Blessing of Election !

[tdidymas]

That's a typical bail. But, it's not me that is simply arguing for the sake of arguing. I have presented you with numerous evidences showing how verses 3-12 apply to Israel. I've asked you repeatedly to show where those things were promised to the Gentiles. You gave nothing. I showed you where Paul states explicitly that the "you" group is the Gentiles. I've shown how the Gentiles were included at a later date. You've given no evidence to support what you've said other than your opinion.

I gave adequate answers, you just refuse to read it. Again, you're just arguing your opinion, so I'm out of here.

 

[brightfame52]

But, you're not testifying to the truth, that's the point. Look at your 5 points of Calvinism and see if you can show us a single passage of Scripture that supports any one of them. Can you show any Scripture that says man is totally depraved? Can you show any that says man is unconditionally elected to salvation? Can you show any that say Christ's atonement iAugs limited to only certain people? Can you show any Scripture that says God's grace is irresistible? Actually, Scripture speaks of people who resisted God's grace. Can you show anything from Scripture that states that the saints will absolutely persevere?

You won't find Scripture for these, how then can this be the Biblical truth? The sad part is that the early church actually argued against many of the points of Calvinism and called them heretical. The Gnostics held many of these positions and the early church argued vehemently against them. How can these points be Biblical truth if the first Christians argued so vehemently against them?

Calvinism has it's roots in Augustinianism. Augustine was a Gnostic before becoming a Christian. He had a Gnostic world view when he read the Scriptures. That tainted his understanding and it can be seen in his writings. Augustine changed quite bit from the original faith. Augustine's "Just War" theory is responsible for millions of Christians going to war in opposition to the Scriptures. The earliest Christian would not go to war for any reason. Augustine changed that. Augustine was also a Fatalist. He believed all things were fated. So, when he became a Christian he simply changed the source of things being fated from fate to God. He didn't change his doctrine to match what the church had taught from the very beginning. He tried instituting several of his non Biblical ideas, however, those higher up in the church prevented him from doing so. Fast forward 1200 years and we have the Reformation. Luther was an Augustinian monk and Calvin was a Stoic, they also held to Fatalism. Calvin was also familiar with Augustine's works. So, we can see how, where, and when, these ideas entered the church. Prior to the Reformation any attempts to institute these teachings of Augustine were thwarted. However, with the Reformation and no one in charge, Luther and Calvin were free to make up their own doctrines, and that they did.

Here's a quote from a very early Christian writer Justin Martyr. He wrote this around 160 AD shortly after the apostle John.

And for this [rite] we have learned from the apostles this reason. Since at our birth we were born without our own knowledge or choice, by our parents coming together, and were brought up in bad habits and wicked training; in order that we may not remain the children of necessity and of ignorance, but may become the children of choice and knowledge, and may obtain in the water the remission of sins formerly committed, there is pronounced over him who chooses to be born again, and has repented of his sins, the name of God the Father and Lord of the universe; he who leads to the laver the person that is to be washed calling him by this name alone.
Early Church Fathers - – Ante-Nicene Fathers: The Writings of the Fathers Down To A.D. 325.

Notice his statement, "him who chooses to be born again". That was the teaching of the entire early church. People chose whether or not to be born again.

Yes I am testifying to the truth.

 

[Consecrated Life]

You kept asking how do we know who is pretending. I answered the same answer that Jesus gave, "by their fruit."

If " by their fruit " is the indicator what is indicated by an individual boasting/declaring , unsolicited mind you , that they are one of the blessed elect ?
Is declaring of self appointment , unsolicited , to others an example of true " fruit bearing " as you see it ?
If it is in your mind , then fine .
But if it is not then why should it not be looked at with a jaundiced eye , as Jesus pointed out in those sounding a trumpet for themselves ?

 

[JLB]

How can one be an administrator and yet break the forum's rules that one is supposed to uphold ??????
Rule 1.4: Do not misquote or misrepresent another member. Do not state a negative opinion about a member's denomination, leaders, founders, or the veracity of a member's faith. (Exodus 20:16)

Are you misrepresenting John Calvin they way you just misrepresented me?


