Predestination and Election

[unred typo]

mondar on Fri Aug 03, 2007 5:53 pm
Drew, unreds "slightly harsh" attitude has nothing to do with the issue of his salvation. Neither does it have to do with anyones salvation. In one of the threads the subject of justification came up. Someone quoted Galatians 1:9 and pronounced my position of justification by faith alone as anathema. That is nothing new for me, the council of Trent has done the same thing. I am not sure, I think unred made that statement about Galatians 1:9.

My slightly harsh attitude is more tongue in cheek than anything. I’m not a doctor of theology, I’m just a ‘false doctrine’ slasher. Since this is a serious issue and I am prone to be “flippant†and “smart mouthy†in some people’s eyes, I suppose I should work harder on my bedside manner. Then, I wouldn’t be taking up all this forum space to apologize.

I think you will find my Galatians 1:9 quote in all it’s terrible beauty here: http://www.christianforums.net/viewtopic.php?f=14&t=29429 but I don’t remember using it anywhere else recently. Could be. It wasn’t meant to be personal. As I believe you can see, I am addressing it to those who preach another gospel than the one Paul preached. If that’s you, I’m sorry to hear it.

mondar wrote: Actually, the anathema statement in relation to a position on justification is correct. To add works to faith in justification has eternal consequences. In Gal 2:16 it says "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified." While I would not use this to prove justification by faith alone, I mention this text because it is only a chapter away from Galatians 1:9. "As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." Those who add works to justification are no different then the Judiasers in the book of Galatians. By now you know that I believe the issue of justification is not just a doctrinal issue, but one which determines eternal destiny. To add works to faith is a heresy. As I write this, do not misunderstand. It is not an emotional thing, it is what I believe is a proper reading of scriptures.

Justification is God declaring the offering for sin as acceptable. The faith of Jesus Christ is the attitude with which Jesus died in that he believed that God would and could raise him from the dead even after becoming sin for us, on the basis of his perfect life. We had nothing to do with that entire process. It didn’t take any amount of our blood or any animal we could bring that could be added to Christ’s that would have made his sacrifice more sufficient for our sin. His sacrifice was finished and complete and perfect and his resurrection proved it.

Now that was the faith of Christ. He believed that he would rise from the dead as the Father had promised. Now what is faith we are to have, what are we to be believing in Christ that needs no works of the law? It is simply believing that what Christ did on the cross will remove our sin, when we repent and follow him. It is not the works of the law, where we follow the hundred + Jewish ceremonial offerings and rituals, feasts and ordinances. We are saved by the new and living way; the walking in love and the leading of the Spirit into all truth. We are not saved merely by rehearsing a few lines of doctrine and holding fast to those, however wonderful they are.

mondar wrote: I see no reason for myself to be alarmed when one pronounces the anathema of Galatians 1:9 and implys I am going to hell because I believe in justification by faith alone. I know that my salvation does not lie in the hands of mistaken men, but it lies in the hands of God who is full of mercy and grace. If my statement sounded hostile, you all have my apologies, but on the other hand, yes, when unred proclaims his faith in his own ability to please God apart from the shed blood of Jesus Christ (denies justification by faith alone) I see it has the words of an unsaved person.

I don’t see you as an unsaved person, Mondar. I don’t know you from Adam. I don’t know if you follow Christ or if you are a total hypocrite. I believe you are tangled in the terminology of Galatians. Works of the law are not to be confused with the works of faith. The works of the law are useless to save. The works of faith are the power of the gospel that gives life.

mondar wrote: The proper scriptural view on justification is in Romans 4:
4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. 5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
Notice the two opposite statements.
4 Now to him that worketh
5 But to him that worketh not
In the first the reward is only debt. The one who works, must achieve perfection.
In verse 5 the reward of the one who "worketh not" his faith is counted as righteousness, that is the righteousness of Christ. Chapter 4 talks about imputed faith. Inputed faith (faith counted as righteousness) is the only thing that saves. Verse 4 and works, brings only debt.

The context of faith is in believing that what God has promised, he will deliver. There is nothing owed to us through our works that requires that God offer us a reward. The soul that sins, it shall die. No eternal life, no mansion, no inheritance, zilch. Now since we all sin, there is nothing that compels God to offer us these rewards he has offered, so the reward is not reckoned out of debt. God owed us nothing but death. What was it reckoned out of? Out of faith.

