Read Freegrace2's posts. Election means election to service from his POV
Doctrine of Unconditional Election
- Thread starter brightfame52
- 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.
Read Freegrace2's posts. Election means election to service from his POV
FreeGrace2 said:
In fact, the experience on the road to Damascus was to prove to Paul that Jesus HAD BEEN resurrected. Up to that point, he, like all the other religious leaders, viewed Him as a mere human, and therefore blasphemous for claiming to be God's Son.
We simply DON'T KNOW WHEN Paul actually believed.
Amazing. Another verse that PROVES that election is to service. God's will was for Paul to SEE Jesus and hear words from Him.
And what were those words?
5 “Who are you, Lord?” Saul asked. “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” he replied.
6 “Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”
So, what was Paul told in the city? At this point, there is no mention of Paul believing anything.
11 The Lord told him, “Go to the house of Judas on Straight Street and ask for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying.
12 In a vision he has seen a man named Ananias come and place his hands on him to restore his sight.”
The Lord instructed Ananias to go see Paul and restore his sight.
15 But the Lord said to Ananias, “Go! This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel.
16 I will show him how much he must suffer for my name.”
The Lord told Ananias that Paul was His "chosen instrument to proclaim My name to the Gentiles". That is election to SERVICE, not salvation.
The result:
20 At once he began to preach in the synagogues that Jesus is the Son of God.
[QUOTE\]I'm not going to refute all of your points as it wouldn't be worth the effort[/QUOTE]
lol again. You aren't going to because you CAN'T and you know it. The ONLY WAY you could refute my claim about election is IF IF IF you could quote a verse that clearly shows election is to salvation. But you haven't because you CAN'T. And you can't because there are no such verses. iow, you have NO EVIDENCE for your understanding of election.
The calvinist view of election is that God has chosen "certain people" to believe. From that, He then saves them. But there is NO EVIDENCE for that in Scripture. And you know it. You just can't let go of what you have been taught.
If you would only apply the Berean study method of Acts 17:11, you would realize what election really is.
I've given you plenty of verses that clearly show election being to service, not salvation.
You've given NOTHING to show election being to salvation.
In fact, the experience on the road to Damascus was to prove to Paul that Jesus HAD BEEN resurrected. Up to that point, he, like all the other religious leaders, viewed Him as a mere human, and therefore blasphemous for claiming to be God's Son.
Just read the account. Do you disagree that the religious leaders (Pharisees and Sadducees) viewed Jesus as a mere human? That is WHY they condemned Him to the cross: for blasphemy. You are free to disagree all you want. But the facts are quite clear.
That is quite unclear. He spent 3 days blind thinking about what he experienced. And what Ananias said to him doesn't make clear WHEN Paul believed. It just as easily have been when Paul's dream about Ananias came true that convinced Paul.
We simply DON'T KNOW WHEN Paul actually believed.
22:14 - “Then he said: ‘The God of our ancestors has chosen you to know his will and to see the Righteous One and to hear words from his mouth.
Amazing. Another verse that PROVES that election is to service. God's will was for Paul to SEE Jesus and hear words from Him.
And what were those words?
5 “Who are you, Lord?” Saul asked. “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting,” he replied.
6 “Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.”
So, what was Paul told in the city? At this point, there is no mention of Paul believing anything.
11 The Lord told him, “Go to the house of Judas on Straight Street and ask for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying.
12 In a vision he has seen a man named Ananias come and place his hands on him to restore his sight.”
The Lord instructed Ananias to go see Paul and restore his sight.
15 But the Lord said to Ananias, “Go! This man is my chosen instrument to proclaim my name to the Gentiles and their kings and to the people of Israel.
16 I will show him how much he must suffer for my name.”
The Lord told Ananias that Paul was His "chosen instrument to proclaim My name to the Gentiles". That is election to SERVICE, not salvation.
The result:
20 At once he began to preach in the synagogues that Jesus is the Son of God.
The Bible tells us what God chose Paul to do in v.15. Election is to service.
This is lol. You have a very bad habit of believing what the Bible DOESN'T SAY. Where is the verse showing election being to salvation? You still have not provided one.
[QUOTE\]I'm not going to refute all of your points as it wouldn't be worth the effort[/QUOTE]
lol again. You aren't going to because you CAN'T and you know it. The ONLY WAY you could refute my claim about election is IF IF IF you could quote a verse that clearly shows election is to salvation. But you haven't because you CAN'T. And you can't because there are no such verses. iow, you have NO EVIDENCE for your understanding of election.
