Ask Away

[Skandelon]

It would be useless to do so until you can see that the elect are those who are justified, and that the non-elect are those who are not.

Ok, let's presume that is the case. Now, if that is the case, tell me why Paul would say that those who have stumbled have not stumbled beyond recovery?

Do you understand? For the sake of this argument, I'm conceding that the elect are those who are justified, and that the non-elect are those who are not. So, those who "stumbled" are the non-elect, right? If so, why does Paul say they haven't stumbled beyond recovery? And why does he go on to say they may be provoked to envy and saved? That is the question you have avoided for about 13 posts now.

 

[annsni]

Again, you are reading your perspective into the text.

I was talking to an Army recruiter the other day and asked him what he was doing this week. He said that was taking his recruits this week up to the base to start their training.

Now, should I presume that those "recruits" going with him to the base were the only people this man attempted to recruit? Obviously not, yet that is exactly what you have done with the text. Sometimes scripture refers to believers as 'the called ones' or 'the elect' or other such terms, but nothing about that name suggests that others weren't also invited/called or elected to receive God's gracious appeal. The term assumes the response of faith and whether that response was effectually caused by God or not isn't revealed simply by the use of that word. That is something YOU read into the text, period.

Is there a passage that states that the elect of God are not saved? That God elects some and they are not saved?

 

[Iconoclast]

Is there a passage that states that the elect of God are not saved? That God elects some and they are not saved?

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[Skandelon]

Is there a passage that states that the elect of God are not saved? That God elects some and they are not saved?

No, as I've explained the term was used for years in reference to all Jews, as they were known to be the people who God chose to send his revelation. The mystery of the gospel was that God had, from the beginning, chose to make the appeal to all men of all nations to be saved by grace through faith, thus revealing all were chosen to receive the means of saving mercy. Thus, the elect became a term in reference to all the church, all those who believe in much the same manner new army recruits are called "recruits." It's not meant to suggest that others were NOT recruited, it just means to show they were.

 

[annsni]

No, as I've explained the term was used for years in reference to all Jews, as they were known to be the people who God chose to send his revelation. The mystery of the gospel was that God had, from the beginning, chose to make the appeal to all men of all nations to be saved by grace through faith, thus revealing all were chosen to receive the means of saving mercy. Thus, the elect became a term in reference to all the church, all those who believe in much the same manner new army recruits are called "recruits." It's not meant to suggest that others were NOT recruited, it just means to show they were.

So in other words, there will be elect in hell?

 

[Skandelon]

So in other words, there will be elect in hell?

No. Do you call all those who an Army recruiter attempted to recruit a "recruit?" No.

Now, are there those who God chose to invite to his banquet who will be in hell? Yes. See the parable of the banquet.

 

[annsni]

No. Do you call all those who an Army recruiter attempted to recruit a "recruit?" No.

Now, are there those who God chose to invite to his banquet who will be in hell? Yes. See the parable of the banquet.

So we choose to be elect. We are only elect when we decide to be saved.

But does not the Greek word mean chosen? How can we be chosen if we are only elect by OUR choice? Or is it that God chose us because we chose Him first?

 

[Aaron]

Again, you are reading your perspective into the text.

I was talking to an Army recruiter the other day and asked him what he was doing this week. He said that was taking his recruits this week up to the base to start their training.



Now, should I presume that those "recruits" going with him to the base were the only people this man attempted to recruit? Obviously not, yet that is exactly what you have done with the text. Sometimes scripture refers to believers as 'the called ones' or 'the elect' or other such terms, but nothing about that name suggests that others weren't also invited/called or elected to receive God's gracious appeal. The term assumes the response of faith and whether that response was effectually caused by God or not isn't revealed simply by the use of that word. That is something YOU read into the text, period.

Who cares about your talk with the army recruiter? I only care what the Scriptures say. Look at what it says about the elect:

1. They have obtained that for which Israel seeks.
2. The elect are those God has chosen.
3. The elect are those God has justified.
4. The elect are those who will be gathered and delivered from great tribulation while the rest are judged.

 

[Aaron]

The term [elect] assumes the response of faith and whether that response was effectually caused by God or not isn't revealed simply by the use of that word.

So, in other words, the NT use of the term is to describe believers? Is that what you're saying?

 

[Aaron]

Ok, let's presume that is the case. Now, if that is the case, tell me why Paul would say that those who have stumbled have not stumbled beyond recovery?

He doesn't say "those who have stumbled." He asked, "Did [natural] Israel as a nation stumble beyond recovery?" No, because some of them are among the elect.

