5 Points of Tulip???

[Lyric's Dad]

[quote="Lyric's Dad":41267][quote="bbas 64":41267]I thought the doctrive of UR was banned here???

Peace to u,

Bill

Where were we debating UR? I thought we were discussing the fallacy of TULIP and the limited atonement lie?

Here is a reminder for you, Lyric's Dad of who brought Universal Reconciliation into the thread, and continued to promote it throughout the recent postings:

[quote="Lyric's Dad":41267]Well, this is one place we will NEVER come to an agreement at. I will never reconcile God being a forever torturer with His statement that He IS love. They are not compatible. And as for Spurgeon? I could care less what he thought. He is fallible and not the One I follow.

Just thought since you claim to follow Jesus, quoting him in scripture with the correct translation would be something that would edify your walk and correct any error that you may be holding on to. The Word of God teaches the truth for those who are in error. My post has nothing to do with Universal Reconciliation. I think Universal Reconciliation is a topic banned on this forum, therefore, I will teach the truth that Jesus teaches. Jesus teaches in Matthew 25 about the eternal destiny of the sheep and goats. They both go to two different places, one group to eternal life, and the other group to eternal punishment. When folks understand their eternal destiny without Jesus is going to be a terrible price to pay for a temporary period of sinful pleasure, they will seek out Jesus Christ for salvation.

Let us not teach lies for the truth of God's Word, especially when Jesus is so plain and precise as to the eternal destiny of each person born of the flesh.

Now for some history of this thread. The very first post that referred to Universal Reconsiliation was the following:

The "L" is false, Christ died for all, and nothing in the Bible indicates otherwise.

The next post to promote Universal Reconciliation is also from cubedbee with the following post:

The Scripture says it so many times I’m honestly surprised you could be asking me this.

1 Timothy 2:5-6 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

1 John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

.....

Wow, that’s an awfully pride-filled statement. I’m going to trust the Lordâ€â€he did in fact come to save all as is clearly evidenced in the Scripture, and I know God will never fall short in anything he wills.

.....

Yes, I agree with this. The difference is, I don’t limit the scope of God’s power.

The next post promoting Universal Reconciliation is from Lyric's Dad with the following post:

Amen Cubed. That is the truth and there is nothing that can come against it.

I find it reprehensible for some to reduce God to a being that would create some humans for the sole purpose of burning them. That is maniacal and not in any form a loving thing.

Then comes another from Lyric's Dad that continues with further promotion of Universal Reconciliation:

LOL!! You find some peace in such a statement?

Sorry, my God is not a charles manson type who sat down with an evil grin and put together little creatures so He could use them as firewood to keep it burning. Yeah, that just sounds a little sick.

God even condemned the pagan groups who made their children walk through the fire. Hey, at least those people let their kids die in the fire. According to the L, God created people for the sole purpose of forever listening to them cry in torment. Sorry, that is not a God but a demon.

My God said He is love. I am a finite being and can see that this type of thing is not at all loving. I, as a sinner and a wretch could never do that to anyone, not even my worst enemy so am I to believe that the One who IS perfect love could? No freaking way. Jesus is love, not hate and I will never believe otherwise, even if some calvin wants me to.

Next is a response to bbas 64 from Lyric's Dad:

Well, this is one place we will NEVER come to an agreement at. I will never reconcile God being a forever torturer with His statement that He IS love. They are not compatible. And as for Spurgeon? I could care less what he thought. He is fallible and not the One I follow.

Then cubedbee sets out on further Universal Reconciliation promotion in this post:

The verses I posted do in fact say that. The exact phrase "he came to save all" doesn't occur, nor does the exact word Trinity, but both are clearly taught. I posted the verses--they refer to salvation. If you think they do not, what are they referring to?

Quote:

"Wow, that’s an awfully pride-filled statement. I’m going to trust the Lordâ€â€he did in fact come to save all as is clearly evidenced in the Scripture, and I know God will never fall short in anything he wills.


Assertion, yopu have not provided a passage that says "he came to save all"


And you haven't provided one that says "He did not come to save all" So what? I provided verses that convey my assertion that Christ came to save all(yes, there are synonyms for save used in the Bible), while you in fact have not provided evidence for your assertion . You have to prove that "his people" refers to a limited number of people, instead of all people.

Quote:

Are all people saved??
Not currently.
Quote:

Is it Gods will that all people be saved?
Yes, it is. Does it get clearer than this?

1Ti 2:3-4 For this [is] good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

Quote:

How have I limted the power of God?? He uses his power to SAVE HIS PEOPLE.

Mat 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

Peace to u,

Bill
You've limited it by implying that HIS PEOPLE are only a limited number of people who meet whatever set of criteria you have in your head, instead of all of humanity as God has made clear throughout the Scripture. I am taking the words at their face value--God wills that all be saved, Christ died for all, my God is omnipotent, the power of Christ's death cannot be resisted, therefore all will be saved. Any other "interpretation" is a pure denial of the Scripture.

After all of this Universal Reconciliation promotion in the thread specifically posted for the 5 points of Tulip, I posted Jesus teaching on the eternal position of sheeps and goats in Matthew 25.

Cubedbee answers my post with the following Universal Reconciliation post:

Your first paragraph is absolute truth. Your second paragraph is not, it is a mistranslation into English, it takes something that is a finite age that Christ will ultimately end when he accomplishes God's will, a will that cannot be resisted or twarted, and falsely portrays it as eternal, a portrayal which makes a liar out of God and makes him powerless over sin, unable to ultimately conquer it even though he wills it. I will not deny God's sovereignty, God's omnipotence. Neither will I deny hell. The only way to reconcile these two is two correctly translate Aionios as an age, one of finite duration, a meaning which is definitely valid for the word and which is definitely used in certain Bible passages.

And then Lyric's Dad comes out of the pretense of not knowing the promotion of Universal Reconciliation, a false doctrine that he buys into, with the following response to bbas 64:

Where were we debating UR? I thought we were discussing the fallacy of TULIP and the limited atonement lie?

[/quote:41267]
Excuse me solo? This was not a discussion on UR as there are too many blind people who choose not to actually discuss that topic with their brains in tact so we don't do that here.
[/quote:41267]
I know that this was not a topic for discussion on Universal Reconciliation, but you and cubedbee turned it into one. Notice the posts from cubedbee and yourself. Cubedbee says that the "L" is false and that Christ died for all. BBas 64 asks cubedbee where in scripture that it says that Christ came to save all. Cubedbee replies that he is surprised that bbas 64 is asking him that question because the scripture says it so many times. He then goes on to quote various scriptures (1 Timothy 2:5-6, Hebrews 2:9, 1 John 2:2, and 1 Corinthians 15:22).

The "L" is false, Christ died for all, and nothing in the Bible indicates otherwise.

Good Day, Cubedee

Mat 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son; and thou shalt call his name JESUS; for it is he that shall save his people from their sins.


He only came to save his people, where in the Scripture does it say he came to save all?

The Scripture says it so many times I’m honestly surprised you could be asking me this.

1 Timothy 2:5-6 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

1 John 2:2 And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

1 Corinthians 15:22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.

If he in fact came to save all he has fallen short and will spend eternity un forfilled.

Wow, that’s an awfully pride-filled statement. I’m going to trust the Lordâ€â€he did in fact come to save all as is clearly evidenced in the Scripture, and I know God will never fall short in anything he wills.

He saves his people, his sheep, the ones given to him by the Father. He does not only try too, he really does save them.

All the Father gives me I "will" rasie up on the last day......

Peace to u,

Bill

Yes, I agree with this. The difference is, I don’t limit the scope of God’s power.

So cubedbee has began the Universal Reconciliation dialog within the thread of the 5 Tulips (which is not allowed by the TOS), and you, Lyric's Dad responded, not with a reminder to cubedbee to follow the rules of the TOS, but instead an AMEN to his post with a praise that it was truth and "there is nothing that can come against it". Note the post below:

Amen Cubed. That is the truth and there is nothing that can come against it.