You are free to misunderstand whatever you want. But I've shown from many many verses that specifically and clearly show that election is to service.
To clarify your continued confusion, God HAS chosen "certain people" to salvation. These "certain people" are believers.
The calvinist view of election is that God has chosen "certain people" to believe. From that, He then saves them. But there is NO EVIDENCE for that in Scripture. And you know it. You just can't let go of what you have been taught.
If you would only apply the Berean study method of Acts 17:11, you would realize what election really is.
I've given you plenty of verses that clearly show election being to service, not salvation.
You've given NOTHING to show election being to salvation.
God has and will keep His promises perfectly: that God's eternal blessing was intended to Abraham's spiritual (not physical) seed -- was evident when He gave it to Abraham: it will be fulfilled, accordingly; that the stipulation in His covenant to the nation of Israel to give them blessings, was conditioned upon their actions - which stipulation Israel agreed to - and which stipulations they failed; that His stipulation to curse Israel for failure - which stipulation Israel agreed to -- was correctly invoked after repeated warnings to them by God. So, you see God has been, and will continue to be perfectly faithful to all that He said He would do.
You know, it might just be that the problem is with yourselves and not with God, in that you don't understand the intent/conditions of His promises/covenants. Therefore, rest assured that God will perfectly keep them. Any hope that someone has placed in God being faithful to His promises, is well placed hope indeed.
I would have to disagree. Even Arminians seem to accept that election is to salvation. They just explain it differently than calvinists.
To the calvinist, God chooses/elects who will believe, and then is saved.
To the arminian, God chooses to save those who will believe, based on his omniscience.
rogerg said:
Overall, I've found two, but I guess there could be other permutations.
Some believe it represents those whom God has chosen from the foundation of the world to salvation (my belief too)
Some believe it is to service
Hope that helps
Overall, I've found two, but I guess there could be other permutations.
Some believe it represents those whom God has chosen from the foundation of the world to salvation (my belief too)
Some believe it is to service
Hope that helps
Then read my posts. Election is to service, which I have proved with many many verses. And I have many more that clearly show election being to service.
K
kaylagrl
Guest
True. I believe that there are different points that some may hold to that aren't solid choices hard one way or the other. Those are simple the names of the two stands I have seen. That doesn't mean that everyone holds totally to one or the other theology.
That is totally irrelevant to the question of Saul's salvation.
Becoming saved and born-again, as opposed to its manifestation into someone's life, does not happen immediately. God used Saul, as His tool to make visible for our edification how it transpires so that our confidence would grow.
We do know. It occurred unquestionably on the road to Damacus; however, belief is not what causes salvation, belief is the result of
salvation. God's saving is what causes salvation.
There doesn't need to be mention of it - you are trying to impose your own requirements on the verses to make them agree with your own conclusions. Saul communicated directly with God Himself on the road to Damacus. Saul was blinded. By it, Saul's changed from wanting to kill Christians to wanting to be one and of being willing to die for Christ. That is all we need in order to know that Saul was saved/born again and believed. There are many other cases in the Bible where someone was saved but they themselves didn't specifically say they believed, nevertheless, they did. We know by their actions.
There is no debate that those who become saved are to perform good works - primarily, the sharing the gospel; however, a knowledge of, and a desire to share it are attributes (fruit of the Holy Spirit) given to those saved, which means they must have first become saved, which means they must be of the elect. You cannot not go to your "service", without having first gone through being saved and born-again; that is, service doesn't just start with service (using your term), and if it doesn't start that way, then logically speaking, election can't be election to service.
Many of us have provided you with numerous verses that confirm the existence of the doctrine of election. You reject those verses because you cannot perceive from your heart that God is merciful unto salvation and believe instead that it is the receiver's responsibility to earn or make it happen in some way. To elect (or election) to salvation, is a label that defines a concept. You've chosen to outright ignore that concept when confronted by it if it is described by other words. No fair reading of Eph 1 (among many others) would permit any other determination than of election to salvation unless you twist its words into what you want them to mean.
It all comes down to this: Christ alone is the Saviour, we are not.
ok I will grant you this.
He is however the only person I have ever heard in my 40 years of going to churches around the united states that says this. So I would not count him as a secondary major opinion.
