Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
All the promises of God are "Yea" (confirmed, made sure) and "Amen" (end and rest) in Christ (2 Co 1:20).Allow me to shrink scope to simplify this one question. Clare, do you have a promise from God of salvation?
(Promise of God which always means "Covenant" between God and who God is making a Covenant with)
Channeling a bit of Paul's style, could we then say that this contract is between an individual and God?All the promises of God are "Yea" (confirmed, made sure) and "Amen" (end and rest) in Christ (2 Co 1:20).
I have Christ and the new covenant (promised indwelling Holy Spirit).
How about a "contract" between God and Christ (in whom I am)?Channeling a bit of Paul's style, could we then say that this contract is between an individual and God?
Can a person be part of a lawful contract, against their will, by all known established legality, between one party and another?How about a "contract" between God and Christ (in whom I am)?
What contract are we talking about?Can a person be part of a lawful contract, against their will, by all known established legality, between one party and another?
Proverbs 17:18
One without sense enters an agreement[c] and puts up security for his friend.
agreement: Hebrew word: arubbah a thing exchange - a thing exchanged, pledge, token
Our discussion starting at Post #182 linkedWhat contract are we talking about?
God does covenants (promises, undertakings), not contracts--some conditional, some not.Can a person be part of a lawful contract, against their will, by all known established legality, between one party and another?
Proverbs 17:18
One without sense enters an agreement[c] and puts up security for his friend.
agreement: Hebrew word: arubbah a thing exchange - a thing exchanged, pledge, token
So, to the Determinist, they do not Repent to God, who Loved them first, as God Loved all?God does covenants (promises, undertakings), not contracts--some conditional, some not.
Sounds like double-talk, to me, and a moving of the goalposts --"Provisional nature", etc.Jesus did make an atonement for all people (1 Timothy 2:6, 1 John 2:2, Hebrews 2:9), but not all receive it.
This "double payment" issue does not present a problem for those who hold to the provisional nature of the atonement as the payment is only received (or cashed) through faith.
From John 3:14-15: Just as the serpent lifted on the pole in the desert was provided for all, it only benefitted the ones who look to it for healing. No one would argue the serpent did not sufficiently provide the means for healing to all simply because some may have refused to look to the provision for healing. In similar manner, Christ's atonement is sufficient to provide the means for salvation to all, but is only received by those who believe.
John 3:14 Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.From 1 Timothy 4:10: God is the savior of all people - which means everyone has a savior. God is not the savior of those He does not want to save. 1 Timothy 2:4 plainly states that God desires all people to be saved.
1 Timothy 4:10 That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe.1 Timothy 2:4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus,
Nice. But how does that answer the question of whether @Clare73 's (or my) version of "election", if it resembles Calvin's, is therefore of Calvin's invention and not from Scripture or from some source other than Calvin?Theological “election” deals with God’s choices. For instance, the Bible refers to an election of:
In Calvinism, election is labeled as Unconditional Election, in terms of God having decreed a total plan of all things from eternity, which includes a bifurcation of humanity into elect and non-elect camps, that is, fixed classes of sheep and goats. Individuals comprising the elect camp are unconditionally chosen by God for salvation prior to the Genesis creation, the basis of which being known only to Him, while the non-elect camp comprises those whom God never intended to spend eternity with Him in Heaven and thus passed by for salvific graces.
- Christ (Isaiah 42:1; Luke 9:35; 1 Peter 2:6)
- National Israel (Deuteronomy 7:6; Isaiah 45:4)
- Jerusalem (1 Kings 11:13)
- Disciples (John 13:18; John 15:16)
- Christians (Ephesians 1:1-3; 2 Thessalonians 2:13-14)
In non-Calvinism, election is labeled as Conditional Election, in which there are primarily two different views:
(1) The Wesleyan-Arminian “foresight of faith” model of Election and,(2) the Corporate model of Election.In the Wesleyan model, by God’s eternal foreknowledge, all whom He found that will ever positively respond to the gospel and persevere in the faith, He foreordained as members of “the elect.”
As for the Corporate model, which I hold to, the foundation is that Jesus Christ is the Elect One, resulting that all who come to be “in Him,” that is, identified with Him in His body and as His bride, jointly share in His election, and hence believers in Him may rightly also be called “the elect” or favored. In other words, Corporate Election is a class election of Christ’s family, and for His part, He would like to see everyone in it, which He made possible at Calvary.
Comparing and contrasting, Election in Calvinism means God choosing unbelievers, that is, of the elect kind, unto the gift of faith. Election in non-Calvinism means God choosing Christians, that is, unto salvation, service and blessings. Does God choose us or do we choose God? The answer is that many scriptures support that God chooses to show His favor on Christians and we choose whether or not to become a Christian.
The Reformed system is built on volumes of Commentaries. I study church history diligently to try to understand each fracture.Mark Quayle said:
The OP seemed (to me, at least) to posit the notion that the doctrine of Election was only Calvin's invention, as though it hadn't been known before that. But here you seem (to me, at least) to say that you were only talking of Calvin's version of it. If my version (or @Clare73 's version) resembles Calvin's very closely, did it therefore come from Calvin?
Nice. But how does that answer the question of whether @Clare73 's (or my) version of "election", if it resembles Calvin's, is therefore of Calvin's invention and not from Scripture or from some source other than Calvin?
Augustine may have shared the understanding of what is termed Calvinist Unconditional Election. One can argue that Augustine, who came out Gnosticism, introduced its Determinism (what you term Monergism) into Christianity. Arguably Calvin revered Augustine and built on his teachings. Although the RCC also reveres Augustine, it does not hold to Determinism or Unconditional Election. I have no strong opinion here and don't read the tea leaves.Mark Quayle said:
The OP seemed (to me, at least) to posit the notion that the doctrine of Election was only Calvin's invention, as though it hadn't been known before that. But here you seem (to me, at least) to say that you were only talking of Calvin's version of it. If my version (or @Clare73 's version) resembles Calvin's very closely, did it therefore come from Calvin?
