Generic Oranges

Augustine_Was_Calvinist said:

Therefore, as usual, Van's premise makes salvation a reward for human efforts and merits.

Click to expand...

I have shown that repeatedly, and his answer is always,

"I'm right, and you're not!"

"None are so blind as those whom WILL NOT see."

Van said:

Philip, just a few quick points. Rev 3:5 says Jesus will not erase names, so it is unwarranted, to conclude names are entered and then erased.

Click to expand...

That they won't be blotted out is predicated on conquering.

Could be, but there is no support for the idea in this verse.

Click to expand...

Since not plotting out the names is conditional, the verse by itself is evidence. You are welcome to dismiss this a hypothetical, but you can not deny that this verse opens the logical possibility of names being removed.

nobdysfool said:

I have shown that repeatedly, and his answer is always,

"I'm right, and you're not!"

"None are so blind as those whom WILL NOT see."

Click to expand...

I'm not so surprised, since pelagianism captured the majority of professers of faith in the more subtle form of semi-pelagianism, the only conclusions that can be arrived at is that eternal life is the reward for human efforts, which is exactly what Van's conclusions are, and, open-theism follows close behind.

Reject a God who works all things according to His Purpose, who calls what is not as if it is from the beginning, and ultimately, a god who is not omniscient surfaces and this god is reactionary to man's free will.

I see very little difference between that version of God and the Word of Faith version.

cygnusx1 said:

at long last , now it all makes sense ....... Van thinks none can be elect before they exist ...... because they do not exist!!!! Pure rationalism!
I will pursue this !




so for those who are finding it difficult if not impossible to follow your line of reasoning van , there is no election other than Christ ...... Christ was chosen before the world began .......... but how could He be chosen if the world had not begun yet ? things did not yet exist Van so how can The Messiah be chosen to be the Messiah before the world was formed and before men fell ?
Can you please make sense of your term generic ....... to me generic is something , it is a whole (Church) ...... but all that means is a body made of individuals ........




"What the Arminian wants to do is to arouse man's activity: what we want to do is to kill it once for all---to show him that he is lost and ruined, and that his activities are not now at all equal to the work of conversion; that he must look upward. They seek to make the man stand up: we seek to bring him down, and make him feel that there he lies in the hand of God, and that his business is to submit himself to God, and cry aloud, 'Lord, save, or we perish.' We hold that man is never so near grace as when he begins to feel he can do nothing at all. When he says, 'I can pray, I can believe, I can do this, and I can do the other,' marks of self-sufficiency and arrogance are on his brow." - C. H. Spurgeon

Click to expand...

Van said:

Yes 2 Timothy 1:9 is a very important verse. But what does it say? Does it say we were in Christ Jesus before creation? Nope Well what does it say then? Paul, speaking of his condition in Christ in the present, says he was saved not based on his works, but according to God's purpose and grace established before creation. As with the rest of us, Paul was chosen in Him, when God chose Christ to be our redeemer. Anyone in Christ has received salvation according to God's purpose and grace granted us in Christ from all eternity. When God chose Christ as Redeemer, all those who are subsequently redeemed receive the grace granted when God chose Christ as Redeemer. Oh to be a perfect orange by grace, in the Orange Crate of God.

Click to expand...

the scripture is clear , your position and posts are not ..... sorry van.

Van said:

Scripture is clear and my posts make a great read, and you are sorry that you must tell me you cannot understand what I post. I think the price of rice in China is up.

Click to expand...

YOUR posts are "a great read"???

What a pompous attitude!

Your posts have been nothing but confusion and baloney, because you can't quote a scripture without injecting your own interpretation into it, interpretation which not only makes no sense, but is actually contrary to the Word of God. And then you pompiously declare over and over that you are right, and everyone who disagrees is wrong, because you say so.

Van said:

When God chooses us unto salvation, we become God's Elect, as described in Romans 8:33. Since we are in Christ, nothing can be charged against us, we are forgiven.

Click to expand...

You have been proven wrong about the first part, but the second part is fine. You have half the truth, but you resist learning the other half.

None are so blind as those who WILL NOT see.....

Van said:

The elect are those chosen by God unto salvation. Many are called by few are chosen. You can attempt to change the meaning of words till the cows come home, we become the elect when God chooses us and places us in Christ. This occurs during our physical lives, based on the plain reading of 1 Peter 2:9-10.

Click to expand...

You mean based on what they do prior to God choosing them. You make God a respecter of persons, which is in direct opposition to scripture. The elect were chosen before the foundation of the World, individually foreknown and foreloved by the Father, not for what they would do, but because He loved them. You won't allow God to choose as He wills, you insist that man does something to induce God to choose him. Your theology states it, you have stated it, and any reasonable person would agree that you do.

