The Number Of God’s Elect

[Tea]

If in the passive voice, that means the person or people receive benefit from the action.

What the verse does NOT say:
And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as believed were appointed to eternal life.

What the verse DOES say:
And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.

You, Sir, have been sold a fiction. I cannot pull you out. You must actually study and find the truth for yourself.

No sir, when attempts are made to change definitions and rearrange words, it demonstrates a refusal to believe what has been written.

 

[Zaatar71]

Z all you have proven is that you are a calvinist.

Hold on SH, JohnC has pronounced that I am not a Calvinist ! Not once did you question him on that. No one on here disputed his claim, so I guess you cannot say I am

Your own confessions say that God determined all things

here is the problem this time Sh, you cannot even quote the Confession of faith accurately , so it is not possible you could begin to understand it, or what it teaches directly......

thus any one that is condemned is condemned because God determined that they would be condemned B4 they even existed. If your version of god picked out all those that would be saved prior to creation then logically he also picked out all those that would be doomed.

It is sad that even that simple fact seems to be beyond your ability to grasp.

Some day you might come back and read your posts and see they were foolish.

Why would I,

Maybe so you would not be posting like a fool, not knowing what was actually available to you that you turned your nose up at. You remind me of little children who will not try a new vegetable, or food, because they never have before. You are just like it.

someone that trusts the word of God, want to listen to someone, Beeke, that promotes a philosophy based on pagan teachings?

this post is as close to moronic as you can be. You have not read one line of what he teaches, not one book, yet you are judge ,jury, and executioner. This is why your posts have no substance whatsoever. This is why you will not learn, you and any others who will not read the books of men,lol , You can just read the musings of JohnC, going on and on about France, ECF's and whatever else he wants to misrepresent. You ,JohnC, and Van, riding off into the sunset together

It is sad that you have placed so much faith in man.

You ignore godly teachers at your own peril,

 

[Silverhair]

Is God allowed to run salvation then as He so chooses? Can He decide who are the elect or not?

Can God give man an actual free will with which to make real choices for which he will be judged?

What do we see in scripture @JesusFan. Eph 2:8 For it is by grace {how one is saved} you have been saved through faith,..{the reason one is saved}

That one verse answers both of your questions @JesusFan

God is sovereign so I have to wonder why do those that hold to the DoG/TULIP want to deny this truth.

 

[Silverhair]

Hold on SH, JohnC has pronounced that I am not a Calvinist ! Not once did you question him on that. No one on here disputed his claim, so I guess you cannot say I am

What does JonC's view have to do with mine Z?
I call you a calvinist because that is what your posts point you out as being.

here is the problem this time Sh, you cannot even quote the Confession of faith accurately , so it is not possible you could begin to understand it, or what it teaches directly......

Which confession do you want Z

WCF
God from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass:

LBCF
God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass

Both say the same thing Z. By the both confessions WCF/LBCF calvinists make the false claim that God freely and unchangeably decreed/ordained all things.

So it is your confessions that make God the author of evil. Your false theology has called the character of God into question by your slanderous comments.

Some day you might come back and read your posts and see they were foolish.

Well since scripture is not foolish and I post according to scripture then I will not have any doubt about what I posted..

Maybe so you would not be posting like a fool, not knowing what was actually available to you that you turned your nose up at. You remind me of little children who will not try a new vegetable, or food, because they never have before. You are just like it.

You think I reject Beeke because I do not know calvinism, wrong . I reject Beeke because I do know calvinism.

this post is as close to moronic as you can be. You have not read one line of what he teaches, not one book, yet you are judge ,jury, and executioner. This is why your posts have no substance whatsoever. This is why you will not learn, you and any others who will not read the books of men,lol , You can just read the musings of JohnC, going on and on about France, ECF's and whatever else he wants to misrepresent. You ,JohnC, and Van, riding off into the sunset together

I do not have to read the book of Mormon to know that it is wrong. Just as I do not have to read Beeke to know that his calvinist views are wrong. Does he say anything different than the other calvinist teachers? No he does not so when one is wrong then those that say the same thing are wrong also.

Does Beeke say anything different than Wayne Grudem?

You ignore godly teachers at your own peril,

That is why I do not ignore John, Paul, Peter, James etc or any of the OT saints.

Sadly you seem to trust more in your calvinist teachers than you do those teachers found in scripture.

