There words are NOT different.
Dude, the word "ELECT" CAME FROM THE VERY WORD THAT MEANS TO CHOOSE SOMETHING
Upvote
0
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.
No, it's not.
The words are different, which is obvious, and do have an overlap, as in:
all elections involve a choice, but very few choices involve an election.
Sometimes Calvinists do label those who practice eisegesis. It makes them easy to identify without using long descriptions. Some call them Arminians. I just call them synergists.
There words are NOT different.
Dude, the word "ELECT" CAME FROM THE VERY WORD THAT MEANS TO CHOOSE SOMETHING
While they are, he wasn't describing them as elect in 2 Thess 2:13. He was simply noting on what basis God had chosen them for salvation: through faith in the truth.Thanks for clearing up what you are referring to. I probably missed it earlier.
But we should always give thanks to God for you, brethren beloved by the Lord, because God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the truth. (2 Thessalonians 2:13 NASB)
So are these that Paul refers to "elect"?
Well, that is your right.Well, I would say so.
Something's missing here. Please clarify.Otherwise, there's no to to thank God for the choice.
Why would that be? Please elaborate, but it's absolutely not clear to me why anyone would believe that.If this was man's choice to believe, then we would be thanking man, not God.
I've always noted that God chooses who will be saved, and have given Scripture to back it up. So why would anyone think that I would think differently?That is, unless you think chosen in this verse means something other than chosen.
The discussion has been going on for this long, and now this question??!! Really? Amazing. But, ok, here's the difference.Could you please explain the difference between 'haireomai' and "eklegomai"? I'd like to know how that difference threatens what I believe.
I provided 2 Greek words; eklegomai and haireomai. Please provide evidence that these 2 words are related in the Greek.There words are NOT different.
Dude, the word "ELECT" CAME FROM THE VERY WORD THAT MEANS TO CHOOSE SOMETHING
I like Doug Hamp. And what he said.DUDE! No it didn't and in the NT is defines who are Christians, not HOW they became Christians.
DOUGLAS HAMP states the following;
Thus when we read in 2 Peter: Therefore, brethren, be even more diligent to make your call and election sure, for if you do these things you will never stumble (2 Pet 1:10) we know that Peter is talking to Jews and that their election has nothing to do with salvation. Therefore, this is not a Calvinistic call for us to somehow make sure that we have been chosen to eternal life! It is rather a reminder to the chosen people to embrace the fact that they were elected, chosen by God to be His special treasure. However, their election is by no means an absolute guarantee that they will inherit eternal life. Paul corroborates this fact so clearly in 2 Timothy: Therefore I endure all things for the sake of the elect, that they also may obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory. (2 Tim 2:10) Note well that Paul must endure for the elect, the Jews, so that they too might be saved. As we have seen, election has nothing to do with salvation. Furthermore, election is generally a term used of the Jews, who are of course, the chosen people. This is confirmed yet again in Romans 11, where Paul, who is speaking about the Jews, states Concerning the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but concerning the election they are beloved for the sake of the fathers. (Rom 11:28)IMO this is PROPER exegesis.
My point was that this label is from the RT side, NOT from those who debate against RT. There is no Arminian icon on CF, so why is there a Calvinist one if all are believers and Christians? I am NOT an Arminian, I don't follow doctrines of men, regardless of how close my beliefs may be to some man. By defining yourself as a Calvinist, it is no different than saying RCC or JW, IMO, and we all know they both have inherent errors in their doctrines.
So are you saying that Arminians = synergists = those who practice eisegesis?Sometimes Calvinists do label those who practice eisegesis. It makes them easy to identify without using long descriptions. Some call them Arminians. I just call them synergists.
The discussion has been going on for this long, and now this question??!! Really? Amazing. But, ok, here's the difference.
Eklegomai is translated as elect (verb), while haireomai is only translated as choose.
So are you saying that Arminians = synergists = those who practice eisegesis?
I've yet to see one who doesn't.
I don't follow the doctrines of men any more than you do. And I've never called you an Arminian. A synergist, yes. But that's because it's reflective of your theology. It just a description.
The thing about pointing fingers is that there are three times as many pointing back at yourself.
This is another typical RT tactic rather than addressing the actual scripture.
That is EXACTLY what you do, if not why label yourself a Calvinist? As usual you equivocate on the point I made. I'm beginning to believe you cannot have a genuine UNEQUIVOCAL discussion.
It describes Paul as well, for his answer to the jailer, who asked what he MUST DO to be saved. And Paul commanded him to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and he would be saved.I don't follow the doctrines of men any more than you do. And I've never called you an Arminian. A synergist, yes. But that's because it's reflective of your theology. It just a description.
The difference between an election and a simple choice.What's the difference in the definitions?
I'd love to see any verse that actually says any of this.I call myself a Calvinist for easy reference. It's easier than saying "I'm a Christian who believes that man is radically depraved, that God elects unconditionally, that the atonement was limited to to those elect, that's there's an effectual call, and that God's saints will persevere to the end".
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?