Calvinism / pre-destination

[DeafPosttrib]

Gadgeteer,

GOOD POST! I agree everything you say. I strong disagree with Calvinism. God is not dicator. God gives us the choice, because He loves us. Keep Up!!

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

[Gadgeteer]

Gadgeteer,

GOOD POST! I agree (with) everything you say. I strong disagree with Calvinism. God is not dicator. God gives us the choice, because He loves us. Keep (it) Up!!

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

Hi, "DeafPosttrib"! I'm honored by your kind words! :-D

Which post --- #99?

:-)

[Redeemed by Grace]

"Prognōsis" means foreknowledge; God can see the future. Do you agree that "many are called but few are chosen" (Matt22:14) in context teaches that all (as many as you find) are called, but only those who chose to accept became "chosen"? Do you accept that the guy in Heb10:29 was sanctified by Jesus' blood once, but now scorns that blood, tramples Jesus, and insults the Spirit?

How can we see a "unilateral (monergistic) sanctification", that cannot be volitionally accepted or rejected?

Again... let's just stay on the text of 1 Peter 1:1,2... it declares: 1 Peter 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen 2 according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure.

Let's not truncate the sentence... would you agree that Peter is declaring that God calls believers by the sanctifying work of the Spirit to obedience in Jesus Christ?

[Gadgeteer]

Again... let's just stay on the text of 1 Peter 1:1,2...

We can't just study one letter, "Redeemed". No verse, passage or letter operates in a vacuum. ALL Scripture is inspired by God ("God-breathed"). It all must fit together.

If we focus on just one letter or passage (say, Ephesians 1:4-5 or 11 for instance), we might perceive a doctrine that conflicts the rest...

it declares: 1 Peter 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen 2 according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure.

Let's not truncate the sentence... would you agree that Peter is declaring that God calls believers by the sanctifying work of the Spirit to obedience in Jesus Christ?

No. "Chosen" by the sanctifying work of the Spirit in no way precludes participatory faith. In 1Cor6:11 we are sanctified, justified, and washed (regenerated) in the name of Christ and by the Spirit. We know that "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved" --- not "everyone whom the Lord has called".

In Matt22:14, "many are called but few are chosen", Jesus clearly teaches that all are called and those who come, become the chosen.

The direction is men-coming-towards-God, not God coming towards a specific few "chosen".

would you agree that Peter is declaring that God calls believers by the sanctifying work of the Spirit to obedience in Jesus Christ?[/

And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation. Heb5:9.

What is God's position in Heb5:9? Are men responding to GOD'S decision, or is God responding to men's obedience? Just as in Rom3:26 where God responds to faith, God responds to obedience, doesn't He?

[Redeemed by Grace]

We can't just study one letter, "Redeemed". No verse, passage or letter operates in a vacuum. ALL Scripture is inspired by God ("God-breathed"). It all must fit together.

I agree, but we can't jump past steps either... Thus we need to understand all scriptures in independence, and understand the author's meening and reason for writting.... It's only after that, should we then look to compare other writings for perceived conflict.... for we can't and is improper to gloss over three tile positions of the floor to reach the next step to place the next tile.... There must be first position and order in laying out the floor. We must understand each tile for the value it represents and then place them in pattern in relationship to the first tile placed. Thus I have given 1 Peter 1:1,2 as the first tile to place and understand. So what does it say?

If we focus on just one letter or passage (say, Ephesians 1:4-5 or 11 for instance), we might perceive a doctrine that conflicts the rest... No. "Chosen" by the sanctifying work of the Spirit in no way precludes participatory faith. In 1Cor6:11 we are sanctified, justified, and washed (regenerated) in the name of Christ and by the Spirit. We know that "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved" --- not "everyone whom the Lord has called".

In Matt22:14, "many are called but few are chosen", Jesus clearly teaches that all are called and those who come, become the chosen.

The direction is men-coming-towards-God, not God coming towards a specific few "chosen".

