Doctrine of Election

[A Brother In Christ]

roman 3:23 all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God

1 cor 10:32 jews, gentiles ,and the church of God

the elect are chosen by God ......2 tim 1:9

how does God chose...1 cor 1:26-29
1peter 2:9-10

no response ..?

 

[A Brother In Christ]

Did you ever read the book of James? What 'faith' did the demons have?

The demons know that God does what He says.....

God promises Judgement ...the Demons have faith that will happen

not saving faith that God offered to humans

 

[Lockheed]

...not saving faith that God offered to humans

...not saving faith that God gives to humans by grace.

 

[Lockheed]

I was asking for a specific verse to support you previous claim (which you failed to provide).

I don't believe I need to provide that verse to you, you're well versed in what Scripture states. Was Christ lying when He said "you have not chosen me, but I have chosen you"?

 

[unimportantbuthisnameis]

I don't believe I need to provide that verse to you, you're well versed in what Scripture states. Was Christ lying when He said "you have not chosen me, but I have chosen you"?

I've explained that verse several times at this website, but to explain it again: The verse deals with who Christ chose to teach in more depth than the others at times thousands that followed him. It is in no way, form , or fashion relevant to the Calvinstic teaching of it. The 12 apostle were chosen to be the "inner circle" and that is as far as the verse goes. (try again)

 

[MbiaJc]

Where do you see that the Apostles sought Christ? He sought them out. Everything else flowed from that.

Would you care to prove that biblically, as i f you read the accounts of the calling in John it seems that they sought the Messiah, not your view.

My mistake: I used the wrong phrase there, however that does not change the fact they were not "quickened" till the day of Pinecost.

The Apostles and the spies make it plain the Holy Spirit deals with man before they are "quickened" made alive by the Spiritl.

 

[MbiaJc]

Does Christ's own words not count? It is apparent that people were seeking a messiah, yes, but not the type of Messiah that Christ was. Likewise, people all over the world seek for a god, but none seek for the Living God of Scripture apart from His calling and choosing them first.

Nice to see you are realising the Spirit deals with man before being "quickened" by the Spirit.

 

[unimportantbuthisnameis]

Where do you see that the Apostles sought Christ? He sought them out. Everything else flowed from that.


My mistake: I used the wrong phrase there, however that does not change the fact they were not "quickened" till the day of Pinecost.

The Apostles and the spies make it plain the Holy Spirit deals with man before they are "quickened" made alive by the Spiritl.

Where did you get the notion that I denied the Holy Spirit in the convicting of sin?

 

[SteveR2021]

I asked a friend why it is that Calvinists seem to spend most of their time defending their theology (rather than focusing on say Christian living for example).

He said this:

Because it is counter-intuitive.

I agree.

I know what i have said is a sweeping generalization (so my apologies to individual persons...this is not an attack on any individual (s) )

The truth is, Calvinism is counter-intuitive. It just does not fit with the whole of Scripture.

I try not to get involved in debates with Calvinism...but it's hard to stay silent when it keeps popping up. Calvinism in it's extreme is not just counter-intuitive...it's deadly. It removes from the individual his/her responsibility...but that doesn't change the fact that God holds each of us responsible...if He didn't we wouldn't need to fear damnation.

I'm not sure what is at the heart of Calvinism...could it be pride (God picked ME)? I really don't know - but Christ's great and infinite love seems somehow absent.

What is most strange is that you and I can argue about predestination while millions of poor Africans die without Christ. Does God favor Americans? Is that why more Christians are found in America?

I find it interesting that the chapter following Romans 9 (the champion of Calvinism) asks how they cannot call on him to save them unless they believe in Him. And how can they believe in Him if they have never heard about Him? And how can they hear about Him unless someone tells them?

I never used to dislike Calvinism as much as I do now...I always found it counter-intuitive but I figured the main thing is that we focus on holy living (on glorifying God). Is that the focus of the Calvinist? Does the Calvinist weep and pray over the lost or were they predestined to be lost?

