Did Jesus Die on The Cross for The Just/Elect/Saved Whose Names Are Written in The Book of Life OR

There's too much static interference inhibiting our communication.

Thank you for explaining . And for the inspiration .


Romans 1:18-20

Hmmm...so then you believe God's saving grace is effectual? That his gracious activity will bear fruit, always accomplishing its purpose?

Pentecost was a one-time, historical event by which Jesus promised the outpouring of the Spirit and actually commanded his disciples to go to Jerusalem to wait for the day. But ever since Pentecost, I have to think that the Holy Spirit has always been active every day by imparting life to dead souls (regeneration) that would eventuate in their new birth.

I believe largely as you do. I simply believe your presentation mutes your message.

Don't believe me; rather believe the Holy Word of God. The bottom line here to this "men seeking God" issue is that scripture basically says two things about this: The natural man [left to his own evil devices] does not seek after God (Rom 3:11). On the other hand, those who do seek God and his Christ do so entirely by God's grace (Jn 6:65) -- not by their natural ability or inclination or desires or the mighty power of their "autonomous free will".

If evil men cannot say anything good because the mouth can only speak by that which overflows the heart (Mat 12:34-35); or if, conversely, no one speaking by the Spirit of God can say, "Jesus be cursed", and no one can even say from his heart that "Jesus is Lord" either, except by speaking from the same Spirit (1Cor 12:3), then how much less can unregenerate, God hating, sworn enemies of God and rebels from birth (Ps 51:5; Job 25:4-6; Isa 48:8) change their hearts to have godly desires that would incline them to seek after the Lord God?

The devil has planted many tares (his sons and daughters) in Christ's Church, so verify everything by the inspired, infallible, authoritative Word of God. " Let God be true and every man a liar" (Rom 3:4)!

This post is an excellent example of what I meant. First you imply that I don't form my doctrine based on the Bible, while also implying your superiority because you do. Not the most endearing of tactics.
Second, what you shared is already my position. You are tone-deaf to other posters. You don't actually hear what others are posting to you, but seem only interested in stopping to post long enough for others to respond. What you have to say is more important to you than the edifying of others.

We all are at times. But I don't think I'll ever understand putting so much effort into the study of a subject only to present it in a way that others won't receive it.

🤭 He's basically saying....




🌺

You did say in your prior post that you "largely believe as I do". But I don't want anyone to take my word for anything, per se. The reason I either cite or quote numerous passages to support my premises is to encourage readers to check out the cites for themselves or to ponder and meditate on what I quote or to find other relevant, supporting passages.

As far as what I shared in my last post, I have no idea that would [also] be "your position" since I brought new passages to bear upon the topic. (But I'm glad you still agree with scripture.) Yes, you did basically say that where God is "active", men respond. All I did was emphasize the absolute necessity of God's sovereign, effectual grace (which you characterized as his actions through your use of the verb "active"). I just put a finer point on your verb "active".

Methinks, sir, you protests too much. You're reading things into my posts that I never said or implied.

Unfortunately, I believe post #5047 is accurate. Grace and peace.

Well, of course. Birds of a feather and all that...

But I do have a question to ask you for clarification. When you essentially said earlier that "where God is active, men respond", did you mean by that that all their responses would perfectly align with God's purpose?

I have a new question for one and all to ponder: God, throughout scripture, characterizes his chosen people as "sheep". Of all the numerous animals upon the earth, why did God choose "sheep" as his metaphor?

Not sure I understand the question.
We understand from Isaiah that when God's word goes forth it never returns to Him void, so His purpose is always accomplished in it. If this is what you mean, then yes.

To be honest, I don't know how Calvinists can even imply that God would have certain people predestined for damnation. Jesus went to the cross in order to offer everyone the chance to be saved, if only they would believe. Jesus paid an awesome price on that Cross. That’s how much God loved the world.
…because they’re pretty helpless without a shepherd. right?

That's exactly what I meant! So, it appears that you pretty much subscribe to the "T" and "I" portions of TULIP. And if "I", then likely you adhere to the "U", as well. After all, who can frustrate God's decrees?

Every letter of the Word of God is what Christians subscribe to.

I have no problem with the basic tenets of TULIP. I arrive at my conclusions a little differently on some points. But there are hot button terms when used in conversation about salvation that lend themselves to those conversations becoming emotionally driven rather than scripturally driven. So, in my experience, if you want to have a productive and edifying discussion about the outworking of salvation, employing language that doesn't incite emotional responses might be more effective.

It's a tough doctrine for many because they tend to overthink it, instead of just going by what scripture says. So many want to reason their way as to why predestination cannot be true. But is there any scripture that says that God decreed or predestined that all men be saved? Also, we really do have to understand what went on in the Garden after the Fall. Genesis 3 sets the rock-solid foundation for soteriological truth throughout all scripture. Right after the Fall God determined that there would be two kinds of people on this earth: The Woman's seed and the Serpent's seed. When Paul talks about the Potter making two lumps of clay out of one (Rom 9:21), I have to think he was alluding to Genesis 3. God indeed made two lumps from Adam (not forgetting that Eve proceeded from Adam!).. One lump God gave to the devil. The other lump he gave to the promised SEED ("all that the Father gives me will come to me...") who would come through the Woman and one day crush the serpent's head. There is not even one scintilla of a hint in the bible that God ever intended to save the entire human race. God cannot possibly be unjust for giving sinners what they deserve; nor can He be unjust for giving the elect his grace and forgiveness that they don't deserve, since His Beloved paid their sin debt in full. Grace and Mercy were not given freely at the expense of Justice. Perhaps I'll elaborate more later....

You continue to impress, sister. I would say that is the main point that is being emphasized in that metaphor. Whereas in the spiritual death metaphor inability is being stressed. Don't forget....going back to the Garden again...what did Adam and Eve fail to do that caused their sin? They both didn't trust God. They failed to rely upon him, to depend on their Creator. Anyhow...I do plan on eventually unpacking this metaphor. There are many components to it.

I can't be responsible for how people think or emote. While the TULIP acronym, admittedly, isn't perfect, it's still a convenient way to remember and express the Five Doctrines of Grace. TULIP is certainly "scripturally driven". It just isn't popular in much of the Church. But then again...Jesus wasn't very popular either during his First Advent...and he still isn't in the world.