Election/Free Will/Neither Discussion

[J. Jump]

Lots of talk about whether it's election or whether it's free will (Arminian) or whether it's somewhere in between.

Well I would like to give both sides something to chew on. Here is the link to a different take on the issue:

http://www.xs4all.nl/%7Erjvelema/rve_e/predelcn.pdf

Looking forward to reading the responses.

 

[StraightAndNarrow]

Maybe I haven't taken enough time to study this paper but I don't see anything in here that is different from the usual Calvinist theology.

 

[JackRUS]

The only book that I ever read that really took a view between Calvinism and Armnianism on the subject of eternal security and rewards is "The Reign of the Servant Kings" by Dr. Joseph C. Dillow.

http://www.faithalone.org/bookstore/reign.html

 

[J.D.]

It's very unorthodox and definitely NOT calvinist.

This from the text:

"Contrary to that which has been taught over the years in Calvinism, election is not
related to the gospel of grace; rather, it is related to the gospel of glory."

He has several different "gospels" going on, and then he adds several different "predestinations" and then several "elections" etc.

Then later he's got this going on:

"Thus, Matt. 22:14 deals with "election" relative to the salvation of the soul, not
relative to the birth from above and the salvation of the spirit."

He's got one salvation for the soul and another one for the spirit.

Again, he's over-dividing the word.

Looks like an unorthodox Arminian Polemic.

There's some truth in there, but it's mixed with error.

 

[Rippon]

Fence sitting .

Sick in sin/dead in sin

Jesus died for everyone/Jesus died for His own

On and on . It is a one or the other proposition .There is not really a comfortable gray-zone , never-neverland for the luxury of the biblically indolent .