Is unconditional election biblical?

posthuman · Oct 29, 2019

this:

when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), it was said to her, “The older shall serve the younger.”
(Romans 9:10-12)

So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.
(Romans 9:16)

He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.
(Romans 9:18)

what about this would make someone understanding what's being said say, 'how can God still judge? for who can resist His will?'

John146 said:

All the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing; He does according to His will in the army of heaven And among the inhabitants of the earth. No one can restrain His hand Or say to Him, “What have You done?”
(Daniel 4:35)

John146 said:

in truth there are only two things you or i have ever done: resisted His will and submitted to it.
in which were we successful?

7seasrekeyed · Oct 29, 2019

Sackcloth-N-Ashes said:

and he is the moderator of that board wherein preacher4truth tries to do the same type of thing I already noted

whatever

makes for interesting reading though

pretty sure the Bible does not tell us to preach Calvin everywhere we go though

IMO, you really have to twist what Leighton is saying to make it seem he says the horrible heretical things some think he is saying

horrible....just so horrible

posthuman · Oct 29, 2019

Melach said:

non sequitur is Latin for 'does not follow'

it means that a conclusion has been drawn that the facts don't imply.
for example, it is generally dark at 11pm. suppose you wake up, and power has gone out, so that your clocks aren't working. you see that it is dark outside, so you say, "it must be 11pm" -- that's a non-sequitur. it doesn't follow that it's 11pm just because it's dark out.

Sackcloth-N-Ashes · Oct 29, 2019

7seasrekeyed said:

it's not going to happen

I am going to listen to the video and familiarize myself with his teaching but being familiar with the style of certain members here, I already know they are not being truthful

the worst thing about that, is that they do not seem to be bothered by lying

smh

Non Sequitur ("It does not follow"). This is the simple fallacy of stating, as a conclusion, something that does not strictly follow from the premises

basically it means answering something or addressing something, with a statement that has no basis in the first statement

like this:

person a: cats are pretty animals

person b: well trees have branches

makes no sense and it is an act of desperation when a person knows they are wrong but will not admit it for whatever reason

Go back to my post #802 and click on the link provided. Professor Flowers is ‘Skandelon’ who said “Knowing God is a ‘personal achievement’.”

Sackcloth-N-Ashes · Oct 29, 2019

7seasrekeyed said:

it's not going to happen

I am going to listen to the video and familiarize myself with his teaching but being familiar with the style of certain members here, I already know they are not being truthful

the worst thing about that, is that they do not seem to be bothered by lying

smh

Non Sequitur ("It does not follow"). This is the simple fallacy of stating, as a conclusion, something that does not strictly follow from the premises

basically it means answering something or addressing something, with a statement that has no basis in the first statement

like this:

person a: cats are pretty animals

person b: well trees have branches

makes no sense and it is an act of desperation when a person knows they are wrong but will not admit it for whatever reason

A short video of Professor Flower’s choice meats error.

posthuman · Oct 29, 2019

preacher4truth said:

careful - apparently she'll put you on ignore if you point out non-sequiturs or ask certain questions

Sackcloth-N-Ashes · Oct 29, 2019

7seasrekeyed said:

Another video where Professor Flowers says the gospel, not the gospel PLUS some supernatural work of the Holy Spirit, is all that is needed. It’s less than 9:00 minutes long. Roger Olson, a classical Arminian, disagrees with Flowers’ heretical stance when he denies the necessity of the supernatural work of the Holy Spirit. He doesn’t engage him, he just says, “okay”.

posthuman · Oct 29, 2019

Sackcloth-N-Ashes said:

obvious question no one seems to ask:

why a menstrual rag?
this isn't some accidental analogy -- it's the breathed word of God.

this is what leads up to it:

Since ancient times no one has heard,

no ear has perceived,

no eye has seen any God besides you,

who acts on behalf of those who wait for him.

You come to the help of those who gladly do right,

who remember your ways.

But when we continued to sin against them,

you were angry.

How then can we be saved?

All of us have become like one who is unclean
(Isaiah 64:4-6)

this explains why all our righteous deeds are like menstrual cloths.

when no one asks the obvious questions, no one answers them.
skipping the answers to the obvious questions is a great way to wind up holding ignorant views.

i'll just leave this right here for now - with one other clue

when I passed by you and saw you struggling in your own blood, I said to you in your blood, ‘Live!’
Yes, I said to you in your blood, ‘Live!’
(Ezekiel 16:6)

posthuman · Oct 29, 2019

IFOLLOWHIM said:

if they're only "so-called" believers doesn't that make them "lost" ??