What is it that we are to have faith in? We must believe that in following Christ and walking in love, the Spirit will cleanse us from all unrighteousness and indwell us and raise us to life eternal when we die. Do you see how the faith of Christ is connected to the faith we are to have in Christ? It‘s a beautiful thing. He becomes our example.

mondar wrote: Justification on the basis of works and faith is never justification. Works are the fruits of justification, but never the cause of justification. The one who adds works to his justification adds debt, and it is a debt that never can be paid. Only the blood of Christ can mediate for us. No work done by me or any other man or angel can mediate. Gods wrath is propitiated by Christ's death and Christ's death alone. The Jews tried to add circumcision to Christs blood in Galatians, Gal 5:2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. and it resulted in Christ blood not being of profit. If works of any kind are added to the merit of Christs blood, then you have not Christs blood. As Galatians 5:2 says, "Christ shall profit you nothing."

This is what you must do with the mess you have made of these scriptures by misunderstanding a few key words and concepts. Paul is saying the new Christians do not need to continue in the Jewish sacrificial system which was the foreshadow of the death of Christ. Separate in your mind Christ’s blood of the new covenant as the means of justification. Then realize that it is the blood that makes our lives acceptable in the beloved, and it is by believing and following the words of Christ that the blood is applied.

mondar wrote: By the way, I think the subject of election and predestination is a very worthwhile subject. Therefore, I hope we can continue the discussion of God's choice of who he will save, and his action of predestining a certain people to fellowship with him.

I think the Calvinistic doctrines are straight from the pit of hell. These discussions will only be worthwhile if we can expose them for what they truly are.

 

[Atonement]

Before this thread goes any further, please make sure we are addressing the topic and not the person(s), or your post will be deleted.

Thank you

 

[tim-from-pa]

Hi Tim,

Thanks for that explanation. So you are a gentile like I am because you are not a Jew by your own admission. Let us go back to the scriptures and the categories of Jew and gentile as expressed by the apostolic authority of Paul. What you offer in contrast to this is an interpretation of history with an angle that is almost 'Mormon' - in reference to a lost tribe (?) and the USA.

A few years ago I had the privilege of meeting some Messianic Jews. There have always been Messianic Jews - all the disciples of Jesus were Messianic Jews, and the early, early church was primarily Jewish. From this base the church spread to the gentile world as, at the same time, a hardening came upon Israel and a veil fell over the eyes of those who did not believe Jesus. In Romans 9-11 Israel is hardened 'until the full number of gentiles come in. What you and I are apart of is the 'full number of the gentiles coming in'. Hence I affirm that all gentiles in Christ are the children of Abraham by promise, while I also affirm that the Messianic Jews are children of Abraham by promise and blood descent.

Now I know that after 70AD the Jews were dispersed in an unprecedented fashion, as well as during the exiles of the northern tribes (722BC) to which you refer, as well as to the exile of Judah (586BC). Some Jews would also have been dispersed in part throughout the Roman Empire prior to the destruction of Jerusalem. So while some Jews were absorbed - I do belief that that is not the case for every Jew.

The reason for saying this is because God's purpose for the Jew and Israel is ongoing even after the destruction of Jerusalem. This purpose is within the purposes of God for the church and Israel. Replacement theology misunderstands these continuing purposes. Of course the reinstitution of the nation of Israel in 1948 is further proof of this, as is the conflict surrounding Israel to this day. So Isarael and the Jew are very much preserved and back on the world radar. This is why I am a little surprised at attempts to track what happened to the Jews in the so called interim period ie without reference to God's prophesy concerning the Jew.

Besides just as a bloodline can be lost through intermarriage, who is to say that it cannot be reclaimed through marriage over many generations? The means by which God presevers His promises and purposes are not limited to our view of history.

But we are gentiles talking about Jews - would it not be expedient to ask the Jews about the Jews themselves? And in doing so not to simply confirm what we already believe - but in an attitude of fear in the Lord because we are talking about a people who have paid double for their sins. My approach is to put such matters on the 'back burner' - don't read a book or books and make up your mind because of what you have read too hastily, what's the rush?. Such interpretations of history are rewritten even as the next edition comes off the printing press.

What I was saying is that the blood descendants of Abraham would also be the ones that primarily accept the gospel. Israel generally accepted the gospel. The Jews did not. God had two chosen nations meant to be one under 12 tribes, but in fact split into two groups, each with their own prophecies and destinies. In the end times, they will rejoin again and become one as it was meant to be. Most see God's chosen as one nation, but it is not. Probably most of the bible is misunderstood because prophecies to Israel are applied to the Jew.

Just because I am not Jewish does not mean I do not have blood lineage to Abraham. If by your definition Gentile means no physical lineage to Abraham, then I am not a Gentile, but I still am not Jewish, either. I use the term more broadly to mean mannerisms and nations. Technically, Gentile meant the nations, and when Paul speaks of the the fullness of the Gentiles, what he was effectively saying was that Israel will be (partially) blinded until they become many nations (or, the fullness of the Gentiles). He was quoting the same verse I have in my avatar.

 

[stranger]

tim_from_pa wrote:

What I was saying is that the blood descendants of Abraham would also be the ones that primarily accept the gospel. Israel generally accepted the gospel. The Jews did not. God had two chosen nations meant to be one under 12 tribes, but in fact split into two groups, each with their own prophecies and destinies. In the end times, they will rejoin again and become one as it was meant to be. Most see God's chosen as one nation, but it is not. Probably most of the bible is misunderstood because prophecies to Israel are applied to the Jew.

Hi tim,
Backtrack. . .

Less confusing if you use terms like 'one nation' to refer to a united kingdom under David. Only after Solomon did the split occur. So God has not so much chosen two nations but one which split into two separate kingdoms. Yes there is some confusion as to what prophesy applies to which kingdom. But surely it is better to use the biblical terms, eg David was from the tribe of Judah and was accepted as King by all the tribes. When Jesus was called the King of the Jews - it referred back to that one nation David once ruled as did the title Son of David.

Just because I am not Jewish does not mean I do not have blood lineage to Abraham. If by your definition Gentile means no physical lineage to Abraham, then I am not a Gentile, but I still am not Jewish, either. I use the term more broadly to mean mannerisms and nations. Technically, Gentile meant the nations, and when Paul speaks of the the fullness of the Gentiles, what he was effectively saying was that Israel will be (partially) blinded until they become many nations (or, the fullness of the Gentiles). He was quoting the same verse I have in my avatar.

If Israel becomes many nations that is detrimental in biblical theology. Israel is to be separte from the nations and it is the separation that is the blessing until Christ rules over all the nations and the nations no longer rage. The fullness of the Gentiles cannot refer to Israel because the Jews were blinded UNTIL the full number of gentiles come in. At this junction the fullness of gentiles means 'individuals' from amongst the nations of the world and perhaps churches BUT not nations. There has been no such thing as a Christian nation so far. So when this number represented by the fullness of the gentiles is complete - then the blessing will turn to whence it departed.

In my useage of Hebrews, Jews, Israelites etc refer to blood descendants of Abraham descended from the twelve sons of Jacob. EVERYONE else not in the direct bloodline are Gentiles ie non jews, non Israelites and non hebrews. So when we read about Jews and gentiles - Paul is speaking about Jews and NON Jews (who are the gentiles). The church does not become Israel even though some advocate that. That is the error of replacement theology.

 

[MrVersatile48]

A New Covenant


But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, now crowned with glory and honor because he suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone. (NIV) Hebrews 2:9

In the Old Testament, God graciously offered reconciliation between the Jews and Himself through the covenant Law. The levitical system of sacrifice was the provision God made to maintain fellowship with His people. The primary obligations for Israel under the old covenant, were to be loyal and obedient to God. These two responsibilities were to be expressed by exclusively worshiping God and Him alone.

The old covenant was broken almost as soon as it was established (Exodus 32) and continued to be broken throughout the history of the people of Israel. God honored His obligations to the people despite the fact that Israel persisted in rebelling against Him (Isaiah 1:5).

Ignoring the prophets' pleas and threats of judgment, the people persisted in their disobedience. The old covenant needed to be replaced with a new covenant, one that man could not ruin.

God's new covenant was unveiled. It was not an agreement based upon merit or works, like the old plan, but one that was independent of external laws and human interpretations. Obedience no longer resulted from fear of God's wrath. Instead, obedience was a natural response to the incomprehensible love shown by God.

God sent Christ to earth to become the perfect sacrifice (Hebrews 2:9, 9:14). It was God's will that Jesus suffered and died on the cross. In Christ's death, He made the atonement for sin. The author of Hebrews quotes Jeremiah 31:31-34 in writing that God said, "For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more" (Hebrews 8:12). Christ specifically came to earth so that He could die for mankind and thus provide a means of offering salvation.

