"Calvinist teach false doctrine".

[Andy T.]

OK...you say you have "proof" they are sometimes gentile believers...where's the "proof"?

By the plain reading of Scripture. Dwmoeller has posted some verses above, in particular the one in Romans 8. From a plain reading of this passage and others that use the word 'elect' or 'chosen' there is no reason to believe that it is only referring to Jews. And BTW, even if it could be established that every instance of 'elect' and 'chosen' refers to Jewish believers (I don't think it can be), you still have not proven anything up to that point. You would then need to prove that the use of 'elect' and 'chosen' are used to inherently describe the nature of salvation for Jews vs. the nature of salvation for Gentiles. IOW, the majority of the very early church was Jewish, and so the use of the terms elect and chosen towards Jewish believers may only be incidental to their Jewishness, but it may be inherent to them as believers.

So it is a two-step process for you: (1) Prove that all references to elect and chosen are to Jewish believers, and (2) Prove that such references are inherent to them being Jews and not merely being believers.

You or Helen have done neither 1 or 2.

 

[webdog]

By the plain reading of Scripture. Dwmoeller has posted some verses above, in particular the one in Romans 8. From a plain reading of this passage and others that use the word 'elect' or 'chosen' there is no reason to believe that it is only referring to Jews. And BTW, even if it could be established that every instance of 'elect' and 'chosen' refers to Jewish believers (I don't think it can be), you still have not proven anything up to that point. You would then need to prove that the use of 'elect' and 'chosen' are used to inherently describe the nature of salvation for Jews vs. the nature of salvation for Gentiles. IOW, the majority of the very early church was Jewish, and so the use of the terms elect and chosen towards Jewish believers may only be incidental to their Jewishness, but it may be inherent to them as believers.

So it is a two-step process for you: (1) Prove that all references to elect and chosen are to Jewish believers, and (2) Prove that such references are inherent to them being Jews and not merely being believers.

You or Helen have done neither 1 or 2.

Andy, you said you have proof that elect can be gentile believers. Stating "by the plain reading of Scirpture" is not proof, or else I submit that as my proof to your questions.

 

[Andy T.]

Andy, you said you have proof that elect can be gentile believers. Stating "by the plain reading of Scirpture" is not proof, or else I submit that as my proof to your questions.

My proof is that the Epistles were written to believers, both Jew and Gentile. In these Epistles, we have many references to believers being elect or chosen. BTW, "proof" can be a relative term - some people require more proof than others. So maybe a better word is defense or argument.

Now, can you prove (defend) the two points I laid out above?

 

[webdog]

My proof is that the Epistles were written to believers, both Jew and Gentile.

That's odd...I thought 1 & 2 Timothy was written to a jew (Timothy). Same with 1 Peter,

 

[Andy T.]

Timothy wasn't a believer?

I guess we are at a stand still on this. You will continue to measure the addressees based soley on their nationality, while I will continue to measure the addressees based soley on their position in Christ as believers. I think I have Romans 2:28-29, Galatians 3:26-29 and many other passages to support my presupposition over yours.

 

[npetreley]

Andy, you said you have proof that elect can be gentile believers. Stating "by the plain reading of Scirpture" is not proof, or else I submit that as my proof to your questions.

You're way off.

elect angels - are they Jews, too?

1 Timothy 5:21
I charge you before God and the Lord Jesus Christ and the elect angels that you observe these things without prejudice, doing nothing with partiality.

Elect Thessalonians (Paul was the apostle to the Gentiles)

1 Thessalonians 1:4
knowing, beloved brethren, your election by God.

Elect Colossians (Gentiles)

Colossians 3:12
Therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, put on tender mercies, kindness, humility, meekness, longsuffering;

Give it up, you're dead wrong on this issue.

 

[dwmoeller1]

If I'm explaining russian history to a group of chinese...does the russian history apply to my chinese audience?

If the audience is actually an audience of communists who happen to be both Russian and Chinese, and the reason for describing Russian history is to show the development of communist thought, then absolutely Russian history would apply to the Chinese audience.

But you don't answer the question. But maybe because that is too broad. Forget Rom 9 and 11 for now. How about Rom 8? What is the primary audience of Rom 8?

Rom 11:1

Since "elect is mentioned first in Rom 8, lets deal with that in detail first.

Are you not aware that jews commonly referred to each other as "brother", whether they were beleivers or not? You cannot base Paul calling them "brothers" as meaning gentile believers. Research Pauls writing patterns.

First of all, you misunderstand my point. I am not arguing that 'brethern' equals 'gentile' believers. I am merely pointing out that 'brethren' is the only possible indicator of change. Which brings up my next point - you also avoid addressing the question. What indication is there, IN CONTEXT, that he is addressing only the jewish believers in this verse and not his whole audience?

You aren't arguing that 'brethren' is a natural indicator that Paul is speaking of Jewish believers only are you?

What about it? I don't see "elect" anywhere in there. Chosen doesn't mean "elect". If it did, Pharaoh and Judas would be lumped into that group since they were "chosen" by God for His purposes.

The word is 'eklektos'. It is the same word used in all other cases to refer to the 'elect'. Never are the unbelievers referred to as 'eklektos'. Forget the English translation and deal with the Greek word.

 

[dwmoeller1]

I want to deal with this argument in more detail:

Are you not aware that jews commonly referred to each other as "brother", whether they were beleivers or not? You cannot base Paul calling them "brothers" as meaning gentile believers. Research Pauls writing patterns.

While I did not argue that 'brethren' was an natural indicator of gentile believers, I find it interesting that you say to 'research Paul's writing patterns'. I agree. Lets do look at his writing patterns concerning 'brethern' in the rest of Thess.

1:9For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God

The 'you' and 'ye' are the brethren/elect of vs. 4. Thus we see the brethren/elect are those who 'turned from idols'. Could it be that Paul means this figuratively and that the 'jewish believers' turned from things which were the same as idols and now serve the living and true God where before they only thought they served the true and living God? Possible I guess. But the 'simple' or 'natural reading'? Clearly not.

The 'simple/natural' reading (ie. the reading which can be taken at face value without need for metaphors or figure of speech) would be that the brethren/elect are those who literally worshipped literal idols, and literally worshipped literally false and dead Gods. This would fit only gentile believers as a whole. In fact, it would tned to exclude jewish believers in the literal sense since literal idolatry was shunned by jewry of the time.

So, does it prove they are gentile believers? No. But if not, it certainly would force one out of the natural reading.

2:14For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea, for you also endured the same sufferings at the hands of your own countrymen, even as they did from the Jews

Notice the comparisons
1) The brethren are imitators of the jewish believer in Judea
2) The Jews persecuted the jewish believers in Judea
3) Likewise the brethren countrymen persecuted them

Now, if the brethren were jewish believers, then wouldn't "your countrymen" also be "the Jews"? Why then does Paul use language which makes it appear as if 'your countrymen' and 'the Jews' are two differenct groups? Again, the 'simple/natural' reading would that the brethren are gentile believers.

Also, the message of the rapture in I Thes 4 is to 'the brethren'. Who is the message of the rapture to in your opinion?

In short, the WHOLE book of I Thess is addressed to 'the brethren'. Unless you are going to argue that the audience of I Thess is jewish believers, then I can't see how you argue that its initial use is only to jewish believers.

Which brings me back to me question: IN CONTEXT, why do you say that the elect brethren of I Thess 1:4 is in reference to jewish believers only?