Who did Christ die for? part//

I don't remember that thread...but thanks for posting the link. I'm glad to know that I'm not the only one to believe that.

 

"Whosoever" (or "all ye who") doesn't guarantee openness to all. For example, whosoever is 6 feet tall or taller shall be saved. There you have the free-willer's favorite word, "whosoever", yet it is clearly not open to all.

It's not the "whosoever" that matters, but the qualification that follows it. The qualification in the verse is "call on the name of the Lord". The question is, why does one person call on the name of the Lord, but another doesn't? That's what really matters. But you won't find the answer in the word "whosoever" and you won't find the answer in this particular verse.

 

John 3:16 ( Rippon's Version )

It was in this way that God loved the world : He gave His one and only Son so that all who believe in Him will not be lost* , but have eternal life .

* go on the way of destruction ; be condemned to perdition


"All who" is the the same thing as "those who" . It does not mean any Tom ,Dick and Harry , or Thelma , Diane , and Henrietta .

 

Well that's what I was trying to ask you in our last go-around about this, but I guess I used a different approach.
If God selected the criteria and then made people, He had to be aware that when He made blue-eyed people they would conform to His criteria and brown-eyed people would not. That's why I'm saying that belief of God's omniscience has consquences that need to be dealt with.
I ask, if the criteria could easily have been blue-eyes as determined by a sovereign God, then how does one choose to have blue eyes in order to meet the criteria?
No one can choose to give themselves blue eyes in order to meet that necessary criteria.
It must be given to them.
Do you see where this is going?

I don't understand the second question after the "OR".
What are you asking?

 

God chose who He chose because it was His good pleasure to do so -- to the praise of His glory . The Son gives life to whom He is pleased to give it John 5:21 says . You can also see this in matt. 11;27 and Luke 10:22 .

I think there is a real spiritual blindness going on when so many insist that God's decision to choose us is due to some aspect of our being . We are all unworthy -- the saved ( and those who shall be ) and the reprobates .None of has any merit . There is nothing desirable in any of us -- no aspect of our being -- not a thimbleful of credit .

The Lord has not chosen a single individual because He knew they would turn to him ! That is infantile . He determines who will turn to himself . He decrees what will be . This inversion of biblical things is so much of a waste of time . Submit to what the Scripture says . A number of non-cals here claim to believe in total depravity as much as the Calvinists . Well , not in actuality . If all are really dead in their trespasses and sins as Eph.2:5 and Col. 2:13 point out -- then none of us have had the power in ourselves to choose . The Lord has to do the choosing of some -- the electing . Our faith is granted to us -- it does not cause us to be viewed more favorably in God's eyes -- it never originated within us .

 

I understand. My analogy was not an exact one but one thrown together. I just didn't have time to go back at that moment and revise it.
But I never said one had to be born with blue eyes. I just said they had to have blue eyes. We have blue contacts by which we can change the color of our eyes by choice now

Anyhow, it was simply an quick reference to illistrate a point to the choice of who got saved and how as being God's soveriegn right and choice. I could have just as easily stated God could have chosen those with blue eyes that will look at the sky once a day to be saved. What I was saying is that it is God's decision to chose who, how, and why regardless of if we thing that is Soveriegn enough or Loving enough. Are you following me, as to what I am saying and not so much specifically setting an exact example. God chose How He would save man, and chose the how and the why's He would save man.

It could be better said this way:

Could God or was God able to have chosen to save men via an attribute common within all men because He desired to save man. I mean even you believe God choose you and me, but you don't know why God chose you or me. But you will deny that it could have something to do with faith, that God must bring forth by either position (man believing Gods word, or God giving man faith).
I believe scriptures do give us two of His reasons for choosing us (though there may be more which God has not divulged) but 1) is the working of the Spirit and 2) is the belief of the truth.

What I don't get is that even though Calvinists believe God GIVES them faith and then changes them in such a way they MUST use it - they will still deny that this faith which scripture is so adamant about can not be one of the reasons God has chosen us. If you ascibe nothing of yourself in salvation then what prevents faith (which would be from God and that God remade you to use it positively) would have absolutly nothing to do with the criteria of Gods choosing you to salvation, But that you absolutely believe God chose us for a reason and not just arbitrarily.

 

I take it your ready to appologize now, and repent?
I've been waiting for about a month now but am a patient man brother and will be here when your ready.

 

What do I need to "appoligize" for in my post ? What do you object to ?

 

I understand that it is an analogy and I'm willing to work with it.

And I agree one does not have to be born with blue eyes. In fact, to make the analogy stick, we need to suppose that none of us were born with blue eyes, yet we all need to have blue eyes for salvation.

But even then it's not really changing our eye color, it's just a veener, right? I realize you were partially joking when you said that. But that is where we differ, is it not?
You believe that man in his fallen nature has the desire and ability to choose the required blue eyes instead of his brown ones.
I believe that man in his fallen nature has no desire or ability to choose the required blue eyes.
But that God must give man the desire and ability to have the required blue eyes and that God in eternity past, did elect which were to be given the desire and ability to have blue eyes.

I understand the point and the illustration.

Okay. I have to stop you here.
I do believe that God's election has to do with faith, but it is a faith that He gave me to believe His Word. So my being chosen is not because of my faith(foreseen faith as some might believe), but because God chose to give me that faith. Why did God choose me to give that faith to is what I marvel at. Why me? What have I done to deserve His gracious gift? I'm utterly amazed and terribly ungrateful much of the time.
So it's not that I deny that faith has to do with election. I deny that the source of my faith is found within me of my own free choice. God had to plant the desire and the ability for my faith. That's the sovereign side, the human side is that I expressed that faith that was given to me in my profession and repentance of sin.

I don't see those as reasons. I see both of those as the means of His election. He brings about my faith through the working of the Holy Spirit which results in my believing the truth. Without both, the plan of salvation is incomplete. The working of the Spirit produces the belief that is necessary to obtain salvation.
We are not waiting around to be zapped cause we think we might be one of the elect. We are responding with belief (faith) to the renewing and rebirthing of our heart(nature, will, etc.) which is done by the Holy Spirit. That initial working of the Holy Spirit is what we call regeneration. My mind or will has been regenerated so that it produces the faith that the Holy Spirit graciously provides. So both your #1 and your #2 speak to God's methods, but not His reasons.

I think I've adequately addressed that above.

I think you've lost me again.

 

I don't know if I understand you or not. If I understand what you're saying, I think you've created a problem for yourself.

You seem to be reasoning, "God couldn't have chosen us arbitrarily. He must have had a reason for choosing one person over another."

So far, so good.

But then you assume THE reason must be our faith. That's where your reasoning gets all screwy. You start with your assumption that it is faith, and then try to figure out how we could receive our faith from God yet still be chosen for our faith.

You can avoid this whole problem by going with the ONLY thing God tells us about why He chose one over another. He foreknew (as in knew intimately as a friend) some people. The rest, He never knew (same word - intimate friendship). If God has other criteria, He hasn't shared them with us. We have no right to insert "faith" as A reason, let alone THE reason.

I don't think you can go any farther with this information, because God hasn't said any more than this. You can't even assume that God knew one person and not another because of foreseen faith, or any other "fore-" reason. He didn't say any such thing. He simply said those He foreknew, He predestined. Accept it and move on.

 

Will of God

It is not the will of man to save believers or thier choice to save believers it is the will of God and the choice of God to.

I praise you Father for you have hidden the truth from the wise and learned and revealed it to little childen

 

This indicates that there is a relationship between evangelizing and salvation:

Mar 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Otherwise, why waste our time and effort?

 

Or, to put it the other way around, think of all those people who will go to hell because nobody went out into their little part of the world and preached the gospel. Right? They're headed for hell without ever having had the opportunity to make a decision. For all we know, many of them would have chosen Jesus, but never got the chance. What an ineffective God we have.

 

I agree. I'm simply questioning the Calvinist belief that it doesn't make any difference. God has already chosen who is going to Heaven (the elect) and therefore who is going to Hell.

 

It really doesn't make any difference in terms of who gets saved. The real difference is between being obedient or disobedient. If we do not share the gospel, we are being terribly disobedient.

You can't pick a soteriology based on what makes you feel good. However, if I HAD to pick one based on what makes me feel better, I'd go with election. I'd much rather do my best to evangelize knowing that it doesn't depend on my effort but on God. I would hate to think the eternal fate of men depended on my ability to evangelize well.

 

Allan,
I was wondering if you had a response to my post #69?

 

We are the tool of God

1 Corinthians 13
Love
1If I speak in the tongues [Or languages] of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. 3If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames,[ Some early manuscripts body that I may boast] but have not love, I gain nothing.

Ezekiel 3:
18 When I say to a wicked man, 'You will surely die,' and you do not warn him or speak out to dissuade him from his evil ways in order to save his life, that wicked man will die for his sin, and I will hold you accountable for his blood. 19 But if you do warn the wicked man and he does not turn from his wickedness or from his evil ways, he will die for his sin; but you will have saved yourself.
20 "Again, when a righteous man turns from his righteousness and does evil, and I put a stumbling block before him, he will die. Since you did not warn him, he will die for his sin. The righteous things he did will not be remembered, and I will hold you accountable for his blood. 21 But if you do warn the righteous man not to sin and he does not sin, he will surely live because he took warning, and you will have saved yourself."
James 5:
17Elijah was a man just like us. He prayed earnestly that it would not rain, and it did not rain on the land for three and a half years. 18Again he prayed, and the heavens gave rain, and the earth produced its crops. 19My brothers, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring him back, 20remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of his way will save him from death and cover over a multitude of sins.

Romans 10:
14How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? 15And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!"

 

The scripture I quoted clearly puts the responsibility on Christians to evangelize. It looks like you don't want to accept that responsibility. Not a good choice for you.

 

Don't tell me what I believe. You don't have a clue.