Understanding God’s election

[Mem]

Thanks! I am pleased you didn't take offence.

I could never rightly take offense to the truth. And such the nerd that I am truly appreciated it as a bonus that you provided a more detail explanation of the mite in relation to the shekel!

 

[PaulThomson]

The proof is that he is saved. The proof that it wasn't extended at other times is that he wasn't saved.

Are you suggesting that if God extends grace through faith an individual will not be saved?

We are saved in grace through faith. That is, we are saved by entering into beginning an act of faith that God's grace has provided for all to be able to do, and completing that act of faith, hence through faith. The act of faith is believing in the heart that Jesus is rose from the dead and confessing that Jesus is Lord, something God ensures is not beyond the reach of any person to perform. if they are willing.

Grace and faith are not substances that God can dish out with teaspoon or buckets. They are abstract descriptors of modes of behaviour. Grace describes the way a person may choose to husband their resources. Faith describes the way a person may choose to treat someone or something. God chooses to make the gift of salvation by belief and confession available to all without prejudice. Man chooses to trust that God is genuine in His gracious offer, and it is available even to me.
Hence, "In grace we are having been saved through faith".

 

[GWH]

lol touché

——

Of course seeming Catholic is bad and you’re not helping your case with the last paragraph lol

So you were raised Baptists, any idea where the Catholicism began to seep in-if you don’t mind me asking.

I was raised in New England, it’s infested with Catholics. Mum went to catholic school, I was raised in public, but the teachers may as well been nuns with all the yard stick action I saw lol

I am quite familiar with RC, having served a church in Maryland, and having viewed RC hosts on RAV for a few years, and so I know that there are many who disavow inquisition and papalism and are compatible with Protestants, even Evangelicals.

I guess you view "ecumenical" as not helping my case, but it means the opposite of denominationalism and divisiveness, and so was prayed for by Jesus in JN 17 and commanded by Paul in 1CR 3.

Again, I need you to specifically cite where you think RC seeps into the kerygma.

 

[Hakawaka]

I am quite familiar with RC, having served a church in Maryland, and having viewed RC hosts on RAV for a few years, and so I know that there are many who disavow inquisition and papalism and are compatible with Protestants, even Evangelicals.

I guess you view "ecumenical" as not helping my case, but it means the opposite of denominationalism and divisiveness, and so was prayed for by Jesus in JN 17 and commanded by Paul in 1CR 3.

Again, I need you to specifically cite where you think RC seeps into the kerygma.

You are supposed to have unity and no denominationalism. The issue with ecumenicalism is that that movement brings in everyone, including those not in the truth.

 

[GWH]

You are supposed to have unity and no denominationalism. The issue with ecumenicalism is that that movement brings in everyone, including those not in the truth.

Yes, as is the case with many words, ecumenicism can refer to striving for peace among Christians
but also refer to that errant movement.

 

[GWH]

You did not get that impression. You made it up and posted it as a fact when you had absolutely nothing to base it on.
That is called bearing false witness. You had a list of things you made up and decided were true based on your sick imagination.

1 John 4:8b~ God is Love

I am glad we agree that God is love, but it would be helpful regarding my false impression for you to compare my clarification (“I glorify God for loving all of humanity and gracing every sinner with sufficient volition so they may seek salvation, find the Gospel, choose to follow Christ
and so be saved.") with a parallel statement showing how/where we agree or disagree.

 

[studier]

@studier
Here is an interesting verse with dia + accusative in one place and dia + genitive in second.
Rom 4:25
Who (hos) was delivered (paredothE) for our offences (dia hEmOn paraptOmata: accusative plural), and (kai) was raised (EgerthE) for our justification (dia hEmOn dikaiOsin: genitive singular).

So, dia + the accusative (dia paraptOmata).
Can we reason that dia + something conveys the sense of both entering and leaving that something as one complete act. Unless you both enter and leave, you did not go through. And the accusative implies movement toward, So the nuance conveyed in this dia + accusative combo is that, when Jesus was handed over, He both entered our offences (He was not bearing our offences, then He was). And He also left behind our offences (He was bearing them and then He was not). Hence "through our offences". And since the action in view is being handed over (to death), the movement involved in handing over is toward the thing through which the person is passing. Hence the accusative case is the natural choice. Jesus is being handed over into bearing our offences.

