Problem with Election

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dorothy Mae

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2018
5,657
1,017
Canton south of Germany
✟75,214.00
Country
Switzerland
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
A short quote from Wikipedia on Servetus:

"As Servetus was not a citizen of Geneva, and legally could at worst be banished, the government, in an attempt to find some plausible excuse to disregard this legal reality, had consulted other Swiss Reformed cantons (Zürich, Bern, Basel, Schaffhausen). They universally favored his condemnation and suppression of his doctrine, but without saying how that should be accomplished.[33] Martin Luther had condemned his writing in strong terms.[34] Servetus and Philip Melanchthon had strongly hostile views of each other. The party called the "Libertines", who were generally opposed to anything and everything John Calvin supported, were in this case strongly in favor of the execution of Servetus at the stake (while Calvin urged that he be beheaded instead). In fact, the council that condemned Servetus was presided over by Ami Perrin (a Libertine) who ultimately on 24 October sentenced Servetus to death by burning for denying the Trinity and infant baptism.[35] Calvin asked that he be beheaded instead of burnt, knowing that burning at the stake was the only legal recourse.[36] This plea was refused and on 27 October, Servetus was burnt alive—atop a pyre of his own books—at the Plateau of Champel at the edge of Geneva."

Even those strongly opposed to Calvin were in favor of the execution. I only wish the Councils of Geneva had shipped him back to Vienne where he escaped prison. However, it would have sent a message to other heretics to those who cared not for the souls of men desiring to follow in the footsteps of Servetus. Somewhere I read that (at least) one such person was detoured from following in the footsteps of Servetus after the execution of Servetus.

It cannot be emphasized enough that the sentence was pronounced by the Councils of Geneva, not Calvin. If Calvin had the authority, Servetus would have been beheaded, rather than burned. That in itself shows where Calvin stood with the Councils.

As for sic implications that John Calvin (while not even a citizen), took some twisted delight in the burning of Servetus when it could not be further from the truth, Tim Challies states truthfully on his blog:

"It should be noted that Calvin was the only person who suggested a lighter sentence, asking the court to allow Servetus to die painlessly by beheading. Calvin prayed with and for Servetus and earlier in his life had sent Servetus a copy of his Institutes. Interestingly, Servetus returned the book with many abusive and insulting comments written in the margins. Despite this offense, Calvin showed clear pastoral concern for this man’s soul." tim challies blog

John Calvin only had a part in Servetus' arrest and investigation, as in recommending to Genevian authorities to investigate him. He was sorry that Servetus went against his advice to come to Geneva, and sorry the council did not give him a quicker less painful death. Not only is there no evidence of John Calvin being unrepentant, it is a judgmental attitude considering he:

"preached over two thousand sermons. He preached twice on Sunday and almost every weekday. His sermons lasted more than an hour and he did not use notes." (not to mention tens of thousands of pages of commentary on Scripture, the first Protestant systematic theology, among his many other writings)

"Within Geneva, Calvin's main concern was the creation of a collège, an institute for the education of children. Although the school was a single institution, it was divided into two parts: a grammar school called the collège and an advanced school called the académie. Within five years there were 1,200 students in the grammar school and 300 in the advanced school. The collège eventually became the Collège Calvin, one of the college preparatory schools of Geneva, while the académie became the University of Geneva."

"when he could not walk the couple of hundred yards to church, he was carried in a chair to preach. When the doctor forbade him to go out in the winter air to the lecture room, he crowded the audience into his bedroom and gave lectures there. To those who would urge him to rest, he asked, “What? Would you have the Lord find me idle when he comes?”

None of these historical facts bear the mark of a bitter unrepentant sinner.

It is difficult today to even wrap the mind around what it would have been like to live in Europe during the Reformation times. Blood was shed on every side in the region, consider the Puritan John Foxe and his "Book of Martyrs", with descriptions of executions of Protestants under "bloody" Mary I. Catholics and Protestant persecuted the Anabaptists. It was a dark time in Christian history, let's be careful not to put out the few Protestant lights that burned especially bright in a time of great darkness.
These are all excuses. Any man who walks with Jesus would never have condemned a man for disagreeing with him. There is no excuse. Luther might have disagreed but NO ONE was burned at the stake because they disagreed with Luther. And the list of men and women killed under Calvin's tyranny is long. There are more.

