This is possible according to predestination?

[Mountainmanbob]

The Gospel is not really The Gospel if people can't choose. Part of the reason is exactly what you shared.

Jesus did not tell Nicodemus
go ahead make a choice.
M-Bob

 

[BBAS 64]

Hello to you.

I don't know if it is right to analyse singular and plural tenses.

However, what about Ephesians 2:11 ? It says: Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumcised .... ” We cannot deny that "you who are GentileS" is clearly plural.

In context, Paul was really saying that God had always pre-planned or predestined to offer redemption to the Gentiles.

Good day, Romans

You have jumped out of the immediate context of eph 1 all the way to eph 2. Not sure how that is even relevant. I agree in 2:11 you are correct with respect to 2:11.

In Him,

Bill

 

[BBAS 64]

Well, one of the ways it is argued that most people (or, at least, the majority of them) are made by God for hell is by reference to Matthew 7:13-14. Coupled with the Calvinist notion of deterministic (unconditional) election, the conclusion is readily drawn that most people are made by God for hell.

Good Day, Aiki

Sorry it has taken so long... I really lost track of this and wanted to respond.

If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him! "So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets. "Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.

The text is pretty clear many enter by the wide gate. I have never heard any one quantitatively interrupt that verse (many) as "most" but in light of the comparative (few) it seems reasonable. Never the less your issue is the same functionally.

I could say in a view that falls outside the historical understandings of the doctrines of Grace. God created many people who he knew would never enter the narrow gate knowing they would be destroyed. The realities are the same many (or Most) enter the wide gate and are destroyed.

Unconditional election:

Unconditional election is another term that I think can be a bit misleading, so I prefer to use the term sovereign election. If God chooses sovereignly to bestow His grace on some sinners and withhold His grace from other sinners, is there any violation of justice in this? Do those who do not receive this gift receive something they do not deserve? Of course not. If God allows these sinners to perish, is He treating them unjustly? Of course not. One group receives grace; the other receives justice. No one receives injustice. Paul anticipates this protest: “Is there injustice on God’s part?” (Rom. 9:14a). He answers it with the most emphatic response he can muster. I prefer the translation, “God forbid” (v. 14b). Then he goes on to amplify this response: “For he says to Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion’” (v. 15). Here the Apostle is reminding his reader of what Moses declared centuries before; namely, that it is God’s divine right to execute clemency when and where He desires. He says from the beginning, “I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy.” It is not on those who meet some conditions, but on those whom He is pleased to bestow the benefit.

TULIP and Reformed Theology: Unconditional Election

In Him,

Bill

 

[roman2819]

Good day, Romans

You have jumped out of the immediate context of eph 1 all the way to eph 2. Not sure how that is even relevant. I agree in 2:11 you are correct with respect to 2:11.

In Him,

Bill

So does Ephesians 2:1 plural debunk the notion of individual predestination?

U seem to think each chapter of ephesians are to be interpreted separately from each other. But they are definity related n connected.

If you want to see how these three chapters of Ephesians are related, try reading 3 chapters in one sitting over a week, . Don't stop to analyze words or sentences, but instead, just read the three chapters several times. I believe u will begin to appreciate how they are really related n trying to explain God's plan for jews n Gentiless.

The way Paul, Peter or any apostles wrote letters is similar to the way we write letters , essays or reports today. We explain our points through sentences and paragraphs. It is common to use couple of paragraphs to explain a significant point. The bible is thw Word of God but it is written in human language. I am surprised at how people zoom in on words and ignore context..

 

[Strong in Him]

Jesus did not tell Nicodemus
go ahead make a choice.
M-Bob

He didn't force him, which means that he HAD a choice.
Everyone Jesus met had a choice; accept his words and follow him, or not.

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

Jesus did not tell Nicodemus
go ahead make a choice.
M-Bob

I agree with what you said M-Bob. But, I disagree with your implication. Just because the Scripture doesn't specifically use the word "choice" doesn't mean that it isn't NECESSARILY implied. I capitalized necessarily--not to shout--but to focus on it.

I can tell you something; but you can choose to believe or disbelief what I tell you. I don't have to explicitly say: "Whether you believe me or not, I am the mechanic, and your brakes work." Instead, I would just say: "Hey, your brakes are fixed. You can come get the car anytime." For you to come, pay me, and drive the car off my lot, implies that you CHOSE TO believe that I fixed them--even though I didn't give you an explicit choice in my verbiage. We usually just eliminate the "chose to" and say "you believe I fixed them", but it is clearly implied in this case that you are making a choice to believe or not believe what I tell you. It certainly isn't something supernaturally given for you to believe a mechanic.

But, while a mechanic can be wrong, what Jesus said is always right and true. Yet, Jesus still asked His very own chosen things like in Matthew 17:17 or John 6:67, 70, etc. Jesus didn't get a very re-assuring answer of the 12's belief in John 6:66-69, when He turned and asked them if they wanted to leave, too. And, Jesus said "If you don't believe me, believe the works" (John 10:38), He even said the reason He wanted them to believe this: "that you may know, and believe, that the Father is in Me and I in Him."

Why do you think Jesus said: "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me" (John 12:32) if only those who God predestined could come to Him? Why wouldn't He say "and I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all My chosen or all those My Father has given Me or all who are predestined by the Father to come to me"? Rather, He simply said "all".

Is it just possible that there is something that changes before and after He is lifted up?

 

[BBAS 64]

He didn't force him, which means that he HAD a choice.
Everyone Jesus met had a choice; accept his words and follow him, or not.

Good day, Strong in Him

John 6 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.


No one can (universal inability) unless something external to them an action by God.



John 8 Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God."


They could not bear to hear because they were of the devil who was their Father. Those how are of God hear Gods word those who are not do not because they can not.

The children of God are god’s though the act of God in adoption of them as children they are of God.

Can you show a passage were Jesus attributes some ones coming explicitly to their choice?

I say you can not will to do that which you are unable to do.

In Him,

Bill

 

[BBAS 64]

I agree with what you said M-Bob. But, I disagree with your implication. Just because the Scripture doesn't specifically use the word "choice" doesn't mean that it isn't NECESSARILY implied. I capitalized necessarily--not to shout--but to focus on it.

I can tell you something; but you can choose to believe or disbelief what I tell you. I don't have to explicitly say: "Whether you believe me or not, I am the mechanic, and your brakes work." Instead, I would just say: "Hey, your brakes are fixed. You can come get the car anytime." For you to come, pay me, and drive the car off my lot, implies that you CHOSE TO believe that I fixed them--even though I didn't give you an explicit choice in my verbiage. We usually just eliminate the "chose to" and say "you believe I fixed them", but it is clearly implied in this case that you are making a choice to believe or not believe what I tell you. It certainly isn't something supernaturally given for you to believe a mechanic.

But, while a mechanic can be wrong, what Jesus said is always right and true. Yet, Jesus still asked His very own chosen things like in Matthew 17:17 or John 6:67, 70, etc. Jesus didn't get a very re-assuring answer of the 12's belief in John 6:66-69, when He turned and asked them if they wanted to leave, too. And, Jesus said "If you don't believe me, believe the works" (John 10:38), He even said the reason He wanted them to believe this: "that you may know, and believe, that the Father is in Me and I in Him."

Why do you think Jesus said: "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me" (John 12:32) if only those who God predestined could come to Him? Why wouldn't He say "and I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all My chosen or all those My Father has given Me or all who are predestined by the Father to come to me"? Rather, He simply said "all".

Is it just possible that there is something that changes before and after He is lifted up?

Good Day, Johnny4

Why did Jesus say "and if I be lifted up"...

The scripture tells us.


And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself."
Joh 12:33 He said this to show by what kind of death he was going to die.

