Faith or Predestination

[Marvin Knox]

I don't think anyone is saying Calvinists are saying predestination *is* salvation, but rather that the theory seems to be saying that salvation is determinate by predestination alongside of faith (or even that faith is determined by predestination) and hence that salvation is by both predestination and faith.

Fine.

And the predestination of Christ living a perfect life and evil men crucifying Him work "along side" of the free choices of Christ and the Jews.

Are you saying they don't mesh perfectly without one cancelling out the other?

The predestination of the choices of men in no way negates the ability of those men to make the choices that were predestined to occur. That is what Calvinists believe and teach.

The difference is that some advocate that the gospel is offered to all men as God desires all to be saved, but the plan does not ensure everyone will be as not all will respond in faith; while others seem to advocate that God picked out specific individuals to be saved and so those few are either given faith or regenerated/overwhelmed so they are ensured to respond in faith, etc., while other individuals remain in condemnation and are unable to respond to the gospel in faith by God's choice.

Setting aside the incorrect teaching of some Calvinists concerning so called limited atonement - both positions you state above are correct.

Again, the Greek term predestination is not like the English term destiny. It doesn't refer to God determining that individuals will pick certain things.

If you mean here that God does not force individuals to pick certain things that would be correct. But predestining that certain people will exist and that the choices they make will be allowed to play out is not forcing those choices. It is not infringing in any way on their ability to make free choices.

God works through means to bring to past what He has predestined to occur and His decrees in no way undermine the means of free choices (in as much as choices can be truly free that is of course).

That will do it now for the reasons I have stated before.
I hate to see you waste a bunch of your time.
Unfortunately the rest of your post will have to go to seed.

It will likely be tomorrow before I return here if then.

Keep them short and concise if we are to continue.

 

[Si_monfaith]

People are not robots programmed by satan. the nonbeliever sinner of satan is choosing to obey satan of his/her own free will make them responsible for their own sins. You are a "slave" of whomever you are obeying, so for just a brief time stop obeying satan and turn to God willing to accept God's help. Giving up, wimping out and surrendering are nothing to provide you with anything, but will allow God to shower you with gifts.

So you can create a plan & create strength to stop obeying satan?

So your plan precedes God?

 

[Si_monfaith]

All mature adult come to their senses sometime in their life and most likely many times. We are talking about humbly accepting sacrificial charity, which mature adults do not like to do (who likes to be in a situation of having to accept charity over self-reliance.) People even with arthritis do not like to ask people to tie their shoes.

Who gives the desire to not like to ask people to tie their shoes? Philippians 2:13.

 

[Si_monfaith]

If people do not like unconditional unselfish sacrificial Love from others or have that type of Love, and would prefer to be loved for the way they want others to perceive them to be, so they would not be happy in heaven since that is the only type of Love there is in heaven. the only way to obtain Godly type Love is through a free will choice, since God cannot program that Love into a person (robotic love) nor can God force that Love on a person (like a shotgun wedding with God holding the shotgun.

can God force that Love on a person (like a shotgun wedding with God holding the shotgun.

Is man more than God to stop Him?

Was Paul able to stop God from forcing him on the road to Damascus?

 

[Si_monfaith]

I'm not sure if that's a question or what.
But I'll take a crack at it anyway.

Justification is through faith alone. I'm equating justification with "saved" for all practical purposes. I think most people would do that.

It is God who saves of course. I'm not sure it would be exactly correct to say that faith itself saves. It may be a matter of semantics though.

While election certainly plays a part in obtaining faith - I don't believe it is exactly correct to say that faith is a "product" of election. Again - it may be a matter of semantics.

Election is the doctrine which says that God chooses some to be enlightened in some way by His Holy Spirit so that they can have faith and say Jesus is Lord. The opposite and understood truth of the doctrine is that He passes other by, since He only chooses some.

Most Calvinists stress that this election is not because of anything in the individual. Some anti-Calvinists accuse Calvinist of teaching that God's election is "random" or "arbitrary". But this is what people call a "straw man". Nothing God does is random or arbitrary and no Calvinist would say so.

Just because we don't know the reason a person is elected and just because we know from scripture that it is not because of their deserving election - does not mean that God does not have a good reason for choosing some and passing others by.

It may be correct to call election "unconditional" or perhaps not, depending on how one looks at things. Full on Calvinists will likely want to shoot me for saying so - but God does respond to the prayers of individuals and of those who pray for them.

