Understanding God’s election

[HeIsHere]

I've moved nothing. I addressed the post before me.

I believe the scripture provides ample evidence of man's fallen estate and tells why man is incapable of faith apart from the work of God on his behalf. This has been shown to you on numerable occasions. You simply choose to disregard it.

Moving the goal post are the pastors, theologians etc., who publish books, write articles, radio programs, websites etc.,
Unfortunately then there are those who fall prey to the evolving parlance.

There is nothing to disregard.

Sorry but the Greek in Ephesians 2:8 does not support your thesis although the "goal post movers" have worked triple over time to destroy the truth of Paul's proclamation to fit the false doctrine.

 

[cv5]

Pure Rubbish! See Rom 9. God's election unto salvation of Issac and Jacob and His election unto reprobation of Ishmael, Esau and Pharaoh had not a thing to do with their conduct. Election has nothing to do with man's desire or his actions (v.16).

Absolute Calvinite nonsense.
Esau literally abandoned his Abrahamic birthright and inheritance. Literally at the point of what HE thought (but not what Jacob KNEW) was the point of his death. A clear act of his own free will BTW.

[Heb 12:16 KJV] 16 Lest there [be] any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of meat sold his birthright.

[Gen 25:32, 34 KJV] 32 And Esau said, Behold, I [am] at the point to die: and what profit shall this birthright do to me? ...

34 Then Jacob gave Esau bread and pottage of lentiles; and he did eat and drink, and rose up, and went his way: thus Esau despised [his] birthright.

You have zero comprehension of Rom 9. Like none.

 

[cv5]

In James, being no respecter of persons means dealing with all the same. In Acts, Peter says God is no respecter of persons because salvation is for all races.

So you you were just kidding earlier?

 

[cv5]

Unfortunately then there are those who fall prey to the evolving parlance.

That is part of their game alright.

 

[Cameron143]

So you you were just kidding earlier?

No. You misunderstand the context. God is still saying He moves sovereignly. That He moved is evidenced by the response. That He doesn't, simply means He isn't moving.
For instance, God forgives a sinner who earnestly asks. What conditions cause someone to earnestly ask? Perhaps when the Spirit of God convicts an individual of his fault? Who moves first? Does an individual convict themselves? Was the Spirit leading in this? Regardless of how you answer, all who do ask forgiveness sincerely will be forgiven. That all are forgiven is what shows God to be no respecter of persons. If say He only forgave one race of people who met the condition, then He would be a respecter of persons.
I'm surprised that so many people who profess to be led of the Spirit would think that in such an estate they are making the choices.

 

[Magenta]

the truth of Paul's proclamation

From Romans 7:18-19 Journey from Inability to Ability I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out... I keep on doing the evil I do not want to do. Praise be to God for circumcising my sinful nature, causing me to obey by putting His Holy Spirit in me, and giving me a new heart.

 

[Rufus]

The God of the bible is not balanced out by His attributes.

“God is love,” declares it is God’s intrinsic character, it is NOT one piece of the pie.... it what underlies all God's attributes.

Therefore God then can never deny his innate nature and contradict love.
And sovereignty (correctly understood) is never to be viewed as part of balancing out God's love.
That is not scriptural.

But LOVE isn't God's name either, is it? HOLY, HOLY, HOLY IS his Name. Holiness, righteousness and justice also declare God's inherent character.

And you might want to consider what and who God loves!

 

[Cameron143]

Moving the goal post are the pastors, theologians etc., who publish books, write articles, radio programs, websites etc.,
Unfortunately then there are those who fall prey to the evolving parlance.

There is nothing to disregard.

Sorry but the Greek in Ephesians 2:8 does not support your thesis although the "goal post movers" have worked triple over time to destroy the truth of Paul's proclamation to fit the false doctrine.

I know for a fact that a number of people have shared dozens and dozens of verses that display man's inability due to his fallen nature.

 

[Magenta]

I know for a fact that a number of people have shared dozens and dozens of verses that display man's inability due to his fallen nature.

Man's depravity vs God's Grace

 

[Rufus]

YOU PROVE IT!

I am gauging by God's nature. Just. Fair… Always truthful.

You guys keep transforming God's nature into Satan's nature without realizing it.

God is going to do what He damn well pleases!

In other words, you can't prove it. You just make stupid statements and people are supposed to believe you because...???? Rom 8:28-30; 9 clearly prove that God's election is not dependent on the man who wills or the man who runs. Eph 1:11 also proves that God's will is not contingent upon any of his moral agents, since he does all things according to the counsel of his own will -- not according to the counsel of man's will. And what part of Jer 10:23 can't you understand?

You better start gauging biblical truth by scripture instead of your profane notions of of what is "just" or "fair".

