Chosen by God - A study in Election

[Nehemiah6]

I do notice that those supposed Christians who reject the doctrine of election are very prone to criticizing God the Father, hurling condemnations such as:
-hypocrite
-unjust
-merciless
-unfair
-tyrannical

That's a nice straw man but it won't work. How can those who uphold the marvelous grace of God think such nonsense?

Those who reject the doctrine of election for salvation reject SPIRITUAL NONSENSE. Unconditional Election in TULIP is a perversion of the truth, and I am surprised that you love to cling to perversions rather than the truth.

 

[EleventhHour]

You choose to ignore the verses of Scripture, wherein the language of Predestination and Election are clearly taught. Anyone who is truly seeking to understand God's Word cannot ignore any Scripture but must harmonize all of God's Word in order to come to the Truth.

You that argue that "all" must mean "all", in every case, are either not interested in harmonizing anything or are choosing to be willfully ignorant. Any good student of Scripture, knows that "all" must be either accepted as "all", if the context supports it or must be limited, if the context supports that.

How can the word "all" always mean "all" in the light of those verses which clearly teach God having chosen? God having Predestinated some? God using Election to obtain what those who were seeking, did not find?

I choose to not ignore these facts, if you do, then that's between you and God but this is no reason to belittle others. As a Christian, life has taught me, that when people resort to belittling another, it is because the facts no longer support their position.

Calvinism harmonizes like this:

Take a more obscure less understandable verse, interpret incorrectly....

then change word meanings in other verses in order to support the first faulty premise.

 

[cv5]

Here is your dogma in a nutshell

Grace is extended to only some, those that God has pre-selected.

In your dogma if you present it accurately it is....

Jane Smith is deliberately foreordained to commit her sins
Is hated by God
Is predestined to hell because God withholds His Grace, salvation is intentionally ``out of reach`` for her.
Is deliberately excluded from the atoning sacrifice of Jesus
Jane Smith will be judged by a god and sent to hell because he favored someone else over her
This is a god who essentially goes against his own commandments where believers are called to love those he hates?

Tell me do not see a problem here?

Prove what you say with scripture. Otherwise it is useless human philosophy.

I have a job for you:
Do a word study on the term "chose" and find out if it says ANYWHERE in Scripture that any single or group of believers CHOOSE or CHOSE to believe.

Good luck. We are waiting.

 

[Magenta]

Praise God that after John 6 other things happened . Erm let me see . I can't quite remember...oh that's it ..wait something to do with a cross , that's it its literally in the same book ,six chapters later . You would think John 6 is the Gospel for calvinists .
But then we read ...32And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.

John 12:31-32

 

[cv5]

That's a nice straw man but it won't work. How can those who uphold the marvelous grace of God think such nonsense?

Those who reject the doctrine of election for salvation reject SPIRITUAL NONSENSE. Unconditional Election in TULIP is a perversion of the truth, and I am surprised that you love to cling to perversions rather than the truth.

Prove me wrong. Posters on this thread are doing it all the time. Everybody knows it. Including you.

 

[cv5]

That's a nice straw man but it won't work. How can those who uphold the marvelous grace of God think such nonsense?

Those who reject the doctrine of election for salvation reject SPIRITUAL NONSENSE. Unconditional Election in TULIP is a perversion of the truth, and I am surprised that you love to cling to perversions rather than the truth.

They don't reject spiritual nonsense(whatever that means).

No, they reject clear unambiguous Scripture.

 

[awelight]

Here is your dogma in a nutshell

Grace is extended to only some, those that God has pre-selected.

In your dogma if you present it accurately it is....

Jane Smith is deliberately foreordained to commit her sins
Is hated by God
Is predestined to hell because God withholds His Grace, salvation is intentionally ``out of reach`` for her.
Is deliberately excluded from the atoning sacrifice of Jesus
Jane Smith will be judged by a god and sent to hell because he favored someone else over her
This is a god who essentially goes against his own commandments where believers are called to love those he hates?

Tell me do not see a problem here?

This was written with such venom behind the words. Trying to paint all aspects of your statements with such a disgusting brush.

