elect

[awaken]

'elect' ...in the OT I find these...

ISA 42:1 Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine ELECT, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
ISA 45:4 For Jacob my servant's sake, and Israel mine ELECT, I have even called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me.
ISA 65:9 And I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob, and out of Judah an inheritor of my mountains: and mine ELECT shall inherit it, and my servants shall dwell there.
ISA 65:22 They shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat: for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine ELECT shall long enjoy the work of their hands.


Bachiyr: 972 ryxb Bachiyr (baw-kheer');
Word Origin: Hebrew, Noun Masculine
from (0977)

chosen, choice one, chosen one, elect (of God)

KJV Word Count (Bachiyr #972) chosen 8
elect 4
chose 1

In the doctrine of election they teach that some are picked and some are not, right? In the verses above it seems this is true. He picked Israel out of many nations and a made a nation for Himself, right?

I am searching this out..the last thread turned into a personal bashing thread..I hope we can discuss the scriptures about election without the personal attacks!

 

[awaken]

MT 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the ELECT's sake those days shall be shortened.
MT 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very ELECT.
MT 24:31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his ELECT from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other *.

Since ELECT is speaking of Israel/Jews in the OT...would it be safe to say that these verses in Matt. also refer to the Jews/Israel?

 

[The Biblicist]

MT 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the ELECT's sake those days shall be shortened.
MT 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very ELECT.
MT 24:31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his ELECT from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other *.

Since ELECT is speaking of Israel/Jews in the OT...would it be safe to say that these verses in Matt. also refer to the Jews/Israel?

I think you might first want to see if election refers to more than mere national election. If there is a personal election (Rom. 8:28-33; Eph. 1:4; Rom. 9:11; 2 Thes. 2:13) then you will have to determine if Jesus is speaking of the FUTURE in Matthew 24 and in regard to all the "elect" living at the time of His coming rather than merely an "elect" nation.

 

[webdog]

'elect' ...in the OT I find these...

ISA 42:1 Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine ELECT, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
ISA 45:4 For Jacob my servant's sake, and Israel mine ELECT, I have even called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me.
ISA 65:9 And I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob, and out of Judah an inheritor of my mountains: and mine ELECT shall inherit it, and my servants shall dwell there.
ISA 65:22 They shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat: for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine ELECT shall long enjoy the work of their hands.


Bachiyr: 972 ryxb Bachiyr (baw-kheer');
Word Origin: Hebrew, Noun Masculine
from (0977)

chosen, choice one, chosen one, elect (of God)

KJV Word Count (Bachiyr #972) chosen 8
elect 4
chose 1

In the doctrine of election they teach that some are picked and some are not, right? In the verses above it seems this is true. He picked Israel out of many nations and a made a nation for Himself, right?

I am searching this out..the last thread turned into a personal bashing thread..I hope we can discuss the scriptures about election without the personal attacks!

:thumbs: The only individual referred to as 'elect' is Christ. I believe the elect are true Israel (believing Jews), and we have been grafted in along with them. The purpose of the future great tribulation focuses around Israel and the remnant God has preserved.

 

[The Biblicist]

:thumbs: The only individual referred to as 'elect' is Christ. I believe the elect are true Israel (believing Jews), and we have been grafted in along with them. The purpose of the future great tribulation focuses around Israel and the remnant God has preserved.

There are many individuals in Scripture that are called God's elect. Paul explicitly writing to the Thessaloians says they (didn't include himself or other Christians in the pronoun) were "chosen" by God from the foundation of the world (2 Thes. 2:13). Writing to the Ephesians he does include all believers in the use of the pronoun and tells them that God "chose us" (Eph. 1:4) before the world began. Writing to the Romans he tells them that all of "those" who were predestinated, called, justified and glorified" are called "the elect" (Rom. 8:33).

In Matthew 24:30-31 this gathering is from all corners of heaven and earth - thus a universal gathering of His "elect" and it is Christ doing the gathering so it is not possible that Christ is the "elect" in that passage. Furthermore, it is not possible it refers to the nation of Israel as they are located only on earth and this refers to a gathering while he is still in the clouds of all the saved on earth and in heaven as Revelation 19:12-20 describes the very same event and there are saints accompanying him from heaven when he appears in the clouds.

