Questions and Answers

[DeaconDean]

I see it's time for another reminder:​

You WILL address ONLY the topic of discussion.​

YOU will NOT address the poster, make personal remarks, reinterpret their posts, change or modify their posts, change or modify their nicks, or any other assundry of jabs, punches, flames, insults, belittling, mocking posts!!!!​

Are we crystal?​

Sister, that is why I said on page 1:

Oh God, not this again!

God Bless

Till all are one.

 

[Van]

When God chooses someone and sets them apart in Christ, they are saved forever. No charge can be brought against God's elect. Therefore the elect must be "in Christ" where they are holy and blameless, otherwise a charge could be brought. Therefore, I believe scripture teaches that when God sets those apart in Christ whose faith He has credited as righteousness, that is our election unto salvation, and so we become the called, chosen, and faithful, Revelation 17:14.

 

[nobdysfool]

What is the charge that would be brought against God's elect, if it were possible?

Why is it that election is equated with salvation, when it is not necessary? Election is God's intent to save. Salvation is the actual saving of those God has elected unto salvation.

God certainly can choose those He has chosen to save, before time. Nothing in scripture prevents that. But, and this is the problem for the anti-Calvinists, that removes the credit for choosing Christ from man, and places it with God. Salvation is of the Lord, not of the Lord plus man's decision.

Synergism is man trying to take credit for making the "right choice" for being "good" enough, or "smart" enough to see his need and to then do something about it. That is claiming some of the Glory of God for man. God does not share His Glory with anyone.

 

[Van]

More questions folks, God chooses the poor, and so the question is what is the condition. Obviously the condition is being poor in some sense, coupled with also being rich in faith and loving God.

The elect sin, and so if they were not in Christ, they would be charged with not keeping the whole law. If you were chosen but not in Christ, you would be elect yet charges could be brought against you. Therefore the concept contradicts scripture.

Now we have a denial of scripture, we were chosen individually to be chosen individually. Give me a break. I have a new doctrine! Once chosen, always chosen. OCAC.

When God credits our faith as righteousness, that is synergism. Our faith by itself is nothing but a filthy rag, but God transforms that rag when He credits it as righteousness. He has mercy on whom He has mercy. And we live without mercy before He chooses us and has mercy upon us.

 

[nobdysfool]

It would be so much more civil if the questions could be answered without the side commentary on them, which is subtle disparagement of those who ask questions.

Sorry that asking for clarification is so annoying. Perhaps teaching isn't for the impatient and disparaging.

 

[bling]

Excuse me for butting in here. If God did not create us with the ability to make, at least one, free will moral choices, then how can we obtain Godly type Love as shown in Christ’s life and teachings and in 1Cor. 13?

What do you see as the reason for God creating humans in the first place?

 

[nobdysfool]

Man is able to make moral choices, but before conversion/regeneration, he only makes uniformly bad moral choices. Not because he doesn't have the ability to choose the good, but because he doesn't want to choose the morally good, God-pleasing choices. Nothing prevents man from making morally good choices except his own corrupted, dead-in-sins, self-seeking nature. It's not that he cannot, he simply will not. There is no outside force causing him to choose badly, he chooses badly because that's what he wants.

 

[Van]

Hi Bling, Matthew 23:13 tells us of folks who were entering heaven. So they were seeking God, they had responded affirmatively to the gospel, but were led astray, prevented from entering by false teaching. Thus the whole idea that all only make bad moral choices is unbiblical.

God created mankind for His glory. When we repent and turn to God, we bring Him glory. He sets before us the choice between life and death, and if we choose life, we bring Him glory.

 

[nobdysfool]

Can one become rich in faith apart from God? Can one be rich in faith by their own doing, or by some natural process not a direct result of God's Hand on their life?

We are being told that God chooses those who are rich in faith and love God. Since as is being said He chooses them because they have rich faith and love God, then it follows that God had nothing to do with their rich faith, and love of Him, it must have been "home-grown", and God recognizes this in them, and chooses them because of it.