Certainly those who will be saved are predestined to be saved from before creation. But that doesn't mean that the "means" (as the Westminster Confession of Faith puts it) to bring what is predestine to occur in time to past cannot included things done by the individual or those praying for him (just as an example for the purpose of this discussion).

IMO some of these things are a bit more murky than many Calvinists would have us believe. The truth of certain doctrines often includes a bit from Calvinist beliefs and also non-Calvinist beliefs. But, enough of that. Doing the theology of some of these maters justice requires more space and time than can be spared by most in a forum like this one.

I believe that the scriptures are clear that those who are save are the ones "given and drawn" to the Son by the Father. They are also clear from the testimony of Jesus that flesh and blood cannot reveal the truth but only the Father in Heaven. Also they are clear that no one can even say Jesus is Lord and mean it in a saving way except by the Holy Spirit.

While some aspects of the giving of the Holy Spirit come post-salvation - it is obvious by this that some aspects come prior to Salvation - i.e. God opened the heart of Lydia so that she might believe. Another example among others would be that Paul was "kicking against the goads" for a time even before God in grace revealed Himself to the un-seeking Pharisee Paul and saved him.

He passes some by and leaves them to their own devices wherewith the scriptures clearly say they will not and indeed cannot understand and receive the things of God.

Faith is a product of the Holy Spirit who is given to some who were elected to receive such who were then given by the Father to the Son according to Jesus.

But that doesn't mean that the "means" (as the Westminster Confession of Faith puts it) to bring what is predestine to occur in time to past cannot included things done by the individual or those praying for him

Prayers precede election or follows it? Prayers cause salvation or election causes salvation?

Justification is through faith alone.

Faith & confession is an external sign of already being justified by the work of Jesus on the cross or faith causes justification?

 

[Jennifer Rothnie]

Rom 9:15

The ordo salutis commences from God's will in Bible and not from man's faith.

Rom 9:15 doesn't say anything in regards to the order of salvation.

However, you are correct that the order of salvation doesn't start from man's faith. Most Christians, Calvinists or not, would agree that the order begins with God's will, mercy, and grace - as without the merciful work of Christ and gracious revelation of Christ and God willing for salvation to be through faith, we would have no message to receive in faith to begin with!

Here is a list of some common systemized theories (Calvinism, Catholicism, Arminianism) and how they present the ordo salutis: What is the ordo salutis? | Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry

None of them start with faith, but all start with some form of grace or will of God. The biggest difference between Calvinism and the other two systems is that in Calvinism, regeneration must precede faith.

Not that these are the only three proposed sequences, but they do show widespread agreement that man didn't just wake up one day and come up with the concept of faith in a Saviour to be saved. God had to will and act first in revealing the method to man and actually accomplishing it by sending Christ to die, and so forth.

 

[Jennifer Rothnie]

Not only salvation, even faith is beyond the capacity of man to achieve or offer, you agree?

Faith is the persuasion that something is true. Man can't 'offer' faith - though he can evangelize by presenting the gospel or give other testimonies and pieces of evidence so that others might respond in faith (Rom 10:17, II Cor 5:18-21, etc.)

Man doesn't 'achieve' faith either. When we come to trust in something we have not seen first-hand (germs, the ocean, Pluto's existence, etc.) that is not a personal achievement of some kind. Rather we receive the evidence presented and respond in belief vs. disbelief.

Responding to the gospel in faith is not beyond man's God-given abilities, as all the evidences and assurances and convictions necessary are given by God.

 

[Si_monfaith]

You believe that the Bible seems to teach it, something that not everyone would agree upon. While I laud the desire to use scripture alone, it does hem you in to having to deal with many scriptures that would seem to conflict with a TULIP approach to Calvinism. For example, how does one reconcile Gods desire that none would perish in 2 Peter 3:9 with a God who creates some humans solely for the purpose of pouring out his wrath and condemning them to hell from before the foundations of the world?

While I believe that the scriptures alone provide enough evidence to negate a TULIP or hyper-Calvinist doctrine, I also believe the logical implications of the characteristics and attributes of God made by Calvinist doctrine are incongruous with the scriptural descriptions of the character of God. I believe God gave us intellectual minds to reason when things are inconsistent, which plays a role in dividing the Word. I have never been evangelized by a Calvinist in any way except them trying to prove that God's love is not extended to everyone. Why the negative focus of Calvinism? Is it possible that there may be a skewed view of God in their doctrine?

