In what way is it ironic that I say that sheep go through the sheep gate and do not go in as wolves only to become sheep because they went in?
Care to answer my question?Hard to believe but true.
Here is v.9 - I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved.They will come in and go out, and find pasture.Actually it says that those who are His sheep already (so much so that He calls them by name) will go through the gate and follow Him.
This is a different passage and context altogether.Those whom He has not foreknown don't even receive that special and personal call.
According to Jesus, there were 3 kinds of sheep:Exactly. They were sheep before they went through the gate. Some were His and some were not. The ones who were His, He called by name and they went through the gate. Those who were not His did not.
Let's not try to mash different contexts and passages together to make a point.No - in order to be His sheep they must have been given to Him by His Father and drawn by His Father and thus believe on Him when He calls their name.
Everyone knows that even Calvinist who claim that only the elect will enter through Him.
What is logical is that v.9 indicates how to be saved. And we know that His sheep are saved. That's the logical connection.It is not a logical deduction that "my sheep" coming after vs. 9 tells us how they became His sheep.
You're reading quite a bit into the text that's not there.No - that is how His sheep are born again and later sanctified. It is not how they became His sheep.
Your posts are obviously influenced by that theology.I am not a Calvinist.
Do you believe that election is being chosen for salvation?But I do believe in being elected by the Father and drawn to the Son because of that election and believing on the Son for salvation.
In the area of election, I hope you answer my question above.In that particular area - Calvinists are correct as it is very easily supported from the Bible. And no - I won't prove it to you
Ah, yes. Throw in a little bit of ad hominem.as I know by now how you operate.
Except Eph 1:4 says nothing about becoming saved. The word "us" is actually defined in Eph 1:19 as "us who believe". So, God chooses believers (us) to be holy and blameless. That is lifestyle. That is service.No - they become saved because they are His sheep given to Him by the Father from the foundation of the world.
You really didn't need to use quote marks around 'saved'. Paul never did in Eph 2:8.They become "saved" through faith.
What verse are you thinking of when you make this statement?But only because they heard the voice of God when He called His sheep by name and they followed Christ because of that inward call.
Well, I just proved who God chose in Eph 1:4. Believers.Talk about inventing a doctrine because of bias.
Sure. Just read the verses above and say that again. Again, don't take my word for it, but DO take Paul's word for it.The Calvinist view of election unto effectual calling to the Son is correct and yours is simply forced into the Word because of a bias against anything that smacks of Calvinism.
Yes, you've said that.Yes I am getting your point and it is extremely bias.
No it isn't. This is what the Bible says about "what makes them come to Jesus".The hearing of their name (as in the inward call expressed in Calvinism) is what makes them come to Jesus.
No they aren't. Those who listened and learned from the Father come to Jesus.Calvinism is quite correct in saying that hose chosen of God receive the inward call and come to Jesus.
In John 10. Not everywhere.Good you have made your point. Everyone is "a" sheep.
It's not bias. It's false doctrine that I point out.Would that your bias was not so strong that you reject anything that the Calvinists happen to have right.
No you're not. You were never taught by Apollos. And it seems real clear to me that you aren't familiar with free grace theology at all.I am of Paul. I am of Apollos. I am of Calvin. I am of Arminius. I am of Catholicism. I am of Free Grace.
More ad hominem noted.Such bias and pride is a terrible way to divide the truth of God's Word IMO.
I post on what I know from Scripture. You can call it whatever you want.Obviously you feel that you've go it all figured out and have no need to consider other views. So be it.
Non sense - vs. 3 tells you all about Him calling His sheep by name and them following Him.I said:
"v.9 of ch 10 tells us how a sheep becomes one of His; by entering through Him."
Here is v.9 - I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved.They will come in and go out, and find pasture. Nothing about naming any of them here. Or that they are His already. It's about how to be saved. by faith in Him (using the metaphor of entering the gate, which is Him).
Well that's a problem of Calvinists not me.Calvinists should have a big problem with the fact that Jesus only used the words "the sheep" when He spoke of dying for sheep, but He also noted those that were His and those that were not His in the same context.
You seem to forget that I'm not a Calvinist. I do not believe in limited atonement. Nor have I given you any reason to think that I do.If Christ only died for the so-called elect, He would have said He died for His sheep.
v.3 - The gatekeeper opens the gate for him, and the sheep listen to his voice. He calls his own sheep by name and leads them out.Non sense - vs. 3 tells you all about Him calling His sheep by name and them following Him.
Quoting Scripture is some kind of game for you?? Really? Too bad. That's what I do.You're starting to play your games again. I'm not interested in them and I bow out when you start - right about now.
No argument. And nothing here that supports Calvinism.The names of His sheep were written in the Lamb's Book of Life from ages past. As His sheep they were given in time to the Son by the Father. He calls them and they follow Him when He calls them by name. Nothing could be more clear.
