THE Great BLESSING OF ELECTION

[Pastor Scott Markle]

24 minutes ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

No, Isaiah 54 is about the restoration of Israel by the hand of the Lord their Redeemer.  The only reference to the Gentiles in the entire chapter is in verse 3; and that verse does not say that the Gentiles will be included with Israel, but that they will be inherited by Israel.  

6 minutes ago, Iconoclast said:

The whole second half of Isaiah is about the Covenant work of the SERVANT OF THE LORD.

It is loaded with Gentile Inclusion.Thinks makes me doubt you went to bible school.

How can you not know this?

My statement said nothing whatsoever about any other portion of Isaiah than that of Isaiah 54.  Even so, my statement stands as given.  Isaiah 54 itself is about the restoration of Israel by the hand of the Lord their Redeemer.  The only reference to the Gentiles in the entire chapter of Isaiah 54 itself is in verse 3; and that verse does not say that the Gentiles will be included with Israel, but that they will be inherited by Israel.  

Now, if you desire to demonstrate that I am wrong in this, quote something from Isaiah 54 itself that demonstrates otherwise.

[Iconoclast]

1 minute ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

My statement said nothing whatsoever about any other portion of Isaiah than that of Isaiah 54.  Even so, my statement stands as given.  Isaiah 54 itself is about the restoration of Israel by the hand of the Lord their Redeemer.  The only reference to the Gentiles in the entire chapter of Isaiah 54 itself is in verse 3; and that verse does not say that the Gentiles will be included with Israel, but that they will be inherited by Israel.  

Now, if you desire to demonstrate that I am wrong in this, quote something from Isaiah 54 itself that demonstrates otherwise.

The Apostle Paul beat me to it; Gal4

²² For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.

²³ But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.

²⁴ Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

²⁵ For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

²⁶ But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

²⁷ For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not: for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath an husband.

²⁸ Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.

²⁹ But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.

³⁰ Nevertheless what saith the scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman.

³¹ So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free.

 

My guess is you are a dispensationalist.

[Pastor Scott Markle]

25 minutes ago, Iconoclast said:

"It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God" (John 6:45 ). Our Lord confirms what He had just said by an appeal to the Scriptures. The reference is to Isaiah 54:13 : "And all thy children shall be taught of the Lord." This serves to explain, in part at least, the meaning of "draw." Those drawn are they who are "taught of God."

Which is the same as I presented in my posting above.

26 minutes ago, Iconoclast said:

And who are these, so highly favored? 

Indeed, who are these "all" that are drawn/taught of God?

27 minutes ago, Iconoclast said:

The quotation from Isaiah 54:0 tells us: they are God’s "children"; His own, His elect. 

This is simply not true.  Isaiah 54:13 in its context is not talking about God's children.  Rather, it is talking about all the children of the Israelites.

29 minutes ago, Iconoclast said:

Notice carefully how our Lord quoted Isaiah 54:13 . He simply said, "And they shall be all taught of God." This helps us to define the "all" in other passages, like John 12:32 : "I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all unto Me." The "all" does not mean all of humanity, but all of God’s children, all His elect.

Indeed, let us notice carefully how our Lord quoted Isaiah 54:13, and how He altered the quote by leaving out the phrase "thy children."  Indeed, by doing so our Lord indicated that for the context of John 6:45 the emphasis of understanding should not be upon any idea of children at all (for that is the very portion that He dropped), but that for the context of John 6:45 the emphasis of understanding should be upon the idea of "all" (for that is the word that He specifically retained).  Thus the attempt to lessen the meaning of "all" in John 12:32 by means of John 6:45 is simply inaccurate.

39 minutes ago, Iconoclast said:

"Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me" (John 6:45 ). This also throws light on the "drawing" of the previous verse. Those drawn are they who have "heard" and "learned of the Father." That is to say, God has given them an ear to hear and a heart to perceive. 

