|
| |
What does Bible teach on election? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
What does the Bible teach about election? |
| |
What does Bible teach on election? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
Election is unconditional.
"And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac; for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God's purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls, it was said to her, "THE OLDER WILL SERVE THE YOUNGER." Just as it is written, "JACOB I LOVED, BUT ESAU I HATED." (Rom 9:10-13)
|
| |
Predetermined or Free Will |
|
|
|
Luke 8:13
|
| |
"Election is the act of God whereby in eternity past He chose those who will be saved. Election is unconditional, because it does not depend on anything outside of God, such as good works or foreseen faith (Romans 9:16). This doctrine is repeatedly taught in the Bible, and is also demanded by our knowledge of God. . . .
No sinner can ever make the first move in the salvation process. This is what Jesus meant in John 6:44, when He said, "No one can come to Me, unless the Father who sent Me draws him."
. . . Ephesians 1:4-5,11 reads, "Just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will . . . also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will." . . . (www.gty.org(slash)IssuesandAnswers(slash)archive(slash) See this website for more information on the Bible doctrine of election. |
| |
How do you then interpret the verses... |
|
|
|
Luke 8:13
|
| |
I want to thank you for the dialogue we've been having. I do appreciate your views and I hope I can be of some help. Of course, the Calvinism vs. Arianism debate has been raging for centuries. It is said that every Christian believes in Election; but not every Christian defines Election in the same way. Because of the length of my answer, I will send this in 2 parts.
. . . WHAT DOES THE BIBLE TEACH ABOUT ELECTION?
Election is the act of God whereby in eternity past He chose those who will be saved. Election is unconditional, because it does not depend on anything outside of God, such as good works or foreseen faith (Romans 9:16). This doctrine is repeatedly taught in the Bible, and is also demanded by our knowledge of God. To begin with, let's look at the biblical evidence.
. . . The Bible says prior to salvation, all people are dead in sin-- spiritually dead (Ephesians 2:1-3). In this state of death, the sinner is utterly unable to respond to any spiritual stimulus and therefore unable to love God, obey Him, or please Him in any way. Scripture says the mind of every unbeliever "is hostile toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so; and those who are in the flesh cannot please God" (Romans 8:7-8, emphasis added). That describes a state of total hopelessness: spiritual death.
. . . The effect of all this is that no sinner can ever make the first move in the salvation process. This is what Jesus meant in John 6:44, when He said, "No one can come to Me, unless the Father who sent Me draws him."
. . . This is also why the Bible repeatedly stresses that salvation is wholly God's work. In Acts 13:48 we read, "And when the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed."
. . . Acts 16 tells us that Lydia was saved when, " . . . the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul."
. . . Romans 8:29-30 states, "For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the first-born among many brethren; and whom He predestined, these He also called; and whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified."
. . . Ephesians 1:4-5,11 reads, "Just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before Him. In love He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will . . . also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will."
. . . Ephesians 2:8 suggests that even our faith is a gift from God.
In 2 Thessalonians 2:13, the apostle Paul tells his readers, "God has chosen you from the beginning for salvation."
. . . Second Timothy 1:9 informs us that God "has saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was granted us in Christ Jesus from all eternity."
. . . (article by John MacArthur at www.gty.org - listed in Issues and Answers archives) To be continued in next message.
|
| |
How do you then interpret the verses... |
|
|
|
Luke 8:13
|
| |
WHAT DOES THE BIBLE TEACH ABOUT ELECTION? (continued from previous message)
Occasionally someone will suggest that God's election is based on His foreknowledge of certain events. This argument suggests that God simply looks into the future to see who will believe, and He chooses those whom He sees choosing Him. Notice that 1 Peter 1:2 says the elect are chosen "according to the foreknowledge of God the Father," and Romans 8:29 says, "whom He foreknew, He also predestined." And if divine foreknowledge simply means God's knowledge of what will happen in advance, then these arguments may appear to have some weight behind them.
But that is not the biblical meaning of "foreknowledge." When the Bible speaks of God's foreknowledge, it refers to God's establishment of a love relationship with that person. The word "know," in both the Old and New Testament, refers to much more than mere cognitive knowledge of a person. Such passages as Hosea 13:4-5; Amos 3:2 (KJV); and Romans 11:2 clearly indicate this. For example, 1 Peter 1:20 says Christ was "foreknown before the foundation of the world." Surely this means more than that God the Father looked into the future to behold Christ! It means He had an eternal, loving relationship with Him. The same is true of the elect, whom we are told God "foreknew" (Romans 8:29). That means He knew them--he loved them--before the foundation of the world.
If God's choice of the elect is unconditional, does this rule out human responsibility? Paul asks and answers that very question in Romans 9:19-20. He says God's choice of the elect is an act of mercy. Left to themselves, even the elect would persist in sin and be lost, because they are taken from the same fallen lump of clay as the rest of humanity. God alone is responsible for their salvation, but that does not eradicate the responsibility of those who persist in sin and are lost--because they do it willfully, and not under compulsion. They are responsible for their sin, not God.
The Bible affirms human responsibility right alongside the doctrine of divine sovereignty. Moreover, the offer of mercy in the gospel is extended to all alike. Isaiah 55:1 and Revelation 22:17 call "whosoever will" to be saved. Isaiah 45:22 and Acts 17:30 command all men to turn to God, repent and be saved. First Timothy 2:4 and 2 Peter 3:9 tell us that God is not willing that any should perish, but desires that all should be saved. Finally, the Lord Jesus said that, "the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out" (John 6:37).
In summary, we can say that God has had a special love relationship with the elect from all eternity, and on the basis of that love relationship chosen them for salvation. The ultimate question of why God chose some for salvation and left others in their sinful state is one that we, with our finite knowledge, cannot answer. We do know that God's attributes always are in perfect harmony with each other, so that God's sovereignty will always operate in perfect harmony with His goodness, love, wisdom, and justice.
For further study:
John MacArthur, The Love of God (Dallas: Word, 1996).
J. I. Packer, Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1961).
© 2000 Grace to You
. . . (article by John MacArthur at www.gty.org - listed in Issues and Answers archives) |
| |
Predetermined or Free Will |
|
|
|
Luke 8:13
|
| |
You wrote: '2: God has predetermined that his plan of salvation will be carried out. This does not mean that he has predetermined who will and will not be saved.'
My reply:
That simply does not make any sense. How can the predetermined will of an all-powerful God NOT come to pass?
You wrote:
'God wants everyone to be saved (If you need several versus to back this up, let me know). He provided the means for that to happen through the death and ressurection of Jesus.
It is our choice whether to accept his Gift or not.'
My reply:
Eph. 2:1-2 "And you were dead in your trespasses and sins" How do the spiritually dead choose anything? When's the last time you have seen a corpse make a choice o do anything else for that matter? John 6:44 "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him." This is pretty explicit. Sure God desires that all be saved, but He did not PROVIDE so that all will be saved. Since all will not be saved, then if you say that God PROVIDED atonement for all, then you are saying that the atonement which God has provided has FAILED. But a failing God is NOT the God of the Bible! It makes more sense to understand that, while God desires all will be saved, He only PROVIDED atonement FOR HIS PEOPLE whom He has elected from eternity past.
As for the numerous verses you quoted: it is not proper to pick and choose numerous verses which support your view while ignoring all the verses which do not support your view. You seem to be ignoring all the verses which speak of election and God's will from before eternity and the fact that God is the ONLY acting party in the regeneration of the soul. What about the verses I have quoted? You simply say things like, "but that doesn't necessarily mean thus and such".... but your responses are really no answer; you are begging the question. My answer to all your verses is that we certainly do choose God: AFTER He has regenerated us and given us the gift of salvation. But as the Bible explicitly and clearly says, we are DEAD in our trespasses and sins and NO ONE comes to Jesus UNLESS the Father draws him. |
| |
Is there no volition? |
|
|
|
John 15:4
|
| |
Is there no volition? My friend, does coming to Christ make us devoid of all will and self? Is the only reason I believe because the Spirit makes me? The only reason I obey is because I am coerced? The only reason I fellowship is because it is the only path set before me? It is my opinion that we still have a will, and that matching our will with God's will is pleasing to Him. Certainly the Holy Spirit is the Helper and Comforter, but I do not think He is the Puppetmaster. I know that works that glorify me are dead, but my obedience glorifies God. When we, of our own free will, choose to depart from sin and serve Jesus (with help and leading of the Holy Spirit), heaven rejoices. The reason I cannot accept unconditional election and the total depravity of man is that it leads to sin being a sign of non-election. If someone sins, it must be because he was not truly chosen. This is an extremely arrogant stance for those who are convinced of their own election. Is it possible they cannot see their own sin? Also, if we start weeding out all who have sinned as being non-elect, heaven will be a very lonely place. Finally, if there is no post-salvation grace, who will be saved? I believe that Jesus is the Author and Perfector of our faith. Our initial faith was a gift from God according to His grace, we can claim no credit. However, I also believe that we participate in some (admittedly small) way afterward, the as a pilgrim. James makes this all clear. He was used to dealing with legalistic Jews who had mapped out a path to God in the flesh. Faith and works are both essential. |
| |
Is there no volition? |
|
|
|
John 15:4
|
| |
I'm not sure what my answer regarding the fruit of the Spirit has to do with the doctrine of election. I fail to see the connection.
. . . Of course man has limited free will. Believing on Christ (commiting oneself to Him) for salvation most definitely involves an act of the will on the part of the individual.
. . . As far as unconditional election, I do not believe I mentioned any such thing in my answer re John 15:4.
. . . I know of no one who believes that if someone sins it is because he was not truly chosen. All have sinned and come short of the glory of God, including the elect, who exist, regardless of how one defines election.
. . . "Is it possible the elect cannot see their own sin?" No, because no one can be saved unless and until he sees his own sin.
. . . "Post-election grace" is a term I am not familiar with.
. . . Yes, I agree with you that obedience has something to do with it. Our obedience is an evidence of genuine saving faith. However, obedience is the result, not the cause, of our salvation.
. . . Works are not essential to salvation. Rom 3:28 NIV "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law." See also Eph 2:8-9. Properly understood, James and Romans do NOT contradict each other. However, proper understanding of the Scriptures does not come from a casual reading or dogmatic interpretation of them.
