is it possibe to be a gay christian

[rojoloco]

I am sorry Rojo, I do like you and definitely think you are a brother, but we still have this one crucial disagreement. For what ever reason, possibly because you are a Legalistic at heart, I am not sure.

Because of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ, God is not "at war with man" any more. I just don't think that you have the full grasp of "saved by Grace" which is for the believer!

Oh, there will be a definite pouring out of his wrath in the "end times" but this is for the non-believers not the the "Born Again" Christian. And, for those Christians, God has given them there salvation as a gift and if it is a gift it is free. God will have his wrath on the unbeliever, but not now and especially for the Christian who has Jesus Christ living in them.

And, respectfully no, this is not an invitation to debate this subject, which we have done to ad-nausea, You have made a claim of the New Covenant that you think we live under and I have made mine. let's please leave it at that, my little Brother!

I'll respect your request to not debate this subject here but I did want to let it be known that I condemn legalism (actually wrote 2 sermons on the subject). I do believe in the Elect though. I believe that the Elect will not face condemnation but the non-Elect are condemned already. It is these men who will face the wrath of God and do not get to share in His love. They receive His common blessing (sun, rain, etc) but that is the extent of it. I'll leave it at that though so we can get back on topic.

 

[RJ]

I know this is off topic but I feel compelled to address it anyway. While the above statement may be true at times, I do not believe it is an unconditional/absolute statement that can be made. While God is a loving God, He is also a vengeful and wrathful God. Perhaps this is best suited in another discussion though.

God truly loves a sinner. What were we, if not first sinners before being saved? Did he not love each one of us?

To say what you said above is to say that Gods's love is not Agape and perfectly unconditional.

What would you say about what these two separate translations say about what 1 Corinthians 13:5 says about God's love?

5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.
5Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;

In light of God's perfect love and your own salvation, how can you say that " God Loves a sinner" is not a totally unconditional and absolute statement?

And this:
Romans 2:4

4 Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, forbearance and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness is intended to lead you to repentance?

If this statement is true, is not this kindness, patience for the sinner as he leads them to repentance?

 

[MelodyC]

So where was the man?

The old deflect the sin I am doing by pointing to the other person.

We don't know where was the man or what was happening there it was given to us in the Bible.

Here is the thing you can't say God's Laws are not right because people are imperfect in applying them.

You can't excuse your own sin by pointing out some one elses. Adam tried that right at the beginning but he didn't miss out on getting judged and dealt with by God.

You ahven't gone back to read what I have written first up I'm sure.

You can't conintue to have sexual intercourse wether it's a Hetrosexual with a prostitute or adultery etc, or Gay couple and keep turning up to Church week in week out and thinking it should be alright with God.

In the end God is the only one who judges and executes His judgement.

We are not to put up with blatant open sin. That is what I was saying. If you are an adulterer or gay then first recognise you are sinning and take steps to stop sinning. Continue to brazenly sin and I will not fellowship with you.

There is are conditions to God's Grace.

 

[RJ]

The old deflect the sin I am doing by pointing to the other person.

We don't know where was the man or what was happening there it was given to us in the Bible.

Here is the thing you can't say God's Laws are not right because people are imperfect in applying them.

You can't excuse your own sin by pointing out some one elses. Adam tried that right at the beginning but he didn't miss out on getting judged and dealt with by God.

You ahven't gone back to read what I have written first up I'm sure.

You can't conintue to have sexual intercourse wether it's a Hetrosexual with a prostitute or adultery etc, or Gay couple and keep turning up to Church week in week out and thinking it should be alright with God.

In the end God is the only one who judges and executes His judgement.

We are not to put up with blatant open sin. That is what I was saying. If you are an adulterer or gay then first recognise you are sinning and take steps to stop sinning. Continue to brazenly sin and I will not fellowship with you.

There is are conditions to God's Grace.

Yes, you could be in a situation of struggling with sin that you are being presently convicted of by the Holy Spirit but blatant sin is a sure fire sign of not having Christ living inside you, the two are not compatible. A person who "blatantly" sins was not saved in the first place. Paul has a good discussion of this in Hebrews 6:4. Judas was most certainly a false Christian, he certainly tasted the fruits of Jesus up close and personal but was lost the whole time.

I respectfully don't think you meant to say that there are conditions to God's Grace, other than believing in it, otherwise there are no pre-conditions; it is a gift and a gift is free and for all. Most assuredly, there are consequences for not accepting Grace.

 

[rojoloco]

God truly loves a sinner. What were we, if not first sinners before being saved? Did he not love each one of us?

It says that God demonstrated His love toward US in that while WE were yet sinners. I will never say God hates all sinners but I will also never say God loves every person. This is not to say that God is not grieved over sinners but I do not believe His love even comes into the picture with the non-Elect. That passage is specifically speaking to believers. There are so many verses that speak of individuals whom God hates as well as entire categories of people who He hates. He can't love everybody while, at the same time, hating even one person. Too often His love is over-emphasized while His hatred is swept under the rug as an unappealing doctrine. The same thing happens with teaching on Hell. It, too, is often swept under the rug while pastors preach on Heaven.

To say what you said above is to say that Gods's love is not Agape and perfectly unconditional.

This only applies toward His Elect. Who those are, I have no idea as I am not privy to His plans.

What would you say about what these two separate translations say about what 1 Corinthians 13:5 says about God's love?

5 It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.
5Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil;

In light of God's perfect love and your own salvation, how can you say that " God Loves a sinner" is not a totally unconditional and absolute statement?

In the Christian's life, the above passage on love is certainly absolute and unconditional. However, in the non-Christian's life, it is not so absolute. If that non-Christian is one of His Elect, it is an absolute statement though that person has not yet been reconciled. If that person is not one of the Elect, he will go about his daily chores gladly rejecting God while God, at the same time, does not show His love toward this person. This person may enjoy common blessings or common grace but His love does not enter the picture.

And this:
Romans 2:4

4 Or do you show contempt for the riches of his kindness, forbearance and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness is intended to lead you to repentance?

If this statement is true, is not this kindness, patience for the sinner as he leads them to repentance?

Of course it is true. However, even for an individual that will never come to repentance, the very fact that God allows them to wake to see another day is a sign of His kindness. However, it is not a sign of His love. Nothing in that passage speaks of His love. It speaks of His kindness. It speaks of His forbearance which means the simple fact that He has withheld His judgment. It speaks of His patience which goes hand in hand with His forbearance. Despite the many who blaspheme Him day in and day out, He has held off judgment for the sake of those who will still come to Him. Again, nowhere does it speak of His love for every sinner. His love is truly evident in that passage but it is clear that the love is directed toward the Elect who will still come to Him in time.

 

[RJ]

It says that God demonstrated His love toward US in that while WE were yet sinners. I will never say God hates all sinners but I will also never say God loves every person. This is not to say that God is not grieved over sinners but I do not believe His love even comes into the picture with the non-Elect. That passage is specifically speaking to believers. There are so many verses that speak of individuals whom God hates as well as entire categories of people who He hates. He can't love everybody while, at the same time, hating even one person. Too often His love is over-emphasized while His hatred is swept under the rug as an unappealing doctrine. The same thing happens with teaching on Hell. It, too, is often swept under the rug while pastors preach on Heaven.



This only applies toward His Elect. Who those are, I have no idea as I am not privy to His plans.



In the Christian's life, the above passage on love is certainly absolute and unconditional. However, in the non-Christian's life, it is not so absolute. If that non-Christian is one of His Elect, it is an absolute statement though that person has not yet been reconciled. If that person is not one of the Elect, he will go about his daily chores gladly rejecting God while God, at the same time, does not show His love toward this person. This person may enjoy common blessings or common grace but His love does not enter the picture.



Of course it is true. However, even for an individual that will never come to repentance, the very fact that God allows them to wake to see another day is a sign of His kindness. However, it is not a sign of His love. Nothing in that passage speaks of His love. It speaks of His kindness. It speaks of His forbearance which means the simple fact that He has withheld His judgment. It speaks of His patience which goes hand in hand with His forbearance. Despite the many who blaspheme Him day in and day out, He has held off judgment for the sake of those who will still come to Him. Again, nowhere does it speak of His love for every sinner. His love is truly evident in that passage but it is clear that the love is directed toward the Elect who will still come to Him in time.

With all due respect to you and your beliefs, I am not surprised that your answer to my questions all hinge upon and are focused on your definition and justification of Election. To support this definition, also requires you to support it by saying that our God is a God of love but a God of hate.

Sure there is Election, because the Bible says that there is but, after that point, we stop on agreement.

Why can't you accept the fact that Jesus died for the sins of the "world"?....not just a few but for all?

Why can't you accept the fact that God said his grace is a gift? And if it is a gift, it must be free and if it is free it must be for anyone?

Surly, if you believe that God is "all powerful" and "all presence" he would absolutely know, in the end, who chose him by their free will and faith in his gift of Jesus Christ.

Your election is of a God that is a "Puppet-Master". Your election says: A believer had no choice and was made to believe by God....What kind of believer is that? And a non-believer has no choice because God made them not believe...how sad is your theology!

If God elects or doesn't elect every man, truly you would say that God elected Abraham and it was God that gave Abrahan his faith, right?
It was God that gave Abraham his faith that if he killed his son on the Altar, that God would resurrect him anyway.So this was all a big play and a stage that was solely set up by God. So Abraham had no choice in the matter because God actually made him choose his actions? So where the Bible said that Abraham did all this through faith, it really wasn't his faith, it was faith that God created for him, to fulfill God's purpose?

