Elect or Not Elect: Why ALL Should Be Alarmed

[Scott Downey]

God loves us and has given all things pertaining to eternal life and Godliness.

God desires to complete His good plan and purpose for each and every one of His children.

The way we will carry out His plan for our life is living our life according to the Spirit, rather than the sinful desires of our flesh.

To be led by the Spirit of God.

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. Romans 8:14

Those who are in Christ that walk according to the flesh, are under His condemnation.


There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. Romans 8:1


Paul warns the Church at Galatia -

Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Galatians 5:19-21




JLB

There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. Romans 8:1

You are reading it the way you feel is right, as in Christians walk according to the flesh or the Spirit depending on what they want to do.

That scripture can be read differently,
a. Those who are in Christ have no condemnation
John 3:18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

b. who do not walk according to the flesh, they walk according to the Spirit.
of course not, they are led by the Spirit.
Proverbs 16:9 A man’s heart plans his way, But the Lord directs his steps.
Galatians 3:26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus

Romans 8
6 For to be [b]carnally minded is death, but to be spiritually minded is life and peace. 7 Because the [c]carnal mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. 8 So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

9 But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.

'Carnally minded Christians'
This does not go hand in hand.
Christians do not have enmity with God.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

God loves us and has given all things pertaining to eternal life and Godliness.

God desires to complete His good plan and purpose for each and every one of His children.

The way we will carry out His plan for our life is living our life according to the Spirit, rather than the sinful desires of our flesh.

To be led by the Spirit of God.

For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. Romans 8:14

Those who are in Christ that walk according to the flesh, are under His condemnation.


There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. Romans 8:1


Paul warns the Church at Galatia -

Now the works of the flesh are evident, which are: adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lewdness, idolatry, sorcery, hatred, contentions, jealousies, outbursts of wrath, selfish ambitions, dissensions, heresies, envy, murders, drunkenness, revelries, and the like; of which I tell you beforehand, just as I also told you in time past, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God.
Galatians 5:19-21




JLB

I rest my case

Your under law my friend, Grace will not do you any good. Because you reject it. You demand you will get to God your way, by your good deeds. No one can help you until you repent.

 

[JLB]

There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. Romans 8:1

You are reading it the way you feel is right,

The way I feel is right?

What are you talking about? Why do you people keep attacking me? Why do you seem to disagree with every scripture I post?

There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. Romans 8:1

• There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh...

What is difficult about understanding these simple words?

Paul is teaching about those who are in Christ Jesus. This refers to born again Christians.

Paul plainly says there is no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk according to the flesh.



JLB

 

[Christian Soldier]

• His commandments are not burdensome.

So you struggle with loving God and loving people?

For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome. 1 John 5:3

To whom are His commandments not, burdensome??? please explain what the verse is saying instead of just citing it without showing how it confirms your interpretation of it. Christians have radically different interpretation of scripture, that's why we have 45,000 Christian denominations. They all have their peculiar way of interpreting the Bible.

I'm just trying to figure out which one you subscribe to., because plucking verses out of the bible doesn't tell me anything about how you're trying to apply it.

 

[JBO]

Again, what you say is correct, but you are understanding God's foreknowledge in a different way ~ a mere, cognitive knowing beforehand, as if God looked forward in time and saw who would choose Him and thus predestined ~ that Paul does, as should be clearly evident in what he says in Romans 8:30 and beyond. Again (cutting and pasting from above):

You will agree, I'm sure, that we must understand Paul's context there. It is possible to understand 'foreknew' as a cognitive knowing beforehand; that is not an invalid understanding of that term in and of itself. If we are to understand it in that sense, though, that makes what Paul is saying to be nonsensical, even contradictory, because in that sense, God foreknows ~ cognitively knows beforehand ~ everyone and everything. But Paul, in saying "those whom He foreknew," is very clearly referring to a limited group, and thus very clearly implying that there are at least some that He did not foreknow. So, his use of the word 'foreknew' must have at least a slightly different... :) ...meaning, or connotation.

How then should we understand it? Well, I would submit to you, JBO, that in various places in the Bible, knowing something or someone is directly said ~ both in the Old Testament Hebrew and the New Testament Greek ~ in the context of intimacy, of loving and serving someone... doing something for them and... causing something to happen. Consider Genesis 4, where we read that "Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bore Cain" (Genesis 4:1). We can assume the same is true subsequently of Abel because of the "And again" at the first of Genesis 4:2. Likewise, in Genesis 4:17, Cain knew his wife, and then in Genesis 4:25, Adam knew his wife again, and she bore a son and called his name Seth." So this knowing is in a very different sense, obviously, because, just woodenly speaking, of course Adam and Cain knew who their wives were, but knowing in that sense would not cause them to conceive and bear children, right?

But we should understand this 'foreknew' in Romans 8:30 in a very similar sense: loved beforehand... and even chose for Himself... beforehand. And that can ~ and should ~ take us back to what John says, as I cited above, that "We love because He (God) first loved us" (1 John 4:19). Now, yes, God loves all His creation, but He does not extend His mercy to all, but only extends that mercy to those He chooses/elects. That might seem... unloving... but the fact is that He is not obligated to extend that mercy to anyone, as none are deserving of it, and in fact deserving of just the opposite. And Paul tells us why he extended this mercy to some and not all, and that he was wholly within his right to do so. The potter (God, the Creator) has every right over the clay (us, the created), to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use, and so to extend mercy to one but not the other.