Maybe I've got Calvinism all wrong...and I trust you Calvinists will forgive me. I know you will correct me.

I'm not Calvinist but I'm not Arminian either. I'm just a Christian that wants to see Jesus receive the reward of His suffering.

I am so grateful for the wonderful salvation provided by our Sovereign Lord...but I sure don't think I was special enough to get me predestined. Now I want to live for His glory and His honor because I am grateful - it's not about me anymore...my salvation is secondary - His glory is primary. My happiness is a byproduct...His glory the prime product. OSAS...irrelevant. I'll live for His glory even if I go to Hell at the end - simply because He is worthy!! Enough of this self-centered salvation! Let's (as one poster on this forum has said) fix our eyes on the Giver rather than the gifts!!

That's enough from me already.

 

[seebs]

I generally feel that any time someone tells me that, to understand a doctrine, I must abandon my sense of right and wrong, I should probably consider this a red flag.

 

[JustinWindsor]

That is what one Arminian said in this thread. The truth is...it has everything to do with Adam's sin. If your doctrine of the fall is not healthy, then how can your doctrine of salvation be healthy?

Jacob Arminius' arguments were none other than the Pelagian heresy.

On the other hand... any doctrine of Salvation that doesn't recognize that we are saved FOR good works (read obedience) denies "Lordship Salvation"... that is "Jesus is Saviour and Lord".

Unfortunately, Arminius would have us 'earn' our salvation. Scripture clearly tells us that we can't pay for it. Only Christ's blood could pay that atonement.

Any doctrine that would have us 'deserving' of salvation is clearly in error.

Now this is important...The Bible is abundantly clear on two truths.

One, if one is saved, it is entirely to God's credit. It is only if we are saved, that we do works pleasing to God. If we are unregenerate, our works 'are as filthy rags'. Why? Because we are trying to earn salvation. We are trying to make ourselves worthy. Scripturally, however, that is something we cannot do for ourselves. Our heart cannot recognize Jesus. Man does not seek God, man is unable to apart from the regenerative work of the Holy Spirit.

Jacob Arminius spoke of free will. There is no such thing. With the absence of the Holy Spirit's regenerate work in the human heart man does not seek God. Man's nature, according to Scripture, and a correct theology of the fall, is the opposite of seeking God.

The doctrine of prevenient grace can only be proven or accepted if your doctrine of the sovereign nature and character of God, AND your doctrine of the fall, are flawed.

The second truth I wanted to mention...if we are unsaved, it is entirely our responsibility. God's judgement will be upon us and rightfully so. We deserve judgement. This is the divine legality of it. He pardons those He saves. Abundant Scripture has been quoted in this thread and properly contextualized in order for you to see it, if you have eyes for it.

Apart from the Holy Spirit's quickening work upon our heart, we cannot please God, and we will be judged. Those who receive God's wrath and judgment are deserving of it, they are condemned by their sin.

The Arminian view would submit that therefore God chooses who is judged and who is saved. The Bible says that He chooses those who are saved, and those who are judged are deserving of that judgment. They followed their free will. It was a will free of God.

I know it doesn't wash with the Arminian viewpoint but...think of this for just a moment; There are two religions in this world...one religion has folks trying in some manner to earn their way into heaven. It is a 'faith' in SELF. Examples of this religion...Mormanism, Christian Science, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mind Science cults, and many branches of 'Christianity' who don't believe they should be included in with these.

The other faith is that which is trusting in what God has done in Christ's blood alone for Salvation, a salvation for all who believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, the only Begotten, the Incarnate, the only Saviour, the Lamb of which the OT sacrifices were only types. This is the salvation which was promised to Abraham and all of those who are Abraham's heirs being declared righteous by faith.

Saved for good works, not by good works. Big, big difference in the eternal plan of things.

