Could Both Arminianism and Calvinism be Wrong?

[xjohnson]

I'd like to share my thoughts with all of you and get your response to it. Thanks in advance.

Both Arminianism and Calvinism are defective in explaining the salvation process. These theological traditions neither recognize nor address the role Isaiah’s curse had in producing significant differences in the way Jews and Gentiles responded to the Gospel as overwhelmingly demonstrated in Scripture. Consequently, both of these traditions are wrong in that their explanations of salvation are too simple in light of Scripture.

A Simple Salvation Process for All​

The salvation process is quite simple:

If you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.” For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. For “whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved” (Romans 10:9-13).​

Notice in Romans 11:5-10, however, the prerequisite required for Jews to follow this salvation process: election. Scripture never describes Gentiles as having this prerequisite, and the reason for this is because the Jews were handicapped by a curse that prevented them from understanding the Gospel.

Isaiah's Curse​

The Jews were cursed through Isaiah, and this curse formed the basis for their peculiar path to salvation:

And He said, “Go, and tell this people:
‘Keep on hearing, but do not understand;
Keep on seeing, but do not perceive.’

“Make the heart of this people dull,
And their ears heavy,
And shut their eyes;
Lest they see with their eyes,
And hear with their ears,
And understand with their heart,
And return and be healed” (Isaiah 6:9-10).​

The above curse was quoted by Jesus when describing the Jewish condition to His disciples in Matthew 13:10-17, and the curse significantly impacted the way in which Jesus communicated to the Jews: in parables only. In addition, the same curse was quoted by Paul when contrasting the Jewish and Gentile responses to the Gospel in Acts 28:17-29. Consequently, the curse rendered all Jews as damned and bereft of salvation unless God chose to break the curse on those Jews He chose for salvation, per Romans 11:5-10. Even the prophets were blinded, according to Isaiah 29:10. Fortunately, the curse had an expiration date (Isaiah 6:11-13) and expired upon the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.

The Electoral Process that Breaks Isaiah’s Curse on the Jews​

In order for Isaiah’s curse on the Jews to be broken so they could be saved, God chose (or, elected) which of the Jews to save:

I say then, has God cast away His people? Certainly not … at this present time there is a remnant according to the election of grace … What then? Israel has not obtained what it seeks; but the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded (Romans 11:1-7).​

In the above passage we find that all Jews were blinded from salvation and some Jews were elected unto salvation with those who were elected as comprising a remnant. This “blinding and election” action was directed toward Jews and not the Gentiles: “Israel has not obtained what it seeks; but the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded”. The efficacy of the blinding was based on Isaiah’s curse on the Jews: “Go and tell this people … Keep on seeing, but do not perceive … and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes ...”.

In addition, “election” is a process that had been going on throughout the course of Jewish history as described in Romans 9:6-13. It’s an election that was still in effect in Paul’s day as described in Romans 11:5 and chronicled by Lydia’s conversion in Acts 16:13-15. But since the curse has expired, the electoral process for Jews has been abandoned (Isaiah 29:17-24).

Significant Differences Between How Jews and Gentiles Respond to the Gospel​

In light of Isaiah’s curse on the Jews and the lack of any such curse placed on the Gentiles, one would naturally expect a significant difference in the way Jews and Gentiles responded to the Gospel; and this is exactly what one finds in Scripture. The following Scriptural references demonstrate this difference:

• Acts 13:42-52
• Acts 17:1-9
• Acts 18:5-6
• Acts 22:17-21
• Acts 28:17-29
• Romans 9:30-33
• Romans 11:7-10
• Romans 11:25
  

The above-referenced Scriptures combined with Isaiah’s curse sufficiently establish the significant difference between the way in which Jews and Gentiles responded to the Gospel and the reason for the different responses between the two groups. And it is at this point that the fundamental flaw inherent in both theological traditions expresses itself: a complete disregard for the Jewish handicap necessitating God’s direct involvement in Jewish salvation, an involvement completely absent in Gentile salvation. As a consequence, Calvinists erroneously attribute election in every salvation instance, and Arminians attribute free will in every salvation instance; and both traditions are wrong.