The drawing of the Father in John 6 is tied to their inability to come, the father draws to over come their inability to come... no drawing means no coming.

John 6 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.

Not related in any way, different context of the same story yes, but as parts they are distinct and server different purposes (teachings) in the text as determined by the context.

As to the question about John 6 :66-69 the text is quite easy...

65 This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father."

..and they did not like being told of their inability to come yet again so they left. No man likes to have their free-will to do something ( you can not come) attacked twice in a fairly short period of time... so they split.

The ability to come, believe, and repent is granted by the Father, in and of our-self's we are unable.


In Him,

Bill

 

[Mountainmanbob]

I agree with what you said M-Bob. But, I disagree with your implication. Just because the Scripture doesn't specifically use the word "choice" doesn't mean that it isn't NECESSARILY implied. I capitalized necessarily--not to shout--but to focus on it.

I can tell you something; but you can choose to believe or disbelief what I tell you. I don't have to explicitly say: "Whether you believe me or not, I am the mechanic, and your brakes work." Instead, I would just say: "Hey, your brakes are fixed. You can come get the car anytime." For you to come, pay me, and drive the car off my lot, implies that you CHOSE TO believe that I fixed them--even though I didn't give you an explicit choice in my verbiage. We usually just eliminate the "chose to" and say "you believe I fixed them", but it is clearly implied in this case that you are making a choice to believe or not believe what I tell you. It certainly isn't something supernaturally given for you to believe a mechanic.

But, while a mechanic can be wrong, what Jesus said is always right and true. Yet, Jesus still asked His very own chosen things like in Matthew 17:17 or John 6:67, 70, etc. Jesus didn't get a very re-assuring answer of the 12's belief in John 6:66-69, when He turned and asked them if they wanted to leave, too. And, Jesus said "If you don't believe me, believe the works" (John 10:38), He even said the reason He wanted them to believe this: "that you may know, and believe, that the Father is in Me and I in Him."

Why do you think Jesus said: "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me" (John 12:32) if only those who God predestined could come to Him? Why wouldn't He say "and I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all My chosen or all those My Father has given Me or all who are predestined by the Father to come to me"? Rather, He simply said "all".

Is it just possible that there is something that changes before and after He is lifted up?

Why did not Jesus tell Nicodemus he could choose to believe.

Instead He went into a story regarding how we have no control over the wind nor the Holy Spirit. Rebirth -- regeneration is the work of the Holy Spirit -- exclusively.

M-Bob

 

[Strong in Him]

Good day, Strong in Him

John 6 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.

No one can (universal inability) unless something external to them an action by God.

Yes - and if a person "just happens" to go into a church and hear the Gospel, goes forward at an altar call, reads a tract/hears a testimony and wants to become a Christian, might that not be because someone has prayed for them?
That is what will draw them to Jesus - but it does not guarantee that they will choose to follow him. The rich young ruler approached Jesus and asked about eternal life - but when Jesus told him what he had to do, the man walked away. He was not forced to approach Jesus, but Jesus didn't force him to stay either. Same with the disciples who deserted Jesus when his teaching got too hard, John 6:66. They had been drawn to Jesus, and may have been with him for some time; they still walked away though.

John 8 Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and has nothing to do with the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God."

They could not bear to hear because they were of the devil who was their Father.

They were still created by God, in his image and, to Jews of the day, were respected religious men who read the Scriptures.
Or are you saying that God creates all people but abandons some to the devil?

Can you show a passage were Jesus attributes some ones coming explicitly to their choice?

I already have - rich young ruler and disciples in John 6. Also the 12.
Jesus didn't FORCE people to follow him, he invited them. He didn't drag the rich young man back kicking and screaming, nor hypnotise the 12 so that they had no choice but to say "yes".

I say you can not will to do that which you are unable to do.