The man was a tyrant and he knew it. Once he was walking through Geneva and a dog barked at him. He said "even the dogs hate me." The Genevites hated him for his tyranny. He chose his successor not letting the citizens do that. Maybe you deny all of this but the crowning blow is when he died, the citizens of Geneva did the unthinkable for that day, they threw the body into an unmarked and unhonored grave. Luther's grave is known. The man Calvin was hated by the citizens of Geneva and was tyrannical. They hated him so much they refused to honor his body at death in the most dishonorable way known.

I repeat, if a man walks with Jesus, he would never have let men and women burn at the stake, be exiled or otherwise tortured for disagreeing with him. No one who walks with Jesus would have done this no matter what others in their age were doing. He will not stand before God and give as a defence that this was what everyone else was doing. This attitude of intolerance indicates a deeply manipulating and evil sinner who was trained as a lawyer bent on power. And the fruit of Calvinism is equally intolerant. Nothing at all like Jesus who let men walk away but never harmed them physically for disagreeing with him. Sorry but that is the standard, not what others were doing but what JEsus did.
 
Upvote 0

Dorothy Mae

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2018
5,657
1,017
Canton south of Germany
✟75,214.00
Country
Switzerland
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Just think on it, Pray on it, and ask God for wisdom to understand this.

God Bless!

In Christ Our Justification, Sanctification, and Redemption 1 Cor. 1:30
You need to realize that those who reject Calvinism do not so do because we do not understand the doctrines. It is because we have thought and prayed about them thoroughly and see the problems with it that you likely do not see. It is very likely you do not see the problems because you do not address them.

I also have to add that this "you do not understand it if you do not believe it" is exactly what the evolutionists say about evolution.
 
Upvote 0

Dorothy Mae

Well-Known Member
May 26, 2018
5,657
1,017
Canton south of Germany
✟75,214.00
Country
Switzerland
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I have yet to see you provide any exegesis of Holy Scriptures.
Calvinism is not in Holy Scripture. Therefore exegesis of it will not be discussing the theology. Red, we ought to finish. You are wearing Calvinist glasses and I know from experience and their history that intolerance is the hallmark of the position. I will you well.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
This is the problem with Calvinism.
You read words and jump on words that seem to agree with that theology.

OSAS did not exist before Calvin.
Predestination did not exist before Calvin, who borrowed part of the idea from Augustine.

So how could any ECF speak of a theory that was not even thought of yet?

I could speak to each of the above, but there's no time now.
You see Justin, for example, as to the blue highlighted, he speaks of the elect. And who are these elect? As usual, and as shown in Romans 9 to 11, they are the elect of God, the nation of Israel through whom God wished to reveal Himself.

See Mathew 8:11-12 which is mentioned in parenthesis right after the "elect".

Mathew 8:11-12 Jesus said:
11“I say to you that many will come from east and west, and recline at the table with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven; 12but the sons of the kingdom will be cast out into the outer darkness; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”

The centurion is one of the first people who will come from the East and the West, from all over the world, to join with the sons of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob -- the Jews.
And then the Jews who have no faith will be thrown out into the dark where there will be gnashing of teeth.
This goes to the Wedding Banquet in Mathew. Those not dressed properly (In Christ) will be removed from the banquet.

The elect are the Jews.
The concept of predestining persons to go to heaven and persons to go to hell is AGAINST God's nature, therefore when we read the word "elect" we should pauses and look into what it means.

As to the green...as in other verses in the N.T. this only means that God created a method for men to be saved from the beginning of time. We are called by the SALVATION which has been prepared beforehand by God, as in Genesis 3:15. We can enjoy this salvation and rest WITH THE ELECT, the Jews. We are grafted in.

Here is something from Justin:

In the books of the Prophets, indeed, we found Jesus our Christ foretold as coming to us born of a virgin, reaching manhood, curing every disease and ailment, raising the dead to life, being hated, unrecognized, and crucified, dying, rising from the dead, ascending into Heaven, and being called and actually being the Son of God. And that He would send certain persons to every nation to make known these things, and that the former Gentiles rather [than Jews] would believe in Him. He was foretold, in truth, before He actually appeared, first five thousand years before, then four thousand, then three thousand, then two thousand, then one thousand, and finally eight hundred. For, in succeeding generations new Prophets rose time and again.{32}
I just showed you a small sampling of how the very early fathers viewed election and predestination. You said "not one." I showed several did.

They had to as any church father commenting on Scriptures will come across the Biblical doctrine of election and predestination. Many have pointed out these passages and you respond with the same refuted assertions.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: sdowney717
Upvote 0
Oct 21, 2003
6,793
3,289
Central Time Zone
✟107,193.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
These are all excuses. Any man who walks with Jesus would never have condemned a man for disagreeing with him. There is no excuse. Luther might have disagreed but NO ONE was burned at the stake because they disagreed with Luther. And the list of men and women killed under Calvin's tyranny is long. There are more.

The man was a tyrant and he knew it. Once he was walking through Geneva and a dog barked at him. He said "even the dogs hate me." The Genevites hated him for his tyranny. He chose his successor not letting the citizens do that. Maybe you deny all of this but the crowning blow is when he died, the citizens of Geneva did the unthinkable for that day, they threw the body into an unmarked and unhonored grave. Luther's grave is known. The man Calvin was hated by the citizens of Geneva and was tyrannical. They hated him so much they refused to honor his body at death in the most dishonorable way known.

I repeat, if a man walks with Jesus, he would never have let men and women burn at the stake, be exiled or otherwise tortured for disagreeing with him. No one who walks with Jesus would have done this no matter what others in their age were doing. He will not stand before God and give as a defence that this was what everyone else was doing. This attitude of intolerance indicates a deeply manipulating and evil sinner who was trained as a lawyer bent on power. And the fruit of Calvinism is equally intolerant. Nothing at all like Jesus who let men walk away but never harmed them physically for disagreeing with him. Sorry but that is the standard, not what others were doing but what JEsus did.

You have no facts, only accusations. Produce this long list, as I only am aware of one man, the heretic Servetus.

John Calvin was not even a citizen of Geneva (at the time of Servetus execution), he had little to do with it, except for telling the man to stay away and trying to convert the man to Christianity.

Nevermind that Servetus had escaped imprisionment, nevermind that he was wanted for civil crimes. Nevermind he was a criminal on the run knowing he had nowhere to seek refuge. Oh but Calvin committed the sin of being a "snitch", he ratted out Servetus, but not exactly, Servetus was foolish enough to pursue Calvin like a dog after a bone, he would not leave Calvin alone nor the good citizens of Geneva.

Romans 13:1 Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval,

If Servetus had rendered unto Ceaser, he never would have escaped prison in Vienne. Had he subjected to the authorities in Geneva, he would not have been executed.

For those who continue in the inquisition against Calvin and Calvinists, I remind you:

1 John 3:15 Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life residing in him.

So many posts in this thread reveal just this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0

ladodgers6

Know what you believe and why you believe it
Site Supporter
Oct 6, 2015
2,123
743
Los Angeles
✟192,004.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
You need to realize that those who reject Calvinism do not so do because we do not understand the doctrines. It is because we have thought and prayed about them thoroughly and see the problems with it that you likely do not see. It is very likely you do not see the problems because you do not address them.

I also have to add that this "you do not understand it if you do not believe it" is exactly what the evolutionists say about evolution.

Thanks for sharing. I beg to differ. Calvinism is often caricatured by you guys who get 3rd party information or just shoot from the cuff. Election is a Biblical teaching if you believe or not. Without it no one to save! Who will bring any charge against God's elect? Who is he that condemns? God is the Just & the Justifier!

In 1 Cor. 1:30, it reads, It is because of HIM, that you are IN Christ Jesus. Who is HIM? Is it the sinner? Is it the believer?
 
Upvote 0

GodsGrace101

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 17, 2018
6,713
2,298
Tuscany
✟231,507.00
Country
Italy
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I do agree with you here, believe or not. We do not know who created the term TULIP. But this acronym was created to help people remember these Doctrines.

Here is a excerpt from a prominent leader Michael Horton in Reformed Theology next R.C. Sproul. Limited atonement (the "L" in TULIP) is an unfortunate label, found in no Reformed confession. It is better to speak of the work of Christ as specific or definite in its intention and scope. Alternative terms such as "Definite Atonement" or "Particular Redemption" seem more useful in clarifying this position.

