Some newbie questions

[worshipjunkie]

I really should stick to textual discussions, but the above statement is drawing me out. If I can repeat your statement back at you as I am hearing it, would you say that there is now no "barrier between God and" unbelievers? The wrath of God does not exist upon unbelievers at this time due to the atonement? Are you saying this?

Maybe what I'm saying would be better described as the wrath of God does not have to exist on unbelievers. It's like if you had a road over a fire with a bridge in the middle, and the bridge was raised and there is nothing keeping you from crossing to safety, but you choose to stay on your side. That's not a lack of success on the part of one who raised the bridge and stands ready to recieve you, but you still perish.

The scripture uses the phrase "without excuse" in Romans 1:20 "For the invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen, being perceived through the things that are made, even his everlasting power and divinity; that they may be without excuse:"
The scripture tells us why men are without excuse and it has nothing to do with being offered a free gift or being ransomed. Romans 1:20 has to do with natural revelation. Men are without excuse because of natural revelation.

But natural revelation they couldn't respond to. If some response was expected to the natural revelation, then it would seem the natural conclusion is that some response is possible.

However, I would not agree that this natural thinking is scriptural. Mankind deserves no more chance than a guilty murder-rapist. We are guilty due to original sin, Adam's sin, and also our own rebellion and sin. I think at the presuppositional level, this is the great difference between reformed theology, and non-reformed theology.

I woiuld agree with that- that it's the big difference at the presuppositional level. Mankind doesn't deserve a chance, but that doesn't mean mankind wasn't given a chance. That's the great miracle of God's mercy; that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Can it really be called rebellion and sin when I don't have a choice? If the person cannot rebel, what are they rebelling against?

Anology-- As an illustration, in antibellium south, the slave was under bondage to the master. After the civil war, the slave was free. But some slaves stayed on the plantation and served their former master. That did not mean they were not legally free. The law said they were free and they were free. So are those under the blood of Christ. It is true that it is folly and stupidity to be a slave to sin when we are free because the divine judge and lawmaker made us free. So then, there is no such thing as staying in slavery when under the blood. There is wrong behavior and practice which acts as if we are in slavery, but the actual legal slavery is broken by the power of the blood.

I would agree- if you were under the blood from the moment of Christ's death on the cross. But if you believe that repentance and faith is necessary to be under the blood, then one would still be a slave until the slavery was broken.

I read what twin1954 said and would agree with what he does with 1 John 2:2. He goes after the word propitiation. Before defining the terms "whole world" one should define the term propitiation.
The non-Reformed understanding would be something like this--- a propitiation is a sacrifice that makes a hypothetical possibility of turning away Gods wrath from the person. Such a definition does not exist. Use any lexicon you wish and let me know if you can find such a definition. The term is talking about an actual gift that actually does turn away the wrath of God.

Again, I am going to ask you to look at the language in verse 1. Christ blood not only propitiates the wrath of God, but Christ is an "advocate with the Father." So then Christ advocates with the Father trying to get the Father's wrath not to abide upon unbelievers? I wonder how that works? Christ advocated for unbelievers?

I think it's a matter of application, not efficacy, that is the debate. At the same time I see what you're saying. I believe Christ advocated for unbelievers because we were all unbelievers. Either He did, or He didn't advocate for us at all. Again, it's the "while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us".
I can understand, though, why it would be problematic to think that any part of Christ's work on the cross was incomplete in any way. And I've never thought about the problem of how Christ's sacrifice was applied before.

The point is that the terms "all" and "whole world" are commonly used not to speak of the whole human race without exception, but just to speak of all kinds of people, or a certain people. The terms "all" and "whole world"are very dependent upon context. In the two context you mentioned so far, you have other atonement concepts such as mediator or advocate that contextually should only be applied to believers.

I agree that context is very important. I also agree there are verses that say "many" like this verse from Romans 5:

"15 But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man’s trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift by the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many. 16 And the free gift is not like the result of that one man’s sin. For the judgment following one trespass brought condemnation, but the free gift following many trespasses brought justification. 17 For if, because of one man’s trespass, death reigned through that one man, much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and the free gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man Jesus Christ."