Conclusion​

In conclusion, the salvation process described in Scripture is more nuanced than either of the descriptions proffered by Arminianism and Calvinism. Consequently, both traditions are inharmonious with Scripture and, thus, defective. A candid review of God’s word reveals that a prerequisite for salvation existed for Jews prior to the expiration of Isaiah’s curse, and this prerequisite was discontinued after Isaiah’s curse expired (namely in AD 70). Therefore, Jews were elected for salvation prior to the curse’s expiration and were given free will in choosing salvation after the curse’s expiration. Gentiles have never had this experience. Instead, Gentiles have always enjoyed free will in their salvation experience.

Interestingly, Arminianism describes the Gentile experience at all times and describes the Jewish experience after AD 70. Calvinism describes the Jewish experience prior to AD 70 only. Because both traditions profess to describe the process of salvation for all people at all times, they are both wrong.

 

[JIMINZ]

It's late and I wanted to post this right away.

Both Calvinism and Arminianism are wrong because they neglect to take into account what Paul said about the Jews

Rom. 11:25
For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

 

[συνείδησις]

And it is at this point that the fundamental flaw inherent in both theological traditions expresses itself: a complete disregard for the Jewish handicap necessitating God’s direct involvement in Jewish salvation, an involvement completely absent in Gentile salvation.

The flaw is in your understanding. No man is saved unless the father draws him and opens his eyes. There is no difference.

 

[Mountainmanbob]

I've been thinking for many years that it is not a good idea to be 100% in any mans camp.

90% Calvinist here.

M-Bob

 

[Jennifer Rothnie]

I find both theories to be defective in explaining salvation. I find more areas where Calvinism seems directly contradictory with the gospel as presented in scripture than Arminianism, though. Both TULIP and FACTS seem to be over-extrapolating/making assumptions from certain texts and then making philosophical assumptions based on those interpretations which are subsequently read back into other scriptures.

For my basic take on the two theories:

Calvinism

The five points of Calvinism are Total depravity (T), Unconditional Election (U), Limited Atonement (L), Irresistible Grace (I), and Perseverance of the Saints (P). The five points are often referred to by the Acronym "TULIP".

Each point can be examined individually:

Total Depravity: Total Depravity is also known as Total Inability. It teaches that all men sin (Rom 3:10-23), that sin corrupts every aspect of our being, such as flesh, heart, mind, etc, (Mark 7:21-23), and that man cannot save himself (Psalm 60:10-12, Is 63:5-6).

All this is true; but the teaching goes beyond this to philosophically claim that must mean man is so tainted by sin that he cannot even accept the offer of Christ’s salvation and receive Christ's deliverance from sin (Yet scripture not only asks us to believe but presents faith in Christ's work as the method God offered for salvation precisely because man wasn't capable of achieving salvation by works): Rom 10:9-13, John 3:14-21, Luke 11:5-13, Heb 11:13-16, Gal 3:24, Deut 30:11-14, etc). As such, most Calvinist hold that spiritual regeneration must occur *before* one believes to allow the person to believe (contrary to scripture which states we receive the Holy Spirit after we believe, not before: Gal 3:2-3, Gal 3:10-14, Eph 1:11-14, II Cor 5:17, etc).

Unconditional Election Unconditional Election is also based in the misunderstandings that the 'Total Depravity' teaching brings in. The basic teaching is that because man, in His sin, cannot accept the free gift of Salvation, then God chose (elected) some to be regenerated by the Holy Spirit so they can believe and be saved, whereas others he chooses not to regenerate, so they cannot believe, and hence they stand condemned.

However, scripture gives a different presentation of election: The nation of Israel was elect due to God’s own choice (Ezek 16:5-7). Israel entered the covenant with God to confirm this (Deut 29:9-15), but they still rebelled, and thought salvation was by works and not the promise. More importantly, in regards to salvation: God elected a people for Himself, the body of Christ, both Jew and Gentile. (I Pet 2:7-10, Rom 1:1-3, II Tim 2:1-13, etc). His calling this people is by His grace, not by any of our own works (I Pet 2:9-10, Eph 2:8-10, Rom 11:1-6).

Limited Atonement This teaching holds that Christ's sacrifice was sufficient for all, but it wasn't efficacious for all; that Jesus only bore the sins of the elect; that Christ only died for some, not all.

However, scripture presents that Christ died for all, and God desires all men to be saved (I John 2:2, I Tim 2:4, John 12:32, John 4:4-42, John 10:9, John 3:16-17, Rev 22:17, Matt 11:28, Ti 2:11, etc) Jesus was a perfect sacrifice, offering complete propitiation to appeasing the wrath of God for all who believe (Rom 1:16-17).

Irresistible Grace In short, this is the teaching that there is an 'internal call' to salvation by the Holy Spirit that cannot be resisted, as such anyone that God calls to Him cannot refuse.

However, as most easily seen by Israel's continual rebellion, God never stops people from rebelling, disobeying, or ignoring conviction (Acts 7:51-53, Deut 30:11-20, Josh 15:14-28, Luke 6:46, Luke 9:5).

Rather, God commands everyone to repent, Christ draws all men to Himself, and the Holy Spirit is given to all who believe and also helps us testify to Christ (Acts 6:8-12, John 15:26-27). We still can refuse, but we remain under condemnation if we do so (John 3:16-17).

Perseverance of the Saints The last point is quite complicated, but teaches that the individuals that God chooses and then draws (see above points) will then persevere in their faith to the end.

Conversely, scripture shows that belief must be continuous abiding, not a one time decision (John 3:16, Mk 16:16, John 15:1-17, Luke 8:4-15, I John 5:3-5).

 

[Jennifer Rothnie]

Arminianism

Arminianism is a system of theology created by Jacob Arminius, and first published in 1610. It was primarily crafted as a response to the flaws in the 'Reformed' theology of John Calvin.

Arminianism begins with the premise that God wants/desires all men to be saved (II Pet 3:9, I Tim 2:4).

From there, it can be broken down into five points much like Calvanism [Acronymn FACTS but listed in logical order, not acronym order:]

Total Depravity

Arminians believe that men are 'totally depraved', much like the Calvinist belief, and thus have the same over-extrapolated interpretation that fallen man can not respond to the revealed gospel. However, unlike Calvinists, Arminians believe that God in His common grace has given all men the ability to respond in faith to the conviction brought by Christ's death (Jn 12:32, Jn 16:18)

This position is more scripture-based than the Calvinist proposition that God only gives a select few the power to come to faith, but both systems of theology assume that man cannot respond to the gospel (even when God specifically and graciously offers salvation by faith precisely because man cannot achieve it on his own by works...so it would make little philosophical sense to claim God's solution was picking an equally impossible method.)

Scripture shows that while all men are sinners, corrupted in flesh, and that no man can be completely sinless, this does not mean they -cannot- choose God or cannot do anything good at all. (Rom 2:14-16, John 5:40, Matt 23:37, Rom 10:17, John 8:24, etc)

Conditional Election
This belief holds that God elects people to salvation based upon their response to the gospel (Eph 1:13; Rom 3:28). This election is not based on a work of man, but a work of God (Rom 4:4-5, Gal 2:26). In this view, God chooses based on his foreknowledge of who will trust Christ (I Pet 1:1-2, Rom 8:29).

While stronger than the premise of Calvinism of unconditional election, both theories seem to over-complicate election/foreknowledge.

God predestined the process (Christ) by which He would choose and redeem a people for Himself, a plan for salvation that God chose in His foreknowledge and wisdom. As such, we become part of the people of God by faith - not because God looked to the future, or because God chose that we as individuals would have faith while others would not - but because through Christ God chose to give us the right to be His children (I John 2:24-29, I John 3:1-10, Rom 8:1-16, Rom 9; Rev 21:13, II Sam 7:22-24, etc). As we see in Eph 1:1-14, God chose before time that those "in Him" (In Christ, which as the passage states is through belief) would be made holy and were predestined to be adopted as sons. They were not chosen or predestined to become 'in Christ' (i.e. to get faith.)

