This should end the discussion about easy grace and OSAS!

[expos4ever]

Using words like 'never' and 'ever' and other absolutes usually shows a lack of understanding as there are so few absolutes about human beings and their thoughts. What it reflects, IMHO is a lack of understanding of the complexity of people and human beings. Simple minded people like to say 'always', but very little is 'always'.

If you can find one post - just one - where someone has changed their mind, I will back off from the "never" language.

I am simply reporting the fact that, to the best of my recollection, I have never seen anyone change their mind on a major item of theology.

 

[expos4ever]

I am living proof that your observations here are not based on fact.

Please show me an actual post where you or anyone else has changed their mind. Perhaps you have changed your mind, but I trust you can understand that I would like to see actual evidence of this. It would be a first, I will grant you.

 

[ZacharyB]

I do not believe that natural man cannot understand the message of the gospel in the sense that they do not understand words.
I don't believe that the hearers of the parables could not understand the words either.

Gospel: Yes, they understand the words, but they are "foolishness" to them.
Parables: Yes, they understand the words, but the meaning was to be
understood only by those in the Kingdom (according to Jesus).
.

 

[Marvin Knox]

I want to clarify somethings here for those who may be interested concerning where I differ with most Calvinists and many Arminians and what have you as well.

I do not equate regeneration with the new birth. The two things are certainly related to each other. But they are not the same thing.

Most people have what I would call a sort of loose goose/slip shod idea about these things and their terminology shows it. It also causes much confusion when discussing theology IMO.

One is "born again" by the reception of the spoken or written Word of God according to the Apostle Peter. This is how we enter into Kingdom living. It is much like being born naturally as Jesus illustrated.

But the act of hearing the Word itself has no magic powers that are imparted through the sound of it that causes the dead spirit of natural man to come alive. This is no more the case with being born again than is taking that first breath of air for the new born baby in the natural world the moment of imparting life. It is certainly necessary to accept the things related through the gospel message to function in your new world. It is just like it is necessary take in air to function in this natural world. But it is not the initial giving of life as I see it.

Jesus gave us the dual examples of the wind and birth so that we could see what He was getting at without any misunderstanding.

As He chided Nicodemus about - we really should understand very clearly that God was telling the truth about mankind dying the day that they ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Fallen mankind is spiritually dead. They must be regenerated somehow and they must be justified before God and enter into the Kingdom of God through faith.

The faith we enter into the Kingdom with is authored by God just as faith in any other realm of life must be taught or experienced in order for it to exist.

We see the results of the activities of the wind. But that is not the wind itself. What we observe is the result of the secret activities of the invisible wind.

We see the results of the activities of the Holy Spirit when one prays the sinners prayer or walks the isle at a crusade. But this is not the actual beginning of spiritual life any more than breathing and crying are the beginnings of natural life.

This may sound contrived to some - simply because they are so used to that slip shod idea about the new birth being the same as regeneration. But, in point of fact, these are the natural and unavoidable ideas that result from understanding the illustrations exactly as Jesus gave them to us.

I don't claim to know what a spirit looks like or how it functions exactly. I don't claim to know exactly how the dead spirit works for a natural man to give him a conscience or how a live spirit works for the spiritual man either. I just know that spiritual life seems to be inexorably tied in scripture to the idea of us being infused with and taught by the Spirit of God.

As the scriptures say, no one knows the thoughts of a man but the spirit of the man and no one can know the thoughts of God but the Spirit of God. No one can come to Jesus unless the Father draw him.

"We have the mind of Christ" the scriptures say. If it were not for that fact we could not have believed in a saving way the gospel when it was preached to us and we could not have said "Jesus is Lord". It is only bythe Spirit of God within us that we can proclaim Him Lord.

I don't believe that a basic understanding of these things should be all that difficult for one having the mind of Christ within him or her.

The only things that could hinder us from understanding would be a rather slip shod approach to systematically understanding doctrine OR a refusal to accept where it leads us because of some feeling that it somehow would not be fair of God to act in one way with one sinner and another way with another sinner.

Either way - IMO - there is really no excuse for wondering how these doctrines work at least roughly.

If you somehow see some kind of "prevenient" grace in scripture that is given to all sinners in exactly the same dose - go ahead on with that idea. As for me - I see in scripture only the sinners that God chooses to bring Him glory through His mercy receiving the special inward call that is necessary to receive Christ. All things considered - it seems to me from scripture that He passes other sinners by and gives them the wrath which we all so richly deserve.