Thank you for being patient with me. It's very strange trying to think about some of these concepts.

 

[twin1954]

Something I wrote a while back.
Particular Redemption

Let me begin by saying I am not very fond of the term “limited atonement’. All but Universalists limit the atonement in some way. I prefer the term “Particular Redemption” as it speaks more plainly to the teaching of the Scriptures and leaves less room for misunderstanding. I will take as my text John 10:11. I am the Good Shepherd: the Good Shepherd giveth His life for the sheep. Now if that were the only passage of Holy Scripture that speaks to the doctrine of a definite and particular redemption we would still be bound to believe what it says. There seems to me to be absolutely no wriggle room in this statement by our Lord.
I want to speak to this issue from 3 perspectives as the Scriptures speak: Christ as our Surety, Christ as our sin bearer and Christ as our substitute. It is my purpose to show how and why we can trust Christ’s work for all our salvation.
A proper understanding of the atonement of Christ is crucial to the Gospel. There really is no Gospel without it. Let me see if I can explain: The good news of the Gospel lies in the truth of what Christ accomplished on the cross. Either He, by His death, actually accomplished redemption for someone or His death really means nothing. Where is the good news in an atonement that didn’t atone? Where is the wonderful message in a redemption that that didn’t redeem? How can a sinner look to a Savior with confidence who didn’t actually save? The only hope a sinner can have is that Christ did actually make an atonement for his sin. This is the ground of assurance we preach and believe. Our hope is in the finished work of the Savior.
Now our text says that the Good Shepherd gives His life for the sheep. No one took His life, they had neither the authority nor power to do so, He gave it up for the sheep. He repeats the fact that He lays down His life for the sheep again in verse 15 of John 10. He makes it even more plain in verses 17and 18 of the same chapter. He told Pilate that he had no power over Him unless it was given him from above. (John 19:11) Christ laying down His life for the sheep was a voluntary act on His part. There was no force or coercion involved. Infinite love and fathomless mercy toward the sheep moved Him to act.

A question?
This brings us to a question: How is it possible that Christ could voluntarily lay down His life for the sheep? It is true that no court in the world would allow such a thing. No righteous judge could possibly put to death an innocent person. God says in Proverbs 17:15, He that justifieth the wicked and he that condemeth the just, even they both are an abomination to God. How then can God be righteous and put to death that One who was holy, harmless, undefiled and separate from sinners? The answer rests in the fact that the Lord Jesus Christ was no mere man. A mere man has no authority to lay down his life because his life doesn’t belong to him. All men answer to a higher authority, God, and have no right to give that which doesn’t belong to them. That isn’t the case with Christ. As God, He has every right over His own life and may give it as He pleases. He alone is able to lay down His life for the sheep. The word translated power in John 10:18 is authority.
Are you still with me? I know I have taken the long way around to get here but I believe it was necessary to lay a foundation in order to properly grasp the meaning of Scripture when it speaks of Christ’s atonement. So with what has been already said in mind lets now look at 3 ways the Bible speaks of Christ. I hope to answer the question as to how God can righteously put to death His darling Son in the place of chosen sinners. Once that has been answered we are able to see that the death of Christ on the cross was for the sheep alone.

Continued:

 

[twin1954]

Continued:

