PDA

View Full Version : Why Jesus did not come to save everyone



John Zain
Jan 15th 2012, 01:11 PM
Why everyone is not invited to salvation

In case you missed it, Paul spent 17 years total (Ephesians 1 and 2) in the desert places ...
being trained by the Lord in spiritual Truth before really hooking up with the church at Jerusalem.

He says that man has no excuse for not recognizing God: in nature, in the heavens, and in his conscience.
I.E. Man has no excuse for not seeing there is a Creator God, and for not wanting to follow and please Him.

He also says that natural man is at enmity with (an enemy of) God.

He also says that natural man who is perishing spiritually sees the message of the cross (the gospel) as “foolishness”.
Now, just what does this have to do with any kind of free will? Does natural man choose to see it as foolishness?

Others have said that it takes a miracle for man to want to follow God vs. following his own fallen nature.

I know there are plenty of verses which say that man has a choice.
But, the Lord sees man's heart ... and He knows who He desires to save.
All of those “anyone”s who can believe the foolish gospel simply have been elected by God to believe.

All men are not created the same ... witness how Paul quotes Isaiah re: the potter and the clay.
Many verses tell us exactly the attributes of those whom the Lord desires to have with Him in heaven.
God saw Pharaoh's hardened heart and He knew what choices Pharaoh would make, so He merely hardened it further.

But, those who actually choose God ... have been given the ability, desire, etc. by the Lord.
Also, man appearing to have the freedom to choose warrants evangelists going to the 4 corners of the earth.
And the Lord Himself personally revealed to me the 2 reasons why He insists on the lost being evangelized:
(1) The elect must hear the gospel in order for them to respond to it. (Note: this is God's plan of salvation.)
(2) The non-elect must hear the gospel so they cannot complain at the Judgment that they never heard the gospel.

Re (1): The illusion that man appears to be free to choose the gospel hides the ugly Truth (to us)
that it is God who chooses. Remember, Jesus said that He chose us and not the other way around.

But THE KEY to this whole deal is:
(a) Man has a terribly-flawed human sin nature, which destines him to be separated from God.
(b) God, therefore, owes no man anything, which is another ugly Truth (to us).
(c) God has the authority to do whatever He damn well pleases. Sorry for putting it so bluntly.

All in all, to me, the evidence weighs quite heavily on the side of foreknowledge, predestination, election, etc.

jayne
Jan 15th 2012, 01:52 PM
In case you missed it, Paul spent 14 years in the desert places (see Acts) ...
being trained by the Lord in spiritual Truth before really hooking up with the church at Jerusalem.



Brother, I didn't miss it. It is Galatians, not Acts. It was three years (possibly less), not 14. It says a general "Arabia", not "desert". And it doesn't say that Paul was being trained by the Lord is spiritual Truth. In fact, it doesn't say anything about what he did there.


Galatian 1:13-18

For you have heard about my former way of life in Judaism: I persecuted God’s church to an extreme degree and tried to destroy it. I advanced in Judaism beyond many contemporaries among my people, because I was extremely zealous for the traditions of my ancestors. But when God, who from my birth set me apart and called me by His grace, was pleased to reveal His Son in me, so that I could preach Him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone. I did not go up to Jerusalem to those who had become apostles before me; instead I went to Arabia and came back to Damascus.

Then after three years I did go up to Jerusalem to get to know Cephas, and I stayed with him 15 days. But I didn’t see any of the other apostles except James, the Lord’s brother. Now I am not lying in what I write to you. God is my witness.

Indueseason
Jan 15th 2012, 02:03 PM
But THE KEY to this whole deal is:
(a) Man has a terribly-flawed human sin nature, which destines him to be separated from God.
(b) God, therefore, owes no man anything, which is another ugly Truth (to us).
(c) God has the authority to do whatever He damn well pleases. Sorry for putting it so bluntly.


And yet He loved us and gave His Son to save mankind, so that anyone who believes in Him will be saved! :pp

blessings to you :hug:

Bandit
Jan 15th 2012, 04:23 PM
Why everyone is not invited to salvation

...

Re (1): The illusion that man appears to be free to choose the gospel hides the ugly Truth (to us)
that it is God who chooses. Remember, Jesus said that He chose us and not the other way around.

But THE KEY to this whole deal is:
(a) Man has a terribly-flawed human sin nature, which destines him to be separated from God.
(b) God, therefore, owes no man anything, which is another ugly Truth (to us).
(c) God has the authority to do whatever He damn well pleases. Sorry for putting it so bluntly.

All in all, to me, the evidence weighs quite heavily on the side of foreknowledge, predestination, election, etc.

Hello John Zain,

First, I would have used the word "darn" (a more polite form of bluntness, if you will). Second, I also agree with evidence for "foreknowledge, predestination, election, etc," as you put it, but the real question is what are the different ways these things can be understood. I think you are arguing for a particular interpretation of these things, but perhaps the interpretation you assume is not the only possible one. So, although I disagree with much in your post, it is your interpretation of these things rather than the things themself that I find objectionable.

Watchman
Jan 15th 2012, 05:18 PM
...I also agree with evidence for "foreknowledge, predestination, election, etc," as you put it, but the real question is what are the different ways these things can be understood. I think you are arguing for a particular interpretation of these things, but perhaps the interpretation you assume is not the only possible one.
Hi Bandit,

What might some other interpretations be? Thanks.

W :)

GitRDunn
Jan 15th 2012, 05:44 PM
John 3:16 (NIV)
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

I would write more, but I think that verse says it all.

John Zain
Jan 15th 2012, 06:06 PM
John 3:16 (NIV)
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

I would write more, but I think that verse says it all.
The point is that all of the "whosoever"s are God's elect.
If you happen to be lucky enough to believe, you are one of the elect.

John Zain
Jan 15th 2012, 06:10 PM
Brother, I didn't miss it. It is Galatians, not Acts. It was three years (possibly less), not 14. It says a general "Arabia", not "desert". And it doesn't say that Paul was being trained by the Lord is spiritual Truth. In fact, it doesn't say anything about what he did there.
'Tis necessary to read a bit further ... try Galatians 2:1.
After the 3 years, he wasn't much involved, but his ministry really began after the 14 years.

Bandit
Jan 15th 2012, 06:22 PM
...I also agree with evidence for "foreknowledge, predestination, election, etc," as you put it, but the real question is what are the different ways these things can be understood. I think you are arguing for a particular interpretation of these things, but perhaps the interpretation you assume is not the only possible one.


Hi Bandit,

What might some other interpretations be? Thanks.

W :)

Hi Watchman,

Well, this topic usually splinters pretty quickly, but there are two general viewpoints, one is called 'individual election/predestination' and the other is called 'corporate election/predestination'. I guess it would be easiest explained through an analogy.

Let's say that God, through a number of prophets, tells the people living on an island that the island is going to explode and sink into the sea, but that He [God] has provided a ship at a certain dock which will carry to safety anyone who chooses to board it. Now in this story, God has not elected to save any particular person, but rather He has elected to save any and all who come aboard (and stay aboard). So, in this story, who did God 'foreknow' for salvation? It was not any particular individual, per say, but rather He foreknew their salvation in a corporate sense - He foreknew the group as a whole. And who did He predestine to salvation? Was it not the same group? And who did He elect to save? Was it not the same group?

And think about this. Let's say that while the ship is in dock, taking on passengers, that one of the prophets named Paul comes into one of the boarding rooms and says the the crowd in that room, "God has predestined you to salvation; He has elected to save you and bring you to Himself; He chose to save you from the very foundation of the world." Now think about this very carefully, what has this Paul just said which conflicts with the story as I outlined above? I hope you can see that his words in no way conflict with the outline I have given. And would it not be a mistake to interpret Paul as having said that God chose/elected/predestined people in an individual sense? I hope you can see that it would be.