Just be sure that it is really because you read it in scripture in a different way than I am saying that you hold your beliefs. Be real sure that you are not reading things a certain way because you have come to these things with a preconceived idea of what would and would not be fair. That would be dangerous for you to do - especially if you teach these things to others.

God's ways are not exactly our ways and His thoughts are so high above what we are able to comprehend that they are like the distance between us and the farthest star in the universe.

It's always best to just go with what He says and not let emotion get in the way. After all we are needing to deal with two natures as we consider these things. Emotions can play tricks on us.

 

[Marvin Knox]

Gospel: Yes, they understand the words, but they are "foolishness" to them.
Parables: Yes, they understand the words, but the meaning was to be
understood only by those in the Kingdom (according to Jesus).
.

You are agreeing with me right?

 

[Marvin Knox]

Please show me an actual post where you or anyone else has changed their mind. Perhaps you have changed your mind, but I trust you can understand that I would like to see actual evidence of this. It would be a first, I will grant you.

No - I don't believe I will. I can't blame you for the request. But I don't believe I will spend my time doing that for you.

If I find the time I may go to that trouble. We'll see. If I find the time you will be the first to know.

I started discussing these things as a full 5-point Calvinist. I taught the 5-points of Calvinism in the Presbyterian church for many years. I believed that I had thought through them thoroughly. But I had not. After listening to others, including those online, I have moderated my position to one teaching strongly against limited atonement as presented by most strict Calvinists.

I have dozens of books and taped series on Reformed theology. I still value them highly. But I have learned to be more selective about taking in all that they teach without my own thorough evaluation according to scripture.

I started debating these things as perhaps the most hyper Calvinistic believer in hard determinism. I now hold more of a moderated position along the lines of (but not exactly like) so called Molinism.

I started teaching an extremely strong position concerning the lack of any possible correlation between predestination and free will. I now hold a position which is pretty much unlike every other Reformed theologian I have encountered. And I emphasize the compatibility of the two concepts at every chance I get.

The moderation of my views is a bit unusual. That I will grant you. But I do not believe that I am alone in this.

I have had several people tell me in this forum alone that my way of presenting these things has caused them to reconsider their own teaching. But I will grant you there have not been many.

Both Calvinism and Arminianism have much to offer IMO. Would that more of them from both sides would moderate their views as they debate doctrine.

I do agree with you sentiment in a general and overall sort of way. But because of my own experience and the things I have been told I must disagree with your very strong stance concerning the universality of this phenomenon.

 

[brotherjerry]

Just be sure that it is really because you read it in scripture in a different way than I am saying that you hold your beliefs. Be real sure that you are not reading things a certain way because you have come to these things with a preconceived idea of what would and would not be fair. That would be dangerous for you to do - especially if you teach these things to others.

Could not the same be said of you?

 

[Marvin Knox]

Could not the same be said of you?

Of course.

Who said otherwise?

 

[sdowney717]

Downey,

So let me ask you this...someone who is not saved today. Tomorrow if he becomes a believer does he have to make a blood sacrifice all over again?
No. Why? Because Christ already paid that price. It was already paid for that unbeliever 2000 years ago. The blood sacrifice is not something that happens when we get saved...it is something that has already happened...for the world. Because of God's grace He paid that price.


No it's not...what does the verse say? Does it say "beleivers", no it says Christ came not to condemn the world, but to save the world. Christ's first coming was for the propitiation of sins...to be the final and perfect sacrifice.


Then by your own statemenst you and I are condemned. For we were not present when Christ died and was resurrected. We were once unbelievers, condemned. But I am sure you will agree we were not finalized.


Not quite...anyone could kill an animal on an altar. But one had to ask for forgiveness. It was and still is a two stage event...blood sacrifice and asking of forgiveness (repenting). What God did by His grace was take care of the first part for us...no longer is a blood sacrifice needed...because nothing could be more perfect than Christ. So now we have but one thing to do...believe. Man is not reconciled with God until man asks for forgiveness and accepts Christ. But the price of shedding blood is already taken care of for man.

This is what is spoken of in 1 John 2:2 "and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world" Christ paid the sin offering price for the whole world, not just those that were saved with John. That is exactly what John says there. It takes gyrating the verse to get it to say anything different.