- - - - - - - - - -

Faith Alone, Jesus Alone, Scripture Alone

Okay...I'll stand against the wall for the firing squad now..

PS. To Lockheed, thanks for the scripture references and the orthodox interpretation.

 

[MbiaJc]

=JustinWindsor]

That is what one Arminian said in this thread. The truth is...it has everything to do with Adam's sin. If your doctrine of the fall is not healthy, then how can your doctrine of salvation be healthy?

Man inherited Adams sin nature along with other natures, not his sin.

Jacob Arminius' arguments were none other than the Pelagian heresy.

agreed

On the other hand... any doctrine of Salvation that doesn't recognize that we are saved FOR good works (read obedience) denies "Lordship Salvation"... that is "Jesus is Saviour and Lord".

agreed

Unfortunately, Arminius would have us 'earn' our salvation. Scripture clearly tells us that we can't pay for it. Only Christ's blood could pay that atonement.

agreed

Any doctrine that would have us 'deserving' of salvation is clearly in error.

agreed

Now this is important...The Bible is abundantly clear on two truths.

One, if one is saved, it is entirely to God's credit. It is only if we are saved, that we do works pleasing to God. If we are unregenerate, our works 'are as filthy rags'.

Not so! Man canot please God if he could Jesus death on the cross is usless.
Even after we are "quickened". Mans best works is as filty rags.

Why? Because we are trying to earn salvation. We are trying to make ourselves worthy. Scripturally, however, that is something we cannot do for ourselves.

Our heart cannot recognize Jesus. Man does not seek God, man is unable to apart from the regenerative work of the Holy Spirit.

You are condtardicting yourself if as you say (which is not so) unregenerated man can't seek God? Then how can his good works be trying to earn salvation?

Man can seek God without the Spirit drawing, however he cannot find or come to God unless the Spirit draws.

Yes man can recognise Jesus in his sin state. For Aberham told his son that God would provide the Lamb still in his sin state.

Jacob Arminius spoke of free will. There is no such thing.

If you have scripture to prove that the Bible contardicts itself.

Does God elect, from eternity past, certain sinners to salvation, or does man have the ability to choose/believe. What saith the scripture?

Deuteronomy 30:19 I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:


The Old Testament Jews, who were part of the elect nation had a personal/individual obligation to "choose" to follow the dictates of the law.

The fact that man can and does "choose" whether or not to obey/accept God is absolutely clear from scripture, which no gymnastics required.

Proverbs 1:29 For that they hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the LORD:

Proverbs 1:31 Therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices.

The option is there, the choice is for man. When he does not choose the fear of the Lord he is guilty. When he stands before the Lord at judgement he will be guilty.

Have you ever considered "guilt"? God is sovereign, an earthly king is called a sovereign. God gave the Law, an earthly king makes laws. God set's the punishment for man's failure to follow the Law (believe in Christ), an earthly king sets the punishment for failure to follow his law. In both cases the sovereign one is just. They say, "Here are the rules boys, follow them and live in peace. Break them and pay the price." Allowing for this option makes neither of them "not sovereign" (albeit God on a grander scale of course), to lay out peace and punishment is righteous. When you take away choice and inflict punishment upon those who have no alternative then you become (in human terms) a Saddam Husein.

Isaiah 56:4 For thus saith the LORD unto the eunuchs that keep my sabbaths, and choose the things that please me, and take hold of my covenant;

Mark 9:23 Jesus said unto him, If thou canst believe, all things are possible to him that believeth. (pre-crucifixion even)

Luke 8:12 Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.

With the absence of the Holy Spirit's regenerate work in the human heart man does not seek God. Man's nature, according to Scripture, and a correct theology of the fall, is the opposite of seeking God.

Not so! Along with the sin nature man inherited from Adam a nature to serve his god. If he didn't there would not be any false gods.

The doctrine of prevenient grace can only be proven or accepted if your doctrine of the sovereign nature and character of God, AND your doctrine of the fall, are flawed.

