• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

God Got The Memo

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
standingfirminChrist said:
As I pointed out, there were no mention of elect in Paul's epistle to Galatia. Peter apparently knew of some 'elect' in Galatia at the time of his writing the epistle... approximately 63AD. Paul's letter to the Church in Galatia was approximately 56AD.



It is evident there were no elect in the Churches Paul communicated with in Galatia at the time he wrote the epistle, but there were saved.

Paul spoke of elect in other epistles, but not in the Churches of Galatia.

The word 'elect' does not occur in the book of Galatians , but the 'called' are the elect . See 1:6 ;and 5:8,13 . Also , the Galatians were known by God . See 4:9 . The Lord does not know reprobates . See Matthew 7:23 for that .

Check out 3:26 with the designation "sons of God" .

Finally , in 6:10 Paul refers to the elect as those belonging "to the family of believers" . There are all sorts of words used in the Bible for the very same group of people , i.e. Sheep , Church , Body , Believers , Christians , children of God and so on .
 

skypair

Active Member
canadyjd said:
How can that be? They hear His voice, He calls them by name, then they follow Him. Jesus is calling His sheep by name, prior to their following Him.

What about those to whom Jesus said they didn't believe because they were not His sheep (John 10:26)?
Parables do not doctrine make, jd. In this particular situation, Jesus was speaking about His disciples. You will find this teaching of "sheep" as already saved -- not "pre-saved" as you describe it -- in Luke 15 in the parable of the "backsliding" sheep." :laugh:

Surely you must acknowledge that some people will live their entire lives without hearing the gospel.
Yeah. In fact, NONE who lived precross had the NT "gospel" of which you speak -- yet they could be saved.

Start thinking like this and see what you come up with: People are saved by repenting from self and trusting God. This is why Rom 1:20's "they are without excuse" is so pointed! Did they (OT) have to know Christ? No. What did Noah know of Christ?

There is coming a day when the angels will preach to truly EVERYONE on earth. What will be that "everlasting gospel" (Rev 14:6)?? "Fear God, and give glory to Him ... worship Him..." (14:7) What was the error of those "without excuse" back in Romans 1? "Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful;..." Rom 1:21 Do you see Jesus mentioned in either Rom 1:21 or Rev 14:7?

It just so happens that in our age, that the God to fear and to give glory and be thankful to is JESUS!!

IOW, Calvies have a much more restrictive notion of salvation and, apparently because they cannot describe how it really works, they describe it as "election."

skypair
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
skypair said:
I believe that's what is called the "Cliff Notes" approach. Remember those little yellow and black stripes synopses we got of our reading assignments? 30 pages vs. 300? The Cliff Notes blew off the details and gave us what the author thought were the "raw, ungarnished" facts. Well, that's sorta like what you been reading. There is no "covenant of grace." The word "elect" has a vastly different meaning than the "Cliff Note" version (even though the authors tend to call their notes "Systematic Theology" or "Institutes" and such like titles). And the two images --- it's all God's fault but man is responsible --- are quite ludicrous when seen for what they really are, now aren't they?

skypair

Quite ludicrous , but then you tend to specialize in that department. Who on the BB has ever said "It's all God's fault ?!
 

skypair

Active Member
jdlongmire said:
John 15:16
" You did not choose Me but I chose you, and appointed you..."

John 6:70
Jesus answered them, " Did I Myself not choose you, the twelve, and yet one of you is a devil?"
Do you really not realize you are using citations here for convenience that don't apply??? Both of these involve the temporal choosing of Jesus disciples --- which you are attempting to compare with God's choosing the "elect???"

Romans 9:15For He says to Moses, "I WILL HAVE MERCY ON WHOM I HAVE MERCY, AND I WILL HAVE COMPASSION ON WHOM I HAVE COMPASSION."[/quote] And again -- you compare temporal mercy on Israel with spiritual salvation of the church. For 3 chapters Paul pours forth his heart for secular Israel and for 3 chapters Calvinism makes spiritual application of Israel's temporal experience to the church's spiritual future.

Many Calvinists make these comparisons because they are "replacement theologists," jdlongmire. But since we now see Israel again, it is becoming increasingly obvious that God did not mean for us to make some of those applications.

skypair
 

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
standingfirminChrist said:
God does not save just the elect, He saves any who will come to Him in repentance. And no one is elect before Salvation. Elect only means chosen for a special service.

He does not save just elect.

It's amazing how wrong you are on a consistent basis . Do you know Ephesians 1:4 ? It says elect before the foundation of the world . Of course all the elect are just that long before salvation .

Elect "only means chosen for a special service" ?! You better try to square your unique views with the Word of God .

