Conditional Election vs. Unconditional Election

[TedT]

Conditional election teaches that the elect are predestined by God to salvation due to God's foreknowledge that they would believe on their own free will, while unconditional election teaches that God predestines the elect according to His sovereignty alone, without regard to the elect's free will.

Sorry - this is not the only interpretation of election... PCE conditional election rests upon the thesis that we were all there and heard the gospel before the foundation of the world, Col 1:23, and made our free will choice as an innocent, ie not yet a sinner, to put our faith in YHWH as our GOD and in the Son as our saviour if we should ever sin.

This conditional election has nothing to do with our choices while we are human sinners enslaved to sin with no free will of our own while living predetermined lives due to our sinfulness...ie, it is not Arminian in the least!!!

Making the condition for our election before the foundation of the world to rest upon HIS insight into our future sinful lives is the failure of this doctrine... PCE has our election based on the condition of our free will faith at the time of our election ie, at the foundation of the world!

 

[Humble_Disciple]

Sorry - this is not the only interpretation of election... PCE conditional election rests upon the thesis that we were all there and heard the gospel before the foundation of the world, Col 1:23, and made our free will choice as an innocent, ie not yet a sinner, to put our faith in YHWH as our GOD and in the Son as our saviour if we should ever sin.

This conditional election has nothing to do with our choices while we are sinners enslaved to sin with no free will of our own while living predetermined lives due to our sinfulness...ie, it is not Arminian in the least!!!

Where does the Bible anywhere say that we were pre-existent before our natural birth? That sounds very Mormon to me.

 

[TedT]

It's simply the teaching that God predestined you unto faith in Christ, regardless of any foreseen good works on your part or a free-willed decision on your part to believe.

Ignoring the bad part that some are not chosen for any reason found in them not to be predestined to heaven with everyone else... I accept that our free will decision of faith as innocents, ie not human sinners, before election at the foundation of the world, is a way, way, different thing than you propose...and a way less blasphemous to HIS good name as LOVE-ing.

 

[TedT]

If Arminianism is true, I don't know how we can have assurance of salvation.

i doubt Arminianism is true but no matter, there is no assurance of salvation except by faith, and a mature faith at that!

 

[Humble_Disciple]

Ignoring the bad part that some are not chosen for any reason found in them not to be predestined to heaven with everyone else... I accept that our free will decision of faith as innocents, ie not human sinners, before election at the foundation of the world, is a way, way, different thing than you propose...and a way less blasphemous to HIS good name as LOVE-ing.

Where does the Bible teach pre-existence of souls? That's a Mormon doctrine.

 

[TedT]

Where does the Bible anywhere say that we were pre-existent before our natural birth? That sounds very Mormon to me.

Every biblical truth has its Mormonist interpretation or JW or Hindu or whatever...this just means that Satan can lie about any truth.

I have many verses that are true to the words of the verse yet can be interpreted as telling us we had an existence before coming into the world as human...but because orthodoxy has had 4000 years of supremacy in teaching our creation on earth at conception or at birth, no one ever even sees the potential for a verse to teach anything but our creation on earth...

Think about Job 38:7 ...while the morning stars sang together and ALL the Sons of GOD shouted for joy? in which GOD is chastening Job about being less than HIM, the Almighty creator. It says all the sons of GOD were there!! This can mean that if you are a son of GOD then you were there!

But hey ! the cavalry arrives in the nick of time to save us from any thoughts of our pre-conception existence before the creation of the physical universe in the form of the KJV et al, who translate "all the sons of GOD" as angels just to keep us from making a mistake about what we should believe here! It is a wrong (blatantly wrong!) interpretation of the actual words but it is a perfect eisegetical interpretation to express their commitment to our being created here on earth. <FACEPALM, HEADSHAKE>

 

[Humble_Disciple]

Every biblical truth has its Mormonist interpretation or JW or Hindu or whatever...this just means that Satan can lie about any truth.

I have many verses that are true to the words of the verse yet can be interpreted as telling us we had an existence before coming into the world as human...but because orthodoxy has had 4000 years of supremacy in teaching our creation on earth at conception or at birth, no one ever even sees the potential for a verse to teach anything but our creation on earth...