Soooo back to the text, taken as my first tile:

1 Peter 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen 2 according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure.

Would you agree that Peter is declaring that God calls believers by the sanctifying work of the Spirit to obedience in Jesus Christ?

[tea]

I cannot find scripture that teaches we have a free will before Jesus enters our hearts. I see things like ; we were slaves to sin, & we were dead in our trespasses.
I so far have never seen a dead man choose.

[Noeb]

I cannot find scripture that teaches we have a free will before Jesus enters our hearts. I see things like ; we were slaves to sin, & we were dead in our trespasses.
I so far have never seen a dead man choose.

Hebrews 11.....

[Noeb]

Hi Noeb,

Thanks for clarifying your response... One word answers leave very little room to see you meant something else... Thanks again...

I don't know how I could mean anything else. You posted 1Peter 1.3 which about God's plan to save man then asked who the us is.

[Gadgeteer]

I agree, but we can't jump past steps either... Thus we need to understand all scriptures in independence, and understand the author's meening and reason for writting.... It's only after that, should we then look to compare other writtings for conflict.... for we can't and (it) is improper to gloss over three tile positions of the floor to reach the next step to place the next tile.... There must be first position and order in laying out the floor. We must understand each tile for the value it represents and then place them in pattern in relationship to the first tile placed. Thus I have given 1 Peter 1:1,2 as the first tile to place and understand. So what does it say?

Soooo back to the text, taken as my first tile:

1 Peter 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen 2 according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure.

Would you agree that Peter is declaring that God calls believers by the sanctifying work of the Spirit to obedience in Jesus Christ?

You're still perceiving "obedience" to be the consequence of God's call and the Spirit's sanctification. Is that a valid understanding?

You and I are not Greek scholars; so noting Robertson:

1Pet1:1
Peter (Petro). Greek form for the Aramaic (Chaldaic) Chpa, the nickname given Simon by Jesus when he first saw him ( John 1:42 ) and reaffirmed in the Greek form on his great confession ( Matthew 16:18 ), with an allusion to petra, another form for a rock, ledge, or cliff. In 2 Peter 1:1 we have both Simwn and Petro. Paul in his Epistles always terms himself Paul, not Saul. So Peter uses this name, not Cephas or Simon, because he is writing to Christians scattered over Asia Minor. The nominative absolute occurs here as in James 1:1 , but without cairein as there, the usual form of greeting in letters ( Acts 23:26 ) so common in the papyri. An apostle of Jesus Christ (apostolo Ihsou Cristou). This is his official title, but in 2 Peter 1:1 doulo is added, which occurs alone in James 1:1 . In II and III John we have only o presbutero (the elder), as Peter terms himself sunpresbutero in 1 Peter 5:1 . Paul's usage varies greatly: only the names in I and II Thessalonians, the title apostolo added and defended in Galatians and Romans as also in I and II Corinthians and Colossians and Ephesians and II Timothy with "by the will of God" added, and in I Timothy with the addition of "according to the command of God." In Philippians Paul has only "doulo (slave) Cristou Ihsou," like James and Jude. In Romans and Titus Paul has both doulo and apostolo, like II Peter, while in Philemon he uses only desmio (prisoner) Ihsou Cristou. To the elect (eklektoi). Without article (with the article in Matthew 24:22 Matthew 24:24 Matthew 24:31 ) and dative case, "to elect persons" (viewed as a group). Bigg takes eklektoi (old, but rare verbal adjective from eklegw, to pick out, to select) as an adjective describing the next word, "to elect sojourners." That is possible and is like geno eklekton in Matthew 2:9 . See the distinction between klhtoi (called) and eklektoi (chosen) in Matthew 22:14 . Who are sojourners (parepidhmoi). Late double compound adjective (para, epidhmounte, Acts 2:10 , to sojourn by the side of natives), strangers sojourning for a while in a particular place. So in Polybius, papyri, in LXX only twice ( Genesis 23:4 ; 38 or 39 12), in N.T. only here, Genesis 2:11 ; Hebrews 11:13 . The picture in the metaphor here is that heaven is our native country and we are only temporary sojourners here on earth. Of the Dispersion (diaspora). See John 7:35 for literal sense of the word for scattered (from diaspeirw, to scatter abroad, Acts 8:1 ) Jews outside of Palestine, and James 1:1 for the sense here to Jewish Christians, including Gentile Christians (only N T. examples). Note absence of the article, though a definite conception (of the Dispersion). The Christian is a pilgrim on his way to the homeland. These five Roman provinces include what we call Asia Minor north and west of the Taurus mountain range (Hort). Hort suggests that the order here suggests that Silvanus (bearer of the Epistle) was to land in Pontus from the Euxine Sea, proceed through Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, to Bithynia, where he would re-embark for Rome. This, he holds, explains the separation of Pontus and Bithynia, though the same province. Only Galatia and Asia are mentioned elsewhere in the N.T. as having Christian converts, but the N.T. by no means gives a full account of the spread of the Gospel, as can be judged from Colossians 1:6 Colossians 1:23 .