. . . Works are not essential to salvation -- they are the result of salvation and evidence of genuine saving faith. "Not of works lest any man should boast." This remains true no matter what Scriptures or human reasoning one uses to contradict it. |
| |
What does Bible teach on election? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
Please be very careful here not to just jump into this doctrine. The study of election requires a careful and detailed study of many topics including the sovereignty of God, the fall of man, The work of salvation (man's capabilites, God's will and God's work) before one should even begin to think about election, predestination and free will. I taught a Sunday School class on this. It took a full year to complete. I would be happy to post it here a little at a time, if you would rally like to investigate, or we can work out a way for me to send you the entire set of notes from the class. |
| |
do we have any free will? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
All men have a free will, the freedom to make choices. It is a natural part of who God made us to be. The issue on free will is not if we have it or not, but what we can do with it or not.
Every choice we EVER make in out entire lives is based upon a greatest desire at the moment we make the choice. Think hard about that. I'll offer that you cannot truly think of an exception to that. The problem for an unsaved person is that they do not have a desire for Christ. They are dead in sin, enemies of God, not able to abide by His commands and not able to please Him. Hence the problem is not that we don't have a freedom to choose, but that we don't have the capacity or desire to choose Christ.
This begins to get into the idea of election which requires a careful study. See the post on that for more information. |
| |
What does Bible teach on election? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
Thanks for your answer. I agree with you completely. No one should read their favorite 3 verses on election and then jump to a conclusion about the subject of election. It does require careful investigation.
. . . Also I thank you for your kind offer to share your notes with me. If you can think of a way to get in touch with each other by email -- without posting our addresses for the whole world to read -- I would appreciate it. This problem has me stumped and I can't think of a solution. Once again, thanks for a well-stated, well-thought-out answer to my question. |
| |
Is there no volition? |
|
|
|
John 15:4
|
| |
"...work out your salvation with fear and trembling;" PHI 2:12 "...let us run with endurance the race that is set before us," HEB 12:1. Dear fellow, these are not intellectual exercises or academic processes. Let me explain: The original question was 'How do you abide in Christ?' (not, "what is the theory behind abiding?") My answer was that various willing actions of faith (submitting to the commands of Christ) would produce (sorry, bear) fruit. Your note indicated that faith, obedience, fellowship and sharing the gospel were fruit of the Holy Spirit, that we had no volition in the matter. Your above answer makes it clear that you believe salvation has little to do with life on earth. All our works are only a result of God's election. We indeed become merely puppets. This sounds so much like 'karma' that it is eerie. Are we simply products of the 'fate' that God decided. In the same way we credit Adam with willful sin (or was he just a tool to bring sin to mankind), give us all a little credit for abstaining from sin after we come to know Jesus (post-salvation grace and works). Apparently, 'proper understanding" of James is that he was wrong, works are not essential. I keep talking about how to serve Jesus here, now, in our present state, in the world we now occupy, and you keep answering in nebulous, prehistoric, and eschatological terminology, quoting dead people that agree with your doctrinal leanings. "To abide in Christ...is to have no known sin unjudged and unconfessed..." Does this mean that if you don't know it, it's not sin? Do you actually know anyone who has correctly judged and confessed every one of his sins? I haven't yet met such a person (except maybe in his own mind). Again, God initiated our walk in Christ by sending the gift of faith, but desires that we choose to continue that walk from our volition. He sent His Spirit to help us, and comfort us, and encourage us. Thank You, Jesus! |
| |
Is there no volition? |
|
|
|
John 15:4
|
| |
The Bible does indeed say "...work OUT (emphasis mine) your salvation." However, it does not say: "...work FOR your salvation."
...Re Heb 12:1, we don't win our salvation in a race.
...I thank you for condescending to explain things to this dear fellow.
My previous reply answered the question 'How do you abide in Christ?' (not what is someone's pet theory for or against the doctrine of election?)
You wrote: "Your note indicated that faith, obedience, etc. were fruit of the Holy Spirit, that we had no volition in the matter." Apparently, that's what you inferred, not what I indicated.
...Thank you for telling me what I believe. If I need further clarification on what I believe, I'll be sure to ask you.
...Why do you insist that I said our works are only a result of God's election? I never used the word or the concept of election with regard to works. What I said was good works are evidence of genuine saving faith. Good works are the result, not the cause, of our salvation. When did I EVER mention good works in relation to the word election?????
You want "a little credit for abstaining from sin . . ."? I think not. If one makes the choice to abstain from sin after coming to know Jesus, what credit is that to him? The only reason a believer would have the ABILITY to abstain from sin is because of the shed blood of Jesus and the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit. Credit for us?
It is not apparent to me that James was wrong. What I said was "James and Romans do NOT contradict each other." It would be idiotic for anyone to assert that one portion of inspired Scripture was "wrong" and another was "right." We may not agree with each other, but I'm no idiot. Niether are you, for I can tell that you have a keen, inquiring mind. I mean that sincerely. I don't ridicule your questions and answers. Why do you ridicule mine by calling them "nebulous, prehistoric, and eschatological terminology"?
If one cannot quote "dead people," then let's stop quoting Moses, Isaiah, Peter, James, John, Paul, Martin Luther, Charles Spurgeon, Dr. Scofield, Andrew Murray, Oswald Chambers, etc. Or I could quote a certain living author that has studied the Bible 30 hours a week for 30 years in the original languages. Such study does not involve intellectual exercises or word games. Nor is it about gaining Bible knowledge so that one can win arguments. Is there not the slightest possibility that he may, just may, know a little more about the Bible than MOST professing Christians and churchgoers?
...You say: "Does that mean that if you don't know it, it's not sin?" If ignorance were a sin, then most of us would be without hope.
You say: "...God...desires that we choose to continue that walk from our volition." That is correct. I couldn't agree with you more.
Yes, God did send His Spirit to help us, comfort us, and encourage us. He also commands us to be "filled with the Spirit." Filled means controlled and empowered by. (Look it up in Vine's Expository Dictionary or any Greek word study, unless of course Vine is regarded as just another ignorant heretic.) So God commands us to be controlled and empowered by the Spirit.
Hopefully replies to this message (if any) will focus not on what I did not say or what I meant. Hopefully they will focus on what I SAID. Likewise, we know what the Bible means BY what it says. |
| |
Is there no volition? |
|
|
|
John 15:4
|
| |
Dear fellow, Please understand that I mean dear, and I mean fellow. I am in no way being condescending. I don't know your name, your gender, your age, or your place of domicile. I know you only as a Christian. You are apparently well-read and fervent in your faith in Christ Jesus. I injected irony into my comments, and I did say, "...you believe...," which was inappropriate. You are correct in stating that you never mentioned the word election. For these I humbly apologize. This forum is for the benefit of all who read, of the many-membered body of Christ. It seems to me that your answers tend to be more theological or philosophical. I can see that you have spent a great deal of time studying the Bible and the works of others (dead and alive) that dedicated themselves to the study of the Bible. Though I also study, my calling leads me to be more concerned with the application of faith in everyday terms dealing with common folk. Very few people understand (or care) about how Hebrew and Greek applies to them. Few people really grasp the difference between 'produce' and 'bear' fruit. Even I know that my good works do not purchase my salvation, and I think that anybody who has come to a personal relationship with Jesus understands this. "Credit for us?"(scoff) Yes, I think we do participate in the battle against sin. I do understand that "all praise is God's," but we also enter the fray. Maybe you live in an environment with little temptation or trial. Where I live there are less than 1 percent professing Christians. Theoretical faith has little use. When someone asks me, "How do I abide in Christ?" I have to give them some practical direction, not a theological discourse. Winning arguments doesn't win souls here. It only further alienates those who are already convinced that all Christian are pedantic and arrogant. Please understand my point of view, and I will try to reciprocate. Back to this forum, I am under the impression that many who participate are searching for practical means of serving God. I hope be share with them, giving and receiving as we work out our salvation.
Peace to you, in Jesus' name. |
| |
Dwell with your wife with understanding? |
|
|
|
1 Pet 3:7
|
| |
What does it mean to dwell with your wife with understanding? (Note this question is not about election or works or divorce or Peter's mother-in-law. In your answer(s), please stick to the question as it is stated. Thank you.) |
| |
What does Bible teach on election? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
First, thanks for the excellent idea of setting up a temporary hotmail email account to communicate with other members of this website. Good work!
. . . Second, please note: what people usually call predestination is actually the doctrine of election. The two terms are not synonymous. "Divine predestination means that God has a purpose that is determined long before it is brought to pass. It implies that God is infinitely capable of planning and then bringing about what he has planned, and Scripture speaks of him as doing this" (p. 628, Baker's Theological Dictionary of the Bible, Edited by Walter A. Elwell, Baker Books). For example, Rom 8:29 (NASB) "For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren;"
. . . On the other hand, "Election is the act of God whereby in eternity past He chose those who will be saved. Election is unconditional, because it does not depend on anything outside of God, such as good works or foreseen faith (Romans 9:16). This doctrine is repeatedly taught in the Bible, and is also demanded by our knowledge of God. . . .
. . . "In 2 Thessalonians 2:13, the apostle Paul tells his readers, "God has chosen (elected) you from the beginning for salvation."
. . . "In summary, we can say that God has had a special love relationship with the elect from all eternity, and on the basis of that love relationship chosen them for salvation. The ultimate question of why God chose some for salvation and left others in their sinful state is one that we, with our finite knowledge, cannot answer. We do know that God's attributes always are in perfect harmony with each other, so that God's sovereignty will always operate in perfect harmony with His goodness, love, wisdom, and justice." (John MacArthur at www.gty.org, under Issues and Answers, "What Does the Bible Teach About Election?")
(. . . For further study: John MacArthur, The Love of God (Dallas: Word, 1996); J. I. Packer, Evangelism and the Sovereignty of God (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1961). © 2000 Grace to You)
. . . Third, while all Christians do believe in election, not all Christians define election in the same way.
|
| |
What does Bible teach on election? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
I do believe your interpretation of Divine Predestination. I guess where I disagree is interpretation of Election. In the verse you listed (2 Thes 2:13), I interpret this as follows: Paul is writing to a group of believers and when he refers to "God has chosen (elected) you from the beginning for salvation", he's not telling them that they are special because God had pre-chosen them individually, but God had made a provision for them to be saved and they are special (the "Elect" or in today's terms "the born-again" or "believers") because they accepted God's gift and chose to follow Christ.
