Understanding God’s election

[HeIsHere]

Jonny C was heavily influenced by the Age of Reason. As such, his postulates fall flat when examined by the Spirit.

For example: for the man who is lost, it is the spirit of that man that may respond to the spiritual call of the Holy Spirit by refusing to resist the Spirit. In this, it was not the man's volition to be saved... only his decision to discontinue resisting the Spirit. So, man is NOT responsible for his own salvation.

Try this the next time someone claims they are agnostic or atheist. Tell them "No you're not. You know God is real. You just want to keep doing what you're doing knowing that it's wrong." Be careful, you might need a helmet. Some, however, will know the the gig is up hearing an external voice resonate with the one that has been disturbing their spirit. So you might continue with "If you want to connect to the author of your life you'll have to stop resisting Him."

I do think there is more than resisting, one has to trust in the good faith offer and truth of the Gospel.

That is by no means one saving oneself, it is accepting the full salvation "gift" procured by Christ Jesus.
He did all the work in His death and resurrection, why does everyone have to make it so complicated!!!!

Accepting His gift is not a work, it is not effort or meritorious if it is what God places as the condition/responsibility for all mankind!

There is this fear that accepting a gift is saving oneself, if you cannot present the Gospel as a good faith offer by God then one is preaching a different Gospel.

 

[Magenta]

Define "flesh". Are you referring to the skin that covers our bones or something else?

And just what is it specifically that a person's "flesh" cannot do?

And do unbelievers have this this problem with their "flesh" or is this unique to only believers?

The flesh opposes the things of the spirit ... and you may find this ridiculously hard to believe because it's so ridiculous that it was even said in the first place... that what is said of the Natural man or the carnal man, the man of the flesh...only applies to the spiritual man ... meaning it does not apply to the natural man at all ... but of course at the same time they also ascribe to the natural man qualities and abilities that can only be true of the spiritual man, because their theology is so mixed up they cannot tell one from the other. They equate them just as they equate the ability to make choices to mean the natural man has a will that is free even against all the verses that say otherwise.

 

[Rufus]

Thanks Rufus, but apparently, somehow, it is far too confusing for @cv5 to be able comprehend.

I probably really got up his nose by 'dissing this superhero Adam, who unselfishly sinned to save his wife that he loved so much even though he threw Eve under then bus when approached by God. This is the same Adam who he claims repented and trusted in God, in spite of there being zero biblical evidence for such a wildly absurd claim.

 

[HeIsHere]

Define "flesh". Are you referring to the skin that covers our bones or something else?

And just what is it specifically that a person's "flesh" cannot do?

And do unbelievers have this this problem with their "flesh" or is this unique to only believers?

Depends on the context.
The flesh is present in both.

 

[Cranberry]

The greatest act God institutionalized was making us aware of our need for Him and then letting us respond by using our faith to believe in Him. It's the greatest picture of the heart of God.

John 6:44

 

[cv5]

More DOUBLESPEAK by the Master of it on this thread. FWT implies everywhere, every time that MAN controls his own "free" will and controls his own eternal destiny. Then how can this not be the case with the Passover, since each and every Hebrew who participated in the ritual freely chose to do so? If those who didn't participate (assuming there were any for the sake of this discussion) would be held accountable for their own "free" will choice, then how is that those who did cannot take credit for making the opposite choice?

Wow. A short sweet and on point post and the Calvinites REALLY go into orbit.

Do you know what is the big difference between you and me @Rufus ?
I do not need to EXHAUSTIVELY parse vicissitudes and drone on ENDLESSLY with pseudo-intellectual gibberish like you do.
Why? Why pray tell?

Because I "get it" man. I really do. I understand PERFECTLY well why:
"Men do not take credit for their salvation for the same reasons the Israelites in Egypt could not take credit for the Passover"

I mean I DO NOT need further commentary man. Like none. Zero.
I DO NOT need further astute analysis or even YOUR analysis.

Its just a done deal as far as I am concerned man.
Thats what it's like when you break out of the Calvinite dungeon BTW.
The theological air is oh so bright, crisp and clear up here in the sunshine. Aaaaahhhh....wonderfully refreshing.
As opposed to dark, dank and oppressive waaaaay down there in the pits.

 

[Aaron56]

I do think there is more than resisting, one has to trust in the good faith offer and truth of the Gospel.

That is by no means one saving oneself, it is accepting the full salvation "gift" procured by Christ Jesus.
He did all the work in His death and resurrection, why does everyone have to make it so complicated!!!!

Accepting His gift is not a work, it is not effort or meritorious if it is what God places as the condition/responsibility for all mankind!

There is this fear that accepting a gift is saving oneself, if you cannot present the Gospel as a good faith offer by God then one is preaching a different Gospel.

In my view, we were created to receive direction from the Spirit of God, Spirit to spirit. It's in the hard-wiring, so to speak. When we stop resisting Him He can begin the work in us.

We can see this in the natural: vestigial organs in the physical body. Except, when a person no longer resists the Spirit, his own spirit is reconnected to their original intent of God who gave it.

