An Unanswered Argument for all the Bible Believing Calvinists

So what?????? So this mystery which is the exact same word used in both passages is said to have been revealed by God to __________ Who? THE APOSTLES AND PROPHETS (but their dead, but that supports my view of OT election as well so we'll mention them too). Which contradicts the idea that Eph.1:3-12 have all the saints in focus. THAT'S...SO WHAT!!!!

First of all, I don't recall communicating any assumptions about Ephesians 1:9. But as to your assumption that God revealed these mysteries only to the apostles (and I assume you'll concede the prophets, too):

Psst... Don't look now, but I think that Paul, speaking by the Holy Spirit just let the cat out of the bag regarding this mystery. So much for God revealing it only to the apostles. </font>[/QUOTE]We both know that the apostles revealed these mysteries to all the saints, but that is not what either of these passages say. They speak of God's revealing to the Apostles, not the apostles revealing to the saints. Look again at 1:9, who does the revealing? GOD Therefore, who must be the referent? THE APOSTLES

Point made! Even other Calvinist on this board can see that "the possiblity" is there, but you are so cruel, arrogant and blinded by your lack of objectivity you wouldn't admit any possiblity that didn't exactly line up with the assumptions you bring to the text.

Because something doesn't agree with your assumptions you deem it as irrational. Go look up the word in the dictionary and you'll see your picture right beside it.

By the way, you call it rational to believe that God geniunely calls all men to salvation without providing them the means by which they can respond to that call? The paradoxes that Calvinism creates is what is irrational.

Oh, it just goes to show the "uniqueness" of the way in which Paul receieved "grace". Which goes to the question of the "means" of salvation. Grace was "dispensated" to him. That a unique "means" different from the means of "faith" by which we are saved.

If you are fimilar with Paul's conversion experience, his salvation occured at the time of his appointment to become an Apostle.

A call to service was not seen as different from salvation in the eyes of scripture. They are one in the same. We have made them into seperate callings.

The point made concerning God's revelation of mysteries to the Apostles in 1:9 has not been refuted, therefore my point still stands. Paul's referent (us/we) in 1:3-12 was the apostles, thus supporting my assumptions, not yours.

Bro. Bill

 

Ok, you insist on making this difficult by getting picky because you know your wrong. Ok, I'll go along with you distractions. Just as God had made this mystery known to the Apostles he also had made known mysteries to the Prophets of old. Isaiah speaks of the coming messiah and many prophets seem to indicate the "hardening" of Israel for the ingrafting of the Gentiles. But according to this passage, it had not been made know to the "sons of men" in ages past. Now it was being made know by God to the Apostles so as to be revealed to the saints.

Eph. 1:9 speaks of God's revelation, not the Apostles or the Prophets. GODS

Therefore the referent must be the divinely sent messengers the apostles and before them the prophets. This does absolutely nothing to help your point. It's a mere distraction to divert attention because you know your arguments stinks. But you keep trying...ok.

Wow. You are worse than most Arminians when it comes to reinterpreting a passage to fit your assumptions. The verse says, "Wherein He [God] hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence; Having made known unto us the mystery of his will."

Let's go to school Npetreley:
Who does the revealing, class? God does.

Who does he do the revealing to, class? The Apostles (and the before them to the Prophets)

Therefore, who is Paul speaking about in this passage? The Apostles.

Yes, Npetreley, you have your hand up, do you have a question?

"Uh, yeah, uh, your stupid and nobody likes you and we're ignoring you because 'your questions don't merit a response', oh but wait, you make a good point so I guess I better say something now, Uh, Paul says the prophets too, so your wrong! He means all the saints! You dumby, I'm a Christian, you idiot, I treat stangers better than brothers on the Baptist Board, your ugly."

The teacher responds: Well, Npety, that's not very nice to speak that way to fellow believers. Do we need to go through that again for you slower. Look at verse 8 that we just read together, "he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom.." Now, let me ask you a question. Do the first century Christians act in God's wisdom? Or is it the apostles through the spoken and written word who impart to them the wisdom of God to show them how they should act?" Before you answer you may want to look at the problems in the first century churches.

Believers aren't wise within themselves, this board is case and point, we glean our wisdom from divine revelation with the help of the interpretive powers of the the Holy Spirit. The scripture, WRITTEN BY APOSTLES, is our standard of God's wisdom. Which you insist God gives to all saints in the same way he did the apostles.

You get an "F" for poor hermeneutics and for just plain rudeness.

Ok, whatever Npety, ignore the means God uses to impart to us that wisdom and those mystries, eventually people will all begin to ignore the divine gifting of the apostles' wisdom. Afterall, according to you we all have equal wisdom and we have all heard the mystery from God himself, let's write a new Bible, sense we are so inspired! GET REAL!!!!

It's amasing to me that your willing to undermine the apostles authority by explaining away their uniquness and divine calling by making us all equals with them. Why? Just to support your assumptions.

That might be Paul's possible intent if he did not go on to say in the very next verses, "That we should be to the praise of his glory, those WHO FIRST TRUSTED IN CHRIST. In whom you also trusted, AFTER YOU HEARD THE WORD OF TRUTH."

I noticed you didn't deal with these passages, they didn't fit your theory did they. Details...details

When the the "first who trusted" ("we/us") trust in Christ? When God revealed to them directly. DIVINE REVELATION!

When did ("you" )the ones he speaks to in verse 13 trust in Christ? After they heard the MESSAGE OF THE APOSTELS.

If Paul means to apply all that is in verses 3-12 to all the saints why does he even include verses 13-14? What's the point? Its redudant at best. He just says the same things again. Please explain this???????

Also, Paul 'despensation of Grace' in Eph. 3:2 and his "effectual calling" in 3:7 also set Paul apart as unique. Paul's appointing to apostleship cannot be seperated from his salvation, just as the other apostles calling are not separate, as you assumed in your last post. Jesus did not say, "I chose you first for salvation then to go and bear fruit." in John 15:16, which by the way is a prime Calvinistic proof text to support God's election for Salvation. So, now you've not only started to contradict Apostolic authortity, you're now contradicting Calvinism by insisting that Paul's "effectual calling" was to preach and not to salvation as well, as if their are two different "effectual callings." Is that a new belief system you're starting there Npety? The two "effectual calls" of God, he effectually calls you first to salvation then effecually calls you to bear fruit then he effectually calls you to fulfill His divine purpose. Sounds like it would have been better for God to make a bunch of puppets and have a big puppet show for himself. Aren't you contradicting Calvinism by assuming that Paul's effectual calling to preach was separate from his calling to serve?

Let's wait and see what Npety will contradict next...

Bro. Bill

 

There he goes again ladies and gentlemen.

Npetrelism--the avoiding of arguments for the sake of self preservation.

He contradicts himself in the scripture and he even contradicts Calvinism by creating two types of "effectual calls." Yet, all he says is, "It's alive" Hardy har har

You're argument is "dead, its dead I tell you!" :

 

Rufus, I appreciate you transcribing you commentary for us to read. At least the scholar you are quoting acknowlegdes Paul's distinction of Referant's based upon his use of what Npetreley calls PRONOUNISM. It's interesting that even Calvinistic scholars recongize this change in referants based upon his pronouns and direction, yet Npetreley is so bent on "winning" an arguement he doesn't even concede the obvious points of agreement. This makes debate very frustrating and fruitless.

I don't see how your quote provides a link between the Jewish referant (apostles) and the Gentile referant in regard to Predestination and Election. I only see the link of their trust; their inheretance through the Holy Spirit; and their redemption. Nothing is said that links the Gentile referants to Predestination/Election or effectual calling expect the assumption that it must be so.

God Bless,
Bill

 

A display of "Npetrelism" at its finest.

 

What was revealed? The mysteries: which is that God has provided "The WAY" for salvation to the Gentiles.

Who revealed this mystery? God

To whom did he reveal this mystery too? Apostles and Prophets.

Who did the apostles (namely Paul) reveal it to? The Gentiles as seen in verses 13-15.

I'm not confused about these clear facts. It is you who must provide the link from the referent in 3-12 to the referent in 13-14 concerning these matters. The text does not provide the link, you must assume it is there.

If I haven't made any arguments worth answering, why are you here?

I've met few Calvinist who think any Arminian's arguments are worthy of response, yet they just keep responding. It must be another one of them paradoxes.

 

Bro. Bill,

This argument could be used to say that only Paul was elected. How??

Because each of the Apostles left Christ when he was arrested; Peter openly denied him, even in His presence, later Peter also feared the Jews to the point that he was withstood by Paul. Yeah, only Paul acted in the wisdom revealed to him from God, thus only Paul was elected.

Paul, once converted never denied Christ, never stood with the Jews because he feared persecution, yeah, I believe these facts would show us the election of Paul and the fact that these other men were believers because they chose to be; thus their weaknesses are more apparent.
</font>[/QUOTE]Dallas,

Careful now. Are you saying that everyone is as wise as the Apostles were in the inspired writings.

I never said the men were perfect. I said they were given the wisdom of God in order to make it known to us.

You seem to be questioning that wisdom. Please explain yourself.

With Respect,
Bill

 

Paul's example of humility, like Christ's example, in no way lessons his God given authority in imparting the wisdom of God to us.

Yes, his weakness showed God's glory but his authority in displaying God's wisdom to us should not be undermined to prove your assumptions.

Bill

 

You must be new to our discussion. I provide an interpretation to Eph. 1 in my thread titled "I'm sorry, We all make assumptions, lets START OVER"

I explain there that the apostles are the referants in verses 3-12 while Paul is using the "us/we" pronouns but his referant obviously changes from him and those "who first trusted in Christ" to his audience, "those who believed through their message" when his pronouns change to "you in verses 13 and following. You can see the full argument if you read through that thread.

I never state that the apostles are merely being predestined to preach as you seem to assert. You may need to explain further. Thanks.

With Respect,
Bro. Bill

 

You just don't seem to understand that there are two beings doing the revealling and two groups doing the listening.

God reveals it first. To whom?

The Apostle during NT times and the Prophets in the OT times (this in no way undermines my argument, it actually strengthens it)

Who reveals this mystery the second time, and to whom? The Prophets and the Apostles. Specifically the apostles make this mystery clearly known to the saints using the Prophets words as support.

So, lets follow the order. God to Messengers; then Messengers to Saints. With that in mind what does Eph. 1:8-9 say? "He [GOD] made abound toward US in all wisdom and prudence, have made known to us the mystery of His will."

God the first to do the revealing, made know to US (the messengers)

However, I do understand your point. You saying that God made known the mystery of His will to all the saints through his messengers but Paul just doesn't refer to those messengers in this text. Right?

Well, then your the one who has to assume that is what Paul's intention is here, because that is not what the text specifically says. Even Sturgman, who shows intergity and objectivity, says, "This could be taken both ways." In your stubbornness and obvious bitterness toward me, you won't even admit that.

Npetreley, the argument that I'm refering to you ignoring concerns the point that your assumption is weakened by the fact that his REFERANT obviously changes in verse 13. This point you have ignored and dismissed as being a joke in your eyes calling it "pronounism" as if its a new argument. Yet, you ignorant of the fact that there are many commentators, if not most of them, that reconize this change in pronouns as an obvious change in those to whom he is referring. You're not willing to admit that because that would weaken if not completely destroy the assumption that you make concerning verse 9. Thus, you have avoided the argument altogether.

Bill