Only The Elect Are Saved and Will Be

[sandusky]

mikeledes says:

Galatians 1:6

6 I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel;

According to you, only the elect are called by the grace of Christ.

Galatians 3:2

3 Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?

According to you, only the elect have “begun by the Spirit.”

Galatians 5:2-4

2 Behold I, Paul, say to you that if you receive circumcision, Christ will be of no benefit to you.
3 And I testify again to every man who receives circumcision, that he is under obligation to keep the whole Law.
4 You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

When we take it in its broader context, Paul is speaking to genuine born again Christians in this passage. Only they are called by the grace of Christ, can begin with the Spirit, and only they can be severed from Christ and fall from grace. You have to be in grace first before you can fall from it.

In the last statement in the above quote, we see that mikeledes is inconsistent in his hermeneutic. In the above statement, he says that Paul’s statement applies to all genuine Christians.

In mikeledes’ "plural you" hermeneutic, he states that, when the plural “you” is employed, what is being said applies only to those to whom the letter is specifically addressed, and that what is being said does not apply to "all Christians in all of the world and throughout history."

So then, mikeledes employs different hermeneutical methods, depending on the the point he desires to “prove.” ISTM that, overall, he employs a “shell-game” hermeneutic—the old
**“heads I win; tails you lose” **charade.

It seems to me, that in so doing, mikeledes is being dishonest. :tsktsk:

I’m certain that all of the “you” pronouns in the above passages are plurals; therefore, according to mikeledes “plural you” hermeneutic, Paul’s statements apply only to those in the Church of Galatia, at that time.

IOW, mikeledes’ “plural you” hermeneutic demands that Paul “is not making a statement regarding all Christians in all of the world and throughout history.”

But, that’s not what mikeledes wants to prove from the above passages, so he abandons the “plural you” hermeneutic, for another—shell-game hermeneutics.

 

[fbl9]

hi sanduskyre 1Cor.1;18 the key word is “being” saved, this is an active salvation not a finished salvation…quote “God predestined some to salvation some to hell” “who are my brothers and sisters…who ever does the will of my Father” St. Mark 4:35…now according to this statement those who are predestined for hell live a life of sin acording to the Father’s will???and those who are to be in heaven are there because they did the Father’s will???you have rightly stated that God hates sin yet it is His will one has to sin so He can condemn them??one must remember that in calling the diciples it was God Himself calling these men not these men reacting to the words of the gospel.

 

[sandusky]

hi sanduskyre 1Cor.1;18 the key word is “being” saved, this is an active salvation not a finished salvation…quote “God predestined some to salvation some to hell” “who are my brothers and sisters…who ever does the will of my Father” St. Mark 4:35…now according to this statement those who are predestined for hell live a life of sin acording to the Father’s will???and those who are to be in heaven are there because they did the Father’s will???you have rightly stated that God hates sin yet it is His will one has to sin so He can condemn them??one must remember that in calling the diciples it was God Himself calling these men not these men reacting to the words of the gospel.

fbl9, biblical salvation has 3 time frames: past, present, and future, and each is certain.

And, you are mistaken about it being “an active salvation.”

In the Greek, it is a “passive” verb; IOW, the salvation spoken of is not being done by the man, but, it is being done **to the man, by God.

Salvation is not something the believer does for himself; rather, salvation is something God does TO the believer—God saves him.

 

[fbl9]

fbl9, biblical salvation has 3 time frames: past, present, and future, and each is certain.

And, you are mistaken about it being “an active salvation.”

In the Greek, it is a “passive” verb; IOW, the salvation spoken of is not being done by the man, but, it is being done ***to the man, ***by God.

Salvation is not something the believer does for himself; rather, salvation is something God does TO the believer—God saves him.

this last part is where we part company.rather salvation is for the believer it is God’s free gift to all mankind.the Father’s only begotten Son came to do His Father’s will…and you tell me one who dies in mortal sin is also doing this same Father’s will?? St. John 16:30 the apostle’s say for this reason they know what the truth is.God who was Himself in person told him so. Has God himself stood before you and teach you the gospel?

 

[sodak]

Here is what the Catholic Church teaches on predestination (from the Catechism):

God predestines no one to go to hell;620 for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”:621

So you are mistaken Sandusky.

 

[sandusky]

Sodak:

Here is what the Catholic Church teaches on predestination (from the Catechism):

God predestines no one to go to hell;620 for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”:621

So you are mistaken Sandusky.

Here are mikeledes words:

However,…there is a particular election that is not enjoyed by all true members of the Church Militant, and that is election to final salvation. These - and these alone - will receive the unmerited gift of final perseverance (i.e. perseverance to the end).

Note carefully what he’s saying—there is an election that is not to final salvation.

I expect a great deal of denial from Catholics, and from mikeledes when he returns; nevertheless, as I said, this all comes down to God’s choice, as stated above.

God has the ability to influence, and save everyone, and He doesn’t; no matter how many soothing words concerning “mortal sin,” and “free-will” are used to assuage your sensibilities that fact remains.

Ott on RC predestination

 

[sandusky]

fbl9:

this last part is where we part company.rather salvation is for the believer it is God’s free gift to all mankind.the Father’s only begotten Son came to do His Father’s will…and you tell me one who dies in mortal sin is also doing this same Father’s will?? St. John 16:30 the apostle’s say for this reason they know what the truth is.God who was Himself in person told him so. Has God himself stood before you and teach you the gospel?

Sounds to me like He’s stood before you and taught you the gospel; is that correct?

 

[fbl9]

Sounds to me like He’s stood before you and taught you the gospel; is that correct?

yes he has shown me His face in the person of my pastor.you have yet to address the idea of God also being the cause of people sinning.in the link provided by you God allows some to sin even to thier end, but His knowing this will be their choice does not cause them to choose so.it is God’s positive will that all should beleive in Him. that some do not is not because of sometthing God has done to them,or knows about.Christ demonstrated that He had free will in saying “if asked the Father He would send down an army of angels” but Christ as an everlasting example to man did His Father’s will…thanks for the link

 

[sodak]

Here are mikeledes words:Note carefully what he’s saying—there is an election that is not to final salvation.

I expect a great deal of denial from Catholics, and from mikeledes when he returns; nevertheless, as I said, this all comes down to God’s choice, as stated above.

I don’t care about who says what, I’m quoting the Catechism, the official teaching of the Church.

Ott on RC predestination

Never heard of this web site.

 

[sandusky]

sodak:

I don’t care about who says what, I’m quoting the Catechism, the official teaching of the Church.

Never heard of this web site.

OK.

Have you heard of Ludwig Ott, and his book entitled, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, about which it is said:Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma. Recognized as the greatest summary of Catholic dogma ever put between two covers. A one-volume encyclopedia of Catholic doctrines. Tells exactly what the Church teaches on any particular topic. Tells when the pronouncement was made and gives the sources from Scripture, Church Councils, Papal statements and the Fathers and Doctors of the Church. Essential for priests, seminarians, parents and teachers. Easily one of our most important books.Have you heard of him?

 

[sandusky]

fbl9:

yes he has shown me His face in the person of my pastor.

I see.

fbl9:

you have yet to address the idea of God also being the cause of people sinning.in the link provided by you God allows some to sin even to thier end, but His knowing this will be their choice does not cause them to choose so.

You must have misunderstood the link; God does not cause people to sin; they do so on their own, and they do so freely, and without prompting.

fbl9:

it is God’s positive will that all should beleive in Him.

And you would cite 1 Tim 2:4; correct?

 

[j1s2a3]

I’m very sorry but performing some ritual in church and being “saved” by the words of some man and saying a pray is NOT enough and in no way did i feel the Holy Spirit come in me after doing this.

 

[fbl9]

hi sandusky it is not the link that gave me this misunderstanding to me you seem to have been saying God causes the beleiver to believe and the sinner to sin.double predestination.i hold the beleif that one has to choose to do the Father’s will,and you seem to hold that the Father makes one do His will whether it be to sin or to be a saint. am i correct as to were you stand?the parable of the talents,the ones with more talents are the ones He gave more spiritual support?and the one with one talent He gave little spiritual support to?because He knows who will make the best use of this gift? yet Jesus states “blessed are the poor in spirit” so one knowing they have one talent and puts into the bank will be rewarded just the same as those who made good use of thier ten talents.there is an element of choice here we can choose what to do with our one talent.with this one talent i choose to put it in the bank of Christ’s church.

 

[sandusky]

fbl9:

hi sandusky it is not the link that gave me this misunderstanding to me you seem to have been saying God causes the beleiver to believe and the sinner to sin.double predestination.

God does not cause the believer to sin; however, he does cause, grant, gives to the believer the ability to believe; with respect to the latter, I’ve cited a number of passages.

fbl9:

i hold the beleif that one has to choose to do the Father’s will,and you seem to hold that the Father makes one do His will whether it be to sin or to be a saint. am i correct as to were you stand?

For the fourth, or maybe fifth time: God does not cause anyone to sin; God does cause, grant, gives to the believer the ability to believe.

fbl9:

the parable of the talents,the ones with more talents are the ones He gave more spiritual support?and the one with one talent He gave little spiritual support to?because He knows who will make the best use of this gift? yet Jesus states “blessed are the poor in spirit” so one knowing they have one talent and puts into the bank will be rewarded just the same as those who made good use of thier ten talents.there is an element of choice here we can choose what to do with our one talent.with this one talent i choose to put it in the bank of Christ’s church.