The offer to be saved is truely open to all, God has chosen to save a certain group, and these are predestined to salvation, and Paul can say these words to any subset (even a single individual on the boat) without compromising or conflicting the general corporate nature of the salvation process.

I hope this helps, but as I said, this topic splinters quickly. Get what you can before it is too late.

Bandit

jayne
Jan 15th 2012, 06:37 PM
'Tis necessary to read a bit further ... try Galatians 2:1.
After the 3 years, he wasn't much involved, but his ministry really began after the 14 years.

Brother, it does say in Galatians 1:21-24 (the passage between the one I cited and the one you mention above) that Paul was indeed involved. It says he was involved to the point that people were praising God because of his (Paul's) preaching.

With that being said, what do you (as a Calvinist) do with Cain. God warned him that sin was crouching at the door and God told Cain that if he would do right that he would be accepted. Cain chose not to do right.

And the rich young ruler.

Jesus told him what to do. Jesus taught him - through the commandments that he claimed to have obeyed - that it wasn't about a "to-do" list. The rich young ruler rejected Jesus' personal teaching on how to have eternal life.

Was God lying to Cain? Jesus to the rich young ruler? Were God and Jesus just toying with these men - not really caring about them because they hated them before the foundation of the world?

John Zain
Jan 15th 2012, 06:42 PM
Greetings, Bandit ...

Let's consider that since God is willing to create one person (or nation) for destruction
it makes sense that He is also willing to create many persons (or nations) for destruction.
(Ref. Paul's quoting of Isaiah's "the potter and the clay" explanation)

John Zain
Jan 15th 2012, 07:03 PM
... what do you (as a Calvinist) do with Cain. God warned him that sin was crouching at the door
and God told Cain that if he would do right that he would be accepted. Cain chose not to do right.
And the rich young ruler. Jesus told him what to do. Jesus taught him - through the commandments
that he claimed to have obeyed - that it wasn't about a "to-do" list. The rich young ruler rejected
Jesus' personal teaching on how to have eternal life.
Was God lying to Cain? Jesus to the rich young ruler? Were God and Jesus just toying with these men -
not really caring about them because they hated them before the foundation of the world?
Re: Cain ... I don't see salvation being offered in the OT at all to anyone.
The blood of animals was applied for several other reasons.
The OT was to prove that man is a hopeless sinner, and to prophesy the Messiah/Savior/Redeemer.

Re: the rich young ruler ... yup, it's not about works, it's about election.

I've already explained that God can make it look like a free-will salvation
(without lying to anyone) so He doesn't look so bad, and etc.

jayne
Jan 15th 2012, 07:10 PM
My last question...

....what do you think that God meant when He told Cain that if he would do what He (God) said that Cain would be "accepted"?

paidforinfull
Jan 15th 2012, 07:26 PM
I've already explained that God can make it look like a free-will salvation
(without lying to anyone) so He doesn't look so bad, and etc.

Why on earth would God do anything devious in order to make Himself look 'not so bad'?
That is not God's way, nor is it His character.

GitRDunn
Jan 15th 2012, 07:33 PM
...I also agree with evidence for "foreknowledge, predestination, election, etc," as you put it, but the real question is what are the different ways these things can be understood. I think you are arguing for a particular interpretation of these things, but perhaps the interpretation you assume is not the only possible one.



Hi Watchman,

Well, this topic usually splinters pretty quickly, but there are two general viewpoints, one is called 'individual election/predestination' and the other is called 'corporate election/predestination'. I guess it would be easiest explained through an analogy.

Let's say that God, through a number of prophets, tells the people living on an island that the island is going to explode and sink into the sea, but that He [God] has provided a ship at a certain dock which will carry to safety anyone who chooses to board it. Now in this story, God has not elected to save any particular person, but rather He has elected to save any and all who come aboard (and stay aboard). So, in this story, who did God 'foreknow' for salvation? It was not any particular individual, per say, but rather He foreknew their salvation in a corporate sense - He foreknew the group as a whole. And who did He predestine to salvation? Was it not the same group? And who did He elect to save? Was it not the same group?

And think about this. Let's say that while the ship is in dock, taking on passengers, that one of the prophets named Paul comes into one of the boarding rooms and says the the crowd in that room, "God has predestined you to salvation; He has elected to save you and bring you to Himself; He chose to save you from the very foundation of the world." Now think about this very carefully, what has this Paul just said which conflicts with the story as I outlined above? I hope you can see that his words in no way conflict with the outline I have given. And would it not be a mistake to interpret Paul as having said that God chose/elected/predestined people in an individual sense? I hope you can see that it would be.

The offer to be saved is truely open to all, God has chosen to save a certain group, and these are predestined to salvation, and Paul can say these words to any subset (even a single individual on the boat) without compromising or conflicting the general corporate nature of the salvation process.

I hope this helps, but as I said, this topic splinters quickly. Get what you can before it is too late.

Bandit
I have to agree with your explanation of who is elected. Nice analogy too.

Bandit
Jan 15th 2012, 07:37 PM
Greetings, Bandit ...

Let's consider that since God is willing to create one person (or nation) for destruction
it makes sense that He is also willing to create many persons (or nations) for destruction.
(Ref. Paul's quoting of Isaiah's "the potter and the clay" explanation)

Did you mean Jeremiah?

Jemand
Jan 15th 2012, 08:07 PM
[

But THE KEY to this whole deal is:
(a) Man has a terribly-flawed human sin nature, which destines him to be separated from God.
(b) God, therefore, owes no man anything, which is another ugly Truth (to us).
(c) God has the authority to do whatever He damn well pleases. Sorry for putting it so bluntly.

All in all, to me, the evidence weighs quite heavily on the side of foreknowledge, predestination, election, etc.[/FONT][/COLOR]

Your point (a) is incorrect. The Bible neither says nor implies that man has a “terribly-flawed human sin nature” or any other kind of a sin nature.

In first-century Hellenistic (the cultural background of the New Testament) thought, the σαρχ (flesh) is the material part of man responsible for the desire of such things as food, drink, physical comfort, sex, etc. Therefore, Paul used the word σαρχ (flesh) to express that concept, sometimes with emphasis on the material itself, and sometimes with emphasis on the desires for which it is responsible. When these desires are contrary to the desires of God for the man, we find Paul contrasting the flesh with the Spirit, the two often-opposing sources of desire. When these desires were contrary to the desires of the intellect, the rational part of man, the νους (mind), we find Paul contrasting the flesh with the mind and its desires (Rom. 7:25).

Christ, in His humanity, shared this material part of man with all men (Rom. 1:3, 8:3), but He never yielded to the desires for which it is responsible. Paul taught that Christians are to identify with Christ through identifying with His death and resurrection, and to yield as Christ did, not to the desires of the flesh that result in sin, but to the desires of the Spirit that result in righteousness.

The fleshly man is the man who allows the desires of the flesh to rule his daily life; the spiritual man is the man who allows the Holy Spirit to rule his daily life, he is the man who is walking by the Spirit—and this man will not carry out the desire of the flesh, and hence he will not sin (Gal. 5:16).

Moreover, we as Christians are commanded to walk by the Spirit. Those Christians who consistently obey that command consistently live lives free from sin. Those Christians who do not consistently obey that command live lives in which sin is a daily occurrence, and many of them believe that such a life is the norm for a Christian—indeed, they do not believe that an alternative even exists.

Your point (b) is incorrect because it depends upon point (a) being correct, which it is not.

Your point (c) is incorrect because God, in accord with his sovereign will at the time, created man with a free will, thereby relinquishing some of his sovereignty. This was the view of Judaism during the centuries in which the Old Testament canonical and deuterocanonical books were written, and it was the view of the Church until the 16th Century. I find it rather difficult to believe that the O.T. and N.T. canonical books, and the O.T. deuterocanonical books, were written so poorly that the Church was unable to understand them until the 16th century.


