The Elect Hear The Voice Of The Shepherd.

[Walpole]

You missed my points. Luke didn't only use eyewitnesses. He used researched evidence handed down to him.

And you missed my point. What eyewitnesses witnessed the annunciation in Nazareth between Gabriel and Mary?

 

[Christ_empowered]

no. slave of sin or slave of righteousness. she was faithful to God, already...

 

[Boaz]

Lest you think I am ridiculing you, here's an easy test:

---> Was Mary free to say no to Gabriel?

Huh? Don't see the connection between what I said and your question. And also wasn't saying you were ridiculing ME but my BELIEFS. I understand that you hate Reformed Theology, that is fine but don't make false accusations about it, inflammatory statements even. Doing this, Calvinist/Islam as if the two hold the same beliefs is EXTREMELY PREDUDICIAL and absolutely not even close to true. You were also implying that according to MY beliefs which are reformed, the way WE interpret Luke 2 would amount to Mary being a puppet and God a rapist. Why don't you just stick to explaining what YOU believe and quit talking about what I believe, which I realize you think you know everything about Reformed Theology, but I see clearly you do not.

 

[Boaz]

That is false. I don't 'hate Reformed Theology'. I reject the Scripture twisting it engages in.

And I hate the scripture twisting your side engages in. Good grief Oz. You always, every single time, miss the point of what I am saying and go right to something you can attack or contradict. Get it through your head.I INTERPRET THOSE SCRIPTURES DIFFERENTLY! Because I put them into context and compare them to others and also compare them to what God says about Himself. I am not careless about it and YOU ARE NOT THE JUDGE!!! So just stop.

 

[Boaz]

And I hate the scripture twisting your side engages in. Good grief Oz. You always, every single time, miss the point of what I am saying and go right to something you can attack or contradict. Get it through your head.I INTERPRET THOSE SCRIPTURES DIFFERENTLY! Because I put them into context and compare them to others and also compare them to what God says about Himself. I am not careless about it and YOU ARE NOT THE JUDGE!!! So just stop.

Just another point, though I'm sure you will miss it. I realize that the scriptures you use to contradict my BELEIFS at face value seem to do just that. But there are other's that clearly say the opposite. I think we can probably agree on the impossibility of true contradiction in the Bible since it is God's word. I say free will folks either ignore those passages or "twist" them to suit what they want them to mean. You say no, that is what the predestination people do. What I do, my own way of approaching it, is IT DOESN'T MATTER to me what someone else believes on this subject, we are all brothers and sisters in Christ. That is what is important. This free will predestination war is beside the point, damaging, and ridiculous.
I don't feel the need or desire to PROVE MY POINT OR THAT I AM RIGHT. And I am not blindly following someone's teaching. I MADE UP MY OWN MIND! I believe what I believe. So do you. Last I checked that was allowed.

 

[Boaz]

Just another point, though I'm sure you will miss it. I realize that the scriptures you use to contradict my BELEIFS at face value seem to do just that. But there are other's that clearly say the opposite. I think we can probably agree on the impossibility of true contradiction in the Bible since it is God's word. I say free will folks either ignore those passages or "twist" them to suit what they want them to mean. You say no, that is what the predestination people do. What I do, my own way of approaching it, is IT DOESN'T MATTER to me what someone else believes on this subject, we are all brothers and sisters in Christ. That is what is important. This free will predestination war is beside the point, damaging, and ridiculous.
I don't feel the need or desire to PROVE MY POINT OR THAT I AM RIGHT. And I am not blindly following someone's teaching. I MADE UP MY OWN MIND! I believe what I believe. So do you. Last I checked that was allowed.

 

[Boaz]

That scripture twisting accusation made by both sides is like two five year old on the playground.
"You do."
"No. You do"
"No. You do"
"No. You do"

WE NEED TO GROW UP PEOPLE

 

[Walpole]

Huh? Don't see the connection between what I said and your question. And also wasn't saying you were ridiculing ME but my BELIEFS. I understand that you hate Reformed Theology, that is fine but don't make false accusations about it, inflammatory statements even. Doing this, Calvinist/Islam as if the two hold the same beliefs is EXTREMELY PREDUDICIAL and absolutely not even close to true. You were also implying that according to MY beliefs which are reformed, the way WE interpret Luke 2 would amount to Mary being a puppet and God a rapist. Why don't you just stick to explaining what YOU believe and quit talking about what I believe, which I realize you think you know everything about Reformed Theology, but I see clearly you do not.

