Understanding God’s election

[Rufus]

God miraculously intervened in history with one of His Prophets to accomplish His will. The Prophet proclaimed the message God sent him to proclaim. The people believed God & turned from their evil way. God repented of the evil (the overthrow of Ninevah) He said He would do to them.

That's basically what we're told. It does not substantiate TULIPism Irresistible Grace in individual salvation.

But NOT the only prophet. Neither was Jonah's experience unique in terms of how God effectuates his will.

 

[studier]

God's will is irresistible! Answer this question, Einstein: Whose will prevailed in the Jonah saga: Jonah's or God's? Whose will was done in the story: rebellious Jonah's or God's? And did God send Jonah to Nineveh in vain? Did God's preached Word in Nineveh return to Him void?

The account of Jonah proves God's will was ultimately done by Jonah and it's fair to say that it was God's will for the people to believe Him and turn from evil.

It does not substantiate TULIPism Irresistible Grace in individual salvation.

 

[studier]

I'm just looking for a straight "yes" or "no" answer, which very obviously you cannot give. Why do I need a link to get a simple one word answer? I don't read answer your equivocating tomes responses that use Scripture in context.

As you say, FTFY.

 

[Rufus]

Who? Who? Was it Moses? Abraham? Noah? Isaiah? Amos? Ezekiel? Elisha? Jonah? Habakkuk? Daniel? Jeremiah? Joel? Micah? Paul????

Do tell which ONE it was!!!!

This is precisely what Studier does. He makes every effort to dichotomize passages and/or the main character in a given passage. He makes no attempt to harmonize any given passage with the rest of the bible. He'll even take an entire book of the bible (such as Jonah) and dichotomize it from the rest of scripture. To his perverse way of thinking the story of Jonah is just anomalous filler because God got bored one day and had nothing better to do than entertain the sons of men with a story that is largely irrelevant in today's world.

 

[Rufus]

As you say, FTFY.

Nah...I had it right the first time. Again, either give me the specific number to your Jer 13:23 reply or a straight up, honest, unequivocal "yes" or "no" answer to a rhetorical question.

 

[studier]

Oh, my, my....our make-believe bible scholar doesn't know where to go in the bible to find the Balaam story. Do you know where the OT is in your bible? Do you think you can find the Book of Numbers in it? And I know I'm pushing the envelope here but hey... do you think you could find chapter 22 in that book, Mr. Laziness?

Balaam is discussed in Num22-24 and then more times in Scriptures. Not using Scripture to substantiate your statements is another list of your odd practices but fits right in with your manner. As I've said before, do some real work.

 

[studier]

But NOT the only prophet. Neither was Jonah's experience unique in terms of how God effectuates his will.

Jonah is NOT the only Prophet? Agreed.

Can you name another story of a man at God's direction being swallowed and transported by a great fish?

 

[Rufus]

The account of Jonah proves God's will was ultimately done by Jonah and it's fair to say that it was God's will for the people to believe Him and turn from evil.

So, then...by virtue of the fact that God's will ultimately prevailed, then how is this fact not prima facie evidence that Jonah's eventual compliance to His will was compatible with God's will and purpose for his life and the life of the Ninevites for that matter? How does outcome of Jonah's encounter with the Lord not constitute prima facie evidence for the efficacy of God's holy, perfect, righteous will?

 

[Rufus]

Balaam is discussed in Num22-24 and then more times in Scriptures. Not using Scripture to substantiate your statements is another list of your odd practices but fits right in with your manner. As I've said before, do some real work.

Yeah...but you would want start in chapter 22. See...unlike you...I know my bible pretty well, thank you. And besides, why aren't you intimately acquainted with that account, already? Is it because God once again "bullied" a mere mortal into submission?

 

[Magenta]

The account of Jonah proves God's will was ultimately done by Jonah

HeIsHere would have us believe that God is unfair because we were not all made aware of God's will like Jonah was.