Actually, it turns out that John Calvin didn’t really teach what most people who claim to be Calvinist’s, promote as his doctrine.



It’s up to each individual to present what they believe here on this Forum so we can evaluate what is true and what is false…. like good Berean’s


We will start by having you answer a simple question —


What happens to those who were chosen before the foundation of the world to be holy and without blame, who don’t comply with becoming holy and without blame?





JLB

 

[Butch5]

It's your theology that's wrong. The gentiles are included when they become believers. Again, you are confusing the covenants. It appears to me you don't know what you're talking about, and just want to argue, so don't expect any more response from me on this issue.

Again, you create a straw man. Or, you simply can't follow along. If someone doesn't know what they're talking about, it's not me. I gave plenty of evidence for what I said. You, on the other hand, have presented, 'because I so' as evidence.

 

[Butch5]

I gave adequate answers, you just refuse to read it. Again, you're just arguing your opinion, so I'm out of here.

You keep telling yourself that.

 

[Butch5]

Yes I am testifying to the truth.

No, The truth was around long before the Reformation.

 

[tdidymas]

If " by their fruit " is the indicator what is indicated by an individual boasting/declaring , unsolicited mind you , that they are one of the blessed elect ?
Is declaring of self appointment , unsolicited , to others an example of true " fruit bearing " as you see it ?
If it is in your mind , then fine .
But if it is not then why should it not be looked at with a jaundiced eye , as Jesus pointed out in those sounding a trumpet for themselves ?

If you are a mature Christian, it should be obvious. If not, then search the scriptures prayerfully that God will give you discernment. Everything we need to know for spiritual growth and edification is found in the Bible.

 

[brightfame52]

No, The truth was around long before the Reformation.

Yes, Im testifying to the truth.

 

[Butch5]

Yes, Im testifying to the truth.

That's interesting since your truth didn't exist until the Reformation.

 

[Consecrated Life]

If you are a mature Christian, it should be obvious. If not, then search the scriptures prayerfully that God will give you discernment. Everything we need to know for spiritual growth and edification is found in the Bible.

Your lack of a clear yes or no in regards to whether people declaring, unsolicited, that they are one of the few Blessed & predestined elect is true " spiritual fruit " , or more of a sounding trumpet for one's self as Jesus warned of tells me you believe the latter.
Curious to me that you are not willing to come right out and say it though .
Kind Regards , Consecrated Life .

 

[tdidymas]

Your lack of a clear yes or no in regards to whether people declaring, unsolicited, that they are one of the few Blessed & predestined elect is true " spiritual fruit " , or more of a sounding trumpet for one's self as Jesus warned of tells me you believe the latter.
Curious to me that you are not willing to come right out and say it though .
Kind Regards , Consecrated Life .

There is no way I'm going to tell you how to accuse someone when I have no idea who you're talking about. I don't cater to gossip.

 

[brightfame52]

That's interesting since your truth didn't exist until the Reformation.

Thats in your imagination.

 

[Butch5]

Thats in your imagination.

Dude, you need a reality check. Do a little research. It's not hard to see.

 

[Consecrated Life]

There is no way I'm going to tell you how to accuse someone when I have no idea who you're talking about. I don't cater to gossip.

Very generic circumstance being described, no name needed.
Not sure where you are getting that requirement from ?
Remember that Jesus did not need to identify the person's name when he pointed out the way they sounded a trumpet for themselves .

Your lack of a clear yes or no in regards to whether people declaring, unsolicited, that they are one of the few Blessed & predestined elect is true " spiritual fruit " , or more of a sounding trumpet for one's self as Jesus warned of tells me you believe the latter.
Curious to me that you are not willing to come right out and say it though .
Kind Regards , Consecrated Life

 

[tdidymas]

Very generic circumstance being described, no name needed.
Not sure where you are getting that requirement from ?
Remember that Jesus did not need to identify the person's name when he pointed out the way they sounded a trumpet for themselves .

Your lack of a clear yes or no in regards to whether people declaring, unsolicited, that they are one of the few Blessed & predestined elect is true " spiritual fruit " , or more of a sounding trumpet for one's self as Jesus warned of tells me you believe the latter.
Curious to me that you are not willing to come right out and say it though .
Kind Regards , Consecrated Life

Maybe it was the way you asked. I'll make it clear. If they are sounding a trumpet for themselves, then it's probably pretension. But then, why would you ask the question knowing the right answer, unless your question was insincere?

However, if they are sounding a trumpet to glorify God, then that's called praise. It's all through the scripture. "Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven." Some people want to share their praise of God, but others direct their energy toward being merciful or other deeds motivated by the love of God.

It could go either way, and depends on a person's attitude or agenda, which will be judged by God as praiseworthy or not. Does this make it clear?

 

[Consecrated Life]

Maybe it was the way you asked. I'll make it clear. If they are sounding a trumpet for themselves, then it's probably pretension. But then, why would you ask the question knowing the right answer, unless your question was insincere?

However, if they are sounding a trumpet to glorify God, then that's called praise. It's all through the scripture. "Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven." Some people want to share their praise of God, but others direct their energy toward being merciful or other deeds motivated by the love of God.

It could go either way, and depends on a person's attitude or agenda, which will be judged by God as praiseworthy or not. Does this make it clear?

Yes , much more so , Thank You .
There is definitely a line that can be crossed where self-glorification becomes the focus, rather than praising God .

 

[brightfame52]

Dude, you need a reality check. Do a little research. It's not hard to see.

Thats you.

 

[GodsGrace]

Your response makes me wonder if you wrongly judge Calvin and the reformers because of what you've been told or what some people in the forum say. I'm certainly no expert on Calvin, but I tend to believe the statement by a historian that if there was no Calvin, there would be no U.S.A. (our nation would be entirely different, perhaps even still under British rule). But that aside, I've read some of the major reformed confessions like the Westminster and the 1689 London Baptist, and there is very little in it that I think is not solidly biblical. I don't follow them, but I compare them with scripture, and agree where I see they agree with scripture.

No, I have not wrongly judged Calvin.
I don't go by what "I've been told".
I go by The Institutes of the Christian Religion written by John Calvin. (4 volumes).
Haven't read every word...but I've read enough.
Never in the history of Christianity did anyone believe that God chose the destiny of men; especially as to who would be saved and who would not.
Calvinists like to refer back to Augustine. Interesting that they take this one idea of Augustine (who changed his mind on several theological t opics BTW)
but discard everything else that is Catholic or they'd know that NOT EVEN the CC agrees with Predestination as Calvin taught it.
As to the Westminster Confession, if it's read carefully it does not deny what Calvin taught but states it in milder terms that I consider to be deceiving.

Many are led into Calvinism, which is a heresy, unknowingly because some pastors are afraid to state their true beliefs and might take years to convince their parishioners. This is dreadful and not the way Jesus meant HIS gospel to be preached.

But the providence of God, which is a term for God's work among people described by Paul in Rom. 8:28, was a well-established idea in Judaism long before NT times. It is mentioned in many verses of OT scripture, and some unbelieving Jews who conversed with Jesus understood it, shown by their question "what must we do to work the works of God."

What must we do to work the works of God could be discussed.
God's work amoung people does not mean He predestined anything, or His work would not be necessary since God only need have a thought to make it
materialize.
Calvinism also states that we do not have free will because all has already been predestined for us.
If this is so, why would Jesus state that some in Jerusalem were NOT WILLING to come to Him?
Matthew 23:37
37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing!

Willingness to do something, or not, denotes free will.
This verse alone disproves Calvinism.
Did Jesus not know that God predetermines all ??

So if God causes all things to work together, according to Rom. 8:28, then He must be sovereign and in complete control of all things, even the devil who needs God's permission to do anything. Even when "the whole world is under the control of the evil one" (1 Jn. 5:19, ESV), God is ultimately in control, and either lets people do what they want, or sways their choices when it suits His purpose (Prov. 16:9).

