You Are Chosen! Believe it or Not! Like it or Not!

[Winman]

Winman you are ignoring my request!

I have no idea what you are talking about here.

Now consider what you say above Winman!

So you admit that we were chosen in Jesus Christ before the foundation of the world. Is that what the above statement by you states. YES.

Of course I admit this, this is what the word of God says.

Next you say:

Now explain how CHOSEN IN JESUS CHRIST BEFORE TIME, BEFORE THE FOUNDATIONS OF THE WORLD squares with ENTER INTO CHRIST IN TIME. If there is a distinction what is it? If they mean the same thing then explain how that is possible?

Paul was not "in Christ" until he believed in his lifetime. He clearly said that Andronicus and Junia were "in Christ before me" in Rom 16:7.

So, you have what APPEARS to be a contradiction in scripture, but it is not. One verse says God has "chosen us in him" before time existed, the other verse says Paul was "in Christ" in time, that is, within Paul's lifetime.

The only answer for this seeming contradiction is foreknowledge. God in his foreknowledge could foresee who would believe in time as Paul did and chose him before the foundation of the world.

Not only does this solve what appears to be a contradiction, it is what the scriptures actually say, the scriptures say we are elect according or based upon the foreknowledge of the Father (1 Pet 1:2).

This is how God could say he "knew" Jeremiah before he formed him;

Jer 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

Before Jeremiah was conceived in the womb, God already knew Jeremiah would believe in time after he was born, and God chose Jeremiah to be a prophet.

When Jesus chose the twelve disciples, he already knew eleven would believe and serve him faithfully. He also knew Judas would not believe and would betray him. He knew all this by foreknowledge.

But it's not like we existed before we were conceived in the womb, we did not.

You understand this well, non-Cals and Arminians have believed this for centuries, my view is very orthodox.

 

[AresMan]

Paul was not "in Christ" until he believed in his lifetime. He clearly said that Andronicus and Junia were "in Christ before me" in Rom 16:7.

So, you have what APPEARS to be a contradiction in scripture, but it is not. One verse says God has "chosen us in him" before time existed, the other verse says Paul was "in Christ" in time, that is, within Paul's lifetime.

The only answer for this seeming contradiction is foreknowledge. God in his foreknowledge could foresee who would believe in time as Paul did and chose him before the foundation of the world.

Yes, the answer lies in God's "foreknowledge," but this is not limited to a passive prescience of what people would do. It is an active foreknowing of people themselves. It is God "before the foundation of the world" choosing to enter into a relationship with a certain people that He would call to Himself with a holy calling at a point in time in their lives according to His eternal plan.

Yes, God knows in eternity who will believe and who will not, but He is not passive in this. He foreknows who will believe because He foreknows them personally; therefore, He calls them effectually to Himself "out of every kindred, tongue, tribe, and nation" with a holy calling with the result that they believe.

2Co 4:6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

Not only does this solve what appears to be a contradiction, it is what the scriptures actually say, the scriptures say we are elect according or based upon the foreknowledge of the Father (1 Pet 1:2).

It does not solve your problem because we have Jesus saying that He "never knew" reprobates.

Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

If ginwskw merely has to do with factual prescience, we would have a problem. Jesus obviously knows everything about these people. For Him to say that He does not "know" someone must mean something other than factual knowledge.

ginwskw with a person as a direct object has to do with personal relationship, not mere factual knowledge.

Adding the prefix pro to ginwskw does not change this functionality. proginwskw with a person as a direct object has to do with personal relationship "beforehand," not mere factual prescience.

We are elect according to God foreknowing us personally.

This is how God could say he "knew" Jeremiah before he formed him;

Jer 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations.

If you are trying to say that "knew" here has to do with mere factual knowledge about Jeremiah or something he would do, then God could say "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee" about everyone.

No, this was unique to Jeremiah, because God foreknew Jeremiah in a special way that He did not "know" anyone else in the nation. God "knowing" Jeremiah beforehand here is directly tied to God sanctifying and ordaining Jeremiah.

