Understanding God’s election

[Cranberry]

Then if Judas lost his salvation, we, too, can! I guess God doesn't keep us. He doesn't protect us. He doesn't preserve us. And Jesus stinks at being the "Good Shepherd" who promised he would lose no one!

And I suppose you think the people talked about in Mat 7:23 also lost their salvation?

You appear deeply confused. I never stared anything even remotely related to your post. In face my first words in my post that you quote states that I think Judas was Saved.

Unless I'm mistaken that you are in full error misrepresenting my post and instead are making a declaration of your beliefs.

 

[Cranberry]

You still didn't answer my question about the imputation of Adam's sin to the human race. Did God impute the Federal Head's sin to mankind or not?

And unless man's conscience is external to man -- something that hangs out in the external world -- then I would have to say you're dead wrong about the existence of evil or sin within man. Too many scriptures contradict your thinking. A&E ran and hid from God after they sinned! Why? Because their consciences (WITHIN THEM) accused them! They felt (within themselves) guilt, shame and fear -- all of which are byproducts of sin. Their bodies became "temples" of sin! Plus you have contradicted yourself by telling us that we have a human nature like Adam's. How did we get that human nature if it weren't passed down to us -- if we didn't inherit it!? And are we born with Adam's sin nature?

Jesus also taught us that all manner of evil proceeds from within man -- from within man's heart (Mat 15:19)! And didn't a prophet tell us that man's heart is desperately wicked and self-deceived above else, so much so that man cannot even understand it (Jer 17:9)? And didn't another prophet teach that there is no spiritual soundness in man at all -- that the entire heart is afflicted (Isa 1:5-6)? And didn't Paul proclaim that there was no good thing within his human nature ("flesh"), cf. Rom 7:18?

Finally, Adam's death on the day he disobeyed God was not physical, but spiritual. The Holy Spirit departed from him and that severed Adam from the life of the Spirit, hence he DIED on that very day that he ate! Everyone on this little green planet is either alive in the Spirit or is dead in their sinful flesh (nature).

I did answer your question.

 

[Cameron143]

Lord and Christ Jesus are synonymous and does not change the meaning in the text.

So then you agree it is after someone has been saved, in the correct order, belief >> regeneration.

Thanks for the response. And no.
Belief is the result of hearing, and hearing by the word of God. As hearing involves understanding, and understanding requires enlightenment, the Spirit has been working all along.

I'm curious, do you attend church?

 

[Cranberry]

Matthew 26:24
The Son of man goes as it is written of him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of man is betrayed!
It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.

I believe Judas was not saved.

Judas was possessed by Satan. Satan is also the son of perdition.

That Scripture that comments upon the man is an observation of the writer. Not a declaration or judgement of Judas by Jesus.

Whereas Jesus as we know from scripture knew of Judas,Satan within him, plan of betrayal and told Judas to do what he must do quickly.

Clearly due to that outcome we know Jesus knew Judas was going to tell the Pharisees where to find Jesus. Which is why Jesus was in the garden at Gethsemane preparing for his death.

When we know Jesus had earlier told his Disciples to buy swords and Peter had one in Gethsemane do we really think Judas would have been able to leave that upper room to "betray" Jesus if it wasn't foreordained by the Father? Jesus knew it was.
Which is why in Gethsemane He asked the Father if it be His will to remove that cup from him.

I believe Judas was Saved. Even possessed, Satan within him served God's will and plan for Salvations new covenant.

Salvation is irrevocable.

No doubt that upset Satan to know how he assured that seal later on.

 

[Pilgrimshope]

How how can we know what it was like to be Adam or Eve when they were not in the condition that we are born into? What we do know is that Eve was deceived and Adam sinned deliberately. I also contend that they were of the natural world and were in as much need as being born again as we are... The Tree of Life was available to them but they chose to eat from the tree that promised death... And God banished them from the garden and guarded the way to the Tree of Life so that they could not eat from it and live forever after in their sinful state.

How do you explain abel who is called righteous by his deeds ? Or Enoch who it says was approved of God and translated and never died ? Or Noah who it calls perfect and righteous and walked with God ? Surely you aren’t including those people in with us now ?

does it matter sister that this is said after Israel broke the law covenant and brought the curse ?

“The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, To see if there were any that did understand, And seek God. They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: There is none that doeth good, no, not one.”
‭‭Psalm‬ ‭14:2-3‬ ‭KJV‬‬

surely that doesn’t include those beforehand tbat received another witness does it ?

