Conditional Election

If God chose certain people to save, Then why would He go through all the trouble of creating sin (you believe God created sin), Making sure His elect hear His Word, Giving them faith, Regenerating their hearts, Create trials for them to go through for the process of sanctification all for His glory when He could simply create the elect He desires and let them glorify Him as they would ultimately do anyway if He went through all the trouble mentioned above. - Let me clear something up. I am not completely sure if God created sin or not; this is something I am testing as viable or not, I admit. How God chooses to set up the process of salvation is up to him, So answering or not answering the rest of this question doesn't disprove my argument biblically. Here's a question: why did God create us? For his glory. Why did God make the salvation process like above? For his glory. Your belief in only election without free will is not logical. God is logical. He is the Creator of logic. Also, God did not have to give the world the Bible. He could easily snap His fingers (once more) and regenerate all the souls of His elect. - This is simply a straw man. The process of salvation is not without free will. I don't think we have a say in our election, But he doesn't force us to believe either. I believe that God regenerates our soul (born again; John 3 says that a man cannot even see the kingdom of God unless he is born again, So, How can we make a choice about something we don't even know about? ) and with our new spirit, We can believe in God, Because we want to. We will want to because of our spirit, Etc. The other part of your sentence is explained above. - Also, God's logic is different than ours. Yes, He is the creator of logic, But you have to realize that just because the motives of something don't make sense or the action doesn't make sense at all, Doesn't mean it isn't biblical. Take the Trinity for example; we don't and can't comprehend it, Or the reasoning behind it. Does that mean it's not logical to God? Does it mean it's not logic? "Point 1. Conditional Election is in disagreement with John 10:26-27. "In the context (John 9-10), Jesus has been talking to the Pharisees which He mentions as Jews in other verses as well as the one before John 10:26. These Pharisees did not and would not believe that Jesus was the Christ, The Son of God. Jesus knew their hearts and his righteous anger was kindled against them for the yoke of bondage they placed upon his people. - Why couldn't the Pharisees believe in Jesus, I thought everyone has a choice to believe? - He talks about His sheep universally, So why can't the principles that he's talking about be applied universally? Why would God select a group of people, But then subject them to the exercise of having to hear God"s Word (the Bible, The gospel) to "activate" their election or make it sure? God"s Word is clear that you must hear to obtain faith. Using logic and the bible what justification can you give that explains why God needs this extra step of a person "hearing" God"s Word to secure that person if he has already elected him before the foundation of the world? If you submit that "receiving a gift" of salvation is a work, Do you also submit that "hearing" is a work that is a necessary pre-requisite for salvation? Again, I'm not going to question how God goes through with salvation (as revealed by Scripture). - The word, "hear" isn't just auditory reception. It's also understanding and being able to receive what is being said. Remember when Jesus says, "He who has ears, Let him hear"? He isn't saying, "all who can auditorily receive what I'm saying, Hear. " No, He's saying, "he who can understand what I'm saying, Understand! " He tells the disciples that the unregenerate can't understand because they don't have a regenerated spirit to understand or receive what's being said (ears to hear). This is why it says he (in secret) tells the disciples what the parables mean. The same principle applies here. The "hearing" mentioned in your text (that Grace consistently provides) is auditory reception and understanding. And, Since God regenerates people before faith (which is what I believe) then being able to receive and understand what is being said by say, A preacher, Is not a work by us, Because it is the work of God, For"Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, That ye believe on him whom he hath sent. " [John 6:29]. Chicken. KJV. -Where in the Bible is this "receiving a gift" language used? The Bible calls us to BELIEVE and turn away from our sins (Mark). It calls on us to confess our sins. A true Christian would never suggest their salvation is based on themselves so I dismiss the idea that conditional election leads to this view. This boils down to whether or not free will is a "work". . . [Rest of the Paragraph]-Just because you don't think conditional election ultimately boils down to that, Doesn't mean that it doesn't. . . Ya know? - It doesn't boil down to whether free will is a work, That's not what I'm arguing (if I did, I apologize). What I mean is that with conditional election, God is ultimately choosing to love us, Elect us, Finish the work of saving us, Based on a choice that we make. Sure, Even if the choice isn't a work, Election is still based on what we do. I don't think that gives complete glory to God; I think it gives room for us to boast. Just because you were a better choice maker than others, Means you're ultimately saved and elected. I think the idea that God chose us for salvation not based on anything we did is more loving. It's unconditional. It's not partial. - As for the Sabbath story, I'm again sorry for a misunderstanding. Also, Again, Where is this "receiving the gift" language? Even if He wanted to save everyone, He would not be able to because He would not be set apart. There would be no one or nothing to be set apart from. -Woah. . . This violates God's omnipotence! He's an infinite being, He would be separate regardless. This is why I think if he really wanted to save everyone, He would! Also, This argument doesn't seem biblical either. If He wanted to, He could make it to where it doesn't violate his morals or character. Lastly, I understand these passages in general to mean that God knew who would be "the elect" and before the foundations of the earth reasoned (not that he had to reason, He knows everything right? ): If I"m going to adopt children (and all those I adopt agree to be adopted), I"ll need a place to keep them, To care for them. That"s why I"m already making arrangements to have them live with me in my heavenly home" God is preparing a place for us in heaven! (John 14:1-3)-Sure, But use scripture to interpret scripture (Fiat igitur Scripturam interpretandam scripturam). Other passages add to this message, So it's NOT the only part! And yes, God is preparing a place for us in heaven! Herod was the sovereign king over Israel at the time of Jesus" ministry and he offered to give half his kingdom away to a young woman who had lewdly danced to please him. He gave her the option to choose anything she wanted up to half the kingdom and he would give it. Now we know what she chose, And the prophet John the Baptist lost his head. This illustrates a good point. Herod did not really want to take John's head off for fear of the people. Nonetheless, He vowed to give her whatever she wanted, And even though he was sovereign he abdicated his authority to that of a young girl. -Let me remind you, Herod isn't God. His decisions are influenced by worldly things, And he was an unbeliever, Not God. I don't think it a good idea to compare what Herod did to what God did. God's sovereignty and man's ability to choose are not in conflict. God allows man to make a choice. Um. . . It literally says that God didn't choose based on their choice or anything that they had done! I don't get the point being made here, Please explain. Now for your points:1. Romans 10:8-10 is not the only verse that speaks to salvation; regeneration, Being born again, Election, The Holy Spirit, And other parts of salvation are not included there. How are people able to confess? Who is able to confess? How are they able to believe? Etc. Salvation is a guaranteed promise! Using definitions doesn't prove election to be conditional (even though you are talking about salvation). It says if, Yes. This is true. If we are regenerated, Then we will be able to confess and believe! I think that is the biblical answer (John 3) It's conditional on GOD regenerating us, Not us regenerating us! 2. Serving God is not the same as salvation! If I don't choose to serve God sometimes, Does that mean I'm not saved? "If God gave the Israelites a choice why wouldn't he give the Gentiles a choice" You are making a false equivalency. The Israelites were choosing to serve God or not. The Gentiles, (in your eyes) are choosing salvation. They are different choices, Rendering it a fallacious argument. For reference's sake, We disagree on: Election, Atonement, Prevenient vs. Effectual grace, And (maybe) sin. Sola Deo Gloria! Good luck, And chicken!