Jump to content
  • Welcome to Online Baptist

    Free to join.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Willo

No One Can Come to Jesus Christ, Unless...

Recommended Posts

Romans and Malachi, which refer to God loving JacOB and hating Esau - therefore God choosing JacOB and rejecting Esau - had nothing to do with them being chosen or rejected FOR SALVATION, but chosen for SERVICE - or if you will, chosen to be the high priest in the home and the next in the line of Christ.

Romans 8:29-30 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

This passage is balanced out by this passage:

1 Peter 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto OBedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

God's predestination and election of believers is based on His foreknowledge. Of what? I don't know ALL it includes, but it certainly would include His foreknowledge of what someone would do with the Gospel. There is no record in the Bible of anyone being elected or chosen who rejected (ongoing) the Lord. After they got saved, this may be mentioned in some sense - but never God choosing an unbeliever.

And as has been stated, the Bible does not teach election/predestination to Heaven or Hell, to salvation or damnation - but those in Christ are predestined to certain things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Romans and Malachi, which refer to God loving JacOB and hating Esau - therefore God choosing JacOB and rejecting Esau - had nothing to do with them being chosen or rejected FOR SALVATION, but chosen for SERVICE - or if you will, chosen to be the high priest in the home and the next in the line of Christ.

I'm afraid that's just not Biblical or even close to what Paul was saying in Romans 9. The entire context of Romans 9 was God showing mercy on whoever He chooses to and, likewise, who He chooses not to. That's the whole context. You can rationalize that it has to do with the line of Christ or "head of the home" but you won't find that in the Bible and most certainly not in Romans 9. I'm afraid it's just not there. It couldn't be much clearer.

Romans 8:29-30 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

This passage is balanced out by this passage:

1 Peter 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto OBedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

This finagling of Scripture really concerns me, to be honest. How can you take two different passages from two different books and somehow say that this verse negates the other one, basically pitting Scripture against Scripture. I know that's not your intention, but you are taking the truth out of one verse by placing it up against a related verse that's easier to rationalize around.

1 Peter does reinforce that we are chosen according to God's foreknowledge and says that that foreknowledge works OBedience in us. Take a look at the order. We are chosen, His Spirit makes us holy, and causes us to be OBedient and be cleansed by Christ's blood.

God's predestination and election of believers is based on His foreknowledge. Of what? I don't know ALL it includes, but it certainly would include His foreknowledge of what someone would do with the Gospel. There is no record in the Bible of anyone being elected or chosen who rejected (ongoing) the Lord. After they got saved, this may be mentioned in some sense - but never God choosing an unbeliever.

A person who is chosen is theoretically unable to reject the Lord.

And as has been stated, the Bible does not teach election/predestination to Heaven or Hell, to salvation or damnation - but those in Christ are predestined to certain things.

Unfortunately, it does. It's in there, whether we, in our free-choice, freedom-loving culture want to accept it or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure how it being addressed individually or according to groups affects anything but okay..............

Because "the elect" is always referring to a group, designated for a special purpose. And that special purpose is accomplished by God's design(foreknowledge. Any individual who comes to Christ in faith can become a part of this group.."the elect". It has absolutely nothing to do with salvation...it referrs to service.

Predestination, also never referrs to individuals, and has nothing to do with salvation; it has to do with being conformed to the image of Christ. As soon as any individual gets saved. being conformed to the image of Christ becomes his destiny too.



Romans and Malachi, which refer to God loving JacOB and hating Esau - therefore God choosing JacOB and rejecting Esau - had nothing to do with them being chosen or rejected FOR SALVATION, but chosen for SERVICE - or if you will, chosen to be the high priest in the home and the next in the line of Christ.

That is correct.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Because "the elect" is always referring to a group, designated for a special purpose. And that special purpose is accomplished by God's design(foreknowledge. Any individual who comes to Christ in faith can become a part of this group.."the elect". It has absolutely nothing to do with salvation...it referrs to service.

I don't find that anywhere in Scripture.

Predestination, also never referrs to individuals, and has nothing to do with salvation; it has to do with being conformed to the image of Christ. As soon as any individual gets saved. being conformed to the image of Christ becomes his destiny too.

So let me try and figure out what you're saying here. Groups are not made up of individuals and JacOB and Esau were not individuals. Therefore, since groups cannot be saved, nOBody can be predestined.:icon_confused:

My bad, I didn't realize that when God said, "I chose you," He actually meant, "I chose you after you chose me." Boy, I wish someone would fix that KJV.:wink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kevin, you just gave us another good argument to separate from false teachings: now with all your tolerance of Presbyterianism, you are now embracing their Calvinism too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol. It's always easier to separate than to answer Scripture, isn't it? After all, then you can hold whatever views you want to and nOBody will be there to contradict them. I would be careful with that, if I were you, it's what a lot of cults do when they don't want any kind of foreign ideas that might actually cause their people to think to come into their midst.

Neither one of you has given an answer to Scripture. You've both responded with your own rationalized way of viewing election without actually taking a look at what the Bible says about it and that's a shaky way to build your doctrine.

