Did Jesus Die on The Cross for The Just/Elect/Saved Whose Names Are Written in The Book of Life OR
- Thread starter MerSee
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I marvel at how similar our experiences of God have been, although I cannot say I was made a new person having profound divine interventions... until after I finally laid down my opposition to God and turned my will and my life over to Him. That He drew me, called me, pursued me, I would not quibble with. Some would say I was already saved just because I experienced God, even though I was devoid of faith at the time. I believe faith is a requirement for salvation...
No it does not make any logical sense whatsoever. How could God be just if he was the author of sin and condemned anyone for any sin he "made them commit"? Esau's own sin nature, which he was powerless to overcome, ensured that he would sin -- just like all mankind's sin nature would have guaranteed their condemnation, if it weren't for the sovereign, effectual, intervening grace of God. Esau is a great example of Jesus' teaching in Mat 8:36-37. But Esau sold himself very short -- for a bowlful of soup, was it? And in return God allowed him to father a rebellious, God-hating nation. (Talk about short-sightedness!) BUT I DIGRESS...because I humored you by momentarily responding to your distraction and deflection to show you how absurd your reasoning is.
You didn't address my questions that I asked regarding Rom 9:10-13, so let's set the passage before us for all to see:
Rom 9:10-13
10 Not only that, but Rebekah's children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad — in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls — she was told, "The older will serve the younger." 13 Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."
NIV
God election of Jacob and his rejection of Esau has nothing to do with foreknowledge for three reasons: A) Paul makes it abundantly clear that God's election was not based on any good or bad acts of the twins. Therefore, there were no good or bad acts for God to "foresee".
And B), as explained on previous occasions "foreknowledge" is an anthropomorphism, designed to accommodate our finite minds, since an omniscient God never acquires knowledge by peering "into the future", for example, to see how things will shake out. Since this eternal, omniscient God knows all things innately, instantaneously and spontaneously in eternity, there is no such thing as a future in his eternal realm or existence. He transcends his creation of Time.
And C) Scripture teaches that God's will is not contingent on any of his free moral agents' decisions or acts; for God works out all things according to the purpose and sovereign counsel of his own will (Eph 1:11)
Therefore, what election has everything to do with is God's own sovereign decrees.
So, this brings us back to my earlier question which you have until now evaded with your distractions and deflections from the above text: Do you believe Paul, who was informed by Christ himself (Jn 16:12-15), when he said that divine election took place in eternity and that God's decree to elect (unto salvation or reprobation) was not contingent on anything good or bad that either of the twins would do in temporal reality?
Simple question. Try addressing it head-on for once. Cease and desist from your "misinformation" strategy.
You didn't address my questions that I asked regarding Rom 9:10-13, so let's set the passage before us for all to see:
Rom 9:10-13
10 Not only that, but Rebekah's children had one and the same father, our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad — in order that God's purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls — she was told, "The older will serve the younger." 13 Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."
NIV
God election of Jacob and his rejection of Esau has nothing to do with foreknowledge for three reasons: A) Paul makes it abundantly clear that God's election was not based on any good or bad acts of the twins. Therefore, there were no good or bad acts for God to "foresee".
And B), as explained on previous occasions "foreknowledge" is an anthropomorphism, designed to accommodate our finite minds, since an omniscient God never acquires knowledge by peering "into the future", for example, to see how things will shake out. Since this eternal, omniscient God knows all things innately, instantaneously and spontaneously in eternity, there is no such thing as a future in his eternal realm or existence. He transcends his creation of Time.
And C) Scripture teaches that God's will is not contingent on any of his free moral agents' decisions or acts; for God works out all things according to the purpose and sovereign counsel of his own will (Eph 1:11)
Therefore, what election has everything to do with is God's own sovereign decrees.
So, this brings us back to my earlier question which you have until now evaded with your distractions and deflections from the above text: Do you believe Paul, who was informed by Christ himself (Jn 16:12-15), when he said that divine election took place in eternity and that God's decree to elect (unto salvation or reprobation) was not contingent on anything good or bad that either of the twins would do in temporal reality?
Simple question. Try addressing it head-on for once. Cease and desist from your "misinformation" strategy.