So your God Elects you and it is not of your own free will and choice. So where you have a non-elect that continues to be dead in their sin, they continue to sin because God chooses for them to sin and they actually don't sin because of their free will?

You keep telling us that you are a Preacher. So, is everyone you preach to one of the Elect? If not, what do you do with someone in your congregation that believes that they are not saved because God hasn't elected them? How would you handle that? Surly, if you preach election at your church , as you do here, you must have some wondering if they are to be elected or not? Your theology can easily put people into bondage?

 

[LifeinJesus]

It's so simple, The Bible says homosexuality is wrong and thus it is wrong. Christians are meant to be part of Christ. Paul said it was impossible to take part of the body of Christ and join it with a *****. So is it impossible to take Christ and join him with a homosexual. Only when you live the way God intended, will you be counted as a true Christian.

Sodomy is very wrong and God destroyed the ones that practised it back in Sodom.

 

[RJ]

It's so simple, The Bible says homosexuality is wrong and thus it is wrong. Christians are meant to be part of Christ. Paul said it was impossible to take part of the body of Christ and join it with a *****. So is it impossible to take Christ and join him with a homosexual. Only when you live the way God intended, will you be counted as a true Christian.

Sodomy is very wrong and God destroyed the ones that practised it back in Sodom.

I hate homosexuality, but saying that, we don't live in the day of Sodom and they certainly didn't live under grace that we do.

Surly a practicing homosexual can and will be forgiven of there sin.

After a homosexual comes to the Lord and is saved, are you saying that they will be completely free of this sin and never will have any thoughts of it instantly?

Under the Fulfillment of the Law, Jesus said that if you even look at another person with lust in your heart, it is the same as Adultery. Wouldn't you believe that he would say the same thing about Homosexuality?

Yet when you are truly saved, it means that you will have absolutely no desires of sin at all, immediately?

By the way, I have been happily married for 40 years with 2 sons and 2 grandsons, but I also used to make fun of and redicule homosexuals, but God change my heart. We are called to, not to accept but to love and understand homosexuals wouldn't you say?

 

[Strypes]

Originally Posted by Strypes
Indeed the woman caught in adultery was instructed by Jesus to go and sin no more. That was a conversation between her and Jesus.

Jesus did not instruct the religious leaders to hound her and make sure she conformed.

We are all saved sinners. Saved by the grace of God to love God above all and to love each other.

Jesus told a story about having a log in your eye whilst trying to get the speck out of your brother's eye. First get the log out of your own eye then you will see clearly to help your brother (in love) to get the speck out of their eye.

It seems to me that folks in same sex relationships are being slapped around by the logs of hatered in the eyes of "well meaning" Christians.

Learn to love them, then you may be able to help them.

Actually you are totally incorrect in making that statement.

The Pharisees were only following the law given to them by Moses.

LEV 20:10 " `If a man commits adultery with another man's wife--with the wife of his neighbor--both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.


Those who were going to stone here were completely within their rights to do so by LAW.

So where was the man?

MelodyC,

It was a retorical question. Meaning the answer was obivious.

When the woman was caught in the very act of adultery, was not the man there as well? Why did they only bring the woman out to be stoned? (again retorical, and if that is not obivious then for clairity, "the double standard of the time").

They were not interested in Justice or fullfilling the law, had they, then the man would have been there to be stoned as well.

They were trying to trick Jesus so that they could find fault so that they could kill him.

Reminds me of the way some of you in this thread want to find fault in others so you can stone them too.

John 8:2 Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them. 3 The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst 4 they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. 5 Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” 6 This they said to test him, that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. 7 And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 And once more he bent down and wrote on the ground. 9 But when they heard it, they went away one by one, beginning with the older ones, and Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him. 10 Jesus stood up and said to her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?” 11 She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “Neither do I condemn you; go, and from now on sin no more.”

Forgiveness is found in Jesus.

Luke 7..

"41 “A certain moneylender had two debtors. One owed five hundred denarii, and the other fifty. 42 When they could not pay, he cancelled the debt of both. Now which of them will love him more?” 43 Simon answered, “The one, I suppose, for whom he cancelled the larger debt.” And he said to him, “You have judged rightly.” 44 Then turning toward the woman he said to Simon, “Do you see this woman? I entered your house; you gave me no water for my feet, but she has wet my feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. 45 You gave me no kiss, but from the time I came in she has not ceased to kiss my feet. 46 You did not anoint my head with oil, but she has anointed my feet with ointment. 47 Therefore I tell you, her sins, which are many, are forgiven—for she loved much. But he who is forgiven little, loves little.” 48 And he said to her, “Your sins are forgiven.” 49 Then those who were at table with him began to say among [8] themselves, “Who is this, who even forgives sins?” 50 And he said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.”