2 Thessalonians 2:13 : ... brothers loved by the Lord , because from the beginning God chose you to be saved through the sanctifying work of the Spirit and through belief in the truth .

In 2 Timothy 1:9 it states that "This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of the world." In 2:10 Paul says that he endured "everything for the sake of the elect." In 2:19nit affirms that "The Lord knows those who are His" i.e. the elect .

In Titus 1:1 : "Paul , a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ for the faith of the elect and the knowledge of the truth that leads to godliness."

In Titus 2:14 it says "who gave himself for us to redeem us ... to purify for himself a people that are his very own."

In Hebrews 9:15 it goes on to say that "those who are called ... he has died as a ransom to set them free" ...

In 1 Peter 1:1,2 "To God's elect ... who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father ...

In 1 Peter 2:9 it speaks of "a chosen people , a royal priesthood , a holy nation , a people belonging to God ..." ( See 2:4 also .)

God saves only the elect , no one else . He saves only those whose names are inscribed in the Lamb's Book of Life .

As Christ was chosen [ elect] before the foundation of the world ( 1 Peter 1:20 ] so too were the elect . He always lives to intercede for the elect .
 

skypair

Active Member
Rippon said:
Quite ludicrous , but then you tend to specialize in that department. Who on the BB has ever said "It's all God's fault ?!
I went and fixed it for you, rip. I was equating "all God's fault" with "total sovereignty," the latter of which no self-respecting Calvie would deny. :laugh:

skypair
 

Tom Butler

New Member
Well, I have been forced into an admission that I thought I'd never have to make. It is that I don't know everything after all.

I thought I had a pretty good handle on the non-Calvinist view of election. The view which I thought was fairly universal apparently is not. I thought the non-Calvinist grounded his view of election on foreseen faith. That is, that God, who knows all things, knew ahead of time who would choose him and be saved, and elected them on that basis.

So, I assumed then that all stripes of both Cal and non-Cal believed that God chose from the foundation of the world, but disagreed on the ground of that election.

I am obviously wr....wro......wrong! I now read that no one is elected until salvation. I now read that some saved people are not elect. Or maybe I misread SFIC and skypair.

You non-Cals, help me out. Are those mainstream non-Cal views? SFIC, skypair, have I misread you? I'm confused.
 
Brother Tom,

You have not misread me. It is evident through Scripture that it is not just the elect who are of the Body of Christ.

Paul referred to some people as 'elect' and others as 'saints,' 'believers,' 'brethren,' 'chosen,' and a few other terms.

It appears to me that the 'elect' were possibly 'missionaries' or of a service that might have trained Churches. Paul spoke in some of his epistles of 'elect' who had a 'church in thy house.' These 'elect' may have been elected to a certain service to train Churches (local assemblies of believers).

In Romans 16:23, Paul speaks of 3 different believers but never tags the title of elect on them. John also speaks of one of these same believers in third John; Gaius.

I cannot find Scripture to back the claim that all believers are elect. Paul made very few references to the 'elect' in his epistles.
 

jdlongmire

New Member
standingfirminChrist said:
Brother Tom,

You have not misread me. It is evident through Scripture that it is not just the elect who are of the Body of Christ.

Paul referred to some people as 'elect' and others as 'saints,' 'believers,' 'brethren,' 'chosen,' and a few other terms.

It appears to me that the 'elect' were possibly 'missionaries' or of a service that might have trained Churches. Paul spoke in some of his epistles of 'elect' who had a 'church in thy house.' These 'elect' may have been elected to a certain service to train Churches (local assemblies of believers).

In Romans 16:23, Paul speaks of 3 different believers but never tags the title of elect on them. John also speaks of one of these same believers in third John; Gaius.

I cannot find Scripture to back the claim that all believers are elect. Paul made very few references to the 'elect' in his epistles.
One more post, then I am bowing out of this discussion - This is a very unothodox position - you are creating divisions of meaning that are not implied by the text. Paul clearly understands the term elect to mean all the people of God.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

canadyjd

Well-Known Member
skypair said:
Parables do not doctrine make, jd. In this particular situation, Jesus was speaking about His disciples. You will find this teaching of "sheep" as already saved -- not "pre-saved" as you describe it -- in Luke 15 in the parable of the "backsliding" sheep."
We discussed this once before and you acknoweldged you had no answer for the clear teaching of scripture where Jesus tells some "you do not believe because you are not of My sheep". He didn't say they weren't his sheep because they refused to believe. He said that did not believe because they were not His sheep.

As far as the use of parables is concerned, Jesus conveyed real doctrinal truth through the parables He spoke. It is too bad you dismiss what you refuse to believe.