Again not entirely correct. For someone who is a believer, atonement is not necissary. See you are not understanding the purpose of atonement. It is a reconciliation which even by Websters means "act of causing two people or groups to become friendly again". A believer, someone who is saved, does not need atonement. But an unbeliever is the one who needs atonment. Atonment is for the unbeliever to become a believer. To make things right with God. Those that are already right...don't need atonement.


Nope. And I think I have explained it enough to make it clear that this is not what I say, nor is it the logical conclusion. It does indicate that you may not completely understand atonment, however.

See, there is this word again in scripture 'called; that you don't like to talk about in your posts.
You're talking human wisdom and reasoning here, I will stick with scripture to understand the atonement, and you should also.
Hebrews 9, and notice verse 15 absolutely qualifies for whom the blood atonement is for this sprinkling of Christ's blood.

11 But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation.
12 Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.
13 For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh,
14 how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

Now for those NOT called, they will not be receiving this atonement, the atonement of sin is ONLY for those called to receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. Not all are called. For all those God foreknew, only they are called, and all of them are eventually glorified with salvation to be with Christ.

And also I like 1 Peter 1 so much better than your human reasoning which is contrary to what Peter taught about the blood sprinkling, whom it is for.
Lets see these words elect, chosen, foreknowledge, sanctifying, obedient, sprinkled, blood. in action

1 Peter 1 New International Version (NIV)

1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ,

To God’s elect, exiles scattered throughout the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia,
2 who have been chosen
according to the foreknowledge of God the Father,
through the sanctifying work of the Spirit,
to be obedient to Jesus Christ and
sprinkled with his blood:

Grace and peace be yours in abundance.

If any read that, they will immediately see that those who are elect, have been chosen, according to God's foreknowing them in love, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit to be obedient to Christ and sprinkled with His blood.
So again the truth of election, is to be called, chosen, this resulting in faithful obedience to Christ by the sanctifying work of the Spirit and therefore an actually experiencing the atonement of His blood sprinkling they receive for their sins

I really don't expect to convince you, there are no winners in arguing over scripture, God's word simply is as He intends it and this is not a matter of a private interpretation.

These and so many other scriptures should be ample evidence that only the called of Christ receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

 

[Marvin Knox]

See, there is this word again in scripture 'called; that you don't like to talk about in your posts......................
Now for those NOT called, they will not be receiving this atonement, the atonement of sin is ONLY for those called to receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. Not all are called. For all those God foreknew, only they are called, and all of them are eventually glorified with salvation to be with Christ.
If any read that, they will immediately see that those who are elect, have been chosen, according to God's foreknowing them in love, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit to be obedient to Christ and sprinkled with His blood.
So again the truth of election, is to be called, chosen, this resulting in faithful obedience to Christ by the sanctifying work of the Spirit and therefore an actually experiencing the atonement of His blood sprinkling they receive for their sins............
I really don't expect to convince you, there are no winners in arguing over scripture, God's word simply is as He intends it and this is not a matter of a private interpretation.

It has always seemed to me that the so called "golden chain of salvation" in Romans 8 speaks volumes about predestination and election. Maybe that's why many folks don't refer to it a lot in detail.


"For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified. What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us?" Romans 8:29-31

If one follows the sequence of events as God gives them in this golden chain they come up against the idea that "all" God calls He also justifies.

Since it is obvious that not everyone who hears the gospel is justified. The ones He calls must have received a special calling which the ones that He did not predestine did not receive. This is, of course, what Reformed theologians refer to as the "internal call" or the "effectual call". God opening Lydia's heart to believe would be an example of this inward or effective call.

All those He foreknew He also predestined and all those He predestined He also called and all those He called He also justified and all those He justified He also glorified - is a sequence of events for a special people that non Reformed theologians simply cannot easily deal with. Maybe that's why the vast majority of systematic theologies dealing with soteriology since the Reformation have been from a point of view that embraces predestination and election unto salvation.

Likewise those who do not believe in OSAS come up against an insurmountable road block here as well. This is because "all" those that He justified (once saved) He also glorified. This amounts to a done deal for all who have been justified and saved in the first place.

The golden chain of salvation deals a death blow to the theology of those who deny OSAS and clearly shows divine election along the way as well.

 

[sdowney717]

It has always seemed to me that the so called "golden chain of salvation" in Romans 8 speaks volumes about predestination and election. Maybe that's why many folks don't refer to it a lot in detail.


