Why do Arminians...

[nobdysfool]

It seems to me that the key to discerning who that "dishonest Christian" might be would involve some self-examination, as well as some time spent reading posts in the thread. I don't say that to cast stones at anyone, as I am taking my own advice. If I have been dishonest in any way, I repent and ask your forgiveness. May the Holy Spirit show us all where we stand, and enable us to do what needs to be done, if anything, to correct what needs to be corrected.

 

[OzSpen]

I'm at a loss as well, as to who he is referring to as dishonest.

That's why this statement is very disconcerting, 'I've enjoyed myself but I draw the line at discussing scripture with dishonest Christians.'

Is this kind of accusation violating any Forum rule?

 

[stan1953]

That's why this statement is very disconcerting, 'I've enjoyed myself but I draw the line at discussing scripture with dishonest Christians.'
Is this kind of accusation violating any Forum rule?

Not that I see, especially given the change in THIS particular forum's rules, but it is a tad disconcerting to me as he quoted only me and FG2.
I'll chalk it up to him being new to CF and jumping right into Soteriology. He only has 45 posts and 95% of those are in this forum. He may be a tad over whelmed.

 

[OzSpen]

Not that I see, especially given the change in THIS particular forum's rules, but it is a tad disconcerting to me as he quoted only me and FG2.
I'll chalk it up to him being new to CF and jumping right into Soteriology. He only has 45 posts and 95% of those are in this forum. He may be a tad over whelmed.

OK.

 

[Hammster]

This is an important point IMO. I don't see anyone on here claiming to be Arminian but MANY claim to be Calvinist. Funny how labels have to accompany those who eisegete scripture.

Sometimes Calvinists do label those who practice eisegesis. It makes them easy to identify without using long descriptions. Some call them Arminians. I just call them synergists.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Therefore, God’s chosen ones, holy and loved, put on heartfelt compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience, (Colossians 3:12 HCSB)

Care to guess which word is translated as "chosen"?

There is no need to guess. I've done my homework. The adjective is 'eklektos'.

Care to guess what significance there is from the use of an adjective? {hint} not much. All depends on the purpose of that election.

Here's a sample of my homework.

There are 3 Greek words associated with divine election:
eklegomai, a verb occurring 21 times
Mk 13:20 Lk 6:13 Luke 10:42 Luke 14:7 Jn 6:70 John 13:18 John 15:16 Acts 1:2 Acts 1:24
Acts 6:5 Acts 13:17 Acts 15:7 Acts 15:22 Acts 15:25 1 Cor 1:27-28 Eph 1:4 James 2:5

eklektos, an adjective occurring 23 times
Mark 13:20 Matt 20:16 Matt 24:22 Matt 24:24 Matt 24:31 Mark 13:22 Mark 13:27 Luke 18:7 Rom 8:33 Rom 16:13 Col 3:12 1 Tim 5:21 2 Tim 2:10-11 Titus 1:1 1 Peter 1:1 1 Peter 2:6 1 Peter 2:9 2 John 1 2 John 13 Rev 17:14

ekloge, a noun, meaning “a choice”, occurring 7 times
Acts 9:15 Rom 9:11 Rom 11:5 Rom 11:7 Rom 11:28 2 Peter 1:10

Here's some more:

Categories of Divine Election
1. Election of Christ: an individual election
1 Pet 2:6 Isa 28:16 Isa 42:1 Luke 9:35 Luke 23:35
2. Election of Angels: a group or corporate election
1 Tim 5:21
3. Election of Israel: a group or corporate election
Amos 3:2 Deut 7:6 Acts 13:17
4. Election of believers: a group or corporate election
Eph 1:4a [note: this verse doesn’t say that God chose who would be believers, but that He chose believers…to be holy and blameless]
1 Peter 2:9
5. The Election of the 12 Disciples: a group or corporate election John 15:16
6. The Election of Paul: an individual election Acts 9:15

How many from these categories were elected to salvation?

 

[Hammster]

There is no need to guess. I've done my homework. The adjective is 'eklektos'.

Care to guess what significance there is from the use of an adjective? {hint} not much. All depends on the purpose of that election.

Here's a sample of my homework.

There are 3 Greek words associated with divine election:
eklegomai, a verb occurring 21 times
Mk 13:20 Lk 6:13 Luke 10:42 Luke 14:7 Jn 6:70 John 13:18 John 15:16 Acts 1:2 Acts 1:24
Acts 6:5 Acts 13:17 Acts 15:7 Acts 15:22 Acts 15:25 1 Cor 1:27-28 Eph 1:4 James 2:5

eklektos, an adjective occurring 23 times
Mark 13:20 Matt 20:16 Matt 24:22 Matt 24:24 Matt 24:31 Mark 13:22 Mark 13:27 Luke 18:7 Rom 8:33 Rom 16:13 Col 3:12 1 Tim 5:21 2 Tim 2:10-11 Titus 1:1 1 Peter 1:1 1 Peter 2:6 1 Peter 2:9 2 John 1 2 John 13 Rev 17:14

ekloge, a noun, meaning “a choice”, occurring 7 times
Acts 9:15 Rom 9:11 Rom 11:5 Rom 11:7 Rom 11:28 2 Peter 1:10