All I truly hear in this post, is a person screaming, "That is not fair!!!!!!!!"

To me, it sounds like the teaching of Romans, if we remove your venomous comments.

Oooops, I think I am doing it again, sorry.

 

[Bbrdrd]

This was written with such venom behind the words. Trying to paint all aspects of your statements with such a disgusting brush.

All I truly hear in this post, is a person screaming, "That is not fair!!!!!!!!"

To me, it sounds like the teaching of Romans, if we remove your venomous comments.

Oooops, I think I am doing it again, sorry.

That's because you don't understand the context of Romans and so think the question is about individuals. You read it with modern glasses that give it a humanist twist, rather than ancient glasses that read as a collective. The question is not "how can God judge the individual?" but "How can God remove His blessing from Israel?" "I will have mercy" is not saying to the one He doesn't have mercy on that they have no business questioning Him, but that if God wants to extend His mercy beyond just the Jews it is His prerogative. Which is why Paul stated the following:

What shall we say, then? That Gentiles who did not pursue righteousness have attained it, that is, a righteousness that is by faith; 31 but that Israel who pursued a law that would lead to righteousness[d] did not succeed in reaching that law. 32 Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as if it were based on works.

The whole context of a passage has to be considered to understand its meaning, otherwise all you do is place your own bias on the text. Romans 9 clearly speaks of God's election of Israel and the change to that election not the election of individuals to salvation or damnation.

 

[EleventhHour]

This was written with such venom behind the words. Trying to paint all aspects of your statements with such a disgusting brush.

All I truly hear in this post, is a person screaming, "That is not fair!!!!!!!!"

To me, it sounds like the teaching of Romans, if we remove your venomous comments.

Oooops, I think I am doing it again, sorry.

And why would I not be vehemently opposed to a doctrine that teaches a different Christ?

I am shining the light on the logical conclusions of the Calvinist doctrines of election and irresistible grace.

Maybe somebody out there who is not too far gone will wake up!

 

[EleventhHour]

Prove what you say with scripture. Otherwise it is useless human philosophy.

I have a job for you:
Do a word study on the term "chose" and find out if it says ANYWHERE in Scripture that any single or group of believers CHOOSE or CHOSE to believe.

Good luck. We are waiting.

....just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love,
Ephesians 1:4

No need I understand according to what Jesus and the apostles taught.

When it states God chose us in Him, it literally means He chose US that are in HIM, not that He chose to put us in Him in the first place.

IF an ELECT people were IN CHRIST from the death & resurrection of Christ, then before they had faith, they were NEVER "children of wrath LIKE THE REST OF MANKIND"

 

[Bbrdrd]

Prove what you say with scripture. Otherwise it is useless human philosophy.

I have a job for you:
Do a word study on the term "chose" and find out if it says ANYWHERE in Scripture that any single or group of believers CHOOSE or CHOSE to believe.

Good luck. We are waiting.

Are you implying that Joshua was mistaken when he said "choose this day whom you will serve"? Or that Paul was mistaken when he said "you have judged yourselves unworthy"? Your challenges remind me of Muslim apologetic tactics rather than honest discourse, setting a challenge that isn't actually encompassing of the claim simply because that specific formulation is not present.

 

[EleventhHour]

Calvinism’s God believes in a faithless God‘s chosen/elect

There is no such thing

No one is elect (a descriptor) until they have faith.

 

[John146]

The natural man, before he has been quickened to the new spiritual life, will not, and indeed, can not, believe the spiritual gospel.

You continue to build your whole doctrine from one verse misinterpreted.

 

[John146]

God knows that preaching the spiritual gospel to the natural man, before he has been regenerated, will fall on ears that cannot receive a spiritual gospel, and thinks it to be foolishness. That is why Jesus instructed his Apostles to go and preach the gospel to the "lost sheep"(God's newly born regenerated children) of the "house of Israel", which is "the house of Jacob", as God changed Jacob's name to be called "Israel", Gen 33:28. The "house of Israel" is comprised of people from every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation, Rev 5;9. Most, well intend christians, misinterpret the word "Israel" to mean the "nation of Israel".

