When I said bring the redeemed to Christ I meant that they were already redeemed but needed to be caught in the net so to speak. You know fishers of men.
I sort of knew what you meant, but saw it more as meaning that Reformed considered them not redeemed without the Reformed theological and doctrinal view. But they do see them as redeemed according to their beliefs about the person and work of Jesus, for that is what joins one to Him and gives salvation. Irregardless of how one thinks that came to pass. The Calvinist/Reformed know they believe because they are among the elect, and the A'ist in whatever form, does not know or believe that.
But here is something important to remember considering there are many C/R on this site. Nearly all of them, if not all of them, once believed the same way as the salvation through choice do. So they have experience of both sides of the debate and are familiar with their own thoughts and the teachings, and the interpretation of certain scriptures, from the side you hold up, and the side of all those who argue against the doctrines and theology of C/R.
Whereas some on that "other" side may have some knowledge of the theology and the doctrines that come from it, and have formed an opinion, but they have not ever believed it or lived it. And therefore, their frame of reference cannot penetrate to actually understand what is being said. There is a sense in which it is completely alien to them, and the methods presented in defense of the doctrines, also somewhat alien, at least on that particular subject specific to the TULIP or any particular letter of the acronym. And the problem seems to be a refusal or inability being caused by deeply entrenched tradition of beliefs,--- which is normal and unavoidable in everyone to some degree, about anything really, --- the ears can't hear or accept what is being said. But in the debates, that comes across very differently than what it is. It comes across as simply being ignored and their words being treated as having no value.
So the purpose is not to catch the redeemed in a net. In most cases, and certainly in mine, it is an offering. An attempt to give to the redeemed something of great value. The same value and glory that they found in it. With me it was a simple longing to hear about God from my teachers, and as I have said before, but will repeat, I had no idea what I meant when I thought that. I only knew what I meant when the something about God was placed in my lap. I recognized it and pursued the study of this teaching and way of finding what scripture means, not just what it can be made to say. For it is true, a person can make scripture say anything they want it to. I did not want it to say anything. I wanted to know what it meant.
And all those glorious and deep things began to unfold within me. WHat it means to seek God. This personal, personal relationship and interaction and promise and glory of knowing God. The rolling back of the curtain to not just see grace, atonement, substitution, justification etc. but to peer into them, to see God in all His attributes at work in them in perfect unity and harmony. And an expanded view of everything in His progressive working out of redemption and His purposes in it.
And I have come to realize that those who reject C/R in favor of the tradition that we all grew up in, the only one most of us ever heard, that of "chose Christ and you will be saved." instead of "Believe Christ and you will be saved." are in the same place I was. That of having no frame of reference to understand what I mean by the words I said above as to what happened within me that I underlined. But I say them anyway, and I contend for my faith anyway, because you never know when someone might begin to think about it and consider it, when the spark might catch, and the flame burn bright. It isn't really different, but it is more.