In all of the above instances Christ is never called "the elect" not once. Rather those who are called the elect were chosen "in" Christ and so Christ is the sphere of election rather than the only individual of election.

He tells the Romans in regard to Jacob and Esau while in the womb one was personally chosen over the other according to the election of grace rather than according to personal individual actions good or bad (Rom. 9:11).

In all of these instances this election is "to salvation" as they are all found in salvation contexts.

 

[The Biblicist]

There are many individuals in Scripture that are called God's elect. Paul explicitly writing to the Thessaloians says they (didn't include himself or other Christians in the pronoun) were "chosen" by God from the foundation of the world (2 Thes. 2:13). Writing to the Ephesians he does include all believers in the use of the pronoun and tells them that God "chose us" (Eph. 1:4) before the world began. Writing to the Romans he tells them that all of "those" who were predestinated, called, justified and glorified" are called "the elect" (Rom. 8:33).

In Matthew 24:30-31 this gathering is from all corners of heaven and earth - thus a universal gathering of His "elect" and it is Christ doing the gathering so it is not possible that Christ is the "elect" in that passage. Furthermore, it is not possible it refers to the nation of Israel as they are located only on earth and this refers to a gathering while he is still in the clouds of all the saved on earth and in heaven as Revelation 19:12-20 describes the very same event and there are saints accompanying him from heaven when he appears in the clouds.

In all of the above instances Christ is never called "the elect" not once. Rather those who are called the elect were chosen "in" Christ and so Christ is the sphere of election rather than the only individual of election.

He tells the Romans in regard to Jacob and Esau while in the womb one was personally chosen over the other according to the election of grace rather than according to personal individual actions good or bad (Rom. 9:11).

In all of these instances this election is "to salvation" as they are all found in salvation contexts.

Besides Christ, Israel and the saved there are also "elect" angels

1Ti 5:21 I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality.

The plural demonstrates more than Christ is the "elect" as Paul says for the "elect's SAKES, that THEY...."

2Ti 2:10 Therefore I endure all things for the elect’s sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.

There is also the "elect" Lady who has an "elect" sister

2Jo 1:1 The elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth; and not I only, but also all they that have known the truth;

2Jo 1:13 The children of thy elect sister greet thee. Amen.

In regard to personal election in salvation contexts it those (plural) who are chosen - the elect. The sphere of election in regard to salvation is "in Christ" (Eph. 1:4) while the object of election in regard to salvation is "to salvation" (2 Thes. 2:13)

 

[RLBosley]

'elect' ...in the OT I find these...

ISA 42:1 Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine ELECT, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.
ISA 45:4 For Jacob my servant's sake, and Israel mine ELECT, I have even called thee by thy name: I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me.
ISA 65:9 And I will bring forth a seed out of Jacob, and out of Judah an inheritor of my mountains: and mine ELECT shall inherit it, and my servants shall dwell there.
ISA 65:22 They shall not build, and another inhabit; they shall not plant, and another eat: for as the days of a tree are the days of my people, and mine ELECT shall long enjoy the work of their hands.


Bachiyr: 972 ryxb Bachiyr (baw-kheer');
Word Origin: Hebrew, Noun Masculine
from (0977)

chosen, choice one, chosen one, elect (of God)

KJV Word Count (Bachiyr #972) chosen 8
elect 4
chose 1

In the doctrine of election they teach that some are picked and some are not, right? In the verses above it seems this is true. He picked Israel out of many nations and a made a nation for Himself, right?

I am searching this out..the last thread turned into a personal bashing thread..I hope we can discuss the scriptures about election without the personal attacks!

MT 24:22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the ELECT's sake those days shall be shortened.
MT 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very ELECT.
MT 24:31 And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his ELECT from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other *.

Since ELECT is speaking of Israel/Jews in the OT...would it be safe to say that these verses in Matt. also refer to the Jews/Israel?

The church as a whole is also referred to as "the elect."

Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering; - Col 3:12 KJV

So no it is not safe to assume that Matthew is speaking of Jews alone or national Israel.

The term elect is, as far as I can see, ALWAYS used to describe a group not individuals. (If someone can prove me wrong I will gladly accept the truth.) And refers to these groups that God has His covenant with, the OT Israel under the Mosaic Covenant, and now the Church under the New Covenant.

With a proper understanding of the New Covenant we see that God's focus is on the church who, through their right relationship with God though Christ, have been "grafted" into the elect remnant of national Israel. This grafting in has created an elect covenant body that could be accurately described as a "spiritual Israel" since we are elect based on our relationship to Christ, as the elect (1 Peter 2:6) and Christ as the fulfillment of Israel.

Because of this it makes no sense for God to turn back to the Old covenant, that has "vanished away" (Heb 8:13), and deal exclusively with the Jews in some future "tribulation period."

 

[The Biblicist]

The term elect is, as far as I can see, ALWAYS used to describe a group not individuals. (If someone can prove me wrong I will gladly accept the truth.)

John writes an "elect lady" who also has an "elect sister."

2Jo 1:1 The elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth; and not I only, but also all they that have known the truth;

2Jo 1:13 The children of thy elect sister greet thee. Amen.

Notice John does not include himself in the "elect lady" but rather is the one writing "unto" that elect lady - "the elder UNTO"

Notice there is an "elect SISTER" which is meaningless unless theree is more than one.

Furthermore, salvation is not corporate but individual and the Thessalonians are told that they were chosen "TO salvation" but "THROUGH....beleif of the truth" (2 Thes. 2:13). There is no corporate belief but individual belief.

 

[RLBosley]

John writes an "elect lady" who also has an "elect sister."

2Jo 1:1 The elder unto the elect lady and her children, whom I love in the truth; and not I only, but also all they that have known the truth;

2Jo 1:13 The children of thy elect sister greet thee. Amen.

Notice John does not include himself in the "elect lady" but rather is the one writing "unto" that elect lady - "the elder UNTO"

Notice there is an "elect SISTER" which is meaningless unless theree is more than one.

2 John 1:1 depends on where you decide to but the emphasis. Is it written to just the "elect Lady" or to "the elect lady and her children"? The second option clearly, and that is a group (corporate) not individual.

Now v 13 I admit has me stumped. I forgot that one.

Furthermore, salvation is not corporate but individual and the Thessalonians are told that they were chosen "TO salvation" but "THROUGH....beleif of the truth" (2 Thes. 2:13). There is no corporate belief but individual belief.

But the whole group believes. Salvation is individual yes. But I am leaning towards a few that election is corporate. We are elect because we are in Christ. He is the true "elect" and we become partakers of that through our faith in him. As this verse shows, salvation is described as being based off of faith/belief, not solely because we/they are elect.

Question. Are you a Calvinist?

 

[The Biblicist]

2 John 1:1 depends on where you decide to but the emphasis. Is it written to just the "elect Lady" or to "the elect lady and her children"? The second option clearly, and that is a group (corporate) not individual.

Now v 13 I admit has me stumped. I forgot that one.



But the whole group believes. Salvation is individual yes. But I am leaning towards a few that election is corporate. We are elect because we are in Christ. He is the true "elect" and we become partakers of that through our faith in him. As this verse shows, salvation is described as being based off of faith/belief, not solely because we/they are elect.

Question. Are you a Calvinist?

If election is "TO salvation" and that is "THROUGH...belief of the truth" then you must either accept that salvation is equally corporate as is election or both are individualized just like the word "saints" or "the saved" or any other term that refers to a class but does not mean we are to understand there is corporate sainthood, or corporate saved any more than corporate elect. Thus INDIVIDUAL "saints" and INDIVDIUAL "saved" and INDIVIDUAL "elect" as the "sister" is individualized from the other "Lady."

 

[RLBosley]

If election is "TO salvation" and that is "THROUGH...belief of the truth" then you must either accept that salvation is equally corporate as is election or both are individualized just like the word "saints" or "the saved" or any other term that refers to a class but does not mean we are to understand there is corporate sainthood, or corporate saved any more than corporate elect. Thus INDIVIDUAL "saints" and INDIVDIUAL "saved" and INDIVIDUAL "elect" as the "sister" is individualized from the other "Lady."