All of that sounds okay. However you ignore what came before. Yes, God foreknows ~cognitively knows beforehand~everyone and everything. But from verse 28 it is apparent that in verse 29 he is referring to "those who love God". It is they, those who love God, who in verse 28 Paul says are those who are called. Paul then proceeds in verses 29 and 30 to describe how those who love God are called and what was the result.

For those whom he foreknew [i.e., those who loved God] he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

That justification and glorification is the "good" in verse 28 that all things work together for.

But yet, as Paul says in Romans 11:26, all of Israel will be saved. So, JBO, who really is Israel? Who does the Israel of God truly consist of... include? Well, Paul tells us there in Romans 11:25-26 ~ "...a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this way all Israel will be saved..." ~ after having told us in Romans 2:28-29 who true Jews of God are ~ "...no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit..." ~ and then saying in Romans 9:6 that "not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel..." So... :) Again, JBO, who, really is Israel? Who does the Israel of God truly consist of... include?

There is ethnic or national Israel and there is spiritual Israel. The all Israel who will be saved are the remnant OT saints and the NT saints, the "children of the promise" (Rom 9:8).

Well, yes, and the same group of folks is in view; that we are chosen for salvation means that we were chosen to serve Him ~ "for honorable use," as Paul says in Romans 9:21, and thus "vessels of mercy" (Romans 9:23), and "created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them," which Paul also says, this in Ephesians 2:10.

Yes but He also chose many to serve Him that were not chosen for salvation. He chose Pharoah to serve Him. He chose Esau to serve Him. He chose the Babylonians to serve Him. He chose the Syrians to serve Him. He chose Judas Iscariot to serve Him. None of those does He say He saves them.

Not merey sexual intercourse; that is only the human-to-human expression of the deepest intimacy possible, which is not merely physical, but very spiritual.

"Tired old fallacy..." Well, I was about to laugh at that, but it's no laughing matter. Just a terrible, terrible misconception. Yeah, no laughing matter at all.

The custom of using "knowing" as a euphemism for sexual intercourse was not limited to "the human-to-human expression of the deepest intimacy possible". Take a look at Judges 19:25. Does that call to your mind anything you would like to attribute to God?

That cannot be, as Paul, in discussing God's right of the clay, clearly and irrefutably speaks of God's making us ~ creating us ~ for these specific purposes, either for honorable use or for dishonorable use.

Yes and has nothing whatsoever to do with salvation or condemnation; it has only to do with events in this physical life in this physical time.

Not immediately, but clearly, those He made for honorable use are those He has had or will have mercy and compassion on, and these are clearly His elect (Romans 9) ~ those "He chose... in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him," who "in love He predestined... for adoption to Himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of His Will" (Ephesians 1).

So then your conclusion is if God has used one for honorable use, then He must save them. Sorry, but He used the whole of His chosen nation Israel for the honorable use of bringing the savior, Jesus Christ, into the world. Yet, He saved only the "remnant".

 

[JBO]

Continued from above...


Sigh. It's outward in the sense that it is administered by preachers like Peter... and John the Baptist, who says in John 1, "I baptize with water..."


John's baptism ~ and no baptism administered by man (or woman) after truly washes away sin. The washing of sin is a work of God by His Spirit, Who baptizes with fire.


Hmmm, repentance is certainly a part of the equation, but not actually a requirement for, or a prerequisite for, this baptism. For those who are old enough, it is a sign that they have repented... and that they will continue to repent, as repentance is not a one-time thing in the life of the Christian but an ongoing, continual thing in this life. And in the case of those not old enough to express belief or repentance, it is an acknowledgment of and trust in God's promise to bring those children to belief and repentance in His time, which the parents belief and act on in faith.


Disagree; see above.


I do, thanks be to God.


:) Don't think so... And it was really about me and my wife when they were baptized (both before they were a year old), about our faith in God to keep His promise to draw them to Himself in His time because they were the children of believers... and our returning promise to God to bring our children up in His nurture and admonition. This is a sacrament ~ sacraments, by definition, are means that use our sight, taste, touch, and smell... so they are outward signs in that respect... to impress upon us the same promises of the Gospel found in Scripture; they are not ends in themselves but always point us to the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross as the only ground of our salvation ~ given to us by God, along with Communion.


Well, this is why parents should have their children, regardless of age, baptized. In that way, it mirrors what was required of the Israelites in the Old Testament, which, again, we should be able to see in Colossians 2:11-12.


LOL! Well, I appreciate the thought, but others have their own parents; our responsibility is to our own children, those who God has given us. :)


Yikes! No... See above... :)


Noted; I think the same of... several posters here. It is God's election, after all, not ours, which is what others inadvertently make it out to be.


I agree, but in... kind of the reverse of the way you seem to be meaning that. As Paul says, "those whom (God) foreknew (God) also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, in order that He might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom (God) predestined (God) also called, and those whom (God) called (God) also justified, and those whom (God) justified (God) also glorified" (Romans 8:29-30).


Well... not corrupted, really, but misperceived, in the respect that God's grace is made out to be something other than grace, which is exactly what Paul says in Romans 11:6 ~ "...if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace."


Okay, well, I know what you mean, but, with all due respect, despite your good intentions, I would attribute that very thing to you, JBO.

Grace and peace to you.

Zwingliism at its worst.

 

[PinSeeker]

...you ignore what came before.

No, I'm not ignoring anything; read on...

