Double Predestination

[Lee52]

Verona,


Our mission as evangelists is to find the elect and save them via the gospel. That kind of gets me excited. We are putting out the word and watching the Spirit of God bring those made for His glory home.

How about just lifting up Jesus and letting Jesus do the drawing onto Himself, and the saving of humans that will surrender to Jesus and believe?

 

[Eddie L]

How about just lifting up Jesus and letting Jesus do the drawing onto Himself, and the saving of humans that will surrender to Jesus and believe?

Um... that's the same thing, Lee.

 

[Verona]

..... God's involvement in those He passes over is one as Sovereign Lord, but not a direct cause. The predestination of the reprobate, then, is not symmetrical with God's work to save the elect.

That's how I see it, anyway.

I do not agree with you but then I doubt if you agree with me.

I do not buy the 'Passes over". I know Calvin talks about it as correctly pointed out by AW. But it ignores all the other texts about actively making reprobates.
So for me there is too much missing in just adopting "passing over".

Also I do not go along with "...is not symmetrical..". Simply because this is not in the Bible.



Thanks for you posts Eddie. Hopefully we can agreeably differ.

 

[Eddie L]

Thanks for you posts Eddie. Hopefully we can agreeably differ.

We can certainly agreeably differ.

 

[Lee52]

Um... that's the same thing, Lee.

Eddie,
No, not the same. Your post says: "Our mission as evangelists is to find the elect and save them via the gospel."

OUR mission has nothing to do with OUR saving anyone via the Gospel. OUR mission has NOTHING to do with OUR FINDING anyone, especially these ELECT individuals you talk about.

OUR mission is to lift up Jesus. Jesus does the drawing. Jesus does the saving. Jesus does the reconciling to GOD. Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to become active in our lives to guide us IF we will follow Him.

WE lift up Jesus. Jesus does the rest, ALL of it.

Blessings,
Lee

 

[Eddie L]

Eddie,
No, not the same. Your post says: "Our mission as evangelists is to find the elect and save them via the gospel."

OUR mission has nothing to do with OUR saving anyone via the Gospel. OUR mission has NOTHING to do with OUR FINDING anyone, especially these ELECT individuals you talk about.

OUR mission is to lift up Jesus. Jesus does the drawing. Jesus does the saving. Jesus does the reconciling to GOD. Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to become active in our lives to guide us IF we will follow Him.

WE lift up Jesus. Jesus does the rest, ALL of it.

Blessings,
Lee

Of course Jesus does the saving, but He does it through our preaching. This is what Paul meant when he said...

I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some. (1 Cor 9:22)

Paul doesn't mean that he saves people. He means that Paul is being used as an instrument of God to save people. That's all I meant, too.

If I believe that the elect are saved, just as you do, then certainly our mission is to find the elect through the preaching of the gospel. "Elect" is not a Calvinist word. It is a Bible word. I believe people are of the elect before they believe and you believe they are elect after, but we're both trying to find the elect through our sharing of the gospel.

 

[drstevej]

Eddie,
No, not the same. Your post says: "Our mission as evangelists is to find the elect and save them via the gospel."

OUR mission has nothing to do with OUR saving anyone via the Gospel. OUR mission has NOTHING to do with OUR FINDING anyone, especially these ELECT individuals you talk about.

OUR mission is to lift up Jesus. Jesus does the drawing. Jesus does the saving. Jesus does the reconciling to GOD. Jesus sent the Holy Spirit to become active in our lives to guide us IF we will follow Him.

WE lift up Jesus. Jesus does the rest, ALL of it.

Blessings,
Lee

Still Me + Jesus Salvation. No thanks.

 

[drstevej]

How about just lifting up Jesus and letting Jesus do the drawing onto Himself, and the saving of humans that will surrender to Jesus and believe?

ME + Jesus Salvation. No thanks

 

[Verona]

ME + Jesus Salvation. No thanks

Don't think so.

Accepting a free gift does not imply one has participated in the saving. Some one here has already posted the life boat analogy.


If some one has a gun pointed at your head making demands. Whether you surrender to those demand or not did not determine before hand that the gun men would point his gun at you.

IMO you theology is cart before the horse. With reference to some previous posts. John Calvin et al were and still are ambiguous on this.

 

[CalledOutOne]

Don't think so.

Accepting a free gift does not imply one has participated in the saving. Some one here has already posted the life boat analogy.


If some one has a gun pointed at your head making demands. Whether you surrender to those demand or not did not determine before hand that the gun men would point his gun at you.

IMO you theology is cart before the horse. With reference to some previous posts. John Calvin et al were and still are ambiguous on this.