“There was a man in the land of Uz, whose name was Job; and that man was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed evil.”
‭‭Job‬ ‭1:1‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God.”
‭‭Genesis‬ ‭6:9‬ ‭KJV‬‬

theres no record of these men ever being “ born again “ and truly all it says is they were perfect and righteous and wouldn’t need to be reborn and shouldn’t be considered evil and incapable it tells us they were capable and lives upright lives before God after Adam and Eve even abel is called righteous

“Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him?

Because his own works were evil,

and his brother's righteous.”
‭‭1 John‬ ‭3:12‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judæa, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia: and his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elisabeth.

And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord blameless.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭1:5-6‬ ‭KJV‬

 

[Pilgrimshope]

Well, we have touched on this before and I've said many times that Adam was of the natural world, and that Jesus was purposed from before the foundation of the world, so God certainly knew that Adam was going to sin ... and I believe that as a natural man it was inevitable that he would, not that God forced him to, but because he chose to. And it wasn't until he actually sinned that everything changed ... the whole universe was affected.

So cain had no choice but to kill his righteous brother ? But before that Adam did have a choice whether or not to eat the fruit ?

 

[Cranberry]

AI is very good at reading the scripture and comprehending the text.

Here is an example from Chat GPT.

Romans 8:29-30 and Calvinism

Romans 8:29-30 reads:

"For those whom he foreknew 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."​

Calvinists often use this "golden chain of salvation" to support the doctrine of unconditional election—God predestines certain individuals to salvation based on His sovereign will, not on any foreseen faith or merit in them. The progression from foreknowledge to predestination, calling, justification, and glorification is seen as a seamless work of God's grace.

Contextual Considerations in Romans

However, the broader context of Romans introduces nuances that complicate a purely Calvinistic interpretation:

Paul's Focus on Israel and the Gentiles:

• The immediate and extended context of Romans (chapters 9-11, especially) centers on God’s plan for Israel and the inclusion of the Gentiles. Paul explains how the Jews, despite being God's chosen people, failed to achieve righteousness through the law, while the Gentiles obtained righteousness through faith.
• In this context, “foreknowledge” (Greek proginōskō) may not imply an individual predestining of believers but rather God’s covenantal foreknowledge of a group (e.g., Israel) or a plan for humanity.

Covenantal Election vs. Individual Election:

• Some argue that the election discussed in Romans is primarily corporate or covenantal rather than individual. That is, God foreknew and predestined a people (the church, comprising Jews and Gentiles) to be conformed to Christ’s image.
• This interpretation aligns with the themes in Romans 9-11, where Paul discusses the remnant of Israel and the grafting in of Gentiles into the olive tree of God's people.

Paul’s Concern for the Jews:

• As you noted, Paul expresses a deep concern for the Jews, longing for their salvation (Romans 9:1-5, 10:1). In Romans 11:14, he hopes to provoke his fellow Jews to jealousy so that some might be saved. This seems inconsistent with the Calvinist doctrine of double predestination, where the fate of individuals is irrevocably determined before birth.

Human Responsibility and Faith:

• Throughout Romans, Paul emphasizes the necessity of faith for salvation (e.g., Romans 3:21-26, 10:9-13). This can be seen as placing some emphasis on human responsibility in responding to God’s call, which some argue is at odds with Calvinism's emphasis on irresistible grace.

Does the Context Suppress Calvinism?

The answer depends on how one interprets key terms like "foreknew" and "predestined" and the scope of Paul’s argument:

Support for Calvinism:

• A Calvinist reading of Romans 8:29-30 is possible if one sees the passage as emphasizing God’s sovereign work in the salvation of individuals, independent of human effort or will.
• Challenges to Calvinism:
  • The broader context of Romans, with its focus on God’s dealings with Israel and the inclusion of the Gentiles, lends itself more naturally to a corporate or covenantal understanding of election, which may challenge a strict Calvinist interpretation.
  • Furthermore, Paul's stated hope for the salvation of his fellow Jews and his acknowledgment of their responsibility to respond to God’s call (e.g., Romans 10:21) suggest that human agency plays a role in God’s plan of salvation.

As I see it ChatGPT is not able to rightly divine the word of truth of God. Instead it is merely a semblance of a search engine that compiles related text together through keyword relationships rather than understanding the divinely inspired contextual singular message of hope and eternal irrevocable Salvation.

I.E. It doesn't know God. It does not replace that relationship those in Christ have with The Word,The Teacher.

 

[Cranberry]

Original sin was concocted by Augustine of Hippo.

Thank you for adding that to this discussion.

http://www.utne.com/mind-and-body/st-augustine-and-original-sin-ze0z1505zken/

 

[Pilgrimshope]

Well, we have touched on this before and I've said many times that Adam was of the natural world, and that Jesus was purposed from before the foundation of the world, so God certainly knew that Adam was going to sin ... and I believe that as a natural man it was inevitable that he would, not that God forced him to, but because he chose to. And it wasn't until he actually sinned that everything changed ... the whole universe was affected.