I find it reprehensible for some to reduce God to a being that would create some humans for the sole purpose of burning them. That is maniacal and not in any form a loving thing.

After showing the history of the off topic direction that the thread has taken with the emphasis changing to the Universal Reconciliation doctrine, you, Lyric's Dad post the following response:

This was a discussion on the filthy lie of the L.

You can try and attribute all you want to me of trying to promote this doctrine but you would be wrong. I did not discuss the issue of puishment as an absolute but the fact that God setting out to choose certain people to burn up while others were chosen to be in heaven is a disgusting lunacy.

Imagine that.

I did not discuss the issue of hell being real or not though that could be fun, but the fact that God setting out to choose ahead of time certain people destined to just be burned forever and ever while others were chosen to be in heaven is a disgusting lunacy. It makes God out to be a maniac and I choose not to believe that my God is One who does such things or supports people who think they are better then others.

Furthermore, if you think I am so out of line, please do us both a favor and report me. Until that time do NOT try and manipulate my intentions.

You really ought to come to grips that your understanding is lower than God's, and your ways are not God's ways. You should not let unbelief govern your attitudes towards the truth contained in the doctrines of God in the Word of God, and should take the Words of Jesus to heart, instead of wearing his name in a false manner.

Jesus is very clear in describing the judgment of the sheep and goats. I even showed in your favorite translation where Jesus says that the goats will go to eternal punishment, and the sheep will go to eternal life. The same word is used by Jesus in both instances. You can call God's plan and Jesus' Words lunacy if you want, but you are telling on yourself. How reprehensible is this? Jesus did not say that it was reprehensible.

How long should one be able to burn in the lake of fire before it becomes lunacy or maniacal? I wonder why Jesus did not describe the torment of the rich man as being short so that God didn't appear to be a maniac or lunatic?

By the way, your misunderstanding of the Word of God in no way portrays God as a maniac. You should know better.

6 Seek ye the LORD while he may be found, call ye upon him while he is near: 7 Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts: and let him return unto the LORD, and he will have mercy upon him; and to our God, for he will abundantly pardon. 8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. 9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. Isaiah 55:6-9[/quote:41267]

Solo, I am going to move on after this post. I do not see merit in even speaking to you on any of these subjects as you are stuck in your way of thinking and mainly look for ways to attack people who are not just like you, as if that is a bad thing. I find your bahavior and attitude reprehensible and see absolutely nothing in your walk or talk that would cause me to believe you are a sincere Christian. Being able to regurgitate scripture aligned with one interpretation does not make a follower of Christ. Christ showed love, something you lack in severely.

Furthermore, if you have ANY issue with me personally I will expect that you take it to one of the Admins and I have come to completion with my interactions with you and desire no further. I despise your antics and your constant badgering of all the members here who don't cow to your views and how you use the TOS as your personal whip to keep people in line. I despise how you speak to people and think that it is amazing that any even continue coming here the way that you treat them.

I personally could not care less what you think of my views on scripture and think is laughable that you would even begin to start lecturing me on right and wrong in these areas. Jesus said to love one another. I see nothing but hatred from you. I would have thought a tragedy in your life like you had would have produced a measure of decency and respect for others but it appears to have done the exact opposite.

I don't care either how you view the area of UR. It is not for discussion on this forum and I will respect that. My personal views though are mine and I will not debate that with someone with the lack of ability to step outside a council created box and consider other things for merit such as yourself.

I am now closing and officially finished with you. I will not respond to your next tirade whatsoever though I will hold you accountable to this TOS

Rule 2 - No Flaming:
You will not post any messages that harass, insult, belittle, threaten or flame another member or guest. This will include misquoting another member out of context. You may discuss another member's beliefs but there will be no personal attacks on the member himself or herself.

each and EVERY time you violate it by belittling the members of these forums with your hatred and name calling.

Good day.