We are not literally "sheep". But, as Jesus said, those that belong to Him know His voice. He calls them by name, and they respond by following Him.
Yeah. In fact, NONE who lived precross had the NT "gospel" of which you speak -- yet they could be saved.
They were saved by believing the promises of God, having faith in the One who could keep His promises perfectly. That is the same way we are saved. We have faith in the person of Jesus Christ, who He is and what He did. Salvation has always been by grace, according to God's intervention in the lives of men.
Start thinking like this and see what you come up with: People are saved by repenting from self and trusting God.
You end up thinking salvation is something that orginated within yourself, and not with God. You start thinking in a man-centered way, instead of a God-centered way. You end up thinking your "free-will choice" made the difference in your life, instead of God's grace making the difference in your life. No thank you. I've been there already and the clear teaching of scripture won't let me return.
Do you see Jesus mentioned in either Rom 1:21 or Rev 14:7?
Well, since Jesus is God, and is identified as the creator of all things in John 1 (as well as other places) I can confidently answer "yes".
It just so happens that in our age, that the God to fear and to give glory and be thankful to is JESUS!!
Was there another God in another age that I haven't heard about?

peace to you:praying:
 

Rippon

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
standingfirminChrist said:
I cannot find Scripture to back the claim that all believers are elect. Paul made very few references to the 'elect' in his epistles.

Well , wrong again SFIC . I have been skimming Paul's epistles . So I may have missed a few references . I saw election .elect , election , for the sake of the elect , God's elect .

The word chsen really means the same thing as the elect .

Paul uses the word calls , called and calling quite a number of times . That is bound up in elect .

Paul uses church , saints , predestined , objects of His mercy , those who belong to Him .

Paul uses I have reserved for myself . He uses God's chosen people , remnant , known by God , grace given you in Christ .

God destined for our glory before time began .

Brothers loved by God .

God , that He has chosen you .

A people that are His very own .

This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time .
 

Tom Butler

New Member
If the elect and the saints aren't necessarily the same people, then this means that some folks are saved whom God did not intend to save. For non-Cals, they were saved despite God's foreknowledge that they would not be.

It also can mean that some folks were not saved whom God intended to save.
 

Dale-c

Active Member
If the elect and the saints aren't necessarily the same people, then this means that some folks are saved whom God did not intend to save. For non-Cals, they were saved despite God's foreknowledge that they would not be.

It also can mean that some folks were not saved whom God intended to save.
Yes, very interesting observation.
 

Amy.G

New Member
Here is a question regarding election and who Christ died for. If He died only for certain people and not all, how do we interpret this verse?


Jhn 1:11 He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him.


If these people (His own) were the elect, why didn't they receive Him?
 

nunatak

New Member
I think you have to interpret verse 11 along with 12 and 13.

The Greek in verse 11 is "to his own things." So you could say that the Word came to His own things and people. They should have recognized Him, received Him, and believed on His name.

They didn't. Why?

Verse 12 tells us: He did not give them the right to become God's children. Verse 13 goes even further and tells us that these children are not born by human parents, or human effort, or a husband's will, BUT BY GOD.

IMO, John was speaking of the Jewish nation. Christ came to them. They should have known Him, recognized Him, received Him, and believed on His name.

They couldn't.

Mat 13:13 For this reason I speak to them in parables: Although they see they do not see, and although they hear they do not hear nor do they understand.
Mat 13:14 And concerning them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled that says:
'You will listen carefully yet will never understand,
you will look closely yet will never comprehend.
Mat 13:15 For the heart of this people has become dull;
they are hard of hearing,
and they have shut their eyes,
so that they would not see with their eyes
and hear with their ears
and understand with their hearts
and turn, and I would heal them.'

and

Joh 9:39 Jesus said, "For judgment I have come into this world, so that those who do not see may gain their sight, and the ones who see may become blind."
Joh 9:40 Some of the Pharisees who were with him heard this and asked him, "We are not blind too, are we?"
Joh 9:41 Jesus replied, "If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin, but now because you claim that you can see, your guilt remains."
 
Amy.G said:
Here is a question regarding election and who Christ died for. If He died only for certain people and not all, how do we interpret this verse?


Jhn 1:11 He came to His own, and His own did not receive Him.


If these people (His own) were the elect, why didn't they receive Him?

His own were the Jewish nation. They rejected Him. That is why, after the cross, Salvation was offered to the gentiles... all the gentiles.
 

Amy.G

New Member
standingfirminChrist said:
His own were the Jewish nation. They rejected Him. That is why, after the cross, Salvation was offered to the gentiles... all the gentiles.
I think you guys missed the point of my question. I understand who His own were.

My question was to the Calvinists.

It seems "His own" would certainly be the elect, His sheep. It is said that the sheep and the elect will come to Him, yet in this verse, they did not come to Him, but rejected Him, even though they were "His own".

Clearer?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top