1Pet1:2
According to (kata). Probably to be connected with eklektoi rather than with apostolo in spite of a rather loose arrangement of words and the absence of articles in verses Colossians 1 2 . The foreknowledge (prognwsin). Late substantive (Plutarch, Lucian, papyri) from proginwskw ( Colossians 1:20 ), to know beforehand, only twice in N.T. (here and Acts 2:23 in Peter's sermon). In this Epistle Peter often uses substantives rather than verbs (cf. Romans 8:29 ). Of God the Father (qeou patro). Anarthous again and genitive case. See pathr applied to God also in Romans 1:3 Romans 1:17 as often by Paul ( Romans 1:7 , etc.). Peter here presents the Trinity (God the Father, the Spirit, Jesus Christ). In sanctification of the Spirit (en agiasmwi pneumato). Clearly the Holy Spirit, though anarthrous like qeou patro. Late word from agiazw, to render holy (agio), to consecrate, as in 1 Thessalonians 4:7 . The subjective genitive here, sanctification wrought by the Spirit as in 2 Thessalonians 2:13 (where the Trinity mentioned as here). Unto obedience (ei upakohn). Obedience (from upakouw, to hear under, to hearken) to the Lord Jesus as in 2 Thessalonians 1:22 "to the truth," result of "the sanctification." And sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ (rantismon aimato Ihsou Cristou). Late substantive from rantizw, to sprinkle ( Hebrews 9:13 ), a word used in the LXX of the sacrifices ( Numbers 19:9 Numbers 19:13 Numbers 19:20 , etc.), but not in any non-biblical source so far as known, in N.T. only here and Hebrews 12:24 (of the sprinkling of blood). Reference to the death of Christ on the Cross and to the ratification of the New Covenant by the blood of Christ as given in Hebrews 9:19 ; Hebrews 12:24 with allusion to Exodus 24:3-8 . Paul does not mention this ritual use of the blood of Christ, but Jesus does ( Matthew 26:28 ; Mark 14:24 ). Hence it is not surprising to find the use of it by Peter and the author of Hebrews. Hort suggests that Peter may also have an ulterior reference to the blood of the martyrs as in Revelation 7:14 ; Revelation 12:11 , but only as illustration of what Jesus did for us, not as having any value. The whole Epistle is a commentary upon prognwsi qeou, agiasmo pneumato, aima Cristou (Bigg). Peter is not ashamed of the blood of Christ. Be multiplied (plhqunqeih). First aorist passive optative (volitive) of plhqunw, old verb (from plhqu, fulness), in a wish. So in 2 Peter 1:2 ; Jude 1:2 , but nowhere else in N.T. salutations. Grace and peace (cari kai eirhnh) occur together in 2 Peter 1:2 , in 2 John 1:2 (with eleo), and in all Paul's Epistles (with eleo added in I and II Timothy).

