Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Election question.

When I discussed this issue fairly recently-

http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopi ... 8&start=15

DivineNames said:
bibleberean said:
1 Timothy 2:1 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;

1 Timothy 2:2 For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.

Praying for those in authority would include Kings that were persecuting the church at the time. Herod, Roman magistrates even a man like Nero. etc.

1 Timothy 2:3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;

1 Timothy 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.


But yeah, the verse does seem to support your claim.


I accepted that the verses cited did seem to support the notion that we can freely choose to accept Jesus. (As it supports that God wants everyone saved.)

Perhaps you can answer the point?
 
JM, I thought you wanted a Biblical objection to your position? Can you answer the point?
 
DivineNames said:
JM, I thought you wanted a Biblical objection to your position? Can you answer the point?

1 Timothy 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

What does “all men†mean? Well, I believe it refers to all kinds of men as we see in the context of the chapter, the subject of that prayer is mentioned in v. 1 (kings and those in authority). This same idea is upheld by Titus 2:11 where we see that the Grace of God has appeared to all men, but this can’t mean everyone that has ever lived has heard the Gospel, the meaning is, God’s Grace has appeared to all kinds of men regardless of their station in life. If you view Titus 2 and 3, you’ll soon see my point. God is no respecter of persons. Those who believe in an unlimited atonement (still limit the atonement in power but that’s besides the point), have to answer this: If God did in fact supply an atonement for the whole world (meaning the whole mass of mankind), how is it that God failed to supply a means for the whole world throughout history to hear the Gospel that gives them that offer? This would mean God did not give to everyman equally the chance to accept or reject the Gospel offer.

1Ti 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

In the broader context of atonement passages, this is easy to explain, but those who believe in unlimited atonement (still limit the atonement in power but that’s besides the point), want us to isolate this passage. Where the rubber hits the road…if Christ wants all to be saved and is a ransom for all (meaning every single person in the whole world) then Christ must be the mediator. We know this because of Hebrews 10 “this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God.†If unbelievers reject the Gospel offer then Christ’s work as mediator fails and the “will†of God spoken of in 1 Tim. 2:4 is over ruled by fallen sinful man with the unregenerate mind. This robs God of His status as “savior†and turns Him into the “great assister.†This cannot be true if Heb. 10:14 means what it says, simply this, the offering ALWAYS RESULTS IN THE PERFECTION OF THOSE WHO THE OFFERING WAS MADE.

If Christ is the mediator for the whole world (because He’d have to be if His offering was made on behalf of the whole world) then why doesn’t He pray for them? “I pray for them. I do not pray for the world but for those whom You have given Me, for they are Yours.†That’s interesting to know, Christ isn’t praying for everyone, just those who the Father has given Him. Did the Father give the Son ALL men? No, if so then all are going to be raised up on the last day as we read in John 6:39 and the context is to everlasting life in v. 40.

Reformed exegesis is the only true exegesis of scripture and the only possible way to make sense of scripture.
 
Election question

From Young's Concordance, "elect" or "chosen" are used both of Israel and the Church/body of Christ:

Israel is the elect of God: see Isa. 42:1; 45:4; 65:9 and 65:22.

IMO, Israel is the "elect" mentioned in Matt. 24:22,24 & 31; Mark 13:20,22 & 27; & Luke 18:7. And Israel is involved according to "election" in Rom. 9:11; 11:5, 7 & 28.


We, the Church/body of Christ are also elect or chosen as Paul tells us in Rom. 8:33; Col. 3:12; 1 Thes. 1:4; 1 Tim. 5:21 & 2 Tim. 2:10

To limit God's election strictly to Israel is not Scriptual!

Bick
 
Re: Election question

Bick said:
From Young's Concordance, "elect" or "chosen" are used both of Israel and the Church/body of Christ:

Israel is the elect of God: see Isa. 42:1; 45:4; 65:9 and 65:22.

IMO, Israel is the "elect" mentioned in Matt. 24:22,24 & 31; Mark 13:20,22 & 27; & Luke 18:7. And Israel is involved according to "election" in Rom. 9:11; 11:5, 7 & 28.


We, the Church/body of Christ are also elect or chosen as Paul tells us in Rom. 8:33; Col. 3:12; 1 Thes. 1:4; 1 Tim. 5:21 & 2 Tim. 2:10

To limit God's election strictly to Israel is not Scriptual!

Bick

You just posted that 'elect' was Israel and then quoted NT passages? Did I miss something? Let get this right, you believe the term 'elect' is always in reference to Israel?
 
Back
Top