Election's Historicity (Doctrinal Counter Perspective)

Grip Docility · May 11, 2024

I've been dug in all day. I'm a little sleepy. Excellent dialogue and discussion! I look forward to more, when possible. I leave this discussion with an image of an adorable dancing dog.

All Love in Jesus Christ to All of you...

Hammster · May 11, 2024

Grip Docility said:
This statement is fabrication. When in discussion it helps to read what the individual that you are speaking with is saying.

Having Authority and applying it are two different things. Link to refutation of fabricated debate claim

God Has exercised His authority off and on from Genesis to Jude…. But all Revelation related DAY OF THE LORD PROPHECIES haven’t occurred yet. This is obvious!

That comes across as slick maneuvering. He sorta has authority, but sorta doesn’t.

Clare73 · May 11, 2024

Grip Docility said:
That's the doctrine I've been seeing. It is not biblical. It was contrived 1500 years + after the apostolic scriptures had been completed. It is a result of the Protest of the Catholic Church and a result of a Theologian that Built upon
John Calvin's doctrine of "Election", which misappropriated the word Election from the Jews...

Don't blame it on Calvin,

blame it on Jesus (Mt 24:31) who calls the raptured (which includes the NT saints--"we," 1 Th 4:17) the elect;

blame it on Peter (2 Pe 2:10), who told them to "make their calling and election sure."
So the recipients of the letter were not just Jews, who were already elect simply by the fact of being Jews.

blame it on Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles (2 Tim 2:10), who endured the persecution of the Jews for the sake of the elect (Gentiles) to whom he ministered.

Grip Docility said:
which required traditions such as omitting verses in Jude and such forth. Yes... That's the one.

It is a Manifested Lens that question's the Character of God's Love. Allow me to ask this. Does God Love the reprobate?

God loves all men in that he provides for them and blesses them physically, but he does not love all men savingly.

Grip Docility · May 11, 2024

Clare73 said:
Don't blame it on Calvin,

blame it on Jesus (Mt 24:31) who calls the raptured (which includes the NT saints--"we," 1 Th 4:17) the elect;

blame it on Peter (2 Pe 2:10), who told them to "make their calling and election sure."
So they were not Jews who were already elect simply by the fact of being Jews.

blame it on Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles (2 Tim 2:10) who, endured the persecution of the Jews for the sake of the elect to whom he ministered.

God loves all men in that he provides for them and blesses them physically, but he does not love all men savingly.

There is fiction and fact contained within this response. Let the reader discern.

You’ve been tap dancing around Colossians 1 all day… and I’m cool with it.

That doesn’t change what is being tap danced around.

Clare73 · May 11, 2024

Grip Docility said:
I've been dug in all day. I'm a little sleepy. Excellent dialogue and discussion! I look forward to more, when possible. I leave this discussion with an image of an adorable dancing dog.

All Love in Jesus Christ to All of you...

Aw-w-w-w! So swe-e-t.

Grip Docility · May 11, 2024

Hammster said:
That comes across as slick maneuvering. He sorta has authority, but sorta doesn’t.

Non-Sequitur

Hammster · May 11, 2024

Grip Docility said:
Non-Sequitur

No.

Grip Docility · May 11, 2024

Hammster said:
No.

No, what?

Hammster · May 11, 2024

Grip Docility said:
No, what?

It’s not a non sequitur. I addressed your post.

Grip Docility · May 11, 2024

Hammster said:
It’s not a non sequitur. I addressed your post.

Oh, that. It’s Non-Sequitur.

Hammster · May 11, 2024

Grip Docility said:
Oh, that. It’s Non-Sequitur.

If that’s how you are going to play it, okay.

Grip Docility · May 11, 2024

Hammster said:
If that’s how you are going to play it, okay.

Non sequitur

a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement.

Having authority and Using authority are two different matters.

To dispute this is logically arbitrary

Arbitrary: based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system

Hammster · May 11, 2024

Grip Docility said:
Non sequitur

a conclusion or statement that does not logically follow from the previous argument or statement.

Having authority and Using authority are two different matters.

To dispute this is logically arbitrary

Arbitrary: based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system

And you pick and choose as is convenient for your argument. Sequitur.

Grip Docility · May 11, 2024

Hammster said:
And you pick and choose as is convenient for your argument. Sequitur.

Do you care to address the OP directly at any quotation point? Post's 5 through 7 are important, as well.

Clare73 · May 11, 2024

Grip Docility said:
It indeed denotes that He is GOD.
Let's see how.

Colossians 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God,
the firstborn over all creation.[i]
First born denotes "He who owns everything" by Hebrew tradition. "Birthright"
The Image verse is a specific nod to John writing that no-one has Seen the Father, yet to See Jesus was to have seen the Father, while, Jesus alone has actually "Seen" the invisible Image of God, because He is God. (The word was with God, The word was God and the Word ("Ma'amar" or "Dibbur," "Logos") became flesh.. "With God" denotes the Trinity. Was God... Denotes God the Son. The Word became flesh denotes the INCARNATION of God, God the Son, The Son of God, The Son of Man. In this very John 1 account, John specifies that No one has seen God. Because of the biblical rhythm and rhyme, , we can be certain that this verse in Colossians 1 is indeed nodding to John 1, visa vi... Post Incarnate Jesus Christ..... Post Ascension.

16 For everything was created by Him,
in heaven and on earth,
the visible and the invisible,
whether thrones or dominions
or rulers or authorities—
all things have been created through Him and for Him.

This is a very simple deduction. If everything was Created by Christ, in heaven and on earth, invisible and visible, than He is
UNCREATED or as it can be said.... Pre-Eminant... Having no Beginning or End... Never having not exsisted.

"Pre-eminent" does not mean uncreated, no beginning or end, never having not existed.
It means highest, above all.

Grip Docility said:
To say this differently, to Create everything in existence seen and unseen, knowing that God is uncreated... can lead to no other conclusion than this is about God the Son, The very Incarnation, TRUE Image, Presence of God.

Do you disagree with this?

Assuming God has given no power of creation to anyone outside the Godhead.

It is from the gospel of John that we know Jesus is God the Son.
Colossians does not state that Jesus is God.

Grip Docility · May 11, 2024

Clare73 said:
"Pre-eminent" does not mean uncreated, no beginning or end, never having not existed.
It means highest, above all.

Assuming God has given no power of creation to anyone outside the Godhead.

It is from the gospel of John that we know Jesus is God the Son.
Colossians does not state that Jesus is God.

This is a very disappointing answer.

It suggests that the fear of the implication towards the doctrine of Limited Atonement is more important than Jesus Christ, in this instance.

I genuinely didn’t expect this conversation to end up here.

Clare73 · May 11, 2024

Grip Docility said:
There is fiction and fact contained within this response. Let the reader discern.

You’ve been tap dancing around Colossians 1 all day… and I’m cool with it.

That doesn’t change what is being tap danced around.

Best I can tell, I do not agree that "elect" in Col refers only to Jews,
that elect is a NT word (1 Pe 5:13--"she (the church) who is in Babylon (faithless Jerusalem), chosen (elect) together with you (in Asia Minor),"

Grip Docility · May 11, 2024

Clare73 said:
Best I can tell, I do not agree that "elect" in Col refers only to Jews,
that elect is a NT word (1 Pe 5:13--"she (the church) who is in Babylon (faithless Jerusalem), chosen (elect) together with you (in Asia Minor),"

Colossians is about the meaning of the word “all”. This would be about the sub doctrine of limited atonement.

You brought 1 Peter into the discussion. I pointed out the implied meaning of the word elect per Peter and Paul. This would be about Jehan’s doctrine of election.

I’m not sure how Colossians has to do with the Jews in direct discussion, other than Jesus is now Jewish by blood lineage.

Grip Docility · May 11, 2024

Clare73 said:
Best I can tell, I do not agree that "elect" in Col refers only to Jews,
that elect is a NT word (1 Pe 5:13--"she (the church) who is in Babylon (faithless Jerusalem), chosen (elect) together with you (in Asia Minor),"

Colossians does proof God granted (blessed) Self Sovereignty, per the OP when lingually compared with Daniel 7 and Genesis.1.

However, we were discussing it from the aspect of Jesus died for all people and reconciled all people, per scripture.

Clare73 · May 11, 2024

Grip Docility said:
This is a very disappointing answer.

I know that you know I'm not saying that Jesus is not God.
I am saying that Paul does not explicitly state that Jesus is God, as does Jn 1:1, 14.

Grip Docility said:
It suggests that the fear of the implication towards the doctrine of Limited Atonement is more important than Jesus Christ, in this instance.

I genuinely didn’t expect this conversation to end up here.

So that's what we're talking about. . .I missed it. . .I'm pretty literal, not good at reading between the lines.

Atonement for the unbelieving makes things like, "Make your calling and election sure (to yourself, by faithfulness, 2 Pe 1:10)" to be meaningless if
1) atonement is applied to all,
2) Peter is writing to elect Jews.

Election's Historicity (Doctrinal Counter Perspective)

Well-Known Member

The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.

Well-Known Member

The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.

Well-Known Member

The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.

Well-Known Member

The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Blood-bought

Similar threads