Is it possible?

Romans 8 : 29,30

 

2 Thessalonians 2:13(NASB)
13 But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth. </font>[/QUOTE]Where is it stated that Paul is addressing "The Elect". He is addressing Greek believers. So where is it stated that the gentiles are the elect.

 

2 Thessalonians 2:13(NASB)
13 But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth. </font>[/QUOTE]And how do we know that the "you" doesn't refer to the Gentiles or that "you" refers to the Church?

 

So Paul is calling the Roman believers "the elect"?

 

Yelsew,

1 Peter 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God ........

Romans 8:29 for whom he did foreknow , he also did predestinate ....

Romans 8:30 Moreover whom he did predestinate them he also called : and whom he called, them he also justified : and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Another passage which might be helpful to you is Romans 11, particularly verses 5,11 and 12.

God Bless

Enda

PS Note also 1 Thessalonians 1:4

[ April 23, 2003, 10:42 AM: Message edited by: enda ]

 

In the verse, where he uses the word "chosen," incidentally the same group who "Election" he talks of in 1 Thess 1:4.

In answer to Scott's question, we don't konw that the "You" doesn't refer to Gentiles. IT most likely does, since Thessalonica had a large population of Gentiles and there is no reason to believe they were excluded from the chruch. As far as knowing that the "you" refers to the church, we know that because we see that the "you" who are "Chosen" were chosen to "salvation" and the people who are saved make up the church.

IT absolutely amazes me the kind of questions that get asked. Sometimes I think you guys are just playing dumb with these things. It is hard to imagine these questions are serious.

 

Are you all saying that OMNISCIENT God did not, or does not, know all mankind? Is God limited?

So once again Paul is telling the Thessalonian believers that they are the elect. What about the Cretian believers? The Turkish believers, The Lebanon believers?

 

Yelsew,

I haven't said anything I've just quoted scripture.

Tell me, how do you interpret these verses?

 

But if it is a collective "you," then it literally means that God chose a group of people to be his chosen people, just as he chose the nation Israel to be his chosen people. People had to believe and follow to be considered part of that group.

It's hard to believe you'd write a comment like that. Seems rife with an emotional appeal. I thought you didn't do such things.

 

No, why would you think that?

He didn't say "only" the Thessalonian believers. If you read the text, you will see that. From other places in Scripture, we see that the elect is made up of people from many different places, in accordance with Revelation where Christ has redeemed for himself a people from every tribe and tongue and people and nation. Seems pretty clear to me.

 

Or did people believe because they were a part of that group. We are back to the verse your side has never yet showed us, that verse that says election is the result of belief. That verse, that you so desparately need to prove your point, is just not there. That is why you don't cite it. When God chose a group, that group was made up of individuals. In fact, it is impossible to have a group of people apart from the individuals that make it up.

IT's not an emotional appeal. But I never said I didn't do that. I said I didn't do that in one particular point under question. This was a simple statement of fact, inquiring as to whether you are really serious with these questions. This just seems so basic and you have been here for a very long time. I can't imagine that you ask them in seriousness. It is almost as if you are lobbing softballs up here for us to knock out of the park.

 

The Bride of Christ is doctrinally sound and sure founded on scripture, practicing believer's baptism only, close communion and adhering to all that Christ has commanded them, including and especially the Doctrine of Salvation by Grace alone.

I described the Bride earlier, I was not teasing, though you may have thought honestly so that I was, yet I am certain that Christ does not have an universal and invisible wife, nor does our salvation experience make us a member of His Bride, if John the Baptist can say that he is not of the Bride, then this must be a distinct body (just as my wife or any other is distinct and is not an universal and invisible wife of any other merely because she has the general appearances of all other wives). My position as husband, meaning I am married and am married to one who is generally meeting all the qualifications of a wife, does not make every woman I encounter my wife simply because she/they meet the same 'general' criteria. The difference lays in the choice I made of 'my wife'. Christ also distinguishes between those who to men appear to be of the Bride, yet are not because His Bride is distinctively peculiar in her doctrine etc. It is man who has polluted the view of marriage and has thus polluted the correct and Biblical teaching of the church as the Bride of Jesus. If all women become as my wife because of the appearance then I cannot 'commit' adultery against my wife; if I am free to separate from the 'church' the Bride of Christ, then I am free to 'adulterate' my beliefs and not contend for the doctrines once delivered to the saints. This removes me from adherence to any form of doctrine, but would make me a member of the peculiar Bride? How can it be?

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

Pastor Larry and Bro Dallas, excellent posts, may the Lord grant you both the patience to continue in these debates.

God Bless

Enda

 

Oh, we've shown them before, but it is not made up as a specific verse. When God chose the Israelites, he chose the nation. Biblical truth #1. Not all Israelites were followers of God - merely examine such characters as Ahab and Jezebel. Biblical Fact #2. Paul said in Romans that not all Israel believed, even though they heard.

So how can this be? Israelites were chosen, yet some individuals rejected? We must conclude that GOd chose a people, a nation, to be His. Just beacuse you were of the people did not make you a child of God - one had to choose to follow CHrist to be considered righteous.

How's that?

 

Oh, we've shown them before, but it is not made up as a specific verse. When God chose the Israelites, he chose the nation. Biblical truth #1. Not all Israelites were followers of God - merely examine such characters as Ahab and Jezebel. Biblical Fact #2. Paul said in Romans that not all Israel believed, even though they heard.

So how can this be? Israelites were chosen, yet some individuals rejected? We must conclude that GOd chose a people, a nation, to be His. Just beacuse you were of the people did not make you a child of God - one had to choose to follow CHrist to be considered righteous.

How's that? </font>[/QUOTE]Scott, you're on fire! (kinda like Steve Nash right now on the Mavericks )

When the Bible speaks of being chosen, you must ask, "Chosen for what?"

Does it mean all of Israel was chosen to be saved? Apparently not, because all Jews weren't saved.

Does it mean all of Israel was chosen to hear the message? Yes

Were they chosen to be the lineage of the Christ? Yes.

Were they chosen to be the ones who carried the message of God to the world? Yes.

Before the NT were Gentiles chosen to hear the message, be the lineage of the Christ or to carry the inspired message from God? NO.

Were the Gentiles chosen to hear the message evetually? Yes, which is the shocking and very contraversial news of the 1st century, which is why we have verses like 2 Thess 2:13 where Paul thanks God for his choosing the people of Thessolonica who were predominately Gentiles.

YES! The Mavs won again!!! Go DALLAS!

 

Thank you, Thank you very much

Bro. Dallas

 

IT is certainly made up though, as evidenced by the lack of Scripture

But all Israel was chosen for a certain purpose. It does not say that the purpose was belief. YOU have taken "Chosen" with respect to Israel and tried to make it the same as "chosen" With respect to the church. The idea of "CHosen" is the same; the thing to which they were chosen is clearly different, as a reading of Scripture will show.

Useless. It did not address the question and provided no place in Scripture where "elected" is the result of belief. In fact, it contradicts you. It shows that the Israelites were chosen in spite of their unbelief, not becuase of it. OF course, you will (and should) run to the point that they were not chosen for salvation, and when you get there, you will find me waiting, still asking the question, where is election said to be the result of belief?

 

See my bucket of water, which is very similar in some ways to your own post that refutes his and fails in the same place.

Exactly my point. 2 Thess 2:13 tells what they were chosen for: Salvation. So we see that election is to salvation, which is different than the national election of Israel. So the analogy breaks down from the very beginning.

Which we agree with.

I don't know what you base this on and I don't know what relevance it has anyway.

[qutoe]Were they chosen to be the lineage of the Christ? Yes.[/quote]Agreed, but irrelevant. "Election" isn't used in this connection I don't believe, but my memory may fail me. Either way, it doesn't matter.

Again, "election" is not used in this way in Scripture, so while this is partially true, it is irrelevant for this discussion. (The church is actually chosen to carry the message ot the world.)

There were some Gentiles chosen to hear the message and some chosen to carry it. For instance, Nebuchadnezzar heard and carried it, as did Rahab, Ruth, etc. In fact, Ruth a Gentile was chosen to be in the lineage of Christ as was Rahab, now that I think of it. So your argument falls on all three points. However, it is still irrelevant.

The controversy was that the Gentiles would have equal footing with the Jews in the church. IT Was no controversy that they would hear the message. But you are right that 2 Thess 2:13 teaches us that God chose the people of Thessalonica. And notice what he chose them to ... Go ahead, don't be frightened ... read it ... it's right there in the verse ... Now say it out loud with me -- S A L V A T I O N. See how easy that was ????

But you and they both know, deep in the little places they don't want to talk about, that they will not be able to beat the Lakers. ... So enjoy your parties ... They will be over soon

 

Useless. It did not address the question and provided no place in Scripture where "elected" is the result of belief. In fact, it contradicts you. It shows that the Israelites were chosen in spite of their unbelief, not becuase of it. OF course, you will (and should) run to the point that they were not chosen for salvation, and when you get there, you will find me waiting, still asking the question, where is election said to be the result of belief? </font>[/QUOTE]I have to agree with Pastor Larry. That's unusual

I don't believe we are "chosen by God" as a result of our belief. If God hadn't chosen the Gentiles to hear the message none of us would have been given the opportunity to respond to the gospel.

Larry, notice you said, "But all Israel was chosen for a certain purpose. It does not say that the purpose was belief. "

I agree with this, as my last post explains. And just as the Israelites were not chosen for belief, so too I believe that the Gentiles are not chosen for belief. Instead, they were both chosen to hear the message so that they might see, hear, understand and repent (Acts 28:26-28). The message was given first to the Jews, then to the Gentiles. Those who hear the message and recieve it in faith are placed IN HIM and those IN HIM have been predestined to be adopted as sons.

You get all over Scott for not providing biblical support but you don't have any biblical support for your view that certain individual are chosen for belief while others are passed over in their total inablity.

 

They were chosen for salvation and the end of salvation includes the belief that brings it. Choosing in him was not a choosing to be adopted but a chossing to be "In him."

I have given these references ad nauseum in this forum. I simply didn't see the need to recite them here again when they have been ignored so many times before.