Salvation is a gift from God
-
2
- Show all
Is unconditional election biblical?
- Thread starter UnitedWithChrist
- 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.
Salvation is a gift from God
Mr PennEd you are so funny, we have discussed this soooo many times, and not only that, I have made a very compelling case!!
-
1
- Show all
Mr PennEd you are so funny, we have discussed this soooo many times, and not only that, I have made a very compelling case!!
-
1
-
1
- Show all
I don't believe it is conditional. I believe it is unconditional, if you are talking about unconditional election. I hold a Reformed view, and I believe God elects individuals unconditionally. He regenerates the elect, and causes them to believe and to repent through the liberation resulting from being born again.
I presented the opposite view, though, for comparison purposes. And, the opposite view claims that God elects based on foreseen faith. They believe that the person, in essence, elects himself through his free-will choice to believe and repent.
This would, in essence, mean that God does not choose. And this is a view I reject.
I presented the opposite view, though, for comparison purposes. And, the opposite view claims that God elects based on foreseen faith. They believe that the person, in essence, elects himself through his free-will choice to believe and repent.
This would, in essence, mean that God does not choose. And this is a view I reject.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
Good question.
By the way, I hate the word Calvinism and hardly ever use it to refer to myself.
The obvious charge will be that its adherents follow a man. I didn't even know Calvin's name when I began to understand predestination. My Arminian pastor told me about him when I brought up what I was learning from Romans back then.
And, then, there's always the bogus claims regarding John Calvin and Michael Servetus, which are highly distorted. Unfortunately guys like Dave Hunt have spread a lot of misinformation in the church.
By the way, i heard a great podcast that displays the historical nonsense regarding Calvin and Servetus by Tyler Vela.
He does a lot of good podcasts, some of which are related to Reformed theology:
https://thefreedthinker.podbean.com...story-matters-calvin-and-the-servetus-affair/
By the way, I hate the word Calvinism and hardly ever use it to refer to myself.
The obvious charge will be that its adherents follow a man. I didn't even know Calvin's name when I began to understand predestination. My Arminian pastor told me about him when I brought up what I was learning from Romans back then.
And, then, there's always the bogus claims regarding John Calvin and Michael Servetus, which are highly distorted. Unfortunately guys like Dave Hunt have spread a lot of misinformation in the church.
By the way, i heard a great podcast that displays the historical nonsense regarding Calvin and Servetus by Tyler Vela.
He does a lot of good podcasts, some of which are related to Reformed theology:
https://thefreedthinker.podbean.com...story-matters-calvin-and-the-servetus-affair/
-
2
- Show all
Im not sure about the trems "" "" becasue I ahve not found the terms directly, so I don't know 100% what the pertain to, but I know Jesus says this:
John 5:28-29, " 28 Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29 and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.
John 12:47-48, " 47 If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. 48 The one who rejects me and does not receive my words has a judge; the word that I have spoken will judge him on the last day.
John 5:28-29, " 28 Do not marvel at this, for an hour is coming when all who are in the tombs will hear his voice 29 and come out, those who have done good to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil to the resurrection of judgment.
John 12:47-48, " 47 If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. 48 The one who rejects me and does not receive my words has a judge; the word that I have spoken will judge him on the last day.
-
1
- Show all
When you get involved in any sports, etcetera, it requires that you learn its' language. The same is true with regards to Christianity. For instance, some new believers don't even know that "the nations" can refer to Gentiles alone, or can refer to Gentiles AND Israel.
Same with the phrase "the peoples".
So, no matter what, there is a learning curve.
In the case of "general call" versus "effectual call", the difference is that believers preach the gospel to everyone, yet they know that only the elect will respond, and this response is because they are one of the "sheep" that Jesus says listen to his voice (John 6, 10) and have been given to him by the Father.
To deny this distinction, between the elect and the non-elect, and two different kinds of calling is really to entertain confusion.
There are reasons for theological language, and regardless of theological language, biblical language needs to be clarified, too, such as my example about "the nations", "the peoples". One can't even read Psalms with a decent level of comprehension until they know how the Bible uses phrases, etcetera.
I learned this trying to teach people in a parachurch ministry. Their eyes may have been running across the pages, but they didn't understand the meaning of the text.
Someone asked me how much Bible I read a day. I told them, two chapters. He bragged and told me that was nothing; he reads like ten chapters a day, in order to make himself appear to be the authority. Well, it was obvious from our conversation that he wasn't reading it in depth and was only letting his eyes glance over the page. I doubt if he understood phrases like "the nations", especially since he claimed Israelites were all black, latino or Native American tribes.
He also wanted everyone to use Yehoshua or something like that to refer to Jesus.
He became so angry with me for pointing out the problems with his claims, that he called me the F word, because I didn't accept them. Then he blamed me for making him cuss. I'm laughing right now thinking about that.
I think about anyone here is a girl scout compared to some of the guys I dealt with there.
Same with the phrase "the peoples".
So, no matter what, there is a learning curve.
In the case of "general call" versus "effectual call", the difference is that believers preach the gospel to everyone, yet they know that only the elect will respond, and this response is because they are one of the "sheep" that Jesus says listen to his voice (John 6, 10) and have been given to him by the Father.
To deny this distinction, between the elect and the non-elect, and two different kinds of calling is really to entertain confusion.
There are reasons for theological language, and regardless of theological language, biblical language needs to be clarified, too, such as my example about "the nations", "the peoples". One can't even read Psalms with a decent level of comprehension until they know how the Bible uses phrases, etcetera.
I learned this trying to teach people in a parachurch ministry. Their eyes may have been running across the pages, but they didn't understand the meaning of the text.
Someone asked me how much Bible I read a day. I told them, two chapters. He bragged and told me that was nothing; he reads like ten chapters a day, in order to make himself appear to be the authority. Well, it was obvious from our conversation that he wasn't reading it in depth and was only letting his eyes glance over the page. I doubt if he understood phrases like "the nations", especially since he claimed Israelites were all black, latino or Native American tribes.
He also wanted everyone to use Yehoshua or something like that to refer to Jesus.
He became so angry with me for pointing out the problems with his claims, that he called me the F word, because I didn't accept them. Then he blamed me for making him cuss. I'm laughing right now thinking about that.
I think about anyone here is a girl scout compared to some of the guys I dealt with there.
-
2
- Show all