"For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified. What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us?" Romans 8:29-31

If one follows the sequence of events as God gives them in this golden chain they come up against the idea that "all" God calls He also justifies.

Since it is obvious that not everyone who hears the gospel is justified. The ones He calls must have received a special calling which the ones that He did not predestine did not receive. This is, of course, what Reformed theologians refer to as the "internal call" or the "effectual call". God opening Lydia's heart to believe would be an example of this inward or effective call.

All those He foreknew He also predestined and all those He predestined He also called and all those He called He also justified and all those He justified He also glorified - is a sequence of events for a special people that non Reformed theologians simply cannot easily deal with. Maybe that's why the vast majority of systematic theologies dealing with soteriology since the Reformation have been from a point of view that embraces predestination and election unto salvation.

Likewise those who do not believe in OSAS come up against an insurmountable road block here as well. This is because "all" those that He justified (once saved) He also glorified. This amounts to done deal for all who have been justified and saved in the first place.

The golden chain of salvation deals a death blow to the theology of those who deny OSAS and clearly shows divine election along the way as well.

Yes, I read scripture and He speaks this way also to me as you have just said.

 

[Marvin Knox]

Yes, I read scripture and He speaks this way also to me as you have just said.

Some people in these forums seem to be dismayed and sometimes even in shock that there are arguments over scriptures here.

It really shouldn't surprise anyone. After all debating theology is a bit of a test for Christ's church as I understand it.

"In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it. No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God’s approval." 1 Corinthians 11:18-19 (NIV)

We could compromise a lot more I suppose. But then I don't think God grades on a curve do you?

 

[sdowney717]

Some people in these forums seem to be dismayed and sometimes even in shock that there are arguments over scriptures here.

It really shouldn't surprise anyone. After all debating theology is a bit of a test for Christ's church as I understand it.

"In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church, there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it. No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which of you have God’s approval." 1 Corinthians 11:18-19 (NIV)

We could compromise a lot more I suppose. But then I don't think God grades on a curve do you?

Yes, I am aware of that verse in regards to controversy over spiritual matters. For to show those that are of the truth, there must be divisions among you. That will become evident at the judgement seat, every thing spoken in the dark will be proclaimed in the light and the secrets of the hearts of men revealed both for the good and the bad.

That is right, with God there is no gray, all God's promises are yes and amen.
And a spiritual principle is to let your yes be yes, and your no be no.

Matthew 5:37 New King James Version (NKJV)
37 But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the evil one.

The evil one is of course Satan himself. And we also do not want to be double minded.
For some reason the verse about the eye of the body came into my mind from Luke 11

34 The light of the body is the eye: therefore when thine eye is single, thy whole body also is full of light; but when thine eye is evil, thy body also is full of darkness.
35 Take heed therefore that the light which is in thee be not darkness.
36 If thy whole body therefore be full of light, having no part dark, the whole shall be full of light, as when the bright shining of a candle doth give thee light.

 

[brotherjerry]

See, there is this word again in scripture 'called; that you don't like to talk about in your posts.
You're talking human wisdom and reasoning here, I will stick with scripture to understand the atonement, and you should also.
Hebrews 9, and notice verse 15 absolutely qualifies for whom the blood atonement is for this sprinkling of Christ's blood.

11 But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation.
12 Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.
13 For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh,
14 how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?
15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

Now for those NOT called, they will not be receiving this atonement, the atonement of sin is ONLY for those called to receive the promise of the eternal inheritance. Not all are called. For all those God foreknew, only they are called, and all of them are eventually glorified with salvation to be with Christ.

And also I like 1 Peter 1 so much better than your human reasoning which is contrary to what Peter taught about the blood sprinkling, whom it is for.
Lets see these words elect, chosen, foreknowledge, sanctifying, obedient, sprinkled, blood. in action

1 Peter 1 New International Version (NIV)

1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ,

To God’s elect, exiles scattered throughout the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia,
2 who have been chosen
according to the foreknowledge of God the Father,
through the sanctifying work of the Spirit,
to be obedient to Jesus Christ and
sprinkled with his blood:

Grace and peace be yours in abundance.