I've already shown that election isn't about being chosen for salvation.Of course people are saved through faith in Him. No one believes or teaches otherwise - not even the most die hard 5-point Calvinist. No one teaches that people are saved by their names beinge written, or because they are called (or, as some would put it, they are part of the elect).
If you don't like my quoting Scripture, that's your freedom to do so.I don't have any more time to play your games. Perhaps you can find a Calvinist on another thread to play them.
Then you don't understand their doctrine of election.Just remember that none of them believe and teach that anyone is saved by election. They all believe and teach that anyone saved is saved because they came to believe on the Son through faith.
It's not your quoting of scripture that I object to. It's your silly pretending that no other scripture than the exact one you reference has any bearing on the subject at hand and even worse that you don't know what they are or where Calvinists find them that I object to.Quoting Scripture is some kind of game for you?? Really? Too bad. That's what I do.........If you don't like my quoting Scripture, that's your freedom to do so.
Nonsense - you have shown that there is also the electing by God to certain positions of service for believers as well as election to salvation. So what? Election to salvation is all over the N.T. scriptures.I've already shown that election isn't about being chosen for salvation.
No - it's you who don't understand their doctrine.Then you don't understand their doctrine of election.
Can you defend this silly charge with evidence that I'm pretending that no other Scripture exists except what I reference?It's not your quoting of scripture that I object to. It's your silly pretending that no other scripture than the exact one you reference has any bearing on the subject at hand and even worse that you don't know what they are
OK, now we may be actually getting somewhere.Nonsense - you have shown that there is also the electing by God to certain positions of service for believers as well as election to salvation. So what? Election to salvation is all over the N.T. scriptures.
It is correct that Calvinists don't generally say it that way, but that is the basis for which their doctrine of election is based.I said, "Just remember that none of them believe and teach that anyone is saved by election. They all believe and teach that anyone saved is saved because they came to believe on the Son through faith."
Go ahead and repeat yourself. But I just explained (unpacked) TULIP to show otherwise.No - it's you who don't understand their doctrine.
No Calvinist teaches that anyone is saved by election. They all believe and teach that anyone saved is saved because they came to believe on the Son through faith."
I'll do better. I'll quote from a Calvinist website.Please supply a quote from a Calvinist that teaches otherwise and I'll condemn the quote right along with you.
What is quite interesting is the point that evangelism is totally unnecessary under TULIP. Why? Because God chose from eternity past who would believe (through election and regeneration).Their obvious understanding of the means that God uses to save His elect is why their record of evangelical outreach so great. With regard to outreach - the 19th century has been called the Great Century of Missions. During that century - hardly a single mission outreach was started in the world that was not started by a Calvinist.
OK. But they are inconsistent Calvinists, then.Calvinist missionaries have been more active than most in using the means of preaching the gospel so that God's elect might be called from among the people of the world as God commanded His church to do.
Sure. God has always known who will believe. But the Bible NEVER EVER teaches that God has chosen who will believe, which is through election.The names of God's elect were written long before the creation began.
Where is this so "cleary said"?? I've never seen any such verses.As He clearly says, Jesus was sent forth to the earth to be the one and only gate for the elect to enter salvation through.
Please prove your claim from Scripture. Nothing of what you claim here is found in Scripture.He calls the name of those who have been given to Him by the Father and who have had their hearts prepared by the Father and "His sheep" hear His voice and follow Him unto salvation.
I'm dead serious, whether you are able to grasp that or not. Again, I've studied EVERY verse that contains ALL 3 of the word group regarding election and I've NEVER seen ANY verse linking election to salvation.You know full well where this doctrine is found in the scriptures. There are many pertinent passages. To pretend that you don't know where people get these doctrines is disingenuous to say the least.
If it's so clear, then show me.From the words of Jesus through the conversion and teaching of Paul to the personal call of Lydia - election unto salvation is a clear teaching throughout the N.T. scriptures.
I never said anything about "only applies to certain types of service". You need to slow down a bit when reading my posts.Your silly contention that election only applies to certain types of service is just plain silly in light of that clear teaching.
.While the world receives a general call - the elect receive a personal call (by name if you will) and all those so called and respond are justified having received salvation by grace "through faith"
I know you won't. Because you know yourself that you cannot do it.I'm not going to lead you back through every pertinent scripture regarding the personal inward call of the elect.
OK, one more time. I am not kidding. I've NEVER seen ANY verse that links election to salvation.You already know where to find them and I will not be a party to your silly games.
In the opening verses of ch 10, Jesus was using the literal experience of human shepherds and their sheep. A shepherd's sheep DID know his voice and did follow him. Jesus was setting up His metaphors.You say that vs. 9 and 10 don't say anything about people who are already His sheep being called by name and following Him unto salvation because they are His sheep given to Him by the Father before the foundation of the world. Really? You don't see that in the scripture passage?