Love God above all and love each other. Let the Holy Spirit work His will the the lives of those that He has saved. Realize they are forgiven as were you. LOVE much!

 

[Strypes]

Proverbs 6:16 There are six things that the Lord hates, seven that are an abomination to him: 17 haughty eyes, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, 18 a heart that devises wicked plans,
feet that make haste to run to evil, 19 a false witness who breathes out lies, and one who sows discord among brothers.

I know the passages (previously quoted in this thread) where homosexuality is a sin, but it didn't make the top seven.

So lets stop sowing discord among brothers and learn to love one another and Let God heal his people in His own way.

 

[rojoloco]

To support this definition, also requires you to support it by saying that our God is a God of love but a God of hate.

Exactly! Modern Christianity tends to only look at one facet of God. God is multi-faceted. In fact, the hatred of God is not a new concept. It was taught right alongside the love of God ages ago but it is now swept under the rug, ignored, or even rejected.

Sure there is Election, because the Bible says that there is but, after that point, we stop on agreement.

Mainly because you believe God Elected based on something he knew we would do whereas I believe He Elected based on His own choosing and was not influenced by me in His plans which were decreed from eternity past.

Why can't you accept the fact that Jesus died for the sins of the "world"?....not just a few but for all?

This is where we interpret "world" differently. You say he died for all of mankind without exception. I say it was for all of mankind without distinction (i.e. both Jew and Gentile).

Why can't you accept the fact that God said his grace is a gift? And if it is a gift, it must be free and if it is free it must be for anyone?

Is this kindergarten? If God has something and shares it with one person, does the teacher force Him to share it with everybody or not bring it out at all? To say simply because a gift is free, it must be shared with everybody doesn't make sense. To have a gift, there must be a gifter. The Gifter can give the gift to whomever He pleases in accordance with His Will.

Surly, if you believe that God is "all powerful" and "all presence" he would absolutely know, in the end, who chose him by their free will and faith in his gift of Jesus Christ.

Surely I know that no man would ever choose God of their own will because their will is so tainted by sin and so against God that none seek Him. Based on this, God would have seen everybody without exception rejecting Him while being caught up in their carnal nature. God foreknew who would choose Him because He first chose them and set the plan on motion. Besides, his foreknowledge never eludes to knowledge of an event, choice, or action. It always refers to an individual whenever it uses the word in Scripture.

Your election is of a God that is a "Puppet-Master". Your election says: A believer had no choice and was made to believe by God....What kind of believer is that? And a non-believer has no choice because God made them not believe...how sad is your theology!

The Reformed doctrine of Election is that the believer never makes a choice contrary to his greatest desire and that his desires are within the constraints of his will. Therefore, the carnal man will never desire to choose God. Therefore, he never will choose God. It is only after the carnal man has been regenerated and the Spirit resides in Him that he is awakened and set free. At this point, he immediately chooses God because God has become irresistible. He once was blind but now he sees and what he sees, he will not reject.

God does not force a man to believe or not believe. Man disbelieves by his very nature. This takes no interaction from God. However, it does take God's interaction for the man TO believe. There is no forcing or twisting of arms. God simply enables His Elect to believe and believe they will.

If God elects or doesn't elect every man, truly you would say that God elected Abraham and it was God that gave Abrahan his faith, right?
It was God that gave Abraham his faith that if he killed his son on the Altar, that God would resurrect him anyway.So this was all a big play and a stage that was solely set up by God. So Abraham had no choice in the matter because God actually made him choose his actions? So where the Bible said that Abraham did all this through faith, it really wasn't his faith, it was faith that God created for him, to fulfill God's purpose?

You are mixing up day to day actions with salvation. The 2 are very different. One can choose to sin and choose to follow God so long as they are saved. However, one cannot choose to save himself because. before regeneration, he does not believe he has anything to be saved from.

So your God Elects you and it is not of your own free will and choice. So where you have a non-elect that continues to be dead in their sin, they continue to sin because God chooses for them to sin and they actually don't sin because of their free will?

God does not choose for anybody to sin. Man does that well enough on his own. God simply refrains from interacting. Your belief pretty much places man at the epicenter of the Universe. Your belief portrays man as all important as if sharing in God's love is our purpose. That is not our purpose at all. Our purpose is to glorify God be it through His love or through His wrath.

You keep telling us that you are a Preacher. So, is everyone you preach to one of the Elect? If not, what do you do with someone in your congregation that believes that they are not saved because God hasn't elected them? How would you handle that? Surly, if you preach election at your church , as you do here, you must have some wondering if they are to be elected or not? Your theology can easily put people into bondage?

Only one who is ignorant (sorry for the harsh words) of the doctrine of Election would believe this. Actually, the doctrine of Election, when properly understood, is reassuring, builds confidence, deepens trust, and brings joy. To believe otherwise often leads to doubt, despair, and confusion as to whether or not they are good enough. If one is truly seeking God, they can rest assured it is because God was already working in them and whatever work He begins, He will complete (Philippians 1:6).

