The Great blessing of the biblical teaching of Election

[Van]

Yeshua1, why do you ask questions that have already been answered. We are chosen through or on the basis of faith in the truth, as determined by God crediting our faith in Christ as righteousness.

 

[MB]

Icon;
Mr Blake has no scriptural support not even a hint of a verse. Just seems to me he should at least be able to show just one elect Gentile in Gods Word. Maybe because there aren't any?????
MB

 

[jbh28]

Does "from the beginning" always refer to creation? Nope. So what is not stated is assumed and then the assumption is altered, turning from the beginning into before creation. Fiction folks.

"From the beginning" could refer to creation and it could also refer to something else. Van doesn't offer anything from the passage showing he believes it to be from. since the passage doesn't offer anything other than "from the beginning" we can assume it's referring to the beginning aka creation. This is true unless, from the passage, you can show that it was referring to something else.

 

[convicted1]

ALL are chosen and elected that God knows will believe and accept Jesus as their Lord and Savior. God says He is unwilling that any perish. john 3:16=16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that """whoever""" believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. Yes!!! whoever is whoever=any and all.

Ahhhh, the forseen faith election that barely anyone agrees with. God foreknows them because He elected them from the beginning.


Isaiah 41:1-4

1 Keep silence before me, O islands; and let the people renew their strength: let them come near; then let them speak: let us come near together to judgment.

2 Who raised up the righteous man from the east, called him to his foot, gave the nations before him, and made him rule over kings? he gave them as the dust to his sword, and as driven stubble to his bow.

3 He pursued them, and passed safely; even by the way that he had not gone with his feet.

4 Who hath wrought and done it, calling the generations from the beginning? I the Lord, the first, and with the last; I am he.


Acts 15:18 Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.


2 Thess. 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:



Election took place in eternity....conversion of the sinner takes place in time....

 

[Iconoclast]

Icon;
Mr Blake has no scriptural support not even a hint of a verse. Just seems to me he should at least be able to show just one elect Gentile in Gods Word. Maybe because there aren't any?????
MB

I do not know Mr.Blake but I am confident that he could supply several verses on it.Mb...do you really want any verses or do you just intend to resist truth at all costs?

If verses are given....would you say...sorry...I was mistaken. I see now that I have been opposing myself in resisting truth?

for example...as long as Acts 13:48 is in the bible.....your objection is foolish and demonstrates that you purpose to oppose...not understand.

 

[Van]

"From the beginning" could refer to creation and it could also refer to something else. Van doesn't offer anything from the passage showing he believes it to be from. since the passage doesn't offer anything other than "from the beginning" we can assume it's referring to the beginning aka creation. This is true unless, from the passage, you can show that it was referring to something else.

But my point, ignored, was that from the beginning does not refer to before the beginning, i.e. before creation. So yet another evasion.

No one would buy an assumption based on no evidence to the contrary. Did God put invisible pink elephants in orbit around Mars? Can I say this is true, unless from scripture, where you can show me when it says God did not put invisible pink elephants in orbit around Mars. The question that leaps to mind, why would people repeatedly put forth these kind of arguments?

 

[Iconoclast]

PreachTony

Since when is pointing to scripture an "unfounded assertion?" The fact is, Icon, you say that non-Cals "leave out major portions of the scripture," but from the non-Cal point of view, it is the Calvinist who ignores scripture, not by refusing to look at it, but instead by saying scripture does not mean what it plainly says. To the Calvinist, when scripture says "the world" it obviously means "the Elect." When scripture says "whosoever will," it surely means "whosoever that is Elect."


Your idea is completely wrong....you say world means everyone in the world....Peter said the flood destroyed the world of the ungodly.... it did not mean everyone there did it?


You have not said what election. Is yet PT....

 

[Iconoclast]

PreachTony

Since when is pointing to scripture an "unfounded assertion?"

It is when the scripture you used has no relation to the topic....

The topic is the blessing of election....so when Jesus makes the statement if ANY man will follow me...it does not bear on the topic at all....

The fact is, Icon, you say that non-Cals "leave out major portions of the scripture," but from the non-Cal point of view, it is the Calvinist who ignores scripture, not by refusing to look at it, but instead by saying scripture does not mean what it plainly says.

Calvinists examine the verses and the context to see what God says it means.

To the Calvinist, when scripture says "the world" it obviously means "the Elect." When scripture says "whosoever will," it surely means "whosoever that is Elect."

The whosoever in jn 3 actually reads...everyone believing and continuing to believe...are you ok with that.
In Jn 17 Jesus says ...He prays not for the world...but for those the Father has given to Him ...out of the world....that would be the elect PT...not everyone-

12 when I was with them in the world, I was keeping them in Thy name; those whom Thou hast given to me I did guard, and none of them was destroyed, except the son of the destruction, that the Writing may be fulfilled.

13 `And now unto Thee I come, and these things I speak in the world, that they may have my joy fulfilled in themselves;

14 I have given to them Thy word, and the world did hate them, because they are not of the world, as I am not of the world;

15 I do not ask that Thou mayest take them out of the world, but that Thou mayest keep them out of the evil.
16 `Of the world they are not, as I of the world am not;

Steaver hit the nail on the head by asking you if you were referring to Biblical election or TULIP election

.

neither you nor "steaver' has offered any other idea what biblical election is. The Calvinist position is the biblical position. Until any of you can show otherwise....I am mostly sure you cannot ....it stands. All of these failed ideas....because they are offered do not mean they are even close to being equivalent .

Dance around it all you want to, but the fact remains that there is a difference.

yes...the cal position is true...the others have a few similarities but are defective and inconsistent.

Although it is a comfortable position to say that those who disagree with you simply haven't studied enough. Both Cal and non-Cal relies on that position without having to further the argument.

I do not say that...although sometimes it is painfully obvious by the posts that some are unacquainted with the basic positions.

By the by, I don't mind discussing theological issues of doctrine or the meaning of scripture...but I do not take lightly someone calling into question what I try my best to do for the Lord simply because they disagree with my stance on Calvinism.

You should not take this topic lightly at all. No one questions what you "do for the Lord" unless you are actively opposing truth. Then we have every right to question what you offer ,correct?

I'm not sorry that when I stand for God I rely on His words and not the creative interpretations of John Calvin or the theo-philosophical writings of John MacArthur, John Piper and Paul Washer.

Your so called stand for God ...has not manifest itself yet. You have not offered any real substance yet unless I missed it somewhere...To just make statements and not back them up does not get the job done.

I know what the Bible says. I'm not going to take the Calvinist approach of trying to parse scripture that plainly relates to the whole world down to relating to only a finite number of set-aside individuals.

God is going to save a multitude by His electing grace....all he can wisely save.
It will not be everyone....only those elected and given by the Father to the Son. There will be no non elected person in heaven....not one.

That, to me, is blatantly unscriptural. I cannot address the "blessing of election," as you put it, Icon, because I do not hold to Calvinistic election

.

Unless you hold some form of the biblical doctrine of election,anything you hold will be defective. Put forth what you think is the biblical doctrine....let's see it PT.:wavey:

 

[jbh28]

But my point, ignored, was that from the beginning does not refer to before the beginning, i.e. before creation. So yet another evasion.

No one would buy an assumption based on no evidence to the contrary. Did God put invisible pink elephants in orbit around Mars? Can I say this is true, unless from scripture, where you can show me when it says God did not put invisible pink elephants in orbit around Mars. The question that leaps to mind, why would people repeatedly put forth these kind of arguments?

Either way, before you were born.

 

[Rippon]

In Homer Hoeksema's book :The Voice of Our Fathers :An Exposition of the Canons of Dordrecht he helpfully outlines the planks of the First Head of Doctrine -- Article 7.

1) Election is the unchangeable and eternal purpose of God.
2) The objects of this election are a certain definite number of fallen [people], fallen through their own fault from their primitive state of rectitude into sin and destruction.
3) The source of this election is the free, or sovereign, pleasure of God. Election is pure grace.
4) Election includes Christ, Who is eternally elected and Mediator and Head of the elect and the foundation of election.
5) Election finds absolutely no reason or ground in its object why they should be elect : they are neither better nor more deserving than others by nature.
6) Election includes not only the end, that is, final salvation and glory, but also the means unto that end, that is, union with Christ, calling, faith, justification, sanctification, preservation, and glorification of the elect persons.
7) Election is theocentric : it is for the demonstration of God's mercy and for the praise of His glorious grace.