 

[Rufus]

Total depravity doesn't mean as you suspect. It doesn't mean that man is corrupted to the uttermost. It simply means man is corrupted in all his faculties.
Being no respecter of persons also doesn't mean what you suspect. It simply means God's choices aren't based on anything concerning the individual, but His own sovereign choice. David was a man after God's own heart. Most believe this means David was like God. But that isn't what it means. It simply means that God's choice was David, while the people's choice was Saul.
I would venture that I know personally many more "chosenites" than you. My experience has found them to be amongst the most caring and loving people I have encountered.

And that's because the Doctrines of Grace humble God's elect. Once the concept of grace permeates a soul, that person knows he has absolutely nothing of which to boast. That person like Peter, Cornelius, the centurion, etc. who sent for Jesus, know just how unworthy of God's love and grace he or she is.

 

[cv5]

In other words, you can't prove it. You just make stupid statements and people are supposed to believe you because...???? Rom 8:28-30; 9 clearly prove that God's election is not dependent on the man who wills or the man who runs. Eph 1:11 also proves that God's will is not contingent upon any of his moral agents, since he does all things according to the counsel of his own will -- not according to the counsel of man's will. And what part of Jer 10:23 can't you understand?

You better start gauging biblical truth by scripture instead of your profane notions of of what is "just" or "fair".

Every reference you make you also mis-interpret in woefully consistent fashion, while swirling dizzily in the vortex of Calvinite heresy.

The Promise. Found by those who seek it, pursued by those who desire it, treasured by those who "hang on" to it like Jacob.

[Rom 9:8 KJV]
That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these [are] not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

[Rom 9:9 KJV]
For this [is] the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son.

 

[Inquisitor]

No. You misunderstand the context. God is still saying He moves sovereignly. That He moved is evidenced by the response. That He doesn't, simply means He isn't moving.
For instance, God forgives a sinner who earnestly asks. What conditions cause someone to earnestly ask? Perhaps when the Spirit of God convicts an individual of his fault? Who moves first? Does an individual convict themselves? Was the Spirit leading in this? Regardless of how you answer, all who do ask forgiveness sincerely will be forgiven. That all are forgiven is what shows God to be no respecter of persons. If say He only forgave one race of people who met the condition, then He would be a respecter of persons.
I'm surprised that so many people who profess to be led of the Spirit would think that in such an estate they are making the choices.

You may be over-doing the sovereignty of God.

God has indeed allowed a level of human choice within His sovereignty.

I oppose the concept that mankind exhibits a freewill, i.e., that anyone can choose salvation without
a divine first cause. Is plainly a false idea and misunderstands that no one is righteous. We are at a basic
level opposed to God and sin is the red flag.

Does this then mean God chooses who will be saved?

Certainly not, the overarching trait that Jesus taught us is His love for humanity. That is, God loves both the Jew
and the Gentile. That is what the letter to the Romans teaches us. Israel were grafted out because they refused
to believe in Jesus. The Gentiles did believe in Jesus and had the green light.

We need to be gentle in our understanding of God's ways.

Paul ultimately stated that God's ways were a mystery and they still are today.

Romans 11:25
For I do not want you, brothers and sisters, to be uninformed of this mystery so that you
will not be wise in your own estimation...

The clear sovereignty of God and a permitted level of human interaction, of human will.
They are both at play within the scripture.

 

[cv5]

that anyone can choose salvation without
a divine first cause.

One CANNOT choose salvation without a Divine first cause. Absolutely no doubt about it.
Because there would be nothing to choose in the first place.
So no argument there.

Furthermore, God is ALWAYS the first and Prime Mover.
He FIRST does the "calling", and we bear the responsibility to respond.

Everybody knows the relevant passages so no need to post them once again.

 

[cv5]

And you might want to consider what and who God loves!

Satan. Definitely Satan. The ultimate "elder son" of Luke 15, the former king of the former Eden, the one to whom the sop of honor was given by Christ in an offer of fellowship and love.

Along with everybody and everything else.

[2Sa 19:4 KJV]
But the king covered his face, and the king cried with a loud voice, O my son Absalom, O Absalom, my son, my son!

 

[Kroogz]

The only part of TULIP that I agree with is "P".

I was entrenched in the calvies/reformed theology. If you go down the rabbit hole and reach the calvies dungeon.....It's not "preservation." It is closer to the Armins "loss of salvation."

The calvies....... IF you don't persevere in the faith and produce the works that they require to see from you.....You will lose the salvation you THOUGHT you had. You were not really saved.

The Armins just say......You will lose salvation.

Eternal security is preservation not perseverance. If the believer doesn't advance, the Lord has discipline,harsh discipline if required. And loss of blessing, loss of reward, loss of rank, loss of crowns,ect.

All believers enter the kingdom, but not all will inherit the Kingdom.

After being in a reformed church, I disagree with ALL of tulip. Some may sound good on the surface, but they all go off the rails if one really gets to know the bottom level of their beliefs.

 

[Cameron143]

You may be over-doing the sovereignty of God.

God has indeed allowed a level of human choice within His sovereignty.

