Why Election based on foreseen faith isn't scriptural

Exactly, spot on!

nobdysfool said:

Exactly, spot on!

Click to expand...

Not exactly.

From AndOne:
"No such argument could be made in regards to Esau and Jacob however - and Paul explicitly states so in vs 11: "though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls—"

The issue is to determine the "purpose of election" that is mentioned in Rom 9:11.

Reformed theology believes that election is the doctrine whereby God chooses who He will save, and that choice is unconditional. Meaning, His choice is not swayed by any conditions regarding those He has chosen.

I believe Scripture is clear that the purpose of election is what the ISBE says:
"to be chosen for special privilege and service".

iow, election isn't about being chosen for salvation, but for privilege and service. We know that salvation cannot be involved, because Scripture identifies at least 6 categories of the "elect", and it's very clear that most of these elect categories cannot refer to being chosen for salvation.

Election of Christ: an individual election
1. 1 Pet 2:6 Isa 28:16 Isa 42:1 Luke 9:35 Luke 23:35
2. Election of Angels: a group or corporate election
1 Tim 5:21
3. Election of (national) Israel: a group or corporate election
Amos 3:2 Deut 7:6 Acts 13:17
4. Election of believers: a group or corporate election
Eph 1:4a [note: this verse doesn’t say that God chose who would be believers, but that He chose believers (us)…to be holy and blameless]
1 Peter 2:9
5. The Election of the 12 Disciples: a group or corporate election John 6:70
6. The Election of Paul: an individual election Acts 9:15

Please note that John 6:70 included Judas in this election, so it is obvious that election isn't about being chosen for salvation.

The OP assumes that election is about being chosen for salvation.

The Bible teaches that God is pleased to save those who believe. 1 Cor 1:21 This is a choice based on those who believe, a condition, and is a choice that pleases God.

2 Thess 2:13 indicates that believers are chosen for salvation, but again, a condition is noted: "by faith in the truth". And the word here is "haireomai", which is not related to the usual Greek word translated "elect", which is eklekos.

The 3 related Greek words translated elect/election are eklektos (adjective), ekloge (noun) and eklegomai (verb). All together, they occur 51 times.

Haireomai occurs 3 times total, and is NEVER translated "elect".

nobdysfool said:

Exactly, spot on!

Click to expand...

Yes, God declares what will be BEFORE it happens, from ancient times things not yet done.

And v13 He tells us He brings His righteousness near, our salvation is up to the LORD.

Isaiah 46

8 “Remember this, and show yourselves men;
Recall to mind, O you transgressors.
9 Remember the former things of old,
For I am God, and there is no other;
I am God, and there is none like Me,
10 Declaring the end from the beginning,
And from ancient times things that are not yet done,
Saying, ‘My counsel shall stand,
And I will do all My pleasure,’
11 Calling a bird of prey from the east,
The man who executes My counsel, from a far country.
Indeed I have spoken it;
I will also bring it to pass.
I have purposed it;
I will also do it.
12 “Listen to Me, you stubborn-hearted,
Who are far from righteousness:
13 I bring My righteousness near, it shall not be far off;
My salvation shall not linger.
And I will place salvation in Zion,
For Israel My glory.

Click to expand...

God says no one who shows, no one who declares except Himself.
There is no forseen faith. No One exist but God who declares what will be.

Isaiah 41

26 Who has declared from the beginning, that we may know?
And former times, that we may say, ‘He is righteous’?

Surely there is no one who shows,
Surely there is no one who declares,
Surely there is no one who hears your words.

Click to expand...

No one, not a single one. It is like they are dead, they are nothing before God makes them.

AndOne said:

Why is the issue in this verse to determine the purpose of election? Paul doesn't do it.

Click to expand...

I didn't say he "determined" the purpose. In fact, he STATED that election has a purpose. Which I provided, and you didn't interact with.

He states it as a case of fact - and is why he specifically uses Jacob and Esau as examples in election in addition to Isaac and Ishmael

Click to expand...

Yes, election is a FACT. No argument. The point is that all elections have a purpose. And I gave 6 categories that are described in Scripture as "elect" which you didn't interact with.

I think your fundamental error is not realizing that faith in and of itself is a gift from God (1 Cor 12:9).

Click to expand...

Why did you ignore the 6 categories that are described as being elect? And why did you ignore the 3 Greek words translated elect/election?

Therefore faith can't be a condition if it is something that is given in the first place.

Click to expand...

Your argument falls flat on its face because of Paul's answer to the jailer who wanted to know what he MUST DO to be saved.

The answer is to believe. That is a condition. No amount of denial will change that.

In light of that, election makes much more sense. It is the elect who are given the gift of faith and can meet the conditional requirements that you speak of.

Click to expand...

By ignoring all of my points, you have missed the point entirely. Election isn't even about salvation, as I proved by the 6 categories of who is described as elect.

The condition for salvation is faith in Christ. No one is elected to salvation. We are saved by grace THROUGH faith.

If words mean anything. Maybe not so much for the reformed, though.

FreeGrace2 said:

I didn't say he "determined" the purpose. In fact, he STATED that election has a purpose. Which I provided, and you didn't interact with.


Yes, election is a FACT. No argument. The point is that all elections have a purpose. And I gave 6 categories that are described in Scripture as "elect" which you didn't interact with.


Why did you ignore the 6 categories that are described as being elect? And why did you ignore the 3 Greek words translated elect/election?


Your argument falls flat on its face because of Paul's answer to the jailer who wanted to know what he MUST DO to be saved.

The answer is to believe. That is a condition. No amount of denial will change that.


By ignoring all of my points, you have missed the point entirely. Election isn't even about salvation, as I proved by the 6 categories of who is described as elect.

The condition for salvation is faith in Christ. No one is elected to salvation. We are saved by grace THROUGH faith.

If words mean anything. Maybe not so much for the reformed, though.

Click to expand...

I put in red what you left off your quote of God's word.

We are saved by grace THROUGH faith not of ourselves being the gift of God lest any man should boast.

So dont change what it says. That is leaving out the true meaning of what this scripture says.

sdowney717 said:

I put in red what you left off your quote of God's word.

We are saved by grace THROUGH faith not of ourselves being the gift of God lest any man should boast.

So dont change what it says. That is leaving out the true meaning of what this scripture says.

Click to expand...

The red refers back to being saved; our salvation. That is what is "not of ourselves". iow, we don't save ourselves. God saves those who believe. 1 Cor 1:21 is very clear. We believe, God saves. In that order.

And, you again ignored my points. No answer?

AndOne said:

The reason that election cannot be based on unforeseen faith is found in Romans 9:8-13.

In this passage Paul is explaining why the promises of God were still effectual in spite of the fact that many Jews were rejecting the gospel and gentiles were accepting it in great numbers.

In verses 8-9 Paul explains that not all of the descendants of Abraham are Jews but that the children of the promise are - which is why Ishmael was rejected and Isaac wasn't.

But why didn't Paul stop there? Why doesn't the illustration of Isaac and Ishmael suffice for him to make this point? Why move on to Esau and Jacob?

The reason is because Paul had been explaining in Romans 1-8 the details on things like faith, justification, and grace. To drive the point home that salvation is not based in any way whatsoever on works Paul uses the illustration of Jacob and Esau - who had the same mother and could in no way be differentiated the way Isaac and Ismael could be.

In regards to Isaac and Ishmael the argument could be made that God looked down through the corridors of time and saw the faith of Isaac verses the faith of Ishmael and saw that Isaac had it and Ishmael didn't - or that one was good person and the other wasn't.

No such argument could be made in regards to Esau and Jacob however - and Paul explicitly states so in vs 11: "though they were not yet born and had done nothing either good or bad—in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls—"

Clearly Paul is driving home the point that God chooses His own people - and that he does so on the basis of His grace alone. If God were going to base his choice of election of Jacob over Esau on foreseen faith then the question must be asked why it is not mentioned in the text - and in fact the exact opposite is specifically stated in verse 11. It's not based on foreseen faith - it's based on election - which is at the root of grace. God decides whom He will save - not man.

Click to expand...

If you could place yourself as best as you can into the first century Roman Christian situation as a Jew or a gentile what Paul is saying in the context of what he has already said, would not be difficult to understand.


6It is not as though God’s word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel. 7Nor because they are his descendants are they all Abraham’s children. On the contrary, “It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned.”

It is through Isaac that your offspring will be reckoned. Not that Isaac himself was guaranteed salvation because he, as opposed to Ishmael, was chosen to be the blood-line through whom Christ would come. Let's be clear, Isaac had faith (Hebrews 11) because he chose to, not for any other reason.

This only supports what I am saying; since this whole of Ro. 9 is not addressing salvation coming by blood line. Neither is the “Faith” of Isaac being addressed in Ro. 9.



8In other words, it is not the children by physical descent who are God’s children, but it is the children of the promise who are regarded as Abraham’s offspring.

You are not to be considered a child of God through physical descent. The promise was to Christ.


9For this was how the promise was stated: “At the appointed time I will return, and Sarah will have a son.” 10Not only that, but Rebekah’s children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac. 11Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: 12not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” 13Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”

Paul is underlining his central point - God chose those through whom Christ would come. The promise would not come through the offspring of Esau.

Wow, here is where you go way off on a tangent: “establishing a principle which applies to an individual's salvation as well” and “This is paralleled in the fact a man will not be saved through works of the law.” The “not by works” Paul uses in this passage coveys the meaning “Not by anything the individual did” and has nothing to do with “works of the law” (also the Law did not even exist at this time). Personally I would have chosen Esau over that cheating, lying, conniving snake in the grass Jacob, but God could see even prior to their birth he could work with Jacob and not Esau.

This is establishing the fact you cannot chose what family or situation you are born into (really the earthly task before you). Some (Roman Christians) were born into a highly moral, will educated in God’s law, supportive community, of worshippers of the true God (Jews in Rome) and others were born into the opposite kind of families (gentiles).

The bottom line as we will learn through Ro. 9-11 is “it does not matter”, since salvation has come equally to both groups and those born into the seemingly “better” group (Jews) are having just as hard of a time accepting Christianity as those born as gentiles, but their issues are just different issues.


14What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”

God had every right to do it this way.

16It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. 17For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.” 18Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.

It might be said: “God is merciful to those in Christ…”, but God shows and has mercy for everyone, but only some accept God’s mercy (Love, charity, grace, forgiveness). Pharaoh was given the greatest opportunities possible to see the true God and humbly accept Him, but Pharaoh allowed these same “opportunities” to harden his heart. I do not know (yet God would know) when Pharaoh reached the point where he would never change (repent), but at that point Pharaoh takes on the lesser purpose of helping others to accept God’s charity, which is what we see him going through with Moses.

Yes, God has chosen to extend further “mercy” to those that accept His mercy and continue to harden those that continue to refuse God’s mercy.

To the Jewish and Gentile Christians in Rome at this time it would appear to them that God through their life has been showing greater “mercy” (preparedness) to the Jews than to the gentiles which could have become harden by lack of preparedness (more tolerant of sin). That apparent “mercy” of God toward the Jews will not result in all of them being saved (a lot are rejecting Christ).


19One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’” 21Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

What fits the context: “20…‘Why did you make me like this? Conveying the idea of the way we all start out?

These verses are not saying: all start out made for a “common purpose” and later some are reworked into a “special purpose”, because of “faith”, but that does not fit Paul’s analogy.

Again the bottom line which Paul will explain (Ro. 9-11) is: “It does not matter how you started out” (and I think we can both agree with that idea). All clay vessels get damaged over time and are good for nothing but destruction (but it is not the potter’s fault). What really needs to happen is for the potter to remake us (rebirth us) into pots made of steel that cannot be broken.


22What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— 24even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles?

Paul makes the same point.

The “objects of God’s wrath” are not what left His shop, but through misuses have now been prepared for destruction (God does not want His name on these pots). God’s mercy comes with taking these pots distant for destruction and remaking them, these become objects prepared for glory, but objects prepared for glory are not all the same objects made originally for a special purpose (Jews), but come from both the Jews and Gentiles.

Good day,


John Piper does a real good job in laying this out has he affirms the need of election in effective evangelism at T4G the first week of April and it is on line at t4g.org

He also has a whole book devoted to the 9th chapter of Romans that still stands as the most extensive technical look at the text in question and has never been addressed by any one on the other side of this issue in book form and I do not think it ever will be because they are unable to do so in a consistent technical manner.

In Him,

Bill

In Him,

Bill

BBAS 64 said:

Good day,


John Piper does a real good job in laying this out has he affirms the need of election in effective evangelism at T4G the first week of April and it is on line at t4g.org

He also has a whole book devoted to the 9th chapter of Romans that still stands as the most extensive technical look at the text in question and has never been addressed by any one on the other side of this issue in book form and I do not think it ever will be because they are unable to do so in a consistent technical manner.
In Him,

Bill

Click to expand...

I said this in post #3:
I believe Scripture is clear that the purpose of election is what the ISBE says:
"to be chosen for special privilege and service".

iow, election isn't about being chosen for salvation, but for privilege and service. We know that salvation cannot be involved, because Scripture identifies at least 6 categories of the "elect", and it's very clear that most of these elect categories cannot refer to being chosen for salvation.

