The Glorious "Gospel of Election"

[Jarthur001]

Aw, c'mon, Tom. You're not playing the game right. I'll offer my answers ahead of time. I still would like to hear your counter. Or if I happen to "hit the nail on the head" (I have been doing that a lot lately --- I'm building a privacy fence in my back yard :laugh: ), your "no lo contendre." Learning and growing in Christ should be fun, don't you think?

skypair

Its time to get a new hammer sky.

 

[PK]

Therein lies the crux of skypair's problem.
He is revulsed by the idea that God can and would choose whom He wants, draw whom He wants, reject whom He wants, save whom He wants.

How dare God ?

One of these days these Calvinist will understand that "All" means all the world. They will also understand that mans will is what inhibits all from being saved. We are not robots. Do you know how we will know when they understand this? They will be out on the streets, in the highways and biways, witnessing to the "whosoever will come". This is why the SBC is going calvanistic. They don't want to go as God commanded.

 

[skypair]

You would have us believe there are some who desire to be saved, but God is turning them back and condemning them to hell because they were not part of His "elect". Scripture rejects that notion. First, all have rejected God's revelation. There are none who are seeking for God.

Hence your belief that He alone changes the hearts of only His chosen. Yeah, I know.

Here's what it gets more down to, jd -- if election is the first cause of salvation, then election is justification of the soul. The soul, which was the site of death-by-sin early in life, is restored to God by the first cause -- either election or repentance to God.

Then comes the second cause -- indwelling of the Spirit, our sanctification. That is, God doesn't put His Spirit into an unsaved person.

Now to track Calvinism in this, we see that the first cause of salvation is presumed to be God's election with which we have nothing to do. Anyone who adheres strictly to the Calvinist line of thinking ("gospel of election") has merely skipped step one -- salvation or restoration of the soul -- and is following the step 2 "script" for salvation, growing in Christ.

If you don't agree, do you at least understand what I am saying? Do you believe in man's triune nature?

Do you believe there are 3 "phases" to salvation -- justification, sanctification, glorification? That they involve the soul (conscience), then spirit (mind, emotions, will), then body? Do you see that having the gospel in your spirit does NOT convert the soul?

How do you convert your soul? YOU have to repent from self to God. It has to be an active choice of YOUR will/spirit on YOUR part! Nothing gets to your soul, not even God, except through your spirit. Do you believe that? The soul is the throne of your life. Who is on it --- God or self?

No one can come to the Father unless he is drawn, according to the kind intention of His will, and all that come will not be turned back.

Correct. But Calvinism lies about who is drawn (ALL) and therefore is wrong about who will come.

The problem is only in your mind. You do not like the idea of the Sovereign God of the Universe deciding the fate of His creation, but instead would have their fate determined by their own fallen, marred, and enslaved wills.

It's very easy for you to foist the fault off on MY motives, isn't it. But fortunately, I gave up "having my fate determined by my own fallen, marred, and enslaved will" when I trusted Christ as Savior and Lord. My soul could not be more saved! :jesus: My spirit could, though. raying:

And I love the idea that God is going to decide what fate His creation comes to! Bring it on! IN fact, we are to pray daily "Even so, come, Lord Jesus," Rev 22 I do!

skypair

 

[skypair]

Its time to get a new hammer sky.

Yeah -- I lost my good hammer (all metal w/ rubber grip) 8 years ago in my attic insulation. Now I'm back to relying on my old, slick, wood handled one I've had for 13 years! But it's not the hammer that hits the nails -- it's the hammerer. And I'm pretty good at it!

skypair

 

[skypair]

Incidentally...

I believe JM, in his "Lordship Salvation," touches the real issue --- men have not converted their souls and enthroned God there. How does one do that? Repenting of SELF --repenting from the SINNER, not the sins -- toward God. Repenting of sins does not get to the heart of the issue, does it.

It was the SINNER that was making all the decisions before and JM, in Lordship Salvation, bemoans the fact that the sinner is still in charge after conversion! And then he wants to propose some kind of "competition" betweed "easy believism" and Calvinism while he imposes more "social controls" on his own audience.