Yes I’m curious what you mean when you speak of the “ natural man “

I’m not sure if we touched on this part but do you believe Adam and Eve had a living spirit that came from God dwelling in thier body ? And secondly do you believe thier offspring had living spirits in them ? Or they were only flesh and didn’t have a spirit then ?

I’m trying to understand what you mean by the “natural man “

 

[JesusIsSovereign]

Whoa! That natural guy has problems.

It's all from scripture. The Word of God can be offensive sometimes.

 

[Cameron143]

It's all from scripture. The Word of God can be offensive sometimes.

It was sarcasm. But thanks for the reply.

 

[Magenta]

It was sarcasm. But thanks for the reply.

I understood it as humor and it is good to know that those things are in this thread and that our brother, our dear brother @Pilgrimshope can go back to that post and read what it is that I'm referring to when I speak of the natural man.

I'm back to work today for the first time since Christmas Eve day and I returned to a lot of work... I've been busy and just starting my brunch now...

 

[Cameron143]

I understood it as humor and it is good to know that those things are in this thread and that our brother, our dear brother @Pilgrimshope can go back to that post and read what it is that I'm referring to when I speak of the natural man.

I'm back to work today for the first time since Christmas Eve day and I returned to a lot of work... I've been busy and just starting my brunch now...

We owe, we owe, so back to work we go.

 

[Magenta]

We owe, we owe, so back to work we go.

Actually I am debt free praise the Lord, for it's the best way to be... but in today's economy with inflation the way it's been over the last five years, it's a good thing I am still working even though I do not fear the days when I will not be able to do this anymore..

 

[Cranberry]

Irony is NOT denying anything. It is saying something different from what might be expected, akin to paradox.

My Bible shows that in MT 11:16-19 Jesus was quoting a children's jingle:

"We played the flute for you,
and you did not dance;
we sang a dirge,
and you did not mourn."

Both of these lines employ the literary technique known as irony.

Then Jesus said:

"For John came neither eating nor drinking,
and they say, 'He has a demon.'
The Son of Man came eating and drinking,
and they say, 'Here is a glutton and a drunkard...'"

Again we see an irony, employed to teach the point that
"Wisdom is proved right by her actions."

Which is different from what some might expect.

(You're welcome for the English lesson :^)

https://www.britannica.com/art/irony

irony, linguistic and literary device, in spoken or written form, in which real meaning is concealed or contradicted. That may be the result of the literal, ostensible meaning of words contradicting their actual meaning (verbal irony) or of a structural incongruity between what is expected and what occurs (dramatic irony).


Verbal irony arises from a sophisticated or resigned awareness of contrast between what is and what ought to be and expresses a controlled pathos without sentimentality. It is a form of indirection that avoids overt praise or censure, as in the casual irony of the statement “That was a smart thing to do!” (meaning “very foolish”).

 

[Cameron143]

Does anyone here pray for the lost? What do you pray for God to do for the lost?

I'm particularly interested what someone who believes that a mere exposition of the gospel is sufficient for belief.

 

[Cameron143]

Actually I am debt free praise the Lord, for it's the best way to be... but in today's economy with inflation the way it's been over the last five years, it's a good thing I am still working even though I do not fear the days when I will not be able to do this anymore..

Debt free is a good way to live free. But if one owns anything, property taxes insure we are never truly free of an obligation.

 

[Magenta]

Debt free is a good way to live free. But if one owns anything, property taxes insure we are never truly free of an obligation.

I was never worldly enough to really want to own a house...

 

[Magenta]

https://www.britannica.com/art/irony

irony, linguistic and literary device, in spoken or written form, in which real meaning is concealed or contradicted. That may be the result of the literal, ostensible meaning of words contradicting their actual meaning (verbal irony) or of a structural incongruity between what is expected and what occurs (dramatic irony).


Verbal irony arises from a sophisticated or resigned awareness of contrast between what is and what ought to be and expresses a controlled pathos without sentimentality. It is a form of indirection that avoids overt praise or censure, as in the casual irony of the statement “That was a smart thing to do!” (meaning “very foolish”).

Except it is not irony and Jesus was not meaning to say something other than what He plainly stated... and it is repeated throughout Scripture that God has hidden things from people... Jesus even identified that reason for being why He spoke in parables. So GWH saying Jesus didn't mean what He said is a flat out lie.

 

[Cranberry]

Debt free is a good way to live free. But if one owns anything, property taxes insure we are never truly free of an obligation.

My old boss use to say it's a myth that America is a free country. Because every citizen knows when we pay government to have a job nothing is free.

A boss says that.

I was impressed. lol