Here's some more:

Categories of Divine Election
1. Election of Christ: an individual election
1 Pet 2:6 Isa 28:16 Isa 42:1 Luke 9:35 Luke 23:35
2. Election of Angels: a group or corporate election
1 Tim 5:21
3. Election of Israel: a group or corporate election
Amos 3:2 Deut 7:6 Acts 13:17
4. Election of believers: a group or corporate election
Eph 1:4a [note: this verse doesn’t say that God chose who would be believers, but that He chose believers…to be holy and blameless]
1 Peter 2:9
5. The Election of the 12 Disciples: a group or corporate election John 15:16
6. The Election of Paul: an individual election Acts 9:15

How many from these categories were elected to salvation?

Non sequitur. My post was related to your claim that elect and choose have two different meanings.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Non sequitur. My post was related to your claim that elect and choose have two different meanings.

Sure, ignore all the verses that support my view.

Please identify which statements are true, and which are false:

1. All elections involve a choice.
2. All choices involve an election.
3. Very few elections involve a choice.
4. Very few choices involve an election.
5. All choices are an election.
6. All elections are a choice.

 

[nobdysfool]

Within Christianity, which is what we're supposed to be discussing here (not deciding which socks to wear in the morning, or what kind of coffee to have), it has been claimed that election is not to Salvation, but to special privilege or service, or something along that line. If that special privilege or service requires that one be a Christian in order to do those things, it logically follows that their salvation must also be a matter of election, in order to ensure the election to special privilege or serve. A certain result or outcome cannot arise from an uncertain prior state of affairs.

Election is not a temporal event, given God's Omniscience. It is not conferred upon man's actions after the fact, it is settled from the foundation of the world.

 

[Hammster]

Sure, ignore all the verses that support my view.

Please identify which statements are true, and which are false:

1. All elections involve a choice.
2. All choices involve an election.
3. Very few elections involve a choice.
4. Very few choices involve an election.
5. All choices are an election.
6. All elections are a choice.

Your "point" had nothing to do with my post. I was actually addressing one of your points in that post. So your accusation that I've ignored your point is unfounded.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Within Christianity, which is what we're supposed to be discussing here (not deciding which socks to wear in the morning, or what kind of coffee to have), it has been claimed that election is not to Salvation, but to special privilege or service, or something along that line. If that special privilege or service requires that one be a Christian in order to do those things, it logically follows that their salvation must also be a matter of election, in order to ensure the election to special privilege or serve.

Faulty conclusion. There is no reason at all that one must be elected TO salvation in order to be elected TO special privilege and service. Since God has decreed that all believers have been elected (to special privilege and service), the election is only for believers, not to become one.

And so far, RT has failed to prove or support its claims that anyone is elected TO salvation.

A certain result or outcome cannot arise from an uncertain prior state of affairs.

What would be "uncertain" in God's eyes? I can't think of a thing. What is your view, since it appears that there are uncertain things that God doesn't know?

Election is not a temporal event, given God's Omniscience. It is not conferred upon man's actions after the fact, it is settled from the foundation of the world.

And because God is omniscient, He has always knows who will believe. And His election of believers is a corporate election. He elects believers. Eph 1:4.

And election isn't "conferred", whatever that may mean. It's not a title that we put in front of our names. It's an action of God on a corporate group called "believers". And it is unconditional, in that He has chosen or elected ALL believers to be holy and blameless. Even the stinky ones.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Your "point" had nothing to do with my post. I was actually addressing one of your points in that post. So your accusation that I've ignored your point is unfounded.

Your claim here is unfounded.

 

[Hammster]

Your claim here is unfounded.

What you said "Hold on. Is the opposte equally true; that to choose someone is to elect someone? Of course not.

When I was a kid, there wa a favorite game called "Red Rover". People were chosen to run to the opposite line. What that election, or just a simple choice?

Were your socks elected this morning, or just selected out of a drawer full of socks?"

Note there's nothing about Devine election, but about the word elect versus choose.

What I responded with:

Therefore, God’s chosen ones, holy and loved, put on heartfelt compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience, (Colossians 3:12 HCSB)

Care to guess which word is translated as "chosen"?


The obvious intent was to show that the same word translated at "chosen" is the same word that can be translated as "elect". My claim is verified. Thanks for the opportunity.

 

[nobdysfool]

Faulty conclusion. There is no reason at all that one must be elected TO salvation in order to be elected TO special privilege and service.

Not faulty, but rather a logical conclusion. One cannot simply dismiss it by claiming it to be faulty, without showing reason. That has not been done.

Since God has decreed that all believers have been elected (to special privilege and service), the election is only for believers, not to become one.

Scripture?

And so far, RT has failed to prove or support its claims that anyone is elected TO salvation.

It has been provided. The refusal to acknowledge or engage with it does not mean it hasn't been shown. We believe what we do for clear reasons.

What would be "uncertain" in God's eyes? I can't think of a thing. What is your view, since it appears that there are uncertain things that God doesn't know?