There are many verses in the Bible that talk about God wanting all to be saved and for us to choose to believe. When you look at the verses that talk about the elect and apply the interpretation that the elect are another way of saying believers and that predestination is refering to God's over-all plan rather than individually, then the whole bible falls together. I haven't seen any "Election" verses that can't interpreted this way. I have seen many verses and stories in the Bible that the "Election theory" doesn't hold up.
I will be spending some time exploring the "Election" interpretation in greater detail and hope you will also spend some time exploring the "Free Will" interpretation in an unbiased study. |
| |
What does Bible teach on election? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
I said to be careful, not ignorant. The true student of the Word of God wants to see it in it's completeness and this takes careful study and a lot of time. As you stated, such a study gives the BIG picture of who God is, who we are and who does what in salvation. It is an eye-opener and should be pursued, but it should be done slowly and prayerfully.
As to your statement of free will, this is true, to some extent. We are free to choose that which we have the ability and desire to choose. Choosing Christ is not within either our ability or desire until we are born again, and that is solely a work of God.
As to your comment about being removed from the Book of Life, your interpretation of Exodus 32:33 is incorrect. God is speaking about his revelation to Moses at this point, the history from Genesis on to that day. It is not a reference to the Book of Life in Revelation. We cannot lose our salvation. I can show you dozens of verses which prove this beyond a shadow of a doubt. In fact, the very study of predestination and election leads to this conclusion as well. |
| |
Questions for my Calvinists friends. |
|
|
|
Not Specified
|
| |
I'm having problems seeing the Calvinist viewpoint on Election. I've read the verses and studied documents and have found too many problems with the interpretations. I'll discuss these verses again if requested but a couple things that I don't see how they fit are:
1) If God pre-chose only some individuals that were to be saved, why did he destroy them in the flood? I guess you could always say the Noah and family were the only ones he chose but why then go to all the trouble of populating the world and wipe it out with a flood?
2) If God had his "Elect" already in mind and knew they were going to be saved because the could not resist God, why then did Jesus have to die?
3) Why would it be harder for a rich man to enter the Kindgom of Heaven?
My view on this is that God wants us all to be saved and has provided (initiated, given us, predestined, etc...) the way to salvation through his son.
1) In the time of Noah, the people "went away" from God and the only way at that time to get them back on track was to "start over".
2) In Jesus' time, the people were getting too lost in all their laws and was losing the true meaning of God (Love) and sent Jesus, as a final statement, to show us the path.
3) Because God wants us to chose to worship him and believe in his son and to not follow the "ways of the world", then it would be harder for a rich man because there is greater temptations to sway him away.
Although I do believe we have "Free Will" to choose, I also believe that our Will can be overriden by God, if necessary, for his plan to be fulfilled. I also believe that there could not have been anything we could have done to enter Heaven, but fortunately, he invited everyone free of charge with only one string attached -- you must believe. |
| |
Questions for my Calvinists friends. |
|
|
|
Job 38:1
|
| |
I'm having problems seeing the Calvinist viewpoint on Election. I've read the verses and studied documents and have found too many problems with the interpretations. I'll discuss these verses again if requested but a couple things that I don't see how they fit are:
1) If God pre-chose only some individuals that were to be saved, why did he destroy them in the flood? I guess you could always say the Noah and family were the only ones he chose but why then go to all the trouble of populating the world and wipe it out with a flood?
2) If God had his "Elect" already in mind and knew they were going to be saved because the could not resist God, why then did Jesus have to die?
3) Why would it be harder for a rich man to enter the Kindgom of Heaven?
My view on this is that God wants us all to be saved and has provided (initiated, given us, predestined, etc...) the way to salvation through his son.
1) In the time of Noah, the people "went away" from God and the only way at that time to get them back on track was to "start over".
2) In Jesus' time, the people were getting too lost in all their laws and was losing the true meaning of God (Love) and sent Jesus, as a final statement, to show us the path.
3) Because God wants us to chose to worship him and believe in his son and to not follow the "ways of the world", then it would be harder for a rich man because there is greater temptations to sway him away.
Although I do believe we have "Free Will" to choose, I also believe that our Will can be overriden by God, if necessary, for his plan to be fulfilled. I also believe that there could not have been anything we could have done to enter Heaven, but fortunately, he invited everyone free of charge with only one string attached -- you must believe. |
| |
Questions for my Calvinists friends. |
|
|
|
Job 38:1
|
| |
Just for a moment, forget Calvinism. Many people have a problem accepting the Bible doctrine of election because they do not understand it -- every last little ramification and detail of it. You ask "Why? . . . Why? . . . Why?"
To those who must know the WHY of a thing before they can accept or believe it, often the only answer they will get is the one Job was given.
. . . Job 38:1 (NASB) Then the LORD answered Job out of the whirlwind and said,
2 "Who is this that darkens counsel
By words without knowledge?
3 "Now gird up your loins like a man,
And I will ask you, and you instruct Me!