That’s an interesting understanding.

 

[sodak]

OK.

Have you heard of Ludwig Ott, and his book entitled, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, about which it is said:Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma. Recognized as the greatest summary of Catholic dogma ever put between two covers. A one-volume encyclopedia of Catholic doctrines. Tells exactly what the Church teaches on any particular topic. Tells when the pronouncement was made and gives the sources from Scripture, Church Councils, Papal statements and the Fathers and Doctors of the Church. Essential for priests, seminarians, parents and teachers. Easily one of our most important books.Have you heard of him?

Never heard of him. No matter how famous, if someone contradicts the Catechism, guess which one takes precedence?

 

[sandusky]

Never heard of him. No matter how famous, if someone contradicts the Catechism, guess which one takes precedence?

Got it. Thanks for your candor, sodak.

 

[fbl9]

hi again sandusky finally sunk in my thick head that you don’t support double predestination.but you do support full predestination to heaven.as in God allows only certain people to be able to believe unto birth into enternal life.it was through some of your posts that you seemed to support double predestination.in order to recieve a gift one must accept this gift as it is being given.God offers the gift of faith in Him to all mankind,those who do not accept this free undeserved gift will never see heaven because they turned away from the gift and the giver.

 

[sandusky]

fbl9:

hi again sandusky finally sunk in my thick head that you don’t support double predestination.but you do support full predestination to heaven.as in God allows only certain people to be able to believe unto birth into enternal life

Yes; those who go to heaven do so by the will of the Father.

fbl9:

it was through some of your posts that you seemed to support double predestination.

fbl9, I don’t want to add any confusion, so consider carefully what I’m about to say.

With respect to those who are not elect to salvation, God leaves them in their sin, and does not call them “effectually.” That is known as the “decree of preterition.” Preterition neither necessitates, or brings about perdition (or, condemnation to hell), although it makes it certain. God simply decides to leave the non-elect sinner in his freely chosen sin; so, rather than mercy, the non-elect receive justice, which is what everyone deserves.
flb9:

in order to recieve a gift one must accept this gift as it is being given.God offers the gift of faith in Him to all mankind,those who do not accept this free undeserved gift will never see heaven because they turned away from the gift and the giver.

It seems that you believe that God gives the gift of saving faith to all mankind; how did you arrive at that belief?

 

[fbl9]

St.John 3;17"For God did not send His Son into the world in order to judge the world,but that the world might be saved through Him" seems like a logical view to me.

 

[mikeledes]

mikeledes says:

What I hear most Catholics say, is not what you are saying.

I hear Catholics say the man chooses to be in Christ because of God’s prevenient grace; and, the one who is not in Christ, is not in Christ because of that one’s rejection of prevenient grace.

When I state that God, through his sovereign election places one in Christ; the usual Catholic response is that, if God does so, then man has no choice.

What I say is what the Catholic Church teaches regarding predestination. Namely, that complete predestination (grace to glory) is independent of every merit. In the execution of the execution of His decrees of predestination, God ensures the free cooperation of those predestined to glory.

mikeledes continued:

So not only can the believer “leave” Christ, but also God can throw him away.

You’re favorite citation for that is Jn 15; however, in your earlier hermeneutic you stated that when the when the plural of “you” is used, the passage “is not making a statement regarding all Christians in all of the world and throughout history,” but only to those addressed in the statement; you is in the plural there, so being thrown away only applies to the apostles; correct?

The same is true of 1 Jn 2:24ff.

What does your hermeneutic dictate when "you" is in the singular?

Uh… last time I checked John 15:6, it said:

6"If ANYONE does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.

The “anyone” means that this is a truth that applies to all genuine Christians (since only they can be “in Me”) in all of the world and throughout history. This also settles 1 John 2:24ff. You apparently are not getting the point I was trying to make regarding the Phillipians. I am not saying that the truth Paul said exclusively applies to the Phillipians. What I am saying is that the truth he expressed about the Philippians does not necessarily apply to every single genuine Christians throughout history. Paul makes it quite clear why he felt that way about the Phillipians. Just because he believed that this truth would be fulfilled in the Philippians does not mean he believed that this truth will be fulfilled in every single Christian.

By the way, the “throwing away” are not my words. They are the words of Jesus Himself:

6"If does not abide in Me, he is thrown away as a branch and dries up; and they gather them, and cast them into the fire and they are burned.

Who does the throwing away? The Father in His role as “vindresser” (John 15:1-2).

God Bless,
Michael