 

[RJ]

Exactly! Modern Christianity tends to only look at one facet of God. God is multi-faceted. In fact, the hatred of God is not a new concept. It was taught right alongside the love of God ages ago but it is now swept under the rug, ignored, or even rejected.



Mainly because you believe God Elected based on something he knew we would do whereas I believe He Elected based on His own choosing and was not influenced by me in His plans which were decreed from eternity past.



This is where we interpret "world" differently. You say he died for all of mankind without exception. I say it was for all of mankind without distinction (i.e. both Jew and Gentile).



Is this kindergarten? If God has something and shares it with one person, does the teacher force Him to share it with everybody or not bring it out at all? To say simply because a gift is free, it must be shared with everybody doesn't make sense. To have a gift, there must be a gifter. The Gifter can give the gift to whomever He pleases in accordance with His Will.



Surely I know that no man would ever choose God of their own will because their will is so tainted by sin and so against God that none seek Him. Based on this, God would have seen everybody without exception rejecting Him while being caught up in their carnal nature. God foreknew who would choose Him because He first chose them and set the plan on motion. Besides, his foreknowledge never eludes to knowledge of an event, choice, or action. It always refers to an individual whenever it uses the word in Scripture.



The Reformed doctrine of Election is that the believer never makes a choice contrary to his greatest desire and that his desires are within the constraints of his will. Therefore, the carnal man will never desire to choose God. Therefore, he never will choose God. It is only after the carnal man has been regenerated and the Spirit resides in Him that he is awakened and set free. At this point, he immediately chooses God because God has become irresistible. He once was blind but now he sees and what he sees, he will not reject.

God does not force a man to believe or not believe. Man disbelieves by his very nature. This takes no interaction from God. However, it does take God's interaction for the man TO believe. There is no forcing or twisting of arms. God simply enables His Elect to believe and believe they will.



You are mixing up day to day actions with salvation. The 2 are very different. One can choose to sin and choose to follow God so long as they are saved. However, one cannot choose to save himself because. before regeneration, he does not believe he has anything to be saved from.



God does not choose for anybody to sin. Man does that well enough on his own. God simply refrains from interacting. Your belief pretty much places man at the epicenter of the Universe. Your belief portrays man as all important as if sharing in God's love is our purpose. That is not our purpose at all. Our purpose is to glorify God be it through His love or through His wrath.



Only one who is ignorant (sorry for the harsh words) of the doctrine of Election would believe this. Actually, the doctrine of Election, when properly understood, is reassuring, builds confidence, deepens trust, and brings joy. To believe otherwise often leads to doubt, despair, and confusion as to whether or not they are good enough. If one is truly seeking God, they can rest assured it is because God was already working in them and whatever work He begins, He will complete (Philippians 1:6).

From the red highlights above, I thought we were finally getting somewhere, but can only assume that your pride has only carried over to condescending arrogance; there was no need for these comments and adds nothing for this conversation.

I think that this is a real problem: God is multi-faceted
I really do not think that you fully believe this or understand.

I think that our greatest difference is that I believe your humanistic, worldly view of Election, defines most everything you believe, or you must believe in order to support your Election view. I also, think that the greatest reason for this is your basic belief that God is not all powerful and capable of absolutely anything!

This is my final talk on Election verse Free Will. I am afraid it is too long, but I hope you read it anyway and be honest with yourself; I think this says what I believe much better that I could ever say!
God Bless

Election vs. Free Will

The Doctrine of Election is a theological truth that threads throughout God’s Word. Note the following remarks by C. Fred Dickason, Th.D., Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, Illinois, as recorded in the Wycliffe Bible Dictionary (Hendrickson Publishers).

ELECT. “Chosen” or “selected.” The main OT verb for this is “bahar” a deliberate selecting of something or someone with attendant preference or pleasure. The NT verb “eklegomai” means to choose or select out of a larger group something or someone for oneself. The related adjectives “hahir” and “eklektos” are translated “elect” or “chosen” and are the result of an act of selection. The words are used of choices human (Gen 6:2; Deut 30:19; Lk 10:42; 14:7) and divine for salvation (Eph 1:4), and for service (Jn 15:16).

Various objects are termed “elect” or “chosen” by God: the nation Israel for special favor and purpose (Isa 44:1; 45:4); several individuals, such as Abraham (Neh 9:7), Aaron (Ps 105:26), David (1 Sam 16:8 ff.); Jerusalem (2 Chr 6:6); a remnant of Jews near the second coming of Christ (Mt 24:22; Isa 65:9); the Church, the body of Christ

(1 Pet 2:9; 5:13; Col 3:12; Tit 1:1); Christ Himself (Isa 42:1; 1 Pet 2:6); the “lady”

(2 Jn 1); and angels (1 Tim 5:21). Elect men are chosen by God’s grace (Rom 11:5) and love (Rom 8:33-39; 11:28; Eph 1:4-5) and according to His foreknowledge (1 Pet 1:2); it is never on the basis of human merit (Rom 9:11; cf. 2 Tim 1:9).

