Election's Historicity (Doctrinal Counter Perspective)

[Hammster]

Ad Hominem is to personally attack the person arguing, instead of addressing the argument.

It wasn’t an attack.

 

[Grip Docility]

It wasn’t an attack.

Colossians 1 is "my tradition", in the matter of this discussion. It denotes all authority to Jesus Christ. To tamper with the "Scope" of the specific word "All" in reference to the intended work of Jesus Christ, His Blood and Reconciliation to the insinuated scope of Creation, within the passage of Colossians 1 would immediately reduce the scope of Jesus Christ's Supremacy.

 

[Clare73]

If you desire to claim that the context is not towards ALL of Creation, by the Greek, you again are reducing the scope of Christ's Supremacy over all things, including Human Beings. This is how Colossians 1 reads by the actual Greek.

In context, that is in relation to angels.

 

[Clare73]

I will take your post number 58 as clarification to this answer.

Yes, Peter was writing to the NT church in Asia Minor which included both Jews and Gentiles.

 

[Grip Docility]

In context, that is in relation to angels.

Colossians 1:1 Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother,

2 To God’s holy people in Colossae, the faithful brothers and sisters[a] in Christ:

Grace and peace to you from God our Father.[b]

Prayerful Salutations

Thanksgiving and Prayer​

3 We always thank God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, when we pray for you, 4 because we have heard of your faith in Christ Jesus and of the love you have for all God’s people— 5 the faith and love that spring from the hope stored up for you in heaven and about which you have already heard in the true message of the gospel 6 that has come to you. In the same way, the gospel is bearing fruit and growing throughout the whole world—just as it has been doing among you since the day you heard it and truly understood God’s grace. 7 You learned it from Epaphras, our dear fellow servant,[c] who is a faithful minister of Christ on our[d] behalf, 8 and who also told us of your love in the Spirit.

Paul is now speaking of the one Gospel that Jesus revealed to him, which was revealed to the church in Colossae through "Epaphras", who Paul asserts is of Christ and recognizes the Love in the Spirit within Colossae. Paul is also pointing towards 1 Corinthians 13, by evoking Fruit, Faith and Love.

9 For this reason, since the day we heard about you, we have not stopped praying for you. We continually ask God to fill you with the knowledge of his will through all the wisdom and understanding that the Spirit gives,[e] 10 so that you may live a life worthy of the Lord and please him in every way: bearing fruit in every good work, growing in the knowledge of God, 11 being strengthened with all power according to his glorious might so that you may have great endurance and patience, 12 and giving joyful thanks to the Father, who has qualified you[f] to share in the inheritance of his holy people in the kingdom of light.

Paul is now speaking of the Fruits of the Spirit and his prayers that Colossae grows in those fruits.

13 For he has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son he loves, 14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.

Spiritual warfare between God and God's Chief adversary and adversaries is referenced for the purpose of rejoicing in How Christ's specific work on the Cross has brought Colossae into the kingdom of the Son, whom the Father said... "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased".

A critical point in this matter is that Paul has incited this verbiage to his declaration that there is one true gospel, which if deviated from, begets a curse.

Another critical point is that Paul immediately binds what He is about to say to Christ's work of Forgiveness of sins and redemption.. to which Paul has specifically said...1 Corinthians 1:17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to evangelize—not with clever words, so that the cross of Christ will not be emptied of its effect.

Because Paul has set his words to follow up with the evocation of The One True Gospel and The work of the cross of Christ that mustn't be emptied of it's effect... we now have the "Anathema" warning hovering over whatever Paul is about to say next.

The Supremacy of the Son of God

15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. 18 And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy. 19 For God was pleased to have all his fullness dwell in him, 20 and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven, by making peace through his blood, shed on the cross.

Immediately, the Supremacy of the Son of God is discussed and bound to the effect of the Cross, the Blood and it's total impact as Paul scripturally defines it.

In direct relation to the flow of this epistle, no words about "Angel Conspiracies'" can be applied. Had Paul, desired to encapsulate the above passage within that discussion, he would have pre-framed the dialogue to apply to that discussion.

Do you disagree and if so, what source are you making your assertion, with?

 

[Grip Docility]

Yes, Peter was writing to the NT church in Asia Minor which included both Jews and Gentiles.

No. Your assertion directly deletes the Salutation of 1 Peter and the specific verbiage of Paul. I won't be difficult. I will just say it. Peter is to the Jews, as Peter specifies in his salutation to his intended target audience and Paul specifies in Galatians.

If Peter had intended this to be the intended usage of his words, he would have opened salutations, accordingly.

May I ask what source you are using to attempt to abrogate Peter and Paul's authority?