 

[Cameron143]

I do think there is more than resisting, one has to trust in the good faith offer and truth of the Gospel.

That is by no means one saving oneself, it is accepting the full salvation "gift" procured by Christ Jesus.
He did all the work in His death and resurrection, why does everyone have to make it so complicated!!!!

Accepting His gift is not a work, it is not effort or meritorious if it is what God places as the condition/responsibility for all mankind!

There is this fear that accepting a gift is saving oneself, if you cannot present the Gospel as a good faith offer by God then one is preaching a different Gospel.

Where is accepting the gift found in scripture?

 

[HeIsHere]

In my view, we were created to receive direction from the Spirit of God, Spirit to spirit. It's in the hard-wiring, so to speak. When we stop resisting Him He can begin the work in us.

We can see this in the natural: vestigial organs in the physical body. Except, when a person no longer resists the Spirit, his own spirit is reconnected to their original intent of God who gave it.

I understand this and agree, I think in soteriology this is a part of it for sure.

 

[cv5]

In my view, we were created to receive direction from the Spirit of God, Spirit to spirit. It's in the hard-wiring, so to speak. When we stop resisting Him He can begin the work in us.

We can see this in the natural: vestigial organs in the physical body. Except, when a person no longer resists the Spirit, his own spirit is reconnected to their original intent of God who gave it.

Yes. This is a very fitting metaphorical construct.

And the thing is....we ARE created with this SPIRIT. That which is intentionally endowed with this capacity/functionality.

[Zec 12:1 KJV]
The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.

[Job 32:8 KJV]
But [there is] a spirit in man: and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding.

[Pro 20:27 KJV]
The spirit of man [is] the candle of the LORD, searching all the inward parts of the belly.

[Rom 8:16 KJV]
The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

 

[Rufus]

They have rehearsed answer for every question, reminds me of....

Don't you have one for my 7445? Don't be shy. Don't be bashful. Shirley U. can reconcile the contradiction stated therein between FWT and the bible.

 

[Rufus]

We're really focused on the election part of TULIP, which I have given Scripture to debunk. No the concept isn't there. That is not God's character. And it's quite easily debunked.

There's nothing in Election that is inconsistent with God's holy character. As far as you debunking anything, that was part of one of your pipe dreams.

 

[lrs68]

John 6:44

15 times Jesus told the masses "Come to Me and I will....."

That's a choice those who heard had to make.

 

[ParticularWife]

your complaint about "tulip" not being explicitly stated in the bible, just like the term "trinity" isn't,

What is it about Biblicism that renders people incapable of understanding how language works or why labels for terms exist? "I don't see the USA in the Bible! What are these 'federal republics'?"

The flesh opposes the things of the spirit

If I may: post-fall corrupted carnality, not merely our actual organs but the material world with the pervasive taint of sin and death. Why does it oppose the spirit? Because material things are bad, and spirits are good? No, we're not gnostics - Satan is a spirit and Jesus was a man. It's because original sin corrupted our Earth with us.

 

[cv5]

I do think there is more than resisting, one has to trust in the good faith offer and truth of the Gospel.

Likewise, one has to DESIRE the good faith marriage offer of the Groom. And ADMIRE his glorious attributes as well.

Many are not the least bit interested in doing either.

 

[cv5]

15 times Jesus told the masses "Come to Me and I will....."

That's a choice those who heard had to make.

"Seek. Press into. Ask. Knock. Come. Take."

 

[ThereRoseaLamb]

I asked you a question. I did not say you said that. But I asked the question due to your remark that God would be unjust in sending people to hell. So...I asked WHY?

Tricky, tricky!!

How could God be unjust for sending SINNERS to hell?

Let's try again with our listening ears. I, as in me, did not say that.

Your remark that God would be unjust for sending innocent people to hell implied that he must sending people to hell who are NOT sinners.

God would be unjust for sending innocent people to hell. But that's still not what I said. But you know that. What I said was God did not create a people for hell, He did not choose a people for destruction. Because that would also be unjust.

So...explain yourself and quit complaining about what I didn't say!

Let's calm it down a few rpms, lay off the caffeine and discuss like adults. Mkay?

 

[Rufus]

When did I say that?

By the way, if go back to 7483 and read your OWN post, you said in part that God would be unjust in sending people to hell for "NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN". So what else was I supposed to infer from your ill-conceived post? How does "no fault of their own" equate to them being sinners!? How are were you not implying that these people that God unjustly sends to hell are innocent?

 

[Magenta]

15 times Jesus told the masses "Come to Me and I will....."

That's a choice those who heard had to make.

Some came for the wrong reasons... Guess what happened to them.

And then when they left people say, see? you can lose your
salvation... when they were never saved in the first place...

 

[ThereRoseaLamb]

By the way, if go back to 7483 and read your OWN post, you said in part that God would be unjust in sending people to hell for "NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN".

Yes, he would be. You're stepping on the rake again and again. I don't know if you're doing on purpose or you don't understand. You tell me what you don't get about what I did and didn't say.