Think about Job 38:7 ...while the morning stars sang together and ALL the Sons of GOD shouted for joy? in which GOD is chastening Job about being less than HIM, the Almighty creator. It says all the sons of GOD were there!! This can mean that if you are a son of GOD then you were there!

But hey ! the cavalry arrives in the nick of time to save us from any thoughts of our pre-conception existence before the creation of the physical universe in the form of the KJV et al, who translate "all the sons of GOD" as angels just to keep us from making a mistake about what we should believe here! It is a wrong (blatantly wrong!) interpretation of the actual words but it is a perfect eisegetical interpretation to express their commitment to our being created here on earth. <FACEPALM, HEADSHAKE>

Are you sure about the things you're saying? I don't know of any church besides the Mormons that teaches what you are saying.

 

[TedT]

Are you sure about the things you're saying? I don't know of any church besides the Mormons that teaches what you are saying.

Good morning:
I have has uproarious disagreements with Mormons as I do with Gnostics and JWs, who as we know do make claims that echo proper spirituality. Are wea Catholics because we believe Christ is our saviour? Not me, in the least, but my disagreement with them is in other areas...so don't be trying to gaslight me with the bogeyman of Mormonism.

Good morning,
Indeed, our lack of understanding causes many difficulties.

And yes, I do understand how elusive pce can be. I remember saying pretty much exactly the same thing back in the mid-70s when it was introduced to me. Most of my learning about it came from my dedicated opposition which forced resolutions to be found.

I will show a few verses here so you don't think I'm a complete lunatic, totally divorced from scripture. I won't dump every verse I can find, so please understand this is just an intro so to speak. I also hope you understand that I don't claim these are PROOF verses that can't be argued. It is obvious that these verses have had their orthodox interpretations for centuries of which I am well aware. But they do contain alternative interpretations which should be answered as to how they fail if they are rejected as pce supports.

Jeremiah 1:5 "Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations."

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible sums it up well:
Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee,.... Not merely by his omniscience, so he knows all men before their conception and birth; but with such a knowledge as had special love and affection joined with it; implying a personal relationship with not knowledge about as per:
Matthew 7:21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’
23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

Obviously He knew all about them but He did not have a personal relationship with them as GOD suggests HE had with Jeremiah.

Since I believe that GOD knows about this difference between knowing and just knowing about then when GOD says to me that HE knew Jeremiah before his conception, I believe that GOD is sort of telling me that Jeremiah existed before his conception. If GOD was not bearing witness to Jeremiah's pre-conception existence in this verse, would you please tell me what HE was revealing? Was it HIS omniscience, that is, was HE telling Jeremiah that HE knew all about him before HE made him in the womb, that is, before he was created?

But Jeremiah needed no revelation of GOD's omniscience. Jeremiah was a priest. He was trained in the Scriptures and the Jews knew about GOD's omniscience long before his time. Well, anything but his pre-conception existence eh!!!

Let me ask you this: In your opinion, just what would GOD have to say to Jeremiah to reveal that he existed before he was made in the womb? What would HE have to say so that Jeremiah could put it in the Book in such a way that it would not give away any secrets for 2600 years?

Why don't we remember?
Just because we forget does not mean that we do not exist. Nobody remembers their very early years or every moment in life. We willingly accept the witness of others regarding the follies of our early years that we do not remember. When we have People of this calibre, ie GOD, saying that They knew us way back then, surely we should accept such a witness too!

 

[Humble_Disciple]

I don't belong to a church that, as far as I know, has a specific stance on Calvinism vs. Arminianism or conditional election vs. unconditional election. This is from our statement of faith:

We believe the Scriptures teach that election is the eternal purpose of God, according to which he graciously regenerates, sanctifies and saves sinners; that being perfectly consistent with the free agency of man...
What We Believe - National Baptist Convention, USA Inc.

The above passage could be interpreted as either conditional or unconditional election, depending on one's interpretation of Scripture.

I honestly don't know enough about the Bible to say whether God's election is conditional or unconditional.

These passages seem to support the doctrine of conditional election, that we are predestined unto faith based on God's foreknowledge that we would choose to believe:

1 Peter 1:1–2
Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ,
To the pilgrims of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ:
Grace to you and peace be multiplied.

Romans 8:29
For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.

 

[Humble_Disciple]

We should keep in mind that Arminians and Calvinists both believe in predestination. One believes that God predestines the elect based on His foreknowledge of their faith, while the other believes that God predestines the elect based on no standard other than His unfathomable whim. Please forgive me if I'm explaining this incorrectly.

 

[Sidon]

Conditional election teaches that the elect are predestined by God to salvation due to God's foreknowledge that they would believe on their own free will, while unconditional election teaches that God predestines the elect according to His sovereignty alone, without regard to the elect's free will.

What I'd like to know is why it even matters whether we accept unconditional vs. conditional election. How can we claim to know that one is true and not the other? And what difference does it make if both unconditional election and conditional election result in the salvation of the elect?

Predestined according to the foreknowledge of God, does not teach that God saves some and does not save others.
But rather, Its the foreknowledge of God, that knows who will Choose Christ, and all who do, are predestined to be conformed into the Image of Christ.

See, the "predestined part" is the "conformed into the image of Christ" END RESULT of being born again.
This means that Salvation has a end result that is predestined to happen to all the born again.
If you are born again, and not just water baptized, then you are going to end up "conformed into the image of Christ".......>as this is the predestined or predetermined final result/eternal outcome of being born again.
See it?
And God, knew who would be born again,.. which leads to the predestined end, before you are born.
His knowing who will choose Christ, before you are born, is God's FOREKNOWLEDGE>.
This is knowing be-fore, it happens...>fore-knowledge......Knowledge of all things be-fore they happen.
= God's Fore-Knowledge.

 

[Humble_Disciple]

Calvinists seem to be misinterpreting passages that support conditional election in order to justify their doctrine:

The Greek word – proginosko
Proginosko is the word used in the New Testament that today we translate as “to foreknow”. It literally means “to know before”. The word breaks down like this: Pro (before) ginosko (to know).

We are familiar with this word in English. For example: a doctor will give a prognosis. And someone who makes predictions is called a prognosticator.

The word in its noun or verb form is used several times in the New Testament to explain the foreknowledge of God or of individuals. Here are some passages where the word is used:
Acts 2:23
Acts 26:4-5
Romans 8:29
1 Peter 1:1-2
1 Peter 1:20
2 Peter 3:17

Arminians believe that foreknowledge works like this: God has exhaustive knowledge of the future, thus He “prognosticates” it perfectly. God knows who will believe in Jesus. Those who believe are elected. Election is corporate in scripture (those who believe) as opposed to individual election. The Arminian understanding of foreknowledge is apparent in passages like Romans 8:29 and 1 Peter 1:2

(Bold mine – represents the Greek word for foreknowledge)

Romans 8:28-29: And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. (NKJV)

1 Peter 1:1-2 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To the pilgrims of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace to you and peace be multiplied. (NKJV)

Calvinists err in their understanding of foreknowledge, confusing foreknowledge with predestination. They believe that God decrees whatever happens, so foreknowledge is only a byproduct of His decree. In Calvinist thought, foreknowledge is a synonym of election. But Romans 8:29 and 1 Peter 1:2 show instead that God’s election is a result of His foreknowledge, not the cause of it.

Another Calvinists interpretation of foreknowledge is “to forelove” instead of “to foreknow”. However, there is no justification for this interpretation in the context of the passages in the New Testament.

God is working for the good of those who love Him! He sees everything, he always knows what will happen, and He is always working on the behalf of those who He knows will believe. He is for us!
Foreknowledge

What is more consistent with God’s character of love and justice, that He predestines according to His foreknowledge of belief or unbelief, or that He sends countless sinners to eternal conscious torment in hell without ever having the chance to believe?

I have no intent to say that Calvinists are heretics or not Christian. I just think Calvinism has some problems from a biblical perspective. Calvinists and Arminians both agree on the Five Solas, the five basic insights of the Protestant Reformation, so we’re on the same team.