Doctrine of Unconditional Election

[Papermonkey]

Who defined God's grace that way?

God, via Paul.

 

[rogerg]

Once the Eunuch heard the truth about Jesus, he believed.

One's belief does not/cannot save anyone. Instead, with the Eunuch (and as with all saved) belief comes from
salvation, not the reverse. That he was saved is evidenced by the fact that God led Philip to
preach the gospel to him having saved him first. Many hear the gospel with man's ears, but only those saved
can hear with spiritual ears and truly comprehend - likewise, the Eunuch - he did not/could not of himself come
to true faith but only because he was already indwelt with/by the Holy Spirit.
Saviour is a title which is only rightfully reserved for and belonging to Christ; no man can lay claim to it.
However, you, and your theology, would replace Christ with yourself.
And that unequivocally is a violation to and direct contradiction of the gospel.

 

[John146]

One's belief does not/cannot save anyone. Instead, with the Eunuch (and as with all saved) belief comes from
salvation, not the reverse. That he was saved is evidenced by the fact that God led Philip to
preach the gospel to him having saved him first. Many hear the gospel with man's ears, but only those saved
can hear with spiritual ears and truly comprehend - likewise, the Eunuch - he did not/could not of himself come
to true faith but only because he was already indwelt with/by the Holy Spirit.
Saviour is a title which is only rightfully reserved for and belonging to Christ; no man can lay claim to it.
However, you, and your theology, would replace Christ with yourself.
And that unequivocally is a violation to and direct contradiction of the gospel.

Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and….thou shalt be saved.

 

[Magenta]

God, via Paul.

Do you mean Romans 11:6?

And if by grace, then it cannot be based on works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace.

Does that mean you count faith as a work?

 

[rogerg]

Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and….thou shalt be saved.

To believe is a gift - a fruit of the Spirit. The salvation your verse references is actually of final salvation occurring in the day of the Lord - the last day.

[Gal 5:22 KJV] 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
[Jhn 10:26 KJV] 26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
[1Co 5:5 KJV] 5 To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

 

[rogerg]

Do you mean Romans 11:6?

And if by grace, then it cannot be based on works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace.

Does that mean you count faith as a work?

Faith is a work - but only God's work to accomplish, not ours.

[Jhn 6:28-29 KJV]
28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

 

[Magenta]

No, being born again is not contingent upon receiving and believing. I think that just the opposite is
true - that God alone makes certain of us born-again, and by that, comes a true belief in Christ.
No one has a choice as whether they become saved/born-again or not. It is solely by God's sovereign
will, prerogative and good pleasure alone that it happens.
Those whom God saves contribute nothing to it and are only beneficiaries.
That is why Jesus Christ has the title of Saviour and we do not - and why I said that should we have to do anything whatsoever
to receive grace (then by that prerequisite) it cannot be grace.

[Rom 11:5,6 KJV]
5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
6 And if by grace, then [is it] no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if [it be] of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

Thank you for clarifying I am curious to know then if this means you believe
a person is saved without believing on the shed righteous blood of Jesus Christ?

 

[rogerg]

Thank you for clarifying I am curious to know then if this means you believe
a person is saved without believing on the shed righteous blood of Jesus Christ?

You're welcome. Yes, a person is first saved, and from that, is given belief/faith in Christ - not the reverse.

 

[Magenta]

Faith is a work - but only God's work to accomplish, not ours.

[Jhn 6:28-29 KJV]
28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

I will wait for @Papermonkey's reply, to see which of Paul's verses they meant

 

[VARob]

One's belief does not/cannot save anyone.

That's true. God saves people when they decide to believe the gospel.

Instead, with the Eunuch (and as with all saved) belief comes from
salvation, not the reverse.

That is exactly backwards.

That he was saved is evidenced by the fact that God led Philip to
preach the gospel to him having saved him first.

The Eunuch was not saved until Philip preached Jesus to him.

Many hear the gospel with man's ears, but only those saved
can hear with spiritual ears and truly comprehend -

No, people do not become saved until they hear the gospel and decide to believe it.

likewise, the Eunuch - he did not/could not of himself come
to true faith but only because he was already indwelt with/by the Holy Spirit.

Again, exactly backwards.

Saviour is a title which is only rightfully reserved for and belonging to Christ; no man can lay claim to it.

That's right.

However, you, and your theology, would replace Christ with yourself.

That's not right.

And that unequivocally is a violation to and direct contradiction of the gospel.

I do not understand why people are drawn to Calvinism. The only thing I can figure is that generally speaking, people do not like responsibility, and Calvinism removes all responsibility from people and puts it all on someone else, in this case God. It's basically fate. You won the lottery, and those poor unbelievers are the unlucky losers.

 

[Magenta]

You're welcome. Yes, a person is first saved, and from that, is given belief/faith in Christ - not the reverse.

There are so many different views on this. I was under the impression that you were an
anti-Calvinist, and I apologize if I got you confused with someone else (since your view
as expressed above seems to fall into that "camp." Though truly it would be nice of these
things could be discussed without all the Calvin this and Calvin that LOL)

 

[rogerg]

That's true. God saves people when they decide to believe the gospel.

Not possible. Those dead in sin cannot decide.

That is exactly backwards.

You don't believe Christ is the Saviour?

The Eunuch was not saved until Philip preached Jesus to him.

Nope. The preaching and belief occurred after his salvation.

No, people do not become saved until they hear the gospel and decide to believe it.

[Luk 8:10 KJV] 10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.

Again, exactly backwards.

According to you maybe, but that doesn't make it so.

[Gal 5:22 KJV] 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,

I do not understand why people are drawn to Calvinism. The only thing I can figure is that generally speaking, people do not like responsibility, and Calvinism removes all responsibility from people and put's it all on someone else, in this case God. It's basically fate. You won the lottery, and those poor unbelievers are the unlucky losers.

Because Christ is the Saviour, we are not. What do you think Christ as Saviour means?
The responsibility for salvation is upon God alone. Would you turn it into a work of man?
You would place the responsibility for your salvation under your own works?

 

[VARob]

Not possible. Those dead in sin cannot decide.



You don't believe Christ is the Saviour?



Nope. The preaching and belief occurred after his salvation.



[Luk 8:10 KJV] 10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; that seeing they might not see, and hearing they might not understand.



According to you maybe, but that doesn't make it so.

[Gal 5:22 KJV] 22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,



Because Christ is the Saviour, we are not. What do you think Christ as Saviour means?
The responsibility for salvation is upon God alone. Would you turn it into a work of man?
You would place the responsibility for your salvation under your own works?

Jesus Christ is the Savior. He provided the way to salvation. He died for the sins of the whole world. Salvation is available to anyone, and anyone has the capacity to decide to believe the gospel. That's why we preach it to people. We are ambassadors for Christ. If God determines who is saved and people have no say in it, then being an ambassador for Christ is meaningless. For that matter, life is meaningless. We're all puppets, marionettes in a predetermined puppet show. where God pulls all the strings.

I don't buy it.

I know you do, and neither of us is likely to change our mind. But maybe.... You never know.

 

[rogerg]

He provided the way to salvation

"a way to salvation" in effect means that you are saying that He is not the Saviour - the Saviour, in order to be the Saviour, must alone be
the one who saves without any other explicit or implicit conditions. Anything short of that, is in effect saying that He is not. He either fully is, or He isn't - can't have it both ways. Just being "a way to salvation" is worthless.

 

[John146]

"a way to salvation" in effect means that you are saying that He is not the Saviour - the Saviour, in order to be the Saviour, must alone be
the one who saves without any other explicit or implicit conditions. Anything short of that, is in effect saying that He is not. He either fully is, or He isn't - can't have it both ways. Just being "a way to salvation" is worthless.

That is false, no guilt trip will work, only scripture. You’ve been fooled by a RCC priest who was a murderer.

 

[VARob]

"a way to salvation" in effect means that you are saying that He is not the Saviour -

No it's not.

the Saviour, in order to be the Saviour, must alone be the one who saves without any other explicit or implicit conditions.

Sez who?

Anything short of that, is in effect saying that He is not. He either fully is, or He isn't - can't have it both ways. Just being "a way to salvation" is worthless.

Jesus Christ is fully the Savior. Salvation come through Him alone.

But people have to believe.

 

[rogerg]

No it's not.

Question: how can someone be the Saviour without being the one who does the saving?
Answer: he can't - so therefore, a logical impossibility!

Sez who?

Seriously?

Definition of Saviour:
saviour, deliverer, preserver

That definition leaves no room for anyone besides Christ.

esus Christ is fully the Savior. Salvation come through Him alone.

But people have to believe.

Wait.. do you hear what you just said? You've contradicted yourself within two sentences - both statements simply cannot be true. For a true Saviour there can be no "but(s)" associated to Him - it's all or nothing.
People believe BECAUSE they've been saved. - saved by the SAVIOUR. Did you not read/understand Gal 5:22? Faith comes from the Holy Spirit in becoming born-again as a part of salvation.
If people have to believe in order to be saved, then by that, and were it even possible for someone to do, that would beyond question make them their own saviour, not Christ.

 

[rogerg]

That is false, no guilt trip will work, only scripture. You’ve been fooled by a RCC priest who was a murderer.

Huh? Guilt trip? Murder? Incomprehensible reply.

 

[John146]

Huh? Guilt trip? Murder? Incomprehensible reply.

You guilt trip us by saying that we believe that salvation is not all about Christ and what he accomplished. That is absurd. And yes, Calvin was a RCC priest who murdered people.

 

[Papermonkey]

My point is God hardens men with the Gospel, and then justly condemns them. When God hardens, its judicial and just and its for destruction Joshua 11:20

For it was of the Lord to harden their hearts, that they should come against Israel in battle, that he might destroy them utterly, and that they might have no favour, but that he might destroy them, as the Lord commanded Moses.

Yes the natural man fits himself for destruction because God is fitting him for destruction. All men are born sinners ripe for destruction by nature, even the elect are by nature children of wrath as others Eph 2:3

3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

So without the intervening Grace of God, the elect also fit themselves for wrath and destruction. God could have hardened them as well if He so pleased and would have been just.

So the non elect natural man cannot but fit himself for destruction since God has already created him for that purpose. Gods Eternal purpose causes our actions.

Do you mean Romans 11:6?

And if by grace, then it cannot be based on works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace.

Does that mean you count faith as a work?

Ephesians 2.