Please don't interpret this post as hostility towards Calvinists, but I am interested in how these issues are reconciled in their doctrine.

For example, how does one reconcile Gods desire that none would perish in 2 Peter 3:9 with a God who creates some humans solely for the purpose of pouring out his wrath and condemning them to hell from before the foundations of the world?

If creation of man is a problem because of unconditional election, the same problem exists in conditional election. How? If God knows beforehand who will not believe in Him, why should He go ahead and create them?

 

[Jennifer Rothnie]

Prayers precede election or follows it? Prayers cause salvation or election causes salvation?

Neither. We are saved by grace and through faith. (Eph 2:8) Some might pray before they believe (Acts 10:1-5) - but those prayers do not bring salvation.

Faith & confession is an external sign of already being justified by the work of Jesus on the cross or faith causes justification?

Christ causes justification, and that justification is granted to those who believe in their heart that Jesus is Lord.

"Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." Rom 5:1

 

[Si_monfaith]

Because true love cannot exist without the chance of rejection. You cannot force someone to love you, and what reward for you if you could? If you remove the possibility of rejection, you have simply created a slave. God apparently desires to be loved of our own choice and not by slavery, or he wouldn't have allowed the tree to exist in the garden to begin with.

You cannot force someone to love you,

So God didn't force anyone in the Bible?

 

[Si_monfaith]

We are not naturally born with faith, but we are naturally born with the ability to believe.

Faith can not be bought or sold.

Faith IS -

Heb 11
[1] Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Faith begins with a mans desire to BELIEVE, and MAKE His decision.

And ANY MAN who has decided, simply has to seek God, and God will reward that man, ie gift that man, with FAITH.

Heb 11
[6] ... he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

Because...

Heb 11
[6] ... without faith it is impossible to please him:




Man decides his belief.
God rewards a man with a gift called faith, when a man decides to believe in Him, and seeks God.

God Bless,
SBC

We are not naturally born with faith, but we are naturally born with the ability to believe.

So God didn't give you the ability to believe? Nature have you? Is nature a being?

Faith can not be bought or sold.

Can't faith which is an assurance of being saved, be given by God?

God rewards a man with a gift called faith, when a man decides to believe in Him, and seeks God.

So you have bought faith by paying the price of deciding to believe Him and seeking God?

 

[Marvin Knox]

Prayers precede election or follows it? Prayers cause salvation or election causes salvation?
Faith & confession is an external sign of already being justified by the work of Jesus on the cross or faith causes justification?

We cannot possible fully comprehend how the God of eternity relates to time. Therefore it seems to me that it is impossible to be dogmatic about how some of these things work. Even so - there are many who would gladly tell you that they know fall about it.

But we do have to approach the doctrine from the only standpoint we have and that is from within time where we live. God even explains these things anthropomorphically for us (from our viewpoint) because He understands our state of existence.

Having said that, since the scriptures say that we were chosen in Him before the foundation of the world, that would appear to mean that election would proceed prayers because there was no one there to pray for us before the foundation of the world and in fact there was no "us" to even pray for if there was someone there to pray.

Some non-Calvinists falsely charge that Calvinists believe and teach that men are saved by predestination or election or both rather than a personal apprehension of the work of Christ on the cross. That simply isn't true.

The work of Jesus on the cross justifies no one in and of itself. It is only through faith in that work that we are justified - be we one of the elect or not. Even God's elect stand as vessels of wrath before God, just as the rest of mankind, before such time as they exercise saving faith. Any Calvinist would tell you that.

Tell me what you mean by salvation.
Tell me what you mean by justification.
Most importantly - tell me what you mean by "causes".

 

[InterestedApologist]

If creation of man is a problem because of unconditional election, the same problem exists in conditional election. How? If God knows beforehand who will not believe in Him, why should He go ahead and create them?

The problem does initially appear to be present for both views, but this conundrum disappears upon further reflection. I believe that we would likely agree (or at least hope we do) that man fell in the garden of his own volition, God did not cause it nor ordain it, but certainly knew it would occur. Not only did God create man despite knowing they would fall, but he also set in place a method of redemption and reconciliation by sacrificing His Son upon the cross. It would seem to be a safe inference then that God believed that human life and its relationship with Him was worthwhile despite having to pay the ultimate sacrifice to redeem and re establish a relationship with them. This is the truest exhibition of love from a creator to His creation.

If the above is true, God is not culpable for the fallen state of every man, and through the work on the cross has already done what is necessary to save every man. As man is responsible for his own illness and God has offered him reconciliation, every man is fully responsible for his own eternal damnation if he rejects God's reconciliation offer of grace, but this is only true if man can indeed accept or reject it of their own accord.

The Calvinist view of limited atonement and unconditional election effectively removes man's culpability for sin and places the culpability on God exclusively. God would then actually be creating some men for the specific purpose of damning them for a sin He will not allow them to be saved from! Furthermore, he does save some based only on his preference to do so, but they cannot reject Him (irresistible grace), so those he does save cannot actually love Him in a true sense. The full implications of such a philosophy seem to contradict the Biblical descriptions of God's character.

 

[Si_monfaith]

Rom 9:15 doesn't say anything in regards to the order of salvation.

However, you are correct that the order of salvation doesn't start from man's faith. Most Christians, Calvinists or not, would agree that the order begins with God's will, mercy, and grace - as without the merciful work of Christ and gracious revelation of Christ and God willing for salvation to be through faith, we would have no message to receive in faith to begin with!

Here is a list of some common systemized theories (Calvinism, Catholicism, Arminianism) and how they present the ordo salutis: What is the ordo salutis? | Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry

None of them start with faith, but all start with some form of grace or will of God. The biggest difference between Calvinism and the other two systems is that in Calvinism, regeneration must precede faith.

Not that these are the only three proposed sequences, but they do show widespread agreement that man didn't just wake up one day and come up with the concept of faith in a Saviour to be saved. God had to will and act first in revealing the method to man and actually accomplishing it by sending Christ to die, and so forth.

would agree that the order begins with God's will, mercy, and grace

With respect, the order does begin ONLY from His will and not from His will, mercy and grace.

By His will He chooses to show mercy. Mercy and grace come second - Rom 9:15.

 

[Si_monfaith]

Faith is the persuasion that something is true. Man can't 'offer' faith - though he can evangelize by presenting the gospel or give other testimonies and pieces of evidence so that others might respond in faith (Rom 10:17, II Cor 5:18-21, etc.)

Man doesn't 'achieve' faith either. When we come to trust in something we have not seen first-hand (germs, the ocean, Pluto's existence, etc.) that is not a personal achievement of some kind. Rather we receive the evidence presented and respond in belief vs. disbelief.

Responding to the gospel in faith is not beyond man's God-given abilities, as all the evidences and assurances and convictions necessary are given by God.

If God has given abilities, evidences, assurances and convictions that is necessary as you seem to state, why don't all respond by accept Jesus Christ?

Rather we receive the evidence presented and respond in belief vs. disbelief.

If the necessary evidence is given to all, why don't all be saved?

Faith is the persuasion that something is true.

Persuasion has no origin?

 

[Si_monfaith]

Neither. We are saved by grace and through faith. (Eph 2:8) Some might pray before they believe (Acts 10:1-5) - but those prayers do not bring salvation.



Christ causes justification, and that justification is granted to those who believe in their heart that Jesus is Lord.

"Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ." Rom 5:1

Salvation refers to redemption from the law (Galatians 4: 4, 5). Without redemption through His death no justification by His resurrection.

The elect are already saved and justified by His death and resurrection.

Salvation is proclaimed to people. The elect are given faith (assurance) that they are already saved.

Then follows believing (meditation is internal sign) & confession (external signs) which are signs that the particular person is an elect.

 

[Si_monfaith]

We cannot possible fully comprehend how the God of eternity relates to time. Therefore it seems to me that it is impossible to be dogmatic about how some of these things work. Even so - there are many who would gladly tell you that they know fall about it.

But we do have to approach the doctrine from the only standpoint we have and that is from within time where we live. God even explains these things anthropomorphically for us (from our viewpoint) because He understands our state of existence.

Having said that, since the scriptures say that we were chosen in Him before the foundation of the world, that would appear to mean that election would proceed prayers because there was no one there to pray for us before the foundation of the world and in fact there was no "us" to even pray for if there was someone there to pray.

Some non-Calvinists falsely charge that Calvinists believe and teach that men are saved by predestination or election or both rather than a personal apprehension of the work of Christ on the cross. That simply isn't true.

The work of Jesus on the cross justifies no one in and of itself. It is only through faith in that work that we are justified - be we one of the elect or not. Even God's elect stand as vessels of wrath before God, just as the rest of mankind, before such time as they exercise saving faith. Any Calvinist would tell you that.

Tell me what you mean by salvation.
Tell me what you mean by justification.
Most importantly - tell me what you mean by "causes".

Salvation is deliverance. From what? Galatians 4: 4 -5.
We are saved from wrath caused by law (Rom 4:15) by His death - Rom 7: 4, 6.
We are justified by His resurrection - rom4:25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

Causes refers to producing or leading to something. Cause produces effect.

Some non-Calvinists falsely charge that Calvinists believe and teach that men are saved by predestination or election or both rather than a personal apprehension of the work of Christ on the cross. That simply isn't true.

I hope you believe that predestined to be justified is the same as elected to be justified.

Without election can one come to the cross?

The work of Jesus on the cross justifies no one in and of itself. It is only through faith in that work that we are justified

Faith is just an assurance that Jesus has finished everything for the elect on the cross. Faith doesn't save or justify. Jesus's works does.

 

[Si_monfaith]

The problem does initially appear to be present for both views, but this conundrum disappears upon further reflection. I believe that we would likely agree (or at least hope we do) that man fell in the garden of his own volition, God did not cause it nor ordain it, but certainly knew it would occur. Not only did God create man despite knowing they would fall, but he also set in place a method of redemption and reconciliation by sacrificing His Son upon the cross. It would seem to be a safe inference then that God believed that human life and its relationship with Him was worthwhile despite having to pay the ultimate sacrifice to redeem and re establish a relationship with them. This is the truest exhibition of love from a creator to His creation.

If the above is true, God is not culpable for the fallen state of every man, and through the work on the cross has already done what is necessary to save every man. As man is responsible for his own illness and God has offered him reconciliation, every man is fully responsible for his own eternal damnation if he rejects God's reconciliation offer of grace, but this is only true if man can indeed accept or reject it of their own accord.

The Calvinist view of limited atonement and unconditional election effectively removes man's culpability for sin and places the culpability on God exclusively. God would then actually be creating some men for the specific purpose of damning them for a sin He will not allow them to be saved from! Furthermore, he does save some based only on his preference to do so, but they cannot reject Him (irresistible grace), so those he does save cannot actually love Him in a true sense. The full implications of such a philosophy seem to contradict the Biblical descriptions of God's character.

through the work on the cross has already done what is necessary to save every man.

According to conditional election, if God knew beforehand that only some would believe in His Son, why should He send His Son to make an universal atonement?

Does conditional election empty universal atonement of its meaning?

"Contradict the Biblical descriptions of God's character":
God's character as described by the Bible is in Romans 9:15 where election by His will precedes His mercy and not the other way round. The apparent contradiction is due to seeing election the other way round.

 

[Si_monfaith]

I don't think anyone is saying Calvinists are saying predestination *is* salvation, but rather that the theory seems to be saying that salvation is determinate by predestination alongside of faith (or even that faith is determined by predestination) and hence that salvation is by both predestination and faith.



I think all in this thread would agree that the plan of salvation God devised, being through faith in Christ alone, is by His sovereign choice, grace, and will. The difference is that some advocate that the gospel is offered to all men as God desires all to be saved, but the plan does not ensure everyone will be as not all will respond in faith; while others seem to advocate that God picked out specific individuals to be saved and so those few are either given faith or regenerated/overwhelmed so they are ensured to respond in faith, etc., while other individuals remain in condemnation and are unable to respond to the gospel in faith by God's choice.



Again, the Greek term predestination is not like the English term destiny. It doesn't refer to God determining that individuals will pick certain things. The word proorízō' is to pre-horizon - literally to limit or establish boundaries beforehand. Boundaries - not movement at the level of molecules and individual activity. God certainly can intervene in nature or history to work at that level (and frequently has) but there is nothing in the term to ensure He must always choose every action and motion.

God setting up the boundaries of the sea and telling the waves they can move 'this far, and no further' is a classic example of predestination, as is God determining the boundaries of nations and their alloted time upon the Earth.

some advocate that the gospel is offered to all men as God desires all to be saved, but the plan does not ensure everyone will be as not all will respond in faith;

If as conditional election claims that God knows beforehand those who will believe in His Son, why would He present the gospel to the others who He knows will not believe?

Secondly, why would He give the ability, evidence etc to believe (which you seem to think is given for all humans) to the others who will not believe anyway?

 

[Tolworth John]

Which is first? Faith or predestination? According to Ephesians 2: 8, 9.

If you read the verses you will see that Faith that saves is given by God. So it follows that we are saved because predestined us to be saved.