Friend, for all the old sins that you repented of in salvation, there are a myriad of sins you haven't thought of and if the SINNER is not dethroned by your will with God's power, you will still be floundering years later (barring you taking JM's "social controls" to heart)!! You especially, jd, bury the old self -- let the Spirit resurrect the NEW!

skypair

 

[Jarthur001]

One of these days these Calvinist will understand that "All" means all the world. They will also understand that mans will is what inhibits all from being saved. We are not robots. Do you know how we will know when they understand this? They will be out on the streets, in the highways and biways, witnessing to the "whosoever will come". This is why the SBC is going calvanistic. They don't want to go as God commanded.

Hello PK,

Lets look at what you said above.

One of these days these Calvinist will understand that "All" means all the world.

"All" takes on the meaning of the context, as all other words do. If I tell my family, "all of us is going out to eat"...this is not talking about the whole world. In fact, if others were standing there with my family, I could still say "all of us is going out to eat" and still not be talking about the others outside my family. All can mean many things.

Lets take the verse..."For God so loved the world..."

This has been used my many, to say it is saying God loves all of mankind. They see it no other way. They then change the meaning of other verses that shows clearly that God does hate when He chooses to do so. This is based on how they read John 3:16. Again we are talking about the word LOVE here. Can God love the world and not love each person?

We do this all the time as humans, so why can God not do it? Like I may say..."I love sports" and mean it. I may later say ..."I hate hunting". Hunting is a sport. Does this mean i lied? No...of course not.

I can say "I love food"...and also say "I hate green peas"...both are true statements.

Therefore it is easy to see that God can indeed say I love the world, and I hate some. There is no need to change the meaning of the Bible, for both is true.

You said..

They will also understand that mans will is what inhibits all from being saved.

I along with ALL calvinist believe this now. We call it the big T.

You said...

We are not robots.

I believe this now as well as most Calvinist. You think because God is in control that we are robots...comes only from Calvinist haters and Hypers.

YOU said...

Do you know how we will know when they understand this? They will be out on the streets, in the highways and biways, witnessing to the "whosoever will come".

I witness now. I ask others to come to Christ nearly everyday. I write a colunm that goes into 100,000 homes...not a "church based newspaper"...just a hometown paper. I have to believe that most of my readers are not believers. I ask in most columns for readers to come to Christ. Name me a church that reaches 100,000 homes. They are few. It is not I, but God that gave me this column. I must do His work though it.

I also teach and witness to others outside of church. This I say not in pride, but for you to claim Calvinist do not witness is shameful. Do you not know the history of missions??? Was it not founded my Calvinist?

Look at Livingston, Carey, Edwards....did they not witness? Were they not Calvinist? You need to leave your hate at the door for brothers in Christ, and not think so highly of yourself as a better believer my friend.

Even John Calvin proved himself to be genuinely concerned for the spread of the true gospel as he should be. Under Calvin's leadership, Geneva became the hub of a vast missionary enterprise.

Calvin says...

Since we do not know who belongs to the number of the predestined and who does not, it befits us so to feel as to wish that all be saved. So it will come about that, whoever we come across, we shall study to make him a sharer of peace . . . even severe rebuke will be administered like medicine, lest they should perish or cause others to perish. But it will be for God to make it effective in those whom He foreknew and predestined

You said...

They don't want to go as God commanded.

That is a out right lie and you need to ask forgiveness for slamming brothers in Christ.

History will prove you wrong many times over. I waste no time on this, but tell you you have been mislead in many things.

 

[webdog]

This has been used my many, to say it is saying God loves all of mankind. They see it no other way. They then change the meaning of other verses that shows clearly that God does hate when He chooses to do so.

We don't change the verses, we filter it through the whole of Scripture and interpret it in context.

This is based on how they read John 3:16. Again we are talking about the word LOVE here. Can God love the world and not love each person?

...and here is the flaw again that hate means the opposite of love. I would have thought you would have gotten it by now.