God chose to enter into a relationship with Jeremiah before he was even conceived. In this relationship, God would sanctify and ordain Jeremiah for His own purpose to preach to a rebellious nation.

To try to argue that God "knew" Jeremiah because He knew the faith that Jeremiah would have of his own autonomy is reading into the text entirely something that just is not there. There is nothing in this passage that indicates that God foreknew Jeremiah because He foresaw something that would be autonomously good in him. God supernaturally revealed Himself to Jeremiah and called him as a young man out of a rebellious nation so that he could preach to these rebels without any hope of seeing results. If God did not foreknow Jeremiah--in a personal way--Jeremiah would have been like the rest of the rebels.

Before Jeremiah was conceived in the womb, God already knew Jeremiah would believe in time after he was born, and God chose Jeremiah to be a prophet.

You are reading into the text something that plainly is not there. There is NOTHING here that says anything about Jeremiah being good of his own accord that would make God call Jeremiah instead of any other of the rebellious nation.

Jesus will say on judgment day to reprobates "I never knew you," while yet knowing every fact about them.
God told Jeremiah that, before he was conceived, He "knew" him, and sanctified and ordained him.

Knowing people is entirely different from knowing about people.

When Jesus chose the twelve disciples, he already knew eleven would believe and serve him faithfully. He also knew Judas would not believe and would betray him. He knew all this by foreknowledge.

Yes, but knowing people (personal relationship) is not the same as mere possession of factual information. God's foreknowledge of His elect is NOT limited to mere passive prescience of information about what they would do.

God is the Creator. Give precedence to the One Who created time itself. It would be very wise of you give heed both (1)to language and meaning, and (2)to the fact that an omnipotent God Who made time itself should not have part of His own being--His eternal, perfect knowledge and plan--dependent upon backward determination from the very creatures that He sovereignly created of His own will to create.

But it's not like we existed before we were conceived in the womb, we did not.

Not in spacetime, but Christ is "the lamb slain from the foundation of the world." (Rev 13:8) We existed in the perfect plan of God.

You understand this well, non-Cals and Arminians have believed this for centuries, my view is very orthodox.

I understand the history of the Arminian "simple foreknowledge" view. I think it has serious metaphysical problems like a "cyclical redundancy error."

Your problem is that you cannot seem to put your finger on the concept of [fore]knowing a person (relationship) vs. [fore]knowing information.

 

[Revmitchell]

Fellow Saints you are chosen, called, justified, and one day will be glorified, whether you believe it or not, whether you like it or not!

Why do you want to start in your face discussions like this?

 

[OldRegular]

Why do you want to start in your face discussions like this?

I could say it was foreordained but I won't because I don't believe that. I would not encumber the Doctrines of Grace with such a claim. I could say that it is because of the arrogance of the freewillers on this Board and their open hatred of the Doctrines of Grace and the people who believe them; but I won't. I could say it is because these people actually hate the thought that God alone is responsible for their Salvation, that Big I had nothing to do with it; but I definitely will not!

I will say you are 9 pages late!

 

[convicted1]

I could say it was foreordained but I won't because I don't believe that. I would not encumber the Doctrines of Grace with such a claim. I could say that it is because of the arrogance of the freewillers on this Board and their open hatred of the Doctrines of Grace and the people who believe them; but I won't. I could say it is because these people actually hate the thought that God alone is responsible for their Salvation, that Big I had nothing to do with it; but I definitely will not!

I will say you are 9 pages late!

Freewillers are arrogant? Really? Come on now, Brother, you know better than that. We don't hate the Doctrines of Grace, we just don't agree with y'alls interpretation of 'em. There's no hatred, just disagreement.

 

[Winman]

Yes, the answer lies in God's "foreknowledge," but this is not limited to a passive prescience of what people would do. It is an active foreknowing of people themselves. It is God "before the foundation of the world" choosing to enter into a relationship with a certain people that He would call to Himself with a holy calling at a point in time in their lives according to His eternal plan.