The rest of us believe in election. We just have different views of what that means
Jesus was God's elect. Was Jesus in need of salvation? There are elect angels. Were these angels in need of salvation? The answer is no on all accounts. The word elect is only to service, never to salvation.
This is WRONG
But since you REFUSE to look at the actual words in Genesis and leviticus. We will never get anywhere, That is why I said, Until you do that. there is no need of going further..
FreeGrace2 said:
Just read the account. Do you disagree that the religious leaders (Pharisees and Sadducees) viewed Jesus as a mere human? That is WHY they condemned Him to the cross: for blasphemy. You are free to disagree all you want. But the facts are quite clear.
But, why can't you explain John 6:70,71, where Jesus plainly says that He chose the 12, one of which was Judas, an unbeliever who betrayed Him. That is a clear example of being elected for service, but you won't admit it.
Your statement is a complete FALSEHOOD since I haven't ignored anything. But YOU have failed to provide ANY verse that says what you believe.
All you've provided are a lot of calvinist talking points, none of which are found in the Bible showing election to salvation.
And you know it.
Just read the account. Do you disagree that the religious leaders (Pharisees and Sadducees) viewed Jesus as a mere human? That is WHY they condemned Him to the cross: for blasphemy. You are free to disagree all you want. But the facts are quite clear.
It has everything to do with it. Paul, as a Pharisee, viewed Jesus the SAME WAY the religious leaders did. You are only kidding yourself.
One is not saved by a build up of confidence. One is saved by fully trusting solely in the completed work of Christ on the cross who paid fully for our sins. Salvation is a gift.
There is NO evidence for that. Paul had to marinate for 3 days after what he saw.
Wrong. Calvinist talking point. Not found in Scripture. Man believes from the heart, not from God, not from grace. From the heart.
But you don't know WHEN that occurred; no longer wanting to arrest or kill Christians. It is you who are trying to impose your calvinist requirements on the verses to make them agree with calvinist theories.
EVERY believer is "of the elect". Again, you are simply forcing your calvinist theory onto election.
I never said otherwise. In fact, Eph 1:4 says that God chose believers (us) to be holy and blameless. Of course one must be saved before they can be "holy and blameless.
But, why can't you explain John 6:70,71, where Jesus plainly says that He chose the 12, one of which was Judas, an unbeliever who betrayed Him. That is a clear example of being elected for service, but you won't admit it.
I didn't say it did, so please don't try to put words in my mouth.
Clearly NOT the "Calvinist doctrine of election". Of course the Bible teaches election. But it is, as I have PROVED, but you have rejected, an election to service. I'll bet you didn't bother to read ANY of the many verses I have already shared.
What is obvious is that your understanding of my posts is quite limited. I haven't rejected ANY verse. It is YOU who has rejected the clear teaching of election to service in all the verses I've shared.
Sure it does. So what? There are many "doctrines of demons" floating around out there, and many Christians have been deceived by them.
Tell you what. Provide the single BEST and CLEAREST verse that teaches that election is to salvation and watch me believe it.
Your statement is a complete FALSEHOOD since I haven't ignored anything. But YOU have failed to provide ANY verse that says what you believe.
True, and has NOTHING to do with election.
All you've provided are a lot of calvinist talking points, none of which are found in the Bible showing election to salvation.
And you know it.
rogerg said:
Read Freegrace2's posts. Election means election to service from his POV
I certainly agree with you that the VAST MAJORITY of evangelicals think election is to salvation. So what? If any of them would simply take the time to read the Word, they could SEE for themselves what the Bible says about it.
I can give you several pages worth of verses that prove that election is to salvation.
But only if you ask.
Now, if you have any verses that you are convinced that they show election being to salvation, please pick out the most and most clear one and share it with me. I would appreciate it.
Read Freegrace2's posts. Election means election to service from his POV
Didn't you read any of the many verses I have already shared that very plainly SHOW that election is to service?
My source for understanding election is to believe what the Bible says.
I certainly agree with you that the VAST MAJORITY of evangelicals think election is to salvation. So what? If any of them would simply take the time to read the Word, they could SEE for themselves what the Bible says about it.
I can give you several pages worth of verses that prove that election is to salvation.
But only if you ask.
Now, if you have any verses that you are convinced that they show election being to salvation, please pick out the most and most clear one and share it with me. I would appreciate it.
And...Judas Iscariot was also chosen/elected. John 6:70,71. And he was never saved.
Jesus is the Saviour - He is the one who saves. He was without sin and suffered God the Father's punishment on our behalf.
Jesus escaped nothing but took on Himself the brunt of it instead. If you look at the definition of the word "angel" it can mean messenger in addition to it being a non-earthly being. Those who become saved become God's messengers for the Gospel's sake, and as such, are angels
- a messenger, envoy, one who is sent, an angel, a messenger from God
FreeGrace2 said:
Then read my posts. Election is to service, which I have proved with many many verses. And I have many more that clearly show election being to service.
Please share with me your single best and most clear verse that shows election being to salvation. Please.
Then read my posts. Election is to service, which I have proved with many many verses. And I have many more that clearly show election being to service.
Apparently you aren't even interested in the verses I've already shared. What's wrong? Your mind is already made up and you don't want the facts, or what?
Please share with me your single best and most clear verse that shows election being to salvation. Please.
No surprise that you'd reply like this. I actually made my post for others to read, not so much you.
And I responded with this:
"Didn't you read any of the many verses I have already shared that very plainly SHOW that election is to service?"
It is interesting how calvinists howl when someone challenges their doctrines, but they STILL can't defend their doctrines from Scripture.
So they can only say they have. When they haven't.
You go on and on about how I "reject" Scripture when in fact I am rejecting calvinist theory only.
Until you can find a clear verse that shows that election is to salvation, you have no case at all. Just howling.
Quit your howling and provide evidence for your claims.
That's how you prove your claims. With evidence. Not with howling about it.
K
kaylagrl
Guest
It can be eternal, because that is what the promise/covenant says. But you want to deny that and skip ahead, fine.
I ask then: Did God reject his people? By no means! I am an Israelite myself, a descendant of Abraham, from the tribe of Benjamin. 2 God did not reject his people, whom he foreknew. Don’t you know what Scripture says in the passage about Elijah—how he appealed to God against Israel: 3 “Lord, they have killed your prophets and torn down your altars; I am the only one left, and they are trying to kill me”[a]? 4 And what was God’s answer to him? “I have reserved for myself seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to Baal.”[b] 5 So too, at the present time there is a remnant chosen by grace. 6 And if by grace, then it cannot be based on works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace.
Did God reject who?! His people. Which people? "I am an Israelite myself" not the church !! There is a remnant.
7 What then? What the people of Israel sought so earnestly they did not obtain. The elect among them did, but the others were hardened, 8 as it is written:
“God gave them a spirit of stupor,
eyes that could not see
and ears that could not hear,
to this very day.”[c]
Hardened for a time. Jews have been blinded, for a time.
11 Again I ask: Did they stumble so as to fall beyond recovery? Not at all! Rather, because of their transgression, salvation has come to the Gentiles to make Israel envious. 12 But if their transgression means riches for the world, and their loss means riches for the Gentiles, how much greater riches will their full inclusion bring!
Have they fallen beyond recovery? Not at all!!
17 If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, 18 do not consider yourself to be superior to those other branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in.” 20 Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but tremble. 21 For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.
You do not support the root the root supports you! The church does not replace the Jews.
22 Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God: sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise, you also will be cut off. 23 And if they do not persist in unbelief, they will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again.
24 After all, if you were cut out of an olive tree that is wild by nature, and contrary to nature were grafted into a cultivated olive tree, how much more readily will these, the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree!
25 I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers and sisters, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in, 26 and in this way[e] all Israel will be saved. As it is written:
“The deliverer will come from Zion;
he will turn godlessness away from Jacob.
27 And this is[f] my covenant with them
when I take away their sins.”[g]
Don't be conceited. Why? Because God is not done with the Jewish people. Blinded for a time. What time? Until the Gentiles come in. Then what does the Word say? Israel will be saved because of??? My COVENANT with them.
28 As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies for your sake; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs, 29 for God’s gifts and his call are irrevocable.
His call and His gifts are what?? Irrevocable!!
Just as you who were at one time disobedient to God have now received mercy as a result of their disobedience, 31 so they too have now become disobedient in order that they too may now[h] receive mercy as a result of God’s mercy to you. 32 For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all.
OT, NT you're still wrong. We're back where we started, with the covenant.
Silly you thought no one knew the NT. smh