What James is accusing non calvinists of doing is what he is doing himself...interpreting John 3:16 through the Scripture he so chooses.

 

[PK]

Hello PK,

Lets look at what you said above.


"All" takes on the meaning of the context, as all other words do. If I tell my family, "all of us is going out to eat"...this is not talking about the whole world. In fact, if others were standing there with my family, I could still say "all of us is going out to eat" and still not be talking about the others outside my family. All can mean many things.

Lets take the verse..."For God so loved the world..."

This has been used my many, to say it is saying God loves all of mankind. They see it no other way. They then change the meaning of other verses that shows clearly that God does hate when He chooses to do so. This is based on how they read John 3:16. Again we are talking about the word LOVE here. Can God love the world and not love each person?

We do this all the time as humans, so why can God not do it? Like I may say..."I love sports" and mean it. I may later say ..."I hate hunting". Hunting is a sport. Does this mean i lied? No...of course not.

I can say "I love food"...and also say "I hate green peas"...both are true statements.

Therefore it is easy to see that God can indeed say I love the world, and I hate some. There is no need to change the meaning of the Bible, for both is true.

You said..


I along with ALL calvinist believe this now. We call it the big T.

You said...


I believe this now as well as most Calvinist. You think because God is in control that we are robots...comes only from Calvinist haters and Hypers.

YOU said...


I witness now. I ask others to come to Christ nearly everyday. I write a colunm that goes into 100,000 homes...not a "church based newspaper"...just a hometown paper. I have to believe that most of my readers are not believers. I ask in most columns for readers to come to Christ. Name me a church that reaches 100,000 homes. They are few. It is not I, but God that gave me this column. I must do His work though it.

I also teach and witness to others outside of church. This I say not in pride, but for you to claim Calvinist do not witness is shameful. Do you not know the history of missions??? Was it not founded my Calvinist?

Look at Livingston, Carey, Edwards....did they not witness? Were they not Calvinist? You need to leave your hate at the door for brothers in Christ, and not think so highly of yourself as a better believer my friend.

Even John Calvin proved himself to be genuinely concerned for the spread of the true gospel as he should be. Under Calvin's leadership, Geneva became the hub of a vast missionary enterprise.

Calvin says...



You said...

That is a out right lie and you need to ask forgiveness for slamming brothers in Christ.

History will prove you wrong many times over. I waste no time on this, but tell you you have been mislead in many things.

Please show me scripture that "all the world" does not mean everyone in the world.

So if I were part of your family I would not be eating tonight?

 

[Jarthur001]

Please show me scripture that "all the world" does not mean everyone in the world.

So if I were part of your family I would not be eating tonight?

Lets face it PK. It is clear no matter what is posted from the Bible, you will believe as you have been programed.

But nonetheless.... this is but a simple test.

Luk 2:1 And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed

This tax did not include China

China is the world's most populous country during the period of the Roman empire, with a population estimated at around 60 million. (Italy has about six million inhabitants at the height of the empire) It is also, perhaps, the most sophisticated: there are even examinations to make sure that applicants are knowledgeable enough for employment in the civil service.

http://www.channel4.com/history/microsites/H/history/guide03/part12.html

Rev 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.

and....

Rev 13:16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

.notice this passage...144,000...another sealed group ...and marked in their foreheads....and not part of "all the world" found in Rev 13

Rev 7:3 Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.

Rev 7:4 And I heard the number of them which were sealed: [and there were] sealed an hundred [and] forty [and] four thousand of all the tribes of the children of Israel.

YOU ASKED......

So if I were part of your family I would not be eating tonight?

it all depends on the context, and being that you are not here with me, how could we know?

let me ask you this....

If I said......."I saw a bat"

What kind of bat did I see? Was it a bat that flies, or a bat that hits fly balls?

 

[canadyjd]

Hence your belief that He alone changes the hearts of only His chosen. Yeah, I know.