So your "tile" is that God makes holy an unbelieving sinner, and then obedience (inseparable from belief) consequents. Robertson states "to elect sojourners" --- those who are sojourners, are elected; not the elected become sojourners. He connects to Matt22:14, where "many are called but few are chosen". In context, the "clean clothes" is an allegory for sanctification, of which one man accepted the invitation but refused the sanctification.

From verse 2:
hagiasmos:
1) consecration, purification
2) the effect of consecration
.....a) sanctification of heart and life

We are debating two positions:
1. The Spirit sanctifies an unbeliever and then belief/obedience follows (therefore one cannot unsanctify himself)
2. The state of being "chosen" is through sanctification and belief, "belief" being causal to sanctification

Look at this verse:

2Th 2:13 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.

So there is "chosen-through-sanctification-by-the-Spirit", the same concept you see in 1Pet1:1-2, but it's also in conjunction with "THROUGH FAITH". How can we be "chosen from the beginning through faith", before we believed?

The answer is in the same chapter:

1Pet1:20-21: "For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you
21) who through Him are believers in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God."

And that works. Jesus was the predestined-before-time-plan, we who through Him are believers join that plan; "chosen" therfore reflect voluntary accepting of the invitation and receiving His sanctification, fully fitting Matt22:2-14. "Many are called" (everyone), "but few are cosen" (those who come and put on clean clothes).

That also perfectly fits Heb10:29, where a man can have BEEN sanctified once by Jesus' blood, but now He scorns the very blood which once sanctified him. In no way does all this work with "monergistic-sanctification and consequential belief/obedience", but fully fits with "chosen through foreknowledge, consequential sanctification through faith".

With respect, you have not crafted a tile from Scripture which embodies "causal-sanctification and consequential-obedience". We've supported the opposite, "causal-obedience and consequential-sanctification".

[Noeb]

Oh, I bet we're more in agreement than not. If you agree that mankind is fallen, inclined towards sin, and "apart from Jesus can do nothing" (Jn15:5), then we're more in agreement than not...

You'd have to define fallen, tell me why we are inclined towards sin, and explain why you need to use John 15.5 out of the context of the disciples continuing in the NT mission Jesus gave them. A new administration is starting and its no longer the law, but grace. Without Jesus, all they were were Israelites under the law. It has nothing to do with getting saved. You should not just grab a verse and apply it to anything that seems fitting spiritually. That how we end up with so many strange doctrines in the church.

The spirit of the Gospel is that what weak flesh could not do, God did, sending His Son in the likeness of sinful flesh (Rom8:3) to propitiate our sins (1John2:2).

I didn't say spirit of the gospel and find no need for such an expression here.

If men had "inherent goodness", then they wouldn't need Jesus; that's the argument of Pelagius.

Pelagius argued mans innocents at birth and inherent ability to do both good and evil. He was right there.

I don't see any verse that speaks of "heart-change" before belief.

Hmmm, then what is repentance other than a change of mind, which is part of the heart? You have to agree before you believe and the mind is most certainly involved in the process of the heart.

Well, I know what those who believe in it find. The four passages that I call "founding", are Eph1:4-5, Eph1:11, Rom8:29-35, and Rom9:11-21. There are nearly thirty five "secondary" passages, like John6:37 and 39 and 44 and 65, John10:26 and 28, Acts13:48, Romans3:10-12, Rom11:29, 1Cor2:14, 2Cor4:3-4, 2Tim2:25, 1Jn2:19, 1Jn5:1, Jeremiah13:23 and 17:9, Prov16:4, Isaiah6:10 and Mark4:11-12, Ezekiel 36:26-27, and so on. Each of these passages can be shown not to support "Reformed Theology" --- the secondaries conclusively, and the primaries nearly as strongly (the primaries when taken with certain connecting passages are conclusively "non-predestinary"; Romans9:11-21 for instance is the exact same teaching as Gal4:21-31, both allegories about two covenants).

Right. I said I do not find. Others are not reading in context.

[Gadgeteer]

I cannot find scripture that teaches we have a free will before Jesus enters our hearts. I see things like ; we were slaves to sin, & we were dead in our trespasses.
I so far have never seen a dead man choose.

Hi, Tea! Welcome to the boards! :-)

Please look at Eph2:1-8 --- when we were dead in our sins, "children of wrath same as the rest", God made us alive by grace through faith. That is "faith" WHEN we were dead. We could not be "made-alive-through-faith", if faith happens AFTER (or along with) made-alive.

Consider also Romans6:17; we were formerly slaves to sin, but we became obedient from the heart --- it is Romans10:10 that says "with the HEART man believes resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses resulting in salvation". Recognize Romans10:6-10 is quoting Deuteronomy30:11-20; Rom10:6 is Deut30:12, Rm10:8 is Deut30:14. The "word of faith" (which Paul says is the SAME word-of-faith that they were preaching concerning Jesus) is IN our hearts and mouths; if we confess and believe we will be saved, but (Deut30:17) if we turn away and disobey we perish.

The word of faith is in our hearts and mouths; dead men can choose life!
"I have set before you life and death, ...the blessing and the curse; so choose life by loving the Lord your God, by obeying His voice and ...by holding fast to Him." (Deut30:19-20)

Recognize too that "regeneration" does not exist separate from "made-alive"; one cannot be made alive without being regenerated, nor can one be regenerated without having life. Now recognize that Jn5:40 ("...come to Him to HAVE life"), and Jn20:31 ("...and believing, you may have life") --- assert that belief comes before being made alive!

Hebrews 11.....

Noeb is right, Tea. Hebrews11:6 says:

"Without faith it is impossible to please God; for he who COMES to God must believe He is (must come BY faith), and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him."

People come to God BY faith, God does not come to men (and give salvation) before they have faith. Look again at Acts10:34-35; not only is God's position welcoming those who revere Him and desire righteousness, the opposite of that (God selecting men who do NOT believe/revere/seek-righteousness) is partiality that God is NOT.

Make sense?

[Gadgeteer]

You'd have to define fallen, tell me why we are inclined towards sin, and explain why you need to use John 15.5 out of the context of the disciples continuing in the NT mission Jesus gave them.

When Adam and Eve fell, they passed on a "sinful nature"; it is our inclination to sin, we lack the strength to resist. Thus, Jesus, the perfect sacrifice, had to pay the price that we could never achieve.

A new administration is starting and its no longer the law, but grace. Without Jesus, all they were were Israelites under the law. It has nothing to do with getting saved. You should not just grab a verse and apply it to anything that seems fitting spiritually. That how we end up with so many strange doctrines in the church.

John15 is about salvation; anyone IN CHRIST who does not produce good fruit is cut off and cast into the fire.

"Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends.
"You are My friends if you do what I command you." John15:13-14.

I didn't say spirit of the gospel and find no need for such an expression here.

All right, the THEME of the gospel, if you wish. The theme is God did through Jesus what we were too weak to do; He paid the price that we could not.

Pelagius argued man's innocence at birth and inherent ability to do both good and evil. He was right there.

Jesus agrees with you; Lk6:33 says that "sinners do good". But we cannot be righteous before God, else Jesus would not have to have died on the Cross.

I don't see any verse that speaks of "heart-change" before belief.

Hmmm, then what is repentance other than a change of mind, which is part of the heart? You have to agree before you believe and the mind is most certainly involved in the process of the heart.

Understand that Reformed Theology places "born-again/regeneration/heart-change", as prior to and completely apart from belief. Thus, "regeneration" is monergistic and is imposed on a NON-BELIEVER. This is what I don't find in Scripture. All the "change-before-belief" verses (like 2Cor4:3-4, Ezk36:26-27, 1Jn5:1, 1Cor2:14) have been shown NOT to support "regeneration-before-belief".

Right. I said I do not find. Others are not reading in context.

I agree; but our "job" here is to reveal the context, both immediate and distant, and support with Scripture theological positions.

What does not align with Scripture must change; we cannot interpret Scripture to fit preconceived positions (like "all does not mean all in 1Tim2:4", etc.).

:-)

[Redeemed by Grace]

You're still perceiving "obedience" to be the consequence of God's call and the Spirit's sanctification. Is that a valid understanding?

You and I are not Greek scholars; so noting Robertson:

So your "tile" is that God makes holy an unbelieving sinner, and then obedience (inseparable from belief) consequents. Robertson states "to elect sojourners" --- those who are sojourners, are elected; not the elected become sojourners. He connects to Matt22:14, where "many are called but few are chosen". In context, the "clean clothes" is an allegory for sanctification, of which one man accepted the invitation but refused the sanctification.

From verse 2:
hagiasmos:
1) consecration, purification
2) the effect of consecration
.....a) sanctification of heart and life

We are debating two positions:
1. The Spirit sanctifies an unbeliever and then belief/obedience follows (therefore one cannot unsanctify himself)
2. The state of being "chosen" is through sanctification and belief, "belief" being causal to sanctification

Look at this verse:

2Th 2:13 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.

So there is "chosen-through-sanctification-by-the-Spirit", the same concept you see in 1Pet1:1-2, but it's also in conjunction with "THROUGH FAITH". How can we be "chosen from the beginning through faith", before we believed?

The answer is in the same chapter:

1Pet1:20-21: "For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you
21) who through Him are believers in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God."

And that works. Jesus was the predestined-before-time-plan, we who through Him are believers join that plan; "chosen" therfore reflect voluntary accepting of the invitation and receiving His sanctification, fully fitting Matt22:2-14. "Many are called" (everyone), "but few are cosen" (those who come and put on clean clothes).

That also perfectly fits Heb10:29, where a man can have BEEN sanctified once by Jesus' blood, but now He scorns the very blood which once sanctified him. In no way does all this work with "monergistic-sanctification and consequential belief/obedience", but fully fits with "chosen through foreknowledge, consequential sanctification through faith".

With respect, you have not crafted a tile from Scripture which embodies "causal-sanctification and consequential-obedience". We've supported the opposite, "causal-obedience and consequential-sanctification".

I know you like being the leader of the conversation and all, but it's really a simple question...



1 Peter 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen 2 according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure.

No need for additives or fillers.... 100% natural statement...Would you agree that Peter is declaring that God calls believers by the sanctifying work of the Spirit to obedience in Jesus Christ?

[Gadgeteer]

I know you like being the leader of the conversation and all...

I was thinkin' the same about you!

but it's really a simple question...


1 Peter 1:1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen 2 according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure.

No need for additives or fillers.... 100% natural statement...Would you agree that Peter is declaring that God calls believers by the sanctifying work of the Spirit to obedience in Jesus Christ?

No. Clearly stated, you propose that the Spirit SANCTIFICES an UNBELIEVER, and then through that action a person is called (irresistibly) to obedience in Christ. This is the "tile" you wish to lay down first, and get me to agree to. The concept of "by the sanctifying work of the Spirit" does NOT imply "apart-from/prior-to faith".

"Obedience" (Heb5:9) is interchangeable in the scheme of salvation with "faith/belief" (Rom3:26). He who believes, obeys; he who obeys, believes. God's position is to respond to "faith/belief/obedience", blatant in those two verses just cited. So even if you place "belief" before "obey" (thus constructing a platform of "Eternal Security", that is --- through belief the Spirit causes obedience by His sanctification), if obedience is the same as belief then he who ceases to believe, ceases to obey. Note that Hebrews4:11 warns us not to fall and fail to enter God's kingdom by imitating their disobedience and unbelief.