See https://ebible.com/questions/3273-h...ion-connected-with-foreknowledge#answer-16960 for further details.
https://ebible.com/questions/265-what-is-predestination-is-predestination-biblical#answer-15328
https://ebible.com/questions/2097-how-can-i-know-if-i-am-one-of-the-elect#answer-9176

Atonement for All

This is the premise that Christ died for the whole human race (II Cor 5:19, I Tim 4:10, Heb 2:9, I John 1:29)

"He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world". (I John 2:2)

This is the presentation of the gospel that scripture portrays. Christ died for all men, and His blood is sufficient to cover all men and all sin. However, His blood must be 'applied to the door of our lives' so to speak (Ex 12:22-23), in order for God to count it on our account.

Freed by Grace to Believe Because God wants all to be saved (I Tim 2:4, II Pet 3:9, Ezek 18:23), He draws all men to Himself (John 12:32, Jn 16:8). Yet, many humans resist God's will and reject the work of Christ (Mt 23:37, Heb 4:2, Lk 7:29-30, John 3:16-17)

See also: https://ebible.com/questions/3181-is-god-sovereign-or-do-we-have-a-free-will#answer-14667

Security in Christ
While modern Arminians vary widely on this view, Arminius and John Wesley held that we have 'experiential' assurance of salvation, but could lose salvation for various reasons.

Other short essays I've written specifically on this:

https://ebible.com/questions/1844-can-a-christian-give-back-salvation#answer-14123
https://ebible.com/questions/673-does-hebrews-6-4-6-mean-we-can-lose-our-salvation#answer-14122

I haven't studied Arminianism as extensively as Calvinism though, so could be misrepresenting or misunderstanding certain views. So I will leave this link here for anyone who wants to study it from an Arminian's perspective: http://evangelicalarminians.org/an-outline-of-the-facts-of-arminianism-vs-the-tulip-of-calvinism/

 

[xjohnson]

The flaw is in your understanding. No man is saved unless the father draws him and opens his eyes. There is no difference.

The phrase: "No man is saved unless the father draws him and opens his eyes" has no Biblical basis. The phrase you are misrepresenting is from John 6:44 (NKJV): "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day". Moreover, you have not provided the context in which this statement was made.

Consequently, the thesis of the paper has not been challenged by your reply. The paper refers to a curse (that Jesus and Paul referred to) as the basis for its thesis that God's salvific intervention was necessarily used on the Jews due to a curse that was upon them, and no such intervention was needed upon the Gentiles due to there being no curse upon them. If you can show how this understanding is erroneous, then that would be great. Thanks in advance.

 

[Dave L]

Here's where Arminianism and Calvinism meet. We freely choose what we want and therefore incur responsibility for our sins. But God controls the reasons we base our choices on. Our will always responds to the reasons God uses to control us to his determined end.

 

[xjohnson]

It's late and I wanted to post this right away.

Both Calvinism and Arminianism are wrong because they neglect to take into account what Paul said about the Jews

Rom. 11:25
For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

If you are stating that both theological traditions are wrong because they do not take into account the blindness aspect of the Jews, then I'd say that you are correct. Neither Arminianism nor Calvinism address the aspect of the Jews being blind to the Gospel.

The paper I started this thread with claims (with what I consider to be a convincing and compelling argument) that the blindness is the curse from Isaiah. Why neither of these two theological traditions take into account the curse that was placed on the Jews is surprising because the curse affected significantly both Jesus' and Paul's ministry.

 

[xjohnson]

I find both theories to be defective in explaining salvation. I find more areas where Calvinism seems directly contradictory with the gospel as presented in scripture than Arminianism, though. Both TULIP and FACTS seem to be over-extrapolating/making assumptions from certain texts and then making philosophical assumptions based on those interpretations which are subsequently read back into other scriptures.

For my basic take on the two theories:

Calvinism

The five points of Calvinism are Total depravity (T), Unconditional Election (U), Limited Atonement (L), Irresistible Grace (I), and Perseverance of the Saints (P). The five points are often referred to by the Acronym "TULIP".

Each point can be examined individually:

Total Depravity: Total Depravity is also known as Total Inability. It teaches that all men sin (Rom 3:10-23), that sin corrupts every aspect of our being, such as flesh, heart, mind, etc, (Mark 7:21-23), and that man cannot save himself (Psalm 60:10-12, Is 63:5-6).