The doctrine that is flawed is the doctrine that man does not have free will.

The second truth I wanted to mention...if we are unsaved, it is entirely our responsibility. God's judgement will be upon us and rightfully so. We deserve judgement. This is the divine legality of it. He pardons those He saves. Abundant Scripture has been quoted in this thread and properly contextualized in order for you to see it, if you have eyes for it.

you are still cantradcting yourself. From the above statment man would haft to have free will if it is his responsibility?

Also that is what predestination is, He predetermined that the ones choosing Christ he pardons and gives power to become Sons of God.

Apart from the Holy Spirit's quickening work upon our heart, we cannot please God, and we will be judged. Those who receive God's wrath and judgment are deserving of it, they are condemned by their sin.

Flawed doctrine! According to your statment God chooses some to save and some to punish. That is making God a liar. For He says He has no respect of persons.

The Arminian view would submit that therefore God chooses who is judged and who is saved. The Bible says that He chooses those who are saved, and those who are judged are deserving of that judgment. They followed their free will. It was a will free of God.

Man you are one mixed up dude. You are still contradicting yourself. You started out with man does not have free will now you are admitting that is what the bible teaches.

I know it doesn't wash with the Arminian viewpoint but...think of this for just a moment; There are two religions in this world...one religion has folks trying in some manner to earn their way into heaven. It is a 'faith' in SELF. Examples of this religion...Mormanism, Christian Science, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mind Science cults, and many branches of 'Christianity' who don't believe they should be included in with these.

agreed

The other faith is that which is trusting in what God has done in Christ's blood alone for Salvation, a salvation for all who believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, the only Begotten, the Incarnate, the only Saviour, the Lamb of which the OT sacrifices were only types. This is the salvation which was promised to Abraham and all of those who are Abraham's heirs being declared righteous by faith.

agreed! However you are contradcting yourself..

Saved for good works, not by good works. Big, big difference in the eternal plan of things.

agreed
- - - - - - - - - -

Faith Alone, Jesus Alone, Scripture Alone

agreed

Okay...I'll stand against the wall for the firing squad now..

PS. To Lockheed, thanks for the scripture references and the orthodox interpretation.

You have been hit right between the eyes.

 

[ksen]

Where do you see that the Apostles sought Christ? He sought them out. Everything else flowed from that.

Would you care to prove that biblically, as i f you read the accounts of the calling in John it seems that they sought the Messiah, not your view.

• Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and [that] your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you. - John 15:16 (KJV)

Jesus did the choosing, not the Twelve.

 

[JustinWindsor]

Philosophically it doesn't wash. But that is man's reasoning.

The Bible says that if we are saved, it is entirely to God's credit. It is entirely His doing.

The Bible also says that if we are lost, and damned, we deserve the judgment we receive. Because of the sin nature we inherited from Adam (the fall) we are lost in sin (unless quickened by the Holy Spirit).

Man's reasoning would say that those two truths are opposed, they cannot be both true. Yet they are what Scripture says.

The Bible also says God is one, there is one God. Yet He reveals Himself to us throughout Scripture as a triune God...Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Three persons, yet one God. That doesn't wash philosophically either...yet we accept it as orthodox.

Free will adds something to Grace. Grace plus anything is not grace. If it is up to you to decide, then it is not grace. It is a work, you've earned it.

Without God, man is totally depraved. Darkness is the absence of light. The light is either on or off. God has taken up residence in your heart by the quickening of the Holy Spirit, or He hasn't. He doesn't leave the hall light on with the door open a crack. Prevenient grace is a lie.

Israel...a shadow and type, symbolic for the NT believer...God chose and established that nation out of many. God put the nation together. God did everything. God's example of Israel shows that man cannot save himself nor can he keep himself saved. Only God can do it. Only those whom He has kept as a remnant unto Himself will be saved. Only God can do it, man cannot.


Thanks again to Lockheed for his correct interpretation of Scripture in this thread.

 

[BT]

I'm so far behind that I probably shouldn't even enter this thread again.. but I suppose I'm a sucker for punishment.

By saying there are names not written in the book of life implies that there are names that ARE written in the book.

Though there are names written in the book of life, this does not prove election. If anything, foreknowledge. But I don't think you can make an honest argument for divine election from this passage..

Acts and Revelation don't teach doctrine? Where do we get our doctrine of Missiology if not from Acts? What about our Eschatological doctrine?

From elsewhere. Matthew-Mark, Romans - ...

One of the great (huge) errors of Pentacostalims and Charismaticism is that they pull "doctrine" from transitional books. These books give histories. You can get doctrines from the actions and the events, but the doctrine has to agree with the rest (see: Contextual interpretation rule 3 "Context of the Whole Bible"). There were certain things going on in the book of Acts that were unique to the people and the time at which the book was written. That is why you see so called contradictions elsewhere. Acts was never written to instruct in doctrine, as were the general epistles etc.

But no I absolutely do not get my missiology or my eschatology from Acts and Revelation.

Well, if the names of the saved were written before the foundation of the world then Someone had to write them there.....didn't He? We didn't write our own names there.

Sure did, but not because they were "elected". It doesn't fit with the context of the book or the doctrine of election as it stands elsewhere.

Calvinism and Limited Atonement do not deny that "whosoever will may come." The question is: Who is it that will will to come? The Calvinist answers that only the Elect will ever "will" to come to God.

This is my object encapsulated thank you. You here are adding to what it says. You add your dogma to a verse where it does not exist. Not only is it a bad means of interpretation, it is false doctrine (at least here). We have to take what is said at face value. You know the Catholic theologians have all kinds of stuff that they eisegete into passages like this that we reject for exactly the same reasoning. This is a logical fallacy.

I think my answer is going afield of what the OP was asking so I will wrap this up. Only the Elect will ever want to come to God through faith in Christ.

You have no scripture to support this. I will ask again, show me 1 verse from the Bible of "elect sinners" walking around.

There is a caricature of Calvinism out there that says we teach that there are multitudes of people begging God to save them that God will ignore because they are not Elect. That could not be further from the truth. Calvinism affirms the Biblical teaching that only those who are given to Christ by the Father will ever come to God in faith.

Logical fallacy #2: Red Herring

Just because some people misrepresent calvinistic ideas does not mean that the opposite is true. Point: your red herring does not prove your statement. It is a means to avoid the question (fallacy 3).

God does not turn anyone away who responds to the Gospel.




Ok, I'll be careful.

(sorry it took so long to respond)

Amen. I'll be careful too.

 

[BT]

From the moment I gave my life to Christ, I was sure of election. Like a pig in mud, I was happy in sin and would never have chosen Jesus Christ if it wasn't for His saving Grace calling me out. As someone pointed out in the Reformed Forum, maybe the TULIP needs to be updated to ELECT: Exhaustive Depravity, Lord-centered Election, Effectual Atonement, Conquering Grace and Triumphant Saints.

I wasn't taught to believe in the election, I read the Bible and it drips of God's purpose and plan, I've even tried to deny the truths of the Gospel when I first found out I was a calvinist.

Never again.

(I'm not picking on you bro, this post just makes for a good point)

Logical fallacy #4: The argument to experience.

Just because you "believe" something doesn't make it so. An example that we would agree with: Charismatics and the gifts of the Spirit.

If the doctrine is so obvious and so clear, then there would not be the great disagreement.

Show 1 scripture that presents elect sinners walking around, and I'll be a calvinist too.

 

[BT]

You are doing what you have accused others of doing.

You have been shown verses supporting the Calvinist view of Election. You just reject that interpretation. That's fine, but please don't say you haven't been shown.

No I have not.

These verses show clearly man's ability to choose.

I have not been shown 1 verse that shows an elect sinner walking around.

Nor have I ever been given a straight answer on any question, devoid of semantics or eisegesis.

 

[oworm]

Show 1 scripture that presents elect sinners walking around

Not sure what you mean by this. Can you elaborate?

and I'll be a calvinist too.

So you would be willing to change your theological position on the strength of a verse or passage of scripture which supports that "elect sinners are walking around"?

 

[unimportantbuthisnameis]

• Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and [that] your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you. - John 15:16 (KJV)

Jesus did the choosing, not the Twelve.

I've already explained this verse several times...go back and read my exegesis of it.

 

[MbiaJc]

JustinWindsor

Philosophically it doesn't wash. But that is man's reasoning.

The Bible says that if we are saved, it is entirely to God's credit. It is entirely His doing.

That is right He gave us the free will and made the provision for choice.

The Bible also says that if we are lost, and damned, we deserve the judgment we receive. Because of the sin nature we inherited from Adam (the fall) we are lost in sin (unless quickened by the Holy Spirit).

Not So! The sin nature does not condim us. It is what we do with thet nature that condims us. big difference

This is the root of your flaud doctrine. We are not born sinners, we are born into sin. big difference

Man's reasoning would say that those two truths are opposed, they cannot be both true. Yet they are what Scripture says.

You keep on saying what scripture says but don't give the scripture to back it up.

The Bible also says God is one, there is one God. Yet He reveals Himself to us throughout Scripture as a triune God...Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Three persons, yet one God. That doesn't wash philosophically either...yet we accept it as orthodox.

Depends on who you are washing with it? For it washes with me.

Free will adds something to Grace. Grace plus anything is not grace. If it is up to you to decide, then it is not grace. It is a work, you've earned it.

Devinatly not so! Free will is not a work. If I hand you the keys to a new car saying, here this is yours. If you reach out and take the keys have you worked to earn the car? Course not, neither choosing God(which I have proven by scripture we are free to do)is works, to say so is not being honest.

Without God, man is totally depraved. Darkness is the absence of light. The light is either on or off. God has taken up residence in your heart by the quickening of the Holy Spirit, or He hasn't. He doesn't leave the hall light on with the door open a crack. Prevenient grace is a lie.

Absoutly not! He doesn't leave the hall light on, but He stands outside the door knocking. We open the door in the dark to let the lingt in. Your doctrine is flaud. flaud.

Israel...a shadow and type, symbolic for the NT believer...God chose and established that nation out of many. God put the nation together. God did everything.

Right but your how He did it doctrine is flaud. When God sent Moses down the mountain to see if the Iseralites would accept\reject the covenant all Iserale had a CHOICE to make. Praise be to God they made the right CHOICE for they said "all the Lord has said we will do".

When you take man's free will from him you have a flaud doctrine any way you look at it. And man becomes a robot. And Christ death on the cross is usless.

God's example of Israel shows that man cannot save himself nor can he keep himself saved. Only God can do it. Only those whom He has kept as a remnant unto Himself will be saved. Only God can do it, man cannot.

Exactly no one is arguing that point. Man can't save or keep himself. Man cannot please God before or after regeneration. Only Jesus Christ pleased God. And it is His pleasing God that we stand on and nothing else.

What you don't understand is, Jesus did not shed His blood for all men. Just the "who soever will" these are the ones sins He paid for.

Who are the remaint that He kept? The ones who believed in the Lamb that was to come same as Aberham. Aberham CHOSE to believe God, that He would supply the Lamb, by that it was counted to him for rithtousness. He was going to offer up his son, (his works) by that he was justified. We come the same way. By God grace through the faith of Jesus Christ the only thing required of us is to believe in Jesus or even in His name.

I have given you scriptures that prove man has a CHOICE to make. I have proven to you that Iseral had a CHOICE to make. Give scripture to prove man has no free will or the debate is over.