Election of Christ: an individual election
1. 1 Pet 2:6 Isa 28:16 Isa 42:1 Luke 9:35 Luke 23:35
2. Election of Angels: a group or corporate election
1 Tim 5:21
3. Election of (national) Israel: a group or corporate election
Amos 3:2 Deut 7:6 Acts 13:17
4. Election of believers: a group or corporate election
Eph 1:4a [note: this verse doesn’t say that God chose who would be believers, but that He chose believers (us)…to be holy and blameless]
1 Peter 2:9
5. The Election of the 12 Disciples: a group or corporate election John 6:70
6. The Election of Paul: an individual election Acts 9:15

Please note that John 6:70 included Judas in this election, so it is obvious that election isn't about being chosen for salvation.

The OP assumes that election is about being chosen for salvation.

The Bible teaches that God is pleased to save those who believe. 1 Cor 1:21 This is a choice based on those who believe, a condition, and is a choice that pleases God.
How would Piper refute any of this?

AndOne said:

The reason that election cannot be based on unforeseen faith is

Click to expand...

Also, because the Bible doesn't say any such thing, not even a single time. In fact, it doesn't even imply it.

FreeGrace2 said:

I said this in post #3:
I believe Scripture is clear that the purpose of election is what the ISBE says:
"to be chosen for special privilege and service".

iow, election isn't about being chosen for salvation, but for privilege and service. We know that salvation cannot be involved, because Scripture identifies at least 6 categories of the "elect", and it's very clear that most of these elect categories cannot refer to being chosen for salvation.

Election of Christ: an individual election
1. 1 Pet 2:6 Isa 28:16 Isa 42:1 Luke 9:35 Luke 23:35
2. Election of Angels: a group or corporate election
1 Tim 5:21
3. Election of (national) Israel: a group or corporate election
Amos 3:2 Deut 7:6 Acts 13:17
4. Election of believers: a group or corporate election
Eph 1:4a [note: this verse doesn’t say that God chose who would be believers, but that He chose believers (us)…to be holy and blameless]
1 Peter 2:9
5. The Election of the 12 Disciples: a group or corporate election John 6:70
6. The Election of Paul: an individual election Acts 9:15

Please note that John 6:70 included Judas in this election, so it is obvious that election isn't about being chosen for salvation.

The OP assumes that election is about being chosen for salvation.

The Bible teaches that God is pleased to save those who believe. 1 Cor 1:21 This is a choice based on those who believe, a condition, and is a choice that pleases God.
How would Piper refute any of this?

Click to expand...

I am not so sure he would, or to exergete the passage it is nessary:

You could read:

The Justification of God: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Romans 9:1-23

Skala said:

Also, because the Bible doesn't say any such thing, not even a single time. In fact, it doesn't even imply it.

Click to expand...

In fact, the Bible never links being elected to salvation.

BBAS 64 said:

I am not so sure he would, or to exergete the passage it is nessary:

You could read:

The Justification of God: An Exegetical and Theological Study of Romans 9:1-23

Click to expand...

If you have read it, could you refute what I've posted?

My points are quite straightforward.

1. study of ALL 3 forms of "election/elect" and all their occurrences: noun, verb, and adjective.
2. listing of all the categories identified as elect in the Bible.
3. none of the categories were elected for salvation.

If one is elected to a position, service, or special privilege that is only given to a Believer, i.e. only a Believer can be qualified for, and receive such an election, then their salvation is also a matter of election, because there can be no certainty of the election to service, privilege, or position without that person also being elected to Believe. So election to salvation is a biblical concept, despite the naysayers. In other words, election to service, position, or privilege necessitates election to the prerequisite, i.e. salvation. Certainty cannot arise from uncertainty.

One very certain and positive quality to election, God determines to save some, since God says no one seeks Him, If He does not absolutely with certainty save some, then none would believe and be saved.

FreeGrace2 said:

In fact, the Bible never links being elected to salvation.

Click to expand...

1 Thess 5

[9] For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ


1 Thess 2


[13] But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth



Romans 8

[30] Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.
[31] What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?
[32] He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?
[33] Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.

FreeGrace2 said:

If you have read it, could you refute what I've posted?

My points are quite straightforward.

1. study of ALL 3 forms of "election/elect" and all their occurrences: noun, verb, and adjective.
2. listing of all the categories identified as elect in the Bible.
3. none of the categories were elected for salvation.

Click to expand...

Good Day,

It has been years so I am unable to address it at this time.