I never said it was simply a knowledge. I agree with you that it is speaking of a personal relationship. But that personal relationship does not begin until we believe in time, that is what Galatians 4:9 shows. However, God in his foreknowledge could foresee this personal relationship that would begin in time before it actually took place. This is that foreknowledge that we were elected according to.

Yes, God knows in eternity who will believe and who will not, but He is not passive in this. He foreknows who will believe because He foreknows them personally; therefore, He calls them effectually to Himself "out of every kindred, tongue, tribe, and nation" with a holy calling with the result that they believe.

2Co 4:6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

I do not differ with you here. Yes, God always foresaw that he would shine the gospel into our hearts, and he foresaw that we would believe when called. I absolutely agree that God took an active role in this.

It does not solve your problem because we have Jesus saying that He "never knew" reprobates.

Mat 7:23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

I agree that Jesus never knew reprobates in a personal, intimate way.

If ginwskw merely has to do with factual prescience, we would have a problem. Jesus obviously knows everything about these people. For Him to say that He does not "know" someone must mean something other than factual knowledge.

ginwskw with a person as a direct object has to do with personal relationship, not mere factual knowledge.

Again, I agree, but that does not cause the least problem for my view.

Adding the prefix pro to ginwskw does not change this functionality. proginwskw with a person as a direct object has to do with personal relationship "beforehand," not mere factual prescience.

We are elect according to God foreknowing us personally.

Agreed, but he knows this by foreknowledge. It is not like we actually had a personal relationship with God before the foundation of the world, we did not exist at that time. And again, no one can have a personal relationship with another by themselves. You used Adam and Eve as an example of what "knowing" means. I ask you, is it possible that Adam could "know" Eve, but that Eve could not "know" Adam? Only Bill Clinton thinks that type of relationship is possible. :laugh:

If you are trying to say that "knew" here has to do with mere factual knowledge about Jeremiah or something he would do, then God could say "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee" about everyone.

No, this was unique to Jeremiah, because God foreknew Jeremiah in a special way that He did not "know" anyone else in the nation. God "knowing" Jeremiah beforehand here is directly tied to God sanctifying and ordaining Jeremiah.

I agree with you that God knew Jeremiah in a personal way. I would not say Jeremiah is the only person in Israel God knew this way, that is adding to scripture what it does not say. I am sure there was some remnant in Israel that believed at all times.

God chose to enter into a relationship with Jeremiah before he was even conceived. In this relationship, God would sanctify and ordain Jeremiah for His own purpose to preach to a rebellious nation.

No, this is where we disagree. God could not enter into a personal relationship with Jeremiah before Jeremiah existed and believed in time. But God in his foreknowledge could know the personal relationship he would have with Jeremiah in time before it actually happened.

To try to argue that God "knew" Jeremiah because He knew the faith that Jeremiah would have of his own autonomy is reading into the text entirely something that just is not there. There is nothing in this passage that indicates that God foreknew Jeremiah because He foresaw something that would be autonomously good in him. God supernaturally revealed Himself to Jeremiah and called him as a young man out of a rebellious nation so that he could preach to these rebels without any hope of seeing results. If God did not foreknow Jeremiah--in a personal way--Jeremiah would have been like the rest of the rebels.

No, 2 Thes 2:13 says we were chosen through belief of the truth.

2 Thes 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:

We were chosen to salvation "through" sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth. It is God who sanctifies us through his word (Jhn 17:17), it is we who believe. This is when we are reconciled and enter into a personal relationship with God (Gal 4:9).

continued- post too long

 

[Winman]

continued from last post

You are reading into the text something that plainly is not there. There is NOTHING here that says anything about Jeremiah being good of his own accord that would make God call Jeremiah instead of any other of the rebellious nation.

No I am not. The scriptures explain themselves, you have to compare ALL scripture on a given subject. 2 Thes 2:13 shows we were chosen through belief of the truth.

Jesus will say on judgment day to reprobates "I never knew you," while yet knowing every fact about them.
God told Jeremiah that, before he was conceived, He "knew" him, and sanctified and ordained him.

The grace that brings salvation has appeared to all men (Titus 2:11), but only profits those that believe (Heb 4:2).

Tit 2:11 For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,

Heb 4:2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

Knowing people is entirely different from knowing about people.

Yes, but knowing people (personal relationship) is not the same as mere possession of factual information. God's foreknowledge of His elect is NOT limited to mere passive prescience of information about what they would do.

Again, no disagreement, but I am saying God could foresee this personal relationship before it happened in time.

God is the Creator. Give precedence to the One Who created time itself. It would be very wise of you give heed both (1)to language and meaning, and (2)to the fact that an omnipotent God Who made time itself should not have part of His own being--His eternal, perfect knowledge and plan--dependent upon backward determination from the very creatures that He sovereignly created of His own will to create.

Who are you to tell God he cannot look forward in time to see those who will believe and choose them? What is wrong with this?

Not in spacetime, but Christ is "the lamb slain from the foundation of the world." (Rev 13:8) We existed in the perfect plan of God.

Yes, because God could foresee that men would sin and so prepared a Saviour for them.

The issue comes down to whether God is the author of sin or not. If God prepared a Saviour because he knew he would cause men to sin, then foreknowledge is not necessary. But if men have free will and sin of themselves, then God can foresee this and prepare a Saviour before time. He can also foresee who will chose this Saviour and elect them before the foundation of the world.

In your system God must be the cause of sin. In my view or system God is not the cause of sin. Which do you think is right?

I understand the history of the Arminian "simple foreknowledge" view. I think it has serious metaphysical problems like a "cyclical redundancy error."

Your problem is that you cannot seem to put your finger on the concept of [fore]knowing a person (relationship) vs. [fore]knowing information.

Well, I can tell you a serious error with the Reformed view. You believe you were chosen OUTSIDE of Christ and then given to him. This is God choosing YOU, it is MAN CENTERED. My view has God choosing us because he sees us IN his Son, it is CHRIST CENTERED. Jesus is the ELECT of God, the CHOSEN ONE. We are only elect because when we believe we are baptized into his body and become ONE with him. We are elect because he was the elect.

Go back in Ephesians 1 and notice how many times it says "in him', or "in the beloved" or "in Christ".

Eph 1:1 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.
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:

This is the great error of Reformed theology, you believe you were chosen OUTSIDE of Christ and then given to him, where the scriptures show we were elected or chosen IN HIM.

There is nothing special about you (or me) that God would choose us and give us to Jesus. No, God chose or elected Jesus, and the only reason we are elect is because when we believe we are baptized by the Spirit INTO his body. We are now ONE with Jesus, and therefore we are now elect.

This is why I said earlier that we ride in on Jesus' coattail. He is like a great ship called THE ELECT ONE, we are simply passengers on board.

 

[OldRegular]

Freewillers are arrogant? Really? Come on now, Brother, you know better than that. We don't hate the Doctrines of Grace, we just don't agree with y'alls interpretation of 'em. There's no hatred, just disagreement.

You had best wake up van Winkle. Where have you been? Do you read the posts of certain on this Forum? Hatred is spewed from half dozen or so non-cals as they like to call themselves.

I assume you know what the Old Regular Baptists think of Freewill Baptists! That is unless they have changed a lot.

 

[OldRegular]

Go back in Ephesians 1 and notice how many times it says "in him', or "in the beloved" or "in Christ".

Eph 1:1 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.
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:

Ephesisns 1:1-10 tells us what God does for us. Can you show anywhere in that Scripture where any action by man is required to receive what God does for us. NO!

 

[SovereignMercy]

My final reply to Winman & company.

Though you grind a fool in a mortar with a pestle along with crushed grain, yet his foolishness will not depart from him.

 

[OldRegular]

Who are you to tell God he cannot look forward in time to see those who will believe and choose them? What is wrong with this?

God is omniscient Winman He doesn't need to look forward in time. Otherwise your continued mantra that it is not God who elects but the free will of people like you is totally contrary to what Scripture teaches about mankind.

And just to repeat a prior post and request:

Originally Posted by Winman
Go back in Ephesians 1 and notice how many times it says "in him', or "in the beloved" or "in Christ".

Eph 1:1 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.
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:

Ephesisns 1:1-10 tells us what God does for us. Can you show anywhere in that Scripture where any action by man is required to receive what God does for us. NO!

 

[convicted1]

You had best wake up van Winkle. Where have you been? Do you read the posts of certain on this Forum? Hatred is spewed from half dozen or so non-cals as they like to call themselves.

I assume you know what the Old Regular Baptists think of Freewill Baptists! That is unless they have changed a lot.

It's posts like this that cause the squabbling Brother. It's has more to do with how you "woof" than what you "woofed".


Oh I know about the chasm betwixt ORBs and FWBs. Most, years ago, wouldn't even recognize them as a Brother or Sister. This is still in existance to a certain degree, but I think the chasm is getting closer.

 

[convicted1]

My final reply to Winman & company.

Though you grind a fool in a mortar with a pestle along with crushed grain, yet his foolishness will not depart from him.

Are you saying that those of us who do not agree with YOUR interpretation of the Doctrines of Grace are fools? Please say it ain't so, Joe!! Say it ain't so!!


If you are going about insinuating that we are "fools", remember what Jesus said about calling someone such.....they are in danger of hell fire/eternal damnation.

 

[Luke2427]

It's posts like this that cause the squabbling Brother. It's has more to do with how you "woof" than what you "woofed".


Oh I know about the chasm betwixt ORBs and FWBs. Most, years ago, wouldn't even recognize them as a Brother or Sister. This is still in existance to a certain degree, but I think the chasm is getting closer.

That's interesting. I used to be a Free Will Baptist. I was one FWB preacher for better than a decade.

 

[convicted1]

That's interesting. I used to be a Free Will Baptist. I was one FWB preacher for better than a decade.

I am not saying that all ORBs believe this, but some still do, or at least to a certain extent. I know an ORB preacher, who said that Brother "so n' so" was in need of prayer. His moderator at that time looked back at him and told him they weren't his Brother....or that's what he told me happened.



The way I have come to understand it, is that all who are saved, are in Christ, whether the name over their church door is "FWB", "ORB", "IFB", "RB", etc. God saves us and places us where He wants us. We aren't saved by a FWB, RB, ORB, IBF, but by the grace of God.

 

[convicted1]

That's interesting. I used to be a Free Will Baptist. I was one FWB preacher for better than a decade.

A friend of mine that I work with, used to belong to Siver Creek United Baptist church. This church is close to 200 years old(maybe older than that), and was in the Old Zion Association of UBs for YEARS. He said one time, that he and one of his fellow members were perusing some of their old business meeting minutes, when back around 1850-1860, they excluded a member for just being seen walking with a FWB person. True story, according to him. FWBs around here are wonderful people, and can really preach when God blesses them. I don't agree with their stance that we can be saved, and then lose our salvation like a set of keys, or just forfeit it, but a lot of what they preach, I agree with.

 

[Winman]

Can you show anywhere in that Scripture where any action by man is required to receive what God does for us. NO!

Yes, I can. I also showed this verse in another thread.

Acts 26:18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

Jesus told Paul that he would be sent to preach to the Gentiles that they "may receive" forgiveness of sins "by faith that is in me".

The phrase "may receive" is the word lambanō in the Greek, which means to take hold of something with the hands.

1) to take
a) to take with the hand, lay hold of, any person or thing in order to use it
1) to take up a thing to be carried
2) to take upon one's self
b) to take in order to carry away
1) without the notion of violence, i,e to remove, take away
c) to take what is one's own, to take to one's self, to make one's own
1) to claim, procure, for one's self
a) to associate with one's self as companion, attendant
2) of that which when taken is not let go, to seize, to lay hold of, apprehend
3) to take by craft (our catch, used of hunters, fisherman, etc.), to circumvent one by fraud
4) to take to one's self, lay hold upon, take possession of, i.e. to appropriate to one's self
5) catch at, reach after, strive to obtain
6) to take a thing due, to collect, gather (tribute)
d) to take
1) to admit, receive
2) to receive what is offered
3) not to refuse or reject
4) to receive a person, give him access to one's self,
a) to regard any one's power, rank, external circumstances, and on that account to do some injustice or neglect something
e) to take, to choose, select
f) to take beginning, to prove anything, to make a trial of, to experience
2) to receive (what is given), to gain, get, obtain, to get back

This word does not mean something imposed, forced, or placed on a person, it means they actively take or receive something or someone. It is not a passive receiving.

 

[OldRegular]

Yes, I can. I also showed this verse in another thread.

Acts 26:18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

Jesus told Paul that he would be sent to preach to the Gentiles that they "may receive" forgiveness of sins "by faith that is in me".

The phrase "may receive" is the word lambanō in the Greek, which means to take hold of something with the hands.

The request was related to the passage from Ephesians which you posted, with emphasis, to support your doctrine [#87]! I show your emphasized Scripture again and ask the same question:

Eph 1:1 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.
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:

Ephesisns 1:1-10 tells us what God does for us. Can you show anywhere in that Scripture where any action by man is required to receive what God does for us. NO!

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Originally Posted by OldRegular
Ephesisns 1:1-10 tells us what God does for us. Can you show anywhere in that Scripture where any action by man is required to receive what God does for us. NO!

1.) First that would be nothing more than an argument from silence and therefore fallacious to begin with, as what it is essentially doing is arguing from a lack of evidence.

2.) The direct answer is no, he couldn't....but the next three verses do, which you patently ignored for obvious reasons.

Eph 1:11 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:
Eph 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.
Eph 1:13 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,[/

 

[percho]

Yes, I can. I also showed this verse in another thread.

Acts 26:18 To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.

Jesus told Paul that he would be sent to preach to the Gentiles that they "may receive" forgiveness of sins "by faith that is in me".

The phrase "may receive" is the word lambanō in the Greek, which means to take hold of something with the hands.



This word does not mean something imposed, forced, or placed on a person, it means they actively take or receive something or someone. It is not a passive receiving.

Originally Posted by Old Regular
Can you show anywhere in that Scripture where any action by man is required to receive what God does for us. NO!

Acts 26:18 To open their eyes, [and] to turn [them] from darkness to light, and [from] the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.


I have a question for you and also for all. Remember I know no Greek and barely know any English.

Is, "by faith," in that verse from Acts 26:18 grammatically, an action?


sanctified by faith that is in me.
ἡγιασμένοις πίστει τῇ εἰς ἐμέ
ones having been hallowed to faith the into me; from Scripture4all.org Christ in you the hope of glory. Faith in you the hope of glory.

A noun not a verb action.

Why was the Holy Spirit, the Comforter, that by which one is sanctified, given?

John 14:16-18 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

If Jesus is not obedient unto death even the death of the cross, there will be no Comforter to come, No promise of the Holy Spirit given to Christ to be shed upon anyone else.See Acts 2:33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. λαμβάνω lambanō There is that word again however Jesus did not take, he received.

Jesus received the promise of the Holy Spirit from the Father then it was shed on man. That is what the word, "through," means.

Gal 3:14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through the faith. What, the faith? Verse 22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise, (of the Holy Spirit) by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

Verse 23 But, before the faith came.
Verse 25 But, after the faith did come.

Faith came the day Jesus died. Went away.


Abraham did not receive the promises. Abraham died in the faith by which he will be able to receive the promise, and he saw that when God told him to kill his only begotten son. He also saw the resurrection for if his only begotten, the son of promise was to die and the promise had not come then he must be going to be resurrected.

Winman, Sampson is listed in the quote, unquote hall of faith in the book of Hebrews. Show me his action of faith from the story in the book of Judges. He had no quote, unquote faith, other than God choose him. His last and maybe his only prayer was for revenge.

Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.



The Archangel wrote a very good post some time back concerning the, "only begotten."


Salvation is of the Lord through election.

Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this the whole of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether good, or whether evil.

Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

By the faith of Jesus Christ; And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all [things] he might have the preeminence.