Who else but God changes the hearts of men? Do men change their own hearts? It seems scripture says they are not able to understand spiritual things in their fallen state, so how can they change their own hearts?

Here's what it gets more down to, jd -- if election is the first cause of salvation, then election is justification of the soul. The soul, which was the site of death-by-sin early in life, is restored to God by the first cause -- either election or repentance to God.

I don't hold that "election is the first cause of salvation", so everything else you said doesn't apply to me.

Then comes the second cause -- indwelling of the Spirit, our sanctification. That is, God doesn't put His Spirit into an unsaved person.

I see the drawing/convicting work of Holy Spirit as a separate work from the indwelling of Holy Spirit. I see the indwelling of Holy Spirit as something that comes with faith.

Now to track Calvinism in this, we see that the first cause of salvation is presumed to be God's election with which we have nothing to do.

We already spoke of this. I don't see the "first cause" of salvation as "election", so everything else doesn't apply.

If you don't agree, do you at least understand what I am saying? Do you believe in man's triune nature?

I understand and disagree. I believe man is a 2-part being, spirit and flesh. The "soul" is sometimes used interchangeably with "spirit", and sometimes to refer to the entire person/self.

Correct. But Calvinism lies about who is drawn (ALL) and therefore is wrong about who will come.

If you believe "all" are drawn, can you explain how many millions, even 100's of millions of people who lived and died without ever hearing the gospel?

Surely, even today, people live and die without hearing the gospel.

Since God declared the preaching of the gospel to be the method that He, God, in His wisdom, decided to use to bring people to salvation,(I Cor 1:21) how is it that "all" heard the gospel, when there is no evidence whatsoever of the gospel being preached in North American, South American, Australian continents until many hundreds of years after the death and resurrection of Christ?

Surely, scripture tells us it took many decades for the gospel to leave Judea. Did no one die on the European, Asian continents during that 30-40 year period? How did they hear the gospel and therefore were "drawn" by Holy Spirit to believe the truth found therein? Why is there no evidence found in these cultures, in those time periods, of the gospel of Christ being preached?

It's very easy for you to foist the fault off on MY motives, isn't it.

The fault lies not in your motives (which I consider to be a sincere and heartfelt attempt, by a true believer, to explain these doctrines), but in your methods of exegesis.

But fortunately, I gave up "having my fate determined by my own fallen, marred, and enslaved will" when I trusted Christ as Savior and Lord. My soul could not be more saved! My spirit could, though.

Which brings us back to the first thing said in this post. Who can change the hearts of men?

What made the difference, skypair? Was it something inside of you that made the difference in your life? Or was it something God did that made the difference in your life?

Did God change your heart, or did you change your heart of your own "free-will"?

peace to youraying:

 

[Amy.G]

If you believe "all" are drawn, can you explain how many millions, even 100's of millions of people who lived and died without ever hearing the gospel?

Surely, even today, people live and die without hearing the gospel.


peace to youraying:

I have several friends at church that claim that "all" have heard the gospel. I've tried to explain that can't be possible, but they will have none of it. I don't understand how they can believe that.

 

[webdog]

If you believe "all" are drawn, can you explain how many millions, even 100's of millions of people who lived and died without ever hearing the gospel?

Surely, even today, people live and die without hearing the gospel.

Since God declared the preaching of the gospel to be the method that He, God, in His wisdom, decided to use to bring people to salvation,(I Cor 1:21) how is it that "all" heard the gospel, when there is no evidence whatsoever of the gospel being preached in North American, South American, Australian continents until many hundreds of years after the death and resurrection of Christ?

Surely, scripture tells us it took many decades for the gospel to leave Judea. Did no one die on the European, Asian continents during that 30-40 year period? How did they hear the gospel and therefore were "drawn" by Holy Spirit to believe the truth found therein? Why is there no evidence found in these cultures, in those time periods, of the gospel of Christ being preached?

This is all based on the presupposition that all have not had the opportunity to respond. God's Law is written on the hearts of all men, and also the desire to live forever and not die. I don't know of one person who hasn't wondered "what is the point of life...why am I here"?