Election, as it applies to the salvation of a person, encompasses several steps, e.g., foreknowledge, predestination, calling, justification and glorification (Romans 8:29, 30). The difficulty in Election in the matter of salvation, for man anyway, lies in reconciling the sovereignty of God with the freedom of man to choose. God chose every person who would be saved before the foundation of the world, i.e., before creation (Ephesians 1:4, 5). Man’s merit or his works have nothing to do with the election process or the act of salvation, since man has no merit and could not generate any merit from the time of his fall in the Garden of Eden onward. Even though man is capable of producing “human good,” this commodity is as “filthy rags” in the sight of God (Isaiah 64:6) and is totally insufficient for the purpose of achieving eternal salvation. Only faith alone in Christ alone brings eternal salvation to the recipient. God chose those who are to be saved strictly in accordance with His purpose, pleasure and will (Acts 4:28; Romans 9:11; Ephesians 1:5; 3:11).

Therefore God, in accordance with His purpose and before time, selected every single person who was to be saved through Jesus Christ. On the “other side of the coin” the Bible clearly spells out that salvation is for everyone and is a function of man’s will. Note the following passages of Scripture.

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. (John 3:16)

But whosoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life. (John 4:14)

And it shall come to pass that whosoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved. (Acts 2:21)

To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whosoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins. (Acts 10:43)

Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life. (Romans 5:18)

For whosoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved. (Romans 10:13)

For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. (1 Timothy 2:3, 4)

For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men . . . . (Titus 2:11)

The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us, not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance. (2 Peter 3:9)

Whosoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves Him who begot also loves him who is begotten of Him. (1 John 5:1)

And the Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let him who hears say, "Come!" And let him who thirsts come. Whosoever desires, let him take the water of life freely. (Revelation 22:17)

Therefore it is just as clear in the Word of God that the love and grace of God is provided for every single man and woman within the realm of time through the sacrifice of His Son. What’s more, any person may obtain this love and grace, this gift of eternal life, by exercising his will (choice) to receive by faith (trusting in) Jesus Christ and His sacrifice on the cross for his personal salvation.

How does a believer reconcile “election” with “free agency?” It is fact that the Bible supports both doctrines. To the rational mind they conflict with each other, but it is not totally unreasonable to believe that God has allowed man sufficient mental capacity to understand each doctrine and how they fit together in God’s purpose and plan. Of course the simplistic approach could be to simply deny man’s ability to reconcile these doctrines, relegating the entire matter to the arena of faith.

There is of course merit in the simplistic approach. Reason can never be elevated over supernatural revelation. If every aspect of God’s plan could be reduced to the level of human reason, there would be no need for faith. The reconciliation of these two doctrines may very well fall within the purview of the following two passages of Scripture.

For My thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways, says the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts. (Isaiah 55:8, 9)

The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but those things which are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law. (Deuteronomy 29:29)

Nevertheless, the number of words penned in commentary regarding the relationship of these two doctrines over the centuries is legion. On the one hand you have the strictly Calvinistic approach stating that man essentially has no say in his salvation, that even his ability to choose must be activated—maybe even controlled— by God. Then there is the strictly Arminian view that has God’s plan teetering on man’s will. There is truth in both views and maybe even some error. So what is the solution? The following is offered as a possibility and not as a concrete (dogmatic) fact—based on the following:

1. God has elected everyone that is to be saved prior to time and creation.
2. God has offered the possibility of salvation to everyone.
3. Christ paid for the sins of everyone on the cross.
4. Man was created in the image of God, i.e. with a mind, soul and spirit and with the ability to chose (free agency).
5. God has stipulated to man that he must exercise his will and receive (trusting in) His Son for salvation.
6. Although God chose before time in accordance with His purpose, He made His selection in conjunction within an orderly process—a prescribed set of steps (Romans 8:29, 30), which are foreknowledge, predestination, calling (otherwise known as the convicting power of the Holy Spirit), justification (by faith alone in Christ alone) and glorification (sanctification from time and into eternity).
7. Foreknowledge appears to be the foundational or commencement step in the election process (Romans 8:29, 30; 1 Peter 1:2)
8. God’s election was not made in a vacuum. The election process cannot be divorced from all of God’s attributes, such as His sovereignty (Lord over all), His immutability (unchanging), His omnipotence (all-powerful), His omniscience (all-knowing), His omnipresence (present everywhere all at once) His holiness and His justice—all such attributes coming to focus and to appliance at the moment of selection.

The conclusion is this. Since both doctrines are true and since God transcends all dimensions, to include time and eternity past and present, simultaneously, they (election and man’s choice) must transpire in the mind of God at the same instant. God’s election does not precede man’s choice and man’s choice does not precede God’s election. One does not depend on the other; rather, they materialize hand-in-hand and are co-dependent on each other in the mind of God. This concept is impossible to understand by the human mind if it thinks only in the realm of “linear time.” Mankind normally thinks in terms of linear time—the fact that everything has a beginning and an end. Eternity to man is a place of a lot of time, and God is a Person who has lots of time.

The fact is that God transcends time. He is not subject to it. A study of the physics of time reveals that it is a physical property dependent upon mass, gravity and velocity. An understanding of this scientific reality may be achieved by studying various commentary treatments offered by Chuck Missler . Once this is understood, it is also important to note that God exists outside the dimension of time. Whereas man views a parade in various increments from a set position along the parade route, God sees both the beginning and the end of it from a position far above it. God exists everywhere, all at the same time. This understanding is necessary when considering what is meant by the “mind of God.”

This may be something akin to the “chicken and the egg first” riddle or an accusation of “fence-riding,” unless of course one takes into account the nature of God. Multiple transactions that are separated by both time and eternity transpiring simultaneously may be impossible with man, who is confined to four dimensions (width, length, height and time), but it presents no difficulty with God who is not confined to any dimension. In fact science now believes there may be upwards to ten or eleven dimensions. God is not only present in each of them, and probably many more, but He also exists everywhere throughout eternity before and after time. In other words He is everywhere (in every dimension) simultaneously. He is at the beginning, at the end and at all in between simultaneously. This then appears to clarify the meaning of “Elect according to the foreknowledge of God . . .” (1 Peter 1:2) and “For whom He foreknew, He also predestined . . .” (Romans 8:29).

Election therefore does not cancel out free agency, and free agency does not cancel out election. Neither doctrine invalidates the other. They compliment each other. God does in fact elect a person to be saved, but He does it in conjunction (partnership) with the person who exercises his God-given capability to accept His Son once the person has been awakened to his sin and need of Jesus by the Holy Spirit. This process—both the act of electing and the person’s exercise of will to receive—happens at the same exact moment in the mind of God who exists before time and creation and at the moment of a person’s salvation, all simultaneously. Both acts—one by God and one by man—are executed together in the mind of God “before the foundation of the world.”

This concept does not invalidate man’s God-given ability and responsibility to choose. Furthermore it does not violate God’s sovereignty or any other of His attributes. In fact, it may very well clarify the concept of foreknowledge and its commencement relationship to the election process. As a person, in time, is faced with the decision to either by faith accept or to reject God’s offer of salvation, God by means of His foreknowledge and attendance fully comprehends the decision the person will make and correspondingly elects or rejects the person in the matter of eternal life. One may argue that this subjugates God to man, but this writer differs with that assessment. Since the ability and obligation for man to make a choice comes from God in the first place, God is therefore supreme in the entire process. The process is totally in accordance with God’s purpose and plan. It is true that God being sovereign could have brought man to eternal life—kicking and screaming—in any manner He would choose. The fact is that He has opted to do it within the parameters of mercy and grace—and the will of man.

Regardless of what position a believer may take regarding these two doctrines, there is one way a person may know if someone is one of the “elect.” He need only apply the test of John 3:18, which is “He who believes in Him [Jesus Christ] is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he had not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.”

Furthermore even if a believer is an adherent to the strict Calvinist viewpoint, he is still under the obligation to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ to everyone in accordance with the commission given to him by Christ. In the words of J. Vernon McGee in his Thru the Bible commentary, “If God would somehow reveal to me who are the elect ones, I would give the gospel only to them. But God does not do this. He has said that whosoever will may come. That is a legitimate offer to every person.”

 

[rojoloco]

From the red highlights above, I thought we were finally getting somewhere, but can only assume that your pride has only carried over to condescending arrogance; there was no need for these comments and adds nothing for this conversation.

They were not meant to be arrogant. Maybe a little snarky in jest but not arrogant. I apologize for coming off that way. There WAS a level of truth to it though. Snarkiness asside,, my points were still valid.

I think that this is a real problem: God is multi-faceted
I really do not think that you fully believe this or understand.

Actually, if you have paid attention to any of my posts you would see my speaking of the love of God as well as the hatred of God. You would see me talking about His mercy as well as His wrath. You would see me talking about His patience as well as His intolerance. God is indeed multi-faceted. However, I have only seen you expound on one aspect and it is the same aspect everybody else focuses on. Nothing wrong with learning about the love of God. Just don't forget He has other sides to Him as well.

I think that our greatest difference is that I believe your humanistic, worldly view of Election, defines most everything you believe, or you must believe in order to support your Election view.

