Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Agreed. I don't even know how the theology ever got a foothold. There's not a single passage of Scripture that states any part of the TULIP outright. It's all by way of inference.For me, this has always been the logical conclusion of Calvinism. Mainstream Calvinists would call this Hyper-Calvinism, and seek to distance themselves from it. But it is, in my opinion, a twisted pretzel that is used to do the distancing.
Basically, if God decreed some to be lost and some to be saved, then the stage is set, and nothing will depart from the will of the one making the decrees! Everything after the decrees are mere details, for all things, including the ways and means of how all things are accomplished, are also decreed to be exactly as they are. This is the long and short of Calvinistic soteriology. All things are meticulously preordained and decreed to be just what they are or will be, thus, anyone decreed to be saved will be, and anyone that isn't will be lost and nothing will alter this destiny in any way or to any degree. Evangelism is not really necessary, for all things are fixed, even before we existed, and how this plays out in real time is merely details.
Doug
Agreed. I don't even know how the theology ever got a foothold. There's not a single passage of Scripture that states any part of the TULIP outright. It's all by way of inference.
Yeah. The problem is that Romans is misunderstood. It's applied to Christians when it's speaking of Israel. The elect are Israel. Romans 2:17 - 11:13 is speaking of Israel, yet many if not most apply it to Christians.And that is based on assumed definitions of words like Sovereignty and Total Depravity.
Doug
By "inference" it's clear you mean "opinion".Agreed. I don't even know how the theology ever got a foothold. There's not a single passage of Scripture that states any part of the TULIP outright. It's all by way of inference.
Yes, there are a lot of opinions swirling around Romans.Yeah. The problem is that Romans is misunderstood.
Another opinion. Paul wrote to the believers in Rome, which was a Gentile city in a Gentile country. Yes, there were Jews living there, but they were in the minority.It's applied to Christians when it's speaking of Israel.
The entire epistle is to Christians. Same for Hebrews. Same for ALL the epistles.The elect are Israel. Romans 2:17 - 11:13 is speaking of Israel, yet many if not most apply it to Christians.
An inference is a conclusion drawn from facts. The problem with inferences is that they can be wrong. Facts can't be wrong, inferences can be. What I said about the TULIP is that it's not stated plainly. For instance, they're is no passage of Scripture that says man is totally depraved to the point that he is unable to believe the gospel. There is nothing in the Scriptures that says people are unconditionally elected to salvation. There is nothing that says the atonement is limited to certain people, nothing that states God's grace is irresistible and nothing that says believers can't be lost.By "inference" it's clear you mean "opinion".
And thanks for noting that no part of TULIP is stated in Scripture.
Yes, Roman's was written to the church at Rome. However, as I pointed out Paul begins to address the Jewish believers at 2:17. He continues this dialog with those Jewish believers through 11:13 where he begins to address the Gentiles. That's not opinion, its demonstrable fact. In that section he makes statements that pertain to Israel alone. For instance, chapter 4, Abraham, our father according to the flesh. That's Israel.Yes, there are a lot of opinions swirling around Romans.
Another opinion. Paul wrote to the believers in Rome, which was a Gentile city in a Gentile country. Yes, there were Jews living there, but they were in the minority.
The entire epistle is to Christians. Same for Hebrews. Same for ALL the epistles.
In fact, Romans contains more theology regarding Christianity than any other book.
One more thing: election is for service. The Jewish people were chosen by God to protect and share His Word with the rest of the world. And they failed.
Believers in the NT are chosen to be holy and blameless (Eph 1:4). That is service.
If you're interested, I can give you EVERY example of those described as "elect" and prove from Scripture that NOT ANY of the examples were chosen for salvation.
If you're interested.
There are no facts that should lead anyone to TULIP. If there are, please share them.An inference is a conclusion drawn from facts.
Exactly why I noted your inferences are opinions. I agree; facts are not wrong.The problem with inferences is that they can be wrong. Facts can't be wrong, inferences can be.
So, the obvious question: why do people believe in TULIP?What I said about the TULIP is that it's not stated plainly. For instance, they're is no passage of Scripture that says man is totally depraved to the point that he is unable to believe the gospel. There is nothing in the Scriptures that says people are unconditionally elected to salvation. There is nothing that says the atonement is limited to certain people, nothing that states God's grace is irresistible and nothing that says believers can't be lost.
I didn't disagree with these facts. The point that you are missing is that Paul was writing to SAVED PEOPLE, regardless of ethnicity.Yes, Roman's was written to the church at Rome. However, as I pointed out Paul begins to address the Jewish believers at 2:17. He continues this dialog with those Jewish believers through 11:13 where he begins to address the Gentiles. That's not opinion, its demonstrable fact.
Well, Israel from the OT. NOT Israel now. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile in the NT.In that section he makes statements that pertain to Israel alone.
So what?For instance, chapter 4, Abraham, our father according to the flesh. That's Israel.
No, it's speaking to SAVED PEOPLE. That's us.Regarding Eph 1:4, that too, is speaking of Israel.
Great!And, I agree, no one is elected to salvation
And that is based on assumed definitions of words like Sovereignty and Total Depravity.
Doug
Well what about your assumptions? Show me in the Bible where the scripture says God loves all people or humans have a libertarian free will. You can't,these are your assumptions.
No, there aren't tests my point.There are no facts that should lead anyone to TULIP. If there are, please share them.
I didnt give you an opinion. I told you what Paul did and gave chapter and verse where he did it.Exactly why I noted your inferences are opinions. I agree; facts are not wrong.
Preconceptions, lack of context, cherry picking, being taught and wrongly.So, the obvious question: why do people believe in TULIP?
AgreedDoctrine and theology should not be based on inferences, for the very reason you point out.
Save or unsaved has no bearing on what he said. The point is that he is addressing Jews about their historyI didn't disagree with these facts. The point that you are missing is that Paul was writing to SAVED PEOPLE, regardless of ethnicity.
It shows he's addressing Jews.So what?
No, it's speaking to SAVED PEOPLE. That's us.
Did God give OT Gentiles (who were intelligent)
"freedom of choice"?
.
I have been through E.E. both in college and in pastoral ministry. Though it's been many years since I've been through it formally, I don't recall any regeneration before faith information in the in plan.
My whole point of interest is simply the fact that Reformed soteriology and its monergistic stance, means that the evangelist knows that God has chosen only certain people, and that more than likely person X is not going to believe, thus they know that there is really no chance at all of them being saved. So one cannot truthfully say that God wants "you", person X, to be a part of his family.
The more truthful, but not as attractive way from my perspective, would be:
"Sir, do you know that you might be one of the few Elect that God has chosen to be forgiven and receive eternal life?" Instead of "If you died today do you think you would go to heaven?"
Doug
Jn 3:16, Acts 17:26-27
Besides this, am I to take your response as an acceptance of my comment regarding the definition of Sovereignty and Total Depravity?
Doug
And that is based on assumed definitions of words like Sovereignty and Total Depravity.
Doug
A theological treatise has every bearing on saved people.Save or unsaved has no bearing on what he said.
Only part of the epistle. The majority of Romans was to educate saved people (Christians) on what Christianity is and how to function.The point is that he is addressing Jews about their history
I have found at least 7 different examples of those described as being elect. Israel's only 1 of the examples.Israel is God's chosen people. That hasn't changed. Remember the New Covenant is with Israel, Jeremiah 31. Paul told the Gentiles in the church at Rome, after he finished addressing the Jewish believers, that they were grafted into Israel.
No, Paul was reminding saved people who their "spiritual father" was; Abe. Paul wasn't addressing Jews specifically.It shows he's addressing Jews.
That was my point. You said Paul was addressing Jews.He may be speaking "to" saved people, but, he's speaking "about" the Jews.
I thought the claim of Calvinistic "total depravity" is that man is unable to believe until or unless he is first regenerated. Has Calvinism changed their points?the Calvinist doctrine that humankind's entire nature, including its reason, is corrupt or sinful as a result of the Fall and that people are therefore completely dependent on God for regeneration.
if you believe that regeneration precedes belief for salvation, please provide the verses that actually make that clear.
Thanks.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?