Peter is the last person to endorse any kind of OSAS, especially "Predestined-Salvation". Take Peter's second letter:

In chapter 1 Peter admonishes diligent to make our calling and election firm/steadfast, so that we are admitted into the very gates of God's kingdom.

In chapter 2, he warns against those who have been saved, but are enticed by the false teachers back into defilements and become worse than before they were saved; better to have never KNOWN the way of righteousnes, than having known to have turned away from the holy comomandment delivered to them.

In chapter 3 he warns us to be diligent to be found spotless and blameless, guard ourselves against being deceived away from Jesus by unprincipled men.

2Pet1:5-11, 2Pet2:18 & 20-22, 2Pet3:14 & 17.

If Peter had meant "sovereign monergistic sanctification and consequential faith" in 1:1:1-2, that would be a blatant contradiction with all of his second letter...



Now, my turn to ask a question of you --- in Matt22:2-14, is the concept of "chosen/elect" conveyed in any sense apart from or prior to "belief/receiving"? It's a simple yes/no question.

[Redeemed by Grace]

I was thinkin' the same about you! No. Clearly stated, you propose that the Spirit SANCTIFICES an UNBELIEVER, and then through that action a person is called (irresistibly) to obedience in Christ. This is the "tile" you wish to lay down first, and get me to agree to. The concept of "by the sanctifying work of the Spirit" does NOT imply "apart-from/prior-to faith".

"Obedience" (Heb5:9) is interchangeable in the scheme of salvation with "faith/belief" (Rom3:26). He who believes, obeys; he who obeys, believes. God's position is to respond to "faith/belief/obedience", blatant in those two verses just cited. So even if you place "belief" before "obey" (thus constructing a platform of "Eternal Security", that is --- through belief the Spirit causes obedience by His sanctification), if obedience is the same as belief then he who ceases to believe, ceases to obey. Note that Hebrews4:11 warns us not to fall and fail to enter God's kingdom by imitating their disobedience and unbelief.

Peter is the last person to endorse any kind of OSAS, especially "Predestined-Salvation". Take Peter's second letter:

In chapter 1 Peter admonishes diligent to make our calling and election firm/steadfast, so that we are admitted into the very gates of God's kingdom.

In chapter 2, he warns against those who have been saved, but are enticed by the false teachers back into defilements and become worse than before they were saved; better to have never KNOWN the way of righteousnes, than having known to have turned away from the holy comomandment delivered to them.

In chapter 3 he warns us to be diligent to be found spotless and blameless, guard ourselves against being deceived away from Jesus by unprincipled men.

2Pet1:5-11, 2Pet2:18 & 20-22, 2Pet3:14 & 17.

If Peter had meant "sovereign monergistic sanctification and consequential faith" in 1:1:1-2, that would be a blatant contradiction with all of his second letter...



Now, my turn to ask a question of you --- in Matt22:2-14, is the concept of "chosen/elect" conveyed in any sense apart from or prior to "belief/receiving"? It's a simple yes/no question.

In study we need to approach the text in it's most natural and literal sense...


There are tiles for both 'sides' if we come to the text with a predisposition that there are sides... so all I'm asking is this; what is Peter declaring in his opening statement? For if we read the text and take it at for what is says, does Peter preach the gospel and declare that God calls believers by the sanctifying work of the Spirit to obedience in Jesus Christ?

That's what I read. Now if we agree that everything in God's word is truth, then this is one truth. Wouldn't it be best if we could line up as many tiles as we can to see how they relate instead of sorting out one type and declaring it better than the other type? For you have been giving your 'defense' with the scriptures you have been using all through out this thread for the one type of tile and now I'm offering another point for consideration. So all I'm asking is do we agree or disagree that Peter is declaring that God calls believers by the sanctifying work of the Spirit to obedience in Jesus Christ?

Shall I put you down as a no, it doesn't mean what it says before I introduce another passage for tile consideration?