I'm not angry. My position is that you misrepresented what Paul was saying and why he was saying it in 2 Tim 2:10. Nothing more, nothing less. It was a very specific point only toward that post.
How is it misrepresented?
How would you interpret it?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
Strengthening families through biblical principles.
Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.
Read daily articles from Focus on the Family in the Marriage and Parenting Resources forum.
I'm not angry. My position is that you misrepresented what Paul was saying and why he was saying it in 2 Tim 2:10. Nothing more, nothing less. It was a very specific point only toward that post.
Yeah, what he said.How is it misrepresented?
How would you interpret it?
Can you make a specific point toward what I said about the 2 Timothy passage, please?I'm not angry. My position is that you misrepresented what Paul was saying and why he was saying it in 2 Tim 2:10. Nothing more, nothing less. It was a very specific point only toward that post.
Paul is not trying to get the elect saved in 2Tim. Yet you said he was:How is it misrepresented?
How would you interpret it?
"
trying to get the elect saved whom you say are already saved
Oh, that's right, you're OSAS.Paul is not trying to get the elect saved in 2Tim. Yet you said he was:
I interpret it hopefully as it was intended. That is Paul teaching Timothy (and other readers) that suffering for other Christians is a good thing. Nothing more, nothing less.
Yes. But that's fine. We can just drop the point I was making and get back to what's really important. Eating vittles on the billiard table in the "formal dinning room".Oh, that's right, you're OSAS.
Awwww....you dun made me homesick. Now I'm blubbering all over the place.Yes. But that's fine. We can just drop the point I was making and get back to what's really important. Eating vittles on the billiard table in the "formal dinning room".
You can be non-OSAS and still be elected.I'm OSAS, I guess I'm elected.
This is really the direction I was going with this.The OP, "What is Election?", I think goes way beyond "who are the elect?"
To understand election, I think one has to explain what it means to be "be predestined by the foreknowledge of God".
I'd have to think about it more, but I'd say the basis is God's omniscience, and the fact that he already knew the outcome of sending Christ to do what he knew Christ would do.Does 'foreknowledge' mean 'determined counsel' and if so, what is the bases for it.
Exactly what Tristan has been saying: Election is about foreknowledge and God knowing ahead of time how a person will respond to the gospel. And that there is a predetermined outcome for the person who chooses to have faith, and a predetermined outcome for the person who chooses to not have faith. The destiny of the former is to be conformed to the image of Christ. It's God's predetermined outcome for those who believe.There are only two verses in the NT that use the word translated 'foreknowledge'.
Acts 2:23 and 1Peter 1:2 I think Acts 2:23, can be quite insightful.
Act 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
Here in context to the crucifixion, it was both by "determined counsel AND foreknowledge".
What do any of you think this means?
The OP, "What is Election?", I think goes way beyond "who are the elect?"
To understand election, I think one has to explain what it means to be "be predestined by the foreknowledge of God".
Does 'foreknowledge' mean 'determined counsel' and if so, what is the bases for it.
There are only two verses in the NT that use the word translated 'foreknowledge'.
Acts 2:23 and 1Peter 1:2 I think Acts 2:23, can be quite insightful.
Act 2:23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
Here in context to the crucifixion, it was both by "determined counsel AND foreknowledge".
What do any of you think this means?
You mean you decided yourself to be homesick, right? You'll get over itAwwww....you dun made me homesick. Now I'm blubbering all over the place.
Debbie, you suddenly shook us with reality!
Ha ha, ha ha, I know how to get you!Sheesh...You keep doing this, !!, thingy.
YES YOU!!!!, when I saw that I thought, "yike, what did I do now?"
No I won't...I'm OHAH.You mean you decided yourself to be homesick, right? You'll get over it
Who does that? I don't. And i believe in election. Typically, you find people that do not believe in election saying that.Why does 'election' mean without the consent and choice of the one being elected? We don't use the word that way in our daily lives. On what basis do we change it to mean 'without the consent, or will, or qualifications of the elected'?
Yes he was chosen for that, just as we are chosen for whatever it is God has in store for us. We do not elect or choose ourselves to God's service, but that hardly means we don't have any choice in the matter. But that is instantly what it means to some.God knew ahead of time that they would put Jesus to death and this was his plan.