I say that everyone is made by God in his image, that Psalm 139 applies to everyone, that God knows that everyone is a sinner, sent his Son to die for sinners and wants all to be saved. I don't believe that God can create someone and give them life, and then make it so that they are forever unable to know their Creator. 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 says that love is patient, kind, eternal and perseveres. 1 John 4:8 says that God IS love.
God doesn't force people to love, and follow, him.
He didn't force Adam to disobey, nor the people of Israel. He didn't force David to commit adultery, or Solomon to marry 300 women. He didn't force Ahab to turn away from God, 1 Kings 16:30, and he didn't force him to repent either, 1 Kings 21:27.
He didn't even force Jesus to go to the cross - his Son chose to lay down his life, John 10:11, John 10:17-18. He did so willingly.

 

[Mountainmanbob]

Yes - and if a person "just happens" to go into a church and hear the Gospel, goes forward at an altar call, reads a tract/hears a testimony and wants to become a Christian, might that not be because someone has prayed for them?
That is what will draw them to Jesus - but it does not guarantee that they will choose to follow him. The rich young ruler approached Jesus and asked about eternal life - but when Jesus told him what he had to do, the man walked away. He was not forced to approach Jesus, but Jesus didn't force him to stay either. Same with the disciples who deserted Jesus when his teaching got too hard, John 6:66. They had been drawn to Jesus, and may have been with him for some time; they still walked away though.




They were still created by God, in his image and, to Jews of the day, were respected religious men who read the Scriptures.
Or are you saying that God creates all people but abandons some to the devil?



I already have - rich young ruler and disciples in John 6. Also the 12.
Jesus didn't FORCE people to follow him, he invited them. He didn't drag the rich young man back kicking and screaming, nor hypnotise the 12 so that they had no choice but to say "yes".



I say that everyone is made by God in his image, that Psalm 139 applies to everyone, that God knows that everyone is a sinner, sent his Son to die for sinners and wants all to be saved. I don't believe that God can create someone and give them life, and then make it so that they are forever unable to know their Creator. 1 Corinthians 13:4-7 says that love is patient, kind, eternal and perseveres. 1 John 4:8 says that God IS love.
God doesn't force people to love, and follow, him.
He didn't force Adam to disobey, nor the people of Israel. He didn't force David to commit adultery, or Solomon to marry 300 women. He didn't force Ahab to turn away from God, 1 Kings 16:30, and he didn't force him to repent either, 1 Kings 21:27.
He didn't even force Jesus to go to the cross - his Son chose to lay down his life, John 10:11, John 10:17-18. He did so willingly.

There are probably not a whole lot of people saved exactly when they are doing the altar call. Seems otherwise Jesus would have done a few?

I think the altar call is only approximately a hundred or a hundred fifty years old? That should be a sign to proceed with caution?

M-Bob

 

[Strong in Him]

There are probably not a whole lot of people saved exactly when they are doing the altar call. Seems otherwise Jesus would have done a few?

I think the altar call is only approximately a hundred or a hundred fifty years old? That should be a sign to proceed with caution?

It doesn't matter how old it is, or whether you think it should happen at all. The point I'm making is that an invitation is given and people respond, or not - just as in Jesus' day. He said "come to me ..." and "all who believe ... ", not "you will be forced to come to me, follow and believe."

 

[Mountainmanbob]

True conversions are a great thing.

Many we know here have made many altar calls such as ourselves and were not saved at that (exact) time.

Saved at sometime but, apparently not at that time.

It's a work of the Holy Spirit not of a man walking forward.

Time is something to consider. Man's new inventions should be looked at carefully.

M-Bob

 

[Strong in Him]

True conversions are a great thing.

Many we know here have made many altar calls such as ourselves and were not saved at that (exact) time.

Saved at sometime but, apparently not at that time.

It's a work of the Holy Spirit not of a man walking forward.

Yes, but the point I'm making is that there is an element of choice.
The evangelist preaches the Good News and issues an invitation; the Holy Spirit may prompt a person and cause them to think, "I should go forward". But whether they obey and go forward, or remain in their seats, is up to them. No one drags them forward against their will - they decide. It doesn't mean that God won't save them at another time, and going forward does not guarantee that they will respond to God and continue in the faith.

In the OT, Moses said to the people that whoever was on the Lord's side should come to him. Joshua and Elijah told people to choose whose side they were on and which God they were going to serve. Like I said, Jesus said to people, "Come to me.... ", Matthew 11:28 - an invitation. Not, "if you don't agree to come to me, you will be forced".

Obviously the Holy Spirit is responsible for our new birth and status as children of God; we cannot save ourselves and are not saved without Him. But he doesn't make, or force, anyone.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Predestination in the bible does not mean God choose individuals.

Read Romans Chapter 9, your eisegesis will not hold up, then read this fine resource from a past issue of The Master's Seminary Journal, an article published in the Spring of 2000 by Leslie James Crawford titled "EPHESIANS 1:3-4 AND THE NATURE OF ELECTION".

I will quote the introduction and conclusion, people wanting the detailed exegetical analysis can click on the link above for the full article.

Ephesians 1:3-4 highlights the very important doctrine of election, but the passage is not without interpretive challenges that relate to that doctrine. An examination of individual words and phrases within the section reflects whether it supports the teaching of corporate or individual election. The two verses are part of a doxology that occupies 1:3-14 and emphasizes God’s activity in benefiting His people. Various words and phrases within the doxology that contribute toward a correct understanding of election are “He chose,” “ He predestined ,” “us,” “in Christ,” “holy,” “blameless,” “with every spiritual blessing,” and “in the heavenly places.” An examination of those leads to the conclusion that God in eternity past selected certain individuals to receive a comprehensive spiritual package that includes justification and adoption. The two verses rule out the position of corporate election and support an individual, unconditional view of election.

The subject of election ha s been a controversial one in the history of the church.1 Two opposing viewpoints have traditionally dominated the debate: unconditional, individual election (norm ally associated with a Calvinistic theology) and conditional individual election (normally associated with an Arminian theology). This scenario is changing and a third view is becoming increasingly popular.

The last four decades have brought an increasing number of books that advocate a corporate view on the subject of election.2 The view first denies individual election to salvation and then teaches that all instances w here individuals are chosen in Scripture are appointments to service. A Christian is only elect by virtue of Christ’s election, not on account of a pre-temporal choice by God out of the mass of fallen humanity. It is at the point of conversion, i.e., a believer’s incorporation into the church, that election could be said to apply to any individual.

Though the topic of election is controversial in theological debate, it is crucial to a theological understanding of salvation. On e cannot divorce an understanding of election from a correct view of God since God is the agent who does the choosing. Likewise, it is impossible to separate an understanding of election from one’s view of man since he is the object being chosen. God and man are defined in part by the definition given to election, which makes this subject of prime importance.

A proper comprehension of election is also critical to evangelism,3 which is a primary task of the church. One’s view of election defines the natures of preaching and conversion, and so again the importance of a correct understanding cannot be overstated. In addition, the issue of eternal security has its roots in the ground of election and the relative parts played by God and man in it. All of these combined demand a true biblical comprehension of the elements of election.

Proponents of the corporate understanding of election use Ephesians 1:3-4 to support their position. The following discussion explores the nature of election in Ephesians 1:3-4 by analyzing the exegetical data of the passage in its context and paying special attention to key terms related to election, so that a clear picture of Paul’s understanding of election may result. A determination of whether either the corporate or the individual position can be sustained biblically will then be possible.

<sniped exegetical content mostly because Hebrew and Greek words will not copy properly from pdf on my current setup>

Summarizing Paul’s Understanding of Election

It is now possible to summarize Paul’s understanding of election as expressed by Ephesians 1:3-4. God, in eternity past, for no other reason than His own design and will, selected certain individuals out of the mass of fallen humanity to be the recipients of a comprehensive spiritual package, which include s their justification and adoption. This is an action totally free on God’s part, without any external influence, which is ultimately purpose d to bring praise to Himself, particularly to His grace.

Election, viewed as foreordination, also guarantees the destiny of the elect, with particular reference to adoption. Every elect person is adopted into God’s family with full filial position and privileges. The historical realization of eternal election is the mystical union of the elect with Christ and only in this relationship do the elect receive the accompanying spiritual blessing s also contained in their election.

There are no preconditions to election, such as a person’s foreseen faith or meritorious life. In fact, the goal of election is to provide the necessary spiritual condition for a sinner to have acceptance with God. Paul refers to the elect as those who have already benefited from their election, but God views their condition prior to all that His activity will produce. The objects of election are unbelievers, who will become believers on account of their election. In all of this, God is supreme, sovereign, and Savior.

IF a person only takes time to read the article in it's entirety, it should be profitable. We'll see...

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

calvinism is a twisted thing thats for sure...

What a nice troll-like inflammatory comment, so I'll leave this as a response, and people can decide whether denominations marrying gays and allowing gays into the clergy is twisted or whether C.H. Spurgeon and B.B. Warfield were "twisted":

"If anyone should ask me what I mean by a Calvinist, I should reply, “He is one who says, Salvation is of the Lord.” I cannot find in Scripture any other doctrine than this. It is the essence of the Bible. “He only is my rock and my salvation.”

Tell me anything contrary to this truth, and it will be a heresy; tell me a heresy, and I shall find its essence here, that it has departed from this great, this fundamental, this rock-truth, “God is my rock and my salvation.” What is the heresy of Rome, but the addition of something to the perfect merits of Jesus Christ—the bringing in of the works of the flesh, to assist in our justification? And what is the heresy of Arminianism but the addition of something to the work of the Redeemer? Every heresy, if brought to the touchstone, will discover itself here.

I have my own private opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else.

I do not believe we can preach the gospel, if we do not preach justification by faith, without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing, unchangeable, eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel, unless we base it upon the special and particular redemption of His elect and chosen people which Christ wrought out upon the cross; nor can I comprehend a gospel which lets saints fall away after they are called, and suffers the children of God to be burned in the fires of damnation after having once believed in Jesus. Such a gospel I abhor."

(Charles Spurgeon, A Defense of Calvinism)
​

And a couple of short quotes from B.B. Warfield:

"The Calvinist, in a word, is the man who sees God. He has caught sight of the ineffable Vision, and he will not let it fade for a moment from his eyes—God in nature, God in history, God in grace. Everywhere he sees God in His mighty stepping, everywhere he feels the working of His mighty arm, the throbbing of His mighty heart. The Calvinist is therefore, by way of eminence, the supernaturalist in the world of thought. The world itself is to him a supernatural product. not merely in the sense that somewhere, away back before all time, God made it, but that God is making it now, and in every event that falls out. In every modification of what is, that takes place, His hand is visible, as through all occurrences His “one increasing purpose runs”. Man himself is His— created for His glory, and having as the one supreme end of his existence to glorify his Maker, and haply also to enjoy Him for ever. And salvation, in every step and stage of it, is of God. Conceived in God’s love, wrought out by God’s own Son in a supernatural life and death in this world of sin, and applied by God’s Spirit in a series of acts as supernatural as the virgin birth and the resurrection of the Son of God themselves—it is a supernatural work through and through. To the Calvinist, thus, the Church of God is as direct a creation of God as the first creation itself. In this supernaturalism, the whole thought and feeling and life of the Calvinist is steeped. Without it there can be no Calvinism, for it is just this that is Calvinism.....

But let us make no mistake here. For here, too, Calvinism is just Christianity. The supernaturalism for which Calvinism stands is the very breath of the nostrils of Christianity; without it Christianity cannot exist. And let us not imagine that we can pick and choose with respect to the aspects of this supernaturalism which we acknowledge—that we may, for example, retain supernaturalism in the origination of Christianity. and forego the supernaturalism with which Calvinism is more immediately concerned, the supernaturalism of the application of Christianity. Men will not believe that a religion, the actual working of which in the world is natural, can have required to be ushered into the world with supernatural pomp and display. These supernaturals stand or fall together."

(B.B. Warfield, Calvinism Today)​

And you call it twisted...who are you?

 

[ICONO'CLAST]

many

Well if there are many it should be easy to point out a few! That is what he asked you to do. The 101 site is not a good source .

 

[roman2819]

Read Romans Chapter 9, your eisegesis will not hold up, then read this fine resource from a past issue of The Master's Seminary Journal, an article published in the Spring of 2000 by Leslie James Crawford titled "EPHESIANS 1:3-4 AND THE NATURE OF ELECTION".

I will quote the introduction and conclusion, people wanting the detailed exegetical analysis can click on the link above for the full article.

Ephesians 1:3-4 highlights the very important doctrine of election, but the passage is not without interpretive challenges that relate to that doctrine. An examination of individual words and phrases within the section reflects whether it supports the teaching of corporate or individual election. The two verses are part of a doxology that occupies 1:3-14 and emphasizes God’s activity in benefiting His people. Various words and phrases within the doxology that contribute toward a correct understanding of election are “He chose,” “ He predestined ,” “us,” “in Christ,” “holy,” “blameless,” “with every spiritual blessing,” and “in the heavenly places.” An examination of those leads to the conclusion that God in eternity past selected certain individuals to receive a comprehensive spiritual package that includes justification and adoption. The two verses rule out the position of corporate election and support an individual, unconditional view of election.

The subject of election ha s been a controversial one in the history of the church.1 Two opposing viewpoints have traditionally dominated the debate: unconditional, individual election (norm ally associated with a Calvinistic theology) and conditional individual election (normally associated with an Arminian theology). This scenario is changing and a third view is becoming increasingly popular.

The last four decades have brought an increasing number of books that advocate a corporate view on the subject of election.2 The view first denies individual election to salvation and then teaches that all instances w here individuals are chosen in Scripture are appointments to service. A Christian is only elect by virtue of Christ’s election, not on account of a pre-temporal choice by God out of the mass of fallen humanity. It is at the point of conversion, i.e., a believer’s incorporation into the church, that election could be said to apply to any individual.

Though the topic of election is controversial in theological debate, it is crucial to a theological understanding of salvation. On e cannot divorce an understanding of election from a correct view of God since God is the agent who does the choosing. Likewise, it is impossible to separate an understanding of election from one’s view of man since he is the object being chosen. God and man are defined in part by the definition given to election, which makes this subject of prime importance.

A proper comprehension of election is also critical to evangelism,3 which is a primary task of the church. One’s view of election defines the natures of preaching and conversion, and so again the importance of a correct understanding cannot be overstated. In addition, the issue of eternal security has its roots in the ground of election and the relative parts played by God and man in it. All of these combined demand a true biblical comprehension of the elements of election.

Proponents of the corporate understanding of election use Ephesians 1:3-4 to support their position. The following discussion explores the nature of election in Ephesians 1:3-4 by analyzing the exegetical data of the passage in its context and paying special attention to key terms related to election, so that a clear picture of Paul’s understanding of election may result. A determination of whether either the corporate or the individual position can be sustained biblically will then be possible.

<sniped exegetical content mostly because Hebrew and Greek words will not copy properly from pdf on my current setup>

Summarizing Paul’s Understanding of Election

It is now possible to summarize Paul’s understanding of election as expressed by Ephesians 1:3-4. God, in eternity past, for no other reason than His own design and will, selected certain individuals out of the mass of fallen humanity to be the recipients of a comprehensive spiritual package, which include s their justification and adoption. This is an action totally free on God’s part, without any external influence, which is ultimately purpose d to bring praise to Himself, particularly to His grace.

