“There is no problem that I see”
That’s because it’s you theology and it would be very hard for you to immediately come out and say, “Hey, I see a gaping hole here”.
_________________
“If a person is trusting in the scriptures, the ONLY reason they are trusting in the scriptures is because they are one of God’s elect.”
The Pharisees trusted in the Scripture.
_________________
“On the contrary. You know if you are one of the “elect” simply because you believe in God. “
And how do you KNOW you believe in God? You right back to subjectivity and emotions.
1) Without a doubt, no one can see the defects of their own perspective as well as their critics. Thank you for that valuable insight.
2) You play fast and loose with the word “trust.” Jesus never said the Pharisees “trusted” in the Scriptures. Read it again. He says “for in them [the Scriptures] you think you have eternal life.” A person may think they have salvation all figured out, but because their heart is so far removed from a true love for God, their trust is in their own thinking, not in Him. If the Pharisees had truly trusted Scripture, they would have seen the suffering and humility of the promised Messiah, they would have seen the many prophesies fulfilled in Christ, and they would, with Simeon, be able to say, on seeing Jesus, that they had seen the salvation of Israel.
3) You have not yet answered my challenge, and by now I am beginning to suspect it is because you have no tenable answer. I have asked you before, and I will ask you again. How do you claim to escape the much vaunted dangers of subjectivity? You are, like us, a fallen being, and just as capable of self-deception. In what then do you trust, if not the sovereign power of God to save a selfish, self-deluding, sin-seeking soul, in spite of himself? You trust perhaps in your own ability to hold up your end of the “Open Transaction” of which you are so fond? So you trust in your own certainty that such and such a Scripture applies to you, or your own level-headed assessment of your spiritual condition and what to do about it, or you trust in your own ability to assess the veracity of the authority figures in your life who have told you what to think and what to do to be saved?
You are braver than I am, by a long shot. That transaction was no more open to me than the decision a master makes to feed his dog. The pet doesn’t know where the food comes from, how much it costs, or why it’s good for him. But his appetite inclines him to eat when good food is presented, and so he does. But dead dogs don’t eat. Even if you spoon feed them.
Or let me ask it another way. When Lazarus was raised from the dead, at what point might he have said, “Y’know, I really want to stay dead, so just leave me alone, g’night.” Was that transaction “open?” What if God wants to raise some from spiritual death? If we are all so trapped in the blindness of our own subjectivity, how can anything God does be “open” to us?
The problem is this: Your “open transaction” presupposes a level playing field between the parties to the transaction, the relative equality of partners to a contract. In salvation there is no such equality. God, as Paul says in Romans 9, has mercy on whom he will, and whom he will he hardens. Does that meet your criteria for “openness?” No, its not a very pleasant idea when first encountered. But the truth is that mercy is something that, by definition, you have no right to expect. It is not owed to you. Otherwise it would not be mercy.
Therefore, unless God had said that any who come to him would not be turned away, none of us would have any reasonable expectation of salvation. If you come before a king for mercy, you do not know whether you will receive it before you ask. But if you have asked, and he has agreed, then it is presumption to deny that he will keep his word.
Is not God greater than our subjectivity? What did Jesus do with the demoniac wandering the graveyards? Did he say, “Go get your head clear, then come back and we’ll straighten out this possession thing if you like?” No. He bypassed the will of that tormented soul and in dramatic fashion cast out the evil that held him in bondage all those years. And what of Paul, who was devoted to destroying Christianity? Did Jesus just put his arm around Paul and say, “you know, it would be great if you would come over to my side. I’ll give you a few days to think about it?” No. He stopped him cold from carrying out his evil plans, then told to wait for further instructions, things he must do, not things optional, but things necessary. And Ananias, who would help him regain his sight, was specifically told that Paul, despite his wickedness, had been chosen by God for a ministry to the Gentiles.
So what place does “subjectivity” have in any of this? In term of impeding the will of God, our subjective nature, problematic as it is, is simply not going to stop Him from having mercy on whomsoever he chooses. I count that a blessing, because without His intervention, it is certain that I would to this day be wandering in the wilderness.
If I grew up in a Reformed church I might agree with you. However, for over 30 years I didn't even understand there was a Reformed "belief". I can attest, scripture does not make sense (especially John, Romans, and the Old Testament) if you do not have a Reformed background.
The Pharisees trusted in the Scripture.
No. The Pharisees made their own set of rules and shoehorned scripture around those rules.
And how do you KNOW you believe in God? You right back to subjectivity and emotions.
Belief in God IS NOT subjective and emotional. I am not a person given to emotion. You can simple see the evidence of God all around in the very fabric of life. There is logic and order in the universe and if one takes the time to observe this, they will come to this conclusion. My salvation experience did not rest upon an emotional experience but one of logical experience.