4 "Where were you when I laid the foundation of the earth?
Tell Me, if you have understanding,
5 Who set its measurements? Since you know.
Or who stretched the line on it?
6 "On what were its bases sunk? Or who laid its cornerstone?
. . . My point? Isa 55:8 "For My thoughts are not your thoughts,
Nor are your ways My ways," declares the LORD.
|
| |
Why won't Calvinists answer directly??? |
|
|
|
Job 38:1
|
| |
If you are new to this thread, please read the prior two postings before this one to understand where I am coming from. Thank you.
Why is it that when something in the Bible doesn't fit with your interpretation, you feel you must either horribly twist it out of context or in this case give the simple answer that since it doesn't make sense then it must just be because we don't know everyting God does? Couldn't this mean that your interpretation doesn't hold up and that Calvinism is no better than the other religions or cults that base their entire belief structure on a few verses taken out of context so that the can separate themselves and "Feel" superior to others?
Why can't you see that the whole bible fits in with the "Free Will" theory while only a small portion can be used to justify "Election".
Is there anyone out there can interpret this without the standard "It's just one of those mysteries"? I'm sorry if I come off as being harsh, but it's just that I'm getting frustrated trying to understand how someone can honestly read and interpret the whole bible and come away thinking that God chose some people to be saved and chose others that would not.
I am willing to admit that I could be interpreting this incorrectly, but as of yet, have not been able to see where my interpretations err (on major subjects) when taking the whole bible into context. |
| |
Why won't Calvinists answer directly??? |
|
|
|
Job 38:1
|
| |
PART ONE. It is not my purpose to sound unkind or to "feel" superior to others. But, I would like to make a few comments in answer to your previous questions on election).
. . . To begin with, you are trying to disprove a doctrine -- election -- of which you have no knowledge or understanding. What attorney, professor or debater ever successfully disproved something of which he had absolutely no knowledge? An effective opponent of an idea would need to know all the main points and details of that idea before he could persuade others that the idea was false. It is obvious to me that all the shrill anti-election people are clueless as to what election is and when, where and how the Bible speaks of the elect or election.
. . . By the way, branding all election as Calvinism is a serious error. There is more than one interpretation of the Bible doctrine of election. So why label as Calvinists everyone who believes in the Bible doctrine of election? Also, to refer to Calvinists as "the elect" or to the elect as "Calvinists" is absurd. Election and people spoken of as the elect exist, according to the Bible, whether you and I believe or don't believe in Calvinism and regardless of how you define election.
. . . And why use the words Calvinism and Calvinist when replying to a posting, when that posting never once mentions Calvinism or Calvinist. If one is not even familliar with the terminology of that which he is debating, he will never convince anyone of anything. I myself wrote two lengthy answers defining and defending election, yet I never once mentioned the word Calvinism.
. . . To set the record straight: 1) the word "freewill" is used 22 times in the NIV Bible. In every single reference the adjective freewill is used to modify the noun "offering(s)." So how does the Bible's use of the word freewill support the idea that the doctrine of election is false?
. . . 2) The dictionary defines the adjective "elect" as "chosen" or "carefully selected". So elect and chosen clearly mean the same thing. You say "only a small portion (of the Bible) can be used to justify "election". For your information, while "freewill" occurs in the Bible (NIV) only 22 times and only in connection with the word "offering(s)", the word "elect" appears 11 times; "election" 3 times; "choose" (which means the same thing as "elect") appears 66 times; "chose" 45 times; and "chosen" 125 times. This gives us a total of 250 occurences of the words "elect", "election" or their equivalents choose, chose and chosen, but only 22 occurences of the word freewill, and then only in connection with offerings.
. . . You refer to "when something in the Bible doesn't fit with your interpretation." If you were familiar, not with Calvinism, but with the BIBLE DOCTRINE of election, you would know that: there isn't one verse in the Bible which -- when properly translated and understood in the context and in relation to all other verses dealing with the same subject -- not one word that contradicts the Bible's teaching on the subject of election.
The only reason I brought up the idea that many of the people who cannot accept election are the same people who don't grasp the concept of it is this: it is true. Nonbelievers in election invariably are people who can neither define nor explain what it is that they are opposed to. It is apparent from the comments written by opponents of election that these people have not read the answers supporting election. They've neither read the answers, looked up the Scriptures cited, nor given the other side a fair hearing.
|
| |
Why won't Calvinists answer directly??? |
|
|
|
Job 38:1
|
| |
PART TWO.
Why won't Calvinists answer directly? 1) Who is a Calvinist? If I don't call myself a Calvinist, who are you to put that label on me? 2)Answer what directly? Sometimes the questions are so off topic, so hypothetical and broad, that they cannot be answered.
. . . 3) Do you respond directly? You all never respond directly to the Scriptures used to defend election. I've rarely, if ever, seen an anti-electionist directly answer a scripture or an argument used to prove election. You usually answer a question with more questions or with sophistry that only confuses the issue. I've read more rambling remarks, irrelevant Scripture, hypothetical questions, "why" questions full of suppositions and way off topic, angry comebacks and just plain nonsense in the anti-Calvinism answers and questions. How is anybody supposed to answer such wide-ranging, hypothetical questions?
. . . I would also note that the underlying resistance of the anti-election people is due to their idea that God just wouldn't be fair if election were true. And so they ask WHY questions that are worded to get the other person to agree with them. If election isn't true or doesn't exist, why does the Bible make 250 references to the subject?
. . . Again people keep raising objections to what they call Calvinism while not bothering to even try to read and understand a definition and explanation of the doctrine. It's as if I had driven a Honda Accord for 20 years. Then you come along. You've never even seen a Honda Accord, but you've already decided you don't like Accords and don't want one. In that situation do you think you could convince me the car is no good? Having never seen one, you wouldn't have the slightest personal knowledge on which to build an argument. At best, you would be limited to quoting the writings of others, parroting their ideas while having none of your own.
. . . Again, if I ever saw a well-thought-out, Scripture related question re election, I would make a sincere attempt to answer it.
. . . In conclusion, thiese remarks may have sounded harsh and critical. Such was not my intention. I have love and respect for you and all who are my brothers and sisters in Christ. I respect your right to your own attitudes, opinions and beliefs.
It's just that I cannot sit by silently and read all the criticism, mockery and misunderstanding of the Bible doctrine of election. As Dylan said, "Don't criticize what you don't understand."
If you've read this entire answer, then I thank you for your time and patience. Let's keep searching and learning for greater wisdom and understanding, shall we? After 30 years of serious Bible study, I feel as though I've only begun to scratch the surface in knowing and understanding Scripture. My thanks to you and the other users for stimulating me to continue to search, study and pay attention to the details of the Bible. Always look forward to reading your questions or comments. In Christ, Radioman |
| |
Problems with Election Theory - Part One |
|
|
|
Job 38:1
|
| |
Thank you for the rather long reply (although you still refuse to interpret how the 3 questions I asked in the original posting relate to the idea of Election.)
In Part 1, you accuse me of not having any knowledge of Election. You are greatly mistaken. I may not have as many years mainly because I can't as easily believe in something that I don't feel is biblically sound.
You also asked why I "branded" this as Calvinism. Mainly because this is one of the points that Calvinist believe. Assuming that there are Non-Calvinists that believe in Election then I will use the term Election believers rather than Calvinists.
You also stated that because the word "Free Will" is only used two times and only then in reference to offerings that it must mean the the doctrine of election is true. I assume then that you don't believe in the Trinity because that word is never used. You have mistakenly assumed that since the term we call "free will" is not mentioned that it must not exists. What you fail to see is all the examples of "free will" that do exists. The same is true for the Trinity. Although the word we use to describe it doesn't exist, examples that show it does. As far as the count of the words elect, election, chose, and chosen you include many accounts that talk more of free will than election.
James 4:4 Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.
John 7:17 If anyone chooses to do God's will...
and many more. In fact, of the 66 times you say "choose" is mentioned, There are only three that when taken out of context could be used to relate to election. Please don't overinflate your numbers to make your point hoping that people will just take for granted what you say.
Then then said that there was not one word that contradicts the teaching of election. You were right. There are many, many words. Examples were the three questions that you nor anyone else I've asked seem to be able to explain. If you'd like more examples, let me know.
In your last paragraph in part one, I think you are really referring to the way people that believe in Election are. I have explained what I'm opposed to and defined it. I've shown (in other postings) how the typical election verses are taken out of context. I've tried to see the Election viewpoint but have had all my questions go unanswered.
You also seem to imply that the only people that will understand Election are the people that accept it. I assume that I misinterpreted what you wrote because that statement would be absurd in trying to prove your point.
(Continued in Part Two) |
| |
Why won't Calvinists answer directly??? |
|
|
|
Job 38:1
|
| |
PART TWO:
In your Part two, I think I've answered your first two paragraphs but would be happy to directly respond to any scripture verses you supply although I have done this elsewhere in this forum. (I would appreciate it if you would respond to my 3 original questions first though).
The idea of God being fair or not has nothing to do with why I don't believe in Election. If God were fair (in God's terms) then we would all go to Hell. If God were fair (in human terms) then all good people would go to Heaven. The point is that God did put a limit on the people that would be saved. That limit is that ANYONE that CHOSES to believe in His Son and repent their sins will be saved.
You bring up the example of the person driving a Honda Accord for 20 years and just because I don't drive one I'm in no position to get you to change cars. I assume then you also believe if you talked to a Jehovah's Witness, a Mormon, an Athiest, a Prostitute, etc... then you would not be able to show them what it means to accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior? I believe I could get you out of that Accord and into a Grand Prix if I were to show you enough examples of why the Accord is a bad car, has poor safety records, is driven only by those that have been taught "that's the car we drive, son", etc... (Although this is a bad example because the Accord really is a good car.)
I assume by your 2nd to last paragraph that you believe that the three questions I asked are not well-thought-out or scripturally based, otherwise you would have attempted to answer them. If this is so, please let me know why.
Thank you (and sorry about the long reply) I also respect your right to your own attitudes, but I also think about the passage where we are warned against those that teach false doctrine. I'm not saying that Election is false doctrine, it's that I'm trying to determine (for myself) if it's worth running from (or fighting against). A little background info -- I'm attending a church that is Calvinistic in majority (and believe in Election - "only some are chosen to be saved") and have come to the conclusion that I need to either understand how I may be misinterpreting the bible, fight or run) I'm not one to believe in something just because someone says it's true. I have to research it for myself and see if there could be two possible interpretations and if not, then determine if this is a doctrinal matter or just a little human petty thing. I really am trying to understand the Election idea but have not received any real help.
Thank you for your patience.
|
| |
Questions for my Calvinists friends. |
|
|
|
Job 38:1
|
| |
In reply to: "Questions for my Calvinists friends."
. . . Re: your question 1. I'm not sure that there is an answer to your hypothetical question, "Why go to all the trouble of populating the world and wipe it out with a flood?" For that matter, why did God go to the trouble of creating a world of humankind when He knew that the vast majority of that creation would be lost and never see eternal life? This is the kind of "Why" question that is God's business and none of my business. I would not dare question God about WHY He does this or that? One thing we do know is that all God's acts are consistent with His Eternal nature. All God's acts are done in perfect justice and righteousness. And, like it or not, our finite minds cannot grasp all the ways of God.
. . . Nor does He owe us an explanation. Deuteronomy 29:29 (KJV) "The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law." What IS revealed is, not Calvinism, but a BIBLE doctrine of election. What is NOT revealed is questions that ask: if election were true, then why would God do this and why would God not do that?
. . . Re: your question 2. Heb 9:22 KVH "And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission." Without shedding of blood is NO remission -- for neither the elect nor the non-elect nor the undecided. That is why Jesus had to die on the cross.
. . . Re: your question 3, Matt:19:24, Mark 10:25, Luke 18:25. Q: "Why would it be harder for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven?" A: It is more difficult because a rich person seldom senses his personal need for salvation as readily as a poorer man does.
. . . (Compare, for example, the conversion rate in the mud hut villages of Zambia, Africa with those of Marin County, California, Beverly Hills, California or Jupiter Beach and Jupiter Island, Florida. This may or may not be an apt comment on the above question or answer. However, it remains a fact that it IS more difficult for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven; and it is a fact for the reason given, i.e., because a rich person seldom senses his personal need for salvation as readily as a poorer man does.)
. . . Now I have given sincere, if not lengthy, answers to your original 3 questions. I'm not trying to win a battle of wits; I merely seek to answer your questions as they were asked.
. . . (More to come) |
| |
Questions for my Calvinists friends. |
|
|
|
Job 38:1
|
| |
. . . P.S.
. . . Regarding your submission, "Problems with Election Theory," I sincerely thank you for the background info. Now I see that for you Calvinism is neither a mere intellectual issue nor a matter for debate for the sake of debate. Rather it is a practical issue. However, I remind you that to my knowledge, I have never once in any of my answers used the word "Calvinism". For the record, I'm neither a Calvinist nor an Arminian. I suppose I'm somewhere in between strict Calvinism and strict Arminianism. I'm not saying either group is absolutely right and the other absolutely wrong. I never even used either of those terms (Calvinism or Arminianism, except perhaps to distinguish between the two or to reply to your comments and questions regarding Calvinsim, but not to defend strict, absolute, undiluted Calvinism).
. . . In the same submission, I agree with you: you have to research it and determine for yourself whether you believe election is true and what your understanding of election is.
. . . I also agree with your statement that ANYONE who ... believes in God's Son and turns to him for salvation SHALL BE SAVED. This is consistent with every statement in the Bible regarding salvation. Whosoever will may come. However, Scripture also plainly teaches that we neither chose nor sought out Christ; instead he did the choosing and the seeking of us (John 15:19). He came to seek and to save that which was lost. For an unregenrate man to say that he is seeking Christ is like the mice saying they are seeking the cat. If they are seeking his location, it is only for the purose of avoiding the cat.
. . . I fear that to give detailed answers to your question "Problems with Election Theory" would take hours. Also that to answer in detail might stir up more emotion and hostility, which certainly is not my intention. I sincerely wish to give you helpful answers. Even if you don't agree with the answers (which is your right and privilege), my intention is to be helpful. Whether I have been helpful remains to be seen. My prayer for you is that the Lord will show you in His Word that which you are seeking to know and understand. Whatever your decision, I pray that it will be the right one for you.
. . . Take care. Thank you for your interest and input. Disclaimer: I am not infallible. Calvin (there -- I used the word) is not infallible. No study Bible footnotes are infallible. Only the Scriptures are WITHOUT error and INCAPABLE of error and ONLY in the original manuscripts .
. . . I apologize for not thoroughly proofreading this answer. If I tried to proof it, I'm afraid I would spend another hour thinking of one more thing after another that I would want to add. Because of Dry Eye Syndrome, if I don't stop reading and typing now, I will go temporarily blind. It will have to stand as is, typos and all.
. . . I thank you for your time and patience. Take care. In Christ, Radioman |
| |
Is there an age of accountability? |
|
|
|
Bible general Archive 1
|
| |
P.S.
. . . Joseph, thank you for your question. After all the sometimes heated, sometimes confused and confusing debate over election, Calvinism or whatever one wishes to call it, I needed a good laugh. Thanks for providing me with one. |
| |
| To See More, Click Here... |
|
|