 

[Lyric's Dad]

Greetings Solo and others:

If someone takes issue with limited atonement, this simply does not imply UR. It is really quite simple. Rejecting limited atonement is entirely consistent with the following non-UR position: Christ died for all in the sense that all have the "free will" option of accepting that gift. Not all will. This is not a UR position.

Good point drew. Unfortunately, some are incapable of seeing outside themselves and have to attack anything that does not line up with their limited views in order to better think themselves the sole officiator of all that is of God.

Where is that vomit smiley when you need it?

 

[Solo]

Solo, I am going to move on after this post. I do not see merit in even speaking to you on any of these subjects as you are stuck in your way of thinking and mainly look for ways to attack people who are not just like you, as if that is a bad thing. I find your bahavior and attitude reprehensible and see absolutely nothing in your walk or talk that would cause me to believe you are a sincere Christian. Being able to regurgitate scripture aligned with one interpretation does not make a follower of Christ. Christ showed love, something you lack in severely.

Furthermore, if you have ANY issue with me personally I will expect that you take it to one of the Admins and I have come to completion with my interactions with you and desire no further. I despise your antics and your constant badgering of all the members here who don't cow to your views and how you use the TOS as your personal whip to keep people in line. I despise how you speak to people and think that it is amazing that any even continue coming here the way that you treat them.

I personally could not care less what you think of my views on scripture and think is laughable that you would even begin to start lecturing me on right and wrong in these areas. Jesus said to love one another. I see nothing but hatred from you. I would have thought a tragedy in your life like you had would have produced a measure of decency and respect for others but it appears to have done the exact opposite.

I don't care either how you view the area of UR. It is not for discussion on this forum and I will respect that. My personal views though are mine and I will not debate that with someone with the lack of ability to step outside a council created box and consider other things for merit such as yourself.

I am now closing and officially finished with you. I will not respond to your next tirade whatsoever though I will hold you accountable to this TOS

Rule 2 - No Flaming:
You will not post any messages that harass, insult, belittle, threaten or flame another member or guest. This will include misquoting another member out of context. You may discuss another member's beliefs but there will be no personal attacks on the member himself or herself.

each and EVERY time you violate it by belittling the members of these forums with your hatred and name calling.

Good day.

Lyric's Dad,

You poor soul. You really should examine yourself to validate your position in Jesus Christ. He can and will guide you into all truth. This post shows your inability to love in the manner in which Jesus loves. That should be your first clue as to the error of your understanding. I will continue to pray for you and yours.

Michael

 

[bbas 64]

[quote="bbas 64":05d6c]Good Day, Lyric's Dad

Then answer me one quick question will all be saved, and has a result go to be with the Lord forever ?


Peace to u,

Bill

Sounds like you are trying to spark a conversation on the merits or lack thereof on UR.

Furthermore, my stance on this issue is not the topic of this thread. This thread is about TULIP. Try staying on topic.[/quote:05d6c]

Good Day, Lyric's Dad

The question is germain to the topic, answer the question and the issue will be quite clear. All hold to some form of "L", the question becomes why are some saved and others not?

Some say Jesus came to sve all men, that is fine exept the problem becomes all men are not saved. I would say the Scriptures do not teach he came to save all men, only His people.

Mat 1:21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.


The text does not say he tries to save, or might save... it says he "shall" save. You have yet to deal with the text.

So, please answer the question and then we can move on....

Peace to u,

Bill

 

[cj]

Total Depravity
Unconditional Election
Limited Atonement
Irrestible Grace
Perserverance of the Saints



I'd be interested to see each person's individual definition of the above phrases as I think it might be most englightening.


In love,
cj

 

[Lyric's Dad]

Solo, if you have anything further to say to me, move it to the mod. forum or p.m. me. This thread has been torn up enough.

 

[Drew]

In partial response to cj's question and in the interests of precision (and at the risk of slight repetition), I would like to say the following:

With regard to unconditional election: My understanding is that this doctrine entails the following elements:

1. A person's ultimate fate (heaven or hell) is fully determined by God - the individual plays no role whatsoever in actively determining his / her ultimate "destination";

2. This is truly a doctrine of pre-destination - in other words, it is not the case that election occurs by "God looking ahead in time and seeing who will, of their own free will, accept Jesus as saviour". Election has nothing, absolutlely nothing to do with any free will actions on the part of the individual.