Why can't election be both? Personal and corporate - both based on Christ as the elect. The church is in Christ - the church as a whole is elect. I am in Christ - I am elect.

I don't see scripture supporting the idea that certain people are arbitrarily picked by God, some to be saved some to be damned (considering the totality of scripture that is - If I only had Romans 9 I'd be a dogmatic Calvinist :smilewinkgrin. Instead what I see is that salvation is always contingent upon personal faith, not "election" - whatever your definition.

Again, are you a Calvinist? I'm just asking cause I want to know where you are coming from. I personally don't care one way or the other.

 

[The Biblicist]

Why can't election be both? Personal and corporate - both based on Christ as the elect. The church is in Christ - the church as a whole is elect. I am in Christ - I am elect.

Would you use the word "saint" the same way or the word "saved" the same way? Election is presented as the cause and salvation is the consequence "chosen TO salvation" and the "through sanctification and belief of the truth" as the chosen means to that end.

I don't see scripture supporting the idea that certain people are arbitrarily picked by God, some to be saved some to be damned (considering the totality of scripture that is - If I only had Romans 9 I'd be a dogmatic Calvinist :smilewinkgrin. Instead what I see is that salvation is always contingent upon personal faith, not "election" - whatever your definition.

Election is "to salvation" not damnation. Election is based upon the fact that all men are already damned by sin and therefore there is no need to elect anyone to damnation as sin has accomplished that already. Election to salvation assumes damnation has already occurred or else there is no need for salvation. Damnation is already the presumptive choice of the depraved mindset (Rom. 8:7-8).

In Romans 9 God is working with the FALLEN clay of mankind not UNFALLEN clay as unfallen clay has no need of "MERCY" as "mercy" presumes already just condemnation. Fallen man is already of a mindset at enmity with God and already resistant to submission to God and freely so.

Again, are you a Calvinist? I'm just asking cause I want to know where you are coming from. I personally don't care one way or the other.

If being faithful to the Scripture makes me a "Calvinist" then I am a Calvinist. If being faithful to the Scripture makes me an "Arminian" then I am a "Arminian." I prefer to be called a "Biblicist." Please take special note that my approach and dealings with scriptures in these post is contextual based not philosophically based. It is the merits of the text that is my presumption not philosophical ideas outside the scripture text. Please take special note that I did not any approach any text of scripture other than on its own inherent merits.

 

[RLBosley]

Would you use the word "saint" the same way or the word "saved" the same way? Election is presented as the cause and salvation is the consequence "chosen TO salvation" and the "through sanctification and belief of the truth" as the chosen means to that end.

No, salvation in the 2 Thess text is "through sanctification and belief of the truth." Therefore sanctification and belief" are the cause and means. The fact that it brings up sanctification makes me think the salvation in mind here isn't justification but ultimate glorification since we cannot be sanctified TO BE justified. If that is so then this text is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. But I'm not certain as I haven't looked into this passage in depth yet.

Election is "to salvation" not damnation. Election is based upon the fact that all men are already damned by sin and therefore there is no need to elect anyone to damnation as sin has accomplished that already. Election to salvation assumes damnation has already occurred or else there is no need for salvation. Damnation is already the presumptive choice of the depraved mindset (Rom. 8:7-8).

Nonsense. If I have a choice of having an apple or an orange and I choose to eat the apple, that implicitly means I chose to not eat the orange. Same here, you can't choose one option for everyone and NOT choose the only other option for everyone else. Not logical.

I agree that damnation is the "default setting". Doesn't change the fact that God would have to choose to let them stay damned.

In Romans 9 God is working with the FALLEN clay of mankind not UNFALLEN clay as unfallen clay has no need of "MERCY" as "mercy" presumes already just condemnation. Fallen man is already of a mindset at enmity with God and already resistant to submission to God and freely so.

I see what you are saying and I actually agree. Though I believe Romans 9 is speaking of nations not necessarily individuals. But that's a debate for another thread.

If being faithful to the Scripture makes me a "Calvinist" then I am a Calvinist. If being faithful to the Scripture makes me an "Arminian" then I am a "Arminian." I prefer to be called a "Biblicist." Please take special note that my approach and dealings with scriptures in these post is contextual based not philosophically based. It is the merits of the text that is my presumption not philosophical ideas outside the scripture text. Please take special note that I did not any approach any text of scripture other than on its own inherent merits.

OK I understand (the first two sentences make you sound like a jerk, though I realize that isn't your intention).

I was just asking so I could have a frame of reference on where you are coming from theologically. I would describe myself similarly.

 

[awaken]

Ok...I see where my assumption could be wrong!

RO 8:33 Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's ELECT? It is God that justifieth.
RO 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to ELECTion might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth
RO 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the ELECTion of grace.
RO 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the ELECTion hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded
RO 11:28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes *: but as touching the ELECTion, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.

Election here is again speaking of God selecting some!

 

[The Biblicist]

No, salvation in the 2 Thess text is "through sanctification and belief of the truth." Therefore sanctification and belief" are the cause and means. The fact that it brings up sanctification makes me think the salvation in mind here isn't justification but ultimate glorification since we cannot be sanctified TO BE justified. If that is so then this text is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. But I'm not certain as I haven't looked into this passage in depth yet.

Notice that one action occurs before they were born (from the foundation of the world) while the other action occurs during their life time (sanctification and belief of the truth). The prior action is the one "to salvation" as primary cause whle the second action at best can only be a secondary cause and thus the consequence of the first action. He is describing the means to obtain salvation to also have its cause in election "chosen to". If your idea was what he was trying to convey he would have said "you believed to salvation in order to be sanctified by the Spirit and become the elect." He did not say or mean that, but that is what you are attempting to force his words to mean. At minimum election is demanded by the langauge to be the primary cause whereas sanctification and belief are secondary causes in obtaining salvation or he would have reversed his words.

Nonsense. If I have a choice of having an apple or an orange and I choose to eat the apple, that implicitly means I chose to not eat the orange. Same here, you can't choose one option for everyone and NOT choose the only other option for everyone else. Not logical.

Is it logical or rational that a cow choose to eat horse meat over grass? No! Why? Because the issue of choice really lies in the nature of the cow in regard to his choice. His choice is free within his nature's own boundaries. Likewise, the unregenerate man's nature is at "enmity with God and is not subject to the law of God and neither can be " according to his own free choice guided by his own nature. Nothing coercing him but his own mindset and desires.

In order to get a cow to freely choose to eat horse meat over grass it takes a CREATIVE act of God to change his nature from grass eating animal to a meat eating animal. That is the new birth, it is God giving a NEW heart and a NEW spirit to love and choose light over darkness. The tree is known by its fruits, one must first make the tree good before its fruits can be good. Likewise, those who are sinners by nature and by choice are in bondage to their own nature and only a change of nature can produce a change of choice. That is why God must give him a NEW heart and a NEW spirit for him to freely choose light over darkness. Election is God's merciful choice to save some in spite of their cow like nature which will always freely chooses grass instead of meat. Election is based on grace "election of grace" (Rom. 11:5-6) and displays God's "mercy" not his JUSTICE! If he were to act purely out of justice NONE WOULD BE SAVED because ALL are condemned ALREADY. NONE left to themselves would ever choose meat (light). Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the lepord his spots, If so then you can change your nature that controls your will.

You agree with me because you agree that "damnation is the 'default setting" and thus you agree that man is already freely predisposed to darkness and nothing forces him to continue in that choice as that is his choice by nature and the issue of choice is really an issue that is determined by nature just as it is in regard to the cow's choice to choose freely between grass and meat. Nothing coerces him to reject the meat but his own nature. That is precisely the teaching of scripture in regard to man's fallen nature (Rom. 8:7-8; 3:10-18; etc.).

I agree that damnation is the "default setting". Doesn't change the fact that God would have to choose to let them stay damned.

