The Myth of saying that Jesus Christ died for all men without exception !

[HisSheep]

You seem to think that this text supports the notion that there are specific individuals who are "pre-destined" to ultimate salvation. However, context shows that this is a teaching about Israel:

Ezekiel 34 citation deleted for space - HisSheep

So the "sheep" here are the people of Israel. Now I grant you that the category of Israel is a very ambiguous one in the Bible - sometimes the term denotes the ethnic Jews, other times (in the New Testament) Paul uses the term to denote the church.

Either way, there is an entire chunk of argumentation that you still need to make to sustain your view - you need to make the case that this "Israel" here in Ezekiel 34 is specifically constituted by people pre-destined to be ultimately in the family of God. You cannot simply assume this, especially since other alternatives present themselves, not least that "His sheep" are those people, Jew or Gentile, who have freely accepted God's gift of grace.

I see nothing in this text which pins down "the sheep of Israel" as being the set of all persons pre-destined to ultimate salvation.

Thank you for your honest and respectful handling of your post. You have gotten to the head of the issue (for me). You’re right; I regard restored “Israel†to be the whole church.

I see national, OT Israel, as a chosen nation. They were chosen to be a light to the gentiles (Isaiah 49) and God is going to re-establish Israel on earth, and the reconstituted Israel will include gentiles as ingrafted branches. (Romans 11:17-18)

To me, the following passage is a description of the New Covenant. It includes baptism by Spirit and water, it includes salvation and repentance as well. Here is the “gatheringâ€part of the O.T., coupled with the New Covenant. Calvinist note: Notice how many times God says “I willâ€. The work of justification is all God’s doing:

Ezekiel 36:

24 “‘For I will take you out of the nations; I will gather you from all the countries and bring you back into your own land. 25 I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your impurities and from all your idols. 26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws. 28 Then you will live in the land I gave your ancestors; you will be my people, and I will be your God. 29 I will save you from all your uncleanness. I will call for the grain and make it plentiful and will not bring famine upon you. 30 I will increase the fruit of the trees and the crops of the field, so that you will no longer suffer disgrace among the nations because of famine. 31 Then you will remember your evil ways and wicked deeds, and you will loathe yourselves for your sins and detestable practices. 32 I want you to know that I am not doing this for your sake, declares the Sovereign LORD. Be ashamed and disgraced for your conduct, people of Israel!

Do you regard this as a picture of the New Covenant? If not, what is it?

Here is a bit that I’m sure you are familiar with about foreigners:

Isaiah 56

6 And foreigners who bind themselves to the LORD
to minister to him,
to love the name of the LORD,
and to be his servants,
all who keep the Sabbath without desecrating it
and who hold fast to my covenant—
7 these I will bring to my holy mountain
and give them joy in my house of prayer.
Their burnt offerings and sacrifices
will be accepted on my altar;
for my house will be called
a house of prayer for all nations.â€
8 The Sovereign LORD declares—
he who gathers the exiles of Israel:
“I will gather still others to them
besides those already gathered.â€

There are other passages in the bible that include gentiles among the “sheep†to be gathered at the restoration, Hosea 2:23 not least among them. Most prominent are the quotes by Jesus claiming that He is the Shepherd referred to in the O.T.

If you don’t think Jesus intended to reach gentiles then we have a much bigger issue to discuss than predestination…

-HisSheep

 

[Drew]

You’re right; I regard restored “Israel” to be the whole church.

I do too, but that alone does not make the pre-destination case. One can believe that "restored Israel" is indeed the church without accepting the proposition that membership in that group was "pre-destined".

To me, the following passage is a description of the New Covenant. It includes baptism by Spirit and water, it includes salvation and repentance as well. Here is the “gathering”part of the O.T., coupled with the New Covenant. Calvinist note: Notice how many times God says “I will”. The work of justification is all God’s doing:

But this entire text is also consistent with the view that human individuals "freely" accept the gift of justification that God is offering.

Do you regard this as a picture of the New Covenant? If not, what is it?

I heartily agree - the text in question is indeed "new covenant" stuff. But I do not see how this connects to the pre-destination issue.

Here is a bit that I’m sure you are familiar with about foreigners:

Isaiah 56....