Now, dia + the genitive (dia dikaiOsin).
Can we reason the same regarding dia as above. Dia + something conveys the sense of both entering and leaving that something as one complete act. Unless you both enter and leave, you did not go through. And the genitive implies movement away from. So the nuance conveyed in this dia + genitive combo is that when Jesus was raised, He entered our justification (He was not justifying us, and then He was, by taking on our sins). And He left behind our justification (He was bearing our sins in death and then He was not, after being raised). Hence "through our justification" And since the action in view is being raised (out of death), the movement involved in raising is away from the thing through which the person is passing. Hence the genitive case is the natural choice. Jesus is being raised away from bearing our offences to justify us.

This can perhaps be summarised as: "He was handed over to the bearing of our offences for a season, and was raised out of the bearing of our offences, through which He had been justifying us."

That's nice work, Paul.

I can tell you in language training that the spatial chart you posted for @Mem is something I was taught early and then it seemed to be dropped in favor of lexical definitions. But I always kept the spatial chart at hand and the way you're working with the different cases and the chart IMO is precisely what needs to be done.

I worked on and off for quite some time on the word "faith" in Scripture because I came to the point where it became clear to me that the tradition I had been trained in did not understand how it's explained and used in Scripture. One thing I learned in that study is that Scripture uses prepositions in such a precise way that we can see the flow towards, into, in, out from, away from, through, etc., of how things like faith and things we receive or that are done for us are related to Christ. IOW, make Christ the core of the spatial chart and see how the prepositions attached to the major words of our Faith interact with Christ.

It all made me realize how much detail and precision is in our Text that most just do not draw from it. What you've brought out above would likely be beneficial for me if I went back to that work and refined it and kept working on it.

Thanks for this type of detail. It's very refreshing especially compared to what these threads are discussing. And it's good to know somebody like yourself who is looking at this depth of detail is there to bring up things I may not be seeing or am seeing incorrectly.

 

[Magenta]

I am glad we agree that God is love, but it would be helpful regarding my false impression for you to compare my clarification (“I glorify God for loving all of humanity and gracing every sinner with sufficient volition so they may seek salvation, find the Gospel, choose to follow Christ and so be saved.") with a parallel statement showing how/where we agree or disagree.

Why do you pretend to know what I believe when you do not? You want me to fix your false impression as if I were privy to the workings of your wicked imagination that allows you to come to the conclusions you do based on nothing whatsoever that I have said that could be interpreted to mean Gd hates humanity as you claimed. That I blaspheme God as you have claimed. And what ever other false accusations you have levelled at me, that I may not have seen because quite frankly I had you on ignore for a while after your blatant unapologetic lies. Why don't you just stop pretending you know things you do not, stop falsely accusing people of believing things they do not, and pay better attention to what people say so you can come to better conclusions, if concluding you know what they believe is your desired end? So weird to see you thank someone in another thread for asking instead of accusing. You appreciate being on the receiving end of that type of exchange while your preferred method with me was to do that which you dislike. My preferred method is to adhere to Scripture. Many do not. You speak of volition but I would like to know what you mean by that. You objected to being counted among those who believe in the free will of the natural man, as if I had actually counted you among them when I was speaking in general terms, and did not name any names. Did your conscience prick you? Do you think a child of wrath, a lover of darkness, a slave to sin, the person who can neither receive nor comprehend the spiritual things of God, the person who is of the flesh and opposed to the things of the Spirit of God, hostile in his mind toward God and with a heart which needs replacing, the stony ground of which is inadequate and incapable of growing the seed of God's Word into anything lasting, for it is with the heart that one believes, is going to decide to believe that which is foolishness to him and to which he is inherently opposed without God first doing a work on that person? Is that what you mean to say every sinner is graced, as if they come into the world in that condition, which is contrary to what he Bible actually teaches? Do you like so many others make no distinction between the natural man and the spiritual man? Do you ascribe to the former qualities and abilities only the latter possesses?

 

[studier]

Rom 3:30
Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith (ek pisteOs), and uncircumcision through faith (dia pisteOs).

Why the difference? Maybe because Paul is assuming that Jews are beginning from a position in faith and so can be justified out of that faith, hence ek pisteOs out of faith. But the Gentiles have to come into faith before being justified out of faith, hence


Or maybe as : He went through bearing our offences, and he was raised after coming through justifying us.

Here's another interesting variation involving dia.

Rom 3:30
Seeing it is one God, which shall justify the circumcision by faith (ek pisteOs), and uncircumcision through faith (dia pisteOs).

Why the difference? Maybe because Paul is assuming that Jews are beginning from a position in faith on account of them believing Moses, and so can be justified out of that faith transferred to Jesus, hence ek pisteOs out of faith. But the Gentiles have to come into faith first before being justified out of faith, hence dia pisteOs through faith.

Again, nice work!

This is one of the threads in the NC I don't think many pick up. Some do see it and simplify it by explaining that there were believing Jews when Jesus arrived, while most treat faith as if it was a brand new thing.

The Gentile part would be interesting to delve into a bit because there were some God-fearing Gentiles who had been prepared through associating with Jews in the diaspora, so were all Gentiles in need to first come into or were some of them already in and could come out from as the Jews? Maybe the gate needed to be opened to them first and they were prepared to enter and go out from.

Thanks, Paul. This type of work seems more like redeeming time but I suppose fighting for The Faith is also part of the job as it has been for millennia.

 

[Magenta]

Again, nice work!

Too funny, since Jesus was of the opinion that they did not believe Moses.

Your accuser is Moses, in whom you have put your hope. If you had
believed Moses, you would believe Me, because he wrote about Me.

 

[studier]

Not according to Ephesians 2, where Paul writes to the Christians at Ephesus:

“And you He made alive, who were dead in trespasses and sins, in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience, among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others. But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,” (Eph 2:1-8 NKJV)

A sinner dead in trespasses and sins does not have the ability to have faith.

It might be interesting to see exactly at what point you read your presupposition into those verses.

 

[Magenta]

Jesus’ words in John 6:65 I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them. Plus Colossians 1:21 and 2:13; Ephesians 2:1a and 3b; Philippians 1:6 and 2:13

 

[Magenta]

You are supposed to have unity and no denominationalism

Oh, there you are! I was looking for you yesterday... hoping to find a thread of yours, the title of which escapes me.

But I cannot find it through your profile anyways since I do not have the ability to view it...

Still, I am glad to see you are still with us

 

[PaulThomson]

You don't get it. Grace, when imparted, exists. One can enjoy it or curse it, but it is true that rain and sunshine are a universal grace of God. Salvation is not universal to mankind. Salvation comes by grace through faith. Where grace is imparted through faith, is there any other outcome but salvation?

You are confusing grace (charis) with the thing bestowed graciously/in grace (charisma). Sunshine is not a grace (charis), it is an undeserved gift (charisma). Sloppy use of terms will produce sloppy arguments and result in faulty theology.

Where does scripture mention grace being imparted through faith? That appears to be a made up turn of phrase.

 

[Cameron143]

We are saved in grace through faith. That is, we are saved by entering into beginning an act of faith that God's grace has provided for all to be able to do, and completing that act of faith, hence through faith. The act of faith is believing in the heart that Jesus is rose from the dead and confessing that Jesus is Lord, something God ensures is not beyond the reach of any person to perform. if they are willing.

Grace and faith are not substances that God can dish out with teaspoon or buckets. They are abstract descriptors of modes of behaviour. Grace describes the way a person may choose to husband their resources. Faith describes the way a person may choose to treat someone or something. God chooses to make the gift of salvation by belief and confession available to all without prejudice. Man chooses to trust that God is genuine in His gracious offer, and it is available even to me.
Hence, "In grace we are having been saved through faith".

Grace is favor and faith is a set of beliefs. Both are exercised and known through activity. Do people know when you've done them a favor? Do people know what you believe by how you behave?
The same is true of God. When God exercises grace, it is manifested. In salvation, grace is manifested in faith. The impetus that leads to the faith is the grace.

 

[Cameron143]

You are confusing grace (charis) with the thing bestowed graciously/in grace (charisma). Sunshine is not a grace (charis), it is an undeserved gift (charisma). Sloppy use of terms will produce sloppy arguments and result in faulty theology.

Where does scripture mention grace being imparted through faith? That appears to be a made up turn of phrase.

Fine. I should have said grace is universally manifested in rain and sunshine. But you make my point for me. In salvation, grace is manifested in faith in an individual as the undeserved gift.