All this is true; but the teaching goes beyond this to philosophically claim that must mean man is so tainted by sin that he cannot even accept the offer of Christ’s salvation and receive Christ's deliverance from sin (Yet scripture not only asks us to believe but presents faith in Christ's work as the method God offered for salvation precisely because man wasn't capable of achieving salvation by works): Rom 10:9-13, John 3:14-21, Luke 11:5-13, Heb 11:13-16, Gal 3:24, Deut 30:11-14, etc). As such, most Calvinist hold that spiritual regeneration must occur *before* one believes to allow the person to believe (contrary to scripture which states we receive the Holy Spirit after we believe, not before: Gal 3:2-3, Gal 3:10-14, Eph 1:11-14, II Cor 5:17, etc).

Unconditional Election Unconditional Election is also based in the misunderstandings that the 'Total Depravity' teaching brings in. The basic teaching is that because man, in His sin, cannot accept the free gift of Salvation, then God chose (elected) some to be regenerated by the Holy Spirit so they can believe and be saved, whereas others he chooses not to regenerate, so they cannot believe, and hence they stand condemned.

However, scripture gives a different presentation of election: The nation of Israel was elect due to God’s own choice (Ezek 16:5-7). Israel entered the covenant with God to confirm this (Deut 29:9-15), but they still rebelled, and thought salvation was by works and not the promise. More importantly, in regards to salvation: God elected a people for Himself, the body of Christ, both Jew and Gentile. (I Pet 2:7-10, Rom 1:1-3, II Tim 2:1-13, etc). His calling this people is by His grace, not by any of our own works (I Pet 2:9-10, Eph 2:8-10, Rom 11:1-6).

Limited Atonement This teaching holds that Christ's sacrifice was sufficient for all, but it wasn't efficacious for all; that Jesus only bore the sins of the elect; that Christ only died for some, not all.

However, scripture presents that Christ died for all, and God desires all men to be saved (I John 2:2, I Tim 2:4, John 12:32, John 4:4-42, John 10:9, John 3:16-17, Rev 22:17, Matt 11:28, Ti 2:11, etc) Jesus was a perfect sacrifice, offering complete propitiation to appeasing the wrath of God for all who believe (Rom 1:16-17).

Irresistible Grace In short, this is the teaching that there is an 'internal call' to salvation by the Holy Spirit that cannot be resisted, as such anyone that God calls to Him cannot refuse.

However, as most easily seen by Israel's continual rebellion, God never stops people from rebelling, disobeying, or ignoring conviction (Acts 7:51-53, Deut 30:11-20, Josh 15:14-28, Luke 6:46, Luke 9:5).

Rather, God commands everyone to repent, Christ draws all men to Himself, and the Holy Spirit is given to all who believe and also helps us testify to Christ (Acts 6:8-12, John 15:26-27). We still can refuse, but we remain under condemnation if we do so (John 3:16-17).

Perseverance of the Saints The last point is quite complicated, but teaches that the individuals that God chooses and then draws (see above points) will then persevere in their faith to the end.

Conversely, scripture shows that belief must be continuous abiding, not a one time decision (John 3:16, Mk 16:16, John 15:1-17, Luke 8:4-15, I John 5:3-5).

Regarding the "over-extrapolating/making assumptions from certain texts" that you mentioned, I have to agree. After listening to sermons and asking questions of those who hold the Calvinist perspective, I've noticed that there is what I call "stretching" going on where those espousing Calvinism will make a text claim something that it does NOT say. I've noticed that even I'm prone to doing that from time to time, and I have to be careful not to do that.

 

[xjohnson]

Arminianism

Arminianism is a system of theology created by Jacob Arminius, and first published in 1610. It was primarily crafted as a response to the flaws in the 'Reformed' theology of John Calvin.

Arminianism begins with the premise that God wants/desires all men to be saved (II Pet 3:9, I Tim 2:4).