Why not consider that God choose simply to allow them to follow their free will???? However, in regard to the elect it is not "he that willeth or he that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy" in regard to the PRIMARY cause. In regard to the elect, they were not born "of the will of man, or of the flesh" , but in regard to PRIMARY cause they were born of the will of God due to pure grace. Of course they became willing as a secondary cause or "belief of the truth."

OK I understand (the first two sentences make you sound like a jerk, though I realize that isn't your intention).

Thank you for giving me the benefit of the doubt because that is exactly what I was trying to convey. I was not trying to be jerkish at all but simply explanatory of my sincere position.

 

[awaken]

COL 3:12 Put on therefore, as the ELECT of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering;

Again..this is showing God chosing

1TH 1:4 Knowing, brethren beloved, your ELECTion of God.
1TI 5:21 I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the ELECT angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality

I have a question about the elect angels...did they have a choice to follow satan?

 

[RLBosley]

Notice that one action occurs before they were born (from the foundation of the world) while the other action occurs during their life time (sanctification and belief of the truth). The prior action is the one "to salvation" as primary cause whle the second action at best can only be a secondary cause and thus the consequence of the first action. He is describing the means to obtain salvation to also have its cause in election "chosen to". If your idea was what he was trying to convey he would have said "you believed to salvation in order to be sanctified by the Spirit and become the elect." He did not say or mean that, but that is what you are attempting to force his words to mean. At minimum election is demanded by the langauge to be the primary cause whereas sanctification and belief are secondary causes in obtaining salvation or he would have reversed his words.

Hmm... maybe. I'll have to look at it more but you may be correct.

Is it logical or rational that a cow choose to eat horse meat over grass? No! Why? Because the issue of choice really lies in the nature of the cow in regard to his choice. His choice is free within his nature's own boundaries. Likewise, the unregenerate man's nature is at "enmity with God and is not subject to the law of God and neither can be " according to his own free choice guided by his own nature. Nothing coercing him but his own mindset and desires.

I think you misunderstood my analogy. I was saying that for me to choose to eat the apple means i choose to not eat the orange. That is analogous to God's choosing individuals, not man choosing God. Thus, if God chose some to salvation, then he also logical had to choose to leave some in damnation.

In order to get a cow to freely choose to eat horse meat over grass it takes a CREATIVE act of God to change his nature from grass eating animal to a meat eating animal. That is the new birth, it is God giving a NEW heart and a NEW spirit to love and choose light over darkness. The tree is known by its fruits, one must first make the tree good before its fruits can be good. Likewise, those who are sinners by nature and by choice are in bondage to their own nature and only a change of nature can produce a change of choice. That is why God must give him a NEW heart and a NEW spirit for him to freely choose light over darkness. Election is God's merciful choice to save some in spite of their cow like nature which will always freely chooses grass instead of meat. Election is based on grace "election of grace" (Rom. 11:5-6) and displays God's "mercy" not his JUSTICE! If he were to act purely out of justice NONE WOULD BE SAVED because ALL are condemned ALREADY. NONE left to themselves would ever choose meat (light). Can the Ethiopian change his skin or the lepord his spots, If so then you can change your nature that controls your will.

I agree that regeneration is a supernatural act of God that changes our disposition! AMEN! I however differ in that I believe that regeneration is contingent on faith, not the other way around. The Spirit convicts a sinner to repent and believe the gospel. The sinner chooses to surrender to God's conviction and believe the gospel. Then, God regenerates him.

But that choosing to surrender to God never occurs without the conviction of the Holy Spirit. It isn't something that we can conjure up create artificially.

You agree with me because you agree that "damnation is the 'default setting" and thus you agree that man is already freely predisposed to darkness and nothing forces him to continue in that choice as that is his choice by nature and the issue of choice is really an issue that is determined by nature just as it is in regard to the cow's choice to choose freely between grass and meat. Nothing coerces him to reject the meat but his own nature. That is precisely the teaching of scripture in regard to man's fallen nature (Rom. 8:7-8; 3:10-18; etc.).

Agreed.

