Election spoken of in scripture...like this-

[Iconoclast]

"Rockson,
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

No he doesn't. There's really no indication Paul is even talking about man from the day of his birth.[

When you attempt to set aside God's word...and offer your own...you no longer have the word of God...

7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

You suggest it can...God says it CANNOT...you reject the word of God

It's believed by many it's really in reference to particular problems the Jews

Nonsense.Greece was a gentile area, and there is no indication of what you say as you attempt to explain away truth

Most men on the earth generally speaking choose not to understand and perceive things spiritually the way God shares with them to do in the gospel. THEY CHOOSE natural thinking but such didn't mean the couldn't choose God's spiritual way of thinking if they so chose.

Another man centered denial of Gods word.

 

[Rockson]

7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

You suggest it can...God says it CANNOT...you reject the word of God

Is it that I reject the world of God? Or rather that you're reading the word of God wrongly? I'd say the passage in question has nothing to do with an unsaved person having no ability to get saved that is by making a choice. It's talking about believers if they choose to walk in the flesh they will die. Rom 8:13 They don't have to stay walking in the flesh they can yield to the Spirit.

If they choose to walk carnally they'd be like what Paul calls them in Corinthians...baby Christians or carnal.1 Cor 3:1-9 It most certainly does not mean unsaved or unregenerated can't have a will wanting God. Jesus even said about his disciples one time, "There spirit is willing but their flesh is weak" Didn't mean they couldn't have stayed awake either for he told them to do so. Matt 24:41 He wouldn't have told them to do something they weren't capable of doing. God has told the sinner to repent. They can do it if they choose to. Then God regenerates their spirits AFTER THEY have chosen him.

 

[Iconoclast]

"Rockson,

Is it that I reject the world of God?

Yes,,,that about covers it

Or rather that you're reading the word of God wrongly?

Let me explain...when you hold error as you do, the truth does not click when you see it posted

I'd say the passage in question has nothing to do with an unsaved person having no ability

You would and have said that, and that is why you are in error.

to get saved that is by making a choice.

Biblical salvation is God making a determination to seek and save that which is lost, HIS SHEEP, no more, no less.

It's talking about believers if they choose to walk in the flesh they will die. Rom 8:13

Wrong again...it speaks of two persons saved/ unsaved/ those with the Spirit, those without the Spirit...
Not a "man centered choice"...No ...those under the Spirits dominion, Kata pneuma.... and those governed and under the dominion of the flesh...

They don't have to stay walking in the flesh they can yield to the Spirit.

not taught here...

If they choose to walk carnally they'd be like what Paul calls them in Corinthians...baby Christians or carnal.1 Cor 3:1-9 It most certainly does not mean unsaved or unregenerated can't have a will wanting God. Jesus even said about his disciples one time, "There spirit is willing but their flesh is weak" Didn't mean they couldn't have stayed awake either for he told them to do so. Matt 24:41 He wouldn't have told them to do something they weren't capable of doing. God has told the sinner to repent. They can do it if they choose to. Then God regenerates their spirits AFTER THEY have chosen him.

totally man centered error...other than that it is just fine,

 

[Rockson]

Let me explain...when you hold error as you do, the truth does not click when you see it posted

Well I guess I've been told BUT....I respectfully disagree.

 

[Iconoclast]

Well I guess I've been told BUT....I respectfully disagree.

Yes....you respectfully disagree with scripture and the clear teaching.
Do you want to learn what it actually teaches?

 

[Rockson]

Yes....you respectfully disagree with scripture and the clear teaching.
Do you want to learn what it actually teaches?

Sure Icon! You referred to clear teaching. Would you kindly share with me how Jesus in the verse below could lament over Jerusalem the following way if it was really wasn't God's will for them to be his children? It says below he longed to. Other translations say it was his desire. In all honesty doesn't that signify to you God's will? That they be saved? God says HE WAS WILLING...but they weren't. Tell us as you said, clearly if you would how can anything of Calvinism can make sense in the light of Matthew 23:37.

"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing. Matthew 23:37

 

[Iconoclast]

Sure Icon! You referred to clear teaching. Would you kindly share with me how Jesus in the verse below could lament over Jerusalem the following way if it was really wasn't God's will for them to be his children? It says below he longed to. Other translations say it was his desire. In all honesty doesn't that signify to you God's will? That they be saved? God says HE WAS WILLING...but they weren't. Tell us as you said, clearly if you would how can anything of Calvinism can make sense in the light of Matthew 23:37.

"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing. Matthew 23:37s

My friend,
First let me point out I was speaking of the extremely clear teaching of Romans 8...that two kinds of men were described....the unsaved...dominated by the carnal mind and the flesh....The saved led by the Spirit to mortifying the deeds of the flesh.
Now you raise the issue of Mt 23:37.....Jesus was sad in that He would have gathered in their children. ...but the reprobate leadership opposed the preaching and teaching of truth.....Jesus declares their depraved condition....saying you will not come to me...
All depraved sinners love their sin....and not one will come in and of themselves,nevertheless Jesus knew they would go to the White Throne Judgment. ....without their sins being atoned for,no reconciliation, no propitiation,no expiation. ...but rather certain second death.
God Does NOT Delight OR Take Pleasure In The DESTRUCTION Of The wicked.....But Their DESTRUCTION Is certain.
All men everywhere are to repent and believe the gospel act's17 :31....but they are depraved and unwilling naturally to submit to God's, law,word.
Jesus links the rejection to the OT. Leadership who were reprobate....the great religious whore Jerusalem is about to be judged within their lifetime....an elect remnant will be preserved Isa1:9.
Nice question...

 

[Yeshua1]

No he doesn't. There's really no indication Paul is even talking about man from the day of his birth. It's believed by many it's really in reference to particular problems the Jews had with their false ideas and the Greeks as well. Many men would have a tendency to look to philosophical things and the Jews were prone to look for signs. Those things were true. Was Paul however making some grand statement about a universal inability of every human on earth to accept the gospel?

Did Paul for example when speaking of Cretans in saying, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.” Titus 1:12 Does that mean 100% of every single one of them always are? Or was he rather talking about as a general rule they most certainly tend to be this way. Most men on the earth generally speaking choose not to understand and perceive things spiritually the way God shares with them to do in the gospel. THEY CHOOSE natural thinking but such didn't mean the couldn't choose God's spiritual way of thinking if they so chose. Add on to that God's encouragement to every human being to do so and there you have it.

Paul was addressing saved and unsaved persons, and His point was that the unsaved person can read the bible, hear the sermon, but in their lost state cannot by themselves accept or even know its spiritual meaning!

 

[Yeshua1]

Well with respect I'd say everything God does is within the perimeters of LOVE, including judgment. God doesn't have any diminished type of LOVE...impossible.

Does God love all persons exactly the same fashion?

 

[Rockson]

Now you raise the issue of Mt 23:37.....Jesus was sad in that He would have gathered in their children. ...but the reprobate leadership opposed the preaching and teaching of truth.....Jesus declares their depraved condition....saying you will not come to me...

If you wouldn't mind let's look at the whole verse again so as not to miss the point I was really wanting to make.

O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!
Matt 23:37 (KJV)

"Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling. Matt 23:37 (CSB)

Didn't Jesus clearly say above that it was his will, God's will to have gathered and saved they and their children? Can one in good conscience really claim Jesus wasn't sincere in his statement? Obviously if these people weren't saved and Jesus said without question he longed and desired to have them saved (gathered)....then what happens to irresistible grace? God wanted them and desired them but their not being willing stood in the way. Why should it have?

 

[Rockson]

Does God love all persons exactly the same fashion?

God is not pleased with all persons in the same fashion but that's not the same as LOVE.

 

[Yeshua1]

God is not pleased with all persons in the same fashion but that's not the same as LOVE.

God has chosen to love His own in a Covenant relationship way, not same for all!

 

[Iconoclast]

Rockson,

If you wouldn't mind let's look at the whole verse again so as not to miss the point I was really wanting to make.

I would mind as you were answerted and ignored the answer...

Didn't Jesus clearly say above that it was his will, God's will to have gathered and saved they and their children?

No....that is not what was said...here is what was said;
"how often would I ".....How often I wanted .....It does not speak to What God actually did.


Can one in good conscience really claim Jesus wasn't sincere in his statement?

this was answered but you ignored it.

Obviously if these people weren't saved and Jesus said without question he longed and desired to have them saved (gathered)....then what happens to irresistible grace?

God's saving grace, irrestible grace, is never ultimately resisted;
Chapter 10: Of Effectual Calling
1._____ Those whom God hath predestinated unto life, he is pleased in his appointed, and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God; taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by his almighty power determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ; yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace.
( Romans 8:30; Romans 11:7; Ephesians 1:10, 11; 2 Thessalonians 2:13, 14; Ephesians 2:1-6; Acts 26:18; Ephesians 1:17, 18; Ezekiel 36:26; Deuteronomy 30:6; Ezekiel 36:27; Ephesians 1:19; Psalm 110:3;Song of Solomon 1:4 )
2._____ This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man, nor from any power or agency in the creature, being wholly passive therein, being dead in sins and trespasses, until being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit; he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it, and that by no less power than that which raised up Christ from the dead.
( 2 Timothy 1:9; Ephesians 2:8; 1 Corinthians 2:14; Ephesians 2:5; John 5:25; Ephesians 1:19, 20 )

3._____ Elect infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit; who worketh when, and where, and how he pleases; so also are all elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.
( John 3:3, 5, 6; John 3:8 )

4._____ Others not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may have some common operations of the Spirit, yet not being effectually drawn by the Father, they neither will nor can truly come to Christ, and therefore cannot be saved: much less can men that receive not the Christian religion be saved; be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature and the law of that religion they do profess.
( Matthew 22:14; Matthew 13:20, 21; Hebrews 6:4, 5; John 6:44, 45, 65; 1 John 2:24, 25; Acts 4:12; John 4:22; John 17:3 )

 

[Rockson]

God has chosen to love His own in a Covenant relationship way, not same for all!

Well actually I have no problem with God showing certain types of favor to those who are in Covenant relationship with him. That's not favor as it relates to salvation though but favor as it relates to someone being obedient. God is LOVE. There is no less LOVE in God.

 

[Iconoclast]

Well actually I have no problem with God showing certain types of favor to those who are in Covenant relationship with him. That's not favor as it relates to salvation though but favor as it relates to someone being obedient. God is LOVE. There is no less LOVE in God.

This is off topic...the thread is about election.

 

[Rockson]

My Statement: Didn't Jesus clearly say above that it was his will, God's will to have gathered and saved they and their children?

Icon's Statement : No....that is not what was said...here is what was said;
"how often would I ".....How often I wanted .....It does not speak to What God actually did.

My Response: What? I think you know you're grabbing at straws here Icon. Would means this is what my will was to do! Any civilized enlightened court of law would tell you the same. Would means YES I'll take this positive action. It was his will for them to be saved! How possibly can you deny it? You say well it doesn't speak of what God did. Well certainly he didn't do it for HE SAID THEY were not willing he didn't say he wasn't. If he was willing and that's what he wanted then how Calvinists think it should have been irresistible grace time.

So therefore in your way of thinking if something wasn't actually done...well Jesus I guess didn't quite mean it....or it wasn't truly heart felt or maybe he changed his mind. Don't know how you could quite say that if Jesus said it was my will for them to be saved. I'm sorry but that stands forever! You can't change it. So again if irresistible grace were true it would have been the order of the day if Jesus meant what he said that he wanted them gathered. It wasn't employed which has to demonstrate such doesn't exist.

 

[Rockson]

And Icon I fail to understand for the life of me why you rolled out your whole discourse of effectual calling. Has nothing to do with the issue I raised. Forgive my but it seems that when you get in a jam you just pile on indoctrination or so many other things to divert the issue. No? Explain why not?

 

[Iconoclast]

My Statement: Didn't Jesus clearly say above that it was his will, God's will to have gathered and saved they and their children?

Icon's Statement : No....that is not what was said...here is what was said;
"how often would I ".....How often I wanted .....It does not speak to What God actually did.

My Response: What? I think you know you're grabbing at straws here Icon. Would means this is what my will was to do!

Here is how Jesus actually answered it, notice it is not based on your speculation ...but clear language so there is no need to wonder about it....
37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.

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.

40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

So therefore in your way of thinking if something wasn't actually done...well Jesus I guess didn't quite mean it....or it wasn't truly heart felt or maybe he changed his mind.

You are trying to be "cute here"....but it just shows you are in over your head. You dodged my response to MT 23;37 given earlier in the thread

Don't know how you could quite say that if Jesus said it was my will for them to be saved. I'm sorry but that stands forever! You can't change it.

As long as Jn 6:37-44 is in the bible...I do not need to change anything...just believe it like you should

So again if irresistible grace were true

It is true, and it is painfully obvious you have no understanding of the teaching. If you want to object, fine, but learn what the teaching is before you object so you do not come across as foolish...

And Icon I fail to understand for the life of me why you rolled out your whole discourse of effectual calling.

For the reason listed above...you are totally ignorant of it, you are totally ignorant of the historic confessions of faith.... so I posted it so you could read it. Now if you did read it , it is clear you still have no understanding of it.....here is a hint......irrestible grace= effectual call.....read and learn, show where the quote from the 1689 is not biblical if you think you can.

Has nothing to do with the issue I raised.

It has everything to do with it.
Here is exactly what you posted;
[Obviously if these people weren't saved and Jesus said without question he longed and desired to have them saved (gathered)....then what happens to irresistible grace? ]

Forgive my but it seems that when you get in a jam you just pile on indoctrination or so many other things to divert the issue. No? Explain why not?

Letting you read historically how millions have believed, is not piling on, or indoctrination....it is an intervention with someone who has no idea what he is talking about. that is not a crime, everyone must learn sometime, but making like you know what you are talking about when you do not...that is a crime

 

[Iconoclast]

And Icon I fail to understand for the life of me why you rolled out your whole discourse of effectual calling. Has nothing to do with the issue I raised. Forgive my but it seems that when you get in a jam you just pile on indoctrination or so many other things to divert the issue. No? Explain why not?

This forum is a place to learn. Little one sentence tweets is not going to help anyone. To learn you need to read, or what is posted is shared ignoranace

 

[Yeshua1]

This is off topic...the thread is about election.

It still is, as the point was that the Lord chooses to save His own Covenant people, that he elects them based upn knowing them in a special way that he does not have with the lost.