Bible Election is about service as Israel, God's people, were Elect but many were not saved. Calvinists like to associate Election with salvation - as in doing so, using the term Elect subtly gives credence to their doctrine that God selects exactly who will be saved.Nice. But how does that answer the question of whether @Clare73 's (or my) version of "election", if it resembles Calvin's, is therefore of Calvin's invention and not from Scripture or from some source other than Calvin?
God is love (1 John 4:8) and thus cares about any one of his creation's lost condition. Above @Clare73 says that God is at best indifferent to the lost, which is not as nasty as what Calvin states. The Bible says that Christ atoned for all people through His suffering (1 Timothy 2:6, 1 John 2:2, Hebrews 2:9) - which seems odd if he does not love all men savingly.God loves all men in that he provides for them and blesses them physically, but he does not love all men savingly.
Jesus did make an atonement for all people (1 Timothy 2:6, 1 John 2:2, Hebrews 2:9), but not all receive it.
This "double payment" issue does not present a problem for those who hold to the provisional nature of the atonement as the payment is only received (or cashed) through faith.
From John 3:14-15: Just as the serpent lifted on the pole in the desert was provided for all, it only benefitted the ones who look to it for healing. No one would argue the serpent did not sufficiently provide the means for healing to all simply because some may have refused to look to the provision for healing. In similar manner, Christ's atonement is sufficient to provide the means for salvation to all, but is only received by those who believe.
John 3:14 Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up, 15 that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.From 1 Timothy 4:10: God is the savior of all people - which means everyone has a savior. God is not the savior of those He does not want to save. 1 Timothy 2:4 plainly states that God desires all people to be saved.
1 Timothy 4:10 That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe.1 Timothy 2:4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus,
It is not double-talk. Your understanding of the atonement is off. Forgiveness of sins, salvation, and the gift of the Holy Spirit are freely provided for all people, but its receipt is not automatic. You can lead a horse to water (provision), but you cannot make him drink. 1 Timothy 4:10 says that God is the Savior of all people even though from other scriptures many are not saved. This attests to God providing salvation for all people - but there is a caveat - reference John 3:14-15, John 3:16, Mark 16:15-16, Romans 10:9-10, and Acts 2:38-39 for terms and conditions of receipt.Sounds like double-talk, to me, and a moving of the goalposts --"Provisional nature", etc.
Are their sins doubly paid for, or not?? Did Jesus actually pay for the sin that they later pay for themselves, or not??
So, by Reform doctrine, Genetic Israel was the Elect… representing God’s chosen.It is not double-talk. Your understanding of the atonement is off. Forgiveness of sins, salvation, and the gift of the Holy Spirit are freely provided for all people, but its receipt is not automatic. You can lead a horse to water (provision), but you cannot make him drink. 1 Timothy 4:10 says that God is the Savior of all people even though from other scriptures many are not saved. This attests to God providing salvation for all people - but there is a caveat - reference John 3:14-15, John 3:16, Mark 16:15-16, Romans 10:9-10, and Acts 2:38-39 for terms and conditions of receipt.
Jesus “takes away the sin of the world” (John 1:29), thus making the atonement available to all, but it will not be applied to you, me or our neighbor if we don’t look to Christ, just like Jesus illustrated at John 3:14/Numbers 21:6-9. His atonement is designed to only apply to those who believe in Him, and if you, me or our neighbor refuse God, then we will perish despite what would have saved us, just like Jesus illustrated at John 3:14/Numbers 21:6-9. No one in Hell can be told: “You had to be there. You had no Savior’s love or atonement for forgiveness, but were born helpless and hopeless due to a cruel, malicious God.” Instead, they’ll be told: “Thou fool! For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, so that whosoever believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life.”
Yes. But that’s no reason jump around when you can’t rebut my point.All Scripture is God breathed. Do you agree?
Sure.At the Moment that the curtain was torn, what is the theological implication towards humanity? Is the bible a carnal book without Spiritual teaching? Did not Jesus say that He spoke in Parables, so that the Hard Hearted wouldn't comprehend?
Mark 4:12 'they may indeed see but not perceive, and may indeed hear but not understand, lest they should turn and be forgiven.
By this same token, we have Jesus discussing hard hearted reprobates... and He states that they "could" turn to Him and be forgiven. Do you deny Jesus' implication's here?
No. There were people whom He didn’t want converted.Did Jesus Christ shed his Blood for all Humanity?
I just want him to stick to a particular until we flesh it out. Synergists tend to want to skip around for verse to verse and ignore context, in my experience.One should be able to support their position from multiple Bible passages - and quotes from multiple people is even better.
1 Corinthians 13:1 This will be my third visit to you. “Every matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.What you don't want is to hook, line, and sinker something based upon a peculiar interpretation of a single scripture passage or philosophical argument. Which I have seen done on many threads.
I don't care if you win every debate point. You won! I care about my Lord Jesus and His precepts of Love, Mercy, 1 Corinthians 13, His limitless inability to be a Hypocrite, His very Divine Precepts that He revealed to us, then died by our own hands to fully reveal.Yes. But that’s no reason jump around when you can’t rebut my point.
Determinists like to ignore entire words. By determinist logic, the Holy Ghost was too inept to write the word "Some" instead of "All".I just want him to stick to a particular until we flesh it out. Synergists tend to want to skip around for verse to verse and ignore context, in my experience.
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?