Who proclaimed the Gospel from Rev. 14:6 and to Saul on the road to Tarsus?

 

[webdog]

I have several friends at church that claim that "all" have heard the gospel. I've tried to explain that can't be possible, but they will have none of it. I don't understand how they can believe that.

All have the truth presented to them. It is what is done with that truth that matters and condemns. If no truth is presented, no condemnation can be made. Even the calvinist believes those who perish reject Christ, so how can one not know the truth...but still reject it

 

[Frogman]

Luther thought the notion was so important that he said that those who don't believe in God's election have no part in Christianity.

63 views went by with only one answer.

The "gospel of election" says you can do nothing and you need do nothing --- either you believe you are elect or you aren't.

skypair

Luther held onto alot of RCC error.

The truth is the belief or disbelief of election or the process of election would have no effect whatsoever on one's condition.


The most beautiful difference between C/A is that all who believe their choice is what set them apart from other sinners were also elected just as much as anyone who believes God chose them. :thumbs:

bro. Dallas:wavey:

 

[Amy.G]

All have the truth presented to them. It is what is done with that truth that matters and condemns. If no truth is presented, no condemnation can be made. Even the calvinist believes those who perish reject Christ, so how can one not know the truth...but still reject it

If by truth you mean creation and acknowledgment that there is a creator and the inner conscience, yes. But not everyone has heard the gospel of Jesus Christ. Not everyone is aware of their need for a Savior.

 

[canadyjd]

I have several friends at church that claim that "all" have heard the gospel. I've tried to explain that can't be possible, but they will have none of it. I don't understand how they can believe that.

Because the truth found in the alternative is too hard for them to accept.

God's plan to bring salvation to men through the preaching of the gospel that started in a little "nothing" of a province of the Roman empire, meant that many would never hear the good news of Christ during their lifetimes.

That is hard to hear and accept as truth, but it is truth nevertheless. If the "rocks cried out" as Christ told us they could, then there would be some kind of evidence in those cultures, during that time. There is none, concerning Christ and His gospel (despite the claims of the Mormans).

peace to youraying:

 

[canadyjd]

This is all based on the presupposition that all have not had the opportunity to respond. God's Law is written on the hearts of all men, and also the desire to live forever and not die. I don't know of one person who hasn't wondered "what is the point of life...why am I here"?

Who proclaimed the Gospel from Rev. 14:6 and to Saul on the road to Tarsus?

We are not speaking of God's Law written on their hearts, which Romans 1 tells us brought no one to salvation. We are speaking specifically of the "message preached" that Paul refered to in I Cor. 1:21, which is Christ and Him crucified. That is the saving message, which God, in His wisdom, has determined to use to bring salvation to men.

If angels or Christ, Himself, spoke the gospel to the people of these continents, there would be some evidence of it....or do you believe the gospel went out to these peoples in vain?

We have evidence in the secular documents of the Romans and others as the gosple spread. The spread of the gospel in the Roman empire can be tracked fairly accurately through secular records.

peace to youraying:

 

[Frogman]

dead spots?

do you mean there are places in the world TBN is not transmitting?:laugh:

bro. Dallas:wavey:

 

[Amy.G]

Because the truth found in the alternative is too hard for them to accept.

God's plan to bring salvation to men through the preaching of the gospel that started in a little "nothing" of a province of the Roman empire, meant that many would never hear the good news of Christ during their lifetimes.

That is hard to hear and accept as truth, but it is truth nevertheless. If the "rocks cried out" as Christ told us they could, then there would be some kind of evidence in those cultures, during that time. There is none, concerning Christ and His gospel (despite the claims of the Mormans).

peace to youraying:

Also, why would Paul say this:

Rom 10:14 How then will they call on Him in whom they have not believed? How will they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how will they hear without a preacher?

If the gospel is not necessary, we don't need missions.

 

[Amy.G]

do you mean there are places in the world TBN is not transmitting?:laugh:

bro. Dallas:wavey:

Yeah. My house! :laugh: