Doubting God’s goodness in unconditional election

[Clare73]

Calvinists, like Claire73, push unconditional election.

As Paul "pushed" it regarding Jacob (Ro 9:10-13).

They also propose that we all start out "Totally Depraved" haters of God.

That's Paul's doctrine (Ro 5:18), not mine.
All those without the Holy Spirit (unregenerate) do not accept the things of God, they think they are foolishness, and they cannot understand them (1 Co 2:14, Jn 3:3-5, Ro 8:7-8).

But they assert that God mysteriously chooses to "irresistibly change of the nature" of the "unconditionally elect" who He favored from the very distant past

That's Paul's idea (Eph 1:4-8, 11, 2Th 2:13, Ro 8:29-30), not mine.

so that they would stop being haters of God

Got is straight from Paul (Ro 8:14-17, Gal 4:6-7).

and meet the qualifications to be saved as delineated in many passages throughout the New Testament.

The "qualification" to be saved is the gift (Php 1:29, Ac 13:48, Ac 18:27, 2 Pe 1:1, Ro 12:3) of faith (Eph 2:8-9).

To believers this "irresistible change of man's nature" is a questionable link as it is not found in scripture.

It is the sovereign rebirth by the Holy Spirit, whose choice is as unaccountable as the wind (Jn 3:3-8).
You are no more able to resist your spiritual rebirth than you are able to resist your natural birth.

The best clue we have is found in Ezekiel 18:30-32,

Are you sure about that?

where God promises to change the nature (i.e. give a new spirit and heart) of those who repent, But how can haters of God repent?

By the sovereign rebirth of the Holy Spirit, who chooses as he pleases, whose choices are as unaccountable as the wind (Jn :3-8) and who enables them to repent .

Calvinists reject this clue as they will not allow the truth in God's word to override their treasured man-made doctrine of "Total Depravity".

The Holy Spirit is more than able to overcome total depravity. . .no problem.

 

[John Mullally]

Calvinists, like Claire73, push unconditional election.

As Paul "pushed" it regarding Jacob (Ro 9:10-13).

Romans 9:10-13 says nothing about election to salvation. Eisegesis.

They also propose that we all start out "Totally Depraved" haters of God.

That's Paul's doctrine (Ro 5:18), not mine.
All those without the Holy Spirit (unregenerate) do not accept the things of God, they think they are foolishness, and they cannot understand them (1 Co 2:14, Jn 3:3-5, Ro 8:7-8).

No that is you not Paul. Romans 5:18 includes ".. one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people." Calvinists don't believe that. How is that statement related to total depravity?

But they assert that God mysteriously chooses to "irresistibly change of the nature" of the "unconditionally elect" who He favored from the very distant past

That's Paul's idea (Eph 1:4-8, 11, 2Th 2:13, Ro 8:29-30), not mine.

No that is you, not Paul. To start with the book of Ephesians is written to the "faithful in Christ" (Ephesians 1:1). So where ever you see us and you in that book it is talking about the "faithful in Christ". The "faithful in Christ" are predestined for "adoption to sonship". I am not going over the rest of your scriptures as you don't find it necessary to explain.

so that they would stop being haters of God

Got is straight from Paul (Ro 8:14-17, Gal 4:6-7).

You did not get that from Paul. Those verses from Paul say nothing about how haters of God change to being "led by the Spirit of God" (Romans 8:14-17). The fact that "God sent the spirit of his Son into our hearts" (Galatians 4:6-7) does not imply that God irresistibly changed the nature of a set of His pre-selected favorites. Those passages are written to Christians.

and meet the qualifications to be saved as delineated in many passages throughout the New Testament.

The "qualification" to be saved is the gift (Php 1:29, Ac 13:48, Ac 18:27, 2 Pe 1:1, Ro 12:3) of faith (Eph 2:8-9).

Being saved requires man's response. No one is saved without faith and faith comes from hearing the Gospel message (Acts 10:17). We all choose what we listen to.

To believers this "irresistible change of man's nature" is a questionable link as it is not found in scripture.

It is the sovereign rebirth by the Holy Spirit, whose choice is as unaccountable as the wind (Jn 3:3-8).

John 3:3-8 says that people have to be regenerated in order to enter heaven. It does not say that they have to be regenerated in order to believe and become Christians. The reference to the wind has do with the working of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:2) and has nothing to do with accountability.

Regeneration is irrelevant to an unbeliever since they do not qualify for it. Regeneration is a spiritual blessing, and Ephesians 1:3 makes it clear that all spiritual blessings are only just for Christians, and thus the spiritual blessing of “regeneration” is blocked—to all except Christians. The purpose of regeneration is so that believers can walk with Christ in a growing relationship.

The best clue we have is found in Ezekiel 18:30-32, where God promises to change the nature (i.e. give a new spirit and heart) of those who repent, But how can haters of God repent?

Are you sure about that?

By the sovereign rebirth of the Holy Spirit, who chooses as he pleases, whose choices are as unaccountable as the wind (Jn :3-8) and who enables them to repent.

Yes in the OT, God promised to change the nature of those who repent per Ezekiel 18:30-32.

A blanket saying that God does as he pleases is not an argument. What does the scripture say on the topic?

Calvinists reject this clue as they will not allow the truth in God's word to override their treasured man-made doctrine of "Total Depravity".

The Holy Spirit is more than able to overcome total depravity. . .no problem.

Total Depravity says that man is so depraved that he cannot believe or repent without God first regenerating Him. That is not taught in scripture. John 3:3-8 does not teach that. It teaches that man must be born again in order to enter the kingdom of Heaven. It says nothing about the Holy Spirit regenerating man in order that man can then believe and repent.

 

[Clare73]

Romans 9:10-13 says nothing about election to salvation. Eisegesis.
No that is you not Paul. Romans 5:18 includes ".. one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people." Calvinists don't believe that. How is that statement related to total depravity?
No that is you, not Paul. To start with the book of Ephesians is written to the "faithful in Christ" (Ephesians 1:1). So where ever you see us and you in that book it is talking about the "faithful in Christ". The "faithful in Christ" are predestined for "adoption to sonship". I am not going over the rest of your scriptures as you don't find it necessary to explain.
You did not get that from Paul. Those verses from Paul say nothing about how haters of God change to being "led by the Spirit of God" (Romans 8:14-17). The fact that "God sent the spirit of his Son into our hearts" (Galatians 4:6-7) does not imply that God irresistibly changed the nature of a set of His pre-selected favorites. Those passages are written to Christians.
Being saved requires man's response. No one is saved without faith and faith comes from hearing the Gospel message (Acts 10:17). We all choose what we listen to.
John 3:3-8 says that people have to be regenerated in order to enter heaven. It does not say that they have to be regenerated in order to believe and become Christians. The reference to the wind has do with the working of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:2) and has nothing to do with accountability.
Regeneration is irrelevant to an unbeliever since they do not qualify for it. Regeneration is a spiritual blessing, and Ephesians 1:3 makes it clear that all spiritual blessings are only just for Christians, and thus the spiritual blessing of “regeneration” is blocked—to all except Christians. The purpose of regeneration is so that believers can walk with Christ in a growing relationship.
Yes in the OT, God promised to change the nature of those who repent per Ezekiel 18:30-32.
A blanket saying that God does as he pleases is not an argument. What does the scripture say on the topic?

Total Depravity says that man is so depraved that he cannot believe or repent without God first regenerating Him. That is not taught in scripture. John 3:3-8 does not teach that. It teaches that man must be born again in order to enter the kingdom of Heaven.

Jn 3:3-5 states that man cannot even see the kingdom of God, much less understand it, until he is born again.

It says nothing about the Holy Spirit regenerating man in order that man can then believe and repent.

I have a better and more simple idea.

You explain the meaning of the following 18 scriptures, in their context, and being true to their words, and then we'll go from there.

And you can refer to my post #81 above to see how I used them.

Ro 9:10-13,

Ro 5:18,

1 Co 2:14, Jn 3:3-5, Ro 8:7-8,

Eph 1:4-8, 11, 2Th 2:13, Ro 8:29-30,

Ro 8:14-17, Gal 4:6-7,

Eph 2:8-9, Php 1:29, Ac 13:48, Ac 18:27, 2 Pe 1:1, Ro 12:3 ,

Jn 3:3-8.

 

[John Mullally]

Jn 3:3-5 states that man cannot even see the kingdom of God, much less understand it, until he is born again.

In the NIV, John 3:3 says "no one can see the kingdom of heaven unless they are born again" and John 3:5 says " no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit". John 3:3-8 does not say that one must be born again to understand the Gospel which is what you are saying.

Calvinism teaches that regeneration precedes faith, meaning that a person is first dead and needs new life (with presumably a gift of faith so that they can then positively respond to the gospel), but notice the pattern of Ephesians 1:13: It’s hears, believes and sealed. I submit that being sealed by the Holy Spirit is regeneration. There is nothing about being regenerated before faith - and if that was as important as Calvinists insist, I believe it would have been plainly stated here. Notice that the passage shows that no one is In Christ until they believe.

Ephesians 1:13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.​

​

There has to be a logical order of operations, and regardless of whether being sealed in Christ includes regeneration (as I believe) or not, the fact remains that both the sealing and regeneration constitute a “spiritual blessing” and Ephesians 1:3 confirms that all such spiritual blessings are reserved in Christ only for the believer, which reinforces the fact that regeneration cannot precede faith in Christ, or else the principle point of Ephesians 1:3 would be nullified.

It is encouraging, though, to find at least one leading Calvinist teaching that lost people can and should ask God to make them Born Again. This is from the late D. James Kennedy (a Presbyterian) who I watched on TV and who wrote "Evangelism Explosion" that our Assemblies of God church used to evangelize our neighborhood - good memories.

D. James Kennedy: “Would you be born anew? There has never been a person who sought for that who did not find it. Even the seeking is created by the Spirit of God. Would you know that new life? Are you tired of the emptiness and purposelessness of your life? Are you tired of the filthy rags of your own righteousness? Would you trust in someone else other than yourself? Then look to the cross of Christ. Place your trust in him. Ask him to come in and be born in you today. For Jesus came into the world from glory to give us second birth because we must--we MUST--be born again.”​

I have a better and more simple idea.

You explain the meaning of the following 18 scriptures, in their context, and being true to their words, and then we'll go from there.

No. If you are citing verses to support your argument, the onus is on you to explain how those verses fit into your argument. You have a habit of attaching a laundry list of scriptures to your argument without explaining how they fit in. Recognize that anyone peddling false doctrine can easily do that.

 

[Clare73]

In the NIV, John 3:3 says "no one can see the kingdom of heaven unless they are born again" and John 3:5 says " no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit". John 3:3-8 does not say that one must be born again to understand the Gospel which is what you are saying.

If you can't even see it (1 Co 2:5, Jn 3:3-5, Ro 8:7-8), how can you understand it?

Calvinism teaches that regeneration precedes faith, meaning that a person is first dead and needs new life (with presumably a gift of faith so that they can then positively respond to the gospel), but notice the pattern of Ephesians 1:13: It’s hears, believes and sealed. I submit that being sealed by the Holy Spirit is regeneration.

There is nothing about being regenerated before faith - and if that was as important as Calvinists insist, I believe it would have been plainly stated here. Notice that the passage shows that no one is In Christ until they believe.

A seal denotes ownership.There's no ownership, nothing to seal, if you are not regenerated. You're still dead in your sins.
The seal follows salvation by faith (which faith is due to sovereign regeneration--Jn 3:7-8, as unaccountable as the wind).

Ephesians 1:13 And you also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation. When you believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, 14 who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory.​

​

There has to be a logical order of operations, and regardless of whether being sealed in Christ includes regeneration (as I believe) or not, the fact remains that both the sealing and regeneration constitute a “spiritual blessing” and Ephesians 1:3 confirms that all such spiritual blessings are reserved in Christ only for the believer, which reinforces the fact that regeneration cannot precede faith in Christ, or else the principle point of Ephesians 1:3 would be nullified.

Yes, these are the spiritual blessings of union with Christ in salvation; i.e., election, justification/sanctification, adoption, redemption, forgiveness of sin, knowledge of his will.
But nothing takes place, they are dead in trespasses and sins (spiritually dead men do not see, believe, respond nor act spiritually), until they are born (again); i.e., God's divine eternal life is re-imparted to their immortal human spirits, giving them his life again.

It is encouraging, though, to find at least one leading Calvinist teaching that lost people can and should ask God to make them Born Again. This is from the late D. James Kennedy (a Presbyterian) who I watched on TV and who wrote "Evangelism Explosion" that our Assemblies of God church used to evangelize our neighborhood - good memories.

D. James Kennedy: “Would you be born anew? There has never been a person who sought for that who did not find it. Even the seeking is created by the Spirit of God. Would you know that new life? Are you tired of the emptiness and purposelessness of your life? Are you tired of the filthy rags of your own righteousness? Would you trust in someone else other than yourself? Then look to the cross of Christ. Place your trust in him. Ask him to come in and be born in you today. For Jesus came into the world from glory to give us second birth because we must--we MUST--be born again.”​

No. If you are citing verses to support your argument, the onus is on you to explain how those verses fit into your argument. You have a habit of attaching a laundry list of scriptures to your argument without explaining how they fit in. Recognize that anyone peddling false doctrine can easily do that.

My request is not about proofing.
My request is that you explain their meaning, being true to their words and in the context of all Scripture.

You can present them one at a time, and we'll look at them one at a time.

 

[John Mullally]

If you can't even see it, (1 Co 2:5, Jn 3:3-5, Ro 8:7-8), how can you understand it?

A seal denotes ownership.There's no ownership, nothing to seal, if you are not regenerated. You're still dead in your sins.
The seal follows salvation by faith (which faith is due to sovereign regeneration--Jn 3:7-8, as unaccountable as the wind).

Yes, these are the spiritual blessings of union with Christ in salvation; i.e., election, justification/sanctification, adoption, redemption, forgiveness of sin, knowledge of his will.
But nothing takes place, they are dead in trespasses and sins (spiritually dead men do not see, believe, respond nor act spiritually), until they are born (again); i.e., God's divine eternal life is re-imparted to their immortal human spirits, giving them his life again.

Seeing (John 3:3) or entering (John 3:5) the kingdom of God refers to entering Heaven itself. Luke 13:28 states: “‘In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but yourselves being thrown out.’” In this sense, the kingdom of God is a place. It’s Heaven. No one can get there unless they are born again. Keep in mind that Nicodemus was already a Jewish believer. So, rather than conveying the idea that one must be made born again in order to believe (which is what Calvinists teach), a better interpretation is that it is necessary to become born again in order to be allowed entrance into Heaven. Moreover, if the meaning was that unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God—in terms of just understanding it—then why would Jesus criticize Nicodemus? In other words, “It’s not Nicodemus's fault that he cannot understand what Jesus is saying because he has not been made born again yet. That may still happen for Nick, and if it does, it will all make sense to him.”

Jesus says, “You must be born again.” The gospel is both personal and an imperative, but what would be the point of a universal imperative without a universal opportunity to receive it? Moreover, if Jesus didn’t really love everyone and was unwilling to die for everyone, then why mandate that everyone must become what they cannot be? In Calvinism, the elect are made born again without consenting to it, and the non-elect are warned to become what they are excluded from ever receiving.

Steven Hitchcock: “If Jesus was referring to a total inability to perceive the things that relate to the kingdom of God then He would be wasting His time telling Nicodemus, as Nicodemus would have needed to be born again before he could perceive anything that Jesus would have to say to him! Jesus’ desire was to see Nicodemus enter that very Kingdom of God that he falsely presumed upon. It was not Jesus’ purpose to confuse Nicodemus with a Calvinistic understanding that he cannot become a believer in Him unless he is first regenerated. Jesus is working with Nicodemus’ expectation of the Jewish hope about the Kingdom of God and seeking to correct that false assumption.”

In the New Covenant, one must be born again to see or enter Heaven. Prior to that, the Old Testament saints went to paradise when they died, which was not the same as Heaven where God dwelled. That paradise was just a temporary location until the resurrection of Christ when they could finally then be taken to Heaven.

 

[Clare73]

Seeing (John 3:3) or entering (John 3:5) the kingdom of God refers to entering Heaven itself.

The kingdom of God is here now (Lk 11:20, Mt 12:28).

It is of the spiritual world (Mt 3:2), not of this world (Jn 18:36).
It is invisible and within men (Lk 17:20-21), in the hearts of those where he reigns and rules.

Luke 13:28 states: “‘In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but yourselves being thrown out.’” In this sense, the kingdom of God is a place. It’s Heaven. No one can get there unless they are born again. Keep in mind that Nicodemus was already a Jewish believer. So, rather than conveying the idea that one must be made born again in order to believe (which is what Calvinists teach), a better interpretation is that it is necessary to become born again in order to be allowed entrance into Heaven. Moreover, if the meaning was that unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God—in terms of just understanding it—then why would Jesus criticize Nicodemus? In other words, “It’s not Nicodemus's fault that he cannot understand what Jesus is saying because he has not been made born again yet. That may still happen for Nick, and if it does, it will all make sense to him.”

Jesus says, “You must be born again.” The gospel is both personal and an imperative, but what would be the point of a universal imperative without a universal opportunity to receive it? Moreover, if Jesus didn’t really love everyone and was unwilling to die for everyone, then why mandate that everyone must become what they cannot be? In Calvinism, the elect are made born again without consenting to it, and the non-elect are warned to become what they are excluded from ever receiving.

Steven Hitchcock: “If Jesus was referring to a total inability to perceive the things that relate to the kingdom of God then He would be wasting His time telling Nicodemus, as Nicodemus would have needed to be born again before he could perceive anything that Jesus would have to say to him! Jesus’ desire was to see Nicodemus enter that very Kingdom of God that he falsely presumed upon. It was not Jesus’ purpose to confuse Nicodemus with a Calvinistic understanding that he cannot become a believer in Him unless he is first regenerated. Jesus is working with Nicodemus’ expectation of the Jewish hope about the Kingdom of God and seeking to correct that false assumption.”

In the New Covenant, one must be born again to see or enter Heaven. Prior to that, the Old Testament saints went to paradise when they died, which was not the same as Heaven where God dwelled. That paradise was just a temporary location until the resurrection of Christ when they could finally then be taken to Heaven.

 

[John Mullally]

The kingdom of God is here now (Lk 11:20, Mt 12:28).

It is of the spiritual world (Mt 3:2), not of this world (Jn 18:36).
It is invisible and within men (Lk 17:20-21), in the hearts of those where he reigns and rules.

The "kingdom of God" is an overloaded term - it has different meanings depending on how it is used. Its use in John 3:3-8 and Luke 13:28 is talking about a place that can be seen. Not the invisible version spoken about in Luke 17:20-21.

 

[Andrewn]

The "kingdom of God" is an overloaded term - it has different meanings depending on how it is used. Its use in John 3:3-8 and Luke 13:28 is talking about a place that can be seen. Not the invisible version spoken about in Luke 17:20-21.

I agree with you. There is no hint of the Calvinist total depravity and unconditional election in Joh 3:3-8. The Lord himself goes on to define spiritual regeneration / being born again in the following verses:

Joh 3:14 And just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the desert,
so must the Son of Man be lifted up,
15 in order that everyone who believes in him
may have eternal life.
16 “For God so loved the world
that he gave his only Son,
so that everyone who believes in him
may not perish
but may attain eternal life.
17 “For God did not send his Son into the world
to condemn the world
but in order that the world might be saved through him.
18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned,
but whoever does not believe in him
already stands condemned,
because he has not believed in the name
of the only-begotten Son of God.
19 “And the judgment is this:
the light has come into the world,
but people preferred darkness to light
because their deeds were evil.
20 Everyone who does evil hates the light
and avoids coming near the light
so that his misdeeds may not be exposed.
21 However, whoever lives by the truth
comes to the light
so that it may be clearly seen
that his deeds have been done
in God.”

notice the pattern of Ephesians 1:13: It’s hears, believes and sealed. I submit that being sealed by the Holy Spirit is regeneration.

Exactly.

 

[Clare73]

Seeing (John 3:3) or entering (John 3:5) the kingdom of God refers to entering Heaven itself. Luke 13:28 states: “‘In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but yourselves being thrown out.’” In this sense, the kingdom of God is a place. It’s Heaven. No one can get there unless they are born again. Keep in mind that Nicodemus was already a Jewish believer. So, rather than conveying the idea that one must be made born again in order to believe (which is what Calvinists teach), a better interpretation is that it is necessary to become born again in order to be allowed entrance into Heaven. Moreover, if the meaning was that unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God—in terms of just understanding it—then why would Jesus criticize Nicodemus?

In other words, “It’s not Nicodemus's fault that he cannot understand what Jesus is saying because he has not been made born again yet. That may still happen for Nick, and if it does, it will all make sense to him.”

Is it that he doesn't understand what Jesus is saying, or what Eze 36:25-27, 37:1-4, 18:31 is saying about renewal?
The kingdom of God is not heaven. The kingdom of God is what Jesus brought (Lk 11:20).
Jesus is not talking about heaven, he is talking about renewal in the new birth.

 

[DialecticSkeptic]

None earn/deserve salvation on their own merits we understand and agree I expect, but don't you also agree we cannot say something equal to God is choosing at random like rolling dice, as nothing like that is in the text I can recall, but instead we can find this is repeatedly in the text, which states God chooses according to certain things He can see in the heart (which is hidden from others, that He can see and we cannot see):

I think we would agree that there is nothing equal to God that is choosing at random. Indeed, there is nothing equal to God—period, full stop. As you are probably aware, even the rolling of dice is under the sovereignty of God: "The dice are thrown into the lap, but their every decision is from the LORD" (Prov 16:33). We would even agree that Scripture contains numerous examples of God choosing a person according to certain things he can see in their heart.

However, where in Scripture is it said that something in the human heart is the basis of God's election to salvation? Just because God has chosen people for a vocation according to things he can see in their heart, that doesn't mean he elects people for salvation on that basis. That is an argument you could make, but you would certainly have your work cut out for you.

I close with this quote from Loraine Boettner, in his book The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination (1963): "[God's] foreknowledge is but a transcript of his will as to what shall come to pass in the future, and the course which the world takes under his providential control is but the execution of his all-embracing plan."

 

[DingDing]

If unconditional election is truly unconditional, how is it good for God to personally choose who goes to heaven or hell irrespective of any aspect of a person’s being, sinful behavior or spiritual belief?

Hello,

There are two basic views on election - individual and corporate. I believe corporate is the biblical position; reformed theology goes the individual route, and unconditional (individual) election is their term for it. Let me know if you want to discuss.

 

[Clare73]

The "kingdom of God" is an overloaded term - it has different meanings depending on how it is used. Its use in John 3:3-8 and Luke 13:28 is talking about a place that can be seen. Not the invisible version spoken about in Luke 17:20-21.