Why does he said this? Because people get confused or do not understand what we are saying. Like in your post here. We believe the Atonement has a efficacy position. Christ's Atonement has a purpose or plan of what it will do. Not just make it possible to be saved. Because as discussed before about Prevenient Grace. You believe there is a place between Life and Death where sinners are placed to make their decision to be saved or perish. And nowhere in Scripture; partial regeneration is taught. Either we are ALIVE in Christ or Dead in Sin! And in Ephesians Paul is clear that God MADE US ALIVE, "WHILE" we were DEAD. And who is the only ONE that can resurrect us?

Just think about it before you respond.

Here is an excerpt from R.C. Sproul on the "L" word. Please do not misunderstand me. I do believe in the teaching of the TULIP. We just prefer Particular or Definite Atonement, because it does not confuse what we mean by it.

Particular Atonement

However, the idea of irresistibility conjures up the idea that one cannot possibly offer any resistance to the grace of God. However, the history of the human race is the history of relentless resistance to the sweetness of the grace of God. Irresistible grace does not mean that God’s grace is incapable of being resisted. Indeed, we are capable of resisting God’s grace, and we do resist it. The idea is that God’s grace is so powerful that it has the capacity to overcome our natural resistance to it. It is not that the Holy Spirit drags people kicking and screaming to Christ against their wills. The Holy Spirit changes the inclination and disposition of our wills, so that whereas we were previously unwilling to embrace Christ, now we are willing, and more than willing. Indeed, we aren’t dragged to Christ, we run to Christ, and we embrace Him joyfully because the Spirit has changed our hearts. They are no longer hearts of stone that are impervious to the commands of God and to the invitations of the gospel. God melts the hardness of our hearts when He makes us new creatures. The Holy Spirit resurrects us from spiritual death, so that we come to Christ because we want to come to Christ. The reason we want to come to Christ is because God has already done a work of grace in our souls. Without that work, we would never have any desire to come to Christ. That’s why we say that regeneration precedes faith.

I have a little bit of a problem using the term irresistible grace, not because I don’t believe this classical doctrine, but because it is misleading to many people. Therefore, I prefer the term effectual grace, because the irresistible grace of God effects what God intends it to effect.

Think of it as with the conversion of Saul on the road to Damascus. Was Saul able to resist it? Did God's Grace complete its effect on what God wanted? Did Saul convert into Paul? Was Paul shown the Truth and believe it? Or did Saul resist it and blame God for doing this to him? Or did Paul trust Christ and followed him?

Just think on it, Pray on it, and ask God for wisdom to understand this.

God Bless!

In Christ Our Justification, Sanctification, and Redemption 1 Cor. 1:30
I've read the above other times LA. I don't need to think about it. I have a big problem with calvinism. I don't even like that it's named after a person, like CHRISTianity.

I don't believe regeneration comes before faith.
Here's what I believe:
God reveals Himself to man, one way or another. I always post Romans 1:19-20 for this. Not just to the Jews but forever and to all the world that is inhabited. Some of us choose God and some do not. I'm always asked WHY some don't choose God, as if to say that it's because HE didn't regenerate them. But then what do you do with John 3:16?
What do you do with John 11:32? What about Acts...what shall we do to be saved? BELIEVE in the Lord, and you shall be saved. And Romans 10:9-11
We confess with our mouth, we believe with our heart.
And 1 Corinthians 15:1-2
Paul says he preached the gospel, it was received, they believed it, they were saved.

There's just too much scripture to get over.

I agree with you about Saul. I've said this. There are persons in the bible which God specifically uses for His purpose. I also believe that God is sovereign and He could do whatever He wishes to do. Moses was one of these, Mary was one of these. They were picked and prepared for their purpose even though they found out about it when God revealed it to them and not before.

The Apostles spent over three years with Jesus. Could it be that they didn't know what He taught? He taught that we had to be born again from above .. He said it as if we had the choice..not as if we had to wait to be called by God. I mean, God calls everyone in the way I explained. Calvinists believe He only calls those He chose before time. I hate to use the word "elect" because the elect are His people, the jews, those through whom He revealed Himself.

My last comment is on Particular Atonement. We do not resist God's grace if HE makes us desire Him and to be saved and HE changes our heart in order to make us want to go to Him. Don't you see that this is not free will?

Free will is also a big problem I have with your theology. How could a sovereign God such as He is, ever be happy with creating little robotic persons that only love Him because He, in effect, if making them love Him? This is also effectual. They THINK they love Him, but it's really HIM "making" them love Him. Would YOU ever be happy with a woman that loves you because YOU changed her heart? Maybe yes, but we're mere mortals, I doubt God is like that.

Don't you see that effectual grace, particular atonement, all means that we have no free will? Can you accept that we have no free will? This idea scares me.
 
Upvote 0

ladodgers6

Know what you believe and why you believe it
Site Supporter
Oct 6, 2015
2,123
743
Los Angeles
✟192,004.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Calvinism is not in Holy Scripture. Therefore exegesis of it will not be discussing the theology. Red, we ought to finish. You are wearing Calvinist glasses and I know from experience and their history that intolerance is the hallmark of the position. I will you well.

Thanks for sharing. Again I beg to differ. We prefer Doctrines of Grace. Calvin was animate about not calling it Calvinism. His opponents nick named it Calvinism, just a history lesson.
 
Upvote 0

GodsGrace101

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 17, 2018
6,713
2,298
Tuscany
✟231,507.00
Country
Italy
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I just showed you a small sampling of how the very early fathers viewed election and predestination. You said "not one." I showed several did.

They had to as any church father commenting on Scriptures will come across the Biblical doctrine of election and predestination. Many have pointed out these passages and you respond with the same refuted assertions.
Yes R, I know you put work into finding those quotes and I really appreciate it.

I explained the problem to you. It's like we're reading the same stuff and not understanding it the same.

Could it be because we come at it from two different vantage points? You already believe in what Calvin taught and so you see words like Elect, Chosen before time, etc.
I don't believe in predestination and I believe in free will so I understand the Elect to be the Jews (and most theologians too BTW) and chosen before time to mean the METHOD by which we are saved.

You call God a loving God and yet you accept, because of His sovereignty, that He can send persons to damnation and you have no problem with this. This is the most unacceptable theory of calvinism. If we have a God like that, we're like ants under His feet (which we are) that He is ready to crush.

We also never discussed free will. How could we not have free will when it's spoken of all over the bible? If we can choose something, we have free will....If the writers of the N.T. didn't believe this, they never would have mentioned it.
 
Upvote 0

GodsGrace101

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 17, 2018
6,713
2,298
Tuscany
✟231,507.00
Country
Italy
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thanks for sharing. I beg to differ. Calvinism is often caricatured by you guys who get 3rd party information or just shoot from the cuff. Election is a Biblical teaching if you believe or not. Without it no one to save! Who will bring any charge against God's elect? Who is he that condemns? God is the Just & the Justifier!

In 1 Cor. 1:30, it reads, It is because of HIM, that you are IN Christ Jesus. Who is HIM? Is it the sinner? Is it the believer?
I wish the biblical writers had been more careful with their words. I think they spoke as people of that time understood, but we THINK in a different way and this creates a problem.

1 Corinthians 1:30
30But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption,

This doesn't mean God put us in Christ. It means that all we have that comes to us by obeying and all we have by living a good life, comes to us by God and He gives us these things by our believing in Jesus. IOW, from the beginning of time God planned to help us to have good things and live a good life through the redeemer, Jesus, if we follow Him.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

συνείδησις

¿uo buıob sı ʇɐɥʍ
Jun 10, 2018
720
439
70
SE
✟24,738.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
John Calvin was not even a citizen of Geneva (at the time of Servetus execution), he had little to do with it, except for telling the man to stay away and trying to convert the man to Christianity.

No matter how much Calvin's toadies try to exonerate him, Calvin's own words condemn him - saying he would not let Servetus leave Geneva alive, if his influence meant anything. That alone shows the man's heart.
 
Upvote 0

redleghunter

Thank You Jesus!
Site Supporter
Mar 18, 2014
38,116
34,054
Texas
✟176,076.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Calvinism is not in Holy Scripture. Therefore exegesis of it will not be discussing the theology. Red, we ought to finish. You are wearing Calvinist glasses and I know from experience and their history that intolerance is the hallmark of the position. I will you well.
No one has defended election and predestination from Calvin's institutes on this thread. They don't have to as has been pointed out multiple times it is a Biblical doctrine.

You and a few others have made this thread about Calvinists and Calvinism. Please keep on subject and address the Scriptural evidence.

Ephesians 1: NASB
3Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly placesin Christ, 4just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love5He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, 6to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved. 7In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace8which He lavished on us. In all wisdom and insight 9He made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him 10with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth. In Him 11also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will, 12to the end that we who were the first to hope in Christ would be to the praise of His glory. 13In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory.

