is the "Whosover Wills" Promise To the Elect of God, or to ALL?

It is an empty meaningless offer because God is completely aware these men have no ability to come.

It was accurate, I said the jail cells represent a man's will. When God took the key and unlocked the cell, he made them willing. But if he only unlocked two cells, then God is partial showing favoritism and has violated his own declaration of himself that he is no respecter of persons.

They CANNOT come. You act as if God does not know this. Does God foolishly call men he KNOWS are unable to come? Nonsense!

Well, you are playing with the word "want". Those men whom God passes over really have no say in the matter. By God's decree they were cursed with a nature that cannot will to come to God. So no, they will never WANT to come to God, but that is God's doing ultimately. And yes, God is keeping them from coming as he alone possesses the power to make a man willing. If he wanted them to be willing, he could easily do so. The fact that he doesn't shows he wants them to be unwilling.

And your view is nonsensical. It makes God to call men whom he knows cannot answer. It would be like me going out in my yard calling my dog when I do not own a dog. People would question the sanity of any person who does this, but this is how you represent God! You also believe only God has the power to make a man willing to come to him, but deny God is responsible when a man is not willing. As usual, you argue a direct contradiction to be true.

 

No, it is meaningful because he will do exactly what he says. What part of "whosoever will" does God not "mean"?

It wasn't accurate because it made it have something other than the person keeping them from getting out of the jail.

read the context of "no respecter of persons." Was God a "respecter of persons" when he choose the Jews as his chosen people and not us gentiles?

What's nonsense is saying that I act if God doesn't know something.



I'm tired of dealing with your straw man. When you want to argue my position, let me know. Everything you have has already been answered, yet you want to continue to misrepresent. You may want to read your Bible before you make accusations against God.

It is NOT Gods doing ultimately that men don't want to come to God. Again, you cannot present my side accurately, hence straw man.

so then you are saying it's all God fault. couldn't he save everyone. Are you going to deny the power of God to save all? If you say that God has the power to save all, then by your own admission, God "keeps them from coming." If you say he doesn't, then you deny the power of God. Which side do you want to take on that?

 

It is meaningless because God knows the unregenerate cannot possibly be willing. It is meaningful for those who can respond, a total waste of time to offer to those who cannot.

The jail cell is their will. Who put them in the jail cell? God.

God chose the Jews as those who kept his precepts, and from whom the Savior would come, but non-Jews could be saved by faith (and were).

God would be foolish to make an offer to unregenerate persons when he knows they cannot possibly respond. You know this, but make this nonsensical argument anyway.

Who caused men to spiritually die? Didn't God do this? Wasn't this God's curse? Men have no control in this area whatsoever.

No, it is your theology that makes God at fault, although you will never admit it. The fact that you won't admit it does not negate that it is the logical conclusion of your theology. It is you that must make fantastic and illogical arguments to rationalize away the logical conclusions of your own view. You have to play with words and twist their meanings and definitions. If your theology were sound, this would not be necessary.

I could say I will give you a million dollars if you flap your arms and fly, now you "may" all fly to me and get it. This is not a real offer, it is disingenuous, because I know very well you cannot fly.

This is how you portray God. Shameful.

 

No, they did. Again, your analogy is flawed to support your straw man.

where have I ever said that it was God's fault that man sins? It's not, it's man's fault. And God is not obligated to save anyone, which is where the rest of your argument is based from.

I'm not talking about salvation, but that the Jews were God's chosen people.

so, why don't they come. I say they don't come because they would rather stay in their sin. What's your answer?

Un no. It was because of man that man sinned. Bible 101

Man sinned because man wanted to sin. God offers salvation to whomever will come to him. Again, if anyone says I believe something other than this, they are purposefully misrepresenting my beliefs. The reason man "can't" come is not because of God, but because of man and his sin.

Really. Looks like I portray a God that says "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” God is not obligated to save, nor offer salvation to anyone. Even if your story was a good one, there would be nothing wrong with God doing that. Man is in the jail because he is a sinner and deserves to pay for his sin. God is under no obligation to save anyone out of the jail.

this will be my last response to you unless you actually bring something valid to the table.

 

I would say your argument is flawed, what does that prove?

It is not God's fault that man sins. But if man's nature is cursed so that he cannot be willing to come to God, that is a result of God's curse.

Well, I thought we were talking about salvation here.

It is true they do not come because they do not want to. We all agree on that. But what caused man to be unwilling? Was it not God's curse?

God is the one who decreed the sentence. If God caused man to spiritually die so that he is unable to be willing to come, then God is the direct cause of this inability. Could not God have chosen some other form of punishment? Man did not determine the sentence, God did.

In my view all have the ability to come and the offer is legitimate to all. In your view the unregenerate cannot possibly come and the offer is disingenuous.

How can you say it is not God's fault men cannot come? Who is the one that changed man's nature? Does man have this ability? NO. Only God can change a man's nature.

The very fact that Calvinists always resort to Romans 9 is because your God given conscience is offended by the thought that a loving and just God could simply create many billions of men for the sole purpose of destroying them in the lake of fire for his pleasure. This would make God more beastly than the worst serial killer.

Rom 9:15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

I see God willing to be merciful and compassionate here, but I see no mention of hate. Do you? Does it say he will be hateful to whom he will be hateful? Or do you read that into the scriptures?

God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked. He has provided his Son Jesus to die on the cross for all men. All men can respond in faith and be saved. If a man goes to hell, it is because he chose to reject salvation through Jesus.

If man is unable to be willing, that is a direct result of God's curse. God determined the results of the curse. Did man cause thorns and briers to spring up? Did man cause childbirth to be more painful? No. Man can do none of these things. It was God that determined and caused these things.

By the way, there is not one word in God's curse concerning man's nature and that men would henceforth be unable to believe and come to God. Show me anywhere in scripture where it ever says God cursed man in this fashion.

You have a theology that teaches doctrine that is NEVER mentioned in scripture, not even ONCE. Unbelieveable.

 

There you go again blaming God for things that people are accountable for. You remind me of the objector(s) of Romans 9.

What kind of a kick are you on with this business of blaming God for things people are going to be accountable for on Judgment Day.

You better examine yourself when you find fault with God on a regular basis on the BB.

That's covered in Romans 9:13.

No,only for His elect.

 

You seem to forget I do not hold your view, I believe all men can respond to God when he calls. If a man refuses, as those men in Matthew 22 refused to come when the king called them, they are 100% responsible for being condemned.

It is your view that falsely accuses God of cursing men so that they cannot come when he calls. It was God who caused the thorns and briers to spring up, it was God who caused women to suffer bearing children. But there is not one word saying God cursed man so they cannot be willing to come when he calls. This is adding to the word of God.

Maybe it is you that should examine your theology. I am defending God, not accusing him as your doctrine logically leads to. It is no accident that people have accused Calvinists of making God the author of sin for hundreds of years. It is you that cannot see the obvious logical conclusions of your doctrine.

 

Winman,

You act as if man is some innocent being, that deserves salvation, as if man is good. It bleeds through in everything you write.

That's where your theology is mightily flawed. You think man is good. And thus has earned and merited escaping the wrath of God.

There is no one in this world innocent (excluding children). Any punishment any man receives at the hand of God is guess what? Justice, that's what.

Uzza, when he touched the cart was stricken down? Why? Well, why not? Was God just in doing so? (answer that)

Was He just or not in doing that to Uzza? Uzza was not an innocent man, that any of us gets the next breath is Grace and Mercy.

I say of course He was just (fair) and it teaches us a lesson: Which do you want, God's Justice, or His Grace?

And it is apparent in Scripture that He and He alone is the determining factor on who receives grace and who receives justice. All the posts in the world from you will not convince me other than that you just plain do not think God is just. You've by what you've said on many debates in here show otherwise, you just don't think it is fair that God is Sovereign in election. But guess what friend, He is, and your disdain for that will not change Him, so instead you fashion your God to your liking. Yet He remains Sovereign and does as He wills to do with His own.

And it scares you. Because you've been taught man is good, and God is love, and you faint to look at His justice.

- Good luck.

 

Yep,you got that right about WM. You are spot-on. God is not gonna' change because of the WM's rants --the WM must change.

 

P4T, you could not be more wrong if you tried. I believe all men have free will and are justly condemned when they choose to sin. And if the refuse the grace of God offered them it is their own fault if they perish. So, I am not defending men whatsoever, though you try to twist my words. A child would not be fooled by your false argument.

It is your doctrine that says only God has the power and ability to change man's nature. If man lost the ability to be willing to choose God when Adam sinned, then God caused this inablity. No fancy arguments can get around this. Adam did not cause this inability, it is not within his power to do so according to your doctrine.

If God caused this inability, and then chooses to let man remain in this inability, then obviously it is his will that the majority of men perish, else he would regenerate them.

I am defending God, not man.

 

Heavens sakes, he and his crew always fighting this thing. God, actually is who they are fighting. I'd name them, but they know who they are. I actually believed this arminian/pelagian laced bad theology (well, maybe I didn't, I was never satisfied with it's view of God, and wondered why we never discussed election, predestination &c) but now, having the blinders off, I realized it's bad theology, dumbed down theology that doesn't do the God of Scripture justice whatsoever.

The bottom line is they have trouble believeing God is God in all of Scriptutre in all His facets. They buck at his Sovereignty. I personally feel this will be one major reason lost man will be having "weeping and gnashing of teeth" out of anger toward the nature of God in the end.

Perhaps this also angered Satan and he took some angels down with him, couldn't handle Gods Sovereign will?

Who knows.

Anyhow, no one will convince them Rippon, but I appreciate your apologetics.

 

Baloney, Winman, you believe man is good and earns election. You're defending man, for to you he is good.

Let's not head down that road again. You believe man does good works, you struggle with God being Sovereign.

It scares you.

Now have a good night, friend.

 

No,you constantly accuse God over and over in your posts.

Man stands guilty because of his sins. God is not culpable. Man is the guilty one,not the Lord. Stop charging the Lord with iniquity. He is the merciful Lord. If you are saved it is because of His mercy that He has done so --despite your wickedness.

No one can accuse God of unrighteousness in the Final Judgment Day.

 

just got to love this pic

 

Now now rippon, you know all of these believe their own faith saved them, these "inherently good men," :rolleyes: who deny unconditional election.

They don't believe God saves by Grace. They believe man saves by faith.

 

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. (Ephesians 2:8-9)

Understandest thou what thou readest? (Acts 8:30)

How can I, except some man should guide me? (Acts 8:31)

 

For by grace are you saved... BY GRACE ARE YOU WHAT?

You got the cart and horse in the wrong spot. Acts 8:30-31 a proof-text? Not even close, son. Man, you're way off track, that has nothing to do with this.

And remember, you mocked Gods Grace and remain unashamed about it:

"Uh, no, son,. What you plainly did was diminished and belittled God's grace by comparing it to a school girl, and implying how trivial it would be by HIM using HIS grace to reach a tribe in Africa.You mocked God's grace. Plain and simply mocked it. Again? You are 100% irreverent."

I'm done with replying to your Grace mocking self. Go read Romans 11, and repent of your wicked mockery of His Grace. And understand the difference between being saved by grace, and being justified by faith.

And leave your personal attacks to yourself. I know, I know, you feel big and safe in canada behind your monitor, so you attack others.

 

I have no problem with God's sovereignty, I have a problem with YOUR VIEW. I believe God in his sovereignty gave man free will and choice. It is you that is afraid of free will. Don't worry, God is fully able to keep things in control and bring about his will.

You seem to think God is afraid of men, if he allows them free will they will run off with the universe. It is laughable really.

Let me ask you, if men and angels do not have free will, then how is there going to be war in heaven in Revelation 12:7? Is God fighting himself?

The scriptures show free will, both Moses and Joshua told the people to choose God. I think they understood doctrine better than John Calvin.

God is not afraid of free will, he will always be victorious.

 

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. (Ephesians 2:8-9)

Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil. (Jeremiah 13:23)

 

"Now therefore why do you put God to the test by placing upon the neck of the disciples a yoke which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? "But we believe that we are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they also are." Acts 15:10-11

By grace are you saved.


...being justified freely by His grace. Romans 3:24

Romans 5:15.

Romans 11. Grace in election saves. It is by grace plainly here.

You semi-pelagians need to open up your eyes, and see that your faith did not save you.

His Grace saves.