What makes the elect sons ?

[Van]

You cannot be elect and be hated by God. You cannot be conceived except in iniquity. God hates iniquity. Hence, you cannot be elected before you are conceived and live without mercy.

 

[grtcr]

grtcr



This is a lie God has never ever hated the elect, this is a false gospel, you and van are really the same , there is really no difference in both of your false understanding of salvation..

Once, again...Beloved57 (and Van) fail to make critical distinctions evidencing their proclivity for falsehood and fallacies.

The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity. (Psalms 5:5)

Was Beloved ever a worker of iniquity? Not according to his testimony. I employ Owen for my reply.


Of reconciliation by the death of Christ as it is a sacrifice.
II. THE next consideration of the death of Christ is of it as a sacrifice, and
the proper effect thereof is RECONCILIATION by his death as a sacrifice.
Reconciliation in general is the renewal of lost friendship and peace
between persons at variance. To apply this to the matter treated of, the
ensuing positions are to be premised: —
1. There was at first, in the state of innocency, friendship and peace
between God and man. God had no enmity against his creature; he
approved him to be good, and appointed him to walk in peace,
communion, confidence, and boldness with him, Genesis 2. Nor had man,
on whose heart the law and love of his Maker was written, any enmity
against his Creator, God, and Rewarder.
2. That by sin there is division, separation, and breach of peace and
friendship, introduced between God and the creature:
<235902>
Isaiah 59:2,
“Your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and
your sins have hid his face from you.”
<236310>
Isaiah 63:10,
“They rebelled, and vexed his holy Spirit; therefore he was turned
to be their enemy, and fought against them.”
<235721>
Isaiah 57:21,
“There is no peace, saith my God, to the wicked.” And therefore it is that,
upon a delivery from this condition, we are said (and not before) to have
“peace with God,”
<450501>
Romans 5:1.
3. That by this breach of peace and friendship with God, God was
alienated from the sinner, so as to be angry with him, and to renounce all
peace and friendship with him, considered as such and in that condition.
“He that believeth not, the wrath of God abideth on him,”
<430336>
John 3:36.
And therefore by nature and in our natural condition we are “children of
wrath,”
<490203>
Ephesians 2:3; that is, obnoxious to the wrath of God, that
abides upon unbelievers, — that is, unreconciled persons.
4. This enmity on the part of God consists, —
“And it was so, that after the LORD had spoken these words unto
Job, the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled
against thee, and against thy two friends: for ye have not spoken of
me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath. Therefore take
unto you now seven bullocks and seven rams, and go to my servant
Job, and offer up for yourselves a burnt offering; and my servant
Job shall pray for you: for him will I accept: lest I deal with you
after your folly, in that ye have not spoken of me the thing which
is right, like my servant Job,” etc.
The offenders are Eliphaz and his two friends; the offense is their folly in
not speaking aright of God; the issue of the breach is, that the wrath or
anger of God was towards them. Reconciliation is the turning away of that
wrath. The means whereby this was to be done, appointed of God, is the
sacrifice of Job for atonement.
This, then, is that which we ascribe to the death of Christ when we say
that, as a sacrifice, we were reconciled to God by it, or that he made
reconciliation for us. Having made God our enemy by sin (as before),
Christ by his death turned away his anger, appeased his wrath, and
brought us into favor again with God. Before the proof of this, I must
needs give one caution as to some terms of this discourse, as also remove
an objection that lies at the very entrance against the whole nature of that
which is treated of.
For the first, When we speak of the anger of God, his wrath, and his being
appeased towards us, we speak after the manner of men; but yet by the
allowance of God himself. Not that God is properly angry, and properly
altered from that state and appeased, whereby he should properly be
mutable and be actually changed; — but by the anger of God, which
sometimes in Scripture signifieth his justice, from whence punishment
proceeds, sometimes the effects of anger, or punishment itself, the
obstacles before mentioned on the part of God, from his nature, justice,
law, and truth, are intended; and by his being appeased towards us, his
being satisfied as to all the bars so laid in the way of receiving us to favor,
without the least alteration in him, his nature, will, or justice. And
according to the analogy hereof, I desire that whatever is spoken of the
anger of God, and his being appeased or altered (which is the language
wherein he converseth with us and instructs us to wisdom), may be
measured and interpreted.
The objection I shall propose in the words of Crellius: —
If this be the chiefest and highest love of God, that he sent Christ,
his only Son, to be a propitiation for our sins, how then could
Christ by his death appease the wrath of God that was incensed
against us? for seeing that God’s love was the cause of sending
Christ, he must needs before that have laid aside, his anger; for
otherwise, should he not intensely love us and not love us at the
same time? And if God could then be angry with us when he gave
up his Son to bitter death for our everlasting happiness, what
argument or evidence at any time can we have from the effect of it,
whence we may know that God is not farther angry with us? f468
To the same purpose Socinus himself: “Demonstravi non modo Christum
Deo nos, non autem Deum nobis reconciliasse, verum etiam Deum ipsum
fuisse qui hanc reconciliationem fecerit,” Socin. de Servator. lib. 1 part. 1
cap. 1.
To the same purpose is the plea of the catechist, cap. 8, “De Morte
Christi,” q. 31, 32.
Ans. 1. The love wherewith God loved us when he sent his Son to die for
us was the most intense and supreme in its own kind, nor would admit of
any hatred or enmity in God towards us that stood in opposition
thereunto. It is everywhere set forth as the most intense love,
<430316>
John 3:16;
<450507>
Romans 5:7, 8;
<620410>
1 John 4:10. Now, this love of God is an eternal free
act of his will; his “purpose,”
<450911>
Romans 9:11; “his good pleasure,” his
purpose that he “purposed in himself,” as it is called,
<490105>
Ephesians 1:5, 9;
it is his [FONT=EJBZZZ+Koine-Medium]pro>qesiv eujdoki>a pro>gnwsiv[/FONT],
<600102>
1 Peter 1:2, as I have

 

[grtcr]

continued:

elsewhere distinctly declared; a love that was to have an efficacy by means
appointed. But for a love of friendship, approbation, acceptation as to our
persons and duties, God bears none unto us, but as considered in Christ
and for his sake. It is contrary to the whole design of the Scripture and
innumerable particular testimonies once to fancy a love of friendship and
acceptation towards any in God, and not consequent to the death of
Christ.
2. This love of God’s purpose and good pleasure, this “charitas
ordinativa,” hath not the least inconsistency with those hinderances of
peace and friendship on the part of God before mentioned; for though the
holiness of God’s nature, the justice of his government, the veracity of his
word, will not allow that he take a sinner into friendship and communion
with himself without satisfaction made to him, yet this hinders not but
that, in his sovereign good-will and pleasure, he might purpose to recover
us from that condition by the holy means which he appointed. God did
not love us and not love us, or was angry with us, at the same time and in
the same respect. He loved us in respect of the free purpose of his will to
send Christ to redeem us and to satisfy for our sin; he was angry with us in
respect of his violated law and provoked justice by sin.
3. God loves our persons as we are his creatures, is angry with us as we are
sinners.
4. It is true that we can have no greater evidence and argument of the love
of God’s good-will and pleasure in general than in sending his Son to die
for sinners, and that he is not angry with them with an anger of hatred
opposite to that love, — that is, with an eternal purpose to destroy them;
but for a love of friendship and acceptation, we have innumerable other
pledges and evidences, as is known, and might be easily declared.
These things being premised, the confirmation of what was proposed
ensues: —
The use and sense of the words whereby this doctrine of our reconciliation
is expressed evince the truth contended for. [FONT=EJBZZZ+Koine-Medium]Ila>skesqai[/FONT], [FONT=EJBZZZ+Koine-Medium]katala>ssein[/FONT],
and [FONT=EJBZZZ+Koine-Medium]ajpokatala>ssein[/FONT], which are the words used in this business, are as
much as “iram avertere,” “to turn away anger:” so is “reconciliare,
propitiate,” and “placare,” in Latin. “Impius, ne audeto placare iram
deorum,” was a law of the Twelve Tables. [FONT=EJBZZZ+Koine-Medium]Ila>skomai[/FONT], “propitior,
placor,” [FONT=EJBZZZ+Koine-Medium]iJlasmo>v[/FONT], “placatio, exoratio,” Gloss. vetus. And in this sense is
the word used: [FONT=EJBZZZ+Koine-Medium]Osa me>ntoi pro<v iJlasmou<v qew~n h} tera>twn[/FONT]
[FONT=EJBZZZ+Koine-Medium]ajpotropa<v sunhgo>reuon oiJ ma>nteiv[/FONT], Plut. in Fabio, — to “appease
their gods, and turn away the things they feared.” And the same author
tells us of a way taken [FONT=EJBZZZ+Koine-Medium]ejxila>sasqai to< mh>nima th~v qeou~[/FONT], — to
“appease the anger of the goddess” And Xenophon useth the word to the
same purpose: [FONT=EJBZZZ+Koine-Medium]Polla< me<n pe>mpwn ajnaqh>mata crusa~ polla< de<[/FONT]
[FONT=EJBZZZ+Koine-Medium]ajrgura~ pa>mpolla de< qu>wn ejxilasa>mhn pote< aujto>n[/FONT]. And so also
doth Livy use the word “reconcilio:” “Non movit modo talis oratio regem,
sed etiam reconciliavit Annibali,” Bell Macedon. And many more instances
might be given. God, then, being angry and averse from love of friendship
with us, as hath been declared, and Christ being said thus to make
reconciliation for us with God, he did fully turn away the wrath of God
from us, as by the testimonies of it will appear.
Before I produce our witnesses in this cause, I must give this one caution:
