I Believe the Doctrine of Unconditional Election,

[Pastor_Bob]

Except that sinners left in their own natural sin states will always reject Jesus and salvation, and so God Himself will have to decide for them whether to be saved or not!

So, the God you serve gives these men the opportunity to hear the gospel of the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, and hear that He is the only way to receive eternal life, and then He says, "Just kidding...you can't have eternal life; I already decided that for you"?

No thank you.

 

[Pastor_Bob]

God uses means. That's been explained to you several times before.

You can explain your Calvinistic viewpoint to me several more times and I'll still disagree.

 

[thatbrian]

You can explain your Calvinistic viewpoint to me several more times and I'll still disagree.

I don't care if you disagree, Bob. I care that you don't understand, yet disagree. That's the problem. You can't disagree with what you don't comprehend.

 

[Yeshua1]

So, the God you serve gives these men the opportunity to hear the gospel of the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, and hear that He is the only way to receive eternal life, and then He says, "Just kidding...you can't have eternal life; I already decided that for you"?

No thank you.

No, rather that same God has provided the means by which some get saved, as we ALL deserve hell, correct?

 

[thatbrian]

So, the God you serve gives these men the opportunity to hear the gospel of the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, and hear that He is the only way to receive eternal life, and then He says, "Just kidding...you can't have eternal life; I already decided that for you"?

No thank you.

You imagine that men are in a morally neutral position, Bob. You speak of them not being at enmity with their Creator. That one thing keeps you from understanding the biblical position on this subject. If you understand "total depravity", you would understand the rest.

 

[atpollard]

So, the God you serve gives these men the opportunity to hear the gospel of the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ, and hear that He is the only way to receive eternal life, and then He says, "Just kidding...you can't have eternal life; I already decided that for you"?

Does the God you serve proclaim a WORD that does indeed return void, failing to accomplish anything, in the vast majority of cases ... because men chose to disbelieve and thwarted the will of God?

It seems that those are the only two choices:
1. God calls some people with 100% effectiveness (God limits application).
2. God calls all people, but only some agree to come (Man limits effectiveness).

So which poison do you choose? A 'mean' God or an 'impotent' God?

 

[Pastor_Bob]

I don't care if you disagree, Bob. I care that you don't understand, yet disagree. That's the problem. You can't disagree with what you don't comprehend.

I may not comprehend your personal viewpoint, Brother; but, I believe I comprehend the biblical doctrine of soteriology just fine. I wouldn’t dogmatically state my position if I didn’t feel that I had a fairly good grasp on what I believe the Bible teaches on the subject.

 

[Reynolds]

Does the God you serve proclaim a WORD that does indeed return void, failing to accomplish anything, in the vast majority of cases ... because men chose to disbelieve and thwarted the will of God?

It seems that those are the only two choices:
1. God calls some people with 100% effectiveness (God limits application).
2. God calls all people, but only some agree to come (Man limits effectiveness).

So which poison do you choose? A 'mean' God or an 'impotent' God?

Does not have to be either. An all powerful, completely sovereign God who gave man permission to choose.

 

[Pastor_Bob]

No, rather that same God has provided the means by which some * get saved, as we ALL deserve hell, correct?

I would add only the words “choose to” to that statement and then I’d agree 100%.

 

[thatbrian]

I may not comprehend your personal viewpoint, Brother; but, I believe I comprehend the biblical doctrine of soteriology just fine. I wouldn’t dogmatically state my position if I didn’t feel that I had a fairly good grasp on what I believe the Bible teaches on the subject.

It's not my viewpoint that I am expressing here. It's the Reformed viewpoint. I'm saying that you don't understand the Calvinist position, Bob. It's Okay, no one who disagrees with it does.

 

[Yeshua1]

Does the God you serve proclaim a WORD that does indeed return void, failing to accomplish anything, in the vast majority of cases ... because men chose to disbelieve and thwarted the will of God?

It seems that those are the only two choices:
1. God calls some people with 100% effectiveness (God limits application).
2. God calls all people, but only some agree to come (Man limits effectiveness).

So which poison do you choose? A 'mean' God or an 'impotent' God?

How about a loving God who will have His will regarding salvation of His own always accomplished!

 

[Pastor_Bob]

You speak of them not being at enmity with their Creator.

No, sir. That is what you’re hearing, but that’s not what I’m saying. I believe that all men are the enemies of God until they accept His offer of reconciliation that is extended to all men indiscriminately.

 

[Yeshua1]

I would add only the words “choose to” to that statement and then I’d agree 100%.

And there choice would be based upon them being predestined/elected by God...

 

[Pastor_Bob]

It's not my viewpoint that I am expressing here. It's the Reformed viewpoint. I'm saying that you don't understand the Calvinist position, Bob. It's Okay, no one who disagrees with it does.

You won’t believe this, but I’ve asked for here and read books that present both sides of the debate. I’m on my phone right now or I would find the thread and post it here.

 

[thatbrian]

No, sir. That is what you’re hearing, but that’s not what I’m saying. I believe that all men are the enemies of God until they accept His offer of reconciliation that is extended to all men indiscriminately.

The reason I said what I said is that if you knew that ALL men were deserving of Hell, you would not think that God not saving some would be unfair. That's what reveals your real thoughts on this matter. You think that God is obligated to show mercy.

 

[Yeshua1]

The reason I said what I said is that if you knew that ALL men were deserving of Hell, you would not think that God not saving some would be unfair. That's what reveals your real thoughts on this matter. You think that God is obligated to show mercy.

I am not saying that pastor BoB does this, but some who express the viewpoint that God must show mercy upon all seem to be saying that they know better than God how to do this, or that they deserved to get saved?

 

[agedman]

In order for one to deal with the thinking of limits to election (unconditional election), does not one first need to determine if the thinking of some prevenient or preceding grace is actually found in the Scriptures?

 

[thatbrian]

I am not saying that pastor BoB does this, but some who express the viewpoint that God must show mercy upon all seem to be saying that they know better than God how to do this, or that they deserved to get saved?

Yes. It's very common. We, by nature, don't understand two things: The holiness of God, and the sinfulness of man. If we did we would be amazed not that God didn't save all, but that He saved any.

 

[Yeshua1]

Yes. It's very common. We, by nature, don't understand two things: The holiness of God, and the sinfulness of man. If we did we would be amazed not that God didn't save all, but that He saved any.

Those in very presence of God, such as an isaiah or John wish risen Jesus, were not really boasting anything, but knew they were sinful men before a holy God!

 

[thatbrian]

Those in very presence of God, such as an isaiah or John wish risen Jesus, were not really boasting anything, but knew they were sinful men before a holy God!

"I am a man of unclean lips. . ."