I don't tolerate Presbyterianism, I went to a Presbyterian church for a year. lol Though, I'm not Presbyterian any more than I'm a Baptist. I was moving towards a reformed position ever since I decided to study it out for myself a year and a half ago. John Piper was the first pastor who I ever heard preach on Romans 9 in my whole life and that's what solidified my belief in what the Bible says about election. Piper is a Baptist, if I'm not mistaken.

I attend a non-denominational church now since I'm back in the States and I really don't know what their views are on election as I've only been attending for about a month and a half.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lol. It's always easier to separate than to answer Scripture, isn't it? After all, then you can hold whatever views you want to and nOBody will be there to contradict them. I would be careful with that, if I were you, it's what a lot of cults do when they don't want any kind of foreign ideas that might actually cause their people to think to come into their midst.

Neither one of you has given an answer to Scripture. You've both responded with your own rationalized way of viewing election without actually taking a look at what the Bible says about it and that's a shaky way to build your doctrine.

I don't tolerate Presbyterianism, I went to a Presbyterian church for a year. lol Though, I'm not Presbyterian any more than I'm a Baptist. I was moving towards a reformed position ever since I decided to study it out for myself a year and a half ago. John Piper was the first pastor who I ever heard preach on Romans 9 in my whole life and that's what solidified my belief in what the Bible says about election. Piper is a Baptist, if I'm not mistaken.

I attend a non-denominational church now since I'm back in the States and I really don't know what their views are on election as I've only been attending for about a month and a half.



You have been and are doctrinally shipwrecked kevin and rather than getting into a life boat while you have been away from the forum you have been swimming farther out to sea apparently. :icon_sad: That means there is no point discussing much of anything with you on a spiritual level since you are blinded. If your going to insist on swimming toward spiritual destruction that is your choice, as much as we would like to help you there is nothing we can do about it, but if your going farther out to sea stop trying to scuttle the boat for others by corrupting the truth and twisting the scriptures on your way through. It pains me to be so sharp but it is quite necessary unfortunately. :twocents:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




You have been and are doctrinally shipwrecked kevin and rather than getting into a life boat while you have been away from the forum you have been swimming farther out to sea apparently. :icon_sad: That means there is no point discussing much of anything with you on a spiritual level since you are blinded. If your going to insist on swimming toward spiritual destruction that is your choice, as much as we would like to help you there is nothing we can do about it, but if your going farther out to sea stop trying to scuttle the boat for others by corrupting the truth and twisting the scriptures on your way through. It pains me to be so sharp but it is quite necessary unfortunately. :twocents:

Unlike you, I don't see having different opinions on the interpretation of certain Scriptures to be "doctrinally shipwreck." By all appearances, the people who have been replying in this thread are the ones who are doctrinally shipwreck since they feel the need to screw around with the Bible in order to prop up a made-up view that has zero basis in Scripture and, indeed, contradicts what God said.

What I have found is that people around here are willing to argue the bark off a tree if they feel they've got a good argument. As soon as they are presented with clear Scripture, however, it becomes a "you're too messed up to argue with" conclusion and they run away with their tails between their legs and not much spiritual or intellectual credibility.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What I have found is that people around here are willing to argue the bark off a tree if they feel they've got a good argument. As soon as they are presented with clear Scripture, however, it becomes a "you're too messed up to argue with" conclusion and they run away with their tails between their legs and not much spiritual or intellectual credibility.


If thats your opinion why come back to post? To stir up trouble is the only reason that comes to mind...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is addressing calvinism in general and isn't to kevin per se because I am pretty sure he won't be able to see it anyway. However I do want to briefly address each of the passages mentioned:

"Ephesians 1:11 In whom also we have OBtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:"

That is cleared up by the very next verse: "Ephesians 1:12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ."

So according to this passage the believer is predestined to glorify God. Nothing to do with salvation. A look at verse 13 later in the chapter also shows that a believer is sealed by the Holy Spirit after he believes where as if predestination unto salvation existed in and of itself it would be a sealing of God.

"John 15:16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you."

The question here is who was chosen and what were they chosen for? The context is the last supper after Judas departed and Jesus is making some of his last statements to his apostles before his death. There is no hint that Christ meant they were chosen for salvation, you must read that into the passage in order to get there, rather the implication is that he chose them to be apostles. We see that he chose them when he called them originally,(they most were just minding their own business before) and then he ordained them(Mark 3:14) and sent them out. He says here that he did this so that they would bring forth fruit. This verse has to do with a specific life calling from God, not with salvation.


"Philippians 1:29 For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake;"

This verse is essentially an irresistible grace question. The answer is that gifts can be rejected. Yes, belief is a gift of God, but that gift is offered to every man and can be rejected. You can chose not to believe just as a Christian can go with the flow and often times reject that suffering for Christ that he would have suffered if he stood for Christ.


"Romans 8:29-30 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified."

This verse is speaking of believers. it says those "whom he did foreknow" or those he knew would chose to accept him, those people he predestinated to become like Christ. It doesn't say he predestinated them to salvation but to be like Christ because of his foreknowledge of their salvation. Then it makes a progression on into their life where the Holy Spirit calls them, their salvation, and their future glorification.

"Proverbs 16:4 The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil."

This verse simply teaches that God will get glory out of the wicked whether they like it or not. It in no way means the wicked has no choice and must be wicked because God made him that way or that God gets pleasure out of punishing the wicked. As it is written:

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?

If God intended and desired to make some people wicked so he could destroy them in the day of judgement he would be contradicting himself.



"Romans 9:10-10-24 And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac; (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth;) It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, JacOB have I loved, but Esau have I hated. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy. For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault? For who hath resisted his will? Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And that he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?"

In this entire chapter Paul is contrasting faith with unbelief. Yet calvinism would say that Paul took a rabbit trail in the middle of the passage to say that no one controls whether or not they get saved or not. That makes no sense in context or in the light of other scriptures.

For example The Lord said to Cain:

"Genesis 4:6-7 And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him."

but if God was offering Cain something Cain could not chose to do God would be presenting him with a strawman which would hardly fit the character of God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is addressing calvinism in general and isn't to kevin per se because I am pretty sure he won't be able to see it anyway. However I do want to briefly address each of the passages mentioned:

That's a great way to start off. :icon_rolleyes:

So according to this passage the believer is predestined to glorify God. Nothing to do with salvation. A look at verse 13 later in the chapter also shows that a believer is sealed by the Holy Spirit after he believes where as if predestination unto salvation existed in and of itself it would be a sealing of God.

Not so. Take a look at the preceding verses, if you will:
Ephesians 1:5-6 - Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
That verse is talking about being chosen before salvation even takes place to be adopted into His family. It doesn't happen after salvation but BEFORE. Being predestined is not a sealing, how could it be? It is simply a choice by God according to His will. After that person responds in faith, THEN he his sealed. Pretty simple, really.

The question here is who was chosen and what were they chosen for? The context is the last supper after Judas departed and Jesus is making some of his last statements to his apostles before his death. There is no hint that Christ meant they were chosen for salvation, you must read that into the passage in order to get there, rather the implication is that he chose them to be apostles. We see that he chose them when he called them originally,(they most were just minding their own business before) and then he ordained them(Mark 3:14) and sent them out. He says here that he did this so that they would bring forth fruit. This verse has to do with a specific life calling from God, not with salvation.

So are you also saying that we are not the branches in the vine of Christ? Only the disciples were the branches? Whether speaking to the disciples or not, I think it is a great illustration of the sovereign will of God in the disciples' inability to choose Christ but were rather chosen by Him to follow Him.

This verse is speaking of believers. it says those "whom he did foreknow" or those he knew would chose to accept him, those people he predestinated to become like Christ. It doesn't say he predestinated them to salvation but to be like Christ because of his foreknowledge of their salvation. Then it makes a progression on into their life where the Holy Spirit calls them, their salvation, and their future glorification.

I guess this passage is one more of semantics and your pre-existing view of God. If God foreknew those people, then He must have had a plan, and if He had a plan, then He must have chosen them to fulfill that plan and those chosen became destined to be saved to the exclusion of others. If God is sovereign in His knowledge, He must also, by default, be sovereign in His choosing of those to whom are determined for salvation according to His foreknowledge and will.

"Proverbs 16:4 The LORD hath made all things for himself: yea, even the wicked for the day of evil."

This verse simply teaches that God will get glory out of the wicked whether they like it or not. It in no way means the wicked has no choice and must be wicked because God made him that way or that God gets pleasure out of punishing the wicked. As it is written:

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?

If God intended and desired to make some people wicked so he could destroy them in the day of judgement he would be contradicting himself.

That almost seems like a good interpretation except that it says that God explicitly "made" them for the day of evil. I certainly don't think that God takes any pleasure in it and would never try to insinuate that He did.

In this entire chapter Paul is contrasting faith with unbelief. Yet calvinism would say that Paul took a rabbit trail in the middle of the passage to say that no one controls whether or not they get saved or not. That makes no sense in context or in the light of other scriptures.

I would like to hear more about how you see this as a contrast of faith and unbelief. I don't see that in their. I see an entire chapter that does nothing but consistently talk about the sovereignty of God in choosing one for mercy and another for destruction, though it doesn't make much sense to us.

We have to look at Cain in the age in which he lived. He already had some sort of fellowship with God because God was speaking with him. In order to gain the fellowship in the church age, we must have Christ as an intercessor. In the OT, that was not the case. Cain already had a relationship with God but was left to decide whether he would sin or live righteously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Article Categories

About Us

Since 2001, Online Baptist has been an Independent Baptist website, and we exclusively use the King James Version of the Bible. We pride ourselves on a community that uplifts the Lord.

Contact Us

You can contact us using the following link. Contact Us or for questions regarding this website please contact @pastormatt or email James Foley at jfoley@sisqtel.net

Android App

Online Baptist has a custom App for all android users. You can download it from the Google Play store or click the following icon.

×
×
  • Create New...