It is not said anywhere expressly that God is reconciled to us, but that we
are reconciled to God; and the sole reason thereof is, because he is the
party offended, and we are the parties offending. Now, the party offending
is always said to be reconciled to the party offended, and not on the
contrary. So
<400523>
Matthew 5:23, 24, “If thy brother have ought against thee,
go and be reconciled to him.” The brother being the party offended, he that
had offended was to be reconciled to him by turning away his anger. And
in common speech, when one hath justly provoked another, we bid him go
and reconcile himself to him; that is, do that which may appease him and
give an entrance into his favor again. So is it in the case under
consideration. Being the parties offending, we are said to be reconciled to
God when his anger is turned away and we are admitted into his favor. Let
now the testimonies speak for themselves: —
<450510>
Romans 5:10, “When we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by
the death of his Son.” [FONT=EJBZZZ+Koine-Medium]Kathlla>ghmen tw~| Qew~|[/FONT], — “We were reconciled to
God,” or “brought again into his favor.” Amongst the many reasons that
might be given to prove the intention of this expression to be, “that we
were reconciled to God” by the averting of his anger from us, and our
accepting into favor, I shall insist on some few from the context: —
1. It appears from the relation that this expression bears to that of verse 8,
“While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us,” with which this upon the
matter is the same, “We are reconciled to God by the death of his Son.”
Now, the intent of this expression, “Christ died for us sinners,” is, he died
to bring us sinners into the favor of God, nor will it admit of any other
sense; so is our being “reconciled to God by the death of his Son.” And
that this is the meaning of the expression, “Christ died for us,” is evident
from the illustration given to it by the apostle, verses 6, 7. “Christ died for
the ungodly;” how? As one man dieth for another, — that is, to deliver him
from death.
2. From the description of the same thing in other words: Verse 9, “Being
justified by his blood.” That it is the same thing upon the matter that is
here intended appears from the contexture of the apostle’s speech, “While
we were yet sinners, Christ died for us; much more then being justified by
his blood;” and, “If, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God.”
The apostle repeats what he had said before, “If, while we were yet
sinners, Christ died for us,” and “we were justified by the blood of
Christ;” that is, “If, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God.”
Now, to be justified is God’s reconciliation to us, his acceptation of us
into favor, not our conversion to him, as is known and confessed.
3. The reconciliation we have with God is a thing tendered to us, and we
do receive it: Verse 11, [FONT=EJBZZZ+Koine-Medium]Katallagh<n ejla>bomen[/FONT], “We have received the
reconciliation (or atonement).” Now, this cannot be spoken in reference to
our reconciliation to God as on our side, but of his to us, and our
acceptation with him. Our reconciliation to God is our conversion; but we
are not said to receive our conversion, or to have our conversion tendered
to us, but to convert ourselves or to be converted.
4. The state and condition from whence we are delivered by this
reconciliation is described in this, that we are called enemies, — being
“enemies, we were reconciled.” Now, enemies in this place are the same
with sinners; and the reconciliation of sinners, — that is, of those who had
rebelled against God, provoked him, were obnoxious to wrath, — is
—

 

[grtcr]

Continued:

1. Of God to man: Verse 18, “God hath reconciled us to himself by
Jesus Christ.”
2. Our reconciliation to God, in the acceptance of that reconciliation
which we are exhorted to.
The first is that inquired after, the reconciliation whereby the anger of God
by Christ is turned away, and those for whom he died are brought into his
favor, which comprises the satisfaction proposed to confirmation; for, —
1. Unless it be that God is so reconciled and atoned, whence is it that he is
thus proclaimed to be a Father towards sinners, as he is here expressed?
Out of Christ he is a “consuming fire” to sinners and “everlasting
burnings,”
<233314>
Isaiah 33:14, being of “purer eyes than to behold evil,”
<350113>
Habakkuk 1:13; before whom no sinner shall appear or stand,
<190504>
Psalm
5:4, 5. So that, where there is no “sacrifice for sins,” there
“remaineth nothing to sinners but a certain fearful looking for of
judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries,”
<581026>
Hebrews 10:26, 27
How comes, then, this jealous God, this holy God and just Judge, to
command some to beseech sinners to be reconciled to him? The reason is
given before. It is because he reconciles us to himself by Christ, or in
Christ; that is, by Christ his anger is pacified, his justice satisfied, and
himself appeased or reconciled to us.
2. The reconciliation mentioned is so expounded, in the cause and effect of
it, as not to admit of any other interpretation.
(1.) The effect of God’s being reconciled, or his reconciling the world to
himself, is in these words, “Not imputing to them their trespasses.” God
doth so reconcile us to himself by Christ as not to impute our trespasses
to us; that is, not dealing with us according as justice required for our sins,
upon the account of Christ’s [work] remitting the penalty due to them,
laying away his anger, and receiving us to favor. This is the immediate fruit
of the reconciliation spoken of, if not the reconciliation itself. Non-imputation
of sin is not our conversion to God.
(2.) The cause of it is expressed, verse 21, “He made him to be sin for us,
who knew no sin.” How comes it to pass that God, the righteous judge,
doth thus reconcile us to himself, and not impute to us our sins? It is
because he hath made Christ to be sin for us: — that is, either a sacrifice
for sin, or as sin, — by the imputation of our sin to him. He was “made
sin for us,” as we are “made the righteousness of God in him.” Now, we
are made the righteousness of God by the imputation of his righteousness
to us: so was he made sin for us by the imputation of our sin to him. Now,
for God to reconcile us to himself by imputing our sin to Christ, and
thereon not imputing it to us, can be nothing but his being appeased and
atoned towards us, with his receiving us into his favor, by and upon the
account of the death of Christ.
(3.) This reconciling of us to himself is the matter committed to the
preachers of the gospel; whereby, or by the declaration whereof, they
should persuade us to be reconciled to God. “He hath committed to us [FONT=EJBZZZ+Koine-Medium]to<n[/FONT]
[FONT=EJBZZZ+Koine-Medium]lo>gon th~v katallagh~v[/FONT], this doctrine concerning reconciliation mentioned,
‘we therefore beseech you to be reconciled to God.’” That which is the
matter whereby we are persuaded to be reconciled to God cannot be our
conversion itself, as is pretended. The preachers of the gospel are to
declare this word of God, namely, “that he hath reconciled us to himself”
by the blood of Christ, the blood of the new testament that was shed for
us, and thereon persuade us to accept of the tidings, or the subject of them,
and to be at peace with God. Can the sense be, “We are converted to God,
therefore be ye converted?” This testimony, then, speaks clearly to the
matter under debate.
The next place of the same import is
<490212>
Ephesians 2:12-16,
“At that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the
commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of
promise, having no hope, and without God in the world: but now
in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by
the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath made both one,
and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of
commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of
twain one new man, so making peace; and that he might reconcile
both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity
thereby.”
1. Here is mention of a twofold enmity: —
(1.) Of the Gentiles unto God;
(2.) Of the Jews and Gentiles among themselves.
(1.) Of the Gentiles unto God, verse 12. Consider them as they are there
described, and their enmity to God is sufficiently evident. And what in
that estate was the respect of God unto them? what is it towards such
persons as there described? “The wrath of God abideth on them,” (not beloved 57)
<430336>
John
3:36; they are “children of wrath,” (not beloved57?
<490203>
Ephesians 2:3. So are they there
expressly called. “He hateth all the workers of iniquity,” (not beloved57?
<190505>
Psalm 5:5, and
“will by no means clear the guilty,”
<023407>
Exodus 34:7; yea, he curseth those
families that call not on his name,
<241025>
Jeremiah 10:25.
(

 

[Rick Otto]

If jesus exsisted then his seed exsisted thats my point, God views the seed as in exsistence of the Father that is the point of the levi Illustration..

Jesus Christ has always had a body that exisited the elect are his body..

Seed or body? Both? I can't picture that any better than I can that my spirit existed in eternity.

 

[beloved57]

otto says

Seed or body? Both? I can't picture that any better than I can that my spirit existed in eternity.

ok see ya later.

 

[beloved57]

Was Beloved ever a worker of iniquity? Not according to his testimony. I employ Owen for my reply.

Nope the elect are never a worker of iniquity..

There is not one verse that designates the elect a worker of iniquity and there is not one verse that says God ever hated the elect, that is your humanism which you shortly will answer to God..

 

[Van]

Lets consider the idea that we were "in Christ" because God planed to put us "in Christ." Now with this plan in place, before the fall, God did not pass over our sins. So, we must say God passed over our foreseen sins. But then God is taking our characteristics into account, and thus the election is not unconditional.

You see folks what creating a "foreseen" creation does? It allows a person to invent stuff to make actual scripture to no effect. We can be "in Christ" but not actually be "in Christ" we can be sinners, but not actually be sinners. Doctrine built on sand, folk.

Lets consider God having mercy on us. First, before creation, He foresees that we will be sinners and in need of mercy, so He passes over our foreseen sins, and chooses us, but this choice does not bestow mercy upon us, we are in limbo unto God manifests His choice, then the mercy takes effect. That way we can live not as His people without mercy, yet be chosen and predestined to receive mercy. Got it? Right.

A more straightforward view, is God chooses us during our lifetime and places us in Christ. This is our election, this is God passing over our sins, and this is God having mercy upon us. This is what scripture actually says, the other view is how you can use "foreseen" stuff to slice and dice scripture so it fits with false doctrine.

 

[beloved57]

van says

Lets consider the idea that we were "in Christ" because God planed to put us "in Christ."

Lets consider the the ideal that we we were in christ because we were in christ before the world began..

2 tim 1:

9Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

It does not say that will be given us in christ but was given us !! in christ before the world began..Its not nice to change scripture lol..

 

[Van]

As I have explained, when God chose the Word to be His lamb before the foundation of the world, He bestowed grace upon everyone redeemed subsequently. Thus when we are placed in Christ, we receive the grace given us in Christ before the world began.

But why could we not be in Christ before we were created. First, that is a logical impossibility, but setting that aside, because scripture says we lived without mercy before we were chosen to be His people. Thus both views, Beloved57, and Grtcr, are unbiblical because the views are inconsistent with 1 Peter 2:9-10.

 

[Van]

We are born again as spiritual children of God, when we are spiritually placed in Christ by the Holy Spirit, after God credits our faith in Christ as righteousness.

 

[beloved57]

van says

Thus when we are placed in Christ, we receive the grace given us in Christ before the world began.

But thats not what the verse says..the verse says we were given grace. When ?

2 tim 1:

9Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

 

[Van]

And to repeat, for the umpteenth time, when God choose the Word to be His Redeemer, He granted or gave or bestowed grace upon those in Christ before the foundation of the world. However, since no one was in Christ before the foundation of the world, we receive that grace, given before the foundation of the world to those in Christ, when we are spiritually placed in Christ. Good Grief.

It is a logical impossibility that anyone was in Christ before creation, before we were created. It is a biblical impossibility that anyone was individually chosen to be in Christ before they lived without mercy.

 

[beloved57]

van says

However, since no one was in Christ before the foundation of the world..

Thats what van says but not what the scripture says again 2 tim 1:

9Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

I either believe scripture or van Thats a no brainer..

 

[grtcr]

And to repeat, for the umpteenth time, when God choose the Word to be His Redeemer, He granted or gave or bestowed grace upon those in Christ before the foundation of the world. However, since no one was in Christ before the foundation of the world, we receive that grace, given before the foundation of the world to those in Christ, when we are spiritually placed in Christ. Good Grief.

It is a logical impossibility that anyone was in Christ before creation, before we were created. It is a biblical impossibility that anyone was individually chosen to be in Christ before they lived without mercy.

Well...Van...I have to hand it to you, you trumped Beloved57 on that one. He fails miserably to make critical distinctions. Much of what I say below you would probably disagree with, but my point is, you are more correct and what's his nose errs.

In the context of the Gospel, we must keep in mind the proper distinction between the Representative and those whom He represents. According to God, the Father&#8217;s, purpose, the elect died in the Person of Christ as their substitutionary Representative at the cross, but died not in their own persons at the cross. This is according to God&#8217;s Testimony! The &#8220;One,&#8221; Christ as Representative, died, and &#8220;all,&#8221; those represented by the One, died when He died (2 Cor. 5:14). The &#8220;all&#8221; were crucified with Christ (Gal. 2:20); the &#8220;all&#8221; satisfied Law and Justice against sin; the &#8220;all&#8221; paid the debt they owed for all of their sins; and the sins of the &#8220;all&#8221; were put away, purged, and paid for at the cross in the Person of their Representative.

