Christian Readers discussion
Scripture Memorization
>
Who's sins did Jesus die for? Who benefits from His sacrifice?
Mod
My response: this is a false statement. Quote me saying any such thing.
God says quote: Romans 10:13 - "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."
shall call upon = Strong's G1941 - epikaleō - "ἐπικαλέομαι epikaléomai, ep-ee-kal-eh'-om-ahee... to entitle ; by implication, to invoke ..."
Robert wrote: "Alexandra wrote: "I take this to mean you are asserting that the non-elect is saved,..."My response: Please re-read my posts. I have never said any such thing."
Don't need to Robert. Not only did I read it the first time, I even quoted it for you.
"I believe that the elect are chosen based on God's foreknowledge (as He says) and that God knows everything."
So you say.
However you also said:
"NOWHERE does God say that the Gospel is His POWER unto salvation ONLY FOR THE ELECT."
These are internally contradictory.
You agree there is an elect, and that they are chosen by God, yet reject the notion that the elect that are chosen by God are those that are saved, and appear to be asserting the non-elect are saved, since you are clearly stating here you believe salvation is for those not chosen, the non-elect.
Your speaking out of both sides of your mouth, Robert, and your statements are self-contradictory.
Mod
I did. It says,
"According to the Bible, what are the answers to these questions?
1 John 2:2 - "And he is the propitiation for our sins : and not f..."
My response: Sorry, you did NOT read the original post, which says... (quoted from the top of this thread)
"Who's sins did Jesus die for? Who benefits from His sacrifice?"
Robert wrote: "My position is clear and has been clearly stated.Those whom God foreknows are elected. God foreknows everything, including (but not limited to) who will endure to the end. "
Your position is muddled, confused, and contradictory, as I stated in my previous post.
Mod
My response: Of course not. This way you can avoid being accountable for the false witness you have borne against me.
Oh well, God knows what I have written or not. Anyone seeking the truth can read through my posts and know that I have NEVER said that the non-elect are saved.
Mod
My response: I have NEVER said any such thing. Quote me.
Note: I have clearly stated my convictions, more than once. But your responses betray the fact that you have not read them.
Mod
Those whom God foreknows are elected. God foreknows everything, including (but not limited to) who will endure to the end. "
Your position is muddled, confused, and contradictory, as I stated in my previous post. ..."
My response: Here is what you are calling muddled and contradictory...
___________________
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."
Matthew 24:13 - "But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved."
Robert wrote: "not true. Some say that the non-elect cannot be brought to life by God's POWER unto salvation. The Gospel."There ya go, contradicting yourself again.
This is you, asserting the "non-elect" are saved, or can be, some are.
This is you, affirming the elect are those God chooses for salvation:
"My position is clear and has been clearly stated.
Those whom God foreknows are elected. God foreknows everything, including (but not limited to) who will endure to the end. "
Make your mind up, Robert. You can't have it both ways. Is it the elect that are saved, or the non-elect too?
And if the elect and non-elect are saved, then who are the elect and what is God choosing them for?
"If God's election is based on nothing... then the Gospel IS too WEAK to save anyone."
No one has said "God's election is based on nothing". And thankfully God is not too weak to save anyone.
"and His election is based on His foreknowledge of everyone's response to His POWERFUL Gospel. "
Interesting premise, however you also reject the notion that the elect are those that are saved,
"Some say that the non-elect cannot be brought to life by God's POWER unto salvation. The Gospel."
I'll await your demonstrating Scripture states that His election is based upon His foreknowledge of how those who are spiritually dead, whom you've already agreed can do nothing to facilitate or participate in their own salvation, respond positively to the Gospel.
And then harmonize that with this:
"7 in order that in the coming ages he might show the incomparable riches of his grace, expressed in his kindness to us in Christ Jesus. 8 and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast."
Ephesians 2:7-9
Don't worry, I'll be very patient, and have plenty to do to keep me occupied while I wait...
Mod
* God's election is based on something .
* That something is His foreknowledge .
* What does God foreknow ?
* Is there anything that God does not know ?
Thus, God's election is based on His omniscience !
Mod
64 Yet there are some of you who do not believe.”For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him.
65 He went on to say, “ This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.”
______________________
Observations:
* Jesus knew from the beginning who would not believe
* Because of this foreknowledge, "This is why" Jesus told them that no one can be saved unless the Father enabled them
- Jesus foreknew who would believe or not
- Because of this foreknowledge, Jesus said only those enabled by the Father can come to Christ
Robert wrote: "Talk about mis-quoting. You go on to speak about "believing". However, there is NO legitimate believing if there is NO legitimate offer of salvation."I never said there was, Robert. I did no mis-quoting - unlike you I didn't truncate the passage conveniently. But your lack of reading skills is showing again.
But of course, God says He legitimately offers salvation unto ALL!
Titus 2:11 - "For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people."
Yup. Never said otherwise.
"Your focus on "believing" also invalidates the fact that the offer has been made unto all... and whosoever will call on the Name of the Lord shall be saved.
"
I didn't "focus" on it, I simply don't ignore it, edit it out, and pretend it's not there as you do.
And no, the fact that it clearly states, ""For I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes : first to the Jew, then to the Gentile."
Romans 1:16
Does not negate the truth of Scripture.
Fun topic eh? Just not with Robert. He's very emotional his twisted Arminianism. I just want to know God and sort out the truth.
Mod
My response: How is it a legitimate offer of salvation if God has predestined most into hell?
Mod
Mod
I just want to know God and sort out the truth."
My response: Rod, I have NEVER appealed to Arminius nor have I appealed to anyone who follows Arminius. I have appealed ONLY to the Bible.
You on the other hand routinely appeal to Calvinist authors to support your position. Why?
Who is twisted? The quotes from the Bible? Or the quotes from Calvinist authors?
(Perhaps neither are, but it is highly unfair to label my beliefs as "twisted Arminianism" when I have NEVER made any such appeals.)
Mod
* The total depravity of man?
or
* The Gospel of Jesus Christ ?
Rod wrote: "Fun topic eh? Just not with Robert. He's very emotional his twisted Arminianism. I just want to know God and sort out the truth."
Robert cannot even be consistent within his own beliefs, and is self-contradictory to the point of muddled confusion.
He doesn't seem to even know who he thinks the Elect are, and I can't make actual sense of what it is he actually believes.
He agrees there's nothing we can do to facilitate our salvation, and then he asserts there is.
He poo poos the concept that "God does it all" then claims that would make God too weak to save anyone, and a "miserable failure" (which doesn't even make sense).
That's typical of what happens when one doesn't take the totality of Scripture and then let Scripture interpret Scripture. And thank God Scripture is much clearer to understand than Robert's convoluted dancing act :D
Mod
Titus 2:11 - For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people .
____________
* God knows the results of this offer of salvation and makes His election based on this knowledge.
1 Peter 1:2 - " Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father ...
____________
* God knows everything, but in regards to salvation, He knows who would and would not have faith in Jesus!
John 6:64-65
64 Yet there are some of you who do not believe.”For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him.
65 He went on to say, “ This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.”
Thanks Alexandra. If Robert thinks all souls are fair game, and that people will go to hell based on his lack of properly flinging the Gospel at people's hearts and emotions. Then their souls are on him. It's all just a choice after all.
I believe God already made that choice. Which is why Jesus never ministered effectively to Judas.
Foreknowledge is too big a word for Robert. He fails to comprehend all of its meanings.
Rod wrote: "If Robert thinks all souls are fair game, and that people will go to hell based on his lack of properly flinging the Gospel at people's hearts and emotions. Then their souls are on him. It's all just a choice after all. "If that is what he thinks then it contradicts his agreement that there is nothing we can do to earn or deserve God's favor, or save ourselves.
I can't even start to make sense of the fact that he affirms there are elect that God chooses (based on knowing how they'll respond to the Gospel), and yet also asserts the non-elect have the ability to be saved by responding positively to the Gospel. But wait! Aren't the non-elect, according to Robert, those God knew wouldn't respond positively to the Gospel? Therefore they're not gonna be saved, cuz they're not gonna respond positively? Which is why they weren't elected (according to Robert)?
He keeps trying to have it both ways - which is why what he states continuously becomes a self-contradictory mess.
Alexandra is right, whenever you use the term Elect - it's meaningless.
Rod wrote: "Alexandra is right, whenever you use the term Elect - it's meaningless."I can understand believing that the elect are those God grants the gift of faith in order to allow them the ability to freely choose, based on His foreknowledge they would choose to believe, but not then also asserting the non-elect can be saved, because that's saying the elect and non-elect can be saved and both can choose to believe (and so what is difference?), or it's asserting everyone is "the elect", which would include even those that reject the Gospel. Or, it's asserting that it's we that place ourselves into the group of "the elect" upon choosing, but that's clearly contradictory to Scripture.
Robert needs to work on his theory so that it at least make sense within itself. As it is, it doesn't.