Yes, God foreknows ~cognitively knows beforehand~everyone and everything. But from verse 28 it is apparent that in verse 29 he is referring to "those who love God".

Right, which is a limited group, as I said; not everyone loves God, and likewise, not everyone is foreknown. So, the foreknowledge of God, in Paul's context, as I said, cannot be a mere cognitive foreknowledge; it has to be something very different than that. The additional problem that anyone maintaining it is merely a cognitive fore-knowing or "seeing the future," is that God is placed inside of time, which He is most certainly not; our linear time is part of His creation, which He is over... He is the great I AM, always present in our past, present, and future... infinite, as opposed to finite.

And what you seem to be doing is drawing some contrast in what Paul is saying in verse 28 and 29 that is not really a contrast at all; "those whom He foreknew" of Romans 8:29 and 8:30 is a further clarification of "those who love God" and "those called according to His purpose" specified in Romans 8:28. God's foreknowing (v.29) is His fore-loving and even fore-choosing a certain group of people individually and collectively and His then inevitable calling of them.

Paul does not ignore... or redefine... or change... his context from one verse to the very next... or even in Romans 8 as a whole, which is, "those who are in Christ Jesus," who "are more than conquerors through Him who loved us" and "(cannot be) separate(d) from the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord"... to Romans 9 and following, where he further clarifies and defines who these people are, "(God's) elect" and thus "all of (God's) Israel" (Romans 9-11).

It is they, those who love God, who in verse 28 Paul says are those who are called. Paul then proceeds in verses 29 and 30 to describe how those who love God are called and what was the result...

I most wholeheartedly agree, so then it becomes a sort of "chicken or the egg" quandary, right? And that's why Paul immediately launches into settling that quandary in Romans 9, speaking of God's elect. This is not a departure from what he has just said in Romans 8 but a further clarification.~ from all those in Christ Jesus, who cannot be separated

...justification and glorification is the "good" in verse 28 that all things work together for.

Ultimately speaking that's absolutely true. But do you not understand that "good" to also include temporal outcomes, things in this life? If not, okay, but I would; we may do certain things or have certain things happen to us that seem... or even are not... good at all from our perspective, and may have short or even long term negative consequences, but then at some point we are able to recognize the good ~ from a godly perspective ~ that has come to be because of those things. Right?

There is ethnic or national Israel and there is spiritual Israel. The all Israel who will be saved are the remnant OT saints and the NT saints, the "children of the promise" (Rom 9:8).

Absolutely true. And the latter, "spiritual Israel," are... is... the Israel of God. Yes.

Yes but He also chose many to serve Him that were not chosen for salvation. He chose Pharoah to serve Him. He chose Esau to serve Him. He chose the Babylonians to serve Him. He chose the Syrians to serve Him. He chose Judas Iscariot to serve Him. None of those does He say He saves them.

Again, most wholeheartedly agree. God can and does use anyone or anything to accomplish His purposes. The way we often puts this is that He uses sin (and sinners) sinlessly. As Paul explicitly says, "for those who love God all things..." ~ all things ~ "...work together for good, for those who are called according to His purpose" (Romans 8:28).

Continued below...

 

[PinSeeker]

Continued from above:

The custom of using "knowing" as a euphemism for sexual intercourse...

...is a very... limited... understanding of this "knowing" in Genesis 4... and Romans 8:29. Generally speaking, it is a concrete act of the highest expression of love possible. And that's... a bit different... just a bit :) ...for human beings, as opposed to God. Isaiah 55:8-9, that God's thoughts and ways are much different and much higher than ours comes immediately to mind...

Aside: Not that you're actually doing this, but it's quite ridiculous to say or suggest that God by His Holy Spirit, had sexual intercourse with all those who are saved. Well, not just "quite ridiculous," but utterly ridiculous, and I think/hope you will agree with that. Yes, humanly speaking, anytime a husband knows his wife, that knowing can be expressed in the form of sexual intercourse, but I would submit that a husband knowing his wife can be expressed in many other ways, also.​

Now back to what I was saying: Again, as John says, "We love because He first loved us" (1 John 4:19). Even just before that, John says, "love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God" (1 John 4:7). We can even further expand on this, that we know God because He first knew us, and even that we serve God because God first ~ here going back to Ezekiel 36 ~ changed our heart of stone to a heart of flesh and thereby put His Spirit within us, and caused us to walk in His statutes and be careful to obey His rules; He ~ going back to Ephesians 2:4-10 ~ because of the great love with which he loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— 6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.. And likewise, we can do the same thing with Romans 8:28-30...

was not limited to "the human-to-human expression of the deepest intimacy possible"

Right; see directly above.

...has nothing whatsoever to do with salvation or condemnation; it has only to do with events in this physical life in this physical time.

Well, certainly not condemnation, but salvation, which is both an instantaneous result in this life (temporal) and the future result (eternal) in us and for us. Do you not believe in what we might call "the now and the not yet"? Do you not believe that we have been saved in the temporal and we are being saved, will be saved for and in the eternal (when Christ returns)? This principle of "now and not yet" recurs throughout Scripture and is put very succinctly by Paul in Philippians 1:6... "...He Who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ" ~ and the writer of Hebrews in Hebrews 12:2 ~ "Jesus is the Author and Perfecter of our faith."

So then your conclusion is if God has used one for honorable use, then He must save them.