 

[Clare73]

Prayerful Salutations

Thanksgiving and Prayer​

Paul is now speaking of the one Gospel that Jesus revealed to him, which was revealed to the church in Colossae through "Epaphras",who Paul asserts is of Christ and recognizes the Love in the Spirit within Colossae. Paul is also pointing towards 1 Corinthians 13, by evoking Fruit, Faith and Love.​

Paul is now speaking of the Fruits of the Spirit and his prayers that Colossae grows in those fruits.
Spiritual warfare between God and God's Chief adversary and adversaries is referenced

Yes, he sums up the doctrine of the gospel regarding the work of our redemption by Christ.

for the purpose of rejoicing in How Christ's specific work on the Cross has brought Colossae into the kingdom of the Son, whom the Father said... "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased".
A critical point in this matter is that Paul has incited this verbiage to his declaration that there is one true gospel, which if deviated from, begets a curse.
Another critical point is that Paul immediately binds what He is about to say to Christ's work of Forgiveness of sins and redemption..

Which is the inheritance only of "the saints."

to which Paul has specifically said...1 Corinthians 1:17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to evangelize—not with clever words, so that the cross of Christ will not be emptied of its effect.
Because Paul has set his words to follow up with the evocation of The One True Gospel and The work of the cross of Christ that mustn't be emptied of it's effect... we now have the "Anathema" warning hovering over whatever Paul is about to say next.

The anathema warning (Gal 1:9) refers to adding the law to the gospel (Judaizing).

Immediately, the Supremacy of the Son of God is discussed and bound to the effect of the Cross, the Blood and it's total impact as Paul scripturally defines it.

In direct relation to the flow of this epistle, no words about "Angel Conspiracies'" can be applied.

"Conspiracies"?

Angel worship - Col 2:18

Had Paul, desired to encapsulate the above passage within that discussion, he would have pre-framed the dialogue to apply to that discussion.

Paul never explicitly describes the false teaching he opposes in the letter.
In addition to diminishment of Christ in worshiping angels, the letter encapsulates several issues; e.g., false asceticism, ceremonial regulations, secret knowledge, human wisdom and tradition.

Do you disagree and if so, what source are you making your assertion, with?

Based on the letter itself, I see the purpose of Paul in Colossians as opposing several false teachings; e.g., regarding religious practices, circumcision, "evil behavior," angel worship which diminishes Christ, maybe some Gnostic secret knowledge.
I see the supremacy of Christ as a response to angel worship of Col 2:18, because God was so far above man that he could only be worshiped in the form of angels he had created.

 

[Grip Docility]

Yes, he sums up the doctrine of the gospel regarding the work of our redemption by Christ.

Which is the inheritance only of "the saints."

The anathema warning (Gal 1:9) refers to adding the law to the gospel (Judaizing).

"Conspiracies"?

Angel worship - Col 2:18

Paul never explicitly describes the false teaching he opposes in the letter.
In addition to diminishment of Christ in worshiping angels, the letter encapsulates several issues; e.g., false asceticism, ceremonial regulations, secret knowledge, human wisdom and tradition.

Based on the letter itself, I see the purpose of Paul in Colossians as opposing several false teachings; e.g., regarding religious practices, circumcision, "evil behavior," angel worship which diminishes Christ, maybe some Gnostic secret knowledge.
I see the supremacy of Christ as a response to angel worship of Col 2:18, because God was so far above man that he could only be worshiped in the form of angels he had created.

Therefore,, it appears (me expressing the weakness of my grey matter and ensuring that I understand you correctly) that you are insinuating that Paul's description of the Supremacy of Jesus Christ and how it binds to His work on the Cross, which MUST not be emptied of it's effect... has no regard to doctrine?

You also seem to dismiss that Paul is reasserting his Gospel warnings to keep it intact.

You do understand that Paul uses the analogy of a prostitute, just as proverbs does, to highlight bad doctrine? He is perpetually warning the churches to maintain the simplicity of the gospel. Do I need to do an OP on that?

 

[Clare73]

Therefore,, it appears (me expressing the weakness of my grey matter and ensuring that I understand you correctly) that you are insinuating that Paul's description of the Supremacy of Jesus Christ and how it binds to His work on the Cross, which MUST not be emptied of it's effect... has no regard to doctrine?

Not sure what you mean by "how Christ's supremacy binds to his work on the cross."
The doctrine presented therein is that

his supremacy lies in
his being the image of God,
firstborn over all creation,
creator of all things, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities (angelic heirarchies of false teaching),
all things created by him and for him,
his being before all things,
all things holding together in him,
head of the the body, the church,
the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that
in everything he has the supremacy.

God's fullness dwells in him,
through him God reconciles all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven
by making peace through his blood shed on the cross (Eph 2:14-16).

You also seem to dismiss that Paul is reasserting his Gospel warnings to keep it intact.

Unless he is warning of false teaching.

You do understand that Paul uses the analogy of a prostitute, just as proverbs does, to highlight bad doctrine? He is perpetually warning the churches to maintain the simplicity of the gospel. Do I need to do an OP on that?

Prostitute in Colossians?

 

[Grip Docility]

Not sure what you mean by "how Christ's supremacy binds to his work on the cross."
The doctrine presented therein is that

His supremacy lies in
his being the image of God,
firstborn over all creation,
creator of all things, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities (angelic heirarchies of false teaching),
all things created by him and for him,
his being before all things,
all things holding together in him,
head of the the body, the church,
the beginning and the firstborn from among the dead, so that
in everything he has the supremacy.

God's fullness dwells in him,
through him God reconciles all things, whether things on earth or things in heaven
by making peace through his blood shed on the cross (Eph 2:14-16).


Unless he is warning of false teaching.

Prostitute in Colossians?

When I speak of Paul, I consider all of his writings at once, because He is the only portion of scripture where we have the same vessel of the Holy Spirit of Christ in 13 confirmed writings. I do recognize individual context, but I also note that there is consistency.

Do you believe that Colossians 1 is an important passage to proof the Divinity of Jesus Christ?

 

[Clare73]

When I speak of Paul, I consider all of his writings at once, because He is the only portion of scripture where we have the same vessel of the Holy Spirit of Christ in 13 confirmed writings. I do recognize individual context, but I also note that there is consistency.

Do you believe that Colossians 1 is an important passage to proof the Divinity of Jesus Christ?

Divinity is about the nature of God, not the actions of God.

For divinity of Jesus we must show things such as
1) OT specific statements of such,
1) his and NT specific statements of such,
2) his nature being the same as God's; i.e., divine.

 

[Grip Docility]

Divinity is about the nature of God, not the actions of God.

For divinity of Jesus we must show things such as
1) OT specific statements of such,
1) his and NT specific statements of such,
2) his nature being the same as God's; i.e., divine.

Only ONE is DIVINE. These 3 Testify. Can we agree on this?

 

[Clare73]

No. Your assertion directly deletes the Salutation of 1 Peter and the specific verbiage of Paul. I won't be difficult. I will just say it. Peter is to the Jews, as Peter specifies in his salutation to his intended target audience and Paul specifies in Galatians.

I see Peter's reference to "the empty way of life handed down to you" as addressing the Gentiles (1 Pe 1:18).

If Peter had intended this to be the intended usage of his words, he would have opened salutations, accordingly.

May I ask what source you are using to attempt to abrogate Peter and Paul's authority?

1 Pe 1:18.

 

[Grip Docility]

I see Peter's reference to "the empty way of life handed down to you" as addressing the Gentiles (1 Pe 1:18).

1 Pe 1:18.

So, Peter writing a letter that starts out... in paraphrase...

Dear Jews,

As under the authority of Paul, to be bringing the Good News to the Jews...

Means... something else?

 

[Clare73]

Only ONE is DIVINE. These 3 Testify. Can we agree on this?

If you are referring to the Trinity and are saying that only God the Father is divine, then no, we can't.

"The word was with God, and the word was God." (Jn 1:1) The word became flesh and dwelt among us (Jn 1:14) in Jesus of Nazareth.

There is only one God (whose nature is divine), in three persons (whose nature is divine), and if not, then they are not God.

 

[Grip Docility]

If you are referring to the Trinity and are saying that only God the Father is divine, then no we can't.

"The word was with God, and the word was God." (Jn 1:1) The word became flesh and dwelt among us (Jn 1:14) in Jesus of Nazareth.

There is only one God (whose nature is divine), in three persons (whose nature is divine), or they are not God.

I specified that there are 3 (1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.)

I specified that the 3 are 1 (Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord

I'm showing you how I build doctrine.

Does this passage bother you?

John 14:8-9 Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father.

This same John, also writes: John 6:46 Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father.

 

[Clare73]

So, Peter writing a letter that starts out... in paraphrase...

Dear Jews,

As under the authority of Paul, to be bringing the Good News to the Jews...

Means... something else?

"Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ,

To God's elect, strangers in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood:

Grace and peace be yours in abundance."

I'm not understanding. . .

 

[Grip Docility]

"Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ,

To God's elect, strangers in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood:

Grace and peace be yours in abundance."

I'm not understanding. . .

The root Greek word for "Strangers of the world" is this 1290 [e]Diasporas. It refers specifically to the Jewish Diaspora. In fact, had Peter simply said Jews, it would be flimsy, but by specifying Diaspora... it immediately binds to Jacob's lineage by Blood.

Should we erase this because it disagrees with the doctrines of "Election" and "Limited Atonement"?

 

[Clare73]

I specified that there are 3 (1 John 5:7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.)

I don't use the Textus Receptus. . .too many corruptions, that being one of them.

I specified that the 3 are 1 (Deuteronomy 6:4 Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord
I'm showing you how I build doctrine.
Does this passage bother you?
John 14:8-9 Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us.” Jesus said to him, “Have I been with you so long, and you still do not know me, Philip? Whoever has seen me has seen the Father.
This same John, also writes: John 6:46 Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father.

Father, Son and Holy Spirit are the one divine God in three distinct divine persons.

 

[Grip Docility]

I don't use the Textus Receptus. . .too many corruptions.

Father, Son and Holy Spirit are the one divine God in three distinct divine persons.

It doesn't matter what translation is used, I refer to all of them in study. Computers are amazing.

You glossed over Jesus' statement to Philip.... Why?