If any read that, they will immediately see that those who are elect, have been chosen, according to God's foreknowing them in love, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit to be obedient to Christ and sprinkled with His blood.
So again the truth of election, is to be called, chosen, this resulting in faithful obedience to Christ by the sanctifying work of the Spirit and therefore an actually experiencing the atonement of His blood sprinkling they receive for their sins

I really don't expect to convince you, there are no winners in arguing over scripture, God's word simply is as He intends it and this is not a matter of a private interpretation.

These and so many other scriptures should be ample evidence that only the called of Christ receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

I have no problem talking about the word "called".

Matthew 20 has the parable of the workers in the vineyard. I am sure you are familiar with verse 16 "For many are called, but few chosen". I am sure it fits right into the election based narrative. However, if one looks closely we see that the stewad gave each their pay, equally, just one denarius. And yet people grumbled because some did more work than others. So all are given equal measure because payment was not based on how much work was done. This has nothing to do with election.

We see again in Matthew 22 a similar phrase "For many are called, but few are chosen". But if we look at the parable of the wedding feast that we find this. This is a picture of the promises of God. Offered first to the Jews, many times, and they did not pay heed, just read the OT to see how often they stopped following God. Then the invitation was opened to all that there was, this is opening things up to the Gentiles as well. Also note that in verse 10 it said they invited good and bad, this is not reference to saved and unsaved...but even by our standards the people who are bad, obviously not 'worthy' by our standards. But God accepted them anyways.

We know that God's desire is for all men to be saved. 1 Timothy 4 "who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth" as well as 2 Peter 3:9 "...not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance"
So we see God desires all to be saved, an invitation to the wedding that has gone to everyone. So everyone has the same opportunity to come to the wedding.

There is no doubt that God does work in people lives. Saved as well as unsaved. And the unsaved will feel the call of God when their heart is ready. I know I felt it when I was struggling in my youth. Then someone near and dear to me said a few words and I could feel God nudging me to pay attention. God did not give me the words or make me do anything, but He put the situation in place and used that person who was already a Christian to help me come to understand and ultimately accept Christ. The thing is that God has invited all to come, but like the jews, many will not listen. The parable of the wedding feast said all were invited, but it did not say all came. It even mentions some that were not welcome showing up.

And it is funny you mention Hebrews 9...the sprinking mentioned in verse 13...who was that for? Let me answer "sprinkling the unclean"

And again you completely do NOT understand what atonemet is for. Even under the Old Testament why did they make sin offerings? It was to atone for sins they had committed...they were UNCLEAN because of sin...so they had to make an OFFERING asking for forgiveness. Technically speaking under the OT Laws if you did not sin, you did not have to make an offering. So the offering was an atonment of the unclean for the sins in order to make them clean. The idea that Christ shed His blood for you and me as we are now is ludicrous. Christ shed His blood for us for you and I as we were, filthy and covered in our iniquities. We were the lost, Christ came to redeem us, we are now the redeemed...Christ no longer comes to redeem us because we are already redeemed. Same with the sacrifice of Christ. It was for the lost, because they were lost. Once they are found they are no longer lost and no longer need a sacrifice because they are no longer lost.

While we are lost we need atonement. Once we have been atoned for, we do not have to be atoned again. The clean do not get washed again.

Besides the "elect" or "chosen" are the extension of Israel who was God's elect and chosen people. So the elect is not in reference to individuals but the body of Christ, the followers of Christ...the jews and the gentiles grafted to the tree.

And there is many scriptures and ample evidence to reflect that anyone and everyone could come to Christ. That it is not God picking and choosing who to save and who not to save, but that the offer of salvation is open to any who wish to receive it. That God's Grace was to offer a sacrifice that would pay the penalty of sin for the world (as scripture says). That salvation is no longer for the few but open to all, and no longer is a blood sacrifice needed for you and I (or anyone) to atone for sins, because the blood sacrifice was made by Christ. Now we have but to believe (as scripture says). But I am sure noneof that will convince you either. I can only pray that it does, and I do. Not for your souls sake, because I do not question your salvation as you have not questioned mine. Nor do I think either one of our doctrines would send anyone to Hell if they listened to it. But we are to be of one mind, and I pray that we can be that.

 

[Job8]

And there is many scriptures and ample evidence to reflect that anyone and everyone could come to Christ. That it is not God picking and choosing who to save and who not to save, but that the offer of salvation is open to any who wish to receive it.

This is exactly what the Bible reveals. At the same time, all those who are saved are eternally secure. All Scriptures pertaining to election and predestination provide assurance that not only are believers eternally secure, but that every child of God shall be perfected. Those Scriptures do not pertain to God picking and choosing who will be saved and who will be damned. That is a man-made doctrine and we are to beware the doctrines of men.

 

[expos4ever]

No - I don't believe I will. I can't blame you for the request. But I don't believe I will spend my time doing that for you.

If I find the time I may go to that trouble. We'll see. If I find the time you will be the first to know.

Fair enough. I realize it would take a lot of work.

But I know my own experience - in over 10 years of heavy participation in boards, I have never seen anyone shift their position on a fundamental matter of doctrine. That says something.

I started discussing these things as a full 5-point Calvinist. I taught the 5-points of Calvinism in the Presbyterian church for many years. I believed that I had thought through them thoroughly. But I had not. After listening to others, including those online, I have moderated my position to one teaching strongly against limited atonement as presented by most strict Calvinists.

Fair enough - good to know that some people can change their minds. By the way, you are a very skilled writer - your posts are clear and understandable.

 

[ZacharyB]

Romans 8:29-31
"For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified. What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us?"
If one follows the sequence of events as God gives them in this golden chain they come up against the idea that "all" God calls He also justifies.

Thanks for omitting a major part of what needs to be understood!
You should have posted the whole deal ...
Romans 8:28-30
28 And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God,
to those who are the called according to His purpose.
29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.
30 Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.

Now, just for starters, the Lord says several times:
Those who love Jesus will obey His commandments!
So, this right here disqualifies many of who YOU think are included in the above passage,
which is talking only about God's special elect from the foundation of the world.

Kinda reminds me of Paul's letter to the Ephesians
... he made it clear that he was writing all of that great and wonderful stuff
... ONLY to the "faithful" saints! ... And ditto for those in Colossae.
Meanwhile, everyone who has responded to an altar call tinks it applies to dem!
.

 

[expos4ever]

Besides the "elect" or "chosen" are the extension of Israel who was God's elect and chosen people. So the elect is not in reference to individuals but the body of Christ, the followers of Christ...the jews and the gentiles grafted to the tree.

I strongly agree - this point is absolutely foundational. At the risk of seeming to "taunt" those who believe otherwise, the case for seeing Israel as God's elect - and then Jesus and Jesus alone - inheriting that "role" is devastatingly powerful.

If we pay any attention at all to the Biblical narrative we cannot help but conclude that "election" is focused solely on Jesus to the exclusion of anyone else (now that Israel failed to fulfill her role as the "elect"). Yes, of course, we believers are "in Christ" and inherit the benefits of Jesus's election. But we are not "elect" in the sense most Calvinists seem to think.

What was Israel elected to? Life after death in heaven for all Jews? Of course not! They were chosen ("elected") to be the means by which God would solve the problem of sin and death. They failed and Jesus, a Messiah, took on that role - He became God's means for dealing with sin and death.

Yes we are described as 'the elect', but we are only elect in the sense that we have, freely I suggest, chosen by faith to unite ourselves with Christ, and thereby, but only thereby, to inherit the benefits of election. We were not "chosen" to be saved. Jesus was chosen as the one true Israelite.

 

[ToBeLoved]

Romans 8:28-30
28 And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God,
to those who are the called according to His purpose.
29 For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.
30 Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.

Now, just for starters, the Lord says several times:
Those who love Jesus will obey His commandments!
So, this right here disqualifies many of who YOU think are included in the above passage,
which is talking only about God's special elect from the foundation of the world.

.

And just how do you know who really does love or not love Jesus?

Or if they love Jesus truly, who loves with all their hearts, soul and mind?

What I have found is those who are very performance orientated Christians tend to count on that performance, rather than to rely totally on God. They can therefore justify why they are God's through obedience or some other form of faithfulness.

 

[ZacharyB]

And just how do you know who really does love or not love Jesus?
Or if they love Jesus truly, who loves with all their hearts, soul and mind?
What I have found is those who are very performance orientated Christians tend to count on that performance, rather than to rely totally on God. They can therefore justify why they are God's through obedience or some other form of faithfulness.

I would suggest that one should see throughout Scripture that ...
God's Plan is for full co-operation between Himself and man.

So, as to your above, we should looking at: relying on God + our performance.

Further, believers who do not see that ...
Salvation is gained through grace + co-operation (obedience, endurance, etc.)
... have been spiritually blinded by Satan + the dreaded "doctrines of men".

.