Gen. 1:26. Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”
27. God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

Adam, in the garden, according to the Scriptures, had the ability to choose to do good or evil, to choose to serve Satan or to serve God.

Gen. 3:1. Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said to the woman, “Indeed, has God said, ‘You shall not eat from any tree of the garden’?”
2. The woman said to the serpent, “From the fruit of the trees of the garden we may eat;
3. but from the fruit of the tree which is in the middle of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat from it or touch it, or you will die.’ “
4. The serpent said to the woman, “You surely will not die!
5. “For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”
6. When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate.

Adam sinned, and there were consequences,

Gen. 3:7. Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings.
8. They heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden.
9. Then the LORD God called to the man, and said to him, “Where are you?”
10. He said, “I heard the sound of You in the garden, and I was afraid because I was naked; so I hid myself.”
11. And He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?”
12. The man said, “The woman whom You gave to be with me, she gave me from the tree, and I ate.”
13. Then the LORD God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?” And the woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”
14. The LORD God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this, Cursed are you more than all cattle, And more than every beast of the field; On your belly you will go, And dust you will eat All the days of your life;
15. And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel.”
16. To the woman He said, “I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain you will bring forth children; Yet your desire will be for your husband, And he will rule over you.”
17. Then to Adam He said, “Because you have listened to the voice of your wife, and have eaten from the tree about which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat from it’; Cursed is the ground because of you; In toil you will eat of it All the days of your life.
18. “Both thorns and thistles it shall grow for you; And you will eat the plants of the field;
19. By the sweat of your face You will eat bread, Till you return to the ground, Because from it you were taken; For you are dust, And to dust you shall return.”
20. Now the man called his wife's name Eve, because she was the mother of all the living.
21. The LORD God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife, and clothed them.
22. Then the LORD God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, he might stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever”—
23. therefore the LORD God sent him out from the garden of Eden, to cultivate the ground from which he was taken.
24. So He drove the man out; and at the east of the garden of Eden He stationed the cherubim and the flaming sword which turned every direction to guard the way to the tree of life.

Was one of the consequences of Adam’s sin the loss of his free will? Genesis does not say that it was.

But you ask, “How about Gen. 6:5 and 8:21,

6:5. Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

8:21. The LORD smelled the soothing aroma; and the LORD said to Himself, “I will never again curse the ground on account of man, for the intent of man's heart is evil from his youth; and I will never again destroy every living thing, as I have done.”

These verses teach that man became very evil, but they do not tell us how or why.


How about the rest of the Hexateuch (Genesis – Joshua, studied today by Old Testament scholars as a literary unit)? No, not so much as a hint that Adam lost his free will when he sinned in the garden. Indeed, the Hexateuch teaches us that man retained his ability to choose to do good or evil, and to choose to serve Satan or to serve God,

Deut. 30:19. “I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants,
20. by loving the LORD your God, by obeying His voice, and by holding fast to Him; for this is your life and the length of your days, that you may live in the land which the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give them.”

Joshua 24: 14. “Now, therefore, fear the LORD and serve Him in sincerity and truth; and put away the gods which your fathers served beyond the River and in Egypt, and serve the LORD.”

Later in the Scriptures, however, we do find that in two, isolated cases, God intervened and altered the heart of an individual, thereby influencing their will,

Prov. 21:1. The king's heart is like channels of water in the hand of the LORD; He turns it wherever He wishes.

Ex. 9:12. And the LORD hardened Pharaoh's heart, and he did not listen to them, just as the LORD had spoken to Moses.

Rom. 9:17. For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, “FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH.”
18. So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.

Nonetheless, it is very clear that, from the point of view of Judeo-Christian theology during the Biblical period, man has a free will to choose to do good or evil, to choose to serve Satan or to serve God.

Ecclesiasticus 15:14 Hee himselfe made man from the beginning, and left him in the hand of his counsell,
15 If thou wilt, to keepe the Commandements, and to performe acceptable faithfulnesse.
16 He hath set fire and water before thee: stretch forth thy hand vnto whether thou wilt.
17 Before man is life and death, and whether him liketh shalbe giuen him.
18 For the wisedome of the Lord is great, and he is mighty in power, and beholdeth all things,
19 And his eyes are vpon them that feare him, & hee knoweth euery worke of man.
20 Hee hath commanded no man to do wickedly, neither hath he giuen any man license to sinne. (Apocrypha, King James Version, 1611)

Ecclesiasticus 15:14. It was he who created humankind in the beginning,
and he left them in the power of their own free choice.
15. If you choose, you can keep the commandments,
and to act faithfully is a matter of your own choice.
16. He has placed before you fire and water;
stretch out your hand for whichever you choose.
17. Before each person are life and death,
and whichever one chooses will be given.
18. For great is the wisdom of the Lord;
he is mighty in power and sees everything;
19. his eyes are on those who fear him,
and he knows every human action.
20. He has not commanded anyone to be wicked,
and he has not given anyone permission to sin. (Apocrypha, New Revised Standard Version)


Was one of the consequences of Adam’s sin the loss of man’s free will? No, God “left them in the power of their own free choice.”

(All quotations are from the NASB, 1995, unless otherwise noted)

John Zain
Jan 15th 2012, 08:17 PM
Your point (a) is incorrect.
The Bible neither says nor implies that man has a “terribly-flawed human sin nature” or any other kind of a sin nature.
Scriptural proof of man's sin nature is presented here >>>>> http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/229446-Researching-the-big-quot-original-sin-quot-fiasco?highlight=fiasco

Kahtar
Jan 15th 2012, 08:21 PM
But, those who actually choose God ... have been given the ability, desire, etc. by the Lord.
Also, man appearing to have the freedom to choose warrants evangelists going to the 4 corners of the earth.
And the Lord Himself personally revealed to me the 2 reasons why He insists on the lost being evangelized:
(1) The elect must hear the gospel in order for them to respond to it. (Note: this is God's plan of salvation.)
(2) The non-elect must hear the gospel so they cannot complain at the Judgment that they never heard the gospel.
But with your understanding, the 'non-elect' can complain, legitimately, that while they were offered the chance to hear the gospel, they were not offered the chance to accept it, because God decided beforehand to simply destroy them instead of save them. I'd certainly complain were I in that position. It kinda renders the 'hear the gospel so they cannot complain' thing moot, don't ya think?

Re: Cain ... I don't see salvation being offered in the OT at all to anyone.:hmm::cool:

John Zain
Jan 15th 2012, 08:28 PM
But with your understanding, the 'non-elect' can complain, legitimately, that while they were offered the chance to hear the gospel, they were not offered the chance to accept it, because God decided beforehand to simply destroy them instead of save them. I'd certainly complain were I in that position. It kinda renders the 'hear the gospel so they cannot complain' thing moot, don't ya think?
No, not at all ... most of the non-elect will have no idea WHY they don't believe the gospel.
Extra: 2 people (whom I trust) have told me that they have tried very hard to believe, but simply cannot.

Jemand
Jan 15th 2012, 08:35 PM
John 3:16 (NIV)
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

I would write more, but I think that verse says it all.


The point is that all of the "whosoever"s are God's elect.
If you happen to be lucky enough to believe, you are one of the elect.

If that is what John 3:16 really means, why is it that no one understood it to mean that until the 16th century when a Roman Catholic dissident introduced into the Church five points of theology that hitherto had never been conceived?

The Bible does not teach that we are saved if we “happen to be lucky enough to believe;” The Bible says,

Mark 1:14. Now after John had been taken into custody, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God,
15. and saying, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel." (NASB, 1995)

If we open up our Greek New Testaments, we see that in verse 15 the Greek words translated as ‘repent’ and ‘believe’ are both in the imperative mood, signifying a choice of repenting and believing, or refusing to do so.

