The Elect, Need a clear definition of....

That really isn't true FFF. And by the way, I like you to.

What I am trying to reconcile is exactly what I am arguing with you all over. Why biblically speaking does one person say "yes" while the other says "no". I am trying to reconcile why the Bible teaches salvation through faith but also says that an omniscient God who knows the future elected us before the foundation of the world. I am trying to reconcile the facts that within the context of a single thought John would declare that as many as believe are given the power to become the sons of God and also that these same people were not born (spiritually) of their own will but by the will of God.

I tried to reconcile the Bible to the implicit arminianism we were taught growing up but it simply doesn't answer the fundamental question biblically.

That isn't true either. The blind man that Jesus healed was bound by his affliction. It would be the height of non-sense to say that his will was violated much less done away with because he could by his own nature and will see after Christ healed him.

Likewise, it would be ridiculous to say that Lazarus' will was violated when Christ raised him from the dead or that living wasn't perfectly natural for him afterwards.

Both of death and blindness are used in the Bible to illustrate the unregenerate state. It is no more a violation of a person's will when the Holy Spirit quickens them spiritually than it was when Jesus quickened Lazarus physically. When someone is resurrected physically or spiritually they of their own free will do that which comes "natural". A spiritually regenerate person repents and believes. One who remains dead in trespasses and sins does not... like the great number of physically dead people Jesus walked past the graves of to get to Lazarus.

Man does have the capacity to choose... and left to his own "dead in sin", unregenerate will, he will always reject the gospel in favor of his own way.

Our ability to choose is of our spiritual nature. I Corinthians tells us clearly that the natural man cannot receive the things of the Spirit.

So in other words, if one brother chose to love a saint resulting in a long productive marriage while the other chose to love and marry the town tramp resulting in him dying of an STD at 25, there would be no sense of merit in those choices?

 

A decision is not an action, it is a mental focus that results in actions that have consequences. </font>[/QUOTE]Wes, A decision is the conclusion of a process of thought. It is an action that shapes behavior.

 

A decision is not an action, it is a mental focus that results in actions that have consequences. </font>[/QUOTE]Wes, A decision is the conclusion of a process of thought. It is an action that shapes behavior.

 

with two people given the same opportunity, there is no bottom line to cut to, unless you know the detail history of each of the parties, and can determine exactly what causes their individual choice! No one man can see the content of another's spirit, only God's Spirit can do that.

So you can stop asking that inane question because there is no right answer and no wrong answer, only an individually unique answer for each unique individual. </font>[/QUOTE]Who controls those circumstances?

 

BTW, a question isn't inane simply because you don't like the implications of the only honest answer you can give.

 

with two people given the same opportunity, there is no bottom line to cut to, unless you know the detail history of each of the parties, and can determine exactly what causes their individual choice! No one man can see the content of another's spirit, only God's Spirit can do that.

So you can stop asking that inane question because there is no right answer and no wrong answer, only an individually unique answer for each unique individual. </font>[/QUOTE]Who controls those circumstances? </font>[/QUOTE]Depends on the persuasion of whomever you ask! </font>[/QUOTE]No it doesn't. It doesn't at all. That answer is INANE... called relativism I believe... and it has no basis in scripture.

Truth is truth regardless of one's persuasion or perspective.

 

A decision is not an action, it is a mental focus that results in actions that have consequences. </font>[/QUOTE]Wes, A decision is the conclusion of a process of thought. It is an action that shapes behavior. </font>[/QUOTE]A decision is not an action! If you come to a fork in the road you must decide which way to go, then take action to go they way you have decided! A decision IS NOT an action! </font>[/QUOTE]When you come to a fork in a road, you evaluate your options. If you make a good evaluation and choose the road that gets you where you want to go then that choice has merit. If you evaluate poorly and take the wrong road, that choice has negative consequences for which you are responsible.

A decision is the end point of an evaluative process. It is an action in and of itself. It is not simply the cause of an action it is the result of actions (thought processes).

You can try to argue semantics all you want but you are simply wrong about this... and even if you weren't, the decision STILL HAS MERIT. That is contradictory to "unmerited favor". If you make a good decision, whether you admit it is an act by you or not, and it results in a positive outcome then you deserve merit for your choice unless someone else can be given credit for it.

 

FFF, When you removed your profile from public view, your PM to me disappeared.

I'd like to be able to contact you. I don't even have the link to your website now.

 

Scott, FFF did NOT remove their profile. They had been a member previously and wasn't able to enter their new email so joined by changing the words around and then asked me to correct their email on the OLD account, resend their password and delete the new account. Try Faith, Fact & Feeling. http://www.baptistboard.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi/profile/5409.html

 

Wes,
You are way over you head on the will, when are you ever going to humble yourself. The very definition of the FREE WILL is to act upon the minds strongest motive, inclination at the moment. The mind of man "spawns" thought for which you base your "decisions" on. Your mind is only and continuously EVIL. Thus your decisions will always be evil in the sense you are starting with an evil base of thought coming from your mind.

Please read "The Freedom of the Will" by Jonathan Edwards... It is the unparalleled authority on the subject.

 

I meant "you" generally Wes. Of course this applies to everybody... THAT'S the point.

Evil is the base of our foundation of thought. We decide EVERYTHING, but will always be inclined to evil, because that's all we KNOW.

You (mankind) can NEVER choose the good, because we are inclined to choose evil.

 

Thanks Wes...
You are right, I take what God says literally. It keeps me from interjecting any humanistic philosphies like "man being good" into my theology. Let scripture mold your thinking not your thinking mold scripture.

All your works are as filthy rags...
No one does good, no, not one.
The natural man HATES God.

 

Amen RC

So we can't think for ourselves since we refuse to let you dictate what we think to us? Another case where your own argument disproves your accusations.

BTW, God through His Word has given us a much greater understanding of humanity than we could ever "think for" ourselves.

I THINK one's thinking for himself shows much more wisdom when he trusts God rather than any man... including himself... to evaluate human goodness.