Yet, all the elect, whether Abel or Paul, and on to the last one to be born, are born &#8220;dead&#8221; in sins and trespasses, and &#8220;children of wrath&#8221; (men under wrath), &#8220;even as others&#8221; (Eph. 2:1-3). Before God&#8217;s appointed time for the conversion of each of His elect, sin is still imputed or charged to their individual persons; therefore, God&#8217;s wrath still abides on them till that time. According to Rom. 3:9, God has proved beyond question that &#8220;all&#8221; men and women without distinction or exception are &#8220;under sin,&#8221; that is to say, under the curse of the Law as transgressors of it, and therefore that all of God&#8217;s elect are born, not immune from, but rather owing, a debt to both the precept and penalty of God&#8217;s holy Law, which Law they broke in Adam, and then followed on to continually break it personally all their lives:

&#8220;For there is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not&#8221; (Eccl. 7:20).

If no distinction is to be made between the Representative and the ones represented, we have an irreconcilable contradiction in Scripture. How could they be righteous from eternity, and &#8220;always saved in Him,&#8221; yet unrighteous in time, and born under the curse of the Law? Does God impute righteousness, then not impute righteousness to impute sin, then not impute sin to impute righteousness again? Not so! Consider:

Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; Who [Christ] was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification (Rom. 4:23-25).

 

[Van]

Beloved57 says 1 Peter 2:9-10 does not exist and can be ignored. He simply repeats the logical impossibility of us being in Christ before we are created. We could not live without mercy if before we were created we were in Christ. Thus you can believe Beloved, or believe scripture. I have explained how Ephesians 1:4 and 2 Timothy 1:9 fit with 1 Peter 2:9-10. Beloved has folks receiving grace before they are created. He has them "in Christ" before they are created. He has them receiving mercy before they sinned. His foreseen house of card is built on sand.

 

[beloved57]

van says

Originally Posted by Van
And to repeat, for the umpteenth time, when God choose the Word to be His Redeemer, He granted or gave or bestowed grace upon those in Christ before the foundation of the world. However, since no one was in Christ before the foundation of the world, we receive that grace, given before the foundation of the world to those in Christ, when we are spiritually placed in Christ. Good Grief.

In direct contrarieness to the truth that Christ before time began existed heb 13:

8Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.

This verse confirms that..

And that before time began the elect who were in him were given grace..

2 tim 1:

9Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

To deny the elect exisited before time began is to deny their head existed before time began which is blasphemy..

 

[beloved57]

gtr says

In the context of the Gospel, we must keep in mind the proper distinction between the Representative and those whom He represents. According to God, the Father&#8217;s, purpose, the elect died in the Person of Christ as their substitutionary Representative at the cross, but died not in their own persons at the cross. This is according to God&#8217;s Testimony! The &#8220;One,&#8221; Christ as Representative, died, and &#8220;all,&#8221; those represented by the One, died when He died (2 Cor. [/5:14).

You dont know what you talking about just full of confusion..

The elect died in their head then they did not die lol..

I guess the elect died in their natural head adam and then they did not die..you are more confused than a betsy bug and brings the truth to light

2 tim 3:

Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.

Thats you dude lol..

 

[Van]

Still waiting for the question to be answered. How could people before they were created live without mercy? Answer: They could not. Therefore Beloved57 view contradicts 1Peter 2:9-10, whereas my view is consistent with Ephesians 1:4 and 2 Timothy 1:9. Whenever believers are spiritually placed in Christ, they receive the grace given to those in Him before the foundation of the world.

 

[nobdysfool]

Still waiting for the question to be answered. How could people before they were created live without mercy? Answer: They could not. Therefore Beloved57 view contradicts 1Peter 2:9-10, whereas my view is consistent with Ephesians 1:4 and 2 Timothy 1:9. Whenever believers are spiritually placed in Christ, they receive the grace given to those in Him before the foundation of the world.

Actually, Beloved57 takes the concepts too far, and does not differentiate between intent and actuality. God can Elect to save individuals before the foundation of the world, that election being His intent to save, and then the actuality of their salvation is brought about during their lives, after they have lived without mercy, as Van puts it. It could be argued that no man lives entirely without mercy, but that's not the point here. The mercy being spoken of is the mercy of salvation and forgiveness of sins.

Election is not salvation itself. It is more clearly seen as intent to save.