Yet in the Greek the verbs "hath heard" and "hath learned" are active voice participles, indicating that these individuals actively chose to hear and learn.  Even so, the verse is NOT conveying the idea that these individuals were somehow passively made to hear and to learn.  These among the "all" whom God the Father taught willingly responded with hearing and learning, whereas others among the "all" whom God the Father taught willfully responded with hardening and rejection.  Their response to God the Father's work of teaching/drawing determined their direction.

[Pastor Scott Markle]

23 minutes ago, Iconoclast said:

My guess is you are a dispensationalist.

No need to guess.  I am indeed a dispensationalist.  I do indeed reject the "covenant theology" of the Calvinistic system of belief.

[Iconoclast]

11 minutes ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

No need to guess.  I am indeed a dispensationalist.  I do indeed reject the "covenant theology" of the Calvinistic system of belief.

I understand. I was first taught that system. I had my Scofield bible, Strongs concordance,

Things to Come by Dwight Pentecost,

commentaries by walvoord, tapes byS, Lewis Johnson and the staff from believers chapel from Dallas. Still have most of those books. Saw jack van impe in person, Marvin Rosenthal..I could still teach the system if I had to.

I could help you quite a bit, if that day comes, Right now you are set to resist so you are not looking for help

Edited May 21, 2022 by Iconoclast

[Jim_Alaska]

2 hours ago, Iconoclast said:

Could you identify any reputable Systematic Theology that agrees with your definition of Election? 

I do not know of Any,

Commentators do not agree with you anywhere.

I don't care if commentators agree with me or not. I can read and come to my own conclusions with the help of God's Holy Spirit. 

I have no need of Calvinist teaching that is wholly man made.

[Jim_Alaska]

3 hours ago, Iconoclast said:

No Jim...sinners do not elect themselves. This is a falsehood.This is a direct denial of scripture.

Nonsense, the elect are the elect and known as such after the fact, not before it. It is quite ironic that you would accuse me of a direct denial of Scripture, when all through this thread you have vehemently denied any Scripture that says "all men" or just "all".

You will find no converts to your man made doctrines here, best you stick to your Calvinist friends.

[BrotherTony]

7 hours ago, Jim_Alaska said:

Iconoclast seemed to be an odd screen name, so I went looking for a definition, which I found very interesting. Based on this definition it would appear that he is here to attack those that do not hold to his beliefs, rather than seek Fellowship with like minded Christians.

i·con·o·clast

/īˈkänəˌklast/

noun
1. a person who attacks cherished beliefs or institutions.

And if he's the same Iconoclast that has been on other forums I've been on, that' exactly what he does. 

5 hours ago, Iconoclast said:

I understand. I was first taught that system. I had my Scofield bible, Strongs concordance,

Things to Come by Dwight Pentecost,

commentaries by walvoord, tapes byS, Lewis Johnson and the staff from believers chapel from Dallas. Still have most of those books. Saw jack van impe in person, Marvin Rosenthal..I could still teach the system if I had to.

I could help you quite a bit, if that day comes, Right now you are set to resist so you are not looking for help

And to be honest, nobody NEEDS your type of help...We have our beliefs that we've come to through Scripture, not through Calvin. Thanks, but, no thanks,, Iconoclast. You might want to think about finding an "echo chamber" somewhere else. Just a suggestion.

[BrotherTony]

7 hours ago, Iconoclast said:

Tony I asked for your understanding.

It should be apparent that MY understanding is the same as that of @Pastor Scott Markle, not Calvins....No need for this nonsense on these forums.

[Pastor Scott Markle]

5 hours ago, Iconoclast said:

I understand. I was first taught that system. I had my Scofield bible, Strongs concordance,

Things to Come by Dwight Pentecost,

commentaries by walvoord, tapes byS, Lewis Johnson and the staff from believers chapel from Dallas. Still have most of those books. Saw jack van impe in person, Marvin Rosenthal..I could still teach the system if I had to.