Why not consider that God choose simply to allow them to follow their free will???? However, in regard to the elect it is not "he that willeth or he that runneth but of God that sheweth mercy" in regard to the PRIMARY cause. In regard to the elect, they were not born "of the will of man, or of the flesh" , but in regard to PRIMARY cause they were born of the will of God due to pure grace. Of course they became willing as a secondary cause or "belief of the truth."

Again, logically, if God chooses to save some, he is at least implicitly choosing to NOT save others. Leaving them in the "default" would be the same as "choosing to not save them" so then there is essentially also an election to damnation. No matter how much our 5 point brothers wish to deny it. (not necessarily directed to you)

And yes we are "born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." But also we must believe. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:"

Thank you for giving me the benefit of the doubt because that is exactly what I was trying to convey. I was not trying to be jerkish at all but simply explanatory of my sincere position.

NP. At first I got annoyed but reread it and understood where you were coming from. No worries brother. :thumbs:

 

[The Biblicist]

I think you misunderstood my analogy. I was saying that for me to choose to eat the apple means i choose to not eat the orange. That is analogous to God's choosing individuals, not man choosing God. Thus, if God chose some to salvation, then he also logical had to choose to leave some in damnation.

If the primary choice is "to salvation" or "chosen" by God "to salvation" then your understanding renders "chosen" meaningless because according to your rationale "the whole world" of mankind was chosen "to salvation" by God and therefore the "whole world" was God's election "TO SALVATION."

I however differ in that I believe that regeneration is contingent on faith, not the other way around. The Spirit convicts a sinner to repent and believe the gospel. The sinner chooses to surrender to God's conviction and believe the gospel. Then, God regenerates him.

Notice election precedes and is the primary cause of "santification of the Spirir" prior to "belief of the truth." Sanctification means "to set apart" and "belief of the truth" is the product of The Spirit's work in setting apart the "chosen to salvation." The "sanctification of the Spirit" includes the entire work of the Holy Spirit that results in "belief of the truth."

You agree that conviction is the work of the Spirit not our work. You agree that regeneration is the work of the Spirit not our work. The product of that work is "belief of the truth." Paul says there is a difference between "godly" and "worldly" sorrow (2 Cor. 7:10). One leads to death while the other is EFFECTUAL to salvation. It is the Holy Spirit's work that make it effectual to salvation.

The gospel is preached to all men irregardless because (1) all men are sinners; (2) all men need salvation (3) the only way to know God's elect is their response to the gospel - 1 Thes. 1:4-5.

The effectual call is the Holy Spirit empowering the gospel as it goes forth so that it becomes God's CREATIVE WORD that brings light out of darkness. This is exactly how Paul describes it in 2 Cor. 4:6 in a direct analogy with Genesis 1:2-3. Hence, not all men are called in this manner as Paul explicitly states in 1 Cor. 1:26-31. Because ALL who are "called" in this sense are also predestinated, justified and glorified - Rom. 8:29-30. That is not true of all men who hear the Gospel (Jn. 10:26).

Again, logically, if God chooses to save some, he is at least implicitly choosing to NOT save others. Leaving them in the "default" would be the same as "choosing to not save them" so then there is essentially also an election to damnation. No matter how much our 5 point brothers wish to deny it. (not necessarily directed to you)

Since election "to salvation" assumes all men are already damned by their own free choice in sin it requires no action by God for them to continue in their own free will. What requires action by God is electing any of them to salvation. That is what makes "election" mean "chose OUT OF" or out from among.

That is the meaning of "grace" unmerited or not conditioned upon anything found in the object of grace - salvation is by "grace" and faith is "of grace" (Rom. 4:16) and the work of God (Jn. 6:29) which Christ is the "author" and the "finisher" of and what He begins he never fails to accomplish (Philip. 1:6). God is not bound to save anyone or that would invalidate the meaning of "saved BY GRACE." God is glorified in justice as in salvation (2 Cor. 2:13-15).

And yes we are "born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." But also we must believe. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:"

Verse 13 is given as the explanatory cause of verse 12. Faith is "the work of God" (Jn. 6:29) that is consequential to God giving a people to his Son (Jn. 6:37). All he gives comes = faith in Christ. When God gives a "new" heart it is a believing heart or else there is no reason to give a "new" one as the old would do quite fine.