New meaning for old verses

No I'm not.

 

This is a good.
Are you contending that everyone in Israel was saved, James? Because that it distorting the verse beyond it's intent.

Israel was chosen for a purpose and not that everyone in Israel was saved my friend. That purpose of their being chosen AS A NATION was to know Him, believe Him, and understand that He is God.

You are severly twisting that verse to pieces to make it state salvation. It is one of the reasons Ron 9 is so misunderstood. It is not about being choosen to salvation but purpose. Salvation can be intwined with the purpose but salvation is not what it is about.

I have already given it, spoken on it, and expounded it James. Just go back a few post and read it.
Game stops here

 

It stops here for me for the night. It's late, and watching the Indians take a 3 -1 lead has me wiped out. G'night guys (and gal...I see you )

 

I take that as a no.

 

Thread is already made.

Regeneration: Is it a prelude to or the act of salvation ~ born again
http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=43205&page=7

 

yes...me too. Just when I was about to give in and let you win ONE!!

oh well.

I'm off to bed

 

Wrong yet again James. God has ALREADY set forth truth to man in nature and his conscience. Your anology isn't even comparable.

But it is lacking.

AND You and Calvinsim believe that though all men have the resposibility to believe the gospel to be saved not all men have the ability to respond in a positive manner.

 

Take it how you want. It is there and we have already spoke of it previously a few postings back.

 

hold that idea....man have I got a good one for that.

Now shutup and go to bed. I have to get up in 3 hours

 

Friends? Shucks. Does this mean I have to put away my Rock'em Sock'em robots game?

 

YOu bet , good night.

 

Yup. I'm dating myself. Well, I WAS dating myself, but I broke up because we have nothing in common.

 

You never cease to crack me up. :laugh:

 

ADDRESSING ISA 43...

Allan and Web,

Then you do not understand the intent of the passage. There has now been given 3 passages to PROVE that God chooses in assertive role in election. God does not elect because of what we do, but rather the intent of election has clearly been shown to be an action by God for the reason to have the person believe. The same can be said of Isa 43.

I recall over a year ago a thread which asked to use one word to describe Calvinism. My word I use is LOVE. This is what I see in Calvinism over and over. Isa is maybe the clearest book to see this. At times you must apply a bit of Via Negativa...well sorta, in order to see it. I understand via negativa is applied to God, but apply this to Gods actions and you may see what I mean.

Case studies...

1 Why was Christ born in a small town of Bethlehem?
Via negativa applied to the action....

Why not Rome? Rome had more people. More people may believe, if this were to happen in Rome. But it did not. Why?

2 Why did the angel speak from Heaven to a small group of shepherds? Why not go to the cities....all the cities of the earth and proclaim to the masses that Christ was born? At least why not speak to the Scribes and Pharisees who were looking for his coming?

Via negativa causes us to ask....
If God had come to the “leaders” and told them that Christ is born, more Jewish people would believe leaders more then a bunch of shepherds. Or maybe even Caesar Augustus. Caesar had the money and means to get the word out to the whole world and proclaim the good news. A few men keeping sheep at night had no such power or money. So why them and not a leader?


Now lets pull this all together.

Isa 43 is showing Gods great love for His people. If you think of the action taking place by God, you must look at the other side of that action and ask why. Look at the opposing action so to speak.

Many people love to quote this verse. It is a great verse, but you miss the real blessing if you stop at this verse.

Did you see that? God “gave up” Ethiopia and Seba as a ransom. Now what does this mean? Ethiopia and Seba died so that Israel could live. Have you ever thought of it that way? This is what the verse says.

This is talking about going through the waters (vs 2). We all know the story. God saved his people. Hip hip hooray..what a great God we have...God does love His people and cares fro them. But this choice means there was another side to it. In order to save Israel, God killed the Egyptians.

Why? Why not just slow down the Egyptians so that the Jews can get away? If God slowed down the Egyptians, then someday He could have sent a preacher to witness to them and maybe some would believe. But no...God killed them. No preacher was sent.

Now I do not have the time to go through the whole chapter, but this is a good start. Keep reading and you will come to our text and if you keep asking WHY???....you will see God chooses people over others based on LOVE.

 

You did not 'prove' your contention of God an accertive role in the salvation of a person since contextually this deals with a NATION.
Of Course God loved them, who said He didn't. God chose the NATION for His purpose, just as He chose to love that Nation which He placed His name in so all that was done was done for His Names sake.

However, in all of that, you STILL neglected what I stated.
So I will try to be more simple: This is NOT ABOUT ETERNAL SALVATION. It is about election to a purpose for the NATION OF ISRAEL. You misapply the text.