And you know this, how?

What is overloaded is your eschatology's putting asunder what God has joined.

 

[John Mullally]

The "kingdom of God" is an overloaded term - it has different meanings depending on how it is used. Its use in John 3:3-8 and Luke 13:28 is talking about a place that can be seen. Not the invisible version spoken about in Luke 17:20-21.

And you know this, how?

I explained from scripture and then you ask "you know this, how?". It would be more productive to state why you disagree - perhaps from other scriptures or identifying a flaw in my argument.

What is overloaded is your eschatology's putting asunder what God has joined.

Look up overloaded in the dictionary. That statement is unintelligible.

 

[Halbhh]

However, where in Scripture is it said that something in the human heart is the basis of God's election to salvation?

Great question. Don't you agree one would need to read through the bible fully to find any such? If one does, they will certainly learn many new things, even if it's the 2nd or 3rd time they are reading through carefully.

But it appears we already agree on the most key thing perhaps:

"[God's] foreknowledge is but a transcript of his will as to what shall come to pass in the future, and the course which the world takes under his providential control is but the execution of his all-embracing plan."

Definitely.

 

[Clare73]

I explained from scripture and then you ask "you know this, how?". It would be more productive to state why you disagree - perhaps from other scriptures or identifying a flaw in my argument.

Look up overloaded in the dictionary. That statement is unintelligible.

According to authoritative NT apostolic teaching, in the realm of time it is the spiritual domain of the Holy Spirit.

Where is the overloading in that.

 

[John Mullally]

According to authoritative NT apostolic teaching, in the realm of time it is the spiritual domain of the Holy Spirit.

That is just sanctimony. If you are going to site an authority, you need to be specific. I prefer a clear logical argument supported by clear explanation from that authoritative NT apostolic teaching termed scripture - but I rarely get that from you. You do commonly reference scripture, but when you do so it is typically a laundry list of "proof texts" without any detailed explanation on how they fit into your argument. To make matters worse you commonly insist others explain what each of your laundry list of scriptures say (as in post 83). Given your thousands of posts on this forum, you should be able to articulate how scripture fits into your arguments and not ask others to do that which you are unwilling to do.

Where is the overloading in that.

Maybe you think you are being cute or funny. Nothing personal, but that is another unintelligible statement from you.

 

[Clare73]

That is just sanctimony. If you are going to site an authority, you need to be specific. I prefer a clear logical argument supported by clear explanation from that authoritative NT apostolic teaching termed scripture - but I rarely get that from you. You do commonly reference scripture, but when you do so it is typically a laundry list of "proof texts" without any detailed explanation on how they fit into your argument. To make matters worse you commonly insist others explain what each of your laundry list of scriptures say (as in post 83). Given your thousands of posts on this forum, you should be able to articulate how scripture fits into your arguments and not ask others to do that which you are unwilling to do.

Maybe you think you are being cute or funny. Nothing personal, but that is another unintelligible statement from you.

If the following from Scripture (post #87) is not apparent to you, there is nothing more I can do.

The kingdom of God is here now (Lk 11:20, Mt 12:28).

It is of the spiritual world (Mt 3:2), not of this world (Jn 18:36).
It is invisible and within men (Lk 17:20-21), in the hearts of those where he reigns and rules.

 

[Andrewn]

However, where in Scripture is it said that something in the human heart is the basis of God's election to salvation? Just because God has chosen people for a vocation according to things he can see in their heart, that doesn't mean he elects people for salvation on that basis. That is an argument you could make, but you would certainly have your work cut out for you.

You may find your question answered in the following thread:

Free will Question

 

[Hammster]

If unconditional election is truly unconditional, how is it good for God to personally choose who goes to heaven or hell irrespective of any aspect of a person’s being, sinful behavior or spiritual belief?

Easy. Without election, nobody would be saved. It’s merciful that He saves anyone.