Jemand
Jan 15th 2012, 08:39 PM
Scriptural proof of man's sin nature is presented here >>>>> http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/229446-Researching-the-big-quot-original-sin-quot-fiasco?highlight=fiasco

No, it is not! It is impossible to prove that which is not true.

-SEEKING-
Jan 15th 2012, 09:55 PM
John 3:16 (NIV)
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

I would write more, but I think that verse says it all.

Here's a little visual to go along with your scripture here.


http://youtu.be/5beoRa_HR8o

Bandit
Jan 15th 2012, 11:25 PM
I have to agree with your explanation of who is elected. Nice analogy too.

Thanks, GitRDunn. I have often tried to explain the corporate election perspective, but have not always succeeded. If this analogy helps, then I am glad. At least I hope it gives people something to think about.

Bandit

Bandit
Jan 15th 2012, 11:29 PM
Scriptural proof of man's sin nature is presented here >>>>> http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/229446-Researching-the-big-quot-original-sin-quot-fiasco?highlight=fiasco

Actually, all you do here John is quote a number of passages with the assumption that they say what you assume them to say. What is needed is a thorough discussion of possible ways to interpret these passages.

Bandit
Jan 15th 2012, 11:41 PM
No, not at all ... most of the non-elect will have no idea WHY they don't believe the gospel.
Extra: 2 people (whom I trust) have told me that they have tried very hard to believe, but simply cannot.

So, is it you're assumption that what these two unbelievers say verifies your whole interpretation of scripture? Or, in other words, are you saying that the opinions of a fellow believer can be outweighed by that of two non-believers?

Watchman
Jan 15th 2012, 11:50 PM
Actually, all you do here John is quote a number of passages with the assumption that they say what you assume them to say. What is needed is a thorough discussion of possible ways to interpret these passages.
Which is precisely why I asked for alternative interpretations before. Anyone can make an assertion...

Bandit
Jan 15th 2012, 11:59 PM
Which is precisely why I asked for alternative interpretations before. Anyone can make an assertion...

So, did you get any discussion concerning interpretation? (I did not look to see what thread this came from - just looked at the referenced post - and I did not follow it to see what was discussed in that thread.) You know, we could always discuss one or two of those passages here, like the first one in his referenced post. I am not sure I would have time to discuss each one though. Perhaps, if you are still interested, you could pick out one or two for discussion. I'm normally very busy during the week, but I could try to jump in every evening for a post or two.

Bandit

Watchman
Jan 16th 2012, 12:16 AM
So, did you get any discussion concerning interpretation? (I did not look to see what thread this came from - just looked at the referenced post - and I did not follow it to see what was discussed in that thread.) You know, we could always discuss one or two of those passages here, like the first one in his referenced post. I am not sure I would have time to discuss each one though. Perhaps, if you are still interested, you could pick out one or two for discussion. I'm normally very busy during the week, but I could try to jump in every evening for a post or two.

Bandit
I understand busy! I used to have several hours a day to study with my sisters and brothers online...alas, no longer!

John 3:16 For God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance.

Belief requires a choice. Repentance requires a choice. One must choose between darkness and light...and it is much easier to remain in darkness, because we are accustomed to that before we come to Christ. One must choose a change of heart, mind, and direction...else they will continue in the same path. This is simply another way of stating God's law of inertia, which is the tendency of an object to resist a change in motion. Two forces must act on us before we can believe and repent: we must be drawn by Father, and we must choose to accept His drawing.

W :)

Bandit
Jan 16th 2012, 01:29 AM
... Two forces must act on us before we can believe and repent: we must be drawn by Father, and we must choose to accept His drawing.

W :)

Yes, I agree with a synergistic effort.

RevLogos
Jan 16th 2012, 04:32 AM
With that being said, what do you (as a Calvinist) do with Cain. God warned him that sin was crouching at the door and God told Cain that if he would do right that he would be accepted. Cain chose not to do right.



I wonder also how would a Calvinist handle the case of Jezebel?

In Rev 2 Jesus is speaking to the Church in Thyatira, warning them of Jezebel. He says this:

Rev 2:20 Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols.
Rev 2:21 I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling.
Rev 2:22 So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. [NIV]

Jezebel is given time to repent. It is her choice. It is Jezebel who is unwilling. But God appears quite willing to forgive her if she chooses that path. In fact, God is giving everyone who has fallen for her time to repent. None of this would make any sense to me if they didn't have the free will to choose.

RevLogos
Jan 16th 2012, 04:57 AM
(b) God, therefore, owes no man anything, which is another ugly Truth (to us).


There is some truth in this. I'd remove the "therefore" because it stands on it's own. And I'd remove the "ugly truth" because there is no ugliness in the truth.

The fact is, God owes man nothing. Neither does God need Man in any way. God could speak this universe out of existence as fast as He spoke it into existence and not be in the slightest way diminished.

So, why does God bother with any of us at all?

The only answer is love.

What father does not love all his children? What father does not want the best for his children? What father would treat his children like some sort of lottery game, where some are loved and some are destroyed based on the father's whim?

But it is in the nature of love that it is a two way street. There are some who reject the love of the father; they are on their own.

What was the point of the parable of the prodigal son? Did the son choose to leave his father, or did the father kick his son out into the street? And when the son repents and returns, what is the loving father's response? Would the parable have any meaning if the son had no choice?

MoreMercy
Jan 16th 2012, 05:23 AM
Sure God has always had His elect on the earth, to do His will on the earth.
They/the elect still have a free will....look at old testament Jonah.

When it comes to the: "who soever will"
Everyone is called to His sacrifice for them, everyone, period !
Jesus spoke parables to hide the free ticket from some, He says this not me.
He hid it because He knows their hearts as individuals not as a group such as the "elect" or even the "non-elect" or any other group, but as individuals...

Jesus's parable of the sower and the seeds the sower cast on different types of soil explains the same principle.

As for people around us today who are given the same opportunity to partake in the benefits and blessings of His sacrifice for us the "who soever wills" I agree some will never get it, but it is not for them to declare nor for us to declare but, what it boils down to is is the Holy Spirit GRIEVED by them/us.
If He is grieved then there is no room for Him/the Holy Spirit to amplify the Truth, Light Love of God to or through them. Hence the many are called but few are chosen.


Father bless and have mercy on us.

Brother Mark
Jan 16th 2012, 12:42 PM
Jesus spoke parables to hide the free ticket from some, He says this not me.

He spoke in parables to hide the truth from those who had blasphemed the Holy Spirit.

MoreMercy
Jan 16th 2012, 03:04 PM
He spoke in parables to hide the truth from those who had blasphemed the Holy Spirit.

Hi Mark, good to see and share with you again,
I totally agree that He will not share with blasphemers of His Spirit.

But for everyone including myself who has had or still has difficulty understanding one or more of His parables and/or metaphors, it is because His Holy Spirit is "grieve" by something in the life lived of the one who is currently lacking or seeking said understanding of His word.

When you, me or anyone else lacks understanding of His words,it may be because of blasphemy of His Spirit... But it is definitely not the exclusive reason.

But, what is exclusively the reason for lack of understanding, is His Spirit is grieved by the life lived of the individual lacking understanding of His words.
The remedy for the that case is:
Confess, repent and show reverence of Him by seeking Him diligently in His word and in patiently waiting prayer.

The remedy for the blasphemy case is:
It is out of our hands and is now, totally dependent upon His unfathomable hands of mercy freely given/not earned, shown toward His creation and creatures.



Father bless and have mercy on us.