There are other passages in the bible that include gentiles among the “sheep” to be gathered at the restoration, Hosea 2:23 not least among them. Most prominent are the quotes by Jesus claiming that He is the Shepherd referred to in the O.T.

If you don’t think Jesus intended to reach gentiles then we have a much bigger issue to discuss than predestination…

I agree with you on all these points. I was a little unclear in my earlier post about what the term "Israel" really denotes in that passage. So I understand why there was a misunderstanding.

 

[francisdesales]

ignore double post

 

[francisdesales]

And sometimes a "mystery" is actually just man's oversight when religious texts were being written and doctrines stated. God can't be all sovereign while man has free will. I does not work.

You are ASSUMING that God's sovereignty is somehow threatened by man's free will. There is no reason to erect such false dichotomies between the Creator and His creatures.

You think we are the first to broach this subject? NO ONE is going to be able to sort out this mystery entirely, and it is not because of "oversight of religious texts". People much more brilliant than either of us have reflected on this - and because man's freedom v grace CANNOT be separated or measured, there is no possible way to determine how they interact entirely.

Regards

 

[HisSheep]

Drew,

I sense that we will get along, even if we disagree. I’m grateful for your civility.

You are right in that there is no “proofâ€. There is no passage that says, “Restored Israel is Heaven and is comprised of the total number of the elect, who are fore-ordained by God to eternal lifeâ€, but that’s what I believe. I can only tell you how I arrived at my view.

Basically, the Ezekiel 36 passage, and surrounding chapters as well… really 34-37… sound to me like works all done by God. This includes the dry bones who are Israel and are unable to do ANYTHING to bring about new life in themselves. They are dead. God does ALL the work of regeneration in them. They have no choice. Only after regeneration do we have a role to play. Only THEN, does our role in Sanctification begin…

In other words, God takes the ones He intends to take, and sprinkles them with water, cleansing them. Then he puts a new heart/spirit in them and causes them to behave righteously. They then regret their former ways… that’s the only part they have in the process Ezekiel describes – confession and repentance. You don’t have to do back bends to conclude that Jesus saves completely.

Especially when combined with the “I know my sheepâ€, “I will loose none of the sheepâ€, no one can snatch themâ€, “and none shall be missing†talk that we see in the bible.

Not to mention the frequency of terms like “electâ€, “chosenâ€, “predestinedâ€, and “prepared in avanceâ€.

Why search for alternative meanings?

-HisSheep

 

[Drew]

Drew,

I sense that we will get along, even if we disagree. I’m grateful for your civility.

Likewise - surely we can treat each other with respect, even in disagreement.

Basically, the Ezekiel 36 passage, and surrounding chapters as well… really 34-37… sound to me like works all done by God. This includes the dry bones who are Israel and are unable to do ANYTHING to bring about new life in themselves. They are dead. God does ALL the work of regeneration in them. They have no choice. Only after regeneration do we have a role to play. Only THEN, does our role in Sanctification begin…

I do not see any of these texts as ruling out "human participation" - in the form of "free will acceptance" of what is otherwise, a "work" for which God deserves basically all the credit.

Not to mention the frequency of terms like “elect”, “chosen”, “predestined”, and “prepared in advance”.

Well, there is very much an argument to be made about what exactly the Biblical authors are talking about when they use such terms.

For example, there is clearly a sense in which the nation of Israel - genetic Israel as a nation - is "elected" to play a special role in the outworking of Gods' promises. But this has nothing whatsoever with the "election" of ethnic Jews to an eternal destiny. We need to remember that, in and of themselves, words like "election" and "pre-destination" have no specificity to the issue of eternal life.

President Obama was "elected", but to the office of the Presidency, not to eternal life.

 

[smaller]

In the 'truest' sense, those who claim 'determinist' positions also claim other positions.

The other positions are as follows:

No one can determinitively say they are a sheep, as that determination resides with God Alone. Most freewillers will make a very similar claim. They too hope that when their 'works and choices' are weighed, they too will be likewise claimed, but within both camps they legitimately seek to have faith proven out in them sufficiently for claiming.

Since NONE actually know who else may or may not be a sheep, there is no sufficient way to HOLD BACK the sufficiency of The Atonement to ANYONE because there is no way to 'determine' who is a sheep or who is not.

Logic of determinism declares that the sufficiency of the Atonement is for ALL sheep, but these statements can not KNOW who these sheep may be, therefore there is NO limitation measure given to them, as they themselves DO NOT KNOW who 'sheep' are and CAN NOT know. They may CLAIM the limit only to sheep, but the determination of SHEEP remains beyond their personal knowledge. Therefore they can NOT logically claim the sufficiency APART from being at the least POTENTIALLY sufficient for ALL mankind.

The determinist may RIGHTLY claim the sufficiency for ALL SHEEP. I would also make such a claim. But with that claim they CAN NOT claim INSUFFICIENCY for ANY of mankind because they DO NOT KNOW.

The 'freewiller' claims the sufficiency for all mankind, but even THEY must likewise claim the INSUFFICIENCY as being on the table, because it is OBVIOUSLY insufficient for those who again MAY not 'make the grade.' So even in their CLAIM of TOTAL SUFFICIENCY their claims are eliminated on the basis of ANY application being proven INSUFFICIENT. So they again can NOT claim total sufficiency.

Both sides of these matters DO claim 'faith' as the determining factor. And both sides DO also take their mutual NON-DETERMINANT positions.

It really is a viscious circle, imho. All can make any sorts of claims, but when they do they all claim insufficient knowledge to make specific determinations to the individuals engaged therein.

All camps of determinism acknowledge that within their groups, there are tares that will not make it.

Freewillism makes the same claims.

The parties are really not that far off imho, particularly in their respective NON-abilities to either LIMIT or UNLIMIT.

I will maintain as many a fine theologian will eventually come to from BOTH camps.

From freewillism, that Gods Grace can NOT be limited and may in fact be vastly greater than man can determine.

And from determinism, the same measure.

In this direction we have HOPE for ALL MANKIND, which is A COMMAND of the Gospel.

We should all bow before The Potential of this matter in the HOPE for the very best for ALL men.

And for those who measure in this direction, MAY GOD MULTIPLY TO YOU the measure of HIS OVERWHELMING GRACE!

For those who can not see this much GRACE, may God take away what you 'think' you have LIMITED HIM to.

I will maintain the measure of UNLIMITED GRACE. I have no way to LIMIT GOD and it profits me NOTHING to try and do that TO GOD. Limiting God seems to me to be the most insane of measures. I have no desire to place a LIMIT or STUMBLING block before ANY potential sheep. That does not compute for me, seeing and knowing Gods Love for me.

Let those who MULTIPLY, multiply. And those who LIMIT be squeezed OUT by their own impositions.

God HAS promised that to those who have, MORE will be given.

All who enter Heaven will be CLOAKED in HIS COMPLETE and SUFFICIENT GRACE.

I can not hold back from ANY PERSON what I desire for myself.

Why any BELIEVER would stand and block HEAVENS GATE to ANY other person is beyond my comprehension, and the practice of such faith is abhorrent to me inside, in my heart.

IF any believer can be FULLY PERSUADED that they are SUFFICIENT to STUMBLE another person, may GOD HAVE MERCY upon such a soul.

And for those who would DAMN ME for what I see, MAY GOD also have mercy UPON YOU!

enjoy!

smaller

 

[HisSheep]

No one can determinitively say they are a sheep, as that determination resides with God Alone. Most freewillers will make a very similar claim. They too hope that when their 'works and choices' are weighed, they too will be likewise claimed, but within both camps they legitimately seek to have faith proven out in them sufficiently for claiming.

Since NONE actually know who else may or may not be a sheep, there is no sufficient way to HOLD BACK the sufficiency of The Atonement to ANYONE because there is no way to 'determine' who is a sheep or who is not.

Logic of determinism declares that the sufficiency of the Atonement is for ALL sheep, but these statements can not KNOW who these sheep may be, therefore there is NO limitation measure given to them, as they themselves DO NOT KNOW who 'sheep' are and CAN NOT know. They may CLAIM the limit only to sheep, but the determination of SHEEP remains beyond their personal knowledge. Therefore they can NOT logically claim the sufficiency APART from being at the least POTENTIALLY sufficient for ALL mankind.

What are you talking about? No one has claimed to know who the sheep are - except Jesus.

Christians don't need to know who the sheep are to understand that God knows His sheep, and will fulfill His plan to find them all.

Jeremiah 23:
3 “I myself will gather the remnant of my flock out of all the countries where I have driven them and will bring them back to their pasture, where they will be fruitful and increase in number. 4 I will place shepherds over them who will tend them, and they will no longer be afraid or terrified, nor will any be missing,†declares the LORD.

Christians, whether Arminians or Calvinists, typically agree on how a Christian is aware of the presence of the Holy Spirit... How they can sense the presence of God in their lives. I have cited 1 John 2 several times in this thread. We aren't discussing that. We are discussing how the Spirit got there. Did we put it there or did God?

Did you choose to be born again, or did God choose to give you new life?

Did you deserve it?

What is the difference between you and the guy who ends up in Hell?

I say it is not man's ability to make a wise decision that lands him in Heaven, but God having favor toward him. The favor is unmerited. There is nothing that can be done to earn it. God’s grace is the determining factor, and nothing else.


Even wanting it isn't enough...

Romans 9:16
It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.-HisSheep

 

[Drew]

Even wanting it isn't enough...

Romans 9:16
It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.-HisSheep

I suggest that you are not being true to context if you use Romans 9:16 to support your position. Paul is not talking about salvation at that point of his argument.

All the examples he has deployed up to that point: Isaac being "chosen" over Ishmael, Jacob over Esau, and the saying to Moses - these are all clearly examples of God making "choices" about events in this present world, not eternal destinies.

 

[Drew]

On a related note, it is simply not correct to couch things as if these were the only alternatives on the table:

1. God does it all;
2. Man does it all.

I suggest that we "free will" types can legitimately claim that while the work of salvation is entirely the work of God, we still need to "reach out" and accept that gift. That does not make our salvation "our achievement", even if we do indeed need to accept the gift to gain salvation.

 

[smaller]

What are you talking about? No one has claimed to know who the sheep are - except Jesus.

Noted in the post. Since none of us know or can determine who sheep actually are, there is no logical way to limit the atonement given to believers.

Christians don't need to know who the sheep are to understand that God knows His sheep, and will fulfill His plan to find them all.

I don't disagree.

Christians, whether Arminians or Calvinists, typically agree on how a Christian is aware of the presence of the Holy Spirit... How they can sense the presence of God in their lives. I have cited 1 John 2 several times in this thread. We aren't discussing that. We are discussing how the Spirit got there. Did we put it there or did God?

And who is fit to measure such matters? Certainly NONE of us.

Did you choose to be born again, or did God choose to give you new life?

I have cited often that I can not adhere to freewill. There is no way to conclusively RULE OUT Gods Interactions with ANY persons will, to saving or to hardening. Both directions serve HIS PERFECT INTENTIONS.

Did you deserve it?

Most determinists claim that ALL deserve HELL and only SOME are saved from that RIGHTFUL FATE.

I would only say that God made all things for HIS SOLE AND PERFECT INTENTIONS, and that any given observer is not equipped to say what those are.

I do feel comfortable that Gods Intentions are not merely GOOD, but PERFECT and that only HE can bring His Intentions about.

Do I then see burning people alive forever is a glorious and perfect intention?

uh, that would be an ABSOLUTE NO. Therein is a huge fallacy of THE IMPERFECT viewers trying to justify what THEY SEE rather than how GOD MAY SEE.

What is the difference between you and the guy who ends up in Hell?

There are other avenues to understand eternal judgments. Most doctrines that surround this matter are FITTED to the 'SUPPOSED' intentions of the VIEWER. There are MANY BLACK HOLES in such views by NON-virtues of the IMPERFECT VIEWERS.

I say it is not man's ability to make a wise decision that lands him in Heaven, but God having favor toward him. The favor is unmerited. There is nothing that can be done to earn it. God’s grace is the determining factor, and nothing else.

And again, I agree. I would also say that limiting that meausure is beyond mens capabilities.

Even wanting it isn't enough...

The desire itself is born of God.

Romans 9:16
It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.-HisSheep

Exactly.

When believers start throwing terms around, they tend to limit and define them to their own limited visions and impositions.

I can say that WHATEVER GOD DOES it is categorically PERFECT and therefore not logically in my hands or anyone else's to LIMIT or DEFINE by limited views. All such attempts of such wranglings to me is just more limited construction attempts for LIMITED PEOPLE to make LIMITED ARGUMENTS and the separations that logically follow such futile efforts.

I prefer The Unlimited Mystery of God to remain undefiled by my limited marring.

To step into Gods Shoes requires one to BE GOD.

enjoy!

smaller

 

[HisSheep]

I suggest that you are not being true to context if you use Romans 9:16 to support your position. Paul is not talking about salvation at that point of his argument.

All the examples he has deployed up to that point: Isaac being "chosen" over Ishmael, Jacob over Esau, and the saying to Moses - these are all clearly examples of God making "choices" about events in this present world, not eternal destinies.

Drew,

Romans 9 is ALL ABOUT salvation. I see the whole of Romans 9 to be a proof Paul makes about God's sovereignty in election. Bear in mind that the chapter breaks in the bible are not inspired. Chapter 9 cannot be properly understood if detached from Chapter 8. After Paul drops the predestination stuff on the reader in 8:18-39, he continues in Chapter 9 by bringing up a few of God’s choices in the OT to demonstrate that God’s choice of the elect under the New Covenant is consistent with the Character of God.

Romans 9 is about NT salvation; case in point: When were gentiles “called†in the OT?

Romans 9:
24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?

25 As he says in Hosea:
“I will call them ‘my people’ who are not my people;
and I will call her ‘my loved one’ who is not my loved one,â€

26 and,
“In the very place where it was said to them,
‘You are not my people,’
there they will be called ‘children of the living God.’â€

In fact when Paul asks:

19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?â€

I think he is addressing the question that Smaller is essentially asking: Does God predestine people to Hell?

I read Paul’s answer to be “yesâ€:

20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘hy did you make me like this?’â€

-HisSheep

 

[Drew]

Drew,

Romans 9 is ALL ABOUT salvation.

No. While Romans 9 does indeed address the matter of salvation, this is done in the context of a wider argument about how God has specifically used Israel in order to bring salvation to the world.

The choice of Isaac over Ishmael is not a salvation issue - it is a choice about whose genetic "branch" will count for membership in national Israel.

The choice of Jacob over Esau is not a salvation issue - it is a choice that Esau would serve Jacob. This is not me talking - its Paul.

The choice that is referred to in relation to Moses is, again, not a salvation issue - it is God telling Moses that He has the right to wipe out, or not wipe out, rebellious Israel. I trust you know the context from which Paul is quoting when he writes the "I will have mercy on whom I choose" thing in Romans 9. It is Exodus, and the issue is not eternal destinies but whether or not God will wipe out the Jews in the desert.

Same with Pharoah. Paul tells us what Pharaoh was elected to and it is not an eternal fate - it is that Pharaoh will resist the departure of the Jews, thereby enabling to make a great public act of redemption - the exodus.

So when people take all these examples and turn them into "proof texts" for pre-destination, they are simply not honouring the details of what Paul is actually writing about.

Granted, Paul might be using these "non-salvation-related" examples of God making choices in order to then make a case for "individual pre-destination". But one thing at a time. Up to and including the Pharaoh example, all the examples are clearly examples of God making choices other than salvation choices.

Again, that's not me talking, that's Paul.

More shortly.....

 

[Drew]

Bear in mind that the chapter breaks in the bible are not inspired. Chapter 9 cannot be properly understood if detached from Chapter 8. After Paul drops the predestination stuff on the reader in 8:18-39, he continues in Chapter 9 by bringing up a few of God’s choices in the OT to demonstrate that God’s choice of the elect under the New Covenant is consistent with the Character of God.

Not likely. Yes we have some kind of a statement about pre-destination at the end of chapter 8. But there is a major "break" at what is the beginning of chapter 9 - a break that I believe is basically universally recognized by theologians. I suspect it would be hard to find a theologian who says that Romans 9 is a continuation of Romans 8. But maybe I am wrong.

In any event, at the beginning of 9 and carrying through to the end of 11, it is substantially the Israel question that is on the table - in the sense of national Israel.

Look how Romans 9 starts:

I am telling the truth in Christ (I am not lying!), for my conscience assures me in the Holy Spirit – I have great sorrow and unceasing anguish in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed – cut off from Christ – for the sake of my people, my fellow countrymen, who are Israelites. To them belong the adoption as sons, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the temple worship, and the promises. To them belong the patriarchs, and from them, by human descent, came the Christ, who is God over all, blessed forever! Amen

In Romands 8, Paul has been expounding the state of the Christian who has received the Spirit. That argument was not about national Israel. Now, in Romans 9 he turns to address a lingering problem that his entire argument to this point in the letter has not yet fully addressed - the problem of unbelieving Israel.

 

[Drew]

Romans 9 is about NT salvation; case in point: When were gentiles “called†in the OT?

Romans 9:
24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?

25 As he says in Hosea:
“I will call them ‘my people’ who are not my people;
and I will call her ‘my loved one’ who is not my loved one,â€

26 and,
“In the very place where it was said to them,
‘You are not my people,’
there they will be called ‘children of the living God.’â€

As I have said all along, the issue of "salvation" is indeed on the table in Romans 9 even though it is not really the focus of Paul's argument. In Romans 9 Paul is defending God's treatment of Israel. As you are no doubt aware, Israel is "the chosen people". And yet, if Christ is really the Messiah, why are so many Jews "on the outside". Paul is in the position of having to explain why it seems that all God's promises to Israel have failed to come true since they are, in the main at least, "on the outside" at this point.

Now to loop back to the salvation question. Yes Paul does talk about salvation but it is a "group level" argument: Paul is saying that in the mysterious purposes of God, the nation of Israel has been "hardened", just like a vessel fitted for destuction, so the entire world has the possiblity of being saved.

There is a ton of argumentation to back this up, but I will stop for now.

 

[mlqurgw]

In reference to knowing who the sheep are Paul seems to think he did:
(1Th 1:4) Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God.

Paul says that he knows that they are elect. He then gives his proof that they are elect.

(1Th 1:5) For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake.
(1Th 1:6) And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost:
(1Th 1:7) So that ye were ensamples to all that believe in Macedonia and Achaia.
(1Th 1:8) For from you sounded out the word of the Lord not only in Macedonia and Achaia, but also in every place your faith to God-ward is spread abroad; so that we need not to speak any thing.
(1Th 1:9) For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God;
(1Th 1:10) And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.

Seems to me that Paul had some understanding and knowedge of who the elect are and what are the proofs of it.

 

[savedbygrace57]

In reference to knowing who the sheep are Paul seems to think he did:
(1Th 1:4) Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God.

Paul says that he knows that they are elect. He then gives his proof that they are elect.

(1Th 1:5) For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake.
(1Th 1:6) And ye became followers of us, and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Ghost:
(1Th 1:7) So that ye were ensamples to all that believe in Macedonia and Achaia.
(1Th 1:8) For from you sounded out the word of the Lord not only in Macedonia and Achaia, but also in every place your faith to God-ward is spread abroad; so that we need not to speak any thing.
(1Th 1:9) For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God;
(1Th 1:10) And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come.

Seems to me that Paul had some understanding and knowedge of who the elect are and what are the proofs of it.

To say that a Person cannot know they are elect, is just like saying one cannot know if they are a believer. Believer and Elect are the same thing.

Also, if one cannot know for certainty if they are saved, then they cannot be a person of Faith.

Because Faith is:

heb 11:

1Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Faith is substance and it is evidence !

Faith gives real Being and conviction/proof to things not seen !

So how can one not be sure or convinced of being saved ? Its ludicrous and a dishonor to God.

 

[smaller]

In reference to knowing who the sheep are Paul seems to think he did:
Seems to me that Paul had some understanding and knowedge of who the elect are and what are the proofs of it.

Perseverance is a LONG standing tenet of determinism and is neccessary. If one does not 'P'ersevere to the END, they were never saved to begin with.

Only God DETERMINES who is a sheep AT THE END.

Every determinist group KNOWS they have tares in their own pews.

s

 

[mlqurgw]

Perseverance is a LONG standing tenet of determinism and is neccessary. If one does not 'P'ersevere to the END, they were never saved to begin with.

Only God DETERMINES who is a sheep AT THE END.

Every determinist group KNOWS they have tares in their own pews.

s

So what are you saying? Did Paul lie and didn't really have some idea who the elect were and why? I find your posts very hard to follow as you seem to always have some hidden agenda that only you know about and your thought process seems to follow it. I am afraid my puny brain just doesn't usually get the point you are making.

 

[savedbygrace57]

smaller:

Only God DETERMINES who is a sheep AT THE END.

Thats not True, God detrmined who they are before the Foundation.

Matt 25:


33And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

34Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: