I abandoned my faith, maybe i have exchanged my faith

[Arial]

all this says is that those who believed were ordained or predestined.

It says those who God ordained to belong to Christ are the ones who believe.

It does not say that they believed Because God gave them some special ability. while withholding the truth from them.

An example of disregarding the clear meaning of a scripture by posting nonsense as though it made sense.

Yes. sadly we do see things slightly different. But it does not mean we are apposed to each other

It isn't about being opposed to someone or not being opposed to someone. It is about what God means in the scripture. One view is consistent with the full gospel message,(@prism ) the other is not. It can't accurately present scripture to support its view.

we both believe a person is saved by the work of God. not of our own power.

You keep saying that is what you believe, but at the same time by saying that faith is the cause of regeneration, faith becomes something of ourselves that moves God to regenerate us. That is us contributing to our salvation, regardless of your insistence that it is not. You put faith in the category of causal and God in the category of second cause. Is that consistent with the self revealed God?

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

First, you objected with, "all this says is that those who believed were ordained or predestined"

That's what it says

Then I show a verse that says 'ordained to eternal life's, so you say let's move on?

You showed me a post where IN YOUR VIEW IT SAID that

please note the difference.

It says those ordained believed

It does not say they believe because they were ordained.

Please note the difference.

we have two views based on two belief systems

 

[Arial]

It says those ordained believed

It does not say they believe because they were ordained.

It says "as many as were appointed to eternal life believed." (ESV)
"and all who were appointed for eternal life believed" (NIV)
"And all who were chosen for eternal life became believers: NLT
"and all who were appointed for eternal life believed" BSB.
"and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed. KJB
"and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed." NKJV

So it most certainly does say that those who believed were the ones who were ordained to believe.

Since the door has been slammed in my face and the resolution to never read anything I say, I give anyone who desires, to post this information verbatim if you wish, under your name.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

I guess we need to look again

as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.

which fits exactly what I have been saying

John 3 -
15 that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 ;For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.


who has eternal life. the one who believes.

John 5: 24 “Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.
Who passes from death to life. the one who believes
John 6: 37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 39 This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day. 40 And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day.”

1. All the father gave predestined will come
2. They will never be lost
3. Who are they who come? Those who see and believe

all these passages say the same thing

we are made alive because of our trust in God (which did not come from the flesh as stated in john 1: 13)
when we trust God and receive his gift in faith. we are given life. and this life is eternal. and we have passed from judgment to life (the reason we will never be lost. our judgment fell on our savior. not on us.. its called redemption. or the price of atonement)

 

[Arial]

@Eternally-Grateful

I recognize that I have transgessed into badgering mode and so will lay off the computer for awhile. I will continue at some point to address issues on doctrine as I deem them to be important. You can read them or not. Address them or not, It makes no. difference to me. What is important to me is that the misinterpretation and misuse of Scripture be countered by what is correct...not according to me...but according to correct hermeneutical methods, using the whole of scripture, as best that I am able, to arrive at the meaning of God and his declarations. It is important for the sake of both readers on line and lurkers.

Your participation with me in these posts is not the point of my responding to your posts. There is nothing personal towards you at all.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

@Eternally-Grateful

I recognize that I have transgessed into badgering mode and so will lay off the computer for awhile. I will continue at some point to address issues on doctrine as I deem them to be important. You can read them or not. Address them or not, It makes no. difference to me. What is important to me is that the misinterpretation and misuse of Scripture be countered by what is correct...not according to me...but according to correct hermeneutical methods, using the whole of scripture, as best that I am able, to arrive at the meaning of God and his declarations. It is important for the sake of both readers on line and lurkers.

Your participation with me in these posts is not the point of my responding to your posts. There is nothing personal towards you at all.

I am fine with this

But to assume your doctrinal view is the correct view and everyone else’s is the false view is where the issue lies

I had a great conversation with @Hazelelponi the past few days. We did not judge each other. We did not attack each other. We openly talked and in the end saw that we do agree on some things but not on others. And these differences are not so far we are not brother and sister in Christ because we are. And we should not tear each other down because we see things differently

I guarantee if I came in and spoke to people like they have spoken to me it would
Not end well for me

I will gladly discuss the word. Knowing sometimes we say things that are oppressive and accusatory. Call Me out I will repent but let’s also Practice what we preach

{ edit}

The name of this chatroom is Christ centered

Let make Christ our center. Not our own personal Doctrinal beliefs. If this is a reformed chatroom it should say so.

I am not here to attack reformed theology or Calvinist. I am here to learn and find things we may agree on and was invited from another member

Like our dear sister said yesterday. Just because I disagree does not mean I hate or attack

But the way I speak can be considered this let’s watch how we talk

Again

If I made a post @makesends asking people to explain to him the truth of Gods word because he is not seeing it. I Am sure that post would either be deleted or I would be called out

It’s one thing to say can someone help him explain our view better

It’s another to accuse someone of
Not knowing the truth

 

[Hazelelponi]

I had a great conversation with @Hazelelponi the past few days. We did not judge each other. We did not attack each other. We openly talked and in the end saw that we do agree on some things but not on others. And these differences are not so far we are not brother and sister in Christ because we are. And we should not tear each other down because we see things different

@Eternally-Grateful,

I had been stepping back for a bit of reflection, but since you've now referenced me by name in your exchange with Arial, I want to clarify a few things publicly and respectfully.

While I’m glad our recent conversation remained civil, please do not confuse civility with agreement. I do not affirm your methods, your hermeneutic, or your conclusions. We differ in more than tone — we differ in doctrine, and for me, doctrine matters deeply.

My convictions are not rooted in personal preference or emotional impression but in what I believe Scripture plainly teaches. And where my views do not align with God’s Word, I want to be corrected — because the authority lies outside of me, not within. Scripture is the standard by which every theological claim must be weighed — mine included, yours included.

That’s the heart of this ministry. This forum exists to defend and uphold historic, Reformed, orthodox doctrine. It’s not a space where every view gets to coexist unchallenged under a broad umbrella of “personal belief.” It’s called Christ-Centered Apologetics for a reason — because they labor to give a reasoned defense for the Gospel, not just host conversations about it.

You should expect pushback — not because anyone is "tearing down" a brother or sister, but because Truth matters. And if you're teaching ideas that stand against Reformed soteriology, you will meet Reformed replies. That’s not division — that’s the whole point of apologetics.

Respect is not the same thing as agreement. Agreement is not the same thing as Gospel unity. And Gospel unity is not found by avoiding theological clarity.

We can keep speaking, but please don't use my name to signal an endorsement that was never offered.


— Hazelelponi

 

[makesends]

If I made a post @makesends asking people to explain to him the truth of Gods word because he is not seeing it. I Am sure that post would either be deleted or I would be called out

No, it won't be deleted. Not by me, anyway. I appreciated it.

It’s one thing to say can someone help him explain our view better

It’s another to accuse someone of
Not knowing the truth

None of us know the truth, except as we know God who is the Way, the Truth and the Life. The rest of what we think is just reason, insight, use of Scripture, and our inescapable attempts to organize thought, hopefully by the Spirit's patient guiding. We are all admittedly biased and to some degree inaccurate in our comprehension and contextual delivery, even when our statements are directly Scripture.

But it seems to us better to give all credit, as does Scripture, to God alone —as does good reason, HE being the only source of existence.

 

[Arial]

But to assume your doctrinal view is the correct view and everyone else’s is the false view is where the issue lies

I don't assume everyone else's is false. If I think it is false, not according to a specific doctrinal view, but according to the full teachings of truth in God's word, then I check within the scriptures to see if it is and if it is, inconsistent with scriptural teaching on the subject, why. You are reducing the content in the post by Calvinist/Reformed posters to something you have expressed your desire that no one does to you, boxing all our words into an "ism". You use that to discount them as having any veracity, rather than actually addressing what is said, or paying any attention to it beyond it not being what you believe. We differ on our methods, hermeneutics, and conclusions. The point should be to examine and address those methods, hermeneutics and conclusions, in light of the full counsel of God. The point should be to attempt to arrive at the truth. Biblical hermeneutics is a science and an art. (I will describe what that means in a moment. And it is a very serious and sober business. We are dealing with God and his truths. That means we find out what those are and stick to them. It does not mean we interpret the Bible any old way that we want to and call it God's truth.

As an art, Bible hermeneutics one must realize the rules are flexible when interpreting literature. A text must be treated with nuance. Poetry conveys meanings through symbolism, illustration, metaphors, and repetition. Each piece of poetry is different from other poetry and must be examined by itself. So the art would be recognizing nuances (even those in the original language if the nuance in the original language could send the meaning one way or another. If it does, then the nuance that is consistent with all other biblical teaching on that subject is the one that would apply.

As a science it means there are rules to interpreting literature. Translators for example, must follow these rules in translating. It is no less true in Bible interpretation, where the translating has been done. The most important rule is context. The context examines the surrounding passages, the historical situation of the author, the book itself, and the audience. It refers to the genre of the passage (poetry, historical, narrative, prophecy, wisdom, etc.). That makes the second most important rule of hermeneutics, finding the author's original intern.

Because this got so long, I will come back to the rest of your post.

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

@Eternally-Grateful,

I had been stepping back for a bit of reflection, but since you've now referenced me by name in your exchange with Arial, I want to clarify a few things publicly and respectfully.

While I’m glad our recent conversation remained civil, please do not confuse civility with agreement.

If you read my post. i said in the end we did not agree.

so I am confused why you would even mention this

I do not affirm your methods, your hermeneutic, or your conclusions. We differ in more than tone — we differ in doctrine, and for me, doctrine matters deeply.

as it does me

My convictions are not rooted in personal preference or emotional impression but in what I believe Scripture plainly teaches. And where my views do not align with God’s Word, I want to be corrected — because the authority lies outside of me, not within. Scripture is the standard by which every theological claim must be weighed — mine included, yours included.

Agree 100% I thought we had this in common in our discussion. Maybe I was wrong?

That’s the heart of this ministry. This forum exists to defend and uphold historic, Reformed, orthodox doctrine.

then it should be called a reformed chatroom. not a Christ centered chatroom.

It’s not a space where every view gets to coexist unchallenged under a broad umbrella of “personal belief.” It’s called Christ-Centered Apologetics for a reason — because they labor to give a reasoned defense for the Gospel, not just host conversations about it.

The reformed gospel

I am christ centered also. Thats why I cam here, to find other people who believe Christ is the center of everything.

You should expect pushback — not because anyone is "tearing down" a brother or sister, but because Truth matters. And if you're teaching ideas that stand against Reformed soteriology, you will meet Reformed replies. That’s not division — that’s the whole point of apologetics.

No I should not in a christ centered forum

again, if this is a refo0rmed centered forum, your right.

But then, the name of the chatroom is deceptive

Respect is not the same thing as agreement. Agreement is not the same thing as Gospel unity. And Gospel unity is not found by avoiding theological clarity.

We can keep speaking, but please don't use my name to signal an endorsement that was never offered.


— Hazelelponi

lol.. Its obvious that you did not read what I posted.

and if this is how it goes.. .. I do not think you need to worry..

 

[Hazelelponi]

I never confuse civility with agreement

I don't think you do. I was talking to Eternally Grateful, I didn't quote you or respond to your post - only EG's.

Wires got crossed I think somehow.

 

[Arial]

I had a great conversation with @Hazelelponi the past few days. We did not judge each other. We did not attack each other. We openly talked and in the end saw that we do agree on some things but not on others. And these differences are not so far we are not brother and sister in Christ because we are. And we should not tear each other down because we see things differently

No one is tearing anyone down. That is your perception, and it is unfortunate that you perceive it that way. No one is saying these differences mean we are not brothers and sisters in Christ. What is being dealt with is finding from scripture, and by doing the necessary work so that what we say is supportive of our view, which of the two views (in this case, though it has ventured off topic of the OP, primarily of which comes first, regeneration or faith.) Your view in which faith comes first is rooted in the belief that man chooses salvation for himself, or rejects it, by his own will. And that is not saying, that you are saying you believe that salvation is not all of God. It is what it amounts to being, whether that is what you believe it is or not. But that aside, all anyone has been trying to do is show you from scripture that the Bible teaches that regeneration precedes faith, but that they come together at the same time. Chronologically the new birth is necessary for the faith. It is the idea that God would choose only some to give to Christ, and Christ only died for those some that he chose, that you are fighting against. If you were to acquiesce even for a moment, long enough to soak in the scriptural evidence being given, i.e. acknowledge that one thing, that indeed the Bible does teach regeneration before faith, the whole house of cards you have built would come tumbling down. So you don't examine the scriptural evidence we give or address it. And if that is what you want to do, then so be it. But there is treasure you cannot fathom behind that door you won't open. But we are never going to agree to disagree. We will continue to disagree. You can't ask us to stop just because you want us to.

I guarantee if I came in and spoke to people like they have spoken to me it would
Not end well for me

For example? Please stop making everything personal. It is a Christian apologetics forum.

I will gladly discuss the word. Knowing sometimes we say things that are oppressive and accusatory. Call Me out I will repent but let’s also Practice what we preach

See? Posting like this instigates what it is you are accusing others of. You are the one doing it. So take a breath and try to remember to leave things like this out of the conversation. In case you haven't noticed, my post responding to you began with a neutral and civil position discussing the issue and the ways in which it is being dealt with, and now here I am, having instead, if I respond, to be responding to remarks that have nothing to to with theology or doctrinal debates. WHich produces more remarks that have nothing to do with theology or doctrinal debates. There is no reason you should take offense at my saying that. No reason you should perceive it as talking down to you, insulting you or anything else against you personally. It is simply trying to make this a better place for all of us, you too, by pointing out how one thing leads to another.

The name of this chatroom is Christ centered

Let make Christ our center. Not our own personal Doctrinal beliefs. If this is a reformed chatroom it should say so.

Christ is the center of every response we make. There is in Christianity this thing called the Doctrine of Christ or Christology. It is crucial to all discussions and of necessity must be doctrinally oriented and doctrinally sound. A person should have personal doctrinal beliefs, based on the doctrines (foundation) of Christ's church as revealed in the Bible. That does not mean, as you seem to imply or believe, that if we have personal doctrinal beliefs it is not biblical but simply by name Calvinist or Reformed. Those doctrines were pulled out of Scripture and I agree with them for the most part. Most of the active members are Reformed but the site is not restricted to only the Reformed. It is a place however where we don't get brutalized everytime we post something, and so we are comfortable here.

If I made a post @makesends asking people to explain to him the truth of Gods word because he is not seeing it. I Am sure that post would either be deleted or I would be called out

It’s one thing to say can someone help him explain our view better

It’s another to accuse someone of
Not knowing the truth

You read "not knowing the truth" into his post. He said "you do not see it". Meaning you can't understand what he has been saying but maybe someone can say it in a way in which you are able to understand. There is nothing wrong with that and if you had posted the very same thing regarding another person, staff would never have seen it as you telling them they did not know the truth. There is something to be said for a person being overly sensitive and perceiving people and what they say in the worst possible light.

 

[Hazelelponi]

does not work. when you defend it by saying other people believe things they do not believe. that tends to come back to haunt

I'm not a moderator here, I am just an individual who posts.

Your interpresonak issues are not my business, I'm happy to discuss theology, nothing more. It's why I'm here.

I am placing you on ignore so that I can discuss theology with people who are interested in it, without all this other nonsense. Please don't mention my name anymore.

 

[Arial]

I don't think you do. I was talking to Eternally Grateful, I didn't quote you or respond to your post - only EG's.

Wires got crossed I think somehow.

Not sure how that happened. My carelessness I'm sure. I edited to take the confusion out. Sorry.

 

[Arial]

From this point forward all posts that are dealing with personal grievances and nothing but personal remarks about persons, or the forum and how it should be run and how people should speak, and fail to deal with the doctrinal and theological issues being discussed, will be automatically deleted. That goes for this thread and all other threads.

 

[Arial]

I guess we need to look again

as many as were appointed to eternal life believed.

which fits exactly what I have been saying

That is not what you are saying. You are using those words to say that those who believe are then appointed to eternal life.

 

[Arial]

John 3 -
15 that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 ;For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.


who has eternal life. the one who believes.

That is correct. Now, who is the one who believes? The one who is appointed to eternal life Acts 13:48

καὶ ἤκουον οἱ ἔθνη
“And the Gentiles were hearing [this]…”

Key clause:

καὶ ἐπίστευσαν ὅσοι ἦσαν τεταγμένοι εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον
“and believed as many as had been appointed to eternal life.”

• ἐπίστευσαν – Aorist active indicative of πιστεύω (to believe): simple past—“believed.”
• ὅσοι – “as many as” or “all who”; a relative pronoun indicating the group in view.
• ἦσαν τεταγμένοι – Pluperfect passive of τάσσω (to appoint, assign, arrange):
  
  • Pluperfect: the action of appointing occurred prior to the belief.
  • Passive: the subject (those who believed) did not appoint themselves but were appointed by another (God).
• εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον – “to eternal life”: shows the direction or purpose of this divine appointment.

Grammatical force:
The pluperfect passive ἦσαν τεταγμένοι ("had been appointed") indicates a past completed action with continuing results. The use of the passive voice emphasizes divine agency—they were acted upon.

---

2. Context​

Paul and Barnabas are preaching in Pisidian Antioch, and the Gentiles respond to the gospel after the Jews reject it (see vv. 44–47). Verse 47 quotes Isaiah 49:6 to affirm that God has commissioned the gospel to go to the Gentiles.

This moment marks a major shift in redemptive history: the gospel going beyond Israel to the Gentile nations, in fulfillment of God's plan.

---

3. Theological Implications​

Divine Election​

This verse is often cited in support of Reformed (Calvinistic) theology regarding election:

• Those who believed are described as those who were already appointed to eternal life.
• The verb τεταγμένοι points to God’s sovereign choice, not human self-determination.
• Belief is the result, not the cause, of being appointed to eternal life.

Faith and Regeneration​

In Reformed soteriology:

• God’s sovereign election precedes human faith.
• God appoints individuals to eternal life, and those are the ones who believe.
• This supports the doctrine of effectual calling: God not only ordains the end (eternal life) but also the means (faith).

Contrast with Arminian View​

An Arminian might argue that τεταγμένοι could mean "disposed" or "oriented," perhaps suggesting those who had inclined themselves to receive the message. However:

• This interpretation is linguistically weak. In the passive pluperfect, τεταγμένοι consistently means appointed or assigned—and there is no indication in the Greek that the subject appointed themselves.
• Additionally, the context emphasizes God’s initiative in turning to the Gentiles (vv. 46–47).

---

4. Other Textual Support for This View​

• John 6:37 – “All that the Father gives me will come to me...”
• John 6:44 – “No one can come to me unless the Father...draws him.”
• Romans 8:29–30 – The golden chain of salvation (foreknew, predestined, called, justified, glorified).
• Ephesians 1:4–5 – “He chose us in him before the foundation of the world...”

---

5. Summary​

Acts 13:48 clearly teaches that those who believed were those already appointed by God to eternal life. The verb tense and voice in the Greek grammar affirm that God did the appointing, and the belief was the fruit of this divine action.

This verse sits comfortably in a theology that emphasizes:

• Monergism (God alone is the author of salvation),
• Election (God chooses some to eternal life),
• Effectual grace (those whom God chooses will respond in faith).

ChatGPT