 

[PreachTony]

It is when the scripture you used has no relation to the topic....

The topic is the blessing of election....so when Jesus makes the statement if ANY man will follow me...it does not bear on the topic at all....

This is one of the biggest gripes I have about this forum. There are some people on here that, unless you respond almost verbatim to their original post, then you are off topic. No discussion is allowed to branch out and make a larger base from which to build.

The "blessing of election" is only apparent in your interpretation of scripture if you already hold to the doctrine of Calvinism. You might as well have labeled your thread "Calvinists Only" if you didn't want to hear non-Cal opinions.

yes...the cal position is true...the others have a few similarities but are defective and inconsistent.

While I admire your conviction to your ideology, I can say the same thing about my non-Cal position. We've neither gained nor lost ground on that part of the discussion.

I do not say that...although sometimes it is painfully obvious by the posts that some are unacquainted with the basic positions.

In post #6 you told me that I need to study more when I said that I don't hold to Calvinist Election.

You should not take this topic lightly at all. No one questions what you "do for the Lord" unless you are actively opposing truth. Then we have every right to question what you offer ,correct?

Your so called stand for God ...has not manifest itself yet. You have not offered any real substance yet unless I missed it somewhere...To just make statements and not back them up does not get the job done.

While I really want to argue this point with you, as I know where I stand with God and I know what I've felt when He leads me to preach, I also know that you're going to twist my words around, as you did earlier, and simply say that "once you're in the Spirit you are a Calvinist."

God is going to save a multitude by His electing grace....all he can wisely save.
It will not be everyone....only those elected and given by the Father to the Son. There will be no non elected person in heaven....not one.

I have never argued that everyone will be saved, Icon. While I'm sure these people exist, I don't even personally know anyone who thinks everyone will be saved. We know from scripture the descriptions provided by Jesus of a narrow gate with few entering and a broad gate with many entering.

I simply believe that man has a greater choice in the matter than you do. Man was created in the image of God, then presented with a commandment. Man was able to choose whether to obey or disobey that commandment. From what I can gather, Calvinists seem to believe man lost the ability to choose at some point.

Unless you hold some form of the biblical doctrine of election,anything you hold will be defective. Put forth what you think is the biblical doctrine....let's see it PT.:wavey:

Now you've left open a vague door. "Some form of the biblical doctrine of election?" I guess in your eyes I'm a defective Christian, as I don't follow closely to the words of the later JC...

 

[steaver]

I simply believe that man has a greater choice in the matter than you do. Man was created in the image of God, then presented with a commandment. Man was able to choose whether to obey or disobey that commandment. From what I can gather, Calvinists seem to believe man lost the ability to choose at some point.

And this is the very root of the contention between Cals and nonCals. Scripture is clear, from what I read, that Adam still maintained his ability to choose life as far as Genesis 3:22 declares, otherwise, no need to block his path. Furthermore we have tons of scripture of God commanding the people to choose life. The Cal's position is that although God commands all people to make a choice they really have no choice. Illogical as far as I see it.

 

[Iconoclast]

Can you answer what I asked you....PT.?

There is no "vague door".......I will make it simple for you......

is Eph 1:3-11....written as a blessing to the church or as a curse upon mankind?

I will respond to your post in full later on tonight.

I would like you to answer this if you could.

 

[Iconoclast]

PreachTony

This is one of the biggest gripes I have about this forum. There are some people on here that, unless you respond almost verbatim to their original post, then you are off topic.

I do branch out and allow others to do so...I was responding to a specific verse you offered that was not on topic. the verse is a good verse and worthy of discussion...once you offer an answer to what is being discussed.

No discussion is allowed to branch out and make a larger base from which to build.

that is not so...what sometimes happens is....some do not have the ability to answer or respond properly ,so they divert to other topics on a thread so as to not answer what they were asked to respond to.

The "blessing of election" is only apparent in your interpretation of scripture

I started this thread in the general discussion forum because the blessing of election is for all Christians,

I asked you to explain eph1:3-11 so we can get a handle on this "other teaching on election".

You speak of "my interpretation" of this passage-being the only place where this blessing is evident however the text shows it was Paul guided by the Holy Spirit who announced it was a blessing to all saints;

1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:2 Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.


You need to address this passage.....

if you already hold to the doctrine of Calvinism.

This teaching is for all Christians...if you cannot articulate a biblical position on this teaching you should not be attempting to preach to people as this is a core truth of scripture....to divert to "Calvinism as a diversion" will not get it done.

You might as well have labeled your thread "Calvinists Only" if you didn't want to hear non-Cal opinions.

Nothing in the OP needed to go there. You have turned it that way. I know what Calvinism teaches on this doctrine. You should also.

While I admire your conviction to your ideology,

Let's be honest. This is not so. I do not see what I hold as "MY" ideology.
I see that the faith once delievered to the saints if revealed to man , by God.
There is a body of truth. It has to take into account all verses from the Divine side and our human responsibility, without contradiction or error.

I can say the same thing about my non-Cal position.

Anyone can say anything...but I do not believe you can sustain your position biblically.

We've neither gained nor lost ground on that part of the discussion.

This is at issue.

In post #6 you told me that I need to study more when I said that I don't hold to Calvinist Election.

You have yet to articulate any view of Election....

While I really want to argue this point with you, as I know where I stand with God and I know what I've felt when He leads me to preach,

What you or I or anyone feels is secondary to what is revealed in scripture.

I also know that you're going to twist my words around, as you did earlier,

Perhaps you can show where I "twisted your words around"......I have no need to twist anything and did not do so...post this if you could.

and simply say that "once you're in the Spirit you are a Calvinist."

I have not said this anywhere.....let me say what I say....not what you think I might say.

I have never argued that everyone will be saved, Icon. While I'm sure these people exist, I don't even personally know anyone who thinks everyone will be saved.

good , because we have had some on here...

I simply believe that man has a greater choice in the matter than you do.

explain what you mean here....what happened to Adam at the fall...

Man was created in the image of God, then presented with a commandment. Man was able to choose whether to obey or disobey that commandment. From what I can gather,

Calvinists seem to believe man lost the ability to choose at some point.

Can you tell me what Calvinists believe on this?

Now you've left open a vague door. "Some form of the biblical doctrine of election?"

PT.....I cannot read your mind...you say you do not believe the cal view of election....but you never say what you believe on it.....I have asked you 6x what you believe......

I guess in your eyes I'm a defective Christian

,

No need to guess PT....if I think something like that I would address you directly on it... I have not posted such ,have I?

as I don't follow closely to the words of the later JC...

Have I mentioned anything like that?

 

[PreachTony]

Icon - I've just now seen your in-depth reply. I plan to reply in depth as well, though it will have to be tomorrow. I have to get up at 4:30am, and as it's already after 10:30pm, I'm losing valuable sleep. If you can wait, I'll deliver my response tomorrow.

 

[Iconoclast]

Icon - I've just now seen your in-depth reply. I plan to reply in depth as well, though it will have to be tomorrow. I have to get up at 4:30am, and as it's already after 10:30pm, I'm losing valuable sleep. If you can wait, I'll deliver my response tomorrow.

No problem bro...rest up...I have time .....we will meet some time what town are you in down there near Atlanta?:thumbs:

 

[convicted1]

And this is the very root of the contention between Cals and nonCals. Scripture is clear, from what I read, that Adam still maintained his ability to choose life as far as Genesis 3:22 declares, otherwise, no need to block his path. Furthermore we have tons of scripture of God commanding the people to choose life. The Cal's position is that although God commands all people to make a choice they really have no choice. Illogical as far as I see it.

Brother, in another thread you started, I showed you that eating of the Tree of Life would have given Adam eternal life outside of Christ. The Tree was a symbol of Christ, yet it wasn't Him. If Adam had eaten of the Tree and lived forever, he would have done this through another source not named Jesus Christ.