Do events just happen by themselves? Does certainty arise from uncertainty, in defiance of all the known laws of cause and effect, and entropy?

And because God is omniscient, He has always knows who will believe. And His election of believers is a corporate election. He elects believers. Eph 1:4.

That's about as Arminian as it can be...

And election isn't "conferred", whatever that may mean. It's not a title that we put in front of our names. It's an action of God on a corporate group called "believers". And it is unconditional, in that He has chosen or elected ALL believers to be holy and blameless. Even the stinky ones.

So now special privilege and service are the same as holy and blameless? And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see who are considered the 'stinky ones'.

That was a thoroughly Arminian reply, from someone who claims to not be Arminian. One thing is not like the other, methinks....

 

[Skala]

No not quite. I vote to choose my local MP. He is only elected IF the majority of people in my riding choose to vote for him/her as well. He then becomes my MP-Elect.
I chose my wife, I chose my savior, I chose where I live.

It is NOT the same thing unless you refuse to accept the difference because it calls into question your RT POV.

You're confusing the act of electing something as an individual with the process of election whereby multiple votes are cast and the highest number wins.

To elect something is to choose something.

If I say I elected to come to work today, that is the exact same thing as saying I chose to come to work today.

To say I elected to eat mexican food for lunch today is the same as saying I chose to eat mexican food for lunch today.

To elect something is to choose something.

When God elected us, he chose us. He did not "start an election" whereby some votes are cast by multiple parties and then the highest # wins.

 

[Skala]

No, and this is a disingenuous question. I confirm that God KNEW everything before He created our universe, and I assume so do you, so why ask this knowing better?
Nobody is in Christ until they accept Him as their savior. We are NOT Muslim who believe as such.
You insist on using semantics and equivocal language instead of admitting to seeing what the Word of God says. It is no different than what the Jews tried to do to Jesus in Mark 3:20-35

Actually I was just testing to see if you were logically honest and consistent.

I got my answer.

 

[Skala]

This is an important point IMO. I don't see anyone on here claiming to be Arminian but MANY claim to be Calvinist. Funny how labels have to accompany those who eisegete scripture.

Because there's no true Arminians here.

Just a bunch of anti-Calvinists, none of which share the same beliefs.

Seriously, the only thing that you guys have in common is not your soteriology, just your anti-Calvinism.

I guess you're all synergists, but that goes without saying.

 

[Skala]

Hold on. Is the opposte equally true; that to choose someone is to elect someone? Of course not.

When I was a kid, there wa a favorite game called "Red Rover". People were chosen to run to the opposite line. What that election, or just a simple choice?

Were your socks elected this morning, or just selected out of a drawer full of socks?

I'm getting really tired of this nonsensical debate.

The Greek word eklektos (where we get the english word "elect" from) MEANS "to select, to choose".
Strong's Greek: 1588. ἐκλεκτός (eklektos) -- select, by impl. favorite

To eklektos something is to select or choose something.
To eklektos something is to select or choose something.
To eklektos something is to select or choose something.
To eklektos something is to select or choose something.
To eklektos something is to select or choose something.
To eklektos something is to select or choose something.
To eklektos something is to select or choose something.
To eklektos something is to select or choose something.

Got it?

That is why the Bible calls us "the elect" because we are eklectosed by God.

Got it?

That is why the Greek word for Church is "ekklesia" because it means a group of "chosen" or eklektosed people.

Got it?

There is no debate here. This is just cold hard facts.

 

[Skala]

What scripture shows that premise. The closest I can find is Eph 1:3-5, see below, but that is about God choosing those that He knew were IN CHRIST, which is basically the same thing Paul teaches in Rom 8:28-30

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, 4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love 5 He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will,
​

You answered your own question. It says He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world.

The very verse you quoted is the "scripture that shows that premise".

I don't know what verse in Rom 8 you are referring to, but Acts 13:48 is about Eternal Life and not salvation.

Rofl.

ETERNAL LIFE IS SALVATION!!!!

I think you are confusing eternal life with justification.

But even if you are, the Bible addresses that, too, in Romans 8:29-30. The predestined ones are always justified. Notice the order in Romans 8:29-30

It doesn't say that God predestines them because they are justified. (Conditional election from Arminianism)
But rather, it says they are justified because they are predestined.

Big difference.

 

[FreeGrace2]

What you said "Hold on. Is the opposte equally true; that to choose someone is to elect someone? Of course not.

When I was a kid, there wa a favorite game called "Red Rover". People were chosen to run to the opposite line. What that election, or just a simple choice?

Were your socks elected this morning, or just selected out of a drawer full of socks?"

Note there's nothing about Devine election, but about the word elect versus choose.

What I responded with:

Therefore, God’s chosen ones, holy and loved, put on heartfelt compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness, and patience, (Colossians 3:12 HCSB)

Care to guess which word is translated as "chosen"?


The obvious intent was to show that the same word translated at "chosen" is the same word that can be translated as "elect". My claim is verified. Thanks for the opportunity.

No thanks. Please answer this question:
Are all choices an election. Yes or No.