Brother Mark
Jan 16th 2012, 03:14 PM
But for everyone including myself who has had or still has difficulty understanding one or more of His parable and/or metaphors, it is because His Holy Spirit is "grieve" by something in the life lived of the one who is currently lacking or seeking said understanding of His word.

Or perhaps we have not grown enough yet to have God explain it to us. I can't find the verse right now, but there's a scripture where Jesus told his disciples "There are things I long to tell you but you are not yet ready for them."

MoreMercy
Jan 16th 2012, 03:19 PM
Or perhaps we have not grown enough yet to have God explain it to us. I can't find the verse right now, but there's a scripture where Jesus told his disciples "There are things I long to tell you but you are not yet ready for them."
Analyzed It boils down to the same thing:
"There is still something in our life lived that grieves His Holy Spirit".

Yeah, also analyzed I am saying: His hand picked disciples/the 12, still grieved and or grieve His Spirit at times in their walk/life lived.
The only flesh man who did not is : Emanuel.


Father bless and have mercy on us.

Brother Mark
Jan 16th 2012, 03:34 PM
Analyzed It boils down to the same thing:
"There is still something in our life lived that grieves His Holy Spirit".

Not necessarily. For instance, I am not grieved when a 6 month old child soils his diapers. I am grieved if a 6 year old does so. I am not grieved when a 2 year old doesn't fully understand sharing. I am grieved when a 40 year old does not.

So as we walk with the Lord, he teaches us 1 step at a time. He doesn't always teach us step 42 until we understand step 41. Sometimes he shows us step 1 through 10. Thing is, he is working with us. He is not grieved because we are on step 3 in our journey until we refuse to take step 3. And while he is working with us on step 3, he may not answer anything about step 15. It's not that he is grieved with us being at step 3, He just knows we are not yet ready.

For instance, when God brought Israel out of Egypt, he led them south to avoid war. He said there hearts were not yet ready for war. Approximately 2 years or so later he led them to war. He didn't want them to know what was next until they had sat around Sinai for a while and learned about Him. There are times when the Lord doesn't give us revelation on a particular matter because it would harm us to know that at that particular time. Not that he is grieved with us, but he is certainly looking forward to the day he can reveal even more to us!

MoreMercy
Jan 16th 2012, 03:35 PM
I can't find the verse right now, but there's a scripture where Jesus told his disciples "There are things I long to tell you but you are not yet ready for them."

Fret not Brother: I know which passage you are referring to...




Why I say fret not: Because my lamp is full, friend !
By His mercy alone, I understand the parable of the 10 virgins.
I see/hear and recognize that the hour and day of the Lord is at hand, each of us as individuals should and are commanded to prepare for ourselves and fill your own lamps with His oil.

Upon request:
I will share the oil of the gospel of Christ with any creature at anytime at any hour, even at the last hour, because He commands us/me.

Where the parable of the 10 virgins is applied:
But, because the day and hour is at hand, upon request I will not share my knowledge of Him and His ways. (With the only exception of sharing VIA my life lived in the sight of my fellows)
For my knowledge of Him and His ways: it is mine all mine and if I keep it: it will last to the last hour because by His mercy I have taken the opportunity (now/today and yesterdays) to prepare/stock-up ahead of time for myself and fill my own lamp for myself, also as He commanded us/me.




Father bless and have mercy on us.

MoreMercy
Jan 16th 2012, 03:45 PM
Not necessarily. For instance, I am not grieved when a 6 month old child soils his diapers. I am grieved if a 6 year old does so. I am not grieved when a 2 year old doesn't fully understand sharing. I am grieved when a 40 year old does not.

So as we walk with the Lord, he teaches us 1 step at a time. He doesn't always teach us step 42 until we understand step 41. Sometimes he shows us step 1 through 10. Thing is, he is working with us. He is not grieved because we are on step 3 in our journey until we refuse to take step 3. And while he is working with us on step 3, he may not answer anything about step 15. It's not that he is grieved with us being at step 3, He just knows we are not yet ready.

For instance, when God brought Israel out of Egypt, he led them south to avoid war. He said there hearts were not yet ready for war. Approximately 2 years or so later he led them to war. He didn't want them to know what was next until they had sat around Sinai for a while and learned about Him. There are times when the Lord doesn't give us revelation on a particular matter because it would harm us to know that at that particular time. Not that he is grieved with us, but he is certainly looking forward to the day he can reveal even more to us!
Maybe you missed this portion of what I shared:


Confess, repent and show reverence of Him by seeking Him diligently in His word and in patiently waiting prayer.



Father bless and have mercy on us.

John Zain
Jan 17th 2012, 12:58 AM
So, is it you're assumption that what these two unbelievers say verifies your whole interpretation of scripture?
Or, in other words, are you saying that the opinions of a fellow believer can be outweighed by that of two non-believers?
By Extra I meant something else to consider. As for the rest of your post ... censored by the poster

John Zain
Jan 17th 2012, 01:05 AM
I wonder also how would a Calvinist handle the case of Jezebel?

In Rev 2 Jesus is speaking to the Church in Thyatira, warning them of Jezebel. He says this:

Rev 2:20 Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols.
Rev 2:21 I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling.
Rev 2:22 So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. [NIV]

Jezebel is given time to repent. It is her choice. It is Jezebel who is unwilling. But God appears quite willing to forgive her if she chooses that path. In fact, God is giving everyone who has fallen for her time to repent. None of this would make any sense to me if they didn't have the free will to choose.
It is believed that there are various levels of Heaven and Hell.
And that this is what the rewards are all about.
Do you think the rewards in the NT refer to salvation?

This would make an interesting thread.
Warning: not all of God's Truths are revealed by Him in Scripture.

Butch5
Jan 17th 2012, 02:56 AM
Why everyone is not invited to salvation

In case you missed it, Paul spent 17 years total (Ephesians 1 and 2) in the desert places ...
being trained by the Lord in spiritual Truth before really hooking up with the church at Jerusalem.

He says that man has no excuse for not recognizing God: in nature, in the heavens, and in his conscience.
I.E. Man has no excuse for not seeing there is a Creator God, and for not wanting to follow and please Him.

He also says that natural man is at enmity with (an enemy of) God.

He also says that natural man who is perishing spiritually sees the message of the cross (the gospel) as “foolishness”.
Now, just what does this have to do with any kind of free will? Does natural man choose to see it as foolishness?

Others have said that it takes a miracle for man to want to follow God vs. following his own fallen nature.

I know there are plenty of verses which say that man has a choice.
But, the Lord sees man's heart ... and He knows who He desires to save.
All of those “anyone”s who can believe the foolish gospel simply have been elected by God to believe.

All men are not created the same ... witness how Paul quotes Isaiah re: the potter and the clay.
Many verses tell us exactly the attributes of those whom the Lord desires to have with Him in heaven.
God saw Pharaoh's hardened heart and He knew what choices Pharaoh would make, so He merely hardened it further.

But, those who actually choose God ... have been given the ability, desire, etc. by the Lord.
Also, man appearing to have the freedom to choose warrants evangelists going to the 4 corners of the earth.
And the Lord Himself personally revealed to me the 2 reasons why He insists on the lost being evangelized:
(1) The elect must hear the gospel in order for them to respond to it. (Note: this is God's plan of salvation.)
(2) The non-elect must hear the gospel so they cannot complain at the Judgment that they never heard the gospel.

Re (1): The illusion that man appears to be free to choose the gospel hides the ugly Truth (to us)
that it is God who chooses. Remember, Jesus said that He chose us and not the other way around.

But THE KEY to this whole deal is:
(a) Man has a terribly-flawed human sin nature, which destines him to be separated from God.
(b) God, therefore, owes no man anything, which is another ugly Truth (to us).
(c) God has the authority to do whatever He damn well pleases. Sorry for putting it so bluntly.

All in all, to me, the evidence weighs quite heavily on the side of foreknowledge, predestination, election, etc.

That's because either you've been taught to proof-text, have taken that method of eisegsis upon yourself or you've simply been indoctrinated. What is clear is that you haven't done a proper exegesis of the Scriptures and let the chips fall where they may. Calvinism was wrong when Calvin taught it and it's still wrong today.

Butch5
Jan 17th 2012, 03:05 AM
Scriptural proof of man's sin nature is presented here >>>>> http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/229446-Researching-the-big-quot-original-sin-quot-fiasco?highlight=fiasco

OK, how does any of that equate to man cannot choose God?

Butch5
Jan 17th 2012, 03:06 AM
No, not at all ... most of the non-elect will have no idea WHY they don't believe the gospel.
Extra: 2 people (whom I trust) have told me that they have tried very hard to believe, but simply cannot.

So two unbelivers define what Scripture means?

LookingUp
Jan 17th 2012, 04:16 AM
Why everyone is not invited to salvation
[/SIZE][/FONT]In case you missed it, Paul spent 17 years total (Ephesians 1 and 2) in the desert places ...
being trained by the Lord in spiritual Truth before really hooking up with the church at Jerusalem.I think the number you came up with—17 years—is debatable. Maybe check into that further?


He says that man has no excuse for not recognizing God: in nature, in the heavens, and in his conscience.
I.E. Man has no excuse for not seeing there is a Creator God, and for not wanting to follow and please Him.Well, man would surely have an excuse if God didn’t give him the ability to see, to follow and to please.


He also says that natural man is at enmity with (an enemy of) God.

He also says that natural man who is perishing spiritually sees the message of the cross (the gospel) as “foolishness”.
Now, just what does this have to do with any kind of free will? Does natural man choose to see it as foolishness?It seems to me that God does need to work on a man's heart before he can see the cross for what it is. But Scripture says it's men who humble themselves before God and are contrite of spirit that receive this grace.


Others have said that it takes a miracle for man to want to follow God vs. following his own fallen nature.

I know there are plenty of verses which say that man has a choice.
But, the Lord sees man's heart ... and He knows who He desires to save.And He makes this choice randomly? Is there anything God does that is random?


All of those “anyone”s who can believe the foolish gospel simply have been elected by God to believe.

All men are not created the same ... witness how Paul quotes Isaiah re: the potter and the clay.Are you saying some are created with a heart that can repent and some are created without the ability to repent?


Many verses tell us exactly the attributes of those whom the Lord desires to have with Him in heaven.
God saw Pharaoh's hardened heart and He knew what choices Pharaoh would make, so He merely hardened it further.

But, those who actually choose God ... have been given the ability, desire, etc. by the Lord.
Also, man appearing to have the freedom to choose warrants evangelists going to the 4 corners of the earth.
And the Lord Himself personally revealed to me the 2 reasons why He insists on the lost being evangelized:
(1) The elect must hear the gospel in order for them to respond to it. (Note: this is God's plan of salvation.)
(2) The non-elect must hear the gospel so they cannot complain at the Judgment that they never heard the gospel.They still have the excuse that God didn’t give them a heart with the ability to repent like He gave to others.


Re (1): The illusion that man appears to be free to choose the gospel hides the ugly Truth (to us)
that it is God who chooses. Remember, Jesus said that He chose us and not the other way around.Which verse are you speaking of here? The one where it says Jesus chose his disciples? From that verse, does that mean he chose you too?


But THE KEY to this whole deal is:
(a) Man has a terribly-flawed human sin nature, which destines him to be separated from God.
(b) God, therefore, owes no man anything, which is another ugly Truth (to us).
(c) God has the authority to do whatever He damn well pleases. Sorry for putting it so bluntly.

All in all, to me, the evidence weighs quite heavily on the side of foreknowledge, predestination, election, etc.[/FONT][/COLOR]Have you learned anything new from any of the posts?

jeffweeder
Jan 17th 2012, 04:24 AM
Jesus died for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD.....God has the sin factor covered...therefore anyone who sinned can find forgiveness. Invitations have gone to every soul, to come to the party, and have your sins forgiven.

Amazing Grace how sweet the sound.

LookingUp
Jan 17th 2012, 04:25 AM
No, not at all ... most of the non-elect will have no idea WHY they don't believe the gospel.
Extra: 2 people (whom I trust) have told me that they have tried very hard to believe, but simply cannot.I see in Scripture that God changes hearts that are humble and contrite. So, I think they can "try" to believe all they want to, God won't open their hearts to respond to the gospel (cf. Acts 16:14) unless their hearts are "gospel ready." Those who truly realize their need for mercy are the ones who find the news good.

IMINXTC
Jan 17th 2012, 05:04 AM
Respectably, I've always wondered about the rationale behind or the reason for this type of statement. (concerning the OP).

It would suggest to some that they are not or cannot be the object of God's love, and suggest to others that they, themselves are the exclusive targets of God's love.

"...not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." 2Pt 3:9

Christ came to pay the price for all men, willing that all men come to Him, fully aware that many will not respond.

The apropos question: Why do not all men receive Christ?

He does not save by any means other than grace by faith, faith itself being a gift.

Therefore the statement is a challenge to what God clearly reveals about His will and purpose in Christ.

"For the Son of man is come to seek and save that which was lost." Luke 19:10


.

John Zain
Jan 17th 2012, 05:42 PM
Okay, the equation is found in the original post.

John Zain
Jan 17th 2012, 05:59 PM
Respectably, I've always wondered about the rationale behind or the reason for this type of statement. (concerning the OP).
It would suggest to some that they are not or cannot be the object of God's love, and suggest to others that they, themselves are the exclusive targets of God's love.
"...not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." 2 Pt 3:9
Christ came to pay the price for all men, willing that all men come to Him, fully aware that many will not respond.
The apropos question: Why do not all men receive Christ?
He does not save by any means other than grace by faith, faith itself being a gift.
Therefore the statement is a challenge to what God clearly reveals about His will and purpose in Christ.
"For the Son of man is come to seek and save that which was lost." Luke 19:10
.
Your 2 Peter 3:9 and Luke 19:10 ... CAN refer to ONLY the elect, as can many other verses.

The OP is correct because the Triune God KNEW the logos (the Word) (sorry, not "Jesus")
wasn't coming to save everyone. So, it is admittedly kind of a trick OP.

Yes, you did answer your own question ... FAITH must be a GIFT from God, which is by His GRACE.
And God does NOT have to give this gift to EVERYONE ... Scripture is full of who His favorite people are.
Since man is incapable, IT MUST BE BY GRACE ... End of story.
Would God impart this free gift of grace upon Hitler, Stalin, etc.? ... I don't see it.

People just cannot get the full revelation of MAN's DISASTROUS and HOPELESS CONDITION.
Many cannot see that man inherits this condition, and that he has no choice but to be a sinner.
We're talking about man's condition vs. the condition of a Holy God.
God simply does not desire unsaved, unredeemed, unsanctified, etc. man to be with Him in Heaven.

Ckeck the OP for WHY God makes the Scriptures appear that salvation is available for everyone.

Allow me to repeat something MAJOR here ...
God proved in the OT (through His special and coddled people) that it was
IMPOSSIBLE for fallen and sin-ridden man to choose and satisfy God on his own
... and try to understand what IMPOSSIBLE means.
So, God says: "Since man is incapable of choosing, I'll do the choosing."
Again ... End of story.

MoreMercy
Jan 17th 2012, 06:35 PM
John Zain,
Your fundamental flaw is two fold on this thread.
I also recognize you from forums other than this one here spreading your same message and employing your same tactcal flaws there also.

1st, You pick and choose which responses to address according to your agenda, I will be more than happy to give you a small library full of documented examples here on this this thread.
you may or may not recognize this in your actions is why I am willing to share that documented evidence with you, otherwise this is my last attempt to share with you, until our Creator allows you to run your full course.

2nd, Many will not recognize this but I recognize it because of my own past conscious behaviors in avoidance tactics... you effort to put words in God's mouth as if they came from His lips, which in fact are your calculated assumptions based on your own theology and or doctrine"s" plural.
It will not take much of my energy to share the documented evidence of this so I will spend it because a prime example is in your post just above this one:

Allow me to repeat something MAJOR here ...
God proved in the OT that it was IMPOSSIBLE for fallen and sin-ridden man to choose God,
to please God, etc. on his own ... and try to understand what IMPOSSIBLE means.
So, God says: "Since man is incapable of choosing, I'll do the choosing."
The place I am referring to in the quote above is in black print, that sir is your assumption whether good intended assumption or not is between you and our Creator.
Have you ever observed an advertisement that caused you do desire what may have been advertised.
Because that is what our Creator does when He observes evidence or proof of faith in His non-elect (HE deposits new re-born desires in them), He does NOT choose for them: He gives them the desire to choose correctly and by default profitably, but the choice is still in their hands, hence the words of God: many are called but few chosen.

This is my second home friend and I will not remain silent very long when such assumptions are allowed to slip by my fellows here and passed by as biblical evidence.

Here are a few word's of mysterious advice for you, directly from me:
A wise man learns more from a fool's question than the fool will ever learn from a wise mans answers ...just saying.


Father please bless, and have mercy on us.

John146
Jan 17th 2012, 06:39 PM
But, those who actually choose God ... have been given the ability, desire, etc. by the Lord.Do they also have the ability to choose to rebel against God? If not then that isn't a choice. That is God forcing people to choose Him. But faith and love cannot be forced.


Also, man appearing to have the freedom to choose warrants evangelists going to the 4 corners of the earth.What do you mean "appearing to have the freedom to choose"?


And the Lord Himself personally revealed to me the 2 reasons why He insists on the lost being evangelized:
(2) The non-elect must hear the gospel so they cannot complain at the Judgment that they never heard the gospel.I don't believe it was the Lord who revealed that to you since He doesn't reveal things that make no sense. What good is it for them to hear the gospel if they don't have the ability to respond to it with faith? If they don't have the ability to believe couldn't they complain about that on judgment day? I would think so. But people are going to be held accountable for their choices on judgment day. They aren't going to be condemned for not believing in Christ if they had no ability to do so. Being punished for not doing something implies that the person had the ability to do so but chose not to do it.


Re (1): The illusion that man appears to be free to choose the gospel hides the ugly Truth (to us)
that it is God who chooses. Remember, Jesus said that He chose us and not the other way around.Explain this then:

Josh 24:15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD.


But THE KEY to this whole deal is:
(a) Man has a terribly-flawed human sin nature, which destines him to be separated from God.
(b) God, therefore, owes no man anything, which is another ugly Truth (to us).
(c) God has the authority to do whatever He damn well pleases. Sorry for putting it so bluntly.

All in all, to me, the evidence weighs quite heavily on the side of foreknowledge, predestination, election, etc.[/FONT][/COLOR]The scriptural evidence weighs quite heavily on the side of the fact that Jesus died for the sins of all people so that all people have the opportunity to be saved. But they are required to choose to humble themselves and put their faith and trust in Christ in order to be saved. Here are some of the scriptures that your view contradicts (besides Joshua 24:15 which I already quoted above):

Ezekiel 18:23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?

2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

Acts 17:30-31 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: 31Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.

Luke 5:31 And Jesus answering said unto them, They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick. 32I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

1 Tim 2:3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; 4Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.

1 Tim 4:10 For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Your doctrine says that God only wants some people to repent and to be saved and He gives them the ability and desire to do so while He does not give that desire and ability to the rest which would mean He would not want the rest to repent. But scriptures like the above show that God wants all people to repent and to be saved. It wouldn't make sense for Him to want all people to repent but then purposely make it so that not all had the ability to do so.

The following scriptures show that Jesus died for the sins of all people (also, see John 3:16 above):

1 John 2:1 My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous: 2And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

1 Tim 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

Rom 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.

John 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. 33This he said, signifying what death he should die.

Heb 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

2 Cor 5:14 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: 15And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.

Butch5
Jan 17th 2012, 06:50 PM
Okay, the equation is found in the original post.

John, Instead of just tossing out verses of Scripture can you give me a logically laid out argument that is Biblically grounded. Anyone can grab a verse from the Bible and say see the Bible says xyz. These writers didn't just sit down and write nice little "thoughts of the day." These books are letters written with a purpose to the intent to transmit the apostles thoughts on a given issue to the churches to which they are addressed. If you can support your claims with logical arguments you will go a lot farther in strengthening your case than if you just make random statements and toss out various verses of Scripture.

John Zain
Jan 20th 2012, 02:09 AM
Greetings, John146 ...

I only have time now to refer you to a very plausible explanation of all, whosoever, etc.,
which is: these words can refer to only God's elect.
But, you seem unwilling to recognize this.

And, just what are all of my election verses doing in Scripture anyway?

BrianW
Jan 20th 2012, 02:13 AM
Here's a little visual to go along with your scripture here.


http://youtu.be/5beoRa_HR8o


That is an awesome video man. + rep. Hit the nail right on the head!

Butch5
Jan 20th 2012, 03:12 AM
Your 2 Peter 3:9 and Luke 19:10 ... CAN refer to ONLY the elect, as can many other verses.

The OP is correct because the Triune God KNEW the logos (the Word) (sorry, not "Jesus")
wasn't coming to save everyone. So, it is admittedly kind of a trick OP.

Yes, you did answer your own question ... FAITH must be a GIFT from God, which is by His GRACE.
And God does NOT have to give this gift to EVERYONE ... Scripture is full of who His favorite people are.
Since man is incapable, IT MUST BE BY GRACE ... End of story.
Would God impart this free gift of grace upon Hitler, Stalin, etc.? ... I don't see it.

People just cannot get the full revelation of MAN's DISASTROUS and HOPELESS CONDITION.
Many cannot see that man inherits this condition, and that he has no choice but to be a sinner.
We're talking about man's condition vs. the condition of a Holy God.
God simply does not desire unsaved, unredeemed, unsanctified, etc. man to be with Him in Heaven.

Ckeck the OP for WHY God makes the Scriptures appear that salvation is available for everyone.

Allow me to repeat something MAJOR here ...
God proved in the OT (through His special and coddled people) that it was
IMPOSSIBLE for fallen and sin-ridden man to choose and satisfy God on his own
... and try to understand what IMPOSSIBLE means.
So, God says: "Since man is incapable of choosing, I'll do the choosing."
Again ... End of story.


John, this reasoning is flawed. Can you supply a single passage of Scripture to support the idea that Jesus didn't come to save everyone?

John Zain
Jan 22nd 2012, 07:54 PM
John146, you certainly have some very good questions.

But, first of all, I'm not sure that you really understand the following:

God doesn't owe any man anything at all ... not grace, not choices, not anything.
If God chooses to grant grace to someone, that's His choice.
If God chooses not to grant grace to someone, that's His choice also.

This is critical for everyone to understand.

elisha
Jan 22nd 2012, 08:06 PM
John 3:16 (NIV)
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

I would write more, but I think that verse says it all.

Here is a little document on that....

http://www.israelect.com/reference/ArnoldKennedy/The%20Two%20Most%20Misapplied%20Verses%20in%20the% 20New%20Testament.pdf - THE TWO MOST MISAPPLIED VERSES IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

John 3:16-17 is said to be THE MOST LOVED Scripture in the Bible. Mark 16:15 is said to be THE MOST MOTIVATING Scripture in the Bible. Both are misapplied.