Does this sound biblical? It doesn't to me, but this is what we're being told, by one who, despite no training in Greek, and despite repeated correction, and pointing out of the untenable nature of his reason for reading James 2:5 the way he insists, continues to insist that this is the way it is.

No consideration is given to the clear fact that God choosing the poor to be rich in faith is in keeping with God choosing the weak to bring down the strong, and the foolish to confound the wise. In each case God utilizes the person in ways that are beyond that person's abilities, so that the Power manifested is clearly that of God, and not of the person.

Poverty does not produce rich faith as a by-product. Weakness does not produce great strength as a by-product. Foolishness does not produce wisdom as a by-product.

 

[Van]

Can a person respond to the gospel and put their trust in Christ apart from God? Nope. But the gospel is the power of God unto salvation, and a natural fallen man can receive the gospel, and put his or her trust in Christ while still unregenerate. Matthew 23:13 proves this fact. They had all the faith necessary to be entering heaven, yet were blocked by false teachers.

God provided the gospel, and created us such that even in our fallen state we could respond, affirmative. So nothing is home grown. He demonstrated His love for us while we were still sinners. And we love Him because He first loved us. The whole "home grown" argument is without merit.

Of course the position presented by another poster does not sound biblical, but that is not the position being presented in my posts. Poverty does not cause faith, but God chooses the poor of this world who are rich in faith, keeping His promise to those who love Him, James 2:5. Scripture does not say God chooses the poor to be or to become rich in faith after regeneration. That is unbiblical. It is a position based on a translation addition to the text, which several translations do not insert.

 

[nobdysfool]

How can they be rich in faith unless God has first worked in them? This is the question that has no answer, apparently.

How is it that someone poor in this world's good has rich faith? How? How many times have I asked this question. Have I ever gotten a straight answer? Not that I've seen. If they have rich faith, the implication is that that faith is in God, because they love Him. How did it get there? They must have been saved, because no unregenerate will naturally have rich faith or love God, and the verse speaks of being an heir of the Kingdom, and no unregenerate can be an heir of the Kingdom.

Therefore, the poor that God chooses are saved,( not because of their poverty, but because of His Will) and heirs to the Kingdom because they love God, and rich faith grows in them because of Christ. God chooses to save them, and the result of His salvation is their rich faith and love of God. Therefore, God chooses the poor of this world to be rich in faith, and heirs to the kingdom that God has promised to them that love Him. He gives them true riches, in place of the temporal riches others have.

If you study the thought structure, and the point being presented by James, you can see that the words "to be," rather than detracting from the meaning, clarify it, against false readings such as we have been dealing with.

 

[Van]

How can they be rich in faith unless God has first worked in them? This is the question that has no answer, apparently.

Yet another repeat of a question answered previously!

Can a person respond to the gospel and put their trust in Christ apart from God? Nope. But the gospel is the power of God unto salvation, and a natural fallen man can receive the gospel, and put his or her trust in Christ while still unregenerate. Matthew 23:13 proves this fact. They had all the faith necessary to be entering heaven, yet were blocked by false teachers.

God provided the gospel, and created us such that even in our fallen state we could respond, affirmative. So nothing is home grown. He demonstrated His love for us while we were still sinners. And we love Him because He first loved us. The whole "home grown" argument is without merit.

Of course the position presented by NBF does not sound biblical, but that is not the position being presented in my posts. Poverty does not cause faith, but God chooses the poor of this world who are rich in faith, keeping His promise to those who love Him, James 2:5. Scripture does not say God chooses the poor to be or to become rich in faith after regeneration. That is unbiblical. It is a position based on a translation addition to the text, which several translations do not insert.

 

[Van]

And what is this reference to thought pattern? If God did not choose the poor who are rich in faith, then James's argument is nullified.

 

[nobdysfool]

The richness of faith they possess as well as the love of God, is the result of His choice of them, not the reason He chose them.

The idea that God chooses people who already believe in Him is unbiblical, and wrong.