You don't deserve one. Find me any verse that tells us that election is for salvation.Give me a break.
yeah, sure. Move along. Don't even try to defend yourself. But of course, such a move only demonstrates your inability to defend yourself.You can play games with others if they want to play along. But I'll be moving along now.
In what way is it ironic that I say that sheep go through the sheep gate and do not go in as wolves only to become sheep because they went in?
I have never heard of a Reformed theologian who denied that we will answer for every word and deed (whether good or bad) that we do in the flesh after initial salvation.................Reformed covenant theology denies that if a person is trusting in the shed blood of Christ and hence heaven bound, that good works are used to determine rewards in the kingdom. They say that there is but one judgement and that is to determine heaven or that other place. There are no rewards, all are equal. True they say that once saved always saved. They get around that by saying that the carnal Christian or the back-slidden Christian isn't really a Christian, isn't of the elect. But what about the dear sweet grandmother that does a few good works but not up to the potential?
I have never heard of a Reformed theologian who denied that we will answer for every word and deed (whether good or bad) that we do in the flesh after initial salvation.
And as always, you're quite welcome.
But you took a pronoun from John 6:44 and rammed it into v.45, which was a quote from the OT, so obviously they aren't the same.
How does this help the "wider context"?
So are you suggesting that Romans 1:19-20, combined with Heb 11:6 doesn't include all of humanity as to whom God has revealed Himself?
Still not grasping the obvious. But I understand why not.
The Bible says "ALL" will be taught. So your assertion is unbiblical. I'm going with what the Bible says, not what you assert.
Back to the example of any classroom. The teacher teaches the whole class. That's everyone. But there are those who L & L and those who don't L & L.
Are you actually denying this FACT?
It ALSO has to do with the EFFECT of His death. It was designed to draw all people to Himself, obviously. A verse about unlimited atonement, among many.
Yep. And the EFFECT as well.
Why do you say that?
Do you think the "drawing of the Father" is somehow different than "drawing all people to Myself"??
Please explain.
Thanks.
I did a little research and you're right. You learn something every day if you're open to it.I never said that reformed theologians deny that the judged will answer for every deed. What I said was that there is a difference between the judgment of believers and non-believers. What I said is that reformed theologians deny that that the saved will be rewarded for their works that advance the kingdom. They teach that there is one judgment and that is to determine saved or unsaved and if saved then those enter the kingdom on an even keel. No rewards for service.
I did a little research and you're right. You learn something every day if you're open to it.
It seems that most Reformed theologians take the stance that we will all have the same "righteousness of Christ" and therefore we will all receive that and only that.
It means we're "born dead", due to alienation from the very source of our existence, God, our Creator. This separation, initiated by Adam, is not the right and just order of things for man. Rather communion with God is what we were made for. And that relationship is the primary and most basic aspect of righteousness or justice for man, from which any and all other righteousness flows. We're "justified" as we turn back to God; merely acting justly doesn't cut it.What is most meaningful to you about being born again?
Given all the other references to water baptism in the New Testament, I think the innocent view automatically tends towards that. A child's mind wouldn't make the leap to amniotic fluid.I think one day..we are all going to be surprised how complicated "man" has made God
That Passage in John is one of the most simplistic...basic passages there is
Jesus explained the Earthly birth then the spiritual re-birth
some simple statements to just...well..just believe it...like,,,childlike faith
If, to some, that translates to Reformed theology rather that so called Arminian theology so be it. That's a matter of labels.
But one thing I do know is that the classic SDA concept of us living out our lives and then going into some kind of soul sleep only to have our lives examined at some future time and being made a new creature if we managed to please God in this life - is diametrically opposed to the simple concept of being "born again" that Jesus proposed to Nicodemus.
After charging the OP with misplacing his emphasis, you also misplace. In your case, you have placed the cause and effect of sheep and the result.
By saying "his sheep do so without faith" and making that "believe and have eternal life", it seems you are suggesting that they are sheep first. iow, his sheep "believe and have eternal life".
But the Bible shows a different order. In order to even BE His sheep, they must believe.
We see that in John 10:9 - I am the gate; whoever enters through me will be saved.They will come in and go out, and find pasture.
This is HOW one becomes one of His sheep; by entering though Him, or faith in Him, obviously.
I agree that reading the rest of John will result in the "whole story".
You quoted part of John 6:39 - And this is the will of him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those he has given me, but raise them up at the last day.
Many people use John 6:44 to support the idea that God chooses who will believe - “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day."
However, the very next verse clarifies exactly who "comes to Jesus" -
"It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me."
IOW, only those who listened and learned from what the Father taught will come to Jesus.
So, God doesn't choose who will believe, but rather chooses whom to save, which is different.
1 Cor 1:21 - For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.
Given all the other references to water baptism in the New Testament, I think the innocent view automatically tends towards that. A child's mind wouldn't make the leap to amniotic fluid.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?