Calvinists confuse God's sovereignty with complete control.
God CAN do whatever He wishes to do.
No Christian denies God's sovereignty.
They have a problem reconciling sovereignty with our free will.
I don't know why since, as they believe, God can do anything He wishes to,,,including giving us free will.

God also does not lose control by giving us free will.
He will accomplish, in the end, what He wishes to accomplish.

 

[tdidymas]

No, I have not wrongly judged Calvin.
I don't go by what "I've been told".
I go by The Institutes of the Christian Religion written by John Calvin. (4 volumes).
Haven't read every word...but I've read enough.
Never in the history of Christianity did anyone believe that God chose the destiny of men; especially as to who would be saved and who would not.
Calvinists like to refer back to Augustine. Interesting that they take this one idea of Augustine (who changed his mind on several theological t opics BTW)
but discard everything else that is Catholic or they'd know that NOT EVEN the CC agrees with Predestination as Calvin taught it.
As to the Westminster Confession, if it's read carefully it does not deny what Calvin taught but states it in milder terms that I consider to be deceiving.

Many are led into Calvinism, which is a heresy, unknowingly because some pastors are afraid to state their true beliefs and might take years to convince their parishioners. This is dreadful and not the way Jesus meant HIS gospel to be preached.

I disagree, as "Calvinism" is not heresy, any more than the "free-will" theory is. It is simply misunderstood, as was Paul's writings, attested by Peter.

What must we do to work the works of God could be discussed.
God's work amoung people does not mean He predestined anything, or His work would not be necessary since God only need have a thought to make it
materialize.

Yet, the scripture clearly states that believers are predestined - Eph. 1:5,11, Rom. 8:29. In the context of John 6 when they asked what they must do, Jesus replied that to believe in Him is the work of God. It becomes obvious, then, that in order for someone to believe in Him, that person must already have had God working in his heart to set up the disposition for believing. Thus, He says in John 6:44-45 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day. It is written in the Prophets: ‘AND THEY SHALL ALL BE TAUGHT OF GOD.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me."

So here there are people who are taught of God, who end up coming to Christ, and there are those who are not taught of God who do not come to Him. IMO you have to completely disregard much of the NT in order to deny that God predestines believers.

Calvinism also states that we do not have free will because all has already been predestined for us.

Concerning this statement "all has already been predestined for us" what exactly do you mean by "all"? Are you talking about determinism, which is the idea that nothing happens unless God causes it?

If this is so, why would Jesus state that some in Jerusalem were NOT WILLING to come to Him?
Matthew 23:37
37 “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing!

Willingness to do something, or not, denotes free will.
This verse alone disproves Calvinism.
Did Jesus not know that God predetermines all ??

The problem with the "free will" idea is that it confuses man's natural abilities with what only God can do in the spiritual realm. Natural man obviously has a free will in relation to other people. But when the Bible says that "the whole world is under the control of the evil one," don't you think that unregenerate man is depicted as a slave of the devil, rather than someone who has the will power to control his destiny?

Jesus said "he who sins is a slave to sin" (John 8). Of course, this offended the religious leaders. They too thought they had a free will, and thought they were obeying God. But in reality, Jesus told them they were of the devil. How then, do you claim that they had a free will, when Jesus clearly stated they were slaves? It is the will of man that is in slavery and bondage, and this is what Jesus was talking about.

Calvinists confuse God's sovereignty with complete control.
God CAN do whatever He wishes to do.
No Christian denies God's sovereignty.
They have a problem reconciling sovereignty with our free will.
I don't know why since, as they believe, God can do anything He wishes to,,,including giving us free will.

God also does not lose control by giving us free will.
He will accomplish, in the end, what He wishes to accomplish.

It depends on what you mean by "complete control." If you're talking about determinism, then you're the one confused, because Reformed Theology does not teach determinism. The only people who are free to choose Christ are the ones whom God has prepared the disposition of their heart to do so. They are the ones who received mercy as Paul taught in Rom. 9. Everyone else who will end up in eternal judgment, God "endures with patience" until that time when He enacts His perfect justice on them.

According to how I read scripture, God does indeed predestine believers, as it clearly states. And in my view, it is your "free will" salvation idea that is the heresy.