Calvinism is not simply a belief. It is the absolute best summary of the Gospel. It is in everything on believes about the Gospel and the nature of God. It lifts God up while bringing man down. It gives glory to God and robs it from man. It shows God as powerful & mighty while showing how man is completely incapable. So yes, it is in everything. However, it is not worldly or humanistic. It is Scripture and God-breathed.

I also, think that the greatest reason for this is your basic belief that God is not all powerful and capable of absolutely anything!

There is a difference between being capable of doing something and desiring to do something. I believe God can do anything. However, I also believe there are many things God will not do. I believe in the sovereignty of God more than the majority of Christians because, unlike most Christians (at least in America), I believe God's sovereignty is far more than His ability to control all things. I believe it is His absolute control of all things.

This is my final talk on Election verse Free Will. I am afraid it is too long, but I hope you read it anyway and be honest with yourself; I think this says what I believe much better that I could ever say!
God Bless

I'll reply to this in the other thread soon.

 

[RJ]

Calvinism is not simply a belief. It is the absolute best summary of the Gospel. It is in everything on believes about the Gospel and the nature of God. It lifts God up while bringing man down. It gives glory to God and robs it from man. It shows God as powerful & mighty while showing how man is completely incapable. So yes, it is in everything. However, it is not worldly or humanistic. It is Scripture and God-breathed.

This the only thing I will reply to, because I grow tired. And yes Calvinism is truly too humanistic with regards to it's Election only stance. And I say that you , in fact, do not understand the Omnipotence of God, and that the Gospel means the "Good News", of which yours is not because you deny God the ability to make all of Election and all of Free Will work together perfectly!

 

[rojoloco]

This the only thing I will reply to, because I grow tired. And yes Calvinism is truly too humanistic with regards to it's Election only stance. And I say that you , in fact, do not understand the Omnipotence of God, and that the Gospel means the "Good News", of which yours is not because you deny God the ability to make all of Election and all of Free Will work together perfectly!

You must not be reading the same posts I have been making then because I have said time and time again how God's Election works with man's free will. There is an entire doctrine for it. It is called Compatibilism. Since I can't post links, I'll just quote the site (since that seems to be allowed on here).

45. What does the term “compatibilism” mean, and is it biblical?

“Compatibilism” is a term which describes the concurrent non-contradictory existence of the two truths we have been discussing above: God's active sovereignty and governance over every event that takes place on earth, and man's responsibility for his actions and freedom (i.e. voluntary choice) to follow his natural desires (which since the fall are wholly corrupt) apart from external coercion. Compatibilism (also known as soft determinism), is the belief that God's predetermination and meticulous providence over all events is "compatible" with voluntary choice. These concepts are both true and biblical, and hence, they are not at odds with each other, but are fully “compatible”.

Not only is the teaching of compatibilism biblical, it is the only solution to the so-called “free will problem” that scriptures allow. The bible teaches, first, that God does not lie, or contradict himself (Hebrews 6:18); second, that God ordains everything that comes to pass (see question 43); and third, that man is fully responsible for his wicked actions, and will suffer eternal punishment for them unless he is given the free grace of God in Christ (Jam 1:13-15; Rev 20:11-15; Rom 2:5-6). Hence, the bible demands that God's active sovereignty and man's real choice and responsibility do not contradict each other, or else God would be a liar, or the author of confusion. Whether we can comprehend the way in which the truths co-exist harmoniously is relatively minor; what matters is that we take God at his word, and believe that these two eminently biblical teachings are in fact compatible with each other.

 

[HisFollower]

No, there is no modification of righteousness to accommodate sin; it does not exist with God. When we presume such a possibility, then are we in the state of a carnal mind, and are thinking as the world thinks.

 

[RJ]

You must not be reading the same posts I have been making then because I have said time and time again how God's Election works with man's free will. There is an entire doctrine for it. It is called Compatibilism. Since I can't post links, I'll just quote the site (since that seems to be allowed on here).

No my friend you have not allowed for all mankind to exercise free choice in their faith. You have repeatedly said that is is through Election only that a person is saved. You have repeatedly said that God chooses to "only" Elect some and not Elect others, that he gives his Elect their Faith first. One of your most recent posts was that God's gift of Grace was Faith.
I say that man chooses and receives God's gift of "Salvation" through the death,burial and resurrection of his son.
You would say that God's Grace is for his Elect only, I would say that God's gift is for absolutely for everyone.
Our beliefs are not the same.

I say that man's salvation is his choice completely.
You say that man's salvation is completely God's choice and man has no control of over it.

You say that God's Election works with man's free will.
I say they are are both required perfectly, absolutely and simultaneously.

 

[SpiritLedEd]

I'm closing this thread because it has been taken off topic and degenerated into a bitter debate between RJ and Rojoloco.

SLE