Butch5
Jan 22nd 2012, 08:20 PM
John146, you certainly have some very good questions.

But, first of all, I'm not sure that you really understand the following:

God doesn't owe any man anything at all ... not grace, not choices, not anything.
If God chooses to grant grace to someone, that's His choice.
If God chooses not to grant grace to someone, that's His choice also.

This is critical for everyone to understand.


John,

I think we all understand that. However, the issue is what God has said. Granted, He can show grace to whoever He chooses, He's stated that. But, is that what He said He'd do?

Butch5
Jan 22nd 2012, 08:27 PM
Here is a little document on that....

http://www.israelect.com/reference/ArnoldKennedy/The%20Two%20Most%20Misapplied%20Verses%20in%20the% 20New%20Testament.pdf - THE TWO MOST MISAPPLIED VERSES IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

John 3:16-17 is said to be THE MOST LOVED Scripture in the Bible. Mark 16:15 is said to be THE MOST MOTIVATING Scripture in the Bible. Both are misapplied.


Interesting, in the paper about misapplied verses that author misapplies verses.

John146
Jan 23rd 2012, 04:52 PM
[FONT=Arial][B][COLOR=#800000]
[SIZE=3][FONT=trebuchet ms]John146, you certainly have some very good questions.Do you plan on ever attempting to answer them?


But, first of all, I'm not sure that you really understand the following:

God doesn't owe any man anything at all ... not grace, not choices, not anything.Yes, I understand that. That certainly doesn't mean that Christ couldn't have died for the sins of all people. It just means that God can do whatever He wants, but it just so happens that He wants all people to repent (Eze 18:23, 2 Peter 3:9, Acts 17:30-31) and to be saved (1 Tim 2:3-6, John 3:16, 1 John 2:1-2) and because of that He gives all people that opportunity.


If God chooses to grant grace to someone, that's His choice.Of course, but what is His choice based on?


If God chooses not to grant grace to someone, that's His choice also.Of course, but what is His choice based on? Are His choices random or does He have certain reasons for His choices?

John Zain
Jan 23rd 2012, 10:24 PM
... what is His choice based on? Are His choices random or does He have certain reasons for His choices?
His reasons for electing some are given in Post #1 here: http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/234745-I-now-agree-with-the-Augustinian-View-of-Predestination-Election
And other related issues (to this thread) are discussed there as well.

So far ... you're not answering some of my questions, and I'm not answering some of yours.

John146
Jan 23rd 2012, 10:43 PM
His reasons for electing some are given in Post #1 here: http://bibleforums.org/showthread.php/234745-I-now-agree-with-the-Augustinian-View-of-Predestination-Election
And other related issues (to this thread) are discussed there as well.

So far ... you're not answering some of my questions, and I'm not answering some of yours.You haven't answered any of mine. I responded to comments that you had made but you seem unwilling to respond in kind for some reason. Are you unwilling to address anything I say unless I first address every single thing you've said? If so I don't find that to be very reasonable since you've made many different claims. I gave you scriptures showing that God wants all people to repent and all people to be saved so why can't you show me why those scriptures don't say what I think they do?

Soulspeaker
Oct 13th 2012, 03:59 AM
Brother, I didn't miss it. It is Galatians, not Acts. It was three years (possibly less), not 14. It says a general "Arabia", not "desert". And it doesn't say that Paul was being trained by the Lord is spiritual Truth. In fact, it doesn't say anything about what he did there.


Not true. Paul said he was in Damascus for three years (Galatians 1:18) where he spent those years growing in strength (Acts 9:22) wile he was preaching Jesus was the Son of God (Acts 9:20). In Galatians 1:16 Paul says he did not conferred with man but conferred with Jesus Christ (Galatians 1:12). He just never told us how long he was alone with Christ in Arabia (Galatians 1:17). In Acts 9:19,23 Luke just says certian days was fulfilled in Damascus he left before the Jews tried to kill him.

Soulspeaker
Oct 14th 2012, 01:44 AM
Re: Cain ... I don't see salvation being offered in the OT at all to anyone.
The blood of animals was applied for several other reasons.
The OT was to prove that man is a hopeless sinner, and to prophesy the Messiah/Savior/Redeemer.

Re: the rich young ruler ... yup, it's not about works, it's about election.

I've already explained that God can make it look like a free-will salvation
(without lying to anyone) so He doesn't look so bad, and etc.

If you can’t see salvation in the Old Testament then you can’t see it in the new as well. Christ said the Old Testament testifies of Him so if there is no salvation in the old there can’t be salvation in the new. The sacrificing of animals was only there to draw men to Him so that they might be saved. The shedding of the blood of animals didn’t save anyone it was still Christ that made intersession for them through their faith and obedience. It does say its better to obey than to sacrifice and God was sick of all their sacrificing. Salvation is really only for those who are willing to forsake their ways and thoughts and obey Him in all things. Salvation is not for everyone but salvation can be chosen by everyone and God would have it no other way, but God wont go against your free will. If you are not going to chose Life then you will stay dead. Christ told Adam when you eat of the fruit you will surely die. Paul said through the influence of the Holy Ghost, through one mans sin all men died. Christ said I Am the way, the truth, and the life. Many verses say then the love of the father is not in you, the truth is not in you, and life is not in you etc. Meaning God is not in you because your sins have separated you from God and life. Separation from God is death and separation from truth, understanding and the Light. Most people will chose to stay in darkness so God will send them into the outer darkness of the universe where there are no stars. Along with the sins of the righteous. These are the goats.

XYZ
Oct 15th 2012, 03:31 PM
But THE KEY to this whole deal is:
(a) Man has a terribly-flawed human sin nature, which destines him to be separated from God.
(b) God, therefore, owes no man anything, which is another ugly Truth (to us).
(c) God has the authority to do whatever He damn well pleases. Sorry for putting it so bluntly.

May I offer you a different perspective?
a) 1st Man does not have a flawed nature, it was created by God, who inspired Paul to write "For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: 15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;"[Rom 2:14-15]

2nd. Man's "evil nature" is a direct result, and taught only in a "doctrine of men" called "the doctrine of original sin." Man's original nature is to please, first, parents, then siblings, then neighbors, finally God. Later, this order will reverse due to training and knowledge. As we grow from the babe to the adult, our focus changes as we learn.

3rd. God has an entire chapter devoted to the truth of defeating the doctrine of "original sin" in Ezekial's 18th chapter. If your evaluation is correct, all men are dead at the point of reaching adulthood. But - "The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him." [Eze 18:20]

b) If that is true I do not owe my children the obligation of feeding them, clothing, sheltering, etc, just because I brought them into the world does not obligate me, if your assertion is true. As a matter of fact, God made us becasue He needs us.
God is the head of Christ, who is the head of man, who is the head of woman. Paul says "can the head say to the foot, "I have no need of thee?" Of course not.

God does not "owe" us salvation, but to say He does not owe us "anything" misses entirely the relationship between God and his creation.

c) It pleases God to remove "Damn" from being our final destination. "Blessed" is His plan for us all, every one, even those who choose to defy Him. But he does not force salvation upon anyonw, because He knows they would make everyone else miserable. Those who insist upon having their own philosophy for theology, are doomed to have their own self for a God. I have seen "me" at my worst, and do not want to worship what I have seen in me."

God gives us free will by which to make our choices, based presumably upon first educating ourselves from His word. Far too many folks educate themselves from books about the bible instead of the bible itself.

Foreknowledge simply references the fact God pre-provided for every eventuallity. So he knew ahead of time, what He would do depending upon men's selections.

Predestination is simply God's signposts on life's highway, pointing to Christ. Who follows the signs, meets the saviour.

Election is God expressing His choice for us all, subject only to our own veto. "I don't want what you have to offer, God, leave me alone" is one way of putting it. Sad, but possible.