The Called Of God

Post by **_tartanarmy** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 8:55 am

Yes, but such breaks the rules of basic grammar in those very texts, where election is upon a direct object, and are verb actions acting upon each persons within a plural or accusative plural .
Or in 2 Thes we have "you" (as the direct singular object of a verb or preposition)

Mark

Post by **_tartanarmy** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 9:03 am

Gal 2:20 I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself for me.

Can anyone ever imagine a soul in Hell saying these words?

Mark

Post by **_tartanarmy** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 9:29 am

The actions of God undertaken in Ephesians 1:3-11 are obviously relevant to individuals and not just groups of people?

Just a quick glance at the text shows how : verse 4 says that we are to be holy and blameless. Is this not personal?
Verse 5 speaks of adoption as sons. Is this not individual?
Verse 7 speaks of redemption through His blood. Do not individuals experience redemption?
Verse 7 also speaks of forgiveness of sins. Is that not personal?

This is a tremendous example of the difference in theology that comes from the Scriptures and a theology that is forced onto the Scriptures.

Mark

Post by **_Homer** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 9:30 am

Consider this call of God:

Paul in Acts 17
30. Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent, 31. because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained.

When God calls on all men everywhere to repent, and do it now, does He command what He does not will? Does this command express his will? Or is the command opposed to his will? Or does it have nothing to do with His will?

If the command is limited to some, wouldn't the rules of grammar limit the judgement only to some?

Let the eisejesis begin!

Post by **_tartanarmy** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 9:36 am

Why not deal with what I have thus far said rather than "jump" somewhere else.
I could easily jump to Rom 8,9, John 6 and other places to back up personal individual election, so please deal with Eph 1 and 2 Thes there.

Mark

Post by **_tartanarmy** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 9:38 am

Homer, who on earth is saying that command in Acts is limited to some anyhow?
Sheesh.

Mark

Post by **_james** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 9:47 am

Homer wrote:Consider this call of God:

Paul in Acts 17
30. Truly, these times of ignorance God overlooked, but now commands all men everywhere to repent, 31. because He has appointed a day on which He will judge the world in righteousness by the Man whom He has ordained.

When God calls on all men everywhere to repent, and do it now, does He command what He does not will? Does this command express his will? Or is the command opposed to his will? Or does it have nothing to do with His will?

If the command is limited to some, wouldn't the rules of grammar limit the judgement only to some?

Let the eisejesis begin!

The question really is - can or does God command that which He knows men can not do. Yes...

Post by **_tartanarmy** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 9:59 am

How many times have we discussed this?
Command does not imply ability...

Mark

Post by **_james** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:02 am

tartanarmy wrote:How many times have we discussed this?
Command does not imply ability...

Mark

Exactly... BTW Mark, how have you been? We used to knock heads on Gene Cook's board.

Post by **_tartanarmy** » Thu Sep 20, 2007 12:32 pm

Hi, give me a reminder where we knocked heads!
I do not seem to recall our discussions at the moment, please refresh my memory brother?

Mark