Whosoever in John 3:16.

Because they have been given the imputed righteousness of Jesus and have become children of God. All in Jesus’ flock are the elect.
And how does this make them "elect"? Who elected 'em? What does "elect" even mean?

I'm beginning to think you don't believe the word "elect" actually has any meaning, since (like every other assertion you make) you hem and haw around saying anything of actual substance.
 
And how does this make them "elect"? Who elected 'em? What does "elect" even mean?

I'm beginning to think you don't believe the word "elect" actually has any meaning, since (like every other assertion you make) you hem and haw around saying anything of actual substance.
Well since they are a “ whosoever” God offered grace through faith and the “ whosoever” repented and placed their belief and faith in Jesus. Yep ,that is scriptural unlike Calvinism.
 
And how does this make them "elect"? Who elected 'em? What does "elect" even mean?

I'm beginning to think you don't believe the word "elect" actually has any meaning, since (like every other assertion you make) you hem and haw around saying anything of actual substance.
God offered grace to the “whosoever” when they believed repented, and placed their faith in Jesus they became part of the elect.
 
Well since they are a “ whosoever” God offered grace through faith and the “ whosoever” repented and placed their belief and faith in Jesus. Yep ,that is scriptural unlike Calvinism.
The above, ladies and gentlemen, is presented as an answer to "And how does this make them 'elect'? Who elected 'em? What does 'elect' even mean?" though it answers none of those questions.

I especially enjoy that you, who accused others earlier of being "scripturally unsound," cannot provide a coherent definition of "elect," a scriptural term, and described another scriptural term, "election," as a lie from the pit of hell. Physician, heal thyself.
 
The best argument against Calvinism, in my opinion, is 1 John 2:2 “And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” This verse indicates the word “whole” as opposed to anything inferring “elect.” On the other hand, philosophically speaking, when considering the idea of predestination and God’s foreknowledge of whom would/wouldn’t accept salvation, it opens a whole new can of worms that I’ve never been able to quite get past.
 
The above, ladies and gentlemen, is presented as an answer to "And how does this make them 'elect'? Who elected 'em? What does 'elect' even mean?" though it answers none of those questions.
The scriptural elect ladies and gents believe and trust scripture not the twisted Calvinist view. Calvinist find a verse that does not fit their dogma their common response is it does not mean what it says it means what we(Calvinist) tell you it means. No thanks.
 
If we (the elect) not if we (the whole world).
  • 1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness
Lol, if it isn’t in the verse just add your preferred dogma. The verse means we the saved which are those who believed, repented, and placed their faith in Jesus.
 
Still aggressively avoiding a useful definition of "elect," I see.
Elect according to what ?
Unchecked Copy Box
1Pe 1:2 - Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father,through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. Did God know who would believe, repent, and place their faith in Jesus ? Scripture says yes.
 
And there you are, still babbling folderol like an infant.
I kinda figured you would ignore the scripture that proves election is based on God’s foreknowledge. That means God knew who would place their faith in Jesus and based on that foreknowledge God elected those who would believe. Nah I leave the infantile noise to those who do it best the calvinist who follow a 15th century man.
 
I kinda figured you would ignore the scripture that proves election is based on God’s foreknowledge. That means God knew who would place their faith in Jesus and based on that foreknowledge God elected those who would believe. Nah I leave the infantile noise to those who do it best the calvinist who follow a 15th century man.
There were others before Calvin...but you conveniently overlook that. I'm pretty sure April 1st is your major holiday.
 
I've always appreciated your contributions to the forum and style of conversation. Just wanted to get that out of the way. 😊

I think in making application it's important to keep context as king in making the determination for application. When we unhinge the truth that we seek to point out from its context then we are in effect putting words in God's mouth. The audience for 1st John 1:9 is clearly speaking to saved people. I think your point that unsaved people need forgiveness unto salvation is correct and easily provable from other places in scriptures, but rather than making this post lengthy, I just think that we ought to prove our theology from a sound hermeneutic which limits applications to the context that we're referencing, and 1st John 1:9 is speaking about fellowship for Christians who might be tempted to lie to themselves and say that they can live a life of sin and still remain in a right relationship to God's good grace.
I have seen at least a few times that in 1 John 1:3 the phrase "that you too may have fellowship with us" indicates that John was initially addressing the lost before moving on to address the believers.
 
Elect according to what ?
Unchecked Copy Box
1Pe 1:2 - Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father,through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied. Did God know who would believe, repent, and place their faith in Jesus ? Scripture says yes.
I agree completely, an omniscient God already knows every decision I will make and the results of those decisions. That does not change the fact I have a freewill to make those decisions.
Most of the Calvinists I have met argue that GOD decided who he would allow to be saved and who would not have the opportunity. They always seem to feel it was unnecessary to share the gospel because those who would be "the called" would get saved no matter what and those who were not could never be saved no matter what. This seems to be contrary to the bible.

Your belief seems to stem from "God created us" and "God already knows how we will decide regarding salvation" and he already knows whether Christians will be obedient and invite them to church or share the gospel with them. I don't understand the difference in the Hyper Calvinist and Regular Calvinist views, but yours seem to be completely compatible with what I believe.

Can you explain the U (Unconditional election) and the I (Irresistible grace) in the Calvin "Tulip. It has always been explained to me the U means God choose who he wanted to be saved when he created us and that those he choose have no choice. They will get saved no matter what happens in their life and the ones he did not choose could never be saved. This is not a matter of God foreknowing how we would choose but him choosing for us. They say there is no need to witness or give a gospel tract or share the gospel because man has no role in the process. God has already made the decision for each and every man.
2 Peter 3:9 seems to refute this idea.

2 Peter 3:8-10 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Forgive me if I am a little ignorant in regards to Calvin and what he taught.
​

 
You're not a Christian, either! You're proving that again, and again, and again! Thanks for proving our point.
Lol, since you ain’t God you do not get to make that call. My faith is in Jesus NOT. You are a lousy representative of a supposed follower of Jesus.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top