The Invitation To Heaven

[1689Dave]

All these "one trick ponies" know is to change the subject and disparage the truth messengers. No mention of John 6:29, James 2:5, 2 Thessalonians 2:13, 1 Timothy 2:4, Matthew 23:13, or 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3.

“And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.” 1 John 3:23 (KJV 1900)

“Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?” James 2:5 (KJV 1900)

“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:” 2 Thessalonians 2:13 (KJV 1900)

“Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.” 1 Timothy 2:4 (KJV 1900)

“But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.” Matthew 23:13 (KJV 1900)

Let's take one at a time and we will compare your interpretation to the truth. Choose one and give your interpretation.

 

[Aaron]

The entire world is made up of Jews and Gentiles. If you are not the one, then most certainly you are the other. There are no aliens in this world, or no nobodies! The fact that the Invitation is made to the "good and the bad", shows that it is NOT limited as you suppose, to the Jews and Gentiles as groups, but to the entire human race.

No one said the call was limited. Election is, however. We merely disagree on the limiter.

Your reference to Luke 14 has nothing to do with what Jesus is saying in these 2 passages.

I think you mean Luke 18. And yes, it does. It's a parable, like those two passages. And it shows that you are taking the wrong approach to them. You have found no grounds for your objections to Calvinism—the Gospel, actually—in them.

 

[1689Dave]

Yet another change the subject post. Yet another false doctrine asserted.
No mention of John 6:29, James 2:5, 2 Thessalonians 2:13, 1 Timothy 2:4, Matthew 23:13, or 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3.

Did I mention Calvinists are "one trick ponies."

Do you hate God if Calvin was right about sin and grace?

 

[Iconoclast]

Calvinism requires its defenders to misrepresent the views of others to change the subject from their bogus doctrine.
Do one comes to Christ unless drawn by the Father. Thus the "all the burden for winning souls" does not rest with God's witnesses, or with the work of the Holy Spirit, because God requires the lost to put their faith in the One He sent.

Reminds me of this;
Log in to Facebook | Facebook

 

[Yeshua1]

No subject change. Although, you refuse to address the issue and switch it to "Calvinist." It is your favorite tactic to avoid the Bible and the actual text.
Van, if you cannot address me directly, don't make it about a 500 year old dead man whom you have never read his writings.

Those against us claim that we worship at the altar od John Calvin, and yet only book of his ever read has been his Institutes!

 

[Yeshua1]

Do you hate God if Calvin was right about sin and grace?

His reply, "taint so"

 

[Yeshua1]

Yet another rewrite of unreferenced scripture. Matthew 23:13 teaches the lost have some spiritual ability, for they were in the process of entering the kingdom.

Paul disagrees with you. and he was inspired!

 

[SavedByGrace]

No one said the call was limited. Election is, however

if this is true, the this "call" to repent and believe and be saved, which is not limited to the "elect", is insincere, as it is the "elect" who can only respond to this call and get themselves saved. Why then "call" the entire human race, if salvation is not for ALL, as they can never be saved? I cannot ever think of the God of the Bible work this way. If the "call" is universal, then the "offer" of salvation must also be unversal, regardless of whether the ALL, are saved in the end. This is another inconsistency of reformed theology.

 

[Van]

(SNIP)

“Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him?” James 2:5 (KJV 1900) (SNIP)

Let's take one at a time and we will compare your interpretation to the truth. Choose one and give your interpretation.

Now we can compare your interpretation to the truth.

"Listen, my fellow siblings in Christ, has not God chosen the poor to this world, yet rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which He has promised to those that love Him."

Key points:
1) beloved brethren refers to James' fellow Christians, rather than Jews or just men.

2) The idea is God has chosen individuals who were poor in the eyes of the world, or poor according to the world's value system.

3) The verb "chosen" has three objects or receptors of its action: (a) those poor to this world, (b) those rich in faith, and (c) those who love God and therefore heirs to the kingdom promised.

4) In order to be poor to this world those chosen were existing in the world when chosen, not foreseen individuals before creation.

5) In order to be rich in faith, those chosen were existing in the world and had their faith credited as righteousness by God.

6) In order to be heirs to the promised kingdom, those chosen were existing in the world and loved God, rather than foreseen individuals who would love God.

 

[Van]

Do you hate God if Calvin was right about sin and grace?

Yet another ignore the topic and disparage the poster post. They are truly one trick ponies, filled with hate for the truth.

 

[Van]

Reminds me of this;SNIP

Calvinism requires its defenders to misrepresent the views of others to change the subject from their bogus doctrine.
No one comes to Christ unless drawn by the Father. Thus the "all the burden for winning souls" does not rest with God's witnesses, or with the work of the Holy Spirit, because God requires the lost to put their faith in the One He sent.

 

[Van]

Paul disagrees with you. and he was inspired!

Paul agrees with me, and there is no need to change the subject.

 

[Iconoclast]

Calvinism requires its defenders to misrepresent the views of others to change the subject from their bogus doctrine.
No one comes to Christ unless drawn by the Father. Thus the "all the burden for winning souls" does not rest with God's witnesses, or with the work of the Holy Spirit, because God requires the lost to put their faith in the One He sent.

Log in to Facebook | Facebook

 

[AustinC]

if this is true, the this "call" to repent and believe and be saved, which is not limited to the "elect", is insincere, as it is the "elect" who can only respond to this call and get themselves saved. Why then "call" the entire human race, if salvation is not for ALL, as they can never be saved? I cannot ever think of the God of the Bible work this way. If the "call" is universal, then the "offer" of salvation must also be unversal, regardless of whether the ALL, are saved in the end. This is another inconsistency of reformed theology.

2 Timothy 1:8-12

Therefore do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but share in suffering for the gospel by the power of God, who saved us and called us to a holy calling, not because of our works but because of his own purpose and grace, which he gave us in Christ Jesus before the ages began, and which now has been manifested through the appearing of our Savior Christ Jesus, who abolished death and brought life and immortality to light through the gospel, for which I was appointed a preacher and apostle and teacher, which is why I suffer as I do. But I am not ashamed, for I know whom I have believed, and I am convinced that he is able to guard until that Day what has been entrusted to me.

 

[WAJungleMonkey]

I agree with some of the things the OP said, and I also agree that many of the guys here are being sinfully contemptuous... and maybe because they are tired of seeing the same tired arguments over and over.. though still not a valid excuse for the behavior. The fastest way to shut down a thread you disagree with is to just keep your mouth shut and let it die out. It is better for everyone's spiritual health... Offer something useful or walk away.

However, SBG, I think you might get further with them, and maybe learn a thing or two yourself, if you had the humility to ask questions to try to learn something rather than making declarative statements that are preachy... maybe we'd all learn something from that kind of conversation... and that would glorify God.

Your brazenness reminds me of a story- I was studying at a Baptist seminary (a little over 10 yrs ago) and occasionally the Mormons would come to campus to try to argue with us. They had some brass cajones- I'll give them that- but it was always a fruitless conversation, and most of the time spiritually damaging, for all involved. The Mormons would often walk away with a theological beating. My point is, if you don't want to get stung, probably best to not shake the beehive.

 

[Van]

SNIP

Calvinism requires its defenders to misrepresent the views of others to change the subject from their bogus doctrine.
No one comes to Christ unless drawn by the Father. Thus the "all the burden for winning souls" does not rest with God's witnesses, or with the work of the Holy Spirit, because God requires the lost to put their faith in the One He sent.

 

[Aaron]

if this is true, the this "call" to repent and believe and be saved, which is not limited to the "elect", is insincere, as it is the "elect" who can only respond to this call and get themselves saved.

Well, no one "gets themselves saved." But it's not insincere at all. You have in your head the notion that men do not love their darkness, and that their condemnation is unjust. Nothing demonstrates that than a call to repentance that they will reject because they love their darkness more than the light.

It's not as if there are some who love God by nature. There is only one source of love for Christ, and that is the Holy Spirit. God will give grace to whom He will give grace. You cannot fault God for that. He doesn't answer to you.

Why then "call" the entire human race, if salvation is not for ALL, as they can never be saved?

To show that their condemnation is just. Why command Pharaoh to let the Israelites go just to harden his heart so that he will not yield? To demonstrate His power to save to His people. Why call out for Adam when God knew exactly where he was and why? Why the interrogation? To show them, and us, that their condemnation is just, and that we stand by grace through faith.

I cannot ever think of the God of the Bible work this way. If the "call" is universal, then the "offer" of salvation must also be unversal, regardless of whether the ALL, are saved in the end.

Sez who?

 

[Aaron]

I agree with some of the things the OP said, and I also agree that many of the guys here are being sinfully contemptuous... and maybe because they are tired of seeing the same tired arguments over and over.. though still not a valid excuse for the behavior. The fastest way to shut down a thread you disagree with is to just keep your mouth shut and let it die out. It is better for everyone's spiritual health... Offer something useful or walk away.

However, SBG, I think you might get further with them, and maybe learn a thing or two yourself, if you had the humility to ask questions to try to learn something rather than making declarative statements that are preachy... maybe we'd all learn something from that kind of conversation... and that would glorify God.

Your brazenness reminds me of a story- I was studying at a Baptist seminary (a little over 10 yrs ago) and occasionally the Mormons would come to campus to try to argue with us. They had some brass cajones- I'll give them that- but it was always a fruitless conversation, and most of the time spiritually damaging, for all involved. The Mormons would often walk away with a theological beating. My point is, if you don't want to get stung, probably best to not shake the beehive.

Who asked you?

 

[SavedByGrace]

You have in your head the notion that men do not love their darkness

what about those, like the Catholic nuns and monks, who probably live more "godly" lives than many born-again Christians do. Do you think that they "love their darkness"? They might be blinded to the Truth of the Gospel, for their salvation, but I am sure they are not enemies of God, nor in rebellion, knowingly.

 

[WAJungleMonkey]

Who asked you?

Relax man, I wasn't talking about you. You just jumped into the conversation to offer your unsolicited opinion too... what makes you any better?