Saved Or Predestined ???

[Tong2020]

Only if you believe in individual election.

My belief that Israel's hardening is absolute is based on the truth about what it means when one is hardened and blinded by God as expressed in the following scriptures:

John 12:37 But although He had done so many signs before them, they did not believe in Him, 38 that the word of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spoke:

“Lord, who has believed our report?
And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?”

39 Therefore they could not believe, because Isaiah said again:
40 “He has blinded their eyes and hardened their hearts,
Lest they should see with their eyes,
Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn,
So that I should heal them.”

If you don't believe that and believe otherwise, that's up to you. But until you can prove those scriptures to be lies, I don't have any reason to not believe God's words there.

My belief that Israel's hardening is temporary is based on the truth found in Romans 11:25, as follows:

Romans 11:25 For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.

If you don't believe that either and believe otherwise, that's up to you. But until you can prove those scriptures to be lies, I don't have any reason to not believe God's words there.

Otherwise, why was Jesus preaching to them?

Why would the preaching of Jesus to them be an issue? Such things necessarily should happen and come to pass, as they are which gives context to what comes in the future. Jesus' preaching to them and their continued rejection of it, laid out the basis of God's hardening them and paved the way for God in bringing the salvation to the Gentiles, which is also in fulfillment of the respective prophecies concerning such.

What about the Jews who believed after Pentecost? Remember, Paul said those hardened were not beyond being saved, so there goes your whole claim here out the window. If they could at any point in time go from being hardened to being saved, individual election is proven to be false.

What is your issue with those who believed after the pentecost? Those who believed obviously and logically are not among the hardened Israel, for if they were, they would not have believed because they are not able.

You said "Remember, Paul said those hardened were not beyond being saved, so there goes your whole claim here out the window." No sir. I don't see Paul saying that those hardened by God were not beyond being saved as to mean that they are still able to believe, despite having been hardened and blinded by God. That is only a product of your erroneous take of the writings of Paul, which clearly goes against the scriptures in John 12:37-40 which unequivocally says that those hardened and blinded by God could not, that is, are not able to, believe. So until you can prove John 12:37-40 to be false, your belief there stands to be rendered false.

You said "If they could at any point in time go from being hardened to being saved, individual election is proven to be false." But those hardened and blinded by God, according to John 12:37-40 could not, that is, are not able to, believe. So until you can prove John 12:37-40 to be false, your argument there stands to be refuted.

Tong
R0600

 

[Renniks]

See, I don't know for sure on that verse, but I have opinions. If the theologians can't agree on it, it's obviously a difficult one to interpret.
But we do know: God always kept for Himself a faithful remnant—those who trusted in Him and who would not bow the knee to Baal (1 Kings 19:18).
This shows us that the remnant are not randomly individually chosen, but chosen for their faith.
This remnant, this true Israel, included men such as David, Joash, Isaiah, and Daniel, as well as women such as Sarah, Deborah, and Hannah. So, even in the Old Testament, not all were Israel who were descended from Israel (Rom. 9:6).
During Jesus’ ministry, true Israel was most visible in those Jewish disciples who believed that Jesus was the Messiah. Those who rejected Jesus were not true Israel, regardless of their race. This included many of the scribes and Pharisees.
True Israel became defined by union with the true Israelite—Jesus Christ (Gal. 3:16, 29).
The Holy Spirit was poured out on the true Israel, and the same men and women who were part of this true Israel were now the true new covenant church. Soon after, Gentiles began to become a part of this small group.
In Romans 1–8, Paul denied that Jews were guaranteed salvation on the basis of their distinctive privileges as Jews. Faith was the key, not ethnicity or any kind of works.
And here we are in verse 25: “And in this way all Israel will be saved.” The biggest debate here is the meaning of “all Israel."
Well, we know who the remnant are, will all ethnic Israel someday be saved? If you think that then you're obviously seeing this as a future prophecy. Maybe it is or maybe Paul is just hoping or maybe he's saying all the remnant, including us are really Israel. I'm not sure why it matters for this discussion. Whosever is saved, is saved through faith, not merely chosen for salvation.

I take notice that it seems with this verse you are open and even acknowledge that "all" does not mean each and every individual Jew.

That's not the issue under discussion. The issue is whether the fullness of the Gentiles has already come in or not yet, or if all Israel had already been saved. For this will settle the matter of the hardening of "the rest" of Israel, whether it had already ended or it still remains. But as you said, you don't know. And so, it is for you, which leaves you somewhat at a lost regarding that matter.

I take knowledge of the mystery which Paul had just revealed therein, that blindness in part has happened to Israel. What is the meaning of this blindness in part? It means that Israel, as a people, as a whole, are blinded to the truth that Jesus Christ as the promised Messiah spoken and prophesied about in the Holy Scriptures, and so they reject the gospel. Why has this happened? According to Paul, taking reference in the OT scriptures, it is because God has given Israel a spirit of stupor, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear (v.8). It is in part, in the sense that God had reserved for Himself, just as He had in past generations of Israel (v.4), a remnant according to the election of grace (v.5), whom He did not harden or blinded (v.7), and whom He saved. Paul said that this hardening and blinding of Israel shall be until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in (v.25). Has this happened yet? Paul gave us a sign that we may know when such had taken place. He said in verse 26, that when that happens, all Israel will be saved. Now, I don't believe that such had already happened simply because, to this very day, it cannot be said that Israel, as a people, as a whole, are saved, that is, believes the gospel of Jesus Christ.

As such then, Israel, to this day, remains in the state of blindness, saved a few, a remnant according to the election of grace.

Tong
R0596

 

[Tong2020]

Yes, it's mans' responsibility, but not in your scheme where God does everything. Essentially dead or literally dead? Because essentially dead means we can respond to the live giver and be brought back to life. Literally dead means we are just corpses and can not be saved. Now, I know some Calvinist is going to bring up Lazarus., and that's fine for an analogy, but not for the complete reality of how salvation works. God doesn't drag our bones in against our will. His Spirit speaks to us and we either respond or not.

Ephesians 6:17
And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God,

Acts 7:51
“You stiff-necked people, uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit. As your fathers did, so do you.

See the contrast? We have to take action in order to be saved or we can take the opposite action of resistance and stay in our sin.
We all know we are capable of resisting because we have all done it.

That's right, it's man's responsibility. And since it's man's responsibility, it is them who make the choice and not God. When God works in one's mind and heart, so that it results to the man deciding to believe, it is not God who make the choice but them.

You asked "Essentially dead or literally dead?". If you read what I said, you would not ask that question. For I clearly said, "essentially dead".

You said "...essentially dead means we can respond to the live giver and be brought back to life." No sir. Now, when I say "essentially dead", what I mean is that, even while one who sinned is not yet six feet under the ground, he is separated from God. And when one is separated from God, as when the unsaved will be cast in Hell, he has no life, and so is dead, not physically perhaps, but "spiritually". Now, we know that being dead is a state of being without life, that is, without any power or ability. So that, "spiritually dead" is a state of being unable to respond in the spirit, particularly pertaining to the things of the Spirit (of God).

Acts 17:51 pertains to Israel, a people chosen by God. Eph. 6:17 applies to the Christian, that is, one who knows God and is saved. In either case, what is said in both, does not apply to all men.

Tong
R0602

 

[Renniks]

The context tells us that the grace of God that brings salvation, which Paul says has appeared to all men, has everything to do with Jesus Christ.

Of course the grace of of God brings salvation, but not all accept his grace, although it is freely offered to all, as the Titus verse says. Willing that none should perish means just that, and trying to limit it to Paul's audience is absurd. You would have to suppose that only the ones who heard or read Paul's words could be saved.

 

[Renniks]

And why would He not? In answer to your question, here's a scriptures that gives a direct answer.

John 16:9 of sin, because they do not believe in Me;

God, through the Holy Spirit, will convict the world of sin, because the world do not believe in Him.

How does this answer the question? Why would he convict people who could not be saved? That's like throwing pearls before swine. God convicts all because all are offered salvation.

 

[Renniks]

And who do you say can humble themselves to God, if not them who knows God

This makes no sense. Did the Ninevites know God? Yet once they heard about him they humbled themselves.
You're denying we can do what scripture says we can:
"whoever exalts himself shall be humbled; and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted."

"The reward of humility and the fear of the Lord
Are riches, honor and life."

"Whoever then humbles himself as this child, he is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven."

 

[Tong2020]

If we can not respond to the Spirit, we could never be saved in the first place.

That's right. And that is the very reason why we need a Savior, no less than God.

But we can.

Yes we can be saved, but not by ourselves.

In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit,

Romans 10:13
For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

Notice the action verbs. This calling isn't only in one direction. Deep calls to deep. Every man is born with a spirit capable of responding to the Holy Spirit.

"Spirit and the Bride say, “Come.” And let the one who hears say, “Come.” And let the one who is thirsty come; let the one who desires take the water of life without price."

"Draw near to God, and he will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded."

Let's study the phrase "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord".

Romans 10:14 How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?

Those who calls on the name of the Lord could only be those who have believed in the Lord. Therefore, that statement does not refer to each and every man, but only to those who have believed in the Lord.

The scriptures which you quoted, "Draw near to God, and he will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded." is part of the letter that James wrote addressed, not to all men, but to the twelve tribes of Israel, who are Christians. Apparently, he is, as a matter of rebuke and admonition, saying that part to the erring Jewish Christians.

Tong
R0602

 

[Tong2020]

Not even close. But without free will, the entire Bible turns into nonsense. If Adam was not really given a choice, what was he punished for? If the people of Noah's time had no other choice but debauchery, why were they drowned ?
And on and on it goes. Freedom is necessary for reward and punishment to be just.

And so, as I said, that all boils down to saying that everything concerning man is really about his free will. Here, even the Bible's being sensible rest on man having a free will.

You asked "If Adam was not really given a choice, what was he punished for? If the people of Noah's time had no other choice but debauchery, why were they drowned ?" No one is saying that man have no will or was not given a will. That is not our issue and so is apparently a strawman issue.

You said "Freedom is necessary for reward and punishment to be just." That sounds noble. But salvation is not about rewards and punishment.

Tong
R0603

 

[Tong2020]

How amusing that those who believe in individual election, always consider themselves one of the "everyone"!

It's okay to believe the faceless majority is irresistibly damned, but not that they probably are too.

You have no refutation in what I posted. That's it then.

Tong
R0604

 

[Tong2020]

I dosdo not see this as a reference to the individual election of seven thousand men, but to God's preserving those who are faithful to him. And this is what we found when we look at Arminian commentators like Adam Clarke.
"These [seven thousand] had continued faithful to God; but, because of Jezebel's persecution, they were obliged to conceal their attachment to the true religion; and God, in his providence, preserved them from her sanguinary rage. "
Another commentary by Cottrell:
"Certainly this is an act of God regarding these men, but God's act is conditioned on the fact that they "have not bowed the knee to Baal." God is telling Elijah, "There are more than just you who have remained faithful. Indeed, I have identified and singled out from the great majority of Israelites a group of seven thousand true worshipers. I have separated them from the rest; in my sight they are a different group, a remnant. These are the ones I have kept in my saving grace and in close fellowship with myself."

The "election" of these seven thousand is conditioned on their faithfulness – those won by grace are thereby "elected," as I explained before.

In the days of Elijah, God had reserved for Himself a remnant of 7000 men. Why or for what?

At least you see that as God's preserving those who are faithful to him. What is this preservation about? How does God preserve them?

Tong
R0605

 

[Tong2020]

Surely you can see that if someone is pre chosen he can not be damned, whether he ever hears the gospel or not.

While at the end of the day, he will be saved, it is not without God working out convicting, convincing and converting him. It is not without hearing the gospel and believing in the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. For God saves through faith. And as scriptures said, there is no salvation except by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth.

Tong
R0606

 

[Renniks]

What do you mean by "incapable of being saved"?

Tong
R0599

I mean not chosen for salvation.

 

[Renniks]

At least you see that as God's preserving those who are faithful to him. What is this preservation about? How does God preserve them?

It's God blessing those who are faithful to him. For the purpose of this discussion, what is important is that the others who were hardened are still capable of being saved. The remnant are the currently elect, but the currently hardened can join the elect by trusting in Jesus as Messiah.

 

[Renniks]

Those who calls on the name of the Lord could only be those who have believed in the Lord. Therefore, that statement does not refer to each and every man, but only to those who have believed in the Lord.

This just confirms what I already said. Belief first then salvation. You don't get regenerated to belief. You believe and thiare regenerated.

 

[Renniks]

And so, as I said, that all boils down to saying that everything concerning man is really about his free will. Here, even the Bible's being sensible rest on man having a free will.

You asked "If Adam was not really given a choice, what was he punished for? If the people of Noah's time had no other choice but debauchery, why were they drowned ?" No one is saying that man have no will or was not given a will. That is not our issue and so is apparently a strawman issue.

You said "Freedom is necessary for reward and punishment to be just." That sounds noble. But salvation is not about rewards and punishment.

Tong
R0603

You have no answer here. Yes, you do claim man has no will of his own in regards to salvation, but God must force salvation. It's the spiritual rape version of salvation, not found in scripture.

 

[Renniks]

You have no refutation in what I posted. That's it then.

Tong
R0604

Do you believe you were chosen and others were not? Why? Perhaps you only think you are chosen if that's the case.

 

[JunChosen]

I do. It's simple. God seeks for whoever will respond. He offers salvation to all. We are not capable of saving ourselves, that is correct, but we certainly have to be able to respond, or all the commands to obey or follow are gibberish. Remember Cornelius? He was actively seeking God although he did not yet have access to the gospel. Actually the majority of people in the world, are seeking for truth. If this weren't so, they would all be atheists.

It is not as simple as you think seeing you demonstrate yourself as a person who does not understand and not know how to read scripture.

I suggest you re-read Acts 10 with a friend to get context about Cornelius. AND, please try to understand what each word means, otherwise I don't see how you can have dialogue with other issues with other people.

 

[Renniks]

It is not as simple as you think seeing you demonstrate yourself as a person who does not understand and not know how to read scripture.

I suggest you re-read Acts 10 with a friend to get context about Cornelius. AND, please try to understand what each word means, otherwise I don't see how you can have dialogue with other issues with other people.

Oh, my! The " you just don't understand my theology." Put down. Lol, I'm pretty sure I've studied Calvinism more than most Calvinists. And the more I looked into it, the more I found that contradicts scripture.

 

[JunChosen]

Oh, my! The " you just don't understand my theology." Put down. Lol, I'm pretty sure I've studied Calvinism more than most Calvinists. And the more I looked into it, the more I found that contradicts scripture.

We ere NOT talking about Calvin rather about Cornelius. I'm sorry but you just displayed how you are not capable to really have dialogue with anyone.

I thought I was very nice to ask you to have a friend read Acts 10 apparently because you had no clue at all who Cornelius is. And now you turn around by throwing Calvin at me to which he had nothing to do with this post.

You seem to think everything is so simple. Yes, ONLY if you know what you are speaking about but not in this forum or to any other subject you choose.

 

[Tong2020]

I mean not chosen for salvation.

So, let me then take that in your question and so it goes as: If they were not chosen for salvation, why would God have to harden them against him?

What is clear is that, when God does something, even the hardening of people, such as the case of Pharaoh, He does it with purpose. So, with regards your question, it is in this sense that God hardens them. Paul tells us the purpose of God behind the hardening of Israel. John tells us what it means when one is hardened by God.

In comment to your question, I would say that, it is reasonable to think and say, that they (those of Israel who were not among the chosen remnant) were not chosen for salvation, at least if they were in such hardened state until the end of their earthly life, where while alive, they ultimately were disabled to see, hear, and so believe, the gospel of Jesus Christ, the gospel of salvation.

In further comment regarding your question, I'd like to point out that God hardens and blinds them, that is, by giving them a spirit of stupor, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear. And we must be careful NOT to mistake that such act of God to be an act that makes people be against him. That would be a wrong understanding of God's hardening of people, and altogether a wrong understanding of God, for such goes against God's nature. God's hardening is not like that. It is really no different from what we can read in Romans 1 about what God did to people then, that is, when He gave them up to uncleanness, gave them up to vile passions, and gave them over to a debased mind. God did not, by those acts, caused people to be against Him. Rather, by such act, God ultimately shuts them off and effectively kept them away from Himself. So I say that God did not, when He hardens people, cause them to be against Him. Go figure!

Tong
R0607