Do you contend that every person in and of Jewish decent was saved??
That would be the texual and logical conclusion derived from your interpretation of the passages.

It is speaking about a NATION, a people unto Himself not of individuals. And I know you next comment - isn't a nation made up of individuals? Yes it is, and again I ask: Do you contend ALL of Israel (the Jews) were eternally saved??

He chose this nation above other nations to Himself for His purpose which was to know Him, believe Him, and understand that He is God. This was done through the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service [of God], and the promises; Though it was not FOR them alone, it was TO them alone.

You are severly twisting these verses to pieces to make it concern salvation of the individual. It is one of the reasons Rom 9 is so misunderstood. It is not about being choosen to salvation but purpose. Salvation can be intwined with the purpose but salvation is not the main purpose of Election. If it was then God failed because not all Jews were nor are saved since they are the Elect.


UH BTW James, God DID send a preacher to Egypt - Jacob (and if I'm not mistaken Abraham as well), Not to mention ALL of their decendents for hundreds of years. God killed Egypt regarding a duel purpose. To judge them who rejected the truth, and save the Jews from their hands so that all would know the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (I am) was the One True God.

Now did God cast away the Egyptians for the sake of Israel. No, He did not. As a matter of fact Egypt in Isaiah that states "blessed [be] Egypt MY PEOPLE".

Egypt was for a time blessed by God because they were a blessing Abraham, Isacc, and Jacob.
Remember God stated ' I will bless them that bless thee and curse them that curse thee'.
When Egypt blessed Israel they were blessed temporially, and when they cursed Israel they were cursed/judged temporially.

 

Amy, somehow I missed this one.

No, to say we know or can know HOW God thinks or WHY He thinks it, is pure speculation.

However, when God states specifically states things about His knowledge (or foreknowledge), that is all we can be sure of regarding it.

LIke the term - foreknow - regards believers of the NT (being conformed to the image of His Son) of His current working. Rom 8:29
and like term - foreknew - regards OT believers (Has God cast away His people which He FOREKNEW) in His previous working. Rom 11:2
These deal with people.

Yet the term foreknowledge deals with knowledge of events concerning people long before they ever take place in time/space.

These are every time the words are used in scripture.

 

Which is that God elected me because I chose Him through my belief. That's what you're arguing that the Bible tells us right? Belief was the criteria.

God was sovereign in choosing the criteria which was belief to elect His people. Then in His foreknowledge He became knowledgable of who would believe, so then He could say, "I elected them".
Is that how you would explain how God's sovereignty in His election?
He had to pick the criteria before He knew who the believers were otherwise His choice would no longer be sovereign but based on people's belief.

Is there an order to God's knowledge?
Can God separate Himself from His Omniscience at any given time and thus know one thing first and then another?
Because that's what you're position seems to require.
God must have known the criteria first, then secondly He knew the people who matched that criteria. If He knew both simultaneously then one would influence the other, would it not?
His choice of the criteria would be influenced by His knowledge of the believers. So He would already know who they were when He picked the criteria and thus not absolutely sovereign because He could not not pick a believer. That had to be part of the criteria. Belief.
I believe that God elected people based on His love for them. And taking it back a step further, what was His loved for them based on? His love.
Just like He told the Israelites in Deut. 7: 8 and 10:15.
He loved them because He loved them.

Some might not like talking about God's knowledge this way, but our beliefs have consequences and we do need to think about those consequences to the best of our abilities. And this next part discusses those consequences.
I don't know how your position absolves God of damning people which is often the charge leveled at Calvinism.
Unconditional election shows God to pick some and not pick others for salvation. How then can man be responsible if he had no choice at all? His damning is not his fault, so the argument goes.
But how does your position absolve God either? No matter which way you look at it, God created people with the knowledge that they would be damned.
When He actualized this world, He did so with the knowledge that the unbeliever would be damned. His criteria, according to you was belief( unless I completely missed your point above). If He was not willing that any should perish, then He could have a created a world in which everyone believed. Or He could have created a world in which the criteria was humanness. You had to be a human. Or maybe no criteria at all. Or whatever other sovereign choices you want to give God. Just create people to fill up heaven.

But even in your system God is the ultimate cause behind an unbeliever's damnation. Either He selected the criteria then He became knowledgeable of those who would not believe that He had created. Or He selected the criteria all the while knowing that there would be many who would not match that criteria and would be damned.
So again, it seems no matter how you want to play it, God is the ultimate reason for creating damned souls.
His exhaustive foreknowledge is a problem for us if we are trying to absolve God of souls lost in hell, unless we acknowledge that God has a God-glorifying purpose in creating a hell.