No, that if He has made one for honorable use ~ for this purpose of His, for His honorable use ~ then He certainly uses them for that which He made ~ and called ~ them. In that way, it's like all His promises, which all "find their 'Yes' and 'Amen' in Christ Jesus (2 Corinthians 1:20). That which He intends to do He will certainly do... which is exactly what Paul says in 1 Thessalonians 5:24... "He Who calls you is faithful; He will surely do it."

No offense, but, well... Goodness gracious. :)

Sorry, but He used the whole of His chosen nation Israel for the honorable use of bringing the savior, Jesus Christ, into the world. Yet, He saved only the "remnant".

You seem to be contradicting here what you yourself just said, that "The all Israel who will be saved are the remnant OT saints and the NT saints, the "children of the promise" (Rom 9:8). I'm assuming you are a Gentile, just as I am. If so, do you not believe yourself to also be a vessel of mercy, made for honorable use? Because... you are... As Paul says, "...we are (God's) workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them" (Ephesians 2:10).

Continued below (again)...

 

[PinSeeker]

Continued from above (again):

Zwingliism at its worst.

LOL! Well, Ulrich Zwingli (born in Switzerland in 1484) was certainly a Reformer who believed and taught many of the same things as Martin Luther (born in Germany in 1483) ~ and, later, John Calvin (a second-generation Reformer, born in France in 1509) would ~ write and teach. Zwingli started a revolution in religious thought in Switzerland that paralleled the work of Martin Luther, even writing, “Before anyone in the area had ever heard of Luther, I began to preach the gospel of Christ in 1516... I started preaching the gospel before I had even heard Luther’s name... Luther, whose name I did not know for at least another two years, had definitely not instructed me. I followed holy Scripture alone." But there are important differences, mainly in how they understood water baptism and to whom it was to be administered. Zwingli's views on baptism were largely a response to Anabaptism, a movement which criticized the practice of infant baptism; he defended the baptism of children by describing it as a sign of a Christian's covenant with disciples and God just as God made a covenant with Abraham ~ so "believer's baptism," which is not correct; it is, as I said, an act of man in view of God's promise, and their trust in that promise... that it is true... to work through the believing parents of children to draw them unto Himself in His time. Luther and Zwingli also disagreed, quite strongly and often vehemently, regarding Communion, the Lord's Supper, and its effects and implications.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[GodsGrace]

Could you please explain who the "us" are, you keep repeating this "us" word but you never reveal who the "us" are. So I can't answer your question, because I don't know who you're talking about.

I know you listed 3 pages of scripture verses, the Demons know them much better than you but they tremble. Quoting scriptures is useless unless you apply them correctly. Yo have attempted to use those scriptures to support you false Arminian gospel. But every one of them refute your false gospel and expose you for abusing Gods Word.

Us and We is the royal use of those two words.
Sorry if you don't like it, but that's how I speak.

As to the 3 pages, are you going to reply to THREE PAGES of verses that state that God DEMANDS that we seek Him....something YOU state is impossible to do.

Either you are wrong,,,,or God is wrong.
Either it's impossible to SEEK HIM, as you state...
or it's possible to seek Him, as He states.

Who are you referring to when you say "then we should stop paying attention to the Bible". Instead f making nonsensical, sweeping statements like that. How about you tell us what Calvin taught, that's unbiblical, at least that way you argument has some credibility, rather than attacking the man, only because he exposed the false Arminian gospel.

Calvin's theology is wrong. The basic premise of Calvinism is wrong.
It's not supported by scripture and was UNKNOWN to the church until the reformers decided that the CC got everything wrong and so taught the opposite of what had been taught for 1,500 years.

Each and every acronym of T.U.L.I.P. is not biblical and is an affront to God's character, who loves His creation and wishes that all come to the saving knowledge of Him.
2 Peter 3:9
9The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

As you can see, God wishes that all come to REPENTANCE.
This is referring to the unsaved....
Not all of whom will believe in God.

As JESUS said in
John 3:18
18“He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Jesus never offered the gospel as a consumer product, like some snake oil salesman. He always asked do you believe in Me and if you believe in Me, both terms refer to the present tense, meaning they already believe in Him. It's not an offer of salvation, where the buyer has to go away and consider if he should accept the offer.

Why would Jesus ask anyone IF they believe in Him?

John 6:64
64“But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him.

If the gospel is not an offer of salvation, what is it?

Jesus offers life:
John 5:40
40and you are unwilling to come to Me, THAT YOU MAY HAVE LIFE.

Those three pages of verses, were all spoken in this same way. None of them support the idea that God saves people according to their choice to accept or reject the lord Jesus Christ as their Savior. Jesus already knew who Gods Children were, He said My Sheep hear my voice.

Pick some out and we'll discuss.

We have some good examples in the Bible to prove that salvation was never offered but instead it was given. Such as the thief on the cross was saved without any conditions,

Wrong. The thief on the cross ASKED JESUS to remember him when Jesus went to His Kingdom.
The thief wanted to be a part of Jesus' Kingdom, just as we must want to be.

while the rich young ruler was not saved, even though he wanted to be. Jesus didn't come to save everyone as Arminian theology teaches, He came to save all those the Father gave Him.

Jesus will save all those the Father gives to Him because HE is the Savior.
Correct.
But WHO will the Father give to the Son?

Scripture please.

John 17:9-10 I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours. 10 And all Mine are Yours, and Yours are Mine, and I am glorified in them.

Arminian's falsely believe that Jesus came to offer salvation to the whole world, but I can list 120 verses to show that He didn't. He only came to save those His Father gave Him, who are His elect.