I change no meanings of words, it is you who do so, and you who inserts words that aren't in the texts, as well as definitions that aren't there. Then you accuse your opponents of doing the very things you do, like any secular liberal, always accusing their opponents of what they themselves are guilty of.

I read the Word for what it says, not what I want it to say or what I think it should say. You cannot say the same, your posts prove that you do not, and will not.

Van said:

God is not a respector of persons, but your view of what this means is completely mistaken. God does not judge people based on the world's value system. He chooses the poor in spirit, those that love Him, those rich in faith, invested in spiritual treasures and not worldly treasures.

Click to expand...

And they are that way all by themselves,? And He chooses, that is, Elects unto salvation, those who love Him, before they are chosen, before they are Elect? What kind of nonsense is this?

At every turn, I am told that I am mistaken about this, I don't understand that, I am wrong about some other thing, and by inference, only my opponent is correct, only he is right, only he has the correct view. Insults are his stock in trade, and his answer to opposition. He has never proven his opponents wrong. the original premise is simply restated, as though that were an answer. It's not.

Notice that the charges have never been directly addressed or answered. And it certainly has never denied that my opponent is an Open Theist. That is an old heresy, one condemned long ago. It denies God's Omniscience and reduces His Sovereignty, as does this "hybrid" hogwash theology.

Van said:

You can claim unbiblical beliefs till the cows come home but 1 Peter 2:9-10 teaches were were chosen during our physical lives.

Click to expand...

1Pe 2:9-10 MKJV But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for possession, so that you might speak of the praises of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; (10) you who then were not a people, but now the people of God, those not pitied then, but now pitied.

Nothing in these two verses says they were chosen during their lifetime. That is complete and utter hogwash, and a clear case of reading a concept into the scripture that isn't there. Anyone with half a brain can see that.

Van said:

Oh to be a perfect orange, secure and sealed in the Orange Crate of God.

Click to expand...

There is no such thing as a perfect orange, and all oranges rot. This one is especially rotten.

nobdysfool said:

YOUR posts are "a great read"???

What a pompous attitude!

...

Click to expand...

What does God hate?
There are six or seven kinds of people the LORD doesn't like:
Those who are too proud or tell lies or murder,
those who make evil plans or are quick to do wrong,
those who tell lies in court or stir up trouble in a family.
(Proverbs 6:16-19 CEV)

And you certainly have never denied that you are an Open Theist. That is an old heresy, one condemned long ago. It denies God's Omniscience and reduces His Sovereignty, as does your "hybrid" hogwash theology.

Click to expand...

The "doctrine" of God's sovereignity.

Imagine two kings want to go to war.
One king picks at random some men to fight and the rest he has exectuted.

The other king asks for volunteers and the rest he executes.

Which king is more sovereign?

The answer is, it's a trick question they are both kings and both equally sovereign.

Determinism is simply refuted by scripture.

They built the high places of Baal in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to offer up their sons and daughters to Molech, though I did not command them, nor did it enter into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.
Jer 32:35

And you believe they are that way all by themselves,? And you say He chooses, that is, Elects unto salvation, those who love Him, before they are chosen, before they are Elect? What kind of nonsense is this?

Click to expand...

The reason it's nonsense is because you've blurred the lines between predestination and election. What I think is nonsense: when people the Bible says the election of the church is in Christ yet people say a person is elect before they are actually in Christ. Predestined yes, elect no.

ian90 said:

The "doctrine" of God's sovereignity.

Imagine two kings want to go to war.
One king picks at random some men to fight and the rest he has exectuted.

The other king asks for volunteers and the rest he executes.

Which king is more sovereign?

The answer is, it's a trick question they are both kings and both equally sovereign.

Determinism is simply refuted by scripture.

Click to expand...

A rather poor analogy of sovereignty, because it does not adequately reflect the natue and character of God as revealed in scripture. equating sovereignty with determinism does not add any weight to the point, it detracts from it, because opponents of Reforemd Theology love to say that RT is determinism, which it is not.

ian90 said:

They built the high places of Baal in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, to offer up their sons and daughters to Molech, though I did not command them, nor did it enter into my mind, that they should do this abomination, to cause Judah to sin.
Jer 32:35

Click to expand...

God saying that it didn't enter into His mind does not mean that he didn't know it was going to happen, rather it means that it is something He would never command or overlook.

ian90 said:

The reason it's nonsense is because you've blurred the lines between predestination and election. What I think is nonsense: when people the Bible says the election of the church is in Christ yet people say a person is elect before they are actually in Christ. Predestined yes, elect no.

Click to expand...

The fault with this line of reasoning is the tendency to view God as being bound by linear time, so that He cannot say something IS until it actually IS. In other words, what is being said here is that no one can be elect until they have received Christ, even though they are predestined to receive Christ from the beginning. It is a wrong understanding of election, not a blurring of the lines between election and predestination.

As I have stated before, God's election of individuals before the foundation of the world is His intent to save them, and predestination is the ordaining of the means, the time and place, and circumstances of their salvation. Election does not save them, and predestination does not save them. Faith in Christ is what saves them. Election makes it possible for that person, predestination makes it sure and Grace makes it happen. Until they are saved, it is unknown to any but god who the elect are. Faith in Christ and their salvation makes it evident to others that they are Elect, but their salvation is not what elects them, any more that God's election of them is what actually saves them, which is the mistaken view of the opponents of Reformed Theology.

A definition of terms would go a long way toward clearing up this needless confusion.

Van said:

God is not a respector of persons, but your view of what this means is completely mistaken.

Click to expand...

God does not respect one's position of status, is what that means.

God does not judge people based on the world's value system. He chooses the poor in spirit, those that love Him, those rich in faith, invested in spiritual treasures and not worldly treasures.

Click to expand...

So, God chooses to save those in whom God has found something worthy and meriting of His Grace and Mercy.

Then Jesus was terribly confused when He told the rich, young man, "Why do you call Me good? Do you not know there is only One who is good, and that is God?"

Everything you point to Van says man merits God's Grace, which makes a mockery of Paul's saying;

4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.(Romans 4:4)

N'sF said:

God's election of individuals before the foundation of the world is His intent to save them, and predestination is the ordaining of the means, the time and place, and circumstances of their salvation...Election makes it possible for that person, predestination makes it sure and Grace makes it happen.Until they are saved, it is unknown to any but god who the elect are.

Click to expand...

Ok. I think that's really weird because I don't believe that's what election and predestination meant to people in first century Palestine.

I would say election is a bestowal of office; predestiny is corporate and concerns God's plan to bring salvation to Gentiles and Jews and grace is the only reason it all happens.

Another thread maybe, I'm thinking of posting something on Romans 8-11.

N'sF said:

A rather poor analogy of sovereignty, because it does not adequately reflect the natue and character of God as revealed in scripture. equating sovereignty with determinism does not add any weight to the point, it detracts from it, because opponents of Reforemd Theology love to say that RT is determinism, which it is not.

Click to expand...

Well I've been to sermons on "God's sovereignity" and the bottom line is always everything, including free actions, are pre-ordained by God and this is because "God is sovereign".

My point was God's actions follow from his attributes - so if God decides not to control every atom in the universe (he's given some dominion to satan and independence of will to human beings and I think this is the cause of sin), this doesn't mean that he can't and that he's still just as sovereign. So I don't think you can just wave your hand and say it doesn't adequetely reflect God since the whole analogy is about taking a different look at what it means to be sovereign.

That Jeremiah verse says conclusively that God does not ordain every single event and if you want to convince me when you say RT is not determinism you will have to reject the following statement:

God controls everything, and everything is predestined.

God purposefully cause sinful events to happen or not? Is God's will always done? The only alternative is to say that his will is frustrated by sin. The reformers appealed to mystery because they ended up with 2 conflicting statments:

1) Humans have responsibility.
2) God controls everything and his will is always done.

I would go further -

1) Humans can and do reject God's will for them.
(Psalm 81:11, Proverbs 1:24, Isaiah 30:15+, Luke 13:34)
2) God determines all events and his will is always done.

This is plain contradiction and statement 2 has to be rejected.

Jeremiah agrees that God's will is frustrated by sin. Paul Helm says this:

"...even on those occasisons when the command of God is disobeyed, the disobedience is in accordance with his will, in the sense of his decree"

Moral evil.. it's entry was not unexcepted by God; rather it was ordained by him.

We have struggled to understand how God can ordain evil and not be the author of it."

I see contradiction.

N'sF said:

The fault with this line of reasoning is the tendency to view God as being bound by linear time, so that He cannot say something IS until it actually IS.

Click to expand...

I think you will find it extremely hard to prove this using scripture. It's a presupposition that God is "outside" of time, there are many views on God's relationship to time most of which go far beyong my understanding.

We obviously have different understanding of election and how it works. I say it is something that we share with Christ, the same as we share in his death and resurrection we share in his election - by being in him.

We're like Ruth - we're the outsiders, the Gentiles. When she became a part of Israel she shared in their election - she was not elect before she became an Israelite.

This is how I understand forgiveness - it is only ever found in Christ, we're not forgiven then put into Christ. To me this is a crucial point in undestanding Christ's work. Just the same election is only ever found in him and we're not elected and placed in him as a result. The reason Ephesians mentions the timescale, "before the foundation of the world" is because we share in Christ's election which is from everlasting to everlasting.