Predestination??

[cygnusx1]

The Arminian says ... ''We choose God and then God chose us.''

The 'soft Calvinists' says ...... ''God Chose us and then we chose Him''.

Jesus said "You did NOT choose me I chose YOU ....... "

what a stark contrast ........... The Lord pushed it so far to the right that no mistake could be made...

 

[ContraMundum]

The Arminian says ... ''We choose God and then God chose us.''

More like "God knew who would choose Him so He gave them the grace to choose Him". Or, for others "God gave us the grace to choose Him, and by His foreknowledge He knew who would do so anyway".

Brother, I know you've got this stuff on your shelves, so how about reading it more?

 

[R.J.S]

More like "God knew who would choose Him so He gave them the grace to choose Him". Or, for others "God gave us the grace to choose Him, and by His foreknowledge He knew who would do so anyway".

So why did God need to give them the grace to choose him if they would anyway?

 

[cygnusx1]

More like "God knew who would choose Him so He gave them the grace to choose Him". Or, for others "God gave us the grace to choose Him, and by His foreknowledge He knew who would do so anyway".

Brother, I know you've got this stuff on your shelves, so how about reading it more?

the Arminian understanding is that Election is conditional on a foresight of a libertarian free-will choice of man ....... after which God merely ratifies this "discovery" ......

Time is against me at present ...

 

[ContraMundum]

So why did God need to give them the grace to choose him if they would anyway?

Well, the obvious answer is because they were/are dead in their sins, unable to save themselves. He just foreknew, because He is outside of time and it's all happening now. No chronology or Ordo Salutis with God. Weird, eh? But then again, Calvinism is equally as surreal, where God, who is love, is all loving and with the omnipotence to save all lets millions die in Hell because He's just not inclined to save them. Even humans show more compassion.

Besides who said Arminianism was logical or perfect? Who said Calvinism made sense? (I Know, I know- Calvinists. Quick joke: you know why Reformed pastors preach topical sermons so well? Because they have to defend Calvinism every Sunday).

It's no different to all the other options- each has weak points. I'm not an Arminian so I'm probably not the best to answer these things- but because there doesn't seem to be any well-informed Arminian apologists here I like to chip in just to shake the tree and watch the nuts fall out.

 

[ContraMundum]

the Arminian understanding is that Election is conditional on a foresight of a libertarian free-will choice of man ....... after which God merely ratifies this "discovery" ......

That would depend on the species of Arminianism, wouldn't it?

Time is against me at present ...

No problem, brother!

 

[R.J.S]

"God knew who would choose Him so He gave them the grace to choose Him". Or, for others "God gave us the grace to choose Him, and by His foreknowledge He knew who would do so anyway".

So why did God need to give them the grace to choose him if they would anyway?

Well, the obvious answer is because they were/are dead in their sins, unable to save themselves. He just foreknew, because He is outside of time and it's all happening now.

So Man is dead in sin and unable to respond to the gospel. So no one can choose God on their own. Now if this is true, which you above said it is, then God knows that noone will choose him until he gives them the grace to. Therefore your statement that "God knew who would choose Him so He gave them the grace to choose Him" is wrong. God diving us grace can not therfore be based upon his foreknowledge of what we will do!

You are indeed correct that "God gave us the grace to choose Him" but that was not based upon his foreknowledge of us having faith. You are saying that God gave us the grace to choose him based upon the fact that we will believe but he also knows that we are unable to respond without his grace. That makes no sense whatsoever!!

 

[woobadooba]

So why did God need to give them the grace to choose him if they would anyway?

God didn't have to give anyone grace to choose Him. He is Grace; and that's why we have choice.

In other words, God can't stop being what He is.

 

[ContraMundum]

So Man is dead in sin and unable to respond to the gospel. So no one can choose God on their own. Now if this is true, which you above said it is, then God knows that noone will choose him until he gives them the grace to. Therefore your statement that "God knew who would choose Him so He gave them the grace to choose Him" is wrong. God diving us grace can not therfore be based upon his foreknowledge of what we will do!

You forgot about the Arminian doctrine of prevenient grace. Basically, that man is dead in sins, but God has showered enough grace on them to allow them to choose. The doctrine of prevenient grace means that God's grace goes before the Gospel, allowing them to respond to the Gospel, by their freed will. This will is restored by a prevenient grace.

You are indeed correct that "God gave us the grace to choose Him" but that was not based upon his foreknowledge of us having faith. You are saying that God gave us the grace to choose him based upon the fact that we will believe but he also knows that we are unable to respond without his grace. That makes no sense whatsoever!!

Sure it does. Even Reformed authors acknowledge a "common grace" of sorts, the Arminians merely state that such a grace is actually grace. The difference mainly lies in the fact that the Calvinist believes that both the regeneration and the effectual call is restricted to the elect only. Arminians believe grace is offered to all, all are given a gracious (as opposed to natural) ability to hear and respond to the Gospel call (offered to all, effective to many- Rom 5:19,20)

 

[R.J.S]

You forgot about the Arminian doctrine of prevenient grace. Basically, that man is dead in sins, but God has showered enough grace on them to allow them to choose. The doctrine of prevenient grace means that God's grace goes before the Gospel, allowing them to respond to the Gospel, by their freed will. This will is restored by a prevenient grace.