 

[PreachTony]

I do branch out and allow others to do so...I was responding to a specific verse you offered that was not on topic. the verse is a good verse and worthy of discussion...once you offer an answer to what is being discussed.

that is not so...what sometimes happens is....some do not have the ability to answer or respond properly ,so they divert to other topics on a thread so as to not answer what they were asked to respond to.

Fair response. I've seen several threads on here that are shut down because someone stepped away from the OP, and that just irks me. Conversation naturally drifts, and I've always been one to write as though I were conversing.

I started this thread in the general discussion forum because the blessing of election is for all Christians,

I asked you to explain eph1:3-11 so we can get a handle on this "other teaching on election".

I'll probably tack on another post responding to the whole of Eph 1, as I feel it would benefit the discussion to take the chapter as a whole.

You speak of "my interpretation" of this passage-being the only place where this blessing is evident however the text shows it was Paul guided by the Holy Spirit who announced it was a blessing to all saints;

1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:2 Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.


You need to address this passage.....

Again, I plan to address the whole first chapter. As to interpretation, I stand by the intent of my statement. When it comes to scriptural doctrine issues, we are left to our interpretation. Naturally, each of us thinks the interpretation we ascribe to is the correct interpretation.

This teaching is for all Christians...if you cannot articulate a biblical position on this teaching you should not be attempting to preach to people as this is a core truth of scripture....to divert to "Calvinism as a diversion" will not get it done.

What is the purpose of preaching? To the believer, it is basically a three-fold chord, reproving those who fall, rebuking those who persist in their failure, and exhorting those who hold true to continue their way. To the unbeliever, it is the gospel, and it is the power of Christ unto salvation. It is the means by which faith comes to a person.

Nothing in the OP needed to go there. You have turned it that way. I know what Calvinism teaches on this doctrine. You should also.

Mea culpa. I allowed emotion to get the better of me. Apologies.

Let's be honest. This is not so. I do not see what I hold as "MY" ideology.
I see that the faith once delievered to the saints if revealed to man , by God.
There is a body of truth. It has to take into account all verses from the Divine side and our human responsibility, without contradiction or error.

I'm not saying that it is your personal ideology, I was merely meaning that it is the ideology you espouse.

Anyone can say anything...but I do not believe you can sustain your position biblically.

All you're saying here, Icon, is that you only see your position as potentially biblically supported. No matter what I relate to you, no matter what scripture I quote, you simply won't accept it as an alternative. And I'm not saying you should. If you stood and preached from a Calvinist point of view, I would have to be like Paul, and be thankful that Christ was preached and just let it be to the Holy Spirit to move upon a person. That's what we do anyway as preachers, so why change?

You have yet to articulate any view of Election....

What you or I or anyone feels is secondary to what is revealed in scripture.

What we feel is the guidance of the Holy Spirit. Naturally, scripture comes first, as it is the knowledge base from which we grow. The Spirit is a guide and a comfort to us. Though we are commanded to try to the spirits, we can still rest in the guidance of the Holy Ghost.

good , because we have had some on here...

explain what you mean here....what happened to Adam at the fall...

Anyone who espouses the idea that all people will be saved has obviously never actually studied the scripture. I would like to think that both you and I have studied, as to me we've both shown a pretty solid command on backing up our points with scriptural evidence, even though we disagree.

I'll say this, too. While you and I disagree on the notion of Calvinist Election, I don't believe that should hinder us from worshipping together. From what I've gathered, we both believe in Jesus Christ, we both believe He was crucified and resurrected, we both believe He ascended and will return, and we both believe that Jesus is the way to the Father, and the way to Jesus is through the Father drawing. It appears our key contention is in the mechanics of the drawing of God. (Yes, I realize that is a fairly extreme generalization. I'm working towards clearing it all up.)

Can you tell me what Calvinists believe on this?

I cannot give you a line by line account of full Calvinist belief, in much the same way that I cannot give you an account of why Lutherans believe the way they do. Not being immersed in that church culture means I cannot accurately portray the fullness of their beliefs. I can only present what I've seen on this forum.

PT.....I cannot read your mind...you say you do not believe the cal view of election....but you never say what you believe on it.....I have asked you 6x what you believe......

I'm hoping my exposition on Ephesians 1 will offer you better answers than what I'm able to cram in here.