So, those who "stumbled" are the non-elect, right?

No, those who have been blinded and cut off.

 

[Skandelon]

So we choose to be elect. We are only elect when we decide to be saved.

But does not the Greek word mean chosen? How can we be chosen if we are only elect by OUR choice? Or is it that God chose us because we chose Him first?

Yes, it does mean "chosen," and as I explained, ALL JEWS were considered to be CHOSEN/ELECT until the "mystery of the gospel was made known." In other words they were known to be INVITED TO THE BANQUET (recruited if you will), through the special revelation sent uniquely to them. Now, all are chosen to receive the invitations as the gospel is sent to all creatures, but still the term is used throughout scripture in reference to Jews or sometimes more broadly, the church including both Jews and Gentiles as people begin to understand that God, from the beginning has elected the Gentiles too.

 

[Skandelon]

Who cares about your talk with the army recruiter?

Yeah, heaven forbid you actually take the time to understand our perspective through looking objectively at comparisons. It must be much easier for you to just continue to misrepresent us and attack, right?

I only care what the Scriptures say. Look at what it says about the elect:

1. They have obtained that for which Israel seeks.

1. Correct. "That the Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, have obtained it, a righteousness that is by faith; but Israel, who pursued a law of righteousness, has not attained it. Why not? Because they pursued it not by faith but as if it were by works. They stumbled over the "stumbling stone." "
   
   

   [*]The elect are those God has chosen.
   [*]The elect are those God has justified.
   [*]The elect are those who will be gathered and delivered from great tribulation while the rest are judged.

The recruits are those the recruiter has chosen.
The recruits are those the recruiter as qualified for service
The recruits are those will be trained to defend our country

Does that suggest the recruiter didn't attempt to recruit any other people? No. You would have to presume that, which is what you do regarding the word "elect."

 

[Skandelon]

He doesn't say "those who have stumbled." He asked, "Did [natural] Israel as a nation stumble beyond recovery?" No, because some of them are among the elect.

Ahhh, so now you want to make this about nations not individuals anymore? I thought nations were made up of individuals? So, if the elect never "stumbled" and those who stumble can never recover, then how does this verse make any sense whatsoever?

Let's read it together again:

"The others were hardened, as it is written: "God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes so that they could not see and ears so that they could not hear, to this very day." And David says: "May their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them. May their eyes be darkened so they cannot see, and their backs be bent forever." Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their fullness bring! I am talking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch as I am the apostle to the Gentiles, I make much of my ministry in the hope that I may somehow arouse my own people to envy and save some of them.

Notice who we are talking about. "The rest who were hardened." He goes on to quote texts about those hardened and then asks "Did they (those who were hardened) stumble beyond recovery?"

And, in your system, what would provoking them to envy have anything to do with their becoming saved? How can they who stumble be provoked to envy and saved?

No, those who have been blinded and cut off.

Didn't you say earlier that those who stumbled were the same as those "cut off/blinded" and that they could not recover after stumbling?

 

[annsni]

Yes, it does mean "chosen," and as I explained, ALL JEWS were considered to be CHOSEN/ELECT until the "mystery of the gospel was made known." In other words they were known to be INVITED TO THE BANQUET (recruited if you will), through the special revelation sent uniquely to them. Now, all are chosen to receive the invitations as the gospel is sent to all creatures, but still the term is used throughout scripture in reference to Jews or sometimes more broadly, the church including both Jews and Gentiles as people begin to understand that God, from the beginning has elected the Gentiles too.

How do we reconcile that with Romans 11:7 "Israel failed to obtain what it was seeking. The elect obtained it, but the rest were hardened"

 

[psalms109:31]

I praise God they were not blinded or hardened beyond recovery, that they turn to Jesus the veil will be removed. To give up what they have been taught for such a long time and turn to Jesus? They will not see God through Jesus, but be blinded until they do.

2 Corinthians 3:
12 Therefore, since we have such a hope, we are very bold. 13 We are not like Moses, who would put a veil over his face to prevent the Israelites from seeing the end of what was passing away. 14 But their minds were made dull, for to this day the same veil remains when the old covenant is read. It has not been removed, because only in Christ is it taken away. 15 Even to this day when Moses is read, a veil covers their hearts. 16 But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.

Hebrews 3:
15 As has just been said:

“Today, if you hear his voice,
do not harden your hearts
as you did in the rebellion.”

16 Who were they who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of Egypt? 17 And with whom was he angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies perished in the wilderness? 18 And to whom did God swear that they would never enter his rest if not to those who disobeyed? 19 So we see that they were not able to enter, because of their unbelief.

 

[Aaron]

Let's read it together again:

Reading together requires that your reading comprehension skills be as well-honed as mine.

"The others were hardened, as it is written: "God gave them a spirit of stupor, eyes so that they could not see and ears so that they could not hear, to this very day." And David says: "May their table become a snare and a trap, a stumbling block and a retribution for them. May their eyes be darkened so they cannot see, and their backs be bent forever." Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious.

Notice who we are talking about.

Elect Israel, for they are not all Israel which are of Israel. Israel will be made envious, not the ones who are hardened.

"The rest who were hardened." He goes on to quote texts about those hardened and then asks "Did they (those who were hardened) stumble beyond recovery?"

The elect weren't hardened, vs 7.

 

[Skandelon]

Reading together requires that your reading comprehension skills be as well-honed as mine.

Meaning you need to have been properly indoctrinated by the right crowd. :laugh:

:1_grouphug:

Elect Israel,

No, clearly he is talking about "the rest who are hardened" which is why he refers to their stumbling. You ignored my questions, btw. I asked about why you are addressing nations and not individuals and about how you claimed that those who stumbled could never recover. I wonder why you didn't address that?

Israel will be made envious, not the ones who are hardened.

Oh, so the individual Jews who stumbled, or who were hardened, or who were cut off don't have a hope of recovery, but somehow the individual Jews representing what you called "natural Israel" who haven't stumbled, been hardened or cut off, might "be saved," leave their unbelief," "not stumble beyond recovery," and "be grafted in again???" Got it, clear as mud on foggy night. :thumbsup:

The elect weren't hardened, vs 7.

Yet, those who were hardened haven't stumbled beyond recovery, because God has bound them over (hardened them) to disobedience in order to have mercy on them. As Paul's concluding remarks explain:

"32 For God has bound all men over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all."

 

[Skandelon]

Let's break this down. You say that Paul means "natural Israel" (meaning Jews according to the flesh) hasn't stumbled beyond recovery. And in the past you have argued along with the rest of Calvinists that nations are made up of individuals:

So we have two types of these "natural Israelites":

1) The Jew who has stumbled, been cut off and judicially hardened by God.

2) The Jew who hasn't stumbled, been cut off, or hardened. (what you would call the "elect" Jew)

So, when Paul speaks of the natural Israel who HAS STUMBLED but not BEYOND RECOVERY, how can he be representing the 2nd group of Jews who have never stumbled? And if he is representing them why speak of their "recovering" from stumbling? Why speak of their being "grafted BACK in AGAIN if they were never cut off to begin with?

 

[Aaron]

We can go back and forth about this ad nauseum. I'm not going to quibble with you over every trifle. Paul identifies those who were blinded (gk: hardened) as the non-elect. That pretty much settles it. It doesn't matter whether one believes God is the one who chooses, or that the choice belongs to the elect, we're told that God foreknows the elect. When one speaks of the elect, he is speaking of the elect of all time. They are not the ones who were hardened.

Neither does the use of the plural pronoun "they" when speaking of elect Israel's stumbling as a whole provide any difficulty. We often, and well within normal and natural usage, interchange plural and singular pronouns when speaking of groups. One often hears of the government referred to as "they" or "it." Where "they" or "them" is used when speaking of the stumbling of Israel, one can just as naturally say "he" or "him" without changing the meaning.

So, where you think "Have they stumbled that they should fall," must mean a plurality of individuals, it can just as easily be said, "Has he stumbled that he should fall," because "they" is referring to the collective.

Once you admit the Scriptural definition and use of the word elect, the meaning in vs 23-32 is clear, for no one who is not elect is foreknown, and no one who is not foreknown is predestined to be conformed to the image of God's Son.

The hardening has happened in part to the collective, and it's only temporary in regard to the collective. It certainly wasn't temporary in the cases of Herod or Caiaphas, or Judas. And Paul, being of the elect, was not one chosen to be blinded, but who but God would have known until his conversion? So, don't boast against the branches. There is nothing in you that makes you any more desireable than a natural one.

 

[Aaron]

So, when Paul speaks of the natural Israel who HAS STUMBLED but not BEYOND RECOVERY, how can he be representing the 2nd group of Jews who have never stumbled? And if he is representing them why speak of their "recovering" from stumbling? Why speak of their being "grafted BACK in AGAIN if they were never cut off to begin with?

Did the man who is as a branch that is cut off the Vine ever truly abide in the Vine to begin with? John 15:4-6.