I'm sure Arminius was a really nice guy,
but I like to go by what the bible states....
unless you....who goes by what John Calvin incorrectly taught.

Could we use the bible, if you don't mind?
After all, it's the bible that we as Christians read and obey.
It IS the word of God.

Those three pages of scripture you listed, were not an invitation to the whole world. They were all directed at Gods children only, because the rest are dead in sin and thewy can't respond to the gospel with faith because they hate God and they love sin and they are enslaved by Satan. If God doesn't set them free, they will remain lost forever.

If the dead in sin cannot respond
WHY does the OT and the NT exhort us to SEEK GOD?

Remember that YOU were saved while YOU were still in sin:

Romans 5:8-9
8But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
9Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him.
10For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

Read the above carefully....
1. God loved us WHILE WE WERE STILL SINNERS.
2. We are saved from the wrath of God THROUGH JESUS ---- our faith in Him. Ephesians 2:8-9
3. WHILE WE WERE ENEMIES OF GOD we were reconciled through the death of His Son.

It's wise to believe the Word of God.

 

[GodsGrace]

None of that is true, you have perverted Gods Word in order to push a false narrative. This is extremely dangerous, I would urge you to repent of this. I will pray that God opens your eyes to see the truth.

God said, they have all turned aside, but you make God a liar by removing the word 'all" and inserting "wicked" God warned that He would cast those who add or remove from His Word, into the lake of fire.

You falsely claim that those who are dead in sin, can somehow wake up from the dead and use their faith to force God to save them. This is pure Demonic Doctrine.

Man turned aside when he sinned, God said that Adam would die on the day he sinned. But you say he somehow made himself alive again, and used his faith to save himself. The entire foundation of your theology, is based on false doctrine. There's no point in dumping 3 pages of scriptures and not explain how any of them support your Arminian theology

Once again, in my post just above this one, I've shown you how incorrect you are in your belief system.

The best you can do is rant insead of givingt scripture that supports your POV.
This might just mean that there isn't any.

 

[JBO]

And what you seem to be doing is drawing some contrast in what Paul is saying in verse 28 and 29 that is not really a contrast at all; "those whom He foreknew" of Romans 8:29 and 8:30 is a further clarification of "those who love God" and "those called according to His purpose" specified in Romans 8:28. God's foreknowing (v.29) is His fore-loving and even fore-choosing a certain group of people individually and collectively and His then inevitable calling of them.

You are doing what Calvinists always do. They have to redefine the meaning of words, otherwise, their theology, particularly their soteriology, makes no sense; that is the case with the whole concept of TULIP. Foreknowledge is not causative. Foreknowing and predestining are two entirely different functions. Foreknowing is not fore-loving or definitely not fore-choosing.

 

[PinSeeker]

Either you are wrong,,,,or God is wrong.

Well, rather, for those of us that believe anything opposite each other about anything taught in God's Word, that means one of two things, that either a) one is wrong and one is right, or b) both are wrong. These are the only possibilities. The only impossibilties are that a) both are right and b) God is wrong. :)

Either it's impossible to SEEK HIM, as you state... or it's possible to seek Him, as He states.

No, it depends on the sense in which you define what is possible and impossible. In other words, something can be impossible in one sense but very possible in another sense. To deny this is... case in point... certainly possible, but very much impossible at the same time, if the former is meant in one sense and the latter is meant in a different sense.

Calvin's theology is wrong. The basic premise of Calvinism is wrong. It's not supported by scripture...

Opinions are like noses... :)

...and was UNKNOWN to the church until the reformers decided that the CC got everything wrong and so taught the opposite of what had been taught for 1,500 years.

Isn't it strange, then, that John Calvin himself likened very intimately his understandings of Scripture to those of Augustine, even writing, "Augustine is so much at one with me that, if I wished to write a confession of my faith, it would abundantly satisfy me to quote wholesale from his writings." And in the Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin quotes Augustine himself in one out of every four pages of that two-volume work. So John Calvin very much deemed himself an Augustinian.

Each and every acronym of T.U.L.I.P. is not biblical and is an affront to God's character...

So goes the Arminian narrative, but the only reason "T.U.L.I.P." exists is that they are John Calvin's responses to Jacobus Arminius's five "objections," which were themselves antithetical to Scripture, which was affirmed at the Synod of Dordt in the early 1600s.

, who loves His creation and wishes that all come to the saving knowledge of Him.
2 Peter 3:9
9The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

But no one ~ no one ~ will... unless and until God, by His Spirit, draws Him. Jesus says, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him" (John 6:44).

As you can see, God wishes that all come to REPENTANCE.

Right, but He doesn't lead everyone to it. Paul says to the Roman Christians that God's kindness leads them to repentance (Romans 2:4).

Why would Jesus ask anyone IF they believe in Him?

John 6:64
64“But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him.

But why did they not believe, GodsGrace? Well:

• Remember John 8, where Jesus said, “You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires... Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God.” So, they are not "not of God" because they do not hear, but rather they do not hear because they are "not of God."
• And remember John 10, where, in being implored by the Jews at the Feast of Dedication, "If you are the Christ, tell us plainly," He replied, "I told you, and you do not believe... but you do not believe because you are not among my sheep. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, Who has given them to Me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand." Again, they are not "not among Jesus's sheep" because they do not believe, but rather they do not believe ~ as Jesus says ~ because they are not among His sheep.

The thief on the cross ASKED JESUS to remember him when Jesus went to His Kingdom.

What the thief on the right said was not in the interrogative sense. He believed in Jesus, saying, “Jesus, remember me when..." ~ when; there was no uncertainty ~ "...You come into your kingdom.” And (Jesus) said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in paradise.” Now, why did He believe in Jesus? Well certainly he made a very conscious decision to do so, but ~ in view of John 8 and John 10 above, because he was of God, and no longer of the devil.

The thief wanted to be a part of Jesus' Kingdom...

...because God was at work in him; see Philippians 2:13 "" and Hebrews 12:2 ""...

...just as we must want to be.

...yes, and do, because we have been drawn by God (see John 8 and 10 again).

But WHO will the Father give to the Son?

Those to whom He gives mercy and compassion, first of all, but then, yes, those who will believe. Both are true, and the latter, which comes from us, is the manifestation of the former in us.

Scripture please.

See above. :)

I'm sure Arminius was a really nice guy, but I like to go by what the bible states....

Yeah, whether you know who Arminius was or not is irrelevant. You understand Scripture in the same way as he erroneously did.

Could we use the bible, if you don't mind?

Well I most certainly am, thus my direct quotes of Scripture ~ not Calvin or any other man ~ above... :)

After all, it's the bible that we as Christians read and obey. It IS the word of God.

Absolutely. :)

If the dead in sin cannot respond WHY does the OT and the NT exhort us to SEEK GOD?

Ah, good question! The answer is because Scripture acknowledges that all ~ all ~ are dead in sin initially, but there are some whom God will have mercy on and give His salvific grace to. Scripture also makes no presumption of who will or will not be recipients of God's grace ~ it merely labels this group God's elect ~ and therefore makes this general call. God can give this grace to all, but does not. The call of the Gospel is general, but only those whom the Lord calls ~ draws to Himself ~ will call upon the name of the Lord. Again, Joel 2:32...

"...it shall come to pass that everyone who calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved. For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those who escape, as the LORD has said, and among the survivors shall be those whom the LORD calls."​

Or calling upon the name of the Lord and resulting salvation is the result of His call, which very clearly is issued to... some number less than the whole of humanity. And back again to Romans 9:16 concerning God's elect "...it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, Who has mercy."

It's wise to believe the Word of God.

Absolutely. Much agreed. It's not about John Calvin or any other mere man.

Grace and peace to you.

 

[GodsGrace]

Well, rather, for those of us that believe anything opposite each other about anything taught in God's Word, that means one of two things, that either a) one is wrong and one is right, or b) both are wrong. These are the only possibilities. The only impossibilties are that a) both are right and b) God is wrong. :)


No, it depends on the sense in which you define what is possible and impossible. In other words, something can be impossible in one sense but very possible in another sense. To deny this is... case in point... certainly possible, but very much impossible at the same time, if the former is meant in one sense and the latter is meant in a different sense.


Opinions are like noses... :)


Isn't it strange, then, that John Calvin himself likened very intimately his understandings of Scripture to those of Augustine, even writing, "Augustine is so much at one with me that, if I wished to write a confession of my faith, it would abundantly satisfy me to quote wholesale from his writings." And in the Institutes of the Christian Religion, John Calvin quotes Augustine himself in one out of every four pages of that two-volume work. So John Calvin very much deemed himself an Augustinian.


So goes the Arminian narrative, but the only reason "T.U.L.I.P." exists is that they are John Calvin's responses to Jacobus Arminius's five "objections," which were themselves antithetical to Scripture, which was affirmed at the Synod of Dordt in the early 1600s.




But no one ~ no one ~ will... unless and until God, by His Spirit, draws Him. Jesus says, "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him" (John 6:44).


Right, but He doesn't lead everyone to it. Paul says to the Roman Christians that God's kindness leads them to repentance (Romans 2:4).


But why did they not believe, GodsGrace? Well:

• Remember John 8, where Jesus said, “You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires... Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God.” So, they are not "not of God" because they do not hear, but rather they do not hear because they are "not of God."
• And remember John 10, where, in being implored by the Jews at the Feast of Dedication, "If you are the Christ, tell us plainly," He replied, "I told you, and you do not believe... but you do not believe because you are not among my sheep. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of My hand. My Father, Who has given them to Me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand." Again, they are not "not among Jesus's sheep" because they do not believe, but rather they do not believe ~ as Jesus says ~ because they are not among His sheep.

What the thief on the right said was not in the interrogative sense. He believed in Jesus, saying, “Jesus, remember me when..." ~ when; there was no uncertainty ~ "...You come into your kingdom.” And (Jesus) said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in paradise.” Now, why did He believe in Jesus? Well certainly he made a very conscious decision to do so, but ~ in view of John 8 and John 10 above, because he was of God, and no longer of the devil.


...because God was at work in him; see Philippians 2:13 "" and Hebrews 12:2 ""...


...yes, and do, because we have been drawn by God (see John 8 and 10 again).


Those to whom He gives mercy and compassion, first of all, but then, yes, those who will believe. Both are true, and the latter, which comes from us, is the manifestation of the former in us.

See above. :)


Yeah, whether you know who Arminius was or not is irrelevant. You understand Scripture in the same way as he erroneously did.