Ok then, how do you know out of all the people in the world who are the lost sheep of the house of Israel?

 

[cv5]

And why would I not be vehemently opposed to a doctrine that teaches a different Christ?

I am shining the light on the logical conclusions of the Calvinist doctrines of election and irresistible grace.

Maybe somebody out there who is not too far gone will wake up!

John ch 3 indicates that the Spirit goes where He wishes. Not where WE wishes.

The Scripture is CHOCK FULL of the terminology of of "choice", yet NOWHERE does it explicitly state that FALLEN MAN FIRST CHOSE GOD! Nowhere. Nor can we induce the Spirit to do OUR BIDDING by supposedly "choosing" to believe.

There is absolutely NO EXPLICIT DOCTRINE of fallen man choosing God.

But there are VAST TRACTS of utterly crisp clear statements by Jesus to the CONTRARY. Likewise in the other NT books, soverign election and God's choice is BOILERPLATE docrine of the kind that is unassailable!

Free will as it relates to salvation is all innuendo and faulty scholarship. All sound and fury signifying nothing.

 

[Bbrdrd]

John ch 3 indicates that the Spirit goes where He wishes. Not where WE wishes.

The Scripture is CHOCK FULL of the terminology of of "choice", yet NOWHERE does it explicitly state that FALLEN MAN FIRST CHOSE GOD! Nowhere. Nor can we induce the Spirit to do OUR BIDDING by supposedly "choosing" to believe.

There is absolutely NO EXPLICIT DOCTRINE of fallen man choosing God.

But there are VAST TRACTS of utterly crisp clear statements by Jesus to the CONTRARY. Likewise in the other NT books, soverign election and God's choice is BOILERPLATE docrine of the kind that is unassailable!

Free will as it relates to salvation is all innuendo and faulty scholarship. All sound and fury signifying nothing.

You keep saying its unassailable yet every Scripture you've offered has been dealt with, and you have yet to deal with Scripture to the contrary.

All you have is your insistence that it is unassailable, and that is not Scripture. You've simply proven yourself dug into the doctrines of men.

 

[dcontroversal]

And read this heresy below ..... all I know is there is an "evil being" written about in scripture who would seek to bind, hide the Gospel from men hearing and being saved.



I can barely tolerate this nonsense anymore and I post less and less ... they speak about the "lost man" not wanting truth such irony!!

It is the Calvinists that do not want TRUTH.

Too be honest, I cannot believe this crap is allowed on this site...

a. Gospel-less, forced, no choice salvation.

b. God does not want us to preach the gospel to the lost.

etc.........

God must not have gotten that memo from Calvin or his prostlytes......

In the end his angel flies through the midst of heaven preaching the everlasting gospel to everyone on the planet giving them one last chance and CHOICE to believe, worship and honor the God of heaven!

 

[dcontroversal]

Saved, according to Greek, means "delivered". When new spiritually borne babe in Christ "comes unto a knowledge of the truth" they experience a deliverance, right then, when they understand the truth. The deliverance they receive is not eternal deliverance, because they already have been given that.

False.......!

 

[cv5]

You keep saying its unassailable yet every Scripture you've offered has been dealt with, and you have yet to deal with Scripture to the contrary.

All you have is your insistence that it is unassailable, and that is not Scripture. You've simply proven yourself dug into the doctrines of men.

I have Scripture to back me up. Tons of them. You have posted zero.

Jesus says God chose us. Never...ever..does He say we first chose Him.

Pauls says God the exact same thing.

All the other books of the NT say the exact same thing.

So far the free willers are holding an empty bag. Everyone here now knows it.

 

[dcontroversal]

Really? How could anyone arrive at that conclusion? Romans 1 is all about those who rejected the truth about God and were spiritually blinded. Thus God gave them over to a reprobate mind. Their foolish hearts were darkened.

Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. (v 21)

If you were unable to discern this, then you should really go back to square one.

Fully agree......what they peddle is not scriptural.....regardless of how they slice and dice!