If you have to accept the free gift or you have to do anything at all in order to be saved, then it is a legal salvation.

I used to hold to this theology. The problem is this.

Faith is a gift:
"For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast," (Ephesians 2:8-9).

And here is what the Bible says about the gifts and the calling of God:
"From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God's choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers; for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable," (Romans 11:29).


ir·rev·o·ca·ble /ˌiˈrevəkəbəl/
Adjective: Not able to be changed, reversed, or recovered; final.

It is final. Salvation is God's work. He initiates, works, and finishes. Man can resist the Spirit of God, but not the gift of salvation when the Spirit applies it.


The problem with your gun analogy is that it leaves out God's work on the heart of the man before the man has to make a decision. Or do you think that Lazarus could have said, "No, Lord; I will stay dead"? I tell you this, if our Lord wouldn't have called Lazarus by name, the tombs would have emptied at His sovereign voice.

"All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out," (John 6:37).

This couldn't be taken in a corporate sense, because of the word "all" used here. If this verse is about a corporate election of the church as a whole, Christ would have said, "That which the Father gives me...."

There is no way around it. This is simply how God exercises His sovereignty.

It's not a gun to your head scenario; it's a sovereign God to man scenario.

 

[Lee52]

If you have to accept the free gift or you have to do anything at all in order to be saved, then it is a legal salvation.

I used to hold to this theology. The problem is this.

Faith is a gift:
"For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast," (Ephesians 2:8-9).

Read the entire letter. WE are SAVED not of ourselves, it (SALVATION) is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast, (ABOUT BEING SAVED BY GRACE). Context.

And as to your understanding of giving of gifts........... if I send you a present and you think it a bomb and do not accept it from the postman, does that mean that I never sent it to you? It does mean that you did not accept it, but it does not mean that I did not give it to you..........it remains a free gift from me to you, whether or not you accepted it.

 

[drstevej]

Hint: Nearest antecedent to gift is faith. Not hard but may be inconvenient to one's predisposition.

 

[Lee52]

And here is what the Bible says about the gifts and the calling of God:
"From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God's choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers; for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable," (Romans 11:29).


ir·rev·o·ca·ble /ˌiˈrevəkəbəl/
Adjective: Not able to be changed, reversed, or recovered; final.

It is final. Salvation is God's work. He initiates, works, and finishes. Man can resist the Spirit of God, but not the gift of salvation when the Spirit applies it.

Romans 11:25-36
Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written,
“The Deliverer will come from Zion,
he will banish ungodliness from Jacob”;
“and this will be my covenant with them
when I take away their sins.”

As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake. But as regards election, they (ISRAEL) are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. For just as you were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy. For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all.
Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!
“For who has known the mind of the Lord,
or who has been his counselor?”
“Or who has given a gift to him
that he might be repaid?”

For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen."

Context, Context, Context............

 

[Lee52]

"All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out," (John 6:37).

This couldn't be taken in a corporate sense, because of the word "all" used here. If this verse is about a corporate election of the church as a whole, Christ would have said, "That which the Father gives me...."

There is no way around it. This is simply how God exercises His sovereignty.

It's not a gun to your head scenario; it's a sovereign God to man scenario.

John 6:35-40:

Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”


Context, Context, Context..............

 

[CalledOutOne]

Romans 11:25-36
Lest you be wise in your own sight, I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written,
“The Deliverer will come from Zion,
he will banish ungodliness from Jacob”;
“and this will be my covenant with them
when I take away their sins.”

As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake. But as regards election, they (ISRAEL) are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. For just as you were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy. For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all.
Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!
“For who has known the mind of the Lord,
or who has been his counselor?”
“Or who has given a gift to him
that he might be repaid?”

For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen."

Context, Context, Context............

You are wrong. The "elect" are those who are grafted in to Spiritual Israel (the elect).

"For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery—so that you will not be wise in your own estimation—that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in; and so all Israel will be saved;"
~Romans 11:25-26a

We have been grafted in to Spiritual Israel.

John 6:35-40:

Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst. But I said to you that you have seen me and yet do not believe. All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never cast out. For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”


Context, Context, Context..............

This does not support your theology. "Whosoever comes". Who comes? Those who the Father draws. The elect. The "whosoever" is the elect.

Read the entire letter. WE are SAVED not of ourselves, it (SALVATION) is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast, (ABOUT BEING SAVED BY GRACE). Context.

And as to your understanding of giving of gifts........... if I send you a present and you think it a bomb and do not accept it from the postman, does that mean that I never sent it to you? It does mean that you did not accept it, but it does not mean that I did not give it to you..........it remains a free gift from me to you, whether or not you accepted it.

You've separated my two arguments. Your claim is invalid. See above about how GIFTS OF GOD cannot be repented of.

 

[drstevej]

Whosoever = The Elect
Whosonever = The non-Elect

 

[Verona]

If you have to accept the free gift or you have to do anything at all in order to be saved, then it is a legal salvation.

I used to hold to this theology. The problem is this.

Faith is a gift:
"For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast," (Ephesians 2:8-9).

And here is what the Bible says about the gifts and the calling of God:
"From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God's choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers; for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable," (Romans 11:29).


ir·rev·o·ca·ble /ˌiˈrevəkəbəl/
Adjective: Not able to be changed, reversed, or recovered; final.

It is final. Salvation is God's work. He initiates, works, and finishes. Man can resist the Spirit of God, but not the gift of salvation when the Spirit applies it.


The problem with your gun analogy is that it leaves out God's work on the heart of the man before the man has to make a decision. Or do you think that Lazarus could have said, "No, Lord; I will stay dead"? I tell you this, if our Lord wouldn't have called Lazarus by name, the tombs would have emptied at His sovereign voice.

"All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out," (John 6:37).

This couldn't be taken in a corporate sense, because of the word "all" used here. If this verse is about a corporate election of the church as a whole, Christ would have said, "That which the Father gives me...."

There is no way around it. This is simply how God exercises His sovereignty.

It's not a gun to your head scenario; it's a sovereign God to man scenario.

It is not my "gun" theology.

FWIW. I am at a loss with monergism vs synergism.

The problem with monergism, as we all know, the bottom line is God is responsible for mans sin. No way around that. The problem with synergism is as has been pointed out it negates Gods omniscience etc to some degree.

As I posted previously, John Calvin did not know that answer ( I won't re-quote his text).

 

[CalledOutOne]

It is not my "gun" theology.

FWIW. I am at a loss with monergism vs synergism.

The problem with monergism, as we all know, the bottom line is God is responsible for mans sin. No way around that. The problem with synergism is as has been pointed out it negates Gods omniscience etc to some degree.

As I posted previously, John Calvin did not know that answer ( I won't re-quote his text).

I don't see how God being responsible for sin proves Christianity to be false. Ever read Vincent Cheung?

Anyway... I don't believe God is the author of sin, but I do believe that He decreed sin. Big difference.

He didn't create it like a substance... since it's not really a substance or anything at all. It's a lack of something: Righteousness.

God made man mutable so He might fall. Why else would He put that tree in the garden? To help man define His moral character? That's Open Theism. Was it to test man? That would mean God learnt something. He does not learn; He decrees.

Don't limit the sovereignty and omniscience of God.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

FWIW. I am at a loss with monergism vs synergism.

The problem with monergism, as we all know, the bottom line is God is responsible for mans sin. No way around that. The problem with synergism is as has been pointed out it negates Gods omniscience etc to some degree.

I am curious, why do you think it has to be "either or", why not "both and", monergism AND synergism?

As I posted previously, John Calvin did not know that answer ( I won't re-quote his text).

"...the will is [either] free , bound , self-determined , or coerced . People generally understand a free will to be one which has in its power to choose good or evil…[But] There can be no such thing as a coerced will, since the two ideas are contradictory. But our responsibility as teachers is to say what it means, so that it may be understood what coercion is. Therefore we describe [as coerced ] the will which does not incline this way or that of its own accord or by an internal movement of decision, but is forcibly driven by an external impulse. We say that it is self-determined when of itself it directs itself in the direction in which it is led, when it is not taken by force or dragged unwillingly. A bound will , finally, is one which because of its corruptness is held captive under the authority of its evil desires, so that it can choose nothing but evil, even if it does so of its own accord and gladly, without being driven by any external impulse. According to these definitions we allow that man has choice and that it is self-determined, so that if he does anything evil, it should be imputed to him and to his own voluntary choosing. We do away with coercion and force, because this contradicts the nature of the will and cannot coexist with it. We deny that choice is free , because through man’s innate wickedness it is of necessity driven to what is evil and cannot seek anything but evil. And from this it is possible to deduce what a great difference there is between necessity and coercion . For we do not say that man is dragged unwillingly into sinning, but that because his will is corrupt he is held captive under the yoke of sin and therefore of necessity will in an evil way. For where there is bondage, there is necessity. But it makes a great difference whether the bondage is voluntary or coerced. We locate the necessity to sin precisely in corruption of the will, from which follows that it is self-determined." -John Calvin, The Bondage and Liberation of the Will pp 69, 70

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Ever read Vincent Cheung?

Sorry but I wouldn't recommend VC (the explanation is long and tedious), and especially on this topic.