 

[Silverhair]

@Zaatar71

Here is a quote from a prominent teacher. Do you agree or disagree with what is said?

We begin with two assumptions or presuppositions:
(1) that the Bible is true and that it is, in fact, our only absolute standard of truth;

(2) that the God who is spoken of in the Bible exists, and that he is who the Bible says he is: the Creator of heaven and earth and all things in them.

These two presuppositions, of course, are always open to later adjustment or modification or deeper confirmation,

 

[Zaatar71]

What does JonC's view have to do with mine Z?
I call you a calvinist because that is what your posts point you out as being.


Which confession do you want Z

WCF
God from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass:

LBCF
God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass

Both say the same thing Z. By the both confessions WCF/LBCF calvinists make the false claim that God freely and unchangeably decreed/ordained all things.

So it is your confessions that make God the author of evil. Your false theology has called the character of God into question by your slanderous comments.


Well since scripture is not foolish and I post according to scripture then I will not have any doubt about what I posted..


You think I reject Beeke because I do not know calvinism, wrong . I reject Beeke because I do know calvinism.


I do not have to read the book of Mormon to know that it is wrong. Just as I do not have to read Beeke to know that his calvinist views are wrong. Does he say anything different than the other calvinist teachers? No he does not so when one is wrong then those that say the same thing are wrong also.

Does Beeke say anything different than Wayne Grudem?

What does JonC's view have to do with mine Z?
I call you a calvinist because that is what your posts point you out as being.


Which confession do you want Z

WCF
God from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass:

LBCF
God hath decreed in himself, from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably, all things, whatsoever comes to pass

Both say the same thing Z. By the both confessions WCF/LBCF calvinists make the false claim that God freely and unchangeably decreed/ordained all things.

So it is your confessions that make God the author of evil. Your false theology has called the character of God into question by your slanderous comments.


Well since scripture is not foolish and I post according to scripture then I will not have any doubt about what I posted..


You think I reject Beeke because I do not know calvinism, wrong . I reject Beeke because I do know calvinism.


I do not have to read the book of Mormon to know that it is wrong. Just as I do not have to read Beeke to know that his calvinist views are wrong. Does he say anything different than the other calvinist teachers? No he does not so when one is wrong then those that say the same thing are wrong also.

Does Beeke say anything different than Wayne Grudem?


That is why I do not ignore John, Paul, Peter, James etc or any of the OT saints.

Sadly you seem to trust more in your calvinist teachers than you do those teachers found in scripture.

You quoted from two solid confessions but do not understand what they teach from the scriptures. This also explains why you and other anti cals blame God for mans sin. I understand.

 

[Silverhair]

@Zaatar71

You call the WCF/LBCF solid confessions but I see them as flawed efforts by men too support a particular theological view that is at odds with the word of God.

You can trust your man-made philosophy and I will trust the word of God.

 

[Zaatar71]

@Zaatar71

You call the WCF/LBCF solid confessions but I see them as flawed efforts by men too support a particular theological view that is at odds with the word of God.

You can trust your man-made philosophy and I will trust the word of God.

Looks as if you trust JohnC and Van and what they say, rather than godly teachers. To each his own.

 

[Silverhair]

Looks as if you trust JohnC and Van and what they say, rather than godly teachers. To each his own.

Have to burst your bubble Z. My faith is not dependent on what Van or JonC think or say.

I have told you more than once that I trust the word of God but that just goes over your head.

You on the other hand have used man to support your view rather than the bible. So take a look in the mirror Z.

I asked you a question in an earier post but you must have missed it so I will ask it again.


Here is a quote from a prominent teacher. Do you agree or disagree with what is said?

We begin with two assumptions or presuppositions:
(1) that the Bible is true and that it is, in fact, our only absolute standard of truth;
(2) that the God who is spoken of in the Bible exists, and that he is who the Bible says he is: the Creator of heaven and earth and all things in them.

These two presuppositions, of course, are always open to later adjustment or modification or deeper confirmation,

 

[Tea]

Ephesians 1:4 is NOT about the election.

Paul identifies "us" as himself along with all the believers mentioned in the letter. They were not unkown to God prior to creation. They were chosen by Him and were predestined to be conformed to His image and receive the blessings associated with being in Christ.

 

[Van]

What the verse does NOT say:
And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as believed were appointed to eternal life.

What the verse DOES say:
And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord, and as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.



No sir, when attempts are made to change definitions and rearrange words, it demonstrates a refusal to believe what has been written.

What the verse does say: as many as "accepted the direction to eternal life believed."

The attempt to change the definition of "tasso" to unilateral appointment demonstrates a refusal to believe what has been written. The "direction" was spoken to or sown upon the Gentiles, thus "Tasso" is in the passive voice, as the Gentiles were acted upon. However, their response, to believe is in the active voice.

Unless you do you own study, rather than copy and past the same arguments I have seen dozens of times, you will not get to the truth.

Here again is the deal, some one in authority, a person or group, specifies an arrangement, such as we will meet here, or we will meet then, and when those being given the direction accept that arrangement, then a "tasso" type of appointment is made. You can look at every single usage of tasso in the new testament, and always find the same kind of arrangement. 100%.

 

[Van]

Ever notice how often Calvinist charge me with changing scripture. Ever notice how Demoncrats charge others with what they have been doing.
Mr. Trump is charged with weaponizing the DOJ.
Van is charged with altering the meaning of scripture.

Here is a short list:
No one seeks after God becomes no one ever seeks after God.
The natural man cannot understand the things of the Spirit becomes the natural man cannot understand any of the things of the Spirit.
Christ died as a ransom for all becomes Christ died as a ransom for some.

As many as had accepted the direction [spoken by Paul] to eternal life believed becomes as many as had been unilaterally appointed by God for eternal life believed.

Last one, we are to "hasten the day" becomes we are to desire the day.

 

[Tea]

What the verse does say: as many as "accepted the direction to eternal life believed."

Let us take into account that nearly every prominent English translation, created by a committee of the world's leading Greek scholars, contradicts that interpretation.

The "direction" was spoken to or sown upon the Gentiles, thus "Tasso" is in the passive voice, as the Gentiles were acted upon. However, their response, to believe is in the active voice.

I understand that some translators might argue that the participle should be interpreted as middle voice rather than passive, given the absence of an agent. Regardless of which way you go, the passive interpretation aligns with the broader context of scripture, which clearly addresses the concept of unconditional election in other places.

Here again is the deal, some one in authority, a person or group, specifies an arrangement, such as we will meet here, or we will meet then, and when those being given the direction accept that arrangement, then a "tasso" type of appointment is made.

In this instance, the Gentiles were guided to the precise location necessary for them to hear the Gospel message and have faith. This kind of arrangement was the consequence of divine intervention, and the intended result was for them to receive eternal life.

 

[Tea]

I want to highlight the charge against Calvinists, claiming that we are the ones not accepting the plain meaning of scripture.

And once again, a Calvinist says a verse does not mean what it says, because it does not fit with Calvinist doctrine.

Later on, the poster engages in the exact behavior that we are being blamed for.

There no need to not accept the plain meaning of the verse, except to revise it to fit previously accepted dogma.

At which point, the initial accusation is redirected towards us.

Ever notice how often Calvinist charge me with changing scripture.

Let that sink in.

 

[Van]

Let us take into account that nearly every prominent English translation, created by a committee of the world's leading Greek scholars, contradicts that interpretation.

I understand that some translators might argue that the participle should be interpreted as middle voice rather than passive, given the absence of an agent. Regardless of which way you go, the passive interpretation aligns with the broader context of scripture, which clearly addresses the concept of unconditional election in other places.

In this instance, the Gentiles were guided to the precise location necessary for them to hear the Gospel message and have faith. This kind of arrangement was the consequence of divine intervention, and the intended result was for them to receive eternal life.

Sir, it is pointless to continue, you are just restating the same arguments I have addressed many times. For example you mention those who say that Tasso is in the middle voice. Which just ignores what I said. There is nothing wrong with translating tasso as appoint, but to claim it means unilaterally appointed by God is not the contextual meaning. You have not even addressed all the causes where the word means to accept an arrangement by mutual consent.

Your mind is made up, and is closed to even discussing the topic.

As for your post #74, I know and you know and everyone else knows that Calvinism is supported by misrepresenting scripture, as I documented.

No need to waste our time...

 

[Tea]

Let these last couple of pages demonstrate why it's so much easier to simply allow verses to say what they say. This approach will help you avoid numerous headaches that come from trying to twist the text into something it doesn't genuinely communicate.

You'll be pleasantly surprised at how beautifully consistent Scripture really is.