 

[GWH]

Why do you pretend to know what I believe when you do not? You want me to fix your false impression as if I were privy to the workings of your wicked imagination that allows you to come to the conclusions you do based on nothing whatsoever that I have said that could be interpreted to mean Gd hates humanity as you claimed. That I blaspheme God as you have claimed. And what ever other false accusations you have levelled at me, that I may not have seen because quite frankly I had you on ignore for a while after your blatant unapologetic lies. Why don't you just stop pretending you know things you do not, stop falsely accusing people of believing things they do not, and pay better attention to what people say so you can come to better conclusions, if concluding you know what they believe is your desired end? So weird to see you thank someone in another thread for asking instead of accusing. You appreciate being on the receiving end of that type of exchange while your preferred method with me was to do that which you dislike. My preferred method is to adhere to Scripture. Many do not. You speak of volition but I would like to know what you mean by that. You objected to being counted among those who believe in the free will of the natural man, as if I had actually counted you among them when I was speaking in general terms, and did not name any names. Did your conscience prick you? Do you think a child of wrath, a lover of darkness, a slave to sin, the person who can neither receive nor comprehend the spiritual things of God, the person who is of the flesh and opposed to the things of the Spirit of God, hostile in his mind toward God and with a heart which needs replacing, the stony ground of which is inadequate and incapable of growing the seed of God's Word into anything lasting, for it is with the heart that one believes, is going to decide to believe that which is foolishness to him and to which he is inherently opposed without God first doing a work on that person? Is that what you mean to say every sinner is graced, as if they come into the world in that condition, which is contrary to what he Bible actually teaches? Do you like so many others make no distinction between the natural man and the spiritual man? Do you ascribe to the former qualities and abilities only the latter possesses?

Why do you pretend not to understand English? I asked for clarification because I confessed
misunderstanding your beliefs! I prefer that you to stop making false accusations yourself and
begin seeking peace as Scripture commands.

Yes, I believe God graces every sinner/natural man with the opportunity to be saved,
because not doing so would make condemnation of them for not being spiritual men unjust.

Over...

 

[Magenta]

Why do you pretend not to understand English? I asked for clarification because I confessed
misunderstanding your beliefs! I prefer that you to stop making false accusations yourself and
begin seeking peace as Scripture commands.

Yes, I believe God graces every sinner/natural man with the opportunity to be saved,
because not doing so would make condemnation of them for not being spiritual men unjust.

Over...

I do not pretend to not to understand English, so that is just another false accusation coming from you while you say you want me seek peace. I actually have a fairly good grasp of English. How is further accusing me you seeking peace??? What am I to clarify, since you have pointed to nothing that can in any way account for your falseness in the first place in claiming I blaspheme God by ascribing hatred of humanity to Him? What false accusation have I made? You falsely accused me and that is a fact. You made a list and pretended it applied to me when it came from your own wicked imagination. Now you say you misunderstood something but there is nothing I have said that could be interpreted to mean God hates humanity. Where is any false accusation in that?

I am seeking further clarification on what you have said. Are you saying God has made alive in Christ every single person that they may rightly choose? That they actually come into the world in a condition that makes belief in God possible even though Scripture calls them children of wrath and says they are condemned already because they do not believe? Or are you saying that the spiritually dead who are opposed to the gospel and the spiritual things of God while lovers of darkness and captive to the will of the devil can of their own volition and no work done on them by God beforehand can and will simply decide/choose to believe that which is foolishness to them?

 

[Magenta]

By "no work done on them by God beforehand" I mean no further work than you seem to say say they already have.
I mean heart circumcision and being made alive in Christ. These are prerequisites according to Scripture.

This (<= link) may help you if you truly wish to understand what I believe.

 

[Jimbone]

And you have to tell them," You are totally depraved and natural. You cannot understand the life, death,burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. You have to wait around until he possibly saves you. My jesus didn't die for all men, you might be one of the un-elect."

Truth matters, right?

You're a liar. He doesn't teach or say anything like this. This is your cartoon version of "Calvinism" that you slap on others so you can ignore any real conversation and lift up yourself as a "warrior of God". It's honestly sad and tragic you're as blind to it as you are. The fact you have to lie about what your "enemy" says is a huge red flag that everything you think and stand on isn't as solid as you think it is.