Sure it does. Even Reformed authors acknowledge a "common grace" of sorts, the Arminians merely state that such a grace is actually grace. The difference mainly lies in the fact that the Calvinist believes that both the regeneration and the effectual call is restricted to the elect only. Arminians believe grace is offered to all, all are given a gracious (as opposed to natural) ability to hear and respond to the Gospel call (offered to all, effective to many- Rom 5:19,20)

How can the grace be offerred to all if it is only once they have been regenerated that they can accept it?

 

[ContraMundum]

How can the grace be offerred to all if it is only once they have been regenerated that they can accept it?

The Arminian position is that men can accept salvation because God's grace has enabled them to respond to the Gospel. So, your question is not applicable in that system. It's a problem only when one is looking from a Calvinist position, but when looking from the Arminian position, the problem dissolves itself.

In Arminianism, the offer of grace is free for all. Read Charles Hodge's (Reformed, Calvinist theologian) commentary on Romans 2:4. Even he acknowledges a prevenient grace (but misses the implication of such).

All the doctrine of prevenient grace is saying is that God has graciously given enough grace to all men to respond to the Gospel. Thus, they are saved by grace alone, but damned by their own choice. As the famous Methodist preacher John Fletcher said: "All our salvation is of God; All our damnation is of ourselves."

 

[R.J.S]

The Arminian position is that men can accept salvation because God's grace has enabled them to respond to the Gospel.

So preventient grace reverses the effect of the Fall?

 

[heymikey80]

All the doctrine of prevenient grace is saying is that God has graciously given enough grace to all men to respond to the Gospel. Thus, they are saved by grace alone, but damned by their own choice. As the famous Methodist preacher John Fletcher said: "All our salvation is of God; All our damnation is of ourselves."

Interesting. You say your damnation is of yourselves, yet your decision chooses the grace of God to your salvation.

Your decision is responsible for your damnation. How is it then not responsible for your salvation?

 

[ContraMundum]

So preventient grace reverses the effect of the Fall?

All grace reverses the effects of the fall, does it not?

Yet not all grace is saving grace. Prevenient grace reverses some of the effects, just like saving grace reverses some of the other effects.

As a Calvinist, you should hold to forms of that idea anyway. I've no idea why you asked that.

 

[ContraMundum]

Interesting. You say your damnation is of yourselves, yet your decision chooses the grace of God to your salvation.

Your decision is responsible for your damnation. How is it then not responsible for your salvation?

One's decision is responsible for one's salvation, but only by God's grace. God initiates and enables, man responds.

My goodness, you'd think you people had never heard this before! Tell me you have, please.

I'm concerned now. Where are the Arminians here? This is Arminianism 101, I'm giving it a shot here, and I don't even hold to it! LOL

 

[ContraMundum]

Here's more confusion for you all:

Calvinism: faith is the result of regeneration.

Arminianism: regeneration is the result of faith.

Lutheranism: faith is the means of regeneration.

Which is right?

 

[MbiaJc]

Here's more confusion for you all:

Calvinism: faith is the result of regeneration.

Arminianism: regeneration is the result of faith.

Lutheranism: faith is the means of regeneration.

Which is right?

Neither one! If we believe in Jesus Christ or even in His name, we are given power to become regenerated.

It is His faith not ours that we believe in, which when we do God gives us power to become sons of God.

Talk about confusion ooooooooooooh my!

 

[MarkT]

It doesn't matter what the Armenian position is or what the Lutheran position is or what the Catholic position is.

The question is settled by the words "You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide; so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you." John 15:16 and "If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you." John 15:19

It's pretty simple. God gave him the men. Jesus revealed himself to them.

It really has nothing to do with choice and therefore freewill on our part.

Just in case you're counting on God's love to save you, you should know God's love isn't going to be judging you. God's Word is going to be your judge.

God is governed by His Word.

Remember the words, "Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone."

Remember the predictions, "Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the close of the age. The Son of man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all evil doers, and throw them into the furnace of fire; there men will weep and gnash their teeth." Matthew 13:40.

The scholars and the Pharisees can debate all they want. God's Word is coming.

 

[woobadooba]

It doesn't matter what the Armenian position is or what the Lutheran position is or what the Catholic position is.

The question is settled by the words "You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit and that your fruit should abide; so that whatever you ask the Father in my name, he may give it to you." John 15:16 and "If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you." John 15:19

But it is important to pay attention to the context of this passage. "Chosen" in this context is referring to those whom God has chosen to carry out His redemptive work, but not chosen in the sense that they were saved without God ever giving them the choice to be saved.

This is also why Jesus had said in another place, "Many are called, but few are chosen."

If all whom God calls must necessarily be saved, how is it then that only a few of them are chosen when many are called?

 

[cygnusx1]

But it is important to pay attention to the context of this passage. "Chosen" in this context is referring to those whom God has chosen to carry out His redemptive work, but not chosen in the sense that they were saved without God ever giving them the choice to be saved.

This is also why Jesus had said in another place, "Many are called, but few are chosen."

If all whom God calls must necessarily be saved, how is it then that only a few of them are chosen when many are called?

Because there are two distinct types of Calling , the outer and the inner .

The Gospel call is both a call upon sinners to repent , and a further calling upon the elect to realise their Lord and Saviour .

Many were called but few chosen ............ this is merely the outer call .

now compair Romans 8 for the inner call :



28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.

29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Notice that all those "called" in Romans 8 are not only justified but also glorified .