Calvinism and Context?
- Thread starter throughfaith
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
- Status
The Calvinist will often say, Jesus only died for those whom God chose [as "His"] before time [before creation].
However, Romans 8:9b says this:
"Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."
[the underlined is true of us before we come to faith in Christ; therefore the bold is true of us before and up to that point]
QFT. = )
However, Romans 8:9b says this:
"Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."
[the underlined is true of us before we come to faith in Christ; therefore the bold is true of us before and up to that point]
QFT. = )
Avoidance is not reconciliation.
https://biblehub.net/searchnt.php?q=elect
https://biblehub.net/searchnt.php?q=election
My emphasis was on "who" does the drawing (from the point in time of His Cross and forward). Jesus said, "I... will draw all to MYSELF" (my point had to do with the "chronology" that is so often disregarded and overlooked).
I believe it is the same for Romans 9, in view of what Romans 11:32 says, "For God hath concluded them ALL [Jew AND Gentile alike] in unbelief, that He might have mercy upon ALL [Jew AND Gentile alike!]"... but this is to consider Romans 9:18 in its proper context, where it had said, "Therefore hath He mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth." [the overall CONTEXT of Romans 9-11 being "nations"... "Israel [singular nation]," and "Gentiles [plural nations]"... and this understanding carries through to our grasp of "eschatology" (I only mention this b/c you and I both agree on "pre-trib"... but "pre-trib" is not really a thing apart from grasping this distinction between "Israel" and "the nations/Gentiles" (here in this context) not to mention also "the Church which is His body" (wherein there is NO distinction, in our standing before God "IN CHRIST")]... IOW, the "on whom He will" (9:18) has to do with their idea that the Jews were "IN" with God by reason of their birth/heritage (them, and them alone! no one else!), but Paul is saying, who are you to say that God cannot have mercy on the Gentiles IF HE WANTS TO (and such was indeed His plan!) The "understood question" underlying the CONTEXT being, "what of the promises made TO ISRAEL?!" (now; ...where are they?! [Jesus died, and...??])
I believe it is the same for Romans 9, in view of what Romans 11:32 says, "For God hath concluded them ALL [Jew AND Gentile alike] in unbelief, that He might have mercy upon ALL [Jew AND Gentile alike!]"... but this is to consider Romans 9:18 in its proper context, where it had said, "Therefore hath He mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth." [the overall CONTEXT of Romans 9-11 being "nations"... "Israel [singular nation]," and "Gentiles [plural nations]"... and this understanding carries through to our grasp of "eschatology" (I only mention this b/c you and I both agree on "pre-trib"... but "pre-trib" is not really a thing apart from grasping this distinction between "Israel" and "the nations/Gentiles" (here in this context) not to mention also "the Church which is His body" (wherein there is NO distinction, in our standing before God "IN CHRIST")]... IOW, the "on whom He will" (9:18) has to do with their idea that the Jews were "IN" with God by reason of their birth/heritage (them, and them alone! no one else!), but Paul is saying, who are you to say that God cannot have mercy on the Gentiles IF HE WANTS TO (and such was indeed His plan!) The "understood question" underlying the CONTEXT being, "what of the promises made TO ISRAEL?!" (now; ...where are they?! [Jesus died, and...??])
-
3
- Show all
E
Calvinism defines the elect as that select group whom, alone, God has from eternity past appointed to salvation and this not the correct understanding of the word.
All others are predestined by God to eternal damnation.
The gospel can be preached day and night to the latter and there would be no point, because they are totally incapable of believing it.
God…gives the faith to believe to the selected alone, though He could do so for all.
Yet never is this absurd doctrine evidenced in Scripture.
All others are predestined by God to eternal damnation.
The gospel can be preached day and night to the latter and there would be no point, because they are totally incapable of believing it.
God…gives the faith to believe to the selected alone, though He could do so for all.
Yet never is this absurd doctrine evidenced in Scripture.
Nice, enjoy.
Though when you have time, I would appreciate the argument for reading "all" as groups rather than universal, especially considering that the direct context of that statement was following the declaration that judgment was coming and the ruler of the world would be cast out.
Though when you have time, I would appreciate the argument for reading "all" as groups rather than universal, especially considering that the direct context of that statement was following the declaration that judgment was coming and the ruler of the world would be cast out.
-
2
-
1
- Show all
Yes yes, we know of these Calvinistic ideas.
You still need to deal with the elect and election. Its there. Its literally EVERYWHERE.
Now I have zero problems with election. It is fully and seamlessly inegrated into present day systematic theology. Which does no good if you simply "don't get it".
Fortunately for me I do. And I sleep well at night believe it.
You still need to deal with the elect and election. Its there. Its literally EVERYWHERE.
Now I have zero problems with election. It is fully and seamlessly inegrated into present day systematic theology. Which does no good if you simply "don't get it".
Fortunately for me I do. And I sleep well at night believe it.
All are agreed Job speaks in ignorance, but it seems a stretch to state God's reprimand of Job's 3 friends is "keeping company of the wicked" in the way Elihu says it.
You still haven't addressed the basic premise, though, that Elihu regardless of whether he says some true things stood in the place of God since Job had made the plea of innocence. The silence on the part of Job and God can be read either way, with Job not answering because Elihu has no place to speak and God not answering for the same reason.
You still haven't addressed the basic premise, though, that Elihu regardless of whether he says some true things stood in the place of God since Job had made the plea of innocence. The silence on the part of Job and God can be read either way, with Job not answering because Elihu has no place to speak and God not answering for the same reason.
- Status