I could help you quite a bit, if that day comes, Right now you are set to resist so you are not looking for help

I possess some of those, and just as many books by Calvinists.  However, I am not at all bound by the human authors that I read, but by my diligent study and searching of God's Holy Word itself.  Indeed, throughout these thread discussions it should have become evident that I do not simply regurgitate the writings of men, but that I engage the Scriptures with thorough personal study.  You are correct that right now I am "set to resist" that which I believe to be false teaching, and that I would not be "looking for help" from those whom I consider to be false teachers.  Indeed, I firmly oppose any who appear to "wrest the Scriptures" when they teach that which is not in conformity to the precise grammar of any given passage of Scripture.

[DaveW]

I rarely post here, but this brings me to my favourite Calvinist question - surely you have an answer for me.

Can you show me a clearly stated testimony of salvation for Calvin please?

And whilst you are at it, you might give your own testimony of salvation.

I will not answer, for I have no interest in any sort of debate, but would dearly love for SOME Calvinist to give me a clear record of Calvin's salvation testimony. Preferably something in his own words, and not what others have said of him.

This should be an easy question to answer, and it requires no further clarity so there is no need for you to ask me all sorts of questions (which I will not answer anyway).

If you refuse to give such a reference, I will have to assume it is because you either do not understand salvation yourself, or you cannot find such a testimony for Calvin.

No one has yet provided any such thing to me, in spite of asking this question of Calvinists for the last 15 years.

[Pastor Scott Markle]

2 hours ago, DaveW said:

I rarely post here

Well hey, I caught one of those rare Brother DaveW appearances.  Good to see that you are still around these parts.  Still counting you as a forum friend. 

[Jim_Alaska]

Brother Dave, please don't make yourself so scarce; we/I miss you  greatly.

[Iconoclast]

21 hours ago, DaveW said:

I rarely post here, but this brings me to my favourite Calvinist question - surely you have an answer for me.

Can you show me a clearly stated testimony of salvation for Calvin please?

And whilst you are at it, you might give your own testimony of salvation.

I will not answer, for I have no interest in any sort of debate, but would dearly love for SOME Calvinist to give me a clear record of Calvin's salvation testimony. Preferably something in his own words, and not what others have said of him.

This should be an easy question to answer, and it requires no further clarity so there is no need for you to ask me all sorts of questions (which I will not answer anyway).

If you refuse to give such a reference, I will have to assume it is because you either do not understand salvation yourself, or you cannot find such a testimony for Calvin.

No one has yet provided any such thing to me, in spite of asking this question of Calvinists for the last 15 years.

Hello Dave W

I have never read up on Calvin.

I know he was in Geneva.

I read about Jesus, not Calvin.

Calvin lived and died in His time and God is who he will give account to.

Calvinists get their teaching from Jesus and the Apostles. 

Most Calvinists have not read Calvin.

The tulip was derived by those who came after him.

If I can help you with doctrinal questions I will attempt to do so.

It looks like you will not get those answers from those on here as they do not understand the teaching but oppose the truth.one man said men elect themselves???

I will give you answers from scripture. 

You may not like my responses but they will be faithful to the scripture. 

 

[BrotherTony]

2 hours ago, Iconoclast said:

Hello Dave W

I have never read up on Calvin.

I know he was in Geneva.

I read about Jesus, not Calvin.

Calvin lived and died in His time and God is who he will give account to.

Calvinists get their teaching from Jesus and the Apostles. 

Most Calvinists have not read Calvin.

The tulip was derived by those who came after him.

If I can help you with doctrinal questions I will attempt to do so.

It looks like you will not get those answers from those on here as they do not understand the teaching but oppose the truth.one man said men elect themselves???

I will give you answers from scripture. 

You may not like my responses but they will be faithful to the scripture. 

 

I noticed that you didn't give a testimony of salvation which Dave W asked for...I find this something that most Calvinists avoid doing as well. I am asking for one now...this will make the second request for such on these forums.