I oppose the concept that mankind exhibits a freewill, i.e., that anyone can choose salvation without
a divine first cause. Is plainly a false idea and misunderstands that no one is righteous. We are at a basic
level opposed to God and sin is the red flag.

Does this then mean God chooses who will be saved?

Certainly not, the overarching trait that Jesus taught us is His love for humanity. That is, God loves both the Jew
and the Gentile. That is what the letter to the Romans teaches us. Israel were grafted out because they refused
to believe in Jesus. The Gentiles did believe in Jesus and had the green light.

We need to be gentle in our understanding of God's ways.

Paul ultimately stated that God's ways were a mystery and they still are today.

Romans 11:25
For I do not want you, brothers and sisters, to be uninformed of this mystery so that you
will not be wise in your own estimation...

The clear sovereignty of God and a permitted level of human interaction, of human will.
They are both at play within the scripture.

I agree that God works within the choices of men. But if you read Acts 2:37 you find God enabling ears to here and circumsizes the heart. I believe this is what alters the volition and leads to...what shall we do?
Many more than 3000 people heard Peter's sermon. What caused some to believe while others did not? As I understand the passage, the working of hearing and the pricking of the heart is the answer. Both these things done internally are works that only God can do. So while I believe fallen man has the ability to understand and make choices, I also believe that those choices are subject to His nature. Since I don't believe choosing God to be possible in the fallen nature, I believe God must first alter the corruption of the fallen nature before man can choose outside of that nature and its corruption.

 

[Rufus]

Every reference you make you also mis-interpret in woefully consistent fashion, while swirling dizzily in the vortex of Calvinite heresy.

The Promise. Found by those who seek it, pursued by those who desire it, treasured by those who "hang on" to it like Jacob.

[Rom 9:8 KJV]
That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these [are] not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

[Rom 9:9 KJV]
For this [is] the word of promise, At this time will I come, and Sara shall have a son.

Yeah...and what exactly did Issac and Jacob have to do with God's eternal decree that he made regarding their eternal destiny? Were Issac and Jacob seated next to God's throne in heaven begging him to make that decree on their behalf?

And what part of Rom 9:16 don't you get? This passage alone precludes any possibility that the "children of promise" played any role in God's election of them. Where is the idea of "seeking" in Rom 9, especially considering what Paul taught earlier in 3:11? You have no shame or qualms about distorting, twisting and perverting God's holy Word, do you? The only reason Issac and Jacob in temporal reality sought after God was due to his eternal decree which took place long, long before they were born.

 

[Genez]

How the Calvintes escaped "total depravity" we will never know.
And how God defied His Rom 2:11 principle of being "no respecter of persons" on behalf of the Calvinites is simply shocking.

Now these chosenites can look down on these OTHER "fallen men" in pity and distain. Which they do. Very commonly.
In fact this doomed hopeless "fallen man.....the other guy" prejudice is one of the Calvinite calling cards.

"Total Depravity..." is a misnomer.

It might be more accurate to say..... Man has "Inherited Depravity."

Man is inherently depraved.

Total Depravity would be making it to be that there is nothing for God to save.
It would be like saying a car that is declared to be 'totalled' has nothing good in its content.
Yet, many parts may be perfectly fine, and to be transferred to another vehicle that will use those parts.

 

[cv5]

I was entrenched in the calvies/reformed theology. If you go down the rabbit hole and reach the calvies dungeon.....It's not "preservation." It is closer to the Armins "loss of salvation."

The calvies....... IF you don't persevere in the faith and produce the works that they require to see from you.....You will lose the salvation you THOUGHT you had. You were not really saved.

The Armins just say......You will lose salvation.

Eternal security is preservation not perseverance. If the believer doesn't advance, the Lord has discipline,harsh discipline if required. And loss of blessing, loss of reward, loss of rank, loss of crowns,ect.

All believers enter the kingdom, but not all will inherit the Kingdom.

After being in a reformed church, I disagree with ALL of tulip. Some may sound good on the surface, but they all go off the rails if one really gets to know the bottom level of their beliefs.

Agree......lets do P for "preservation".
Far more accurate description in light of Who is actually doing the preserving and who is getting preserved.

Or ultimately Who is actually doing the holding-on and who thinks they are doing the holding-on.
Which is what these passages portray....
But lets not forget.....Jacob was doing his part in this drama as an act of his own will no doubt about that.

[Gen 32:24 KJV]
And Jacob was left alone; and there wrestled a man with him until the breaking of the day.

[Gen 32:25 KJV]
And when he saw that he prevailed not against him, he touched the hollow of his thigh; and the hollow of Jacob's thigh was out of joint, as he wrestled with him.

[Gen 32:26 KJV]
And he said, Let me go, for the day breaketh. And he said, I will not let thee go, except thou bless me.

[Gen 32:27 KJV]
And he said unto him, What [is] thy name? And he said, Jacob.

[Gen 32:28 KJV]
And he said, Thy name shall be called no more Jacob, but Israel: for as a prince hast thou power with God and with men, and hast prevailed.