Well I most certainly am, thus my direct quotes of Scripture ~ not Calvin or any other man ~ above... :)


Absolutely. :)


Ah, good question! The answer is because Scripture acknowledges that all ~ all ~ are dead in sin initially, but there are some whom God will have mercy on and give His salvific grace to. Scripture also makes no presumption of who will or will not be recipients of God's grace ~ it merely labels this group God's elect ~ and therefore makes this general call. God can give this grace to all, but does not. The call of the Gospel is general, but only those whom the Lord calls ~ draws to Himself ~ will call upon the name of the Lord. Again, Joel 2:32...

"...it shall come to pass that everyone who calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved. For in Mount Zion and in Jerusalem there shall be those who escape, as the LORD has said, and among the survivors shall be those whom the LORD calls."​

Or calling upon the name of the Lord and resulting salvation is the result of His call, which very clearly is issued to... some number less than the whole of humanity. And back again to Romans 9:16 concerning God's elect "...it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, Who has mercy."


Absolutely. Much agreed. It's not about John Calvin or any other mere man.

Grace and peace to you.

Please post some scripture that states that God chooses who will be saved and who will be lost.

Your entire post is referring to
TOTAL DEPRAVITY
UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION
IRRISISTIBLE GRACE


Which is why it's difficult to even discuss the incorrect doctrines of Calvinism because one runs into the other.
And how does it all start?

FREE WILL.

Calvinists do not believe in free will.

So state some scripture to support your idea that man does not need to seek God, as the bible plainly teaches us to do.
State some scripture to support your idea that man is UNABLE to respond to God's call. We all know man is born depraved.
State some scripture to support your idea that God chooses who will be saved and who will be lost.

Anything else you post will be your own opinion and opinions are really not worth our time.

 

[PinSeeker]

You are doing what Calvinists always do.

If they're "good Calvinists," yes. :)

They have to redefine the meaning of words...

They (I) redefine absolutely nothing. They (I) may not define things the way you define those things, but that's neither here nor there, really; they are what they are. See above.

...their theology, particularly their soteriology, makes no sense...

That really can't be said; the only thing that can really be said is that it doesn't make the kind of sense... others... think it should (or should not).

Foreknowledge is not causative.

That would be true of mere cognitive knowing beforehand, buuuuut.... :)

Ah, so ~ and this is just a human analogy ~ Adam's knowing of Eve (which was not a mere cognitive "knowing," as in, "Oh, hey, I know who you are...!" :)) was not causative of... did not result in... Eve's conception of and giving birth to Seth...? Weeeeeellllllll.... :)

So if you understand God's foreknowledge correctly, what you say here is not true at all. And back to a Godly context... the Father knows Christ and Christ knows the Father, so He is self-causing... "self-existent"... from everlasting to everlasting... and (from John 10:27), Jesus says, "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me." Our following and serving Him is the direct result of His knowing us... Flipping back a few pages, in Matthew 7:23, in the picture Jesus gives us of the final Judgment, to those who are not saved He will declare to them, "I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness." We get an even fuller picture of this judgment in Matthew 25, when He says to them (will say, of course), "I was hungry and you gave Me no food, I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink, I was a stranger and you did not welcome Me, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me..." And this is because He never knew them, and therefore the lack of causation to ~ Ezekiel 36:27 ~ "walk in (His) statutes and be careful to obey (His) rules."

Foreknowing and predestining are two entirely different functions.

I agree. Paul says that "those whom He foreknew He also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son...", right? So yes, they are different things, but the one (God's predestination to be conformed to the image of Christ) always ~ always, inevitably ~ follows the other (God's foreknowing).

Foreknowing is not fore-loving or definitely not fore-choosing.

Like I say, your opinion is your own, and you are absolutely entitled to it.

Again... well, I was about to say I don't understand, but I do understand... why people get so angry when discussing these things. It's really in the same vein as Paul's rhetorical question in Romans 9:21... "Why have you made me like this?" Which is implicitly to say, "What do you mean I didn't make myself? Of course I made myself!" So really, it's not even about the will, it's about autonomy. There are no "free agents" but God. :)

Grace and peace to you.

 

[JBO]

Ah, so ~ and this is just a human analogy ~ Adam's knowing of Eve (which was not a mere cognitive "knowing," as in, "Oh, hey, I know who you are...!" :)) was not causative of... did not result in... Eve's conception of and giving birth to Seth...? Weeeeeellllllll.... :)

You just did it again.

 

[PinSeeker]

Please post some scripture that states that God chooses who will be saved and who will be lost.

You mean as if I haven't? :) And... yet again... there is no Scripture saying that He "chooses who will be lost."

Your entire post is referring to
TOTAL DEPRAVITY
UNCONDITIONAL ELECTION
IRRESISTIBLE GRACE


Which is why it's difficult to even discuss the incorrect doctrines of Calvinism because one runs into the other.

AH! Exactly what I have said... Each one directly follows from the one(s) previous. And again, they are in that order only because Arminius's objections were in that order. Yes, if one understands the carnal nature of man rightly ~ total depravity with regard to godliness, absolute slavery to sin ~ he must then say that God's election has to be unconditional, because no condition God sets could possibly be met; Jesus said, "What is impossible with man is possible with God..." And if we remain in this initial state, God's grace must be irresistible because otherwise we would always resist it and never obtain it, thus no one would be saved.

Limited atonement we should all agree on, because:

• this limitation is not in the sense that "only some are eligible," or that it is "only sufficient to save some,"
• but rather limited in the sense that it is only effective for some.

And we (the saints of God, believers) persevere to the end because we are kept in the power of God. As Peter says, "(God) has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time" (1 Peter 1;3-5).

And how does it all start? FREE WILL.

Nope. :)

• "...it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, Who has mercy..." (Romans 9:16)
• "But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ ~ by grace you have been saved... by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God..." (Ephesians 2... again...).
• "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! According to His great mercy, He has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you, who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time" (1 Peter 1... again...).

Calvinists do not believe in free will.

Yes, we most certainly do, but just that it does not drive God's free will. :) Or somehow dictate to God who should be the recipients of His mercy. :) It's about what depends on what, GodsGrace (wow.... that moniker of yours, for several reasons...), not whether anything, even our free will, is or is not.

So state some scripture to support your idea that man does not need to seek God, as the bible plainly teaches us to do.

Ah, you're right about that, but... :) Why does anyone seek after God? Well, if one is to understand the natural state of man, he or she quickly realizes that he or she will not... :) Cannot, but in the sense that he or she will never ~ unless... :) ~ seek God, because his her her full inclination ~ his or her free will ~ will continue to be to exchange the truth for a lie, to worship creation rather than the Creator (referring here to Romans 1).

State some scripture to support your idea that man is UNABLE to respond to God's call. We all know man is born depraved.

So interesting! So do you really believe that man is born depraved? Prior to that, though, my question to you would be, in what sense to you mean "unable"? And back to the depraved thing, and assuming you know at least some of the Scriptures that talk about this depravity, are you not answering your own... challenge?

State some scripture to support your idea that God chooses who will be saved and who will be lost.

Hm. Well, to repeat from above, because you did here, you mean as if I haven't? :) And... yet again... there is no Scripture saying that He "chooses who will be lost."

So, "chooses who will be saved"... Well here's but one among many...

"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love He predestined us for adoption to Himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of His will..."​

Anything else you post will be your own opinion and opinions are really not worth our time.

Yeah you can certainly make your own decisions about that... :)

Grace and peace to you, GodsGrace. Especially grace... :)

 

[PinSeeker]

You just did it again.

Yes, but not what you say I did... :) I mean, not to compare myself to Jesus at all, but He tells quite a few parables, many of which are what we call Kingdom parables, saying, "The Kingdom of God is like..."... and then following that with some earthly metaphor. Right? Well, we can do that, too...

Grace and peace to you.

 

[JLB]

To whom are His commandments not, burdensome???

Born again Christians.


Do you struggle with loving people?

Is committing adultery with your neighbor's wife, loving or hating your neighbor?




JLB

 

[Christian Soldier]

Us and We is the royal use of those two words.
Sorry if you don't like it, but that's how I speak.

As to the 3 pages, are you going to reply to THREE PAGES of verses that state that God DEMANDS that we seek Him....something YOU state is impossible to do.

Either you are wrong,,,,or God is wrong.
Either it's impossible to SEEK HIM, as you state...
or it's possible to seek Him, as He states.




Calvin's theology is wrong. The basic premise of Calvinism is wrong.
It's not supported by scripture and was UNKNOWN to the church until the reformers decided that the CC got everything wrong and so taught the opposite of what had been taught for 1,500 years.

Each and every acronym of T.U.L.I.P. is not biblical and is an affront to God's character, who loves His creation and wishes that all come to the saving knowledge of Him.
2 Peter 3:9
9The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

As you can see, God wishes that all come to REPENTANCE.
This is referring to the unsaved....
Not all of whom will believe in God.

As JESUS said in
John 3:18
18“He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.




Why would Jesus ask anyone IF they believe in Him?

John 6:64
64“But there are some of you who do not believe.” For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who it was that would betray Him.

If the gospel is not an offer of salvation, what is it?

Jesus offers life:
John 5:40
40and you are unwilling to come to Me, THAT YOU MAY HAVE LIFE.




Pick some out and we'll discuss.



Wrong. The thief on the cross ASKED JESUS to remember him when Jesus went to His Kingdom.
The thief wanted to be a part of Jesus' Kingdom, just as we must want to be.



Jesus will save all those the Father gives to Him because HE is the Savior.
Correct.
But WHO will the Father give to the Son?

Scripture please.



I'm sure Arminius was a really nice guy,
but I like to go by what the bible states....
unless you....who goes by what John Calvin incorrectly taught.

Could we use the bible, if you don't mind?
After all, it's the bible that we as Christians read and obey.
It IS the word of God.


If the dead in sin cannot respond
WHY does the OT and the NT exhort us to SEEK GOD?

Remember that YOU were saved while YOU were still in sin:

Romans 5:8-9
8But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
9Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him.
10For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

Read the above carefully....
1. God loved us WHILE WE WERE STILL SINNERS.
2. We are saved from the wrath of God THROUGH JESUS ---- our faith in Him. Ephesians 2:8-9
3. WHILE WE WERE ENEMIES OF GOD we were reconciled through the death of His Son.

It's wise to believe the Word of God.

As I said last time we came to this brick wall, I can't respond while you keep using these mysterious "US" and "WE" I have no idea who you apply those words to but I suspect it's people like Judas Iscariot and Adolf Hitler.

So with that said, I can't respond to any of the following scriptures you cited for the same reason. I don't believe that Judas was saved, that's a blatant lie on your part.

The problem here is your a devout Arminian and I hold to reformed theology so our interpretation of the Bible is radically different and inconsolable. There's no point in listing 3 pages of scripture if we have opposing views on their meaning.

I'll give you a bunch of verses in the following reply to expose you false theology, and I know you will twist their meaning to support you false doctrine.,