3. The election is specifically unconditional in the sense that God's choice to elect A and not elect B, has nothing to do with any issue of relative merit between A and B.

Those who have read my previous posts will know that I do not accept the doctrine of unconditional election (at least as I understand it).

To reject uncondtional election does not automatically mean acceptance of UR. It is entirely logical for a person to believe that Jesus death allows all to be saved, but does not mean that all will, in fact, be saved. One can claim that whether or not someone is saved is a matter of whether they, through a free will act, choose to accept the offer that is made to all.

The above view seems perfectly logical to me. Whether it is defendable Biblically is another matter altogether.

 

[Bubba]

The Westminster Confession states the doctrine for Unconditional election thus:


"By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestinated to everlasting life, and others are foreordained to everlasting death.

These angels and men, thus predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed; and their number is so certain and definite that it cannot be either increased or diminished.

Those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to His eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of His will, hath chosen in Christ, unto everlasting glory, out of His mere grace and love, without any foresight of faith or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions, or causes moving Him thereunto; and all to the praise of His glorious grace.

As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so hath He, by the eternal and most free purpose of His will, foreordained all the means thereunto. Whereby they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ by His Spirit working in due season; are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by His power through faith unto salvation. Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only.

The rest of mankind, God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of His will, whereby He extendeth or withholdeth mercy as He pleaseth, for the glory of His sovereign power over His creatures, to pass by, and to ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praise of His glorious justice."

Remember, all of us (the elect) would be on the road to perdition if God didn't actively intervene in our lives. He passively lets the reprobate stay in there sin, which is their desire anyway.
Bubba

 

[farley]

Bubba,

If you do truly agree with committee of men who composed this document, then what is to be gained by discussing it with those of us here, or anyone, anywhere?

It is ALL out of our hands anyway, right?

Let's all go fishing!!!

In Christ,

farley

 

[Drew]

Those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to His eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of His will, hath chosen in Christ, unto everlasting glory, out of His mere grace and love, without any foresight of faith or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions, or causes moving Him thereunto; and all to the praise of His glorious grace.

A previous post of mine effectively argues that the whole premiss that God chooses "without any foresight of faith or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions" leaves us with nothing left to "grab onto" in respect to even meaningfully talking about the distinctness of persons. I maintain that if choice is not made on the basis of anything "in the creature", we simply cannot make sense of how God chooses. If Fred and I are to be seen as distinct, this can only occur in reference to something about us as individuals.

Those who accept unconditional election may agree with me that "its a mystery". However, I assert that it is a fundamental precept of sound thinking to not make claims that we cannot make sense of. I would prefer to say that "how people are chosen" is a fundamental mystery rather than to claim a position that seems demonstrably false. To me, accepting unconditional election is like saying: there are integers which are neither odd nor even. Given our commitment to the definition of what an integer is, we are left with no integers at all once we have taken out all the odd ones and all the even ones.

I guess that I am saying that if unconditional election is true, we do not have the conceptual tools to make sense of it and therefore the content of the whole proposition is effectively meaningless for us.

 

[Bubba]

Drew,
Again, what does the Word of God say?
Bubba


1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:
2 Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:
4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
8 Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence;
9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:
11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

 

[Drew]

Greetings Bubba:

I am not unaware of the various texts from the Scriptures which support the notion of unconditional election. I hope that you realize that my problem is that I cannot even make sense of the notion. Before I can accept unconditional election, I have to understand how it is a conceivable state of affairs. And I think that there are big problems here.

I have argued that the claim that election is not based on "inherent characteristics" of the people is not a viable position to hold for the very reason that we have no concept of how 2 individuals can be distinguished except in term of distinctive attributes that inhere in the individuals in question.

Let me try another analogy. Suppose there are two glass jars of marbles and each contains only blue marbles and red marbles. If I say to you, please select one of these jars, but ensure that your selection has absolutely nothing to do with numbers of marbles of each colour in the respective jars, or on anything to do with differences in the glass containers. You have now been deprived of any non-arbitrary basis for discriminating among the 2 jars. Your choice must, by necessity, be arbitrary, based on a random selection or an "eeny-meeny-miney-moe" type of game. If anyone can tell me how a non-arbitrary choice that is not based on inherent properties in the targets is even possible, I am all ears.

While Scripture guides us, we need at least to be able to make sense of it - to represent in our minds the content of the ideas that it contains. This seems to be a problem re unconditional election.

 

[Asaph]

Greetings Bubba:

I am not unaware of the various texts from the Scriptures which support the notion of unconditional election. I hope that you realize that my problem is that I cannot even make sense of the notion. Before I can accept unconditional election, I have to understand how it is a conceivable state of affairs. And I think that there are big problems here.

I have argued that the claim that election is not based on "inherent characteristics" of the people is not a viable position to hold for the very reason that we have no concept of how 2 individuals can be distinguished except in term of distinctive attributes that inhere in the individuals in question.

Let me try another analogy. Suppose there are two glass jars of marbles and each contains only blue marbles and red marbles. If I say to you, please select one of these jars, but ensure that your selection has absolutely nothing to do with numbers of marbles of each colour in the respective jars, or on anything to do with differences in the glass containers. You have now been deprived of any non-arbitrary basis for discriminating among the 2 jars. Your choice must, by necessity, be arbitrary, based on a random selection or an "eeny-meeny-miney-moe" type of game. If anyone can tell me how a non-arbitrary choice that is not based on inherent properties in the targets is even possible, I am all ears.

While Scripture guides us, we need at least to be able to make sense of it - to represent in our minds the content of the ideas that it contains. This seems to be a problem re unconditional election.

So then your argument is that if you can't understand it then God cannot do it? Just exactly who is being worshipped in that scenario?

 

[Imagican]

I don't even know what UR is so please don't accuse me of having ANYTHING to do with something that I know nothing about.

The Bible certainly says that no one will understand Christ except they be chosen by God. And, no one may come to the Father except through Christ. Many that followed Christ turned and walked away when they heard this. What the Bible doesn't say if IF everyone is chosen and some refuse to heed their call. In other words. By saying no one will know Christ unless they are chosen DOES NOT indicate that EVERYONE is not chosen. There is NO indication that we can't be chosen and simply choose to turn away.

WE HAVE FREEDOM of CHOICE folks. There will certainly be those that refuse to heed the call when God touches their hearts and walk away. There will be those that choose to follow the flesh instead of Christ. This in NO way indicates that God CHOSE those that would perish. God has hardened the hearts of those that He chose to punish in the past, but we have NO scripture that indicates that this has happened AFTER Christ. There is also NO indication that God EVER hardened the heart of SOMEONE that loved Him. Those whose hearts that He hardened didn't even know Him. And as far as the Egyptians are concerned, God used them as an example to the known world at the time, of what could befall those that mistreated His people and proof to the Egyptians themselves that the God of the Hebrews, was INDEED TRULY GOD.

Our relationship with The Father through the Son is our own. If one chooses to seek God and follow Christ through love, we have absolutely NO reason to believe that they will NOT be saved. We will each be judged according to the choices we have made. That judgement will not automatically demand death.

I contend that since NO ONE is capable of living without sin, it is ridiculous for ANYONE on this planet to offer condemnation to ANY OTHER. It's about love folks. We are to hate evil, but love our brother. NO, not to hate our evil brothers, hate their evil, but love them. It's hard ain't it?

Our job is to love God and our brothers, (and sisters), not to judge each other. I know it's hard and we are all guilty of it at times, but, we are still flesh.

I don't believe that ANYONE is 'picked' by God to be eternally punished without having any personal choice in matter. That would be a malicious God indeed. I believe that obviously there is misunderstanding of ANY scripture that indicates such. And please, anyone that thinks that they understand everything of God simply by reading the Word is VERY CONFUSED. The Word is ONLY THE BEGINNING of understanding. It is by NO MEANS a complete understanding. Scripture also states that ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE with God. Where we may not understand, God IS UNDERSTANDING. Perhaps He is this malicious God that predetermination would indicate, but I refuse to accept this regardless. That theology would indicate that He were no different than satan himself if God actually 'chose' those from birth that would be eternally punished. Even 'sounds' kinda cruel when you put it that way doesn't it?

So, in summary, I believe that each and every one of us will be judged on 'our' choices and these are ours from childhood. If we choose to accept Christ as our Savior, love God and our brothers and sisters, we will receive forgiveness if we ask. If we choose to ignore the calling and refuse the gift that has been offered, then we will pay the penalty. BUT, I believe that everyone, and I mean EVERYONE is given the choice. God would have to hate someone to punish them for NO REASON. God is love, NOT HATE. We will be punished for OUR CHOICES not God's. WE ARE NOT PUPPETS in some cosmic play. We are ALL children of God if we so choose.

 

[Asaph]

Rom 9:14-25

14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! 15 For He says to Moses, "I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion." 16 So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. 17 For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth." 18 Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens. 19 You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?" 20 But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, "Why have you made me like this?" 21 Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor? 22 What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles? 25 As He says also in Hosea:
NKJV


Paul anticipated your arguement nearly 2,000 years ago. Amazing isn't it?

 

[bbas 64]

I don't even know what UR is so please don't accuse me of having ANYTHING to do with something that I know nothing about.

The Bible certainly says that no one will understand Christ except they be chosen by God. And, no one may come to the Father except through Christ. Many that followed Christ turned and walked away when they heard this. What the Bible doesn't say if IF everyone is chosen and some refuse to heed their call. In other words. By saying no one will know Christ unless they are chosen DOES NOT indicate that EVERYONE is not chosen. There is NO indication that we can't be chosen and simply choose to turn away.

WE HAVE FREEDOM of CHOICE folks. There will certainly be those that refuse to heed the call when God touches their hearts and walk away. There will be those that choose to follow the flesh instead of Christ. This in NO way indicates that God CHOSE those that would perish. God has hardened the hearts of those that He chose to punish in the past, but we have NO scripture that indicates that this has happened AFTER Christ. There is also NO indication that God EVER hardened the heart of SOMEONE that loved Him. Those whose hearts that He hardened didn't even know Him. And as far as the Egyptians are concerned, God used them as an example to the known world at the time, of what could befall those that mistreated His people and proof to the Egyptians themselves that the God of the Hebrews, was INDEED TRULY GOD.

Our relationship with The Father through the Son is our own. If one chooses to seek God and follow Christ through love, we have absolutely NO reason to believe that they will NOT be saved. We will each be judged according to the choices we have made. That judgement will not automatically demand death.

I contend that since NO ONE is capable of living without sin, it is ridiculous for ANYONE on this planet to offer condemnation to ANY OTHER. It's about love folks. We are to hate evil, but love our brother. NO, not to hate our evil brothers, hate their evil, but love them. It's hard ain't it?

Our job is to love God and our brothers, (and sisters), not to judge each other. I know it's hard and we are all guilty of it at times, but, we are still flesh.

I don't believe that ANYONE is 'picked' by God to be eternally punished without having any personal choice in matter. That would be a malicious God indeed. I believe that obviously there is misunderstanding of ANY scripture that indicates such. And please, anyone that thinks that they understand everything of God simply by reading the Word is VERY CONFUSED. The Word is ONLY THE BEGINNING of understanding. It is by NO MEANS a complete understanding. Scripture also states that ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE with God. Where we may not understand, God IS UNDERSTANDING. Perhaps He is this malicious God that predetermination would indicate, but I refuse to accept this regardless. That theology would indicate that He were no different than satan himself if God actually 'chose' those from birth that would be eternally punished. Even 'sounds' kinda cruel when you put it that way doesn't it?

So, in summary, I believe that each and every one of us will be judged on 'our' choices and these are ours from childhood. If we choose to accept Christ as our Savior, love God and our brothers and sisters, we will receive forgiveness if we ask. If we choose to ignore the calling and refuse the gift that has been offered, then we will pay the penalty. BUT, I believe that everyone, and I mean EVERYONE is given the choice. God would have to hate someone to punish them for NO REASON. God is love, NOT HATE. We will be punished for OUR CHOICES not God's. WE ARE NOT PUPPETS in some cosmic play. We are ALL children of God if we so choose.

Good Day, Imgican

There is alot of stuff here and I will not cover them all.

Yes we do make choices no one denies that, the question is why some make the right , and others do not what is the cause.

None seek after GOD!

We are "all" children of God if we choose??? Scripture please.

Jesus:

Joh 8:43 Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
Joh 8:44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
Joh 8:45 And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not.
Joh 8:46 Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me?
Joh 8:47 He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.


Where does Jesus, plead with them to choose other wise??

Peace to u,

Bill

 

[bbas 64]

Total Depravity
Unconditional Election
Limited Atonement
Irrestible Grace
Perserverance of the Saints



I'd be interested to see each person's individual definition of the above phrases as I think it might be most englightening.


In love,
cj

Good Day, CJ

T - Total Depravity. The hearts of men are set fully in themselves to do only evil. Their wills are embonded to sin, a bond they are incapable of breaking.

U - Unconditional Election. God's sovereign decree of election is not founded on any forseen circumstances or forseen qualities in the elect, but is by divine prerogative only.

L - Limited Atonement. As the sacrifice of Christ is a real and sufficient propitiation for sin, and as Christ fulfilled all obligation under the law, and as his righteousness is imputed to those who believe on him, the intent of the atonement was from all time for the elect only.

I - Irresistable Grace. God, being an omnipotent and sovereign God, accomplishes salvation by grace through his Holy Spirit in the hearts of men by way of an irresistable out-pouring of grace, by which the elect person is regenerated, given a new heart of flesh, and their mind is illuminated by the Holy Spirit that they might see and understand the sacrifice of Christ and believe on him unto everlasting salvation.

P - Perserverance of the Saints. Salvation, being the full work and accomplishment of God alone, is not a work which man might undo or forego through a loss of faith or through open rebellion against God. While the creature man remains sinful in this life, nevertheless, the Lord is not pleased that those he has predestined to eternal life should fall away and perish, and to this end, he suffers them to stumble, but never to be cast down, guiding them by the influence of the Holy Spirit in their lives, sanctifying them and ever setting them apart to do the work which Christ commanded unto the glory of the Father.

Hope that helps,

Bill

 

[wavy]

Where does Jesus, plead with them to choose other wise??

In multiple areas of scripture...

 

[bbas 64]

Where does Jesus, plead with them to choose other wise??

In multiple areas of scripture...

Good Day, Wavy

I look forward to you sources, but the question is specfic to those in Jn 8. He says "ye are of your father the devil" where does he tell "them" to choose another father. Did you choose your birth Father?

They claimed Abrahm as their father, and therefore chose him as their father, but they were lying in there claim, and their choice was to no avail.

Peace to u,

Bill

 

[Drew]

Does nobody have a counterargument to my admittedly "philosophical" concerns about the seeming incoherence of the notion of unconditional election?

I am going to go out on a limb and say that simply quoting scripture is not really a satisfactory answer. Of course we all know that certain texts seem to clearly promote unconditional election. But if the very concept cannot be made to work in our minds, the very least we must do is profess a certain degree of ignorance about the whole process of how people get saved. The issues here are perhaps a little subtle but this is not really rocket science. It seems to me that the supporter of unconditional election wants to have it both ways. He wants to make a "deductive" rational case for the doctrine citing certain texts and showing what follows logically from those texts. So in this sense, he is committed to a rational, disciplined style of thinking. So far, no problem.

However, such a person cannot then simply ignore the very real logical problems that go along with the doctrine, problems like the ones I have raised.

Please, go nuts and try to find the flaw or flaws in my argument. I have changed my mind about many things.