Featured Ezekiel 3 Debunks "Election"

Good grief nevermind

 

What is "good" about "grief"?:laugh:

 

For their own responsibility! The wicked is responsible for his wickedness whether he is warned or not by others as his own conscience bears witness to his guilt and warns him. The righteous is responsible because of his knowledge of the truth.

You are arguing with the supralapsarian which I am not. It is not possible only because the wicked is not willing and the not willing is due to his nature and his nature is due to his own responsiblity in Adam where the whole human nature acted in rebellion against sin and thus "all have sinned" when Adam sinned and that is the whole point when Paul continues to argue "BY ONE MAN'S DISOBEDIENCE......MANY WERE MADE SINNERS"

No, it does not! He is "wicked" already and he knows it due to his own conscience at minimum and He knows it due to his own responses to the testimony of creation which he willfully suppresses so that he "is without excuse" whether some man warns him or not. The issue is that the watchman is also without excuse.

That is what I said, but not I did not say that in the context of your later defintion of "predestination to salvation" which demands salvation must occur at FIRST EXPOSURE to the gospel. Neither did I say that God gives different PREDESTINATED OPPORTUNITIES OF EFFECTUAL CALLING simply because of different exposures to the Gospel. I plainly said that the gospel comes many times "in word only." When it comes in "word only" are those who present the gospel responsible witnesses? Yes, because POWER is not their responsiblity. When some sow and others water have they done their responsiblity? Yes! But giving the increase is not their responsibility but God's "WHEN IT PLEASED GOD....He revealed His son in me" Paul says, although he had been exposed to the gospel many times before when he heard Philip, when he put in jail Christians "BUT WHEN IT PLEASED GOD" was the predestinated time when the gospel came "in power and in the Holy Spirit and in much assurance".

True! But what day is that day? For you to arbitrarily demand it MUST BE the first exposure completely invalidats Paul's evidence of election that such a day does not occur whenever the gospel comes "in word only." It contradicts planting and watering and it contradicts that the increase is of God because you are denying it can happen when "IT PLEASED GOD"!

 

Well, kids have fun, I have got to go do some chores, will pick up later.:wavey:

 

webdog

While you have trouble with P4T is that he weeds through your smokescreen of debate fallacy,begging the question,non sequitor,red herring quips.....then offers scripture......but by that time you have already attacked him personally,trying to catch him in his wording,rather than staying focused on the topic.

If you were honest about it, P4T is more than a scriptural match for you.

I have waited in "vain" for you to engage any link, or article i pasted ...as a matter of fact....You wimped out on listening to an audio sermon on acts 17 that i told you would address what we discussed and you avoided it like the plague:laugh: A verse is a verse if it is cut and pasted, or typed out so you still avoid them....like kryptonite:wavey: You have the big red S on your tea shirt....for synergism:laugh:

,

maybe you could post an example of me being cornered and let's see what really happened.....hint...you whining about Augustine does not equal me being cornered:thumbsup:

Sometimes....I do have to drive....I am at lunch break now....I address any serious post.....some like AIC, are not serious and post nonsensical things that deserve no response.

Will you pay me a dollar for every one line post you and RM post??? or each post where you do not post or allude to scripture?

 

webdog

okay-

I will show where I and many others have seen it.

I am a presuppositionalist in understanding and apologetic. In other words I carry clearly revealed truth with me from passage to passage.Why would I not do this as the bible has no contradictions in it?

the term born from above is not in acts 18, but the teaching is
the trinity is not mentioned but is there.
the word covenant is not there but the teaching is

Not a problem WD.....so we can look forward to you answering scripturally from now on ?
4 And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.

5 And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ.

Paul followed a pattern;acts17
2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures,

3 Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ.

Opening and alleging...are legal terms, he made a scriptural legal case against guilty sinners with Jesus being the only God given remedy...

6 And when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean; from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles.

Vs.6 Paul is quoting from ezk 33.....your blood be upon your own heads....

He has done this all along.....Acts13-

, Ye men and brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on.

16 Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with his hand said, Men of Israel, and ye that fear God, give audience.

17 The God of this people of Israel chose our fathers,

26 Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God, to you is the word of this salvation sent.
40 Beware therefore, lest that come upon you, which is spoken of in the prophets;

41 Behold, ye despisers, and wonder, and perish: for I work a work in your days, a work which ye shall in no wise believe, though a man declare it unto you.
he warned of reprobation.....this was his manner...a pattern...

45 But when the Jews saw the multitudes, they were filled with envy, and spake against those things which were spoken by Paul, contradicting and blaspheming.

46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.

47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, saying, I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.

48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

Usually the unbelievers would attack Paul....so here in Acts 18 god speaks directly to him;
9 Then spake the Lord to Paul in the night by a vision, Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace:

10 For I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee: for I have much people in this city.


Paul is told by God that he is to speak boldly....God is with him,and God assures him that he has....MUCH PEOPLE....in that city....[the elect]...they are known to God...The Lord knoweth them that are His.

The word elect is not used.....but God does not save non -elect.
The word sheep is not used....but God does not come to seek and to save goats.....They are predestined to be conformed to the Image of the Son,so they had to be saved.
Those whom God had in this city were quickened as in eph2:1-10
do you see it now?...I did not even read to see what Augustine or Calvin said, imagine that:thumbs: it would not disturb me to read what anyone offers on it however. After i study a passage, then I rad to see what Spurgeon or others saw, that I might have missed.

 

You are absolutely delusional. You don't have the slightest idea what you are talking about.

Now you are flat out dishonest. I also don't recall seeing you interact with any thread I start. Wonder why...

,

Yawn.

Irrelevant.

Stupid question. Come on, you can do much better...like questioning my salvation or something.

 

Translation: I arrive at every passage of Scripture looking for a TULIP.

Would you like to tell me how any of this answers the questions I posed or counters the argument made in the op? I didn't ask you to eisegete...I mean jump around from Acts 17 to Ezekiel 33, then to Acts 13 and Ephesians 2. This looks like your basic confusing answer meant to deflect from actually engaging the question posed, your MO.

 

Maybe it is your dispensational backround that does not allow you to follow the thoughts expressed here...direct quotes are not eisegesis.

When acts 18 speaks of election...much people....and the gospel is rejected...your blood be upon your own head...that answers the question you asked. If You would really want to see the answer...it is right there.:thumbs:

the other verses show the pattern,,,,as his manner was...

 

DrJames posted...

__________________
What Kills You Makes You Stronger: Rom 8:13

Absolutly. Agree completly.

The scriptures are so clear.
Founder Do Right Christians

 

There is a basic problem with the assumptions made in the OP.

The emphasis is NOT upon those who are to hear the message, but upon the messenger.

Just as the believers must be just as earnest as the first century believers in carrying the gospel, so to the watchman of Ezekiel was responsible to deliver the message, irregardless of the people's response.

The believer is given the commission, the quest that must be carried out from the time of new birth to the time of eternal glory.

We are the "watchman."

We are not responsible for the salvation of souls, or who does or doesn't listen to the message. Our ONLY responsibility to deliver the Gospel, baptize and disciple those who believe.

The OP seeks to refute some system of theological thought using Ezekiel, and some folks would rather accept any "proof" to scandalize a view rather than actually examining the truth of what the Scriptures really are stating and how it is applicable to the believer.

Rather than merely jumping on the "bandwagon" of misinformation, does not Paul tell the folks to examine EVERY word spoken of the Scriptures? Does not Paul emphasis that the believers are to cherish as fine gold what is True to the Scriptures and what is not, to treat it as trash?

Yet, on this thread, when it is obvious that the very OP has the agenda contrary to what is responsible exegesis, few have actually called attention to the truth.

Folks, if you are that completely enamored with trying to fight over some view that you actually do not engage the truth of the Scriptures, it is astoundingly sad.

The TRUTH is that this part of Ezekiel is applicable to EVERY believer no matter the doctrinal view. It refutes nor supports ANY view, but states the commission the believer is to engage.

Any other rendering is just wrong.