Written by Marji "Mike" Kruger

Forward this devotion to a friend

 

[unred typo]

Marji "Mike" Kruger wrote:
Ignoring the prophets' pleas and threats of judgment, the people persisted in their disobedience. The old covenant needed to be replaced with a new covenant, one that man could not ruin.

God's new covenant was unveiled. It was not an agreement based upon merit or works, like the old plan, but one that was independent of external laws and human interpretations. Obedience no longer resulted from fear of God's wrath. Instead, obedience was a natural response to the incomprehensible love shown by God.

God sent Christ to earth to become the perfect sacrifice (Hebrews 2:9, 9:14). It was God's will that Jesus suffered and died on the cross. In Christ's death, He made the atonement for sin. The author of Hebrews quotes Jeremiah 31:31-34 in writing that God said, "For I will forgive their wickedness and will remember their sins no more" (Hebrews 8:12). Christ specifically came to earth so that He could die for mankind and thus provide a means of offering salvation.

I disagree, Mike. The new covenant was written in blood just like the old one but this time, it was written in the precious blood of Christ. There will be no continual offering of sheep and bulls. There will be no temple and no religious leaders extorting payments from the people for exchanging money, and making rules that profit the priests and Pharisees and allow them to devour widow‘s houses. There will be no marketplace where the poor are exploited. The terms of the covenant are the same as the old one.

What does God require of us as his creation? To do justly, to love mercy and walk humbly with our God. He is not impossible to please. He’s a merciful and loving God who truly deserves all our devotion and praise. All he wants is for us to love one another and to treat others as we would have them treat us. He wants this attitude to start right in our hearts, not just be an external obedience while others are watching. He wants us to forgive as we were forgiven and to lay up treasures in heaven. He wants us to trust him with our salvation, and to do those things that he has promised will earn us an eternal reward of life everlasting. He is going to reward us according to our faithfulness in following what Jesus taught us to do and what the Spirit constantly affirms to our hearts; LOVE ONE ANOTHER.

I hope I haven’t offended you, Mike. :wink: I really would like your opinion of what I have just written, to see if you still disagree or if I have misunderstood what you have written and vice versa.

 

[tim-from-pa]

Stranger:

I think I made my point. I am nowhere near advocating replacement theology. I'm merely saying that part of Israel (from the whole 12 tribes) split off, became blind to their identity, and became other nations that embraced Christianity. These are still blood descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but Jews are brothers (or cousins). Actually, Joseph is not a Jewish tribe. Dan is not a Jewish tribe. Ephraim is not a Jewish tribe, etc. But what you seem to do is call all Israelites "Jews" and technically they are not. Jews are not in their pedigree, but they are in the family tree.

When this happens, this confuses the term "Chosen" or "Election" which is the subject of this thread---- and Israel (as opposed to the Jews) was chosen to bring the light to the world. I am looking at it from the race slant instead of grace slant as most folks are doing on this thread. What goes on here on this earth is sadly overlooked, but is every bit as important for God's purpose.

And as for many nations, that was clearly stated in Genesis 35:11 but Israel was to dwell alone from the rest of the Gentiles. Well, this American continent seems to be just that. Manasseh and Ephraim together. The British isles are a nice separate land all their own. Goes for Australia and New Zealand, too. They are not overly surrounded by other nations. And these, in turn, "inherited the Gentiles".

 

[Drew]

The proper scriptural view on justification is in Romans 4:
4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
Notice the two opposite statements.
4 Now to him that worketh
5 But to him that worketh not
In the first the reward is only debt. The one who works, must achieve perfection.
In verse 5 the reward of the one who "worketh not" his faith is counted as righteousness, that is the righteousness of Christ. Chapter 4 talks about imputed faith. Inputed faith (faith counted as righteousness) is the only thing that saves. Verse 4 and works, brings only debt.

I would like to challenge the above post about what Romans 4:4-5 is really talking about. I admit that I am using an argument from NT Wright which I have condensed. Due to space limitations some things are merely asserted (without supporting argument). So this is really more of a "plausibility" case than anything else. However, I think it is good to consider views that challenge the "received wisdom" about what this text really means.

I will begin with some assertions that will be my starting assumptions.

- Israel was supposed to be vehicle through which God's effort to redeem creation would be realized;
- God made a covenant with Abraham to this effect;
- Israel failed;
- God is always faithful to his covenant so He needs to find a way to still have "Israel" be the saving vehicle;
- Jesus is the solution - He "becomes Israel", thus ensuring that God's covenant is met through "Israel";
- The righteousness of God as per Romans 3:21-31 is not Christ's righteousness as imputed to us;
- Instead, it is God's own inherent righteousness as a "covenant keeper".

From a perspective based upon the above assertions, Romans 4 is not an "Old Testament proof" of justification by faith (as I believe mondar is stating). Instead, Romans 4 is all about God's faithfulness as a convenant-keeper. In this respect, Romans 4 amplfies on material in Roman 3:21-23 with, and this is important, the "righteousness of God" interpreted not as "imputed righteousness", but God's righteousness as covenant keeper.

If, in Romans 3:21-31, Paul is really talking about God's righteousness as covenant keeper, and not talking about how an individual gets "saved" or justified (this the widely held interpretation), then, quite, naturally, Paul has to return to the fundamental covenantal passage and argue in detail for a meaning to the promises that has come true by the death and resurrection of Jesus. In this case, and with specific reference to Romans 4, the focus is clear: Abraham is indeed the "father" of the covenant people, but he is not the father "according to the flesh". He is the father of all, Gentile and Jew alike, who believe that God raised Jesus.

Here is a proposal of what Romans 4:1 really means in light of the context in which it appears: "What then shall we say, Have we found Abraham to be our forefather according to the flesh?". The implied answer is "no". Consider the possibility that the whole of Romans 4 hinges on the question: "Does Romans 3:21-31 mean that we Christians (Jews and Gentiles alike) now discover that we are to be members of the fleshly family of Abraham?".

And now we get to the Romans 4 passage that mondar has addressed. On the view that NT Wright proposes, Romans 4:2-8 answers the question of the preceding paragraph with a "no" - since works of Torah are clearly not involved as demarcating Abraham (or David for that matter) as God's covenant people.

And now I will directly quote NT Wright

This reading of Romans 4 suggests that the discussion of “works,†“reward,†“debt,†and so forth in verse. 3-4 functions as a metaphor within the wider categories of “works of Torah†(i.e., badges of Jewish ethnic covenant membership). Rom 4:3-8 is sometimes cited as evidence that Paul did after all occasionally write as though he agreed with Martin Luther, as though the real issue he faced was the possibility of people trying to “earn†justification by “good works,†by successful moral effort. The (“forâ€Â) at the start of v. 2 suggests otherwise. The “justification by works†of which v. 2 speaks is clearly an explanation of something in v. 1; and v. 1, as we saw, raised the question not whether or not Abraham was a good moralist but whether those who are in Christ have become Abraham’s family according to the flesh. I suggest, therefore, that the metaphor of “earning†by “working,†which Paul exploits in verses. 3-8, is secondary, occurring to Paul’s mind not because he is thinking about the propriety or otherwise of moral effort, but because he has been speaking of “works†in connection with “works of Torah†in the sense already outlined, and now sees a way of ramming the point home.

If this argument is correct, we generally misread Romans 8:3-5 because we look at it atomistically and fail to carefully ask "what question is Paul really addressing in the text?". I believe that we assume that Paul is simply talking about "personal salvation". I propose that Paul is addressing a different question altogether - whether Abraham is our father (all Christians) according to the the flesh or in some other way? And the answer is the latter - he is our father in virtue of his faith in God.

 

[Albina]

Grace

Rom 11:2 God has not rejected his people whom he chose long ago. Don't you know what the Scripture says in the story about Elijah, when he pleads with God against Israel?
Rom 11:3 "Lord, they have killed your prophets and demolished your altars. I am the only one left, and they are trying to take my life."
Rom 11:4 But what was the divine reply to him? "I have reserved for myself 7,000 people who have not knelt to worship Baal."
Rom 11:5 So it is at the present time: there is a remnant, chosen by grace.
Rom 11:6 But if this is by grace, then it is no longer on the basis of works. Otherwise, grace would no longer be grace.

copy/pasted from esword . :D

 

[stranger]

Stranger:

I think I made my point. I am nowhere near advocating replacement theology. I'm merely saying that part of Israel (from the whole 12 tribes) split off, became blind to their identity, and became other nations that embraced Christianity. These are still blood descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, but Jews are brothers (or cousins). Actually, Joseph is not a Jewish tribe. Dan is not a Jewish tribe. Ephraim is not a Jewish tribe, etc. But what you seem to do is call all Israelites "Jews" and technically they are not. Jews are not in their pedigree, but they are in the family tree.

When this happens, this confuses the term "Chosen" or "Election" which is the subject of this thread---- and Israel (as opposed to the Jews) was chosen to bring the light to the world. I am looking at it from the race slant instead of grace slant as most folks are doing on this thread. What goes on here on this earth is sadly overlooked, but is every bit as important for God's purpose.

And as for many nations, that was clearly stated in Genesis 35:11 but Israel was to dwell alone from the rest of the Gentiles. Well, this American continent seems to be just that. Manasseh and Ephraim together. The British isles are a nice separate land all their own. Goes for Australia and New Zealand, too. They are not overly surrounded by other nations. And these, in turn, "inherited the Gentiles".

Hi tim,

Here is something I found on the web that is similar to what you are saying . . .
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.roytaylorministries.com/am00005.htm

LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL AMERICAN PIE VERSE ONE PAGE THREE
AMERICAN PIE AND THE ARMAGEDDON BIBLE PROPHECY
ROY TAYLOR MINISTRIES . . .

THE LOST TRIBES OF ISRAEL FOUND.

Archeology has solved two of the greatest archeological problems: First what happened to the hundreds, of thousands, of Israelites, who disappeared south of the 'Caucasus mountains;' and second, what was the origin of the "Cimmerians," and the mysterious nomadic tribes Known as, "Scythians," who suddenly appeared, north of the "Caucasus mountains," both at the same time in history. They were one, and the same people, they were the Israelites.


ISRAEL DISPERSED THROUGHOUT THE NATIONS.
The Bible say's about Israel;

Amos 9:9 For, lo, I will command, and I will sift the house of Israel among all nations, like as corn is sifted in a sieve, yet shall not the least grain fall upon the earth.

LOST ISRAEL IS REGATHERED INTO THE SO CALLED "CHRISTIAN NATIONS," AND THESE NATIONS ARE REFERRED TO COLLECTIVELY AS "CHRISTENDOM" WHICH MEANS "THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are any number of divergent movements that follow this type of teaching. So let me try to put a name on it and identify this type of movement an example of which is ' Rod Taylor Ministries'. Again this falls into a highly interpretative view of history - but has this ever been a part of what the church has always believed? So a movement like this has a starting point, it has a founder(s) and it has a development in historical theology. Rather than argue at the top end - it is better to look at foundational issues. Am I on the right track with this sort of approach?

PS my initial thought about Amos 9:9 is that it is part of the covenant curse pursuing the dispersed northern tribes amongst the nations. This would mean they are persecuted where ever they run to - and while the blood of the marytars is the seed of the church - the seed of the church are those who are persecuted because of the new covenant blessing not the old covenant curse! The fact that not one grain will escape sifting and fall to the ground suggests that God has not lost track of who's who among the nations -the lost tribes are not lost to God and never were.

 

[Albina]

unred,
I don't type very much
my first language is french
I understand english very good and can read
but when i try to put somthing on paper it's realy hard for me (it's hard for me express myself on paper that's why i let scriptures do the talking for me)
wich is not a bad thing anyway since the bible is our ultimate final authority

I hope you understand.

 

[tim-from-pa]

Hi tim,

Here is something I found on the web that is similar to what you are saying . . .
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.roytaylorministries.com/am00005.htm

This is similar to what I believe, but I did not look thru all their eschatology yet. Sometimes that is different from what I believe the bible teaches. What I believe is similar to British-Israel teaching. Do a Google on that and there are no shortage of sites---- but like many denominations, one BI group can have minor differences with the other.

The fact that not one grain will escape sifting and fall to the ground suggests that God has not lost track of who's who among the nations -the lost tribes are not lost to God and never were.

Yes, that is true. The Israelites are only "lost" to themselves and the eyes of man, not to God. Otherwise, there would be nobody to regather with the Jews at the end times to allow them back into their land again.

 

[unred typo]

unred,
I don't type very much
my first language is french
I understand english very good and can read
but when i try to put somthing on paper it's realy hard for me (it's hard for me express myself on paper that's why i let scriptures do the talking for me)
wich is not a bad thing anyway since the bible is our ultimate final authority

I hope you understand.

No problem, Albina. I agree that the Bible is more important than our opinions but the same scriptures have been used to prove and disprove totally different points of view on this forum. If everyone was just letting the Spirit of God take the things of God and show them to us, we would all agree. It is human to see things the way we want to and to read into a passage the slant we want it to say. That’s why I liked the Bible links to the verses the old format used to have here. Unless a verse is read in context, it is not proof of anything except a person‘s ability to build a house of straw.

 

[Albina]

unred,
I see predestination and election very clearly in the Bible, by the grace of God I see them and love these truths.

 

[unred typo]

Albina on Fri Aug 10, 2007 6:45 pm
unred,
I see predestination and election very clearly in the Bible, by the grace of God I see them and love these truths.

When i first learned these truths it appeared that the bible was full of contridiction,
it took me a awhile by study and prayer to be convinced that predestination and election is absolutly true.

This truth about grace , predestination..realy opened my eyes and i began to see
truths i had never seen before, it encouraged me to seriously study the word.

I realy thank God for opening my eyes

As you found at first, the doctrines of predestination and election contradict the Bible. It is only when they are carefully extracted from their context that verses and entire chapters can they be woven into a “cunningly devised fable†to ensnare believers. It is very alluring to be told that you have been especially chosen by God and that you can do no wrong that will undo this choice. It appeals to the flesh and it is tempting to fall into such a bed of roses. The truth that we are to “work out our own salvation with fear and trembling†is against our lazy, self-serving egos. We loved to be spoiled by our earthly fathers and we would love for our heavenly father to do the same.

I found the opposite to your experience in my search for truth. I learned the doctrines of predestination and election before really studying what the entire Bible had to say. I had been studying verses linked to other verses, rather than reading them in context. It was when debating a person who studied the entire Bible that I began to see what I had swallowed was a lie fortified by verses that were written as answers to entirely different questions than what they were being used for.

When I prayed that the Lord would show me how to explain away a very clear passage that Jesus himself had taught, the Lord answered with a question to my heart. Why was I working so hard to make the Bible say that the things Jesus taught were not necessary to salvation? Why was I trying to support doctrines that contradicted my Savior? Why would Jesus teach the way to heaven only to later contradict himself through Paul?

Now I had to go back and really examine the verses I had learned and what they were really meant to say. Now I read entire books and not just chapters or verses. Reading one verse is like hearing one sentence in the middle of a phone conversation. There’s no telling what weird ideas you can come up with when you don’t know the context.

Albina wote: (The reason) I'm writting this, is to encourage.

I don’t doubt your sincerity and your heart to share those things that have made you feel better about yourself and your assurance of salvation. It’s like sharing a drug that makes you feel euphoric but you haven’t yet realized the side effects can be deadly.

 

[Albina]

Unred,

It made me see myself for what I am = Nothing
read Romans 3

 

[unred typo]

Albina on Sat Aug 11, 2007 10:02 am
Unred,
These truths didn't make me feel better about myself at all they made me see myself for what I realy am =I am NOTHING neither did they give me assurance of salvation but fear and trembling and cause me to study and pray.

You are correct. These doctrines can bring fear and the need to pray and assure your heart that you are indeed one of the chosen. There are those, however, who assume that a single prayerful moment of conviction where a person ‘accepts the Lord as his personal savior’ is all that is required to prove they are a chosen one, for “why else would they have come for forgiveness if they had not been called of God?†Either way, you have been duped into believing that God only selects some for salvation and that you have been chosen.

So you are nothing ( NOTHING ) and yet chosen of God. What a provocative paradox. I would find such a heady thought to be somewhat tempting to suppose that there is in fact something special about me that God chose me and not another.

I guess the best thing is to be among these fearful:

Isa 66:2 For all those things has mine hand made, and all those things have been, says the LORD: but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembles at my word.

And not among these:

Rev 21:8 But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

 

[Albina]

unred,
here a couple of good links for you
http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/class ... r_god.html

http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibr ... of_Christ/


Rom 9:9 For this is a word of promise, According to this season will I come, and Sarah shall have a son.
Rom 9:10 And not only so; but Rebecca also having conceived by one, even by our father Isaac -
Rom 9:11 for the children being not yet born, neither having done anything good or bad, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth,
Rom 9:12 it was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
Rom 9:13 Even as it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.
Rom 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

 

[Albina]

Rom 3:3 For what if some were without faith? shall their want of faith make of none effect the faithfulness of God?
Rom 3:4 God forbid: yea, let God be found true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy words, And mightest prevail when thou comest into judgment.
Rom 3:5 But if our righteousness commendeth the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who visiteth with wrath? (I speak after the manner of men.)
Rom 3:6 God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?
Rom 3:7 But if the truth of God through my lie abounded unto his glory, why am I also still judged as a sinner?
Rom 3:8 and why not (as we are slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say), Let us do evil, that good may come? whose condemnation is just.
Rom 3:9 What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we before laid to the charge both of Jews and Greeks, that they are all under sin;
Rom 3:10 as it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one;
Rom 3:11 There is none that understandeth, There is none that seeketh after God;
Rom 3:12 They have all turned aside, they are together become unprofitable; There is none that doeth good, no, not, so much as one:
Rom 3:13 Their throat is an open sepulchre; With their tongues they have used deceit: The poison of asps is under their lips:
Rom 3:14 Whose mouth is full of cursing and bitterness:
Rom 3:15 Their feet are swift to shed blood;
Rom 3:16 Destruction and misery are in their ways;
Rom 3:17 And the way of peace have they not known:
Rom 3:18 There is no fear of God before their eyes.
Rom 3:19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it speaketh to them that are under the law; that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may be brought under the judgment of God:
Rom 3:20 because by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified in his sight; for through the law cometh the knowledge of sin.
Rom 3:21 But now apart from the law a righteousness of God hath been manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
Rom 3:22 even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ unto all them that believe; for there is no distinction;
Rom 3:23 for all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God;
Rom 3:24 being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Rom 3:25 whom God set forth to be a propitiation, through faith, in his blood, to show his righteousness because of the passing over of the sins done aforetime, in the forbearance of God;
Rom 3:26 for the showing, I say, of his righteousness at this present season: that he might himself be just, and the justifier of him that hath faith in Jesus.
Rom 3:27 Where then is the glorying? It is excluded. By what manner of law? of works? Nay: but by a law of faith.

 

[unred typo]

Albina on Sat Aug 11, 2007 wrote:
Unred, here a couple of good links for you
http://www.mountainretreatorg.net/class ... r_god.html

http://www.desiringgod.org/ResourceLibr ... of_Christ/


Quoted: (Rom 9:9-14, Romans 3:3-19)

First of all, as I said before, I’m not going to try to attempt to have a discussion with a web site. If you have points from the site you would like to express here, fine. There is no sense in trying to talk about what some other person might mean in their site about what scripture might mean to them. I have the Holy Spirit to reveal scripture to me. I don’t need the opinions of men added to my understanding when I can‘t personally clarify what they mean.

Second, you quoted from Romans 3 but you left out the first two verses. Let’s look at them because they are key to understanding what Paul means by this chapter. He has been comparing the Jew with the Gentile and asking what advantage or disadvantage is there in being a Jew:

1What advantage, then, is there in being a Jew, or what value is there in circumcision? 2Much in every way! First of all, they have been entrusted with the very words of God.

This is the advantage. Does their being ‘chosen’ to be entrusted with the words of God mean they are better than the rest of the world? Does it mean they are not sinners? Paul goes on to say, no, just look at scripture. We have before proved that all are sinners, even the Jew. Then he quotes from those scriptures where both Jews and Gentiles are called unrighteous, non seekers of God. The scathing report of their sin is proof that they are not better than the Gentile, nor is the Gentile sinless because he is not a Jew. All have sinned.

To lift out these verses as you have been trained to do is not using scripture in context. Paul does not say that not one person in the world ever seeks after God. This ‘total depravity’ concept is a flagrant misuse of Paul’s words.
Paul is using a report about the worst condition of the Jew and/or Gentile to prove his point that they are not more righteous just because they happen to be born one or the other.

The portion of Romans 9 that you quoted is another matter. This deals with the election of the ancestry of the messiah. The key to understanding this passage is verse 5:

Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen.

Paul is explaining how God chose the human line of Christ, not by works but by some unknown preference that is not defined for us to know.

Rom 9:11 for the children being not yet born, neither having done anything good or bad, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth,
Rom 9:12 it was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.
Rom 9:13 Even as it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.
Rom 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid.

Esau is not personally hated but if Esau had battled with his brother, for instance, God would have let Jacob prevail because he carried the genetic stock that God preferred for the future human descendant that would bear his Son.

Again, you should be able to see how this has been removed from context and fitted into another meaning, not intended by the writer. If Paul can see how his words are being used, he must be furious. Satan probably delights in using Paul’s words against the very gospel Paul preached. After all, God mightily used Paul to spread the gospel that Jesus taught against the forces of evil. Satan must especially hate him.