 

[Van]

James 2:5 teaches that God chooses those who love Him, keeping His promise to those who love Him. John 1:12-13 teaches that only after we trust in Christ (receive Christ) are we given the right to become children of God, and we become spiritual children of God when we are born again, regenerated. Therefore the regeneration before faith doctrine is unbiblical.

 

[nobdysfool]

What is the charge that would be brought against God's elect, if it were possible?

So far, no answer. Yet, the idea that we could not be chosen until during our lifetime depends on it.

How is it that someone poor in this world's goods has rich faith? How? How many times have I asked this question? Have I ever gotten a straight answer? Not that I've seen. If they have rich faith, the obvious answer is that they have been saved, and their faith is in God, because they love Him.

How did it get there? They didn't work it up themselves, on their own, so they must have already been saved, because no unregenerate will naturally have rich faith or love God, and the verse speaks of being an heir of the Kingdom, and no unregenerate can be an heir of the Kingdom.

If they have rich faith and love God, it MUST be as a result of God choosing them unto salvation, and not the reason God chooses them to be saved.

Apparently it annoys some because I ask the questions. Rather than being annoyed, why not just give straight, clear answers?

So far, I have seen repetition of that which caused the question in the first place. That means it is not an answer. Disparaging the one asking questions, or making side remarks about how burdensome it is to have to answer "yet again" when it was never answered in the first place, show a disdain for the readers, and a refusal to patiently and clearly explain. Such an one is violating scripture with such an attitude, for scripture enjoins us to be "gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient,
In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves" 2Ti 2:24-25a

Ridiculing the questioner, ridiculing his beliefs, and repeating previous posts do not answer, or settle, anything.

 

[bling]

The idea of being chosen needs to remain with God, but just as in the parable of the feast the Lord chose some to come that refused and he later compelled people to come, but that does not mean they could not refuse to come. Now would those homeless and hungry at the feast say very proudly, “I choose to come to the Lord’s feast” or would they very excitedly say, “It maybe hard for you to believe, but the Lord invited me to be here!” The Lord made His choice to invite the homeless and poor and all that came were invited.

 

[bling]

posted twice sorry.

 

[nobdysfool]

The charge that is brought against all mankind is sin, and the one making the charge is Satan, the Accuser of the Brethren. His charges do not stop because a person is born again, if anything they are increased. However, Paul answered the question, "Who will bring a charge against God's elect? It is God who Justifies". The charge means nothing, it is just an accusation. Accusations are only that, accusations, the truth of the accusation is a separate matter. Having a charge brought against someone does not make them guilty of it.

What does that mean, when it's all said and done? It means that the idea that because a charge could be brought against someone who was chosen before time, but not yet saved in time, would nullify 1 Peter 2:9-10, is bogus. The claimed reason (charges could be brought against you) isn't spoken of in this passage, and as I have shown, a charge is an accusation (Romans 8:33), which the accuser makes against everyone, the Elect included, the Saved included. So this is a non-issue, and a bogus objection, because it has no bearing on Election. It simply does not apply.

Satan brings charges against each of us every day. Does that mean we are guilty of them? Paul says "no, it is God who justifies". Since God stays the hand of Satan against those whom God has chosen, but who have not yet been brought into the Kingdom are protected, even though they for a time live as those without mercy. That is not exactly the same as living without mercy. those whom God has chosen will not fail to be brought into the Kingdom, for no plan of God can be thwarted, or prevented.

Those who exalt man's "free will" over God will object, because this removes yet another prop to their view. God is Sovereign, over ALL, including man's so-called free will. Man freely chooses to do exactly as God as fore-ordained that he do. No man can make a choice that was not known by God beforehand, and that foreknown choice factored in and made a part of God's Purpose and Plan.

 

[Van]

Hi Bling, yes it is God who chooses us, we do not choose ourselves for salvation. We are the called (those who responded to the gospel invitation) chosen (those whose faith in Christ was credited as righteousness by God's sovereign choice) and faithful. Once in Christ, our faith in Christ is protected by God, but not our walk. We can engage in unproductive ministry, and build upon Christ's foundation with straw.