I’m not ridiculing you. I am simply pointing out the specific attributes the God of Islam and the God of Calvinism have in common. For example, both believe God can and does act with pure will; both believe in God's determinism; both believe in God's fatalism; both believe God can and does deceive; both believe God is an iconoclast; both believe in divine dictation; both believe in sola Scriptura.

I used the example of the annunciation to demonstrate but one of these similarities.

 

[Boaz]

I’m not ridiculing you. I am simply pointing out the specific attributes the God of Islam and the God of Calvinism have in common. For example, both believe God can and does act with pure will; both believe in God's determinism; both believe in God's fatalism; both believe God can and does deceive; both believe God is an iconoclast; both beli there weeve in divine dictation; both believe in sola Scriptura.

I used the example of the annunciation to demonstrate but one of these similarities.

Well there we have it. You claiming to know what Calvinism teaches and YOU DO NOT. At least consider when I say that that I probably actually do know what I'm talking about regarding Reformation Theology (Calvinism You it) since I AM ONE, And since you aren't you may be incorrect in what you say about us.
So now I feel it necessary to set the record straight, not because I think it will change your mind, but in case someone actually believes what you said.
The God of Calvinism and the god of Islam have nothing in common. Islam does not believe that Jesus is diety. They believe that Isaac is not the true seed of Abraham but Ishmael is. They turn the Bible on its head and do not consider it God's word so no matter how much they borrow from it they are not worshiping the one true and living God.
Calvinist believe the Bible is the word of God, that Jesus is fully God and fully man, that He died, was raised from the dead, and ascended into Heaven and that He will return. They believe His death was a substitutionary death, a propitiation for the sins of those who believe. (Wow! Same thing free willers believe.)
Yes we believe God has pure will, I guess, whatever you mean by pure will. That's a new one to me. We believe that God is sovereign over all things, controls all things, determines all things because He wouldn't be God otherwise. Plus the Bible says these things about God. This does not mean that we believe man is God's puppet. It does not mean that we believe man doesn't make any actual choices. What it DOES mean is that we believe the will of man cannot thwart God's will, and before you say man disobeys God's will all the time, that IS NOT what I'm talking about. What I'm saying is God's will is absolutely free and man's is not. God can and will stop a person from following his own will if it is going to alter His short or long range purposes. He may ALLOW us to do as we please and bear the consequences or reap the benefits, but that does not mean our will is absolutely free.
And I have no idea what you mean by God's fatalism. Do you possibly mean the fatalism PEOPLE perceive belongs to this doctrine? I have heard that argument many times. I can only say my beliefs are anything but fatalistic. I don't feel fatalistic at all because I UNDERSTAND it. It is God's creation, including the people. We are creatures. He made us and He loves us and He cares for us. Who do you think your breakfast this morning came from? He cares for the saved and unsaved alike. He has a plan for redemption. That is the whole role and purpose of the Bible is. First to reveal Himself to us, His character and nature, and second to give us hope by showing us this plan of redemption. The plan, God's plan was laid out by Him long before we even fell. In detail and exactness. He does not change it or alter it according to what our wills or we in other words, May or may not do. It is set this plan. It is established. It will unfold according to His purpose and plan. I don't focus on whether or not I like it or whether or not God is being fair, I focus on Redemption and am GRATEFUL to Him. It's His world after all. It doesn't really matter if you believe God chose you or you chose Him. Either way you are in Christ. Why all the bitter fuss?

Next. You say Calvinists believe God deceives!!! I don't no where you came up with that and I don't really care but it is a bald faced LIE. There is not a Calvinist, past present or future that believes that!
As for God being an iconoclast, not sure in what way you mean that. If you mean He attacks cherished beliefs or institutions, He is the One true God after all. If you mean He destroys idols, why not. He says to have no other gods before us. God is all about TRUTH and His truth is the REAL truth. Divine dictation? Divine inspiration (what the Calvinists and most Christians believe) is not the same thing as divine dictation. And yes Calvinists believe in scripture alone but Islam does not. They accept the writings of Mohammed to be superior to our Bible.

 

[GodsGrace]

View attachment 8974
wondering,

What do these verses teach us about those who are able to believe, i.e. hear the Lord's voice?

John 1:12-13 (NIV), 'Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God – 13 children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God'.

1 John 5:13 (NIV), 'I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life'.

Acts 16:31 (NIV), "They replied, ‘Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved – you and your household'".

Is there anything here about the 'elect' hearing His voice?

Oz

No Oz....it does not use the word ELECT.
In all 3 verses:
1 John 1:12-13
1 John 5:13
Acts 16:31

The writer speaks about how those that receive Jesus and believe in His name will be saved, be children of God, and have eternal life.

To say nothing of John 3:16 that clearly states that WHOEVER believes will not perish but have eternal life.

Sometimes the N.T. speaks about the elect; for instance in
Romans chapters 9 to 11, but this refers to the nation and people of Israel. God chose the Hebrews to whom to reveal Himself...in this sense THEY are the chosen, or elect, people. This is common knowledge.

I can also accept that elect could mean US,,, those of us that HAVE believed in God and His Son Jesus and have accepted God into our lives. But HOW are we part of the elect?
By accepting God's conditions.. and accepting them of our own free will.

 

[GodsGrace]

Well there we have it. You claiming to know what Calvinism teaches and YOU DO NOT. At least consider when I say that that I probably actually do know what I'm talking about regarding Reformation Theology (Calvinism You it) since I AM ONE, And since you aren't you may be incorrect in what you say about us.
So now I feel it necessary to set the record straight, not because I think it will change your mind, but in case someone actually believes what you said.
The God of Calvinism and the god of Islam have nothing in common. Islam does not believe that Jesus is diety. They believe that Isaac is not the true seed of Abraham but Ishmael is. They turn the Bible on its head and do not consider it God's word so no matter how much they borrow from it they are not worshiping the one true and living God.
Calvinist believe the Bible is the word of God, that Jesus is fully God and fully man, that He died, was raised from the dead, and ascended into Heaven and that He will return. They believe His death was a substitutionary death, a propitiation for the sins of those who believe. (Wow! Same thing free willers believe.)
Yes we believe God has pure will, I guess, whatever you mean by pure will. That's a new one to me. We believe that God is sovereign over all things, controls all things, determines all things because He wouldn't be God otherwise. Plus the Bible says these things about God. This does not mean that we believe man is God's puppet. It does not mean that we believe man doesn't make any actual choices. What it DOES mean is that we believe the will of man cannot thwart God's will, and before you say man disobeys God's will all the time, that IS NOT what I'm talking about. What I'm saying is God's will is absolutely free and man's is not. God can and will stop a person from following his own will if it is going to alter His short or long range purposes. He may ALLOW us to do as we please and bear the consequences or reap the benefits, but that does not mean our will is absolutely free.
And I have no idea what you mean by God's fatalism. Do you possibly mean the fatalism PEOPLE perceive belongs to this doctrine? I have heard that argument many times. I can only say my beliefs are anything but fatalistic. I don't feel fatalistic at all because I UNDERSTAND it. It is God's creation, including the people. We are creatures. He made us and He loves us and He cares for us. Who do you think your breakfast this morning came from? He cares for the saved and unsaved alike. He has a plan for redemption. That is the whole role and purpose of the Bible is. First to reveal Himself to us, His character and nature, and second to give us hope by showing us this plan of redemption. The plan, God's plan was laid out by Him long before we even fell. In detail and exactness. He does not change it or alter it according to what our wills or we in other words, May or may not do. It is set this plan. It is established. It will unfold according to His purpose and plan. I don't focus on whether or not I like it or whether or not God is being fair, I focus on Redemption and am GRATEFUL to Him. It's His world after all. It doesn't really matter if you believe God chose you or you chose Him. Either way you are in Christ. Why all the bitter fuss?

Next. You say Calvinists believe God deceives!!! I don't no where you came up with that and I don't really care but it is a bald faced LIE. There is not a Calvinist, past present or future that believes that!
As for God being an iconoclast, not sure in what way you mean that. If you mean He attacks cherished beliefs or institutions, He is the One true God after all. If you mean He destroys idols, why not. He says to have no other gods before us. God is all about TRUTH and His truth is the REAL truth. Divine dictation? Divine inspiration (what the Calvinists and most Christians believe) is not the same thing as divine dictation. And yes Calvinists believe in scripture alone but Islam does not. They accept the writings of Mohammed to be superior to our Bible.

Hi R, I read the above with much interest because, as you've stated, no one knows calvinism as much as a calvinist should.

I am unable to understand a statement you've made which other reformed persons also make:

You said that the reformed to not believe they are God's puppet.
How do you explain that if you, in the same paragraph, also say that God does EVERYTHING according to His will and that He is a deterministic God. If I have only compatible free will...doesn't that make me God's puppet??

As to God deceiving:
I did read some time ago that God actually causes some persons to THINK they are saved, only to find in the end that they are not and thus they were deceived by God.

I'm going to look for the source, I hope I could find it.

 

[Boaz]

Hi R, I read the above with much interest because, as you've stated, no one knows calvinism as much as a calvinist should.

I am unable to understand a statement you've made which other reformed persons also make:

You said that the reformed to not believe they are God's puppet.
How do you explain that if you, in the same paragraph, also say that God does EVERYTHING according to His will and that He is a deterministic God. If I have only compatible free will...doesn't that make me God's puppet??

As to God deceiving:
I did read some time ago that God actually causes some persons to THINK they are saved, only to find in the end that they are not and thus they were deceived by God.

I'm going to look for the source, I hope I could find it.

The puppet thing. I don't know that I can adequately explain it, it's kind of a paradox. I know I don't feel like a puppet and I don't act like a puppet and I don't look like a puppet so I must not be a puppet. Ha, ha. It has to do with the type of being God created us to be, made in His image and likeness for one. I see the image and likeness as we were created to sort of an ANALOGY of God, but of course not God Himself. We would never be omnipotent, omnipresent or omniscient. We would bound within time and space. Yet we would also have some of His characteristics. We can think.And feel and reason and we are creative though we can never create something from nothing. We can only use what God has already created. We can make choices and decisions. We still possess these things after the fall only now that we have the knowledge of good and evil, and as the Bible says, we bend the wrong way so to speak, our will is not free anymore. It's not that God forbids us to use our will, it is that His will overrides ours when necessary to further His plans or purposes. It all falls into that other paradox, God's sovereignty and man's responsibility. The argument against the elect is it means God forcing us to believe, thereby rendering us puppets isn't valid though I certainly see their argument. In my system of belief, it is God doing a powerful and wonderful changing work in me so that I was ABLE to believe. Even if He did it by making me a puppet, if that's what it took, I would STILL be grateful.
And the deceiving. I don't doubt someone may have said that but it is not the position of Calvinism as it was presented. God in no way makes anyone THINK they are saved for them to find out they are not. How would anyone know that anyway unless the followed them into hell, or they came back from hell and told. LOL LOL. If someone thinks they are saved and are not, they did that thinking all on their own. And as we have discussed before what determines salvation is belief in the content of the Gospel. Salvation is not determined by whether you believe you chose God or God chose you. I just hope this all made some sort of sense!
And we have all read the parable of the seed and the different soils.

 

[Boaz]

Hi R, I read the above with much interest because, as you've stated, no one knows calvinism as much as a calvinist should.

I am unable to understand a statement you've made which other reformed persons also make:

You said that the reformed to not believe they are God's puppet.
How do you explain that if you, in the same paragraph, also say that God does EVERYTHING according to His will and that He is a deterministic God. If I have only compatible free will...doesn't that make me God's puppet??

As to God deceiving:
I did read some time ago that God actually causes some persons to THINK they are saved, only to find in the end that they are not and thus they were deceived by God.

I'm going to look for the source, I hope I could find it.

Also. God created us to be His image and likeness. He didn't create us to be puppets so we aren't puppets.

 

[OzSpen]

You always, every single time, miss the point of what I am saying and go right to something you can attack or contradict.

Could you have used hyperbole with this statement?

 

[Boaz]

Could you have used hyperbole with this statement?

No. No hyperbole. A never remember you ever responding to the point I was making. Maybe some other place,some other person. Not with me.

 

[OzSpen]

No Oz....it does not use the word ELECT.
In all 3 verses:
1 John 1:12-13
1 John 5:13
Acts 16:31

The writer speaks about how those that receive Jesus and believe in His name will be saved, be children of God, and have eternal life.

To say nothing of John 3:16 that clearly states that WHOEVER believes will not perish but have eternal life.

Sometimes the N.T. speaks about the elect; for instance in
Romans chapters 9 to 11, but this refers to the nation and people of Israel. God chose the Hebrews to whom to reveal Himself...in this sense THEY are the chosen, or elect, people. This is common knowledge.

I can also accept that elect could mean US,,, those of us that HAVE believed in God and His Son Jesus and have accepted God into our lives. But HOW are we part of the elect?
By accepting God's conditions.. and accepting them of our own free will.

wondering,

My providing those verses was to demonstrate that Scriptures do not endorse the elect hearing his voice to become Christians.

They received Him, accepted Him by faith, after they had heard or read the Gospel. They chose to believe the Gospel message. The God of salvation provided this salvation to whomever would believe.

It wasn't a 'you're in and you're out' by the sovereign choice of God.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

No. No hyperbole. A never remember you ever responding to the point I was making. Maybe some other place,some other person. Not with me.

Hyperbole again: 'A (sic) never remember you ever responding to the point'.

Go back to #84 and #87 where I definitely answered your point, based on the point you were making. So, 'not with me', is untrue.

 

[Boaz]

Probably one of the best statements seen in awhile here, above.

Not only has the electronic world sped up our understanding, reviewing the findings of others is also sped up. Years ago one might have had to sat in a pew for years before they figured out what the leadership was basing their positions on before a common congregant would know it. It could take years. Now most major positions are available to sample in a few clicks and pages of reading. It's an amazing opportunity to review an abundance of views and various matters.

Just having an online Strong's for example increased my own studies exponentially. I used to have to open the Bible, open the Strong's and then begin to pick through each page, each citing. Painfully slow process. Now, it's just zip zip zip through massive data collections. I can take a simple seach term such as "in the midst' or 'behold' and have every citing, in 1/2 a second.

It really is a wonder. And to have this has only served to strengthen my faith across the board.

Also a wonderful sight of the service of ALL THINGS unto our God Mike. I have known that for quite some time. I generally cite this as 'all things serve The Maker of all things.' My own "brief" of what Rev. 4:11 shows us.

Some believers may not see for example, that IF God created evil, how could that ever please God? Or, "that makes God evil." Uh, no. God can and does 'create' evil and will take Great Delights in showing and proving HIS SUPERIORITY over it, by use of same. God making something, some power, does NOT make God that thing or power that He created, because only HE is Superior over ALL of it and all things.

1 Cor. 15:
24 Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power.

For the record I appreciate and prefer the determinist side of the ledgers. What that consists of however will NOT be based on Calvin's sights of it. These various sights only introduce us to elemental concepts, but as to Calvin's validity, is is provably shallow on many counts.

Exactly. And that is why I hate it when people refer to me as a Calvinist when they find out I believe in predestination. I much prefer Reformed Theology. Nor do I like my beliefs reduced toTULIP. For the most part the sum total of reformed teaching is reduced to TULIP and called Calvinism when all the person is referring to or actually knows is the free will, predestination controversy. And some of the teachings, like the sovereignty of God, and the responsibility of man, how God is sovereign and determinate but we are not puppets, can be partly explained but also involve paradoxes and mysteries, things our finite mind can't grasp.

 

[OzSpen]

Oz

I don't know what you mean by God's cream color of the sheep on them. I assume you mean God has not visibly marked them so the pastor knows who the elect are. If I'm wrong, sorry.

The pastor doesn't need to know who they are. I sum up the purpose of preaching the Gospel by Romans 10:"How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?"

If the good news that Jesus saves, that He is the Son God, son of man, that He lived a sinless life and died the death of a sinner as a propitiation for the sins of those who believe on Him. If our need for Him and why is made clear, then certainly they can say, believe on the Lord and you will be saved. Why couldn't they?
The Reformed position on evangelizing is this: the Gospel should be preached to all because Jesus says to do that. The elect will hear and respond at some point because they have been given "ears to hear." The Reformed preacher, in theory anyway, does not concern himself with the who or the how many. It is above his pay grade. That is God's field.
I'm sure some Reformed preachers or evangelists preach from the standpoint of predestination or the elect. I would never do that and I feel it is unwise. People have an instinctive and volatile reaction to it with zero understanding. Even non Reformed Christians.

I did myself but I kept investigating. To preach from that premise is not necessary. All we need to do in evangelizing is tell people about Jesus, preferably not in a superficial way or in regard to felt needs. We should tell about the real Jesus. Who He is, what He did, why we need Him, which is to be saved from the wrath of God. God will take care of the rest. Reformed view, not everyones.

Incidentally, the altar call has only been for a couple hundred years. Came into popularity after the second Great Awakening.

Reformed05,

Sheep are cream coloured in Australia (unless they are 'black sheep' of the family).


Wolves are a different colour. Which colour would be that of non-Christians?

I, as a 'leaky' Reformed Arminian (I accept believers' baptism), believe that all people are potential sheep, Jesus died for all of them (1 Jn 2:2), extended his grace to all of them (Titus 2:11; Jn 12:32), and whoever chooses to believe is saved (Jn 3:16).

Oz

 

[Boaz]

Hyperbole again: 'A (sic) never remember you ever responding to the point'.

Go back to #84 and #87 where I definitely answered your point, based on the point you were making. So, 'not with me', is untrue.

I don't really want to go back and read it but you certainly missed the point of what I said when you called it hyperbole. Evidently that was the sum total of what you got out of what I said. Here is what I have concluded. You miss the point and don't even know it because you are metaphorically "not listening". Instead you are thinking about what you are going to say.

Get th e point?