Calvinism is based upon an assumption

Who is Jesus talking to in John chapter 6?


37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

39 And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.


I believe it was at least 5000 people.

 

Well shucks, you beat me to it

 

That's a big assumption you are making, since the text does not use the word "allow" and your interpretation necessitates reading that word into the text, and a whole lot more.

Not only that, but that interpretation doesn't fit the immediate context very well. The word "But" at the beginning of the verse ties it to the previous verses. Paul is assuring them that they are different from those who did not receive that love of the truth so that they would be saved, to whom God sends a strong delusion. Why can they be assured of that? Because God has chosen them for salvation from the beginning and He will sanctify them and keep them in faith. This is incentive for them to "stand fast."

Except that you missed the argument. It was not simply that the words "you" and "me" are intermingled, but that the language construct says that the reason (the word FOR) that "we" (including Paul) are God's workmanship is because salvation is by grace through faith.

What about that is not faith? Faith is simply enduring confidence in God's provision for us. Paul had that, did he not?

Furthermore, Paul tells us that his salvation is a pattern for us:

This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptance, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of whom I am chief. However, for this reason I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might show all longsuffering, AS A PATTERN to those who are going to believe on Him for everlasting life. (1 Timothy 2:7)

Yes, I do, because Jesus himself calls it faith when he says to Thomas, "Because you have seen me, YOU HAVE BELIEVED."

[ February 07, 2003, 02:55 AM: Message edited by: russell55 ]

 

I find much humor in this! I haven't even read the thread, but I know what it is about. And what is really funny is that Bro Bill's point is what is based upon assumptions. He assumes that certain texts were written to the apostles only, but offers no proof that they are so. Therefore he is saying that we are wrong based upon his assumption. And let me see if I am right, he is wanting us to prove him wrong. And how are we supposed to prove him wrong? With truth. And what is truth? Scripture. And who is scripture written too? Well evidently the apostles. There is nothing to prove on our part, why do you assume those cannot be written for the elect, the church, the body of Christ? But your opinion must have more insight than the whole of scripture. I will go back now and read the thread, if I am wrong, I will apologize. If not, the point remains, these are your opinions, not facts.

 

For cryin out loud Sturgman, What proof is necessary to one who reads Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John? It that the best you can do?

Bill does not make such an assumption. He knows that the New Testament Scriptures were written by the Apostles and not to them. Which is more than it appears that you know.

Jesus spoke many times directly to and about the apostles and to and about no one else. None of the apostolic writings do the same. An apostle writing down what is said to the apostles is not the same as the Apostles writing to the believers in distant places, or to believers wherever they may be.

For example:
The last few verses of Matthew was directly aimed at the apostles, who were charged with going into all the world making disciples, baptising them... etc.

When Jesus came to the men in the boat, who do you think was in the boat? It certainly wasn't the multitude that Jesus had just left, the boat wasn't that big!

When Jesus spoke to Peter and told him that before the cock crows that Peter would deny Him thrice, he wasn't addressing the Sanhedron.

It's to bad that your beliefs have been challenged to the point that all you can do is strike out against personalities.

 

Ok, no apology needed, I was right.

But let me throw some stuff out.

Bro Bill, you said-
You're the one whose interpretation is based upon an assumption. Not mine! Just because there are more of you, you all think you don't have to provide scriptural support for your view.

No that is not true. We have offered many scriptures, but when we offer them, your responce is"that is written of someone else." but that is your only proof.You said Paul was saved, not through faith, but because of site. Many others saw God's miraculoous signs and were not saved. So the question lies, with your line of belief, you really cannot believe in an effectual calling and still hold to your truth can you? For Paul would even have had the right to decline God's grace, for if those who were there when Lazarus was raised, or any other healing, they did not believe, even though they were eye witnesses. Your point is illogical and unfounded.

You also said-
You ask me to provide support that we are saved differently than the apostles. I provide 5 scripturally supported arguements and none of you have even attempted to address them. You all just keep saying, "were going to ignore you until you have scriptural support." 1) If your waiting for me to find a verse that spells out my exact belief, it's not going to happen. 2) And guess what, you ain't going to find one for the Calvinistic system either!

You have two points here as I have definend them.

1) We knew that one.
2) We already have, but you don't see that they apply to us, and you have not (As you believe you have) sufficiently proven that they don't apply to us.

 

Bro Bill, you also said-
You're willing to accept the paradox that God's Sovereignity and man's responsiblity creates in the Calvinistic system. I'm not. It is confusing and unstable and I don't believe that God would author a confusing and unstable system of belief.

So God would not come up with a paradox such as the first shall be last, and those who would want to keep there life will lose it for my sake. And other such paradoxes in scripture.

Come on Bill, try harder.

 

Let's here it from the First (and olny) church of Yelsew.

Yelsew, it is bad enough that you can't interpret the simplist of scriptures, but then to jump in to help Bro Bill out. I think he would do better off without it. We already know of you that scriptures are not reliable by themselves in your opinion.

Bro Bill has not made his point. He has made assumptions and that is what we are pointing out. To say that we have not made ours just because he is unwilling to believe that those scriptures apply to him, does not negate our point.

Thanks Yelsew, but I don't argue scripture with those who don't fully rely on it.

 

1. Because scripture doesn't tell us that He treats us differently.

2. Because the scripture speaks a whole lot about being chosen, elect, predestined--and the amount of space spent on it certainly seems like overkill if it only actually applied to a handful of NT apostles.

3. Because the scripture says we believe like they do. See the scripture quoted in my previous post and also Ephesians 1.

In Him we also have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who works all things according to the counself of His will, that we who first trusted in Christ would be to the praise of His glory. In whom you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, in whom also having believed you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.

This passage points out that those who came later were saved by trusting and believing in the same way that those who first trusted were saved because of it their trust.

4. Because Romans 8:28 says it is those who love God (not just apostles) who are called according to His purpose.

5. Because we are being built into the same building as they are for the same purpose.

Now therefore, you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone, in whom the whole building, being fitted together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.

6. Because the scripture you've used so far to prove otherwise doesn't say what you want it to say.

[ February 07, 2003, 02:49 AM: Message edited by: russell55 ]

 

4   But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us,
5   even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ ( by grace you have been saved),
6   and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
7   so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
8   For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
9   not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
10   For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

By that same logic, you would also have to assume that Paul was not saved by grace either, because in the passage it states that "YOU are saved by grace through faith" but it also states earlier that "By grace YOU are saved" So to make the first arguement that Paul was not saved through faith, you also must say that Paul was saved through his own merit. And of course this also contradicts other scriptures.

Note that the text also states "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them." So the WE here is talking about WE all of us, yet it clearly states that we are His workmanship, CREATED for good works, which God PREPARED beforehand that so that we would walk in them.

Your point is not valid, I am sorry to break it to you.

 

Sturgman, I suppose that is how you treat the law as well, you simply do not deal with it, even though Jesus declared that he did not come to do away with the law but to fulfill the law. (make it complete.) And that not a jot or tittle shall pass away until Jesus comes to reign here on earth.

Then why are you not offering animal sacrafices as instructed by Moses?

What a hipocritical stance you take!

 

Is this not assumption?

Bro. Dallas

 

Jesus is not only speaking in John 10 to the apostles; but is also speaking of the nation of Israel out of whom the apostles were called. This is the "flock" which he is referring when he says other sheep not of 'this flock.'

God bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

Br Bill, it is you who are not addressing scripture. Please address the argument at hand instead of passing it off as though I have not. Let me break it down a little more for you.

4   But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved US,
5   even when WE were dead in OUR transgressions, made US alive TOGETHER with Christ ( BY GRACE YOU HAVE BEEN SAVED),
6   and raised US up with Him, and seated US with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
7   so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward US in Christ Jesus.
8   For by grace YOU have been saved through faith; and that not of YOURSELVES, IT IS THE GIFT OF GOD;
9   not as a result of works, so that NNE may boast.
10   For WE are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that WE would walk in them.


Br Bill, you stated to Russell55 that the text clearly pointed out that Paul made the distinction in verse 8 that it was "For YOU were saved by grace through FAITH" and therefore must be implying that he was not saved by faith but by a unliquely divine intervention. By this same treatment of hermenutics you must agree that Paul does not feel like he is saved by Grace either, for in verse 5 "even when WE were dead in OUR transgressions, made US alive TOGETHER with Christ ( BY GRACE YOU HAVE BEEN SAVED)" it is clearly stated that Paul makes the distinction of saying that "by grace YOU have been saved".

Of course no one believes that Paul was saved by his own merit, but the treatment you give these verses imply that he was, so therefore we must agree that this is not the meaning of these verses. We must assume that if Paul said you were saved by grace and Paul was also saved by grace, then when Paul says "you are saved by grace through faith" he must also be speaking of the same conversion he received.

Then, again you did not address that the text also reads, "For WE are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that WE would walk in them." Paul mentioned Good works that were prepared beforehand, or fore ordained, for WE, all the believers. WHy would God fore ordain works for people who were not divinely called? How could he ensure that these works would be accomplished if they still had free will? (Of which we have had no scriptural backing of)

Please Bro Bill, you asked that we give your nonsence the once over, and many of us have. You refse to listen to it so that you can say we have not refuted you. Please give an account for the whole of scripture.

With respect,
sturgman

 

Through faith... Does not mean through their faith... But through the Faith of the Son of God Jesus Christ... That is the only way any of us are saved whether Prophet... King... Apostle... Or just plain folk like you and I!... Quit reading into scriptures what is not there!... Brother Glen