Romans 8:29-30 ~ Am I re-Calvinizing?

[hedrick]

First, if you look at all of Rom 8, this isn’t about why some people are saved and some aren’t. This is about God’s long-term historical plan. It’s part of God freeing creation itself. He chose people to be part of a large family.

Second, there seems to be an inherent paradox to how Scripture speaks of salvation. On the one hand, we are called by name. We are saved only because he chose us. On the other hand, God wants all to be saved. I don’t believe there’s anything suggesting that God predestined some for damnation. Thus I’m sympathetic with the later Luther, who seems to have felt that damnation is inherently contradictory, and attempts to explain it rationally tend to give a demonic picture of God.

 

[ChristIsSovereign]

First, if you look at all of Rom 8, this isn’t about why some people are saved and some aren’t. This is about God’s long-term historical plan. It’s part of God freeing creation itself. He chose people to be part of a large family.

Second, there seems to be an inherent paradox to how Scripture speaks of salvation. On the one hand, we are called by name. We are saved only because he chose us. On the other hand, God wants all to be saved. I don’t believe there’s anything suggesting that God predestined some for damnation. Thus I’m sympathetic with the later Luther, who seems to have felt that damnation is inherently contradictory, and attempts to explain it rationally tend to give a demonic picture of God.

True. I find Calvinist authors to have the most solid grasp on scripture although the demographic leans towards the scholarly instead of 'basic Joe.'

 

[hedrick]

True. I find Calvinist authors to have the most solid grasp on scripture although the demographic leans towards the scholarly instead of 'basic Joe.'

Yes. I'm a Presbyterian because on average Presbyterian sermons tend to be more exegetical than I've found elsewhere. But I'm not convinced by straight TULIP, as you can see from my last post.

Fortunately the PCUSA doesn't mandate strict conformance with traditional theology.

If you're interested in these issues, I recommend James Dunn's commentary on Romans, in the Word series. Moo's is considered the best commentary that sticks with traditional Reformed theology. Dunn followers more modern Reformed approaches, which tend to soften TULIP by understanding a lot of what Paul says as speaking more of covenant history rather than individuals -- though obviously Paul has a lot to say about individual salvation as well.

If you're interested in the logic of predestination, here's an interesting listing of the possibilities: Predestination II | Presbyterian Mission Agency. It makes the basic problem clearer than anything else I've seen.

 

[ChristIsSovereign]

Yes. I'm a Presbyterian because on average Presbyterian sermons tend to be more exegetical than I've found elsewhere. But I'm not convinced by straight TULIP, as you can see from my last post.

Fortunately the PCUSA doesn't mandate strict conformance with traditional theology.

If you're interested in these issues, I recommend James Dunn's commentary on Romans, in the Word series. Moo's is considered the best commentary that sticks with traditional Reformed theology. Dunn followers more modern Reformed approaches, which tend to soften TULIP by understanding a lot of what Paul says as speaking more of covenant history rather than individuals -- though obviously Paul has a lot to say about individual salvation as well.

If you're interested in the logic of predestination, here's an interesting listing of the possibilities: Predestination II | Presbyterian Mission Agency. It makes the basic problem clearer than anything else I've seen.

I'm not straight TULIP either. I'm like 'TULIP with reservations about L and P' in which I believe Scripture has interesting things to say about them both.

I would've gone with 'Lutheran' but I don't agree with the Real Presence anymore. I read the epistles of Romans and 1 Corinthians and it's a commemoration of Christ's sacrifice, not a reenactment of such. I went with 'Calvinist' since that's my closest belief system.

 

[The Righterzpen]

Keep me in your prayers; re-Calvinizing and not being proud is going to be tolling on my psyche.

I think the "secret" to not being proud is a deep conviction and understanding that we do not deserve God's grace. He gives grace to the humble and hides the truth from the proud. Consider it a gift that He gives you a little bit of truth. You did not "figure out" predestination on your own. God opened your eyes.

Matthew 16:17,
Luke 10:21

Now I don't know if this will shed some light on your question of 2 John 2:2; (Jesus being the "propitiation" for the sins of the whole world.)

Propitiation means payment. If I go into a store and "make propitiation" on a stove; that does not mean I've purchased every stove in the store. LOL But of all the stoves in the world. I "made payment" on this one. And if I'm the only one in the world who can buy stoves; than I am the "propitiation for the stoves of the world". LOL

Here's the judicial way of looking at it. I commit a crime and you tell the judge that you will pay my fine. The judge turns around and says: I'm going to charge both of you! Is that justice? (Even in human terms, that is not justice.)

So translate this into propitiation and election.

If Jesus paid for my sin, and I end up in the lake of fire to pay for my sin; that's two people paying for the sin of one. That makes God unjust.

If God is all powerful and my will can supersede His Devine decree, than God is not all powerful.

Jesus said that all the Father gives him will come and he will lose nothing. So if Jesus loses me, that makes Jesus a liar.

If God's love is not willing to pursue, apprehend and restrain my "free will", than that is not love.

If Jesus is up in heaven wringing his hands waiting for me to believe; than he is not KING.