If there are examples in scripture of God not foreknowing everything--- then Roberts understanding of that word would need a overhaul. Hmmm... I can easily think of 3.
Rod wrote: "If there are examples in scripture of God not foreknowing everything--- then Roberts understanding of that word would need a overhaul. Hmmm... I can easily think of 3."God clearly foreknew us, and yet it doesn't specifically say what Robert is inferring into the text.
It's a common inference, but not when combined with asserting non-elect are also saved.
Robert is desperate to turn foreknowledge into an absolute rather than God's 100% ordained plan. God foreseeing an apocalypse is very different than Him ordaining one.
God choosing who will be saved is very different than merely observing who will be saved.
God foreknowing there will be A Judas is different from Him passively foreseeing it. God is active - working out His plan. Occasionally He sits back and observes it though. We need to be a bit flexible. Robert isn't.
Rod wrote: "We need to be a bit flexible. Robert isn't. "It seems Robert decides what he wants to be true, then tries to shoehorn Scripture into it to make it fit, which is why he ends up with dangling inconvenient extra parts, and blatantly editing parts out. ;)
Even worse though, he can't come up with a theory that even makes sense within itself - as evidenced by all the contradictory assertions.
That's a big clue there's something off somewhere.
Even a person who wanted to learn from Robert and believe what he was telling them would have a hard time making sense of it in order to do so.
Mod
If Robert thinks all souls are fair game, and that people will go to hell based on his lack of properly flinging the Gospel at people's hearts and emotions. Then their souls are..."
My response: NOT Robert... GOD!
_______________
John 12:32 - "And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, WILL DRAW ALL MEN UNTO ME."
Titus 2:11 - "For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men,"
Romans 10:13 - "For WHOSOEVER shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved."
Romans 1:16 - "For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the POWER of God unto SALVATION to EVERY ONE that BELIEVETH; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
Rom 12:3- "...but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to EVERY MAN the measure of FAITH."
Colossians 1:20 - "And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to RECONCILE ALL THINGS unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things IN EARTH, or things IN HEAVEN."
1 John 2:2 - "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and NOT FOR OURS ONLY, but ALSO for the SINS OF THE WHOLE WORLD."
Romans 11:32 - "For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have MERCY UPON ALL."
2 Corinthians 5:19 - "To wit, that God was in Christ, RECONCILING THE WORLD UNTO HIMSELF, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation."
John 1:29 - "The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which TAKETH AWAY the SIN OF THE WORLD."
MarK 16:15 - "And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and PREACH THE GOSPEL TO EVERY CREATURE."
1 Timothy 2:4 - "Who WILL HAVE ALL MEN TO BE SAVED, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth."
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."
Mod
My response: Nope! The Gospel is God's POWER to salvation...
Why do you think the Gospel is too weak to bring the dead to life?
Mod
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."
My response: "Election" is only meaningless when you rip it away from God's omniscience.
Rod, is God omniscient? Does He know everything?
Robert wrote: "Why do you think the Gospel is too weak to bring the dead to life?"Your reading comprehension problem is showing again, Robert.
Mod
My question: Is the Gospel of Jesus Christ too weak to save those non-elect?
Is the sacrifice of Jesus powerless to save the lost?
Robert wrote: " Is the Gospel of Jesus Christ too weak to save those non-elect?"I've already addressed that issue, Robert.
Who do you say the elect are?
"Is the sacrifice of Jesus powerless to save the lost?"
I've addressed that one too.
You don't appear to be paying attention.
Mod
My response: Here is what you call my "theory"... (This is not my "theory"... but I am sticking with it!)
_______________________
Titus 2:11 - For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people .
____________
1 Peter 1:2 - " Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father ...
____________
John 6:64-65
64 Yet there are some of you who do not believe.”For Jesus had known from the beginning which of them did not believe and who would betray him.
65 He went on to say, “ This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has enabled them.”
Mod
I've already addressed that issue, Robert."
My response: You have not. Please point me to the post number where you answered this. It is possible I missed it. Thank you.
Robert wrote: "Alexandra wrote: "Robert needs to work on his theory so that it at least make sense within itself. As it is, it doesn't. ..."My response: Here is what you call my "theory"... (This is not my "the..."
Interesting, as you've been claiming and asserting quite a bit more than that.
Including the things I've demonstrated are self-refuting contradictions.
Mod
My response: I have repeatedly addressed this.
As God says, the elect are those whom He foreknew.
Robert wrote: "As God says, the elect are those whom He foreknew."Foreknew what?
Mod
Foreknew what?"
My response: What do you think God does not know?
Robert wrote: " What do you think God does not know? "So, you don't want to give me a straight answer, and would prefer to play games. Got it.
You've acknowledged some are non-elect, the elect are those who God "foreknew", so, you're asserting there are those who God did not "foreknew", which sounds an awful lot like claiming there's stuff God doesn't know.
Mod
So, you don't want to give me a straight answer, and would prefer to play games. Got it."
My response: YOU are the one avoiding a straight answer. I have repeatedly said that God KNOWS EVERYTHING.
Do you disagree with that?
(Note: a quick look reveals that I have stated that God knows everything in at least the following post numbers: 12, 18, 42, 43, 69, and 80.)
I trust that these repeated statements that God knows everything is a satisfactory answer to your question "foreknew what".
__________________
Now, would you kindly tell me what it is you think God does not know? Thank you.
Genesis 2212 He said, "Do not lay your hand on the boy or do anything to him, for now I know that you fear God, seeing you have not withheld your son, your only son, from me."
13 And Abraham lifted up his eyes and looked, and behold, behind him was a ram, caught in a thicket by his horns. And Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering instead of his son.
What! No foreknowledge? No omniscience?
Gladly, God is an active part of our journey and salvation. Even testing us for our AND HIS sake.
Mod
Gladly, God is an active part of our journey and salvation. Even testing us for our AND HIS sake..."
My response: Where does this passage state that God did NOT KNOW what Abraham would do?
Abraham knew what God would do... are you saying that Abraham knows more than God?
Abraham knew that BOTH he and Isaac would return...
Abraham knew that God would provide a sacrifice for Himself...
Where does God say that He did NOT KNOW what would happen?
______________________________
1 John 3:20 - "For whenever our heart condemns us, God is greater than our heart, and he knows everything. "
Alexandra, do you agree with Rod, that God does NOT know everything ?
Robert wrote: "YOU are the one avoiding a straight answer.Um, no. Your "question" is a diversionary tactic, due to attempting to deflect away from your non-answer.
I don't fall for diversionary tactics, I've had much too much experience debating theology with cult members to fall for it.
We are trying to sort out here your assertions.
"I have repeatedly said that God KNOWS EVERYTHING."
So then, who are the elect? You say, those God foreknew. Which would mean the non-elect are those God did not "foreknow".
Foreknow what?
Mod
My response: Nope! Your non-answer is the diversion
To answer your question again … God knows everything !
Do you agree or disagree?
Robert wrote: "Alexandra, do you agree with Rod, that God does NOT know everything ? "That's actually my question to you. Because right now you appear to be saying that. According to you God only "foreknew" the elect, which would mean He didn't "foreknow" the non-elect. ;)
Mod
My response: GOD KNOWS EVERYTHING!
I apologize for yelling; however, I don't know any other way to say what I have repeatedly stated.
God knows everything... elect, non-elect... end times... all of eternity past... all of eternity future... GOD KNOWS EVERYTHING.
I pray that this is clear now, what I believe.
Do you agree that God knows everything, or are you with Rod who thinks God is NOT omniscient?
Exodus 424 At a lodging place on the way the LORD met him and sought to put him to death.
25 Then Zipporah took a flint and cut off her son's foreskin and touched Moses' feet with it and said, "Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me!"
26 So he let him alone. It was then that she said, "A bridegroom of blood," because of the circumcision.
God was going to put him to death for something he foreknew????? But zipporah did something... and God then changed His mind (that He foreknew???).
This foreknowledge (as Robert misunderstands it) isn't holding together very well.
I say God doesn't Know the future (crystal ball): He makes the future. He guides and pushes it. That is how He knows the begin from the end. He plans and acts and alters when necessary.
Mod
My response: Not as "I" understand it... as the word God chose is DEFINED...
foreknew (as in Romans 8:29) = Strong's G4267 - proginōskō - "προγινώσκω proginṓskō, prog-in-oce'-ko; from G4253 and G1097; to know beforehand, i.e. foresee :"
God chose His words perfectly!
My response: Nothing. "
That question was not for you, however I am glad you understand a dead man can do nothing to save himself.
Which is contradictory to your rejection of the notion that "God does it all".
If a dead man can do nothing to save himself, and God doesn't do it, then...what?
You agree, men can do nothing to save ourselves. Yet you assert God doesn't do it "all".
We can do nothing, you agree, yet there's a part God doesn't do, according to you. That part can't be done by us, because you agree we can do nothing.
So, according to you, there's a piece we can't do, and God doesn't do.
Your theory needs some work.
It's not God - according to you.