Shall we pray she gets swallowed up by a large fish? .

Ah, she might also say God was a tyrannical monster kidnapping people against their will.

Hmmmm. Well, I suppose really it should be said that God bent Jonah's will to His own, to be sure.

 

[lrs68]

Miscellaneous Thoughts on the Exodus...

What Came First: The Chicken or the Egg?

Any honest interpreter of the Exodus account can see immediately that God's declaration to Moses re Pharaoh's heart chronologically (and logically) preceded Pharaoh's willingness to harden his own heart (cf. Ex 4: 21; 7:3) The first time the narrative mentions Pharaoh and/or his officials hardening their own hearts occurs in Ex 8:15, 32; 9:34. But very clearly the emphasis in the Exodus story is on God's role in hardening the kings's heart, so in addition to the two citations above, we have these passages as well: Ex 9:12; 10:1, 20, 27; 11:10; 14:4, 8, 17, Josh 11:20; Ps 105: 23-25. When we do the math we find 12 references to God's sovereign role to only 3 references to the king's subsequent response -- a whopping 4-1 ratio! Yes, Pharoah freely and willingly chose to be obstainate, stubborn and stiff-necked towards Israel as a result of God's eternal purpose for which He raised up the king. The fact that scripture three times attributes the conditon of the kings's heart to him himself is a clear biblical testimony to the seamless and subtle integration of Pharaoh's will with God's! The two wills were NEVER at odds with each other. They were totally compatible! God wrote and directed this actor's role on God's world stage, and this royal actor willingly played his part. The more restraining grace God removed from Pharaoh's heart, the more prideful, arrogant and self-willed the king became! The less divine, spiritual grace that functioned in Pharaoh's naturally evil heart, the more fleshly and wicked he became! This becomes very obvious after the king decided to chase the Israelites down with his army to the Red Sea -- and this in spite of all that he and his officials had witnessed first hand of God's awesome power when He unleashed all His plauges upon Egypt.

Of course, the Exodus story is an excellent illustration of the doctrine of God's sovereignty taught in Prov 21:1.

More on the Exodus account in a separate post....

Hahaha talk about self serving and delusional. Not a single Verse where God claims He will harden Pharaoh's heart before Pharaoh does it himself.

And using the chicken or the egg theory shows you don't have a leg to stand on and grasping for those without a clue to come alongside and rescue you.

Like I said, show me the Verse where God hardened Pharaoh's heart before Pharaoh did it himself.

 

[studier]

RE: Post 14,232

Since I know @Rufus does not believe in universalism, I’m going to strike through his use of “All” in some of these. I'm identifying Rufus's statements with "R:" The bullet points are my responses:

R: All men are saved BY God's grace (Eph 2:8-9).

• Agreed. Men are saved by Grace through Faith and this salvation by Grace through Faith is God’s gift.
• Nothing here says God’s Grace is Irresistible.
• Nothing is said here re: man’s volition.
• This Scripture can lead to a discussion and debate about the meaning of Faith and how it comes about.

R: All men are justified freely BY God's grace (Rom 3:24), and not by man's "freewill" decision to believe the gospel.

• Disagreed due to the commentary added at the end.
• Agreed re: the first sentence which is a paraphrase of part of the verse.
• Nothing is said here re: man’s volition.
• Nothing here says God’s Grace is Irresistible.

R: All God's elect remnant are chosen by His grace (Rom 11:5).

• This verse says in part: [a] remnant has come about/exists according to/in accordance with election [of] grace. From there we work to clarify and understand the verse in context.
• Somewhere back in this thread this concept of the Remnant was discussed and the usual disagreement ensued and no agreement reached.
• Nothing is said here re: man’s volition.
• Nothing here says God’s Grace is Irresistible

R: All God's elect are sovereignly appointed BY His grace to believe (Act 13:48).

• This verse does not mention God’s elect, nor God’s sovereignty nor God’s grace.
• If I was a TULIPist on this thread I’d camp here for a while. Many TULIPists and non-TULIPists scholars have debated this verse in its context.
• The discussion typically boils down to a technical issue in the grammar based in context and the meaning of the word being translated as “appointed”. There are likely very few if any on this thread that can deal with the grammatical issue and it’s a verse that either side seems to just rest on with their different interpretations.
• Nothing is said here re: man’s volition.
• Nothing here says God’s Grace is Irresistible

R: All men who believe the gospel do so BY God's grace (Act 18:27).

• This verse speaks of those in Achaia who had believed through the grace.
• This verse does not say that all men “believe the gospel…BY God’s grace” however it’s a decent discussion based upon other Scripture.
• Nothing is said here re: man’s volition.
• Nothing here says God’s Grace is Irresistible

 

[studier]

So, then...by virtue of the fact that God's will ultimately prevailed, then how is this fact not prima facie evidence that Jonah's eventual compliance to His will was compatible with God's will and purpose for his life and the life of the Ninevites for that matter? How does outcome of Jonah's encounter with the Lord not constitute prima facie evidence for the efficacy of God's holy, perfect, righteous will?

Remind me, are you arguing for or against Irresistible Grace and Compatibility meaning God forces men to believe and to do things?

 

[studier]

Yeah...but you would want start in chapter 22. See...unlike you...I know my bible pretty well, thank you. And besides, why aren't you intimately acquainted with that account, already? Is it because God once again "bullied" a mere mortal into submission?

No pertinent Scripture actually pointed to. It's up to you to try to substantiate what you say with some specific Scripture. You rarely if ever miss a chance for some unexplained proof-texting. Why you're refusing now is anyone's guess. If you want to deal with 1 or more chapters of Scripture and lay out your case contextually, please do, just as I've been asking you to do for longer than I care to think about.

 

[Rufus]

There we go, back to the basic lists of TULIP verses to be easily found published on the internet. Back to the throwing stuff on the wall for other to clean up.

The problem here is if someone requests to examine any of these Scriptures verse by verse in context Rufus will distract, divert, respond with fallacious argumentation techniques, and disappear from any such work in Scripture.

Firstly, a look at a couple of the tactics here:

• Rather than "Irresistible Grace" - the "I" in TULIP - some choose to rename it and call it Efficacious Grace. Efficacious is a word that means the ability of something to produce a desired or intended result.
  • This strategic wording sets up an attack against opponents of TULIP who believe man can and does resist God’s Grace.
  • As Efficacious rather than Irresistible, an opponent can now be alleged to be saying God’s Grace does not have the ability to produce God’s desired or intended result.
  • So, opponents to Irresistible Grace are now alleged to be attacking God’s power. So, they are alleged to be attacking God and are thus alleged enemies and haters of God.
  • We can search back through this thread and see all of this taking place.
  • Biblical Grace is not the issue. Irresistible Grace is the issue. Efficacious Grace is the tactic.
• There are no opponents to TULIP on this thread that I can recall who don't believe God by His Grace is the primary cause of man's salvation.
  • Salvation is God's Plan and gift and opponents to TULIP do not think otherwise not do they believe that accepting a gift makes them the giver of the gift, which is some very strange stab at logic used to make an empty allegation.

Pure nonsense! All FWers believe that it is their "freewill" decision to repent and believe the gospel that triggers God's saving response. In fact, FWers believe that God doesn't actually save anyone but provides the mere OPPORTUNITY to be saved.

"Efficacious" means "having the POWER to produce the desired effect". If this kind of power can be resisted by sinners, then God's grace is neither efficacious or irresistible. BUT...if a sinner does not innately possess greater power to overcome God's grace, then His grace is efficacious or irresistible. Take your pick, Mr. Wanna-be wordsmith.

 

[Rufus]

Remind me, are you arguing for or against Irresistible Grace and Compatibility meaning God forces men to believe and to do things?

Your objection to the Five Doctrines of Grace forces you FWers to try to rebut the Doctrines with your lame theory that if God's grace is irresistible then he must be forcing men to repent and believe. I do NOT believe that God forces anyone to repent and believe the gospel.

So, now answer the question I asked. How is the account of Jonah not prima facie evidence that God's WILL is efficacious in nature?

 

[Rufus]

Who? Who? Was it Moses? Abraham? Noah? Isaiah? Amos? Ezekiel? Elisha? Jonah? Habakkuk? Daniel? Jeremiah? Joel? Micah? Paul????

Do tell which ONE it was!!!!

That should be easy peasy for Studier to answer since he boiled it all down to just ONE prophet. Maybe the "one prophet" was Jesus?

 

[Rufus]

RE: Post 14,232

Since I know @Rufus does not believe in universalism, I’m going to strike through his use of “All” in some of these. I'm identifying Rufus's statements with "R:" The bullet points are my responses:

R: All men are saved BY God's grace (Eph 2:8-9).

• Agreed. Men are saved by Grace through Faith and this salvation by Grace through Faith is God’s gift.
• Nothing here says God’s Grace is Irresistible.
• Nothing is said here re: man’s volition.
• This Scripture can lead to a discussion and debate about the meaning of Faith and how it comes about.

R: All men are justified freely BY God's grace (Rom 3:24), and not by man's "freewill" decision to believe the gospel.

• Disagreed due to the commentary added at the end.
• Agreed re: the first sentence which is a paraphrase of part of the verse.
• Nothing is said here re: man’s volition.
• Nothing here says God’s Grace is Irresistible.

R: All God's elect remnant are chosen by His grace (Rom 11:5).

• This verse says in part: [a] remnant has come about/exists according to/in accordance with election [of] grace. From there we work to clarify and understand the verse in context.
• Somewhere back in this thread this concept of the Remnant was discussed and the usual disagreement ensued and no agreement reached.
• Nothing is said here re: man’s volition.
• Nothing here says God’s Grace is Irresistible

R: All God's elect are sovereignly appointed BY His grace to believe (Act 13:48).

• This verse does not mention God’s elect, nor God’s sovereignty nor God’s grace.
• If I was a TULIPist on this thread I’d camp here for a while. Many TULIPists and non-TULIPists scholars have debated this verse in its context.
• The discussion typically boils down to a technical issue in the grammar based in context and the meaning of the word being translated as “appointed”. There are likely very few if any on this thread that can deal with the grammatical issue and it’s a verse that either side seems to just rest on with their different interpretations.
• Nothing is said here re: man’s volition.
• Nothing here says God’s Grace is Irresistible

R: All men who believe the gospel do so BY God's grace (Act 18:27).

• This verse speaks of those in Achaia who had believed through the grace.
• This verse does not say that all men “believe the gospel…BY God’s grace” however it’s a decent discussion based upon other Scripture.
• Nothing is said here re: man’s volition.
• Nothing here says God’s Grace is Irresistible

But none of the "by grace" verses that I quoted or cited are qualified as you are doing! Paul did not qualify any of those passages! Since all the passages are unqualified, then there is no logical reason to believe that God's grace was either ineffective or relied on the contingency of any of his elect's choices.

 

[Rufus]

The Lord's Prayer reads in part:

Matt 6:9-10
9 "This, then, is how you should pray:

"'Our Father in heaven,
hallowed be your name,
10 your kingdom come,
your will be done
on earth as it is in heaven.
NIV

My question to you FWers has to do with v.10, especially the highlighted part. Jesus taught that we should pray that God's will be done here on planet earth just as it is done in heaven. My question, therefore, is this: Is God's will in heaven contingent on his angels' choices or volition or does God act unilaterally in heaven?

 

[lrs68]

As I pray Your Will be done on earth as in Heaven I am surrendering so my will doesn't get in the way. Even Jesus surrendered His Will so the Father's Will would be done.