Election, viewed as foreordination, also guarantees the destiny of the elect, with particular reference to adoption. Every elect person is adopted into God’s family with full filial position and privileges. The historical realization of eternal election is the mystical union of the elect with Christ and only in this relationship do the elect receive the accompanying spiritual blessing s also contained in their election.

There are no preconditions to election, such as a person’s foreseen faith or meritorious life. In fact, the goal of election is to provide the necessary spiritual condition for a sinner to have acceptance with God. Paul refers to the elect as those who have already benefited from their election, but God views their condition prior to all that His activity will produce. The objects of election are unbelievers, who will become believers on account of their election. In all of this, God is supreme, sovereign, and Savior.

IF a person only takes time to read the article in it's entirety, it should be profitable. We'll see...

Do you see the relationship between these verses 1:1 an 2:11

Ephesians 1:1: To God’s holy people, the faithful in Christ Jesus ... or he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless
AND
Ephesian 2:11 Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumcised” ...

Connecting them together, it means that Paul was writing to Gentile Christians. RSV version said "Saints"; NIV said holy people. But whatever the words, 2:11 show they are Gentile Christians. In context, Ephesians chapters 1,2,3 explained that God predestined the Jews and the Jews to be offered redemption through Christ Jesus -- for this, I believe you have read my previous posts.

Predestination in Ephesians, Peter and Romans mean the same in all three Letters of Ephesians, Romans and Peter. I believe we will not disagree on that

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Do you see the relationship between these verses 1:1 an 2:11

Ephesians 1:1: To God’s holy people, the faithful in Christ Jesus ... or he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless
AND
Ephesian 2:11 Therefore, remember that formerly you who are Gentiles by birth and called “uncircumcised” ...

Connecting them together, it means that Paul was writing to Gentile Christians. In context, Ephesians chapters 1,2,3 explained that God predestined the Jews and the Jews to be offered redemption through Christ Jesus -- for this, I believe you have read my previous posts.

Predestination in Ephesians, Peter and Romans remain the same in all three books, I believe we can agree on that.

The phrase before/from the "foundation of the world" is in the NKJV in the following New Testament verses/books:

Matthew 13:35 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying: “I will open My mouth in parables; I will utter things kept secret from the foundation of the world.”

Matthew 25:34 “Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:

Luke 11:50 “that the blood of all the prophets which was shed from the foundation of the world may be required of this generation,

John 17:24 “Father, I desire that they also whom You gave Me may be with Me where I am, that they may behold My glory which You have given Me; for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.

Ephesians 1:4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love,

Hebrews 4:3 For we who have believed do enter that rest, as He has said: “So I swore in My wrath, ‘They shall not enter My rest,’ ” although the works were finished from the foundation of the world.

Hebrews 9:26 He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

1 Peter 1:20 He indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you

Revelation 13:8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

Revelation 17:8 “The beast that you saw was, and is not, and will ascend out of the bottomless pit and go to perdition. And those who dwell on the earth will marvel, whose names are not written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world, when they see the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.


So it cannot be said as you seem to suggest using Paul's letters alone that the Scripture teach predestination is exclusive to the Jews or Gentiles.

Furthermore in Romans Chapter 1:7 Paul makes no distinction when he wrote; "To all who are in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints". And more context is in Romans 1 verses 13-15 "Now I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that I often planned to come to you (but was hindered until now), that I might have some fruit among you also, just as among the other Gentiles. 14 I am a debtor both to Greeks and to barbarians, both to wise and to unwise. 15 So, as much as is in me, I am ready to preach the gospel to you who are in Rome also."

The original intended audience of Ephesians 1:1 is nearly identical to Romans 1:7; "PAUL, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, To the saints who are in Ephesus, and faithful in Christ Jesus:"

While we're delving into Pauline thought, I'll quote Romans 10:12 which speaks to this:

Romans 10:12 "For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him."

 

[StillGods]

Well if there are many it should be easy to point out a few! That is what he asked you to do. The 101 site is not a good source .

which 101 site do you mean... there are thousands with 101.