Ask a Theist!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 9 Votes - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-09-2012, 03:12 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(11-09-2012 03:01 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(11-09-2012 02:54 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  From this thread.

Jesus was using the RYR as an example of elect vs non-elect. Jesus often taught in parables and symbolism decided to use the instance before Him as a teaching tool. Jesus made it impossible for the RYR to receive salvation while the RYR couldn't figure out why would could not have eternal life.

Jesus uses the metaphor of "rich" to tell the disciples that the non-elect could never get into heaven. The disciples obviously understood what He was saying because they were astonished at it, and then ask about who could get into heaven and their own salvation (this obviously applies to the non-rich).

Take this conversation into context. If Jesus was literally talking about the rich, then why would the disciples ask about everyone else including themselves?

Jesus also plainly says it when He says, "With people this is impossible, but with God all things are possible."

Was this call by the Lord Jesus real, or not? This man walked away from a direct call of the Lord. Can a person really suggest that Jesus said this to the rich young ruler knowing full well he was incapable of following him?
There we go again, you're being intellectually dishonest. You wouldn't be able to interpret it this way if you weren't a Calvinist. Go figure.

Election is an old belief. It's taught by Jesus.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2012, 03:13 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(11-09-2012 03:12 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Election is an old belief. It's taught by Jesus.
According to Calvin's and your own interpretation, yes. There are dozens of real scholars who'd like to disagree with that assertion.

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2012, 03:14 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(11-09-2012 03:03 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(11-09-2012 02:54 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  From this thread.

Jesus was using the RYR as an example of elect vs non-elect. Jesus often taught in parables and symbolism decided to use the instance before Him as a teaching tool. Jesus made it impossible for the RYR to receive salvation while the RYR couldn't figure out why would could not have eternal life.

Jesus uses the metaphor of "rich" to tell the disciples that the non-elect could never get into heaven. The disciples obviously understood what He was saying because they were astonished at it, and then ask about who could get into heaven and their own salvation (this obviously applies to the non-rich).

Take this conversation into context. If Jesus was literally talking about the rich, then why would the disciples ask about everyone else including themselves?

Jesus also plainly says it when He says, "With people this is impossible, but with God all things are possible."

Was this call by the Lord Jesus real, or not? This man walked away from a direct call of the Lord. Can a person really suggest that Jesus said this to the rich young ruler knowing full well he was incapable of following him?

There are countless professional Bible scholars who'd disagree with you. Your Calvinist beliefs are getting in the way of sound judgement. lrn2lrn

Of course people who don't believe in election are going to disagree with me.

Fact remains, election has been taught in the OT and NT long before Arminianism.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2012, 03:15 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(11-09-2012 03:14 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(11-09-2012 03:03 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  There are countless professional Bible scholars who'd disagree with you. Your Calvinist beliefs are getting in the way of sound judgement. lrn2lrn

Of course people who don't believe in election are going to disagree with me.

Fact remains, election has been taught in the OT and NT long before Arminianism.

Sure, and that, like totally, legitimizes it. Thumbsup





Not.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
11-09-2012, 03:15 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(11-09-2012 03:13 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(11-09-2012 03:12 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Election is an old belief. It's taught by Jesus.
According to Calvin's and your own interpretation, yes. There are dozens of real scholars who'd like to disagree with that assertion.

Like I said, the ones that don't believe in election would disagree; however, the ones that do believe in election could back my assertion.

Also, I made it clear I was to be answering questions from a Calvinist POV.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2012, 03:16 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(11-09-2012 03:14 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(11-09-2012 03:03 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  There are countless professional Bible scholars who'd disagree with you. Your Calvinist beliefs are getting in the way of sound judgement. lrn2lrn

Of course people who don't believe in election are going to disagree with me.

Fact remains, election has been taught in the OT and NT long before Arminianism.

So do you admit that your interpretation of the Bible is subjective?

Yes, legitimizes it totally.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2012, 03:18 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(11-09-2012 03:15 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(11-09-2012 03:14 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Of course people who don't believe in election are going to disagree with me.

Fact remains, election has been taught in the OT and NT long before Arminianism.

Sure, and that, like totally, legitimizes it. Thumbsup





Not.

It legitimizes in a theological sense. Arminianism came around later. Much like dispensationalism.

The Bible clearly teaches election.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2012, 03:20 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(11-09-2012 03:16 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  
(11-09-2012 03:14 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Of course people who don't believe in election are going to disagree with me.

Fact remains, election has been taught in the OT and NT long before Arminianism.

So do you admit that your interpretation of the Bible is subjective?

Yes, legitimizes it totally.

All interpretations are pretty subjective; however, I try to keep an even keel with my beliefs and have things line up.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-09-2012, 03:21 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(11-09-2012 03:18 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(11-09-2012 03:15 PM)Chas Wrote:  Sure, and that, like totally, legitimizes it. Thumbsup





Not.

It legitimizes in a theological sense. Arminianism came around later. Much like dispensationalism.

The Bible clearly teaches election.

And the Harry Potter books teach love, loyalty, and selflessness.

I'll go with Harry.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
11-09-2012, 03:22 PM
RE: Ask a Theist!
(11-09-2012 03:20 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  
(11-09-2012 03:16 PM)Logica Humano Wrote:  So do you admit that your interpretation of the Bible is subjective?

Yes, legitimizes it totally.

All interpretations are pretty subjective; however, I try to keep an even keel with my beliefs and have things line up.

And how does one create an accurate, subjective, theological perspective when all known facts about the Bible disprove it?

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: