Problem with Election

[Clint Edwards]

Did Saul chose God on the road to Damascus. Did Saul resist God? Did Saul get angry at God for doing this to him? Or did Paul believe, trust, and follow Christ?

Of course HE CHOSE....................... my point

 

[Clint Edwards]

Yes, God predestines according to purpose, not predestines for salvation, otherwise it is not of faith.


In Romans 9, we see that purpose is the lineage of Christ.

The line from which the Messiah would come.


For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen
who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen. Romans 9:3-5

• and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came

JLB

Great point.

 

[ladodgers6]

Yes, God predestines according to purpose, not predestines for salvation, otherwise it is not of faith.


In Romans 9, we see that purpose is the lineage of Christ.

The line from which the Messiah would come.


For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen
who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen. Romans 9:3-5

• and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came

JLB

We cho

That's a contradiction.

Check this out. In Romans 8 God does predestined us to Salvation.

28And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good,h for those who are called according to his purpose. 29For 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. 30And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

A short quote from Wikipedia on Servetus:

"As Servetus was not a citizen of Geneva, and legally could at worst be banished, the government, in an attempt to find some plausible excuse to disregard this legal reality, had consulted other Swiss Reformed cantons (Zürich, Bern, Basel, Schaffhausen). They universally favored his condemnation and suppression of his doctrine, but without saying how that should be accomplished.[33] Martin Luther had condemned his writing in strong terms.[34] Servetus and Philip Melanchthon had strongly hostile views of each other. The party called the "Libertines", who were generally opposed to anything and everything John Calvin supported, were in this case strongly in favor of the execution of Servetus at the stake (while Calvin urged that he be beheaded instead). In fact, the council that condemned Servetus was presided over by Ami Perrin (a Libertine) who ultimately on 24 October sentenced Servetus to death by burning for denying the Trinity and infant baptism.[35] Calvin asked that he be beheaded instead of burnt, knowing that burning at the stake was the only legal recourse.[36] This plea was refused and on 27 October, Servetus was burnt alive—atop a pyre of his own books—at the Plateau of Champel at the edge of Geneva."

Even those strongly opposed to Calvin were in favor of the execution. I only wish the Councils of Geneva had shipped him back to Vienne where he escaped prison. However, it would have sent a message to other heretics to those who cared not for the souls of men desiring to follow in the footsteps of Servetus. Somewhere I read that (at least) one such person was detoured from following in the footsteps of Servetus after the execution of Servetus.

It cannot be emphasized enough that the sentence was pronounced by the Councils of Geneva, not Calvin. If Calvin had the authority, Servetus would have been beheaded, rather than burned. That in itself shows where Calvin stood with the Councils.

As for sic implications that John Calvin (while not even a citizen), took some twisted delight in the burning of Servetus when it could not be further from the truth, Tim Challies states truthfully on his blog:

"It should be noted that Calvin was the only person who suggested a lighter sentence, asking the court to allow Servetus to die painlessly by beheading. Calvin prayed with and for Servetus and earlier in his life had sent Servetus a copy of his Institutes. Interestingly, Servetus returned the book with many abusive and insulting comments written in the margins. Despite this offense, Calvin showed clear pastoral concern for this man’s soul." tim challies blog

John Calvin only had a part in Servetus' arrest and investigation, as in recommending to Genevian authorities to investigate him. He was sorry that Servetus went against his advice to come to Geneva, and sorry the council did not give him a quicker less painful death. Not only is there no evidence of John Calvin being unrepentant, it is a judgmental attitude considering he:

"preached over two thousand sermons. He preached twice on Sunday and almost every weekday. His sermons lasted more than an hour and he did not use notes." (not to mention tens of thousands of pages of commentary on Scripture, the first Protestant systematic theology, among his many other writings)

"Within Geneva, Calvin's main concern was the creation of a collège, an institute for the education of children. Although the school was a single institution, it was divided into two parts: a grammar school called the collège and an advanced school called the académie. Within five years there were 1,200 students in the grammar school and 300 in the advanced school. The collège eventually became the Collège Calvin, one of the college preparatory schools of Geneva, while the académie became the University of Geneva."

"when he could not walk the couple of hundred yards to church, he was carried in a chair to preach. When the doctor forbade him to go out in the winter air to the lecture room, he crowded the audience into his bedroom and gave lectures there. To those who would urge him to rest, he asked, “What? Would you have the Lord find me idle when he comes?”

None of these historical facts bear the mark of a bitter unrepentant sinner.

It is difficult today to even wrap the mind around what it would have been like to live in Europe during the Reformation times. Blood was shed on every side in the region, consider the Puritan John Foxe and his "Book of Martyrs", with descriptions of executions of Protestants under "bloody" Mary I. Catholics and Protestant persecuted the Anabaptists. It was a dark time in Christian history, let's be careful not to put out the few Protestant lights that burned especially bright in a time of great darkness.

It is always amazing to me what lenghts the Calvinist will go to in the defense of the reprehensible acts of Calvin. The so called "dark time" in Europe during the Reformation was only one time in a period of war in Europe that went from the Roman days up until the 20th century when finally a realistic lasting peace between the major people groups of Europe exist. There was otherwise always a war in Europe each geneartion and sometimes more than one. John Calvin was responsible for the deaths of many men and women in Geneva when he reigned. This cannot be said of Luther although Calvinists try. It would generate more respect if they admitted he was responsible for the murder of men and women and admit it was represensible instead of defending him. Luther did not have anyone killed or arrested or banned because they disagreed with him. Calvin allowed no one to disagree with his theology. That is tyranny.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

We cho

Check this out. In Romans 8 God does predestined us to Salvation.

28And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good,h for those who are called according to his purpose. 29For 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. 30And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

If a person is not like Jesus, that is been conformed to the image of the Son of God, then the rest of the promise in verse 30 does not apply.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

You have no facts, only accusations. Produce this long list, as I only am aware of one man, the heretic Servetus.

"John Calvin’s Reign of Terror

In 5 years as magistrate of the Geneva “church-city-state,” Calvin oversaw 58 death sentences and the exile of 76 people. He wasn't the sole decision-maker in those cases, but personal correspondence and city council records betray his extraordinary influence. When Jacques Gruet, a theologian with differing views, placed a letter in Calvin’s pulpit calling him a hypocrite, he was arrested, tortured for a month and beheaded on July 26, 1547. Gruet's own theological book was later found and burned along with his house while his wife was thrown out into the street to watch."

John Calvin was not even a citizen of Geneva (at the time of Servetus execution), he had little to do with it, except for telling the man to stay away and trying to convert the man to Christianity.

Nonsense. He was in charge of the city.

"Michael Servetus, a Spaniard, physician, scientist and Bible scholar, suffered a worse fate. He was Calvin's longtime friend who resisted the authority of the Roman Catholic Church. However, he angered Calvin by returning a copy of Calvin's Institutes with critical comments in the margins. The next time Servetus attended Calvin's Sunday preaching service on a visit, Calvin had him arrested and charged with heresy. The 38 official charges included rejection of the Trinity and infant baptism. Servetus pleaded to be beheaded instead of the more brutal method of burning at the stake, but Calvin and the city council refused the quicker death method."

This is just history. The thing that surprised me at first until I ran into it over and over again, is the same spirit of intolerance in Calvin and Geneva under his tyranny forms in the attitudes of Calvinists today. The blank intolerance of any other thought was so similar to Calvin's intolerance it was amazing, This intolerance was not seen in Germany where Luther actually did not have any politival power. So in looking into the life and deeds of Calvin, I found that same spirit. Very unchristlike intolerance that surfaces easily when opposed. It is a fruit of the theology that runs through those who embrace it many times not seen in those who embrace other theologies as consistantly. Will be hotly contested by Calvinsists as they oppose the (and any) idea that disagrees with the teachings of Calvin, but the information is very helpful to those who engage with them. This unchristlike intolerance not of sin but of disagreement is remarkable.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

duplicate

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Calvin did not demand the "sinner" in his eyes be let go to repent on another day. Can you imagine Jesus doing this? being a party to and supporting fully the excruciating painful death of a man because he disagrees with your theology? And people follow him.... THis tells anyone with an open mind the kind of man Calvin was. And if one embraces Calvinism, he starts to become like the founder as far as possible.

The lengthy post defending Calvin's actions heavily interprets or changes history on many points trying to excuse him. What cannot be changed is the undeniable evidence that the citizens of Geneva hated Calvin and dumped his dead body in an unmarked grave giving it no love and no honor as it done to this day to men and women the city or nation loved. There is a reason why they hated him. And that piece of evidence shows they hated him a lot.

 

[ladodgers6]

It is always amazing to me what lenghts the Calvinist will go to in the defense of the reprehensible acts of Calvin. The so called "dark time" in Europe during the Reformation was only one time in a period of war in Europe that went from the Roman days up until the 20th century when finally a realistic lasting peace between the major people groups of Europe exist. There was otherwise always a war in Europe each geneartion and sometimes more than one. John Calvin was responsible for the deaths of many men and women in Geneva when he reigned. This cannot be said of Luther although Calvinists try. It would generate more respect if they admitted he was responsible for the murder of men and women and admit it was represensible instead of defending him. Luther did not have anyone killed or arrested or banned because they disagreed with him. Calvin allowed no one to disagree with his theology. That is tyranny.

This again????

 

[redleghunter]

"John Calvin’s Reign of Terror

In 5 years as magistrate of the Geneva “church-city-state,” Calvin oversaw 58 death sentences and the exile of 76 people. He wasn't the sole decision-maker in those cases, but personal correspondence and city council records betray his extraordinary influence. When Jacques Gruet, a theologian with differing views, placed a letter in Calvin’s pulpit calling him a hypocrite, he was arrested, tortured for a month and beheaded on July 26, 1547. Gruet's own theological book was later found and burned along with his house while his wife was thrown out into the street to watch."
Nonsense. He was in charge of the city.

"Michael Servetus, a Spaniard, physician, scientist and Bible scholar, suffered a worse fate. He was Calvin's longtime friend who resisted the authority of the Roman Catholic Church. However, he angered Calvin by returning a copy of Calvin's Institutes with critical comments in the margins. The next time Servetus attended Calvin's Sunday preaching service on a visit, Calvin had him arrested and charged with heresy. The 38 official charges included rejection of the Trinity and infant baptism. Servetus pleaded to be beheaded instead of the more brutal method of burning at the stake, but Calvin and the city council refused the quicker death method."

This is just history. The thing that surprised me at first until I ran into it over and over again, is the same spirit of intolerance in Calvin and Geneva under his tyranny forms in the attitudes of Calvinists today. The blank intolerance of any other thought was so similar to Calvin's intolerance it was amazing, This intolerance was not seen in Germany where Luther actually did not have any politival power. So in looking into the life and deeds of Calvin, I found that same spirit. Very unchristlike intolerance that surfaces easily when opposed. It is a fruit of the theology that runs through those who embrace it many times not seen in those who embrace other theologies as consistantly. Will be hotly contested by Calvinsists as they oppose the (and any) idea that disagrees with the teachings of Calvin, but the information is very helpful to those who engage with them. This unchristlike intolerance not of sin but of disagreement is remarkable.

I have to say I forgot Servetus denied the Trinity. That would have got him the same sentence in Catholic held lands.

 

[redleghunter]

This again????

Can't refute Scriptures, bring up the sins of flawed humans in history.

 

[ladodgers6]

If a person is not like Jesus, that is been conformed to the image of the Son of God, then the rest of the promise in verse 30 does not apply.

Did you notice these adjectives are in the past tense?

 

[ladodgers6]

Can't refute Scriptures, bring up the sins of flawed humans in history.

I read her post about Michael Servetus. And its filled with holes. I'll address it with her.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I have to say I forgot Servetus denied the Trinity. That would have got him the same sentence in Catholic held lands.

But not where Luther lived. Not where Wesley lived either. ANd certainly not where John, Peter, Paul and Jesus lived. Deny evolution is some places and your life isn't worth anything anymore. Tyranny of the mind still exists and did then. The point is who is insisting on it and why.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

I read her post about Michael Servetus. And its filled with holes. I'll address it with her.

I would like to see you justify the fact that Calvin was so hated by those who knew him that they threw his body in an unmarked grave, the height of hating a man holding public office. As for the rest, I am sure there are lots of stories on how he was sorry and how the others felt and so on painting him to be less evil than the facts. This is done because the facts are prettry danming so lets invent feelings of those involved so he looks better than he was.

Those living under Calvins hated him. I suppose those in power with him liked the power they got a well so they were different. The helpers to tyrants always like the state of tyranny.

 

[Dorothy Mae]

This again????

Your team seems to be ignorant of European history. I am educating them.

 

[redleghunter]

But not where Luther lived. Not where Wesley lived either. ANd certainly not where John, Peter, Paul and Jesus lived. Deny evolution is some places and your life isn't worth anything anymore. Tyranny of the mind still exists and did then. The point is who is insisting on it and why.

Considering John Wesley was ordained in 1735 and Servetus died in 1553...different times.

 

[Bobber]

In universal ideas to salvation; everyone should have a equal amount of understanding, or choice to enter or not. But where I am not sure in respect for your premise. Is if everyone has full understanding where the train is going; to heaven and live forever, or stay behind and die & suffer. Why wouldn't everybody get on? I am not trying to trick you or trap you. I am asking a honest question, that's all.

As to why many won't get on as I've said Jesus was clear about that. LIGHT came but men loved darkness rather than LIGHT because their deeds were evil (or are evil today) I think what you're asking me about the universal idea of salvation that everyone should have equal amount of understanding I suppose similar to the question of what if someone has never heard the gospel. Here's one thing we're told that God has put the knowing of the creator by looking at creation.

For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse. Romans 1:20

I think it's probably the case that groups or individuals who have never heard the gospel most likely have had God tug at their hearts encouraging them with the very thought to call out upon God to reveal himself in a greater light. In most nations upon the Earth I'd say that's not really a problem. Most have heard about Jesus or are about to.

 

[redleghunter]

Your team seems to be ignorant of European history. I am educating them.

As you were taking us on a tour of the 16th century, I actually responded to the OP topic in a couple posts. Specifically the following which you may have missed:

No one has defended election and predestination from Calvin's institutes on this thread. They don't have to as has been pointed out multiple times it is a Biblical doctrine.

You and a few others have made this thread about Calvinists and Calvinism. Please keep on subject and address the Scriptural evidence.

Ephesians 1: NASB
3Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly placesin Christ, 4just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. In love5He predestined us to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the kind intention of His will, 6to the praise of the glory of His grace, which He freely bestowed on us in the Beloved. 7In Him we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of His grace8which He lavished on us. In all wisdom and insight 9He made known to us the mystery of His will, according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him 10with a view to an administration suitable to the fullness of the times, that is, the summing up of all things in Christ, things in the heavens and things on the earth. In Him 11also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will, 12to the end that we who were the first to hope in Christ would be to the praise of His glory. 13In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation—having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory.

Address the above from the apostle Paul.

Romans 8: NASB
28And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to His purpose. 29For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren; 30and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified.

31What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who is against us? 32He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him over for us all, how will He not also with Him freely give us all things? 33Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? God is the one who justifies; 34who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us. 35Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?

Address the above from the apostle Paul.

From Vine's Expository Dictionary of the Bible:

Elect, Elected, Election

[ A-1,Adjective,G1588, eklektos ]
lit. signifies picked out, chosen" (ek, "from," lego, "to gather, pick out"), and is used of
(a) Christ, the "chosen" of God, as the Messiah, Luke 23:35 (for the verb in Luke 9:35 See Note below), and metaphorically as a "living Stone," "a chief corner Stone," 1 Peter 2:4, 1 Peter 2:6; some mss. have it in John 1:34, instead of huios, "Son;"
(b) angels, 1 Timothy 5:21, as "chosen" to be of especially high rank in administrative association with God, or as His messengers to human beings, doubtless in contrast to fallen angels (See 2 Peter 2:4; Jude 1:6);
(c) believers (Jews or Gentiles), Matthew 24:22, Matthew 24:24, Matthew 24:31; Mark 13:20, Mark 13:22, Mark 13:27; Luke 18:7; Romans 8:33; Colossians 3:12; 2 Timothy 2:10; Titus 1:1; 1 Peter 1:1; 1 Peter 2:9 (as a spiritual race); Matthew 20:16; Matthew 22:14; Revelation 17:14, "chosen;" individual believers are so mentioned in Romans 16:13; 2 John 1:1, 2 John 1:13.
Believers were "chosen" "before the foundation of the world" (cp. "before times eternal," 2 Timothy 1:9), in Christ, Ephesians 1:4, to adoption, Ephesians 1:5; good works, Ephesians 2:10; conformity to Christ, Romans 8:29; salvation from the delusions of the Antichrist and the doom of the deluded, 2 Thessalonians 2:13; eternal glory, Romans 9:23.
The source of their "election" is God's grace, not human will, Ephesians 1:4-Ephesians 1:5; Romans 9:11; Romans 11:5. They are given by God the Father to Christ as the fruit of His death, all being foreknown and foreseen by God, John 17:6; Romans 8:29. While Christ's death was sufficient for all men, and is effective in the case of the "elect," yet men are treated as responsible, being capable of the will and power to choose. For the rendering "being chosen as firstfruits," an alternative reading in 2 Thessalonians 2:13, See FIRSTFRUITS. See CHOICE, B.
More:
Elect, Elected, Election - Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words​

Response:


Continued below from the lexicon of Greek the words involved in predestination and elect.

4309. proorizó

Strong's Concordance
proorizó: to predetermine, foreordain
Original Word: προορίζω
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: proorizó
Phonetic Spelling: (pro-or-id'-zo)
Short Definition: I foreordain, predetermine
Definition: I foreordain, predetermine, mark out beforehand.
HELPS Word-studies
4309 proorízō (from 4253 /pró, "before" and 3724 /horízō, "establish boundaries, limits") – properly, pre-horizon, pre-determine limits (boundaries) predestine.

[4309 (proorízō) occurs six times in the NT (eight in the writings of Paul). Since the root (3724 /horízō) already means "establish boundaries," the added prefix (pro, "before") makes 4309 (proorízō) "to pre-establish boundaries," i.e. beforecreation.]

Strong's Greek: 4309. προορίζω (proorizó) -- to predetermine, foreordain

1586. eklegó
Strong's Concordance
eklegó: to select
Original Word: ἐκλέγομαι
Part of Speech: Verb
Transliteration: eklegó
Phonetic Spelling: (ek-leg'-om-ahee)
Short Definition: I choose, elect
Definition: I pick out for myself, choose, elect, select.
HELPS Word-studies
1586 eklégomai (from 1537 /ek, "out of" and 3004 /légō, "speaking to a conclusion") – properly, to select (choose) out of, by a highly deliberate choice (i.e. real heart-preference) with a definite outcome (as with the destination of divine selection for salvation).
Strong's Greek: 1586. ἐκλέγομαι (eklegó) -- to select

 

[Dorothy Mae]

Considering John Wesley was ordained in 1735 and Servetus died in 1553...different times.

The law of Christ does not change for those who follow Him. You probably forget that we read the writings of men who lived in the first century and no Christian thinks "different times" regarding what we are instructed to do. But then again, I am not a Calvinist and I can accept and obey the teaching of Christ as he taught it. I do not have to invent different moral standards for different times to hide the truth.