says there is therefore no more condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, so the elect are in Christ Jesus before they were ever born. I just showed you the inconsistency of the position y'all hold in regards to the elect.

How can the elect be in Christ before the foundation of the world? Because that's what Ephesians 1:4 actually says.

As for how the elect can be lost? Well, again, you have the tension between the already and the not yet. The elect are, in one sense, already saved even before they're born, but in another sense they are not saved until they trust Christ. There is a tension, yes, but not a contradiction as you are trying to invent.

Again, you haven't shown an inconsistency because you are taking Romans 8:1 out of its context and trying to interpret Ephesians 1:4 in light of Romans 8:1 when Paul in no way intends Romans 8:1 to say what you are saying it says.

Context is, in fact, king.

The elect are placed in Christ at the point of salvation, and not before. So then how are the elect in Christ Jesus before the foundation of this world, and yet in need of saving?

No. Ephesians clearly says those believing in Christ (the "us" in the passage) are chosen before the foundation of the world.

Election does not in and of itself save. Election ensures salvation at some point. Again, the already-not-yet tension. At some point, the elect must (and will) come to Christ--God sees to that.

Perhaps the problem in comprehension that you are struggling with is that most Calvinists (such as myself) are not hyper-Calvinists (the hyper-Calvinists claiming that the elect will be saved even apart from the Gospel).

So, my encouragement to you, is this: Seek to understand our position, even going so far as to articulate our position to us and then engage the position.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[The Archangel]

This is a typical Calvinist denial of the evidence without actually addressing the evidence.

God did chose us corporately before the foundation of the world, as those the Redeemer would redeem. Thus everyone individually chosen and placed in Christ, the beloved was chosen corporately before the foundation of the world. This view is consistent with the context, the Greek word meanings and with the Greek grammar.

Hmmm....

Well, why don't you parse and outline the passage in Greek? Make your case. Explain the Greek to us.

You've made the assertion that the Greek supports your position. Back up your claim. Explain the Greek.

Oh, and, if you post sources (rather than arguing using your own chops), footnote them, otherwise it's plagiarism.

So, I challenge you: exegete Ephesians 1:4 for us. In fact, why don't you exegete Ephesians 1:3-14.

We'll be waiting.

The Archangel

 

[convicted1]

No, friend, you didn't make your case. As I pointed out, Romans 8:1 is not referring to what you say it is referring to. Remember, the "therefore" in Romans 8:1 is referring to what was written before, which it seems you have ignored.

So, your case is not proven--especially because you want to take a verse (not saying what you want it to say, Romans 8:1) and have that verse "disprove" what Ephesians 1:4 says.



How can the elect be in Christ before the foundation of the world? Because that's what Ephesians 1:4 actually says.

As for how the elect can be lost? Well, again, you have the tension between the already and the not yet. The elect are, in one sense, already saved even before they're born, but in another sense they are not saved until they trust Christ. There is a tension, yes, but not a contradiction as you are trying to invent.

Again, you haven't shown an inconsistency because you are taking Romans 8:1 out of its context and trying to interpret Ephesians 1:4 in light of Romans 8:1 when Paul in no way intends Romans 8:1 to say what you are saying it says.

Context is, in fact, king.



No. Ephesians clearly says those believing in Christ (the "us" in the passage) are chosen before the foundation of the world.

Election does not in and of itself save. Election ensures salvation at some point. Again, the already-not-yet tension. At some point, the elect must (and will) come to Christ--God sees to that.

Perhaps the problem in comprehension that you are struggling with is that most Calvinists (such as myself) are not hyper-Calvinists (the hyper-Calvinists claiming that the elect will be saved even apart from the Gospel).

So, my encouragement to you, is this: Seek to understand our position, even going so far as to articulate our position to us and then engage the position.

Blessings,

The Archangel

First of all, thanks for the civil conversation!! I have always found you to be gracious to me, and for that, again, I am thankful. :thumbs::love2:

Now, in Ephesians, you find that Paul is writing to the church at Ephesus, correct? The reason why I am stating the obvious is to prove a point. Ephesus was a gentile country, and before Jesus broke down the middle wall of partition, the Jews were God's chosen(elected) people. Sure, you can find where Ruth and Rahab were adopted into the Jewish people by faith, but they also had to go along with the Jewish traditions. Now that Jesus died on the cross, but rather, be risen, that we all, both Jew and Gentile, have access to the Father. This is what Paul is meaning when you see pronouns used such as us and we, stating both Jews and Gentiles.

Now that Jesus is sitting on the right hand of God in heaven, the call is going out to both the Jews and Gentiles. John 12:32 Jesus stated this, "If I be lifted up, I will draw all men unto me". Prior to this, Jesus came to His own first, and after they rejected Him, you see where He spoke with Gentile people such as the Syrophenician(sp?) woman, the Samiritan woman at the well in John chapter 4 etc.

Election starts and ends with Jesus. If Jesus hadn't done His part dying on the cross, none of us would be saved. God chose(elected) His Son to die for our sins. I am 99.9999999999999999% sure you will not agree with me, but we do agree on this, we both love the Lord, and thank Him for what He did for us!! Amen???

Have a blessed rest of the week, Brother!!

i am I AM's!!

Willis

 

[12strings]

One side says...

The elect are placed in Christ at the point of salvation, and not before. So then how are the elect in Christ Jesus before the foundation of this world, and yet in need of saving?

And the rebuttal:

No. Ephesians clearly says those believing in Christ (the "us" in the passage) are chosen before the foundation of the world.
Election does not in and of itself save. Election ensures salvation at some point. Again, the already-not-yet tension. At some point, the elect must (and will) come to Christ--God sees to that.

I will put the verses here for us to read again:

For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. In love 5 he predestined us for adoption to sonship[c] through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— (Eph. 1:4-5)

I don't think it is necessary to assert that those chosen were in fact "In Christ" before the foundation of the world, merely that they were chosen to be in Christ at some point in the future. So I would agree that I was not in Christ at the foundation of the world, but that God chose me to be in Christ, and because of that He sent Christ to take my sin on the cross, then sent people to teach me the gospel and opened my heart to receive it. Now I am in Christ.

I think it is possible to uphold individual election without saying that we were "in Christ" from the foundation of the world.

-andy

 

[Rippon]

Pay no attention to Archangel, he simply misrepresents others.

What a sad joke that remark was. Are you foisting your particular tendencies onto others? I find that you misrepresent a great deal here and on the Bible Translation forum.(Especially the latter where there is no reasoning with you. You consistently misrepresent what I have said.)

Archangel demonstrates by his posts on the BB that he is a balanced and godly individual. He asks repeatedly if he has fairly represented what others have said and desires to clarify as uch as possible. I find his posts very edifying as he seeks to be biblical and his explanations are very helpful to me.

I am a Calvinist.Perhaps you'll say that is why I support AA. However,I think many non-Cals here would agree that your charges do not stick Van.

 

[kyredneck]

....Archangel demonstrates by his posts on the BB that he is a balanced and godly individual. He asks repeatedly if he has fairly represented what others have said and desires to clarify as uch as possible. I find his posts very edifying as he seeks to be biblical and his explanations are very helpful to me.

I am a Calvinist.Perhaps you'll say that is why I support AA. However,I think many non-Cals here would agree that your charges do not stick Van.

Amen. IMO, we are very fortunate to have Archangel's participation here on the BB.

 

[Luke2427]

This is not at all what the text teaches


Not all are "potentially" elected anywhere.
Jesus is the elect servant......but The elect are actually chosen in Him.Not potentially ...but actually.

What is trying to be passed off as balanced ...is an out right denial of biblical truth .



There is no contradiction. The bible clearly declares the truth of the covenant redemption that was accomplished at the cross.
Some are still learning about it...others oppose themselves in unbelief of this truth.

Some look to these explanations that are unbib;ical compromise...so as to avoid what they think are emotionally hard sayings of scripture. They try to avoid, or shrink back from the verses.

Yea, I think you nailed it.

Election is not potential. It is actual. The Bible everywhere affirms this. To say otherwise is to twist the truth.

They tend to have a problem with this potential vs actual business.

They do not believe that what Christ did at Calvary was ACTUAL atonement. They believe it is POTENTIAL atonement.

I think this is dangerous.

 

[Aaron]

Look Brother, I just showed you that no one is in Christ prior to salvation, correct? Then how can the elect be in Christ before the foundation of the world, and ever be lost at any time, because according to Eph. 1:4, they were in Christ before they were ever born. Romans 8:1 says there is therefore no more condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, so the elect are in Christ Jesus before they were ever born. I just showed you the inconsistency of the position y'all hold in regards to the elect.

How is Christ the lamb slain from the foundation of the world?