Address the above from the apostle Paul.

Romans 8: NASB
28And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. 29For 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; 30and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

31What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us? 32He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him over for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things? 33Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? God is the one who justifies; 34who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us. 35Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?


Address the above from the apostle Paul.

From Vine's Expository Dictionary of the Bible:
Elect, Elected, Election

[ A-1,Adjective,G1588, eklektos ]
lit. signifies picked out, chosen" (ek, "from," lego, "to gather, pick out"), and is used of
(a) Christ, the "chosen" of God, as the Messiah, Luke 23:35 (for the verb in Luke 9:35 See Note below), and metaphorically as a "living Stone," "a chief corner Stone," 1 Peter 2:4, 1 Peter 2:6; some mss. have it in John 1:34, instead of huios, "Son;"
(b) angels, 1 Timothy 5:21, as "chosen" to be of especially high rank in administrative association with God, or as His messengers to human beings, doubtless in contrast to fallen angels (See 2 Peter 2:4; Jude 1:6);
(c) believers (Jews or Gentiles), Matthew 24:22, Matthew 24:24, Matthew 24:31; Mark 13:20, Mark 13:22, Mark 13:27; Luke 18:7; Romans 8:33; Colossians 3:12; 2 Timothy 2:10; Titus 1:1; 1 Peter 1:1; 1 Peter 2:9 (as a spiritual race); Matthew 20:16; Matthew 22:14; Revelation 17:14, "chosen;" individual believers are so mentioned in Romans 16:13; 2 John 1:1, 2 John 1:13.
Believers were "chosen" "before the foundation of the world" (cp. "before times eternal," 2 Timothy 1:9), in Christ, Ephesians 1:4, to adoption, Ephesians 1:5; good works, Ephesians 2:10; conformity to Christ, Romans 8:29; salvation from the delusions of the Antichrist and the doom of the deluded, 2 Thessalonians 2:13; eternal glory, Romans 9:23.
The source of their "election" is God's grace, not human will, Ephesians 1:4-Ephesians 1:5; Romans 9:11; Romans 11:5. They are given by God the Father to Christ as the fruit of His death, all being foreknown and foreseen by God, John 17:6; Romans 8:29. While Christ's death was sufficient for all men, and is effective in the case of the "elect," yet men are treated as responsible, being capable of the will and power to choose. For the rendering "being chosen as firstfruits," an alternative reading in 2 Thessalonians 2:13, See FIRSTFRUITS. See CHOICE, B.

More:
Elect, Elected, Election - Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words
 
Upvote 0

ladodgers6

Know what you believe and why you believe it
Site Supporter
Oct 6, 2015
2,123
743
Los Angeles
✟192,004.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Yes R, I know you put work into finding those quotes and I really appreciate it.

I explained the problem to you. It's like we're reading the same stuff and not understanding it the same.

Could it be because we come at it from two different vantage points? You already believe in what Calvin taught and so you see words like Elect, Chosen before time, etc.
I don't believe in predestination and I believe in free will so I understand the Elect to be the Jews (and most theologians too BTW) and chosen before time to mean the METHOD by which we are saved.

You call God a loving God and yet you accept, because of His sovereignty, that He can send persons to damnation and you have no problem with this. This is the most unacceptable theory of calvinism. If we have a God like that, we're like ants under His feet (which we are) that He is ready to crush.

We also never discussed free will. How could we not have free will when it's spoken of all over the bible? If we can choose something, we have free will....If the writers of the N.T. didn't believe this, they never would have mentioned it.

You are coming from a neutral position...JK!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: GodsGrace101
Upvote 0

Clint Edwards

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 15, 2016
455
158
75
Slome, Arizona
✟8,727.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
The elect are the saved. They will be saved, because we go through our lives as saved or unsaved depending on our conduct. For example, I may be unsaved right now, but as soon as I confess my sins I can have reasonable assurance that I am saved.

God knows who will ultimately be saved or damned, but just because He has this knowledge doesn't mean that He has caused someone's fate either way. He just knows who will obey and disobey Him.
Hmmmmmm, if God knew a trillion years before I was born that I would choose to be lost, then I could choose nothing but what God foreknew. I was born to be lost, scripted to be lost, I would have absolutely no choice in the matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0

GodsGrace101

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 17, 2018
6,713
2,298
Tuscany
✟231,507.00
Country
Italy
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hmmmmmm, if God knew a trillion years before I was born that I would choose to be lost, then I could choose nothing but what God foreknew. I was born to be lost, scripted to be lost, I would have absolutely no choice in the matter.
Knowing something doesn't cause it to happen.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Clint Edwards

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Jun 15, 2016
455
158
75
Slome, Arizona
✟8,727.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Knowing something doesn't cause it to happen.
Knowing something absolutely means nothing but what is known can happen. The cause is irrelevant. If my act is co opted by foreknowledge I have no freedom to act otherwise.
 
Upvote 0

ladodgers6

Know what you believe and why you believe it
Site Supporter
Oct 6, 2015
2,123
743
Los Angeles
✟192,004.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
I wish the biblical writers had been more careful with their words. I think they spoke as people of that time understood, but we THINK in a different way and this creates a problem.

1 Corinthians 1:30
30But by His doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification, and redemption,

This doesn't mean God put us in Christ. It means that all we have that comes to us by obeying and all we have by living a good life, comes to us by God and He gives us these things by our believing in Jesus. IOW, from the beginning of time God planned to help us to have good things and live a good life through the redeemer, Jesus, if we follow Him.

It is plain as day. Why do you keep exalting people above God? Before Christ came and saved us from this plight before a Holy God. We were condemned Law breakers, waiting to walk the green mile! God saves us WHILE we are still sinners! Notice who we are before God saves us! There is noting in us that will merit or gain any favor with God to chose us! Grace is a 'FREE GIFT', and God will have Mercy on whom He will have Mercy, and He will have compassion on whom He will have compassion. Its His choice and will, not ours! If you do not understand this, then you do not understand Sin or Grace.

Hope this helps???

God Bless!

In Christ Our Justification, Sanctification, and Redemption 1 Cor. 1:30

It is because of Him, that you are IN CHRIST!!
 
  • Agree
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0
Oct 21, 2003
6,793
3,289
Central Time Zone
✟107,193.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Calvinism is not in Holy Scripture. Therefore exegesis of it will not be discussing the theology. Red, we ought to finish. You are wearing Calvinist glasses and I know from experience and their history that intolerance is the hallmark of the position. I will you well.

We must be deluded and deceived then, and for such an unbiblical theology we somehow can produce lists after lists of Scriptures that prove this unbiblical theology.

Scripture Proof Texts - Total Depravity - Total Inability
Scripture Proof Texts - Election - Unconditional
Scripture Proof Texts Regeneration - Ordo Salutis
Saving Faith Is A Gift From God


T.U.L.I.P. Scriptures
Doctrines of Grace Scriptures

Of course these are just a few lists of Scripture proofs that I could quickly refer to.

So far as I have read, YOU have yet to even tell us which glasses YOU are wearing, non-denom could be just about anything under the sun, and everyone thinks they are the Biblicist, so that wouldn't be meaningful, except to demean and suggest others are not. So spill the beans already, which denom or group do you identify with most closely? Or would you rather stay on the offence with tropes and baseless rhetoric? I'd rather be playing nice, by the way, but people like you obviously could care less, so it is what it is.
 
Upvote 0

ladodgers6

Know what you believe and why you believe it
Site Supporter
Oct 6, 2015
2,123
743
Los Angeles
✟192,004.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Hmmmmmm, if God knew a trillion years before I was born that I would choose to be lost, then I could choose nothing but what God foreknew. I was born to be lost, scripted to be lost, I would have absolutely no choice in the matter.

Did Saul chose God on the road to Damascus. Did Saul resist God? Did Saul get angry at God for doing this to him? Or did Paul believe, trust, and follow Christ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: redleghunter
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

GodsGrace101

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 17, 2018
6,713
2,298
Tuscany
✟231,507.00
Country
Italy
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Knowing something absolutely means nothing but what is known can happen. The cause is irrelevant. If my act is co opted by foreknowledge I have no freedom to act otherwise.
Huh?
God sees time from the top of a mountain.
He can see the past, the present and the future.
He can do this because He's not part of time because He created time. If I create a painting, I'm not part of that painting because I'm outside of it.

God created time, so He's not a part of it.
If He KNOWS you're going to refuse Him a trillion years from now, it doesn't mean HE is the reason you're going to refuse Him. It just means that He KNEW it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JLB777
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.