From there, it can be broken down into five points much like Calvanism [Acronymn FACTS but listed in logical order, not acronym order:]

Total Depravity

Arminians believe that men are 'totally depraved', much like the Calvinist belief, and thus have the same over-extrapolated interpretation that fallen man can not respond to the revealed gospel. However, unlike Calvinists, Arminians believe that God in His common grace has given all men the ability to respond in faith to the conviction brought by Christ's death (Jn 12:32, Jn 16:18)

This position is more scripture-based than the Calvinist proposition that God only gives a select few the power to come to faith, but both systems of theology assume that man cannot respond to the gospel (even when God specifically and graciously offers salvation by faith precisely because man cannot achieve it on his own by works...so it would make little philosophical sense to claim God's solution was picking an equally impossible method.)

Scripture shows that while all men are sinners, corrupted in flesh, and that no man can be completely sinless, this does not mean they -cannot- choose God or cannot do anything good at all. (Rom 2:14-16, John 5:40, Matt 23:37, Rom 10:17, John 8:24, etc)

Conditional Election
This belief holds that God elects people to salvation based upon their response to the gospel (Eph 1:13; Rom 3:28). This election is not based on a work of man, but a work of God (Rom 4:4-5, Gal 2:26). In this view, God chooses based on his foreknowledge of who will trust Christ (I Pet 1:1-2, Rom 8:29).

While stronger than the premise of Calvinism of unconditional election, both theories seem to over-complicate election/foreknowledge.

God predestined the process (Christ) by which He would choose and redeem a people for Himself, a plan for salvation that God chose in His foreknowledge and wisdom. As such, we become part of the people of God by faith - not because God looked to the future, or because God chose that we as individuals would have faith while others would not - but because through Christ God chose to give us the right to be His children (I John 2:24-29, I John 3:1-10, Rom 8:1-16, Rom 9; Rev 21:13, II Sam 7:22-24, etc). As we see in Eph 1:1-14, God chose before time that those "in Him" (In Christ, which as the passage states is through belief) would be made holy and were predestined to be adopted as sons. They were not chosen or predestined to become 'in Christ' (i.e. to get faith.)

See https://ebible.com/questions/3273-h...ion-connected-with-foreknowledge#answer-16960 for further details.
https://ebible.com/questions/265-what-is-predestination-is-predestination-biblical#answer-15328
https://ebible.com/questions/2097-how-can-i-know-if-i-am-one-of-the-elect#answer-9176

Atonement for All

This is the premise that Christ died for the whole human race (II Cor 5:19, I Tim 4:10, Heb 2:9, I John 1:29)

"He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world". (I John 2:2)

This is the presentation of the gospel that scripture portrays. Christ died for all men, and His blood is sufficient to cover all men and all sin. However, His blood must be 'applied to the door of our lives' so to speak (Ex 12:22-23), in order for God to count it on our account.

Freed by Grace to Believe Because God wants all to be saved (I Tim 2:4, II Pet 3:9, Ezek 18:23), He draws all men to Himself (John 12:32, Jn 16:8). Yet, many humans resist God's will and reject the work of Christ (Mt 23:37, Heb 4:2, Lk 7:29-30, John 3:16-17)

See also: https://ebible.com/questions/3181-is-god-sovereign-or-do-we-have-a-free-will#answer-14667

Security in Christ
While modern Arminians vary widely on this view, Arminius and John Wesley held that we have 'experiential' assurance of salvation, but could lose salvation for various reasons.

Other short essays I've written specifically on this:

https://ebible.com/questions/1844-can-a-christian-give-back-salvation#answer-14123
https://ebible.com/questions/673-does-hebrews-6-4-6-mean-we-can-lose-our-salvation#answer-14122

I haven't studied Arminianism as extensively as Calvinism though, so could be misrepresenting or misunderstanding certain views. So I will leave this link here for anyone who wants to study it from an Arminian's perspective: http://evangelicalarminians.org/an-outline-of-the-facts-of-arminianism-vs-the-tulip-of-calvinism/

I agree that the benefits of salvation are made only to those who are "in Christ". But, what does it mean to be "in Christ", and how does one become "in Christ"? How do we know that it is through faith that one is "in Christ"?

 

[xjohnson]

Here's where Arminianism and Calvinism meet. We freely choose what we want and therefore incur responsibility for our sins. But God controls the reasons we base our choices on. Our will always responds to the reasons God uses to control us to his determined end.

What are the Biblical bases for your claims?

 

[Dave L]

What are the Biblical bases for your claims?

“In him we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to the purpose of him who works all things according to the counsel of his will,” (Ephesians 1:11)

 

[Jennifer Rothnie]

I agree that the benefits of salvation are made only to those who are "in Christ". But, what does it mean to be "in Christ", and how does one become "in Christ"? How do we know that it is through faith that one is "in Christ"?

The passage itself gives the answer to that.

#1 "us" in Eph 1:1-12 is a pronoun referring back to Eph 1:1 and "Him" is the sometimes the pronoun for "Christ Jesus" and other times the pronoun for "God and Father" as mentioned in Eph 1:3.
"Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To God’s holy people in Ephesus, the faithful in Christ Jesus:" Eph 1:1
So any time you see the word "us" or "us in Him" you can fill in "the faithful" or "the faithful in Christ Jesus" by general grammatical pronoun use.

For example: "For he chose [the faithful in Christ Jesus] before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in [Christ Jesus'] sight. In love [our God and Father] predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with [God and Father's] pleasure and will— to the praise of [God and Father's] glorious grace, which [God and Father] has freely given us in [Jesus Christ who the Father] loves."

#2 Further clarity that we are included "in Him" (in Christ) is directly given in Eph 1:13 when Paul switches from the 'us' pronoun to the 'you' pronoun and addresses how the Gentiles were included in Him and thus share in the predestined promises that all the faithful in Christ Jesus share:
"And [Gentiles] also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation, having also believed. You were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory." Eph 1:13-14

So the answer is very clearly given that one becomes "in Christ" through responding to the gospel in faith.

 

[Dave L]

The passage itself gives the answer to that.

#1 "us" in Eph 1:1-12 is a pronoun referring back to Eph 1:1 and "Him" is the sometimes the pronoun for "Christ Jesus" and other times the pronoun for "God and Father" as mentioned in Eph 1:3.
"Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, To God’s holy people in Ephesus, the faithful in Christ Jesus:" Eph 1:1
So any time you see the word "us" or "us in Him" you can fill in "the faithful" or "the faithful in Christ Jesus" by general grammatical pronoun use.

For example: "For he chose [the faithful in Christ Jesus] before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in [Christ Jesus'] sight. In love [our God and Father] predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with [God and Father's] pleasure and will— to the praise of [God and Father's] glorious grace, which [God and Father] has freely given us in [Jesus Christ who the Father] loves."

#2 Further clarity that we are included "in Him" (in Christ) is directly given in Eph 1:13 when Paul switches from the 'us' pronoun to the 'you' pronoun and addresses how the Gentiles were included in Him and thus share in the predestined promises that all the faithful in Christ Jesus share:
"And [Gentiles] also were included in Christ when you heard the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation, having also believed. You were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of his glory." Eph 1:13-14

So the answer is very clearly given that one becomes "in Christ" through responding to the gospel in faith.

He chose to be holy, not because we were holy.
“For he chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world that we may be holy and unblemished in his sight in love.He did this by predestining us to adoption as his sons through Jesus Christ, according to the pleasure of his will—” (Ephesians 1:4–5)

 

[Jennifer Rothnie]

He chose to be holy, not because we were holy.
“For he chose us in Christ before the foundation of the world that we may be holy and unblemished in his sight in love.He did this by predestining us to adoption as his sons through Jesus Christ, according to the pleasure of his will—” (Ephesians 1:4–5)

Yes, before time God chose that believers would be made Holy and adopted as sons. We don't just automatically 'become' holy by believing in Christ - faith on its own is just our belief in Christ's perfection and work. It is God who sets us apart and sanctifies us, thus making us holy. And God chooses to do so for all those included Christ by faith.

The important distinction is that God only chose that those in Christ would be made holy. The passage doesn't say God chooses anyone to be in Christ.

 

[Dave L]

Yes, before time God chose that believers would be made Holy and adopted as sons. We don't just automatically 'become' holy by believing in Christ - faith on its own is just our belief in Christ's perfection and work. It is God who sets us apart and sanctifies us, thus making us holy. And God chooses to do so for all those included Christ by faith.

The important distinction is that God only chose that those in Christ would be made holy. The passage doesn't say God chooses anyone to be in Christ.

“I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them.” (John 17:9–10)
Why would Jesus pray for some and not for others?

 

[Jennifer Rothnie]

“I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine. And all mine are thine, and thine are mine; and I am glorified in them.” (John 17:9–10)
Why would Jesus pray for some and not for others?

Again, the passage itself gives the context and answer for that. In Jn 17:9 Jesus is praying for His Disciples who me He has been close with. They will soon face trials in the world. In Jn 17:20 Jesus expands the prayer as "not for them alone but all who will believe in me through their message." They too will face trials but be united with God, so that the "world will know" God sent Christ and loves believers.

Jesus specifically praying for His Disciples about their blessings and needs doesn't mean that He doesn't have any prayers for the world (indeed the hope of the he he he world seeing believers loved by God and being convicted that it shows God sent Christ is mentioned a couple times) - it just means that His Disciples and future believers were the special topic of the prayer that Jesus wanted to specifically adress. And that non believers are not united with Christ, so His prayers for unity are specifically to the Disciples and believers.


If I pray and long prayer about the needs of my family which are particular, it doesn't mean I don't care about other people or stranger's different needs, they just are not applicable to my specific prayer.

 

[Dave L]

Again, the passage itself gives the context and answer for that. In Jn 17:9 Jesus is praying for His Disciples who me He has been close with. They will soon face trials in the world. In Jn 17:20 Jesus expands the prayer as "not for them alone but all who will believe in me through their message." They too will face trials but be united with God, so that the "world will know" God sent Christ and loves believers.

Jesus specifically praying for His Disciples about their blessings and needs doesn't mean that He doesn't have any prayers for the world (indeed the hope of the he he he world seeing believers loved by God and being convicted that it shows God sent Christ is mentioned a couple times) - it just means that His Disciples and future believers were the special topic of the prayer that Jesus wanted to specifically adress. And that non believers are not united with Christ, so His prayers for unity are specifically to the Disciples and believers.


If I pray and long prayer about the needs of my family which are particular, it doesn't mean I don't care about other people or stranger's different needs, they just are not applicable to my specific prayer.

““I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word,” (John 17:20)

But he doesn't pray for the rest.

 

[Jennifer Rothnie]

““I do not ask for these only, but also for those who will believe in me through their word,” (John 17:20)

But he doesn't pray for the rest.

Of course He does, just not about the same things (and even if He didn't, it would be an argument from silence to infer that Jesus not praying about the world to in His last prayer specifically about God's unity with believers and God glorifying the Son would imply that Jesus never prayed about the world or cared about the world at all):

"My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me." Jn 17:20-23

Jesus' prayer includes the prayer the world will see the testimony of the believers, their life change as they are united with God, and hence believe! And any in the world who do believe because of this become the very people who believe in Christ through the message of the Disciples, which was passed on to other believers, and hence become part of Jesus' specific prayer for believers as well.

Jesus prays for His disciples to be sanctified and kept safe by God - not taken out of the world, but protected by God against Satan (as they will face many trials following Christ's death as Jn 16 describes) as they are sent into the world.
[And why pray just for the Disciples at this juncture? "I am coming to you now, but I say these things while I am still in the world, so that they may have the full measure of my joy within them." Jn 1:13]

He prays for believers to also be united with God and by this unity give a testimony to the world that Christ is the Messiah, "in order that" the world will see that unity and believe.

For obvious reasons, He does not pray that "the world" be united with God or given "eternal life" as the chapter is very clear (Jn 1:2-3) that Christ only gives eternal life to those who know Him. So "the world" is excluded from being the audience of the prayer dealing with God specifically protecting the 11 Disciples from the evil one or Jesus' prayer that other believers will receive unity with God as well. Jesus' prayer for "the world" is simply that they believe.