_______________________________________________________

Magenta · Oct 29, 2019

fredoheaven said:

Jesus said Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing His day.

John 8:56 "Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad."

IFOLLOWHIM · Oct 29, 2019

posthuman said:

NOPE the unsaved will tell you straight up their spiritual condition.
THE so call believers.....dwaddle,hemhaw,act like ,quote askew,ect.ect......
It's all in God's hands in the end.....for He sees the heart and the motivation behind......

John146 · Oct 29, 2019

posthuman said:

this:

when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), it was said to her, “The older shall serve the younger.”

(Romans 9:10-12)

So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy.

(Romans 9:16)

He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.

(Romans 9:18)

what about this would make someone understanding what's being said say, 'how can God still judge? for who can resist His will?'

All the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing; He does according to His will in the army of heaven And among the inhabitants of the earth. No one can restrain His hand Or say to Him, “What have You done?”

(Daniel 4:35)

in truth there are only two things you or i have ever done: resisted His will and submitted to it.
in which were we successful?

Why did the Lord choose Jacob? To carry out the seed line of the Messiah, not to be saved. Salvation is not the issue in chapter 9 but the purpose of the nation of Israel.

John146 · Oct 29, 2019

posthuman said:

It’s not us who determines the methods God uses, but God. If we’re going to receive mercy, we’ve got to do it God’s way through the Lord Jesus Christ. We can’t will it any other way.

Roughsoul1991 · Oct 29, 2019

These debates are always funny.

If we lack free will then it is God's will that we hold different beliefs. So why debate?

If we do not lack free will then debate makes perfect sense and two contradicting ideas cannot both be right.

And God's holy nature provides absolute truth. So two contradicting ideas cannot both be true and therefore to say it is God's will goes directly against his nature.

Follow me?

posthuman · Oct 29, 2019

7seasrekeyed said:

ForestGreenCook said:

7seasrekeyed said:

@7seasrekeyed
((yeah yeah i know she's made herself deaf & blind to me, but w/e it doesn't mean i cant talk to her; it only means she refuses to listen))

don't you realize Who it is that will save us from this body of death?
the same One who constrained all under sin ((re: Romans 11:32, 2 Corinthians 5:14, 1 Corinthians 15:22, Psalm 149:4, Proverbs 3:34, Luke 1:52, etc))
don't you know what the conflict in Romans 7:14-25 is? it's Romans 6:11 & 8:22-23 --- and an hundred other passages if you could only bear to hear them.
Philippians 4:7 doesn't contradict Romans 7, and it doesn't make Paul a failure for his honesty - Philippians 3:12-14 comes before Philippians 4:7; you can't get to chapter 4 without chapter 3. he is expressing the very faith which is our life: which is Christ living in him.

the non-sequitur here is the one you're making, thinking that the fact of the sureness of our hope in Philippians 4 means Jesus was lying in John 16:33 - where He says, "you will have trouble"

the poor you will always have with you
(Mark 14:7)

preacher4truth · Oct 29, 2019

Sackcloth-N-Ashes said:

Oh, those pesky facts that show he said what we stated him to have said...can't be having that, I still have to be a liar when when facts are given that prove otherwise.

Magenta · Oct 29, 2019

Roughsoul1991 said:

Free will is a terrible term. It should be self will

No small wonder there are endless debates about things which are wrongly named.

posthuman · Oct 29, 2019

IFOLLOWHIM said:

when you say "so-called believers" isn't what you really mean "not really believers at all" ?

like, the two men who went to the temple to pray - one saying 'thank God i'm not like other people' and the other saying 'have mercy on me a sinner'? it turns out the one who was really saved is the one who confessed he couldn't save himself & wasn't worth saving anyhow. the one that looked to God for mercy, putting hope in nothing but God choosing to show mercy.

posthuman · Oct 29, 2019

Magenta said:

i think you're right, purple lady.

IFOLLOWHIM · Oct 29, 2019

posthuman said:

I agree with your paraphrase of the two in the temple!

when I first saw your Avatar,I thought it was posthumous!

Is unconditional election biblical?

Is unconditional election biblical?

Yes, unconditional election is biblical.

No , unconditional election is not biblical.

I don't know.

Senior Member

7seasrekeyed

Guest

Senior Member

Banned

Banned

Senior Member

Banned

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

IFOLLOWHIM

Guest

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

IFOLLOWHIM

Guest