 

[PreachTony]

1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:
2 Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

Obviously this is Paul's greeting to those gathered at Ephesus.

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:
4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

As I mentioned elsewhere, it should be obvious to any Bible reader that not all mankind will be saved. The question then becomes will all men hear the gospel and be given opportunity to repent and turn to God? The Bible even admits that wicked Jezebel, who did not repent, was given a space to repent. That, to me, sounds very much like an opportunity was presented to her.

Under what I've been shown as the Calvinist view of salvation and predestination, God only reveals His truth to those He has already "elected" from before the foundation of the world. If that is so, and only the elect will be moved of God to repent, then why was Jezebel given a space? Was she elect? If so, did she refuse God and resist His grace?

7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
8 Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence;
9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:
12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

I have heard certain Calvinists state things like "preaching is only for edification of the saints" and "why preach to the lost, you can't do anything for them?" These statements sadden me. We know that the gospel is the power of God unto salvation. We know that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the preached word of God. How anyone can say that the lost don't need to hear preaching is beyond me.

We are told in scripture that we are "heirs of God" and "joint-heirs with Christ." You can find also in scripture, in the Book of Ruth, a wonderful type and shadow of a man receiving an inheritance. The inheritance was just foisted upon him, but he had to move to redeem it. Some of the Calvinists I spoken to say that there is absolutely no input from man that has any bearing on their salvation.

I believe the Bible proves this untrue, although the scriptures I've used to make this point are dismissed by Calvinists as not applicable to the lost.

15 Wherefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus, and love unto all the saints,
16 Cease not to give thanks for you, making mention of you in my prayers;
17 That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give unto you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him:
18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that ye may know what is the hope of his calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints,

Paul writes of the love he has towards the saints. Jesus commanded the disciples to love one another as He had loved them. But I cannot escape the sense that, from a Calvinist perspective (and this is based solely on the conversations I've had with self-professed Calvinists) that God does not love everyone.

How are we to effectively preach the word and share the gospel if the unavoidable conclusion is that "God is Love" is only applicable to a select few?

19 And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power,
20 Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places,
21 Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come:
22 And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church,
23 Which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all.

At the end of the day, I don't believe everyone will be saved. This does not mean that I don't believe an opportunity will be given to everyone. Just as Jezebel was given a space to repent, I do believe that even the vilest sinner on this earth will have opportunity. The thing is, I believe wholeheartedly that God already knows and has always known who would accept Him as their savior.

I just cannot hold to the Calvinist idea of Election in which God forces irresistible grace on a person. In pretty much every instance of Jesus offering healing of some sort, either the person sought Him out, or He presented the person with a choice. If He offers that choice to a physical body, why would He apply a completely different formula to our soul? To me, He doesn't. The Holy Spirit, acting as the convicting power of God, moves a person to repent of their sins. The person then has to move of their own accord. The Spirit will not force them to repent, and man cannot suddenly lay hands on someone to repent. The idea of irresistible grace, and as I've seen some Calvinists pervert it into to irresisitibility of God, is not something I see in scripture. I see a God, in the form of the Holy Spirit, that can be quenched from moving about, as the scripture tells us to "quench not the Spirit."

I see a God who offers salvation freely to "whosoever will," but I also see a people that must respond to that calling.

I know that's probably not the best explanation in the world. I've never claimed to be a Biblical scholar. I know what the Spirit has convicted me of during my study and prayer. That's all I can stand on.

 

[steaver]

Brother, in another thread you started, I showed you that eating of the Tree of Life would have given Adam eternal life outside of Christ. The Tree was a symbol of Christ, yet it wasn't Him. If Adam had eaten of the Tree and lived forever, he would have done this through another source not named Jesus Christ.

You "showed me"? The truth of what "is written" remains. God had to block Adam BECAUSE Adam still had a free will to choose the tree of life. To deny this truth is simply to ignore the scripture. Yes, it would have been a bad choice, and God was loving enough to prevent Adam because Christ must first be sacrificed, nevertheless, the ability to still choose is the subject and it is painfully obvious that it remained after the fall. Thus Calvinism's T is destroyed!!