A Sin Bearer.
Next I want us to look at Christ the sin bearer. There are several passages of Scripture that speak of Christ bearing sin. Probably the most well known is Isa 53. In verse 6 we read that the Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all. In verse 11 we read that He shall justify many for He shall bear their iniquities. And in verse 12 we read He bare the sin of many. In what way did Christ bear sin?
Sin incurs guilt. If I rob a bank it makes no difference whether I am caught I am still guilty of bank robbery. I have committed a crime and deserve the just reward of my deed. I bear the guilt for my crime. Peter tells us in 1Pet. 2:24 that Christ bore our sins in His own body on the tree. The great mass of guilt that was the burden of all the elect of God He took upon Himself. He bore it as a burden that was His own. He suffered under the heavy weight of it. The guilt of sin was imputed to Him in an act of justice. We read that the Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all. A transfer was made from the sinner to the Savior. (Remember what I said about Christ being the only one who has the authority to do such a thing) We have this typified for us in the scapegoat. Lev. 15:21,22
We read that Aaron shall lay both his hands on the head of the scapegoat
confessing the sin of the people putting them on the head of the goat typifying a transfer of guilt. In verse 22 we find that the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities. The scapegoat is then led away by the hands of a fit man (I love the way the KJV puts it) into the wilderness and let go never to be seen again. In the same way Christ, as our scapegoat bearing the sin of His people, has born sin away so thoroughly that God says of it that it shall be looked for but shall not be found. Jer. 50:20 He bore it away as far as the East is from the West. How far is that? North meets South at the poles but East never meets West. You may travel East forever without ever traveling West. He has removed our sin so completely that even God who sees everywhere can’t find it. He carried it away in His own body on the tree, blotting out the handwriting of ordinances against us taking it out of the way nailing it to His cross. In Hebrews 1:3 we read that He has (notice it is past tense) purged our sins. That means it is completely removed and no longer exists. When you purge something not even a small remnant of it remains. It is gone. Even the sin that I do today and will do tomorrow is gone. Christ bore it away.

A Subsitute.
Next is Christ our substitute. The passage that speaks to this is 2Cor. 5:21. I will be the first to admit that the word substitute isn’t in the Scriptures but certainly the idea is. 2Co 5:19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. 20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God. 21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him. An old preacher friend of mine once said, “ God must first do something for Himself before He can ever do something for the sinner.” We said earlier that sin incurs guilt. There is something else that sin incurs; it incurs the wrath of a holy and just God. He cannot just overlook and forgive sin. We are able to do that because we are ourselves sinners in need of forgiveness. He has sworn and will not go back that the soul that sins must die, Ezek. 18:4. Strict unbending justice demands the death of the sinner and before mercy can be granted justice must be satisfied. If God were to be merciful and forgive sin without satisfying the demand of strict justice He would cease to be God. His holiness and righteousness would fall to the ground. In Psa 85:10 we read that mercy and truth are met together; righteousness and peace have kissed each other. There is only one way this can ever take place: in Christ our substitute. God hath made Him to be sin for us!
Can it be true? Was Christ made to be sin? Yes it is because He was. Remember what we said about no righteous judge putting an innocent man to death? The act of imputation that took place was no mere pasting on but a transfer of guilt. He didn’t just carry our sin it became His. He took it as His own and died under the wrath of God because of it. With one tremendous draft of love, He drank damnation dry. Again I refer you to 1Pet. 2:24. We read that He bore our sin in His own body on the tree not on His body. Psalm 40 is generally accepted as a Messianic Psalm. It is interpreted as Christ speaking. Hear what He says in verse 12: Psa 40:12 For innumerable evils have compassed me about: mine iniquities have taken hold upon me, so that I am not able to look up; they are more than the hairs of mine head: therefore my heart faileth me
The Lord our Savior Jesus Christ satisfied all the demands of justice against the sin of all for whom He was the substitute. He stood in their place and suffered as a sinner until wrath was spent and could no longer rise up against His people. God can never again punish any for whom Christ was the substitute. God can never be wrathful against any sinner for whom Christ died. He may, in love, chastise and correct them but never again punish them. God did something for Himself in order to be merciful to sinners. He exhausted His wrath against the sin of His elect and satisfied His strict justice in a perfect substitute.

Conclusion.
There are more ways that Christ is spoken of in the Scriptures having to do with atonement by Him that I haven’t dealt with: propitiation, redemption, ransom, Passover, sacrifice, the Lamb of God and Jehovah’s Servant. All of which, when properly understood, speak of Him doing something for a particular people. Christ laid down His life for the sheep. There are no hypotheticals involved. As the Surety of His people He made their debt His. As their sin bearer He has removed their sin. As their substitute He stood in their place and put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. By His own blood He entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption. Heb. 9:12
In light of these things the objections raised pale by reason of the glorious truth that Christ is the Savior.

 

[worshipjunkie]

A proper understanding of the atonement of Christ is crucial to the Gospel. There really is no Gospel without it. Let me see if I can explain: The good news of the Gospel lies in the truth of what Christ accomplished on the cross. Either He, by His death, actually accomplished redemption for someone or His death really means nothing. Where is the good news in an atonement that didn’t atone? Where is the wonderful message in a redemption that that didn’t redeem? How can a sinner look to a Savior with confidence who didn’t actually save? The only hope a sinner can have is that Christ did actually make an atonement for his sin. This is the ground of assurance we preach and believe. Our hope is in the finished work of the Savior.

I'm not trying to sound argumentative, and I've been poorly wording it when I've tried to explain it, but I have to admit to not understanding this. I don't understand why Christ winning a salvation that only becomes applicable on our acceptance of it, on our repentance, means that nothing got accomplished and His death means nothing. Having bought our salvation with His blood, it is certainly up to Him to decide under which criteria it's given to the human race. Calvinists say it's the elect, and Arminians say the repentant. If I have a million dollars which I will give to anyone who asks, but they have to ask, and they don't, it doesn't mean I have any less money or any less ability to give it.

If the idea is that He had to have actually completed His work in some for it to be achieved, wouldn't that include sanctification as well? Wouldn't a fully complete work be from regeneration to sanctification. After all, Romans 8: 30 says "And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified." Or is simply the promise of final perseverance- that the elect cannot lose their salvation- considered complete?

 

[worshipjunkie]

The Lord our Savior Jesus Christ satisfied all the demands of justice against the sin of all for whom He was the substitute. He stood in their place and suffered as a sinner until wrath was spent and could no longer rise up against His people. God can never again punish any for whom Christ was the substitute. God can never be wrathful against any sinner for whom Christ died. He may, in love, chastise and correct them but never again punish them. God did something for Himself in order to be merciful to sinners. He exhausted His wrath against the sin of His elect and satisfied His strict justice in a perfect substitute....All of which, when properly understood, speak of Him doing something for a particular people. Christ laid down His life for the sheep. There are no hypotheticals involved. As the Surety of His people He made their debt His. As their sin bearer He has removed their sin. As their substitute He stood in their place and put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself. By His own blood He entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption. Heb. 9:12
In light of these things the objections raised pale by reason of the glorious truth that Christ is the Savior.

I have to admit I have not been able to find one argument or verse that states that Christ's salvation is anything but a finished work- nor did I expect to. Everything you wrote seems Biblical and clear. But can't it be a finished work even if it is not accepted by all who it was done for?

What about the non-elect, those created for eternal damnation? This all sounds beautiful, and it would be if we were talking about this for people who truly chose to be either elect or non-elect, but my election comes at the cost of so many going to hell through no fault of their own. In what sense can Christ have been said to have loved the world? It also means that God just randomly chose me, that there was nothing about me that led Him to love me. I happened to get the right number in the lottery and that's all. I realize I didn't do anything to earn His choice or His love, but I'd like to think it was more then just a chance passing over or picking. I'd like to think that someone loves me for who I am.

That being said, I can see the strong Biblical case for limited atonement. And I can see the practical problem unlimited atonement leaves: in what sense did Christ's sacrifice actually accomplish what it was meant to do. I have not found any verses that state that Christ's atonement is applied upon believing. I've found "repent and believe", "repent and be baptized", "believe and be saved", but nothing about Christ's atonement being kind of latent until the person believes.
I have found verses that seem to make a point of stating that Christ's death was for all, believers and unbelievers.

1 Timothy 4:10—"For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe."

2 Peter 3:9- "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one has died for all, therefore all have died;15 and he died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised.(2 Corinthians 5:14-15)

I Timothy is the one that seems the most compelling to me. But I'm really not trying to throw more Bible verses into the equation- that's not a good tactic. I'm just trying to talk out my thoughts, I guess. I've read a couple of books on this now and lots of articles, and I would have never thought the Calvinistic case was so Biblically strong. You guys have been able to explain your point of view on this far better then I have mine. This is probably the weakest argument I've ever given for anything.
But I find it repulsive. Just the unconditional election. If people got to choose, then I would even be fine with limited atonement. But the idea that people are created without their will, passed over without their choice or ability, and damned without their choice or ability; that goes against everything I've ever believed about God, who desires that none perish.

 

[twin1954]

I have to admit I have not been able to find one argument or verse that states that Christ's salvation is anything but a finished work- nor did I expect to. Everything you wrote seems Biblical and clear. But can't it be a finished work even if it is not accepted by all who it was done for?

I am sorry but it just can’t be. If the sinner has to accept it then the sinner finishes the work of atonement by his acceptance. if One simple and minute thing is left for the sinner to do then none would be saved. We will not come to Christ that we might have life. We think we are fine the way we are.

What about the non-elect, those created for eternal damnation? This all sounds beautiful, and it would be if we were talking about this for people who truly chose to be either elect or non-elect, but my election comes at the cost of so many going to hell through no fault of their own. In what sense can Christ have been said to have loved the world? It also means that God just randomly chose me, that there was nothing about me that led Him to love me. I happened to get the right number in the lottery and that's all. I realize I didn't do anything to earn His choice or His love, but I'd like to think it was more then just a chance passing over or picking. I'd like to think that someone loves me for who I am.

This paragraph tells me a great deal. Is this what you have been taught? I am not sure where to start. First let me be clear: I am not trying to make a Calvinist out of you. If I did so all that I would be doing is get you to change your theology but will have done your soul no real good. I am interested in showing you the things of Christ not the theological concepts of Calvinism.

The first thing you need to see is who God is. He is not just the Creator but the King who rules with authority and power. He is supreme, self sufficient, sovereign and self satisfied. Here is a link to a couple of books that you should probably read.
The Attributes of God

https://www.eternallifeministries.org/awp_sov.pdf

You also need to find out who man is. Once you see who God is in truth then you will see that man is a worm, maggot, and drink iniquity like water. Please read Isa. 40:12-26.

Isaiah 40:12-26 (KJV) 12 Who hath measured the waters in the hollow of his hand, and meted out heaven with the span, and comprehended the dust of the earth in a measure, and weighed the mountains in scales, and the hills in a balance? 13 Who hath directed the Spirit of the LORD, or [being] his counsellor hath taught him? 14 With whom took he counsel, and [who] instructed him, and taught him in the path of judgment, and taught him knowledge, and shewed to him the way of understanding? 15 Behold, the nations [are] as a drop of a bucket, and are counted as the small dust of the balance: behold, he taketh up the isles as a very little thing. 16 And Lebanon [is] not sufficient to burn, nor the beasts thereof sufficient for a burnt offering. 17 All nations before him [are] as nothing; and they are counted to him less than nothing, and vanity. 18 To whom then will ye liken God? or what likeness will ye compare unto him? 19 The workman melteth a graven image, and the goldsmith spreadeth it over with gold, and casteth silver chains. 20 He that [is] so impoverished that he hath no oblation chooseth a tree [that] will not rot; he seeketh unto him a cunning workman to prepare a graven image, [that] shall not be moved. 21 Have ye not known? have ye not heard? hath it not been told you from the beginning? have ye not understood from the foundations of the earth? 22 [It is] he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof [are] as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in: 23 That bringeth the princes to nothing; he maketh the judges of the earth as vanity. 24 Yea, they shall not be planted; yea, they shall not be sown: yea, their stock shall not take root in the earth: and he shall also blow upon them, and they shall wither, and the whirlwind shall take them away as stubble. 25 To whom then will ye liken me, or shall I be equal? saith the Holy One. 26 Lift up your eyes on high, and behold who hath created these [things], that bringeth out their host by number: he calleth them all by names by the greatness of his might, for that [he is] strong in power; not one faileth.

Man is as the dust that they didn’t even bother to brush off because it didn’t make a difference in the scales. They are as nothing compared to God. Like the grasshoppers that infest the field.

Now look at Dan.4:33-36:

Daniel 4:33-35 (KJV) 33 The same hour was the thing fulfilled upon Nebuchadnezzar: and he was driven from men, and did eat grass as oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven, till his hairs were grown like eagles' [feathers], and his nails like birds' [claws]. 34 And at the end of the days I Nebuchadnezzar lifted up mine eyes unto heaven, and mine understanding returned unto me, and I blessed the most High, and I praised and honoured him that liveth for ever, whose dominion [is] an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom [is] from generation to generation: 35 And all the inhabitants of the earth [are] reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and [among] the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?

Your comments about people going to Hell through no fault of their own and being created for damnation are way off. If you understood that man not only is a sinner in Adam but one in practice because of his depraved will and deserves all that eternal damnation brings you couldn’t say such a thing. Moreover your idea that the Lord saw something in you to draw His love speaks volumes about ill informed you are. You have been taught to think highly of man and very lowly of God. We will work to make you better informed.

That being said, I can see the strong Biblical case for limited atonement. And I can see the practical problem unlimited atonement leaves: in what sense did Christ's sacrifice actually accomplish what it was meant to do. I have not found any verses that state that Christ's atonement is applied upon believing. I've found "repent and believe", "repent and be baptized", "believe and be saved", but nothing about Christ's atonement being kind of latent until the person believes.
I have found verses that seem to make a point of stating that Christ's death was for all, believers and unbelievers.

1 Timothy 4:10—"For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe."

2 Peter 3:9- "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one has died for all, therefore all have died;15 and he died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised.(2 Corinthians 5:14-15)

I Timothy is the one that seems the most compelling to me. But I'm really not trying to throw more Bible verses into the equation- that's not a good tactic. I'm just trying to talk out my thoughts, I guess. I've read a couple of books on this now and lots of articles, and I would have never thought the Calvinistic case was so Biblically strong. You guys have been able to explain your point of view on this far better then I have mine. This is probably the weakest argument I've ever given for anything.
But I find it repulsive. Just the unconditional election. If people got to choose, then I would even be fine with limited atonement. But the idea that people are created without their will, passed over without their choice or ability, and damned without their choice or ability; that goes against everything I've ever believed about God, who desires that none perish.

Noneof the conditions that you speak of actually occur or even exists. Man is not created without a choice. God made Adam and He put him in the Garden with one simple rule: don’t eat of the fruit of the tree off knowledge of good and evil. God entered into a covenant with Adam. Now Adam was our Federal head as in our representative head a type of Christ. Whatever he did was counted as though we did it in him. Now we read in 2Tim. 2:14 that Adam wasn’t deceived. It is therefore a simple conclusion that Adam took of the fruit knowing full well what would happen. When he did we sinned in him and the Fall affected us all. But because we are children of Adam we are born with a nature that loves sin. That is why we are without ability to come to Christ. But the Bible doesn’t stress our inability but our wicked will. The reprobate wouldn’t come if he could. We love our sin too much to come to Christ. Oh we will come to religion but not to Christ. We will not bow before Him and take our place in the dust at His feet. Our will is bent to evil and our depraved minds conjure up a god that we can worship. We will not worship the one true God of the Bible. Therefore it isn’t that man has no choice but that he chooses sin over salvation. I know of men who went to church and heard the Gospel of the free and sovereign grace of God in Christ Jesus the Lord every time. They sat and counted the tiles in the ceiling and were satisfied that they had fulfilled their duty to worship God. But one day the Gospel preached I the power of God reached their hearts and they actually heard the Gospel. That is what happens when a chosen sinner finds his need of Christ by the new birth. The rest aren’t condemned because they weren’t of the elect but because they are sinners without Christ. God’s electing love is absolutely amazing because He didn’t have to save any of us. But He wrapped up His glory in the salvation of chosen sinners in Christ Jesus the Lord.

I'm not trying to sound argumentative, and I've been poorly wording it when I've tried to explain it, but I have to admit to not understanding this. I don't understand why Christ winning a salvation that only becomes applicable on our acceptance of it, on our repentance, means that nothing got accomplished and His death means nothing. Having bought our salvation with His blood, it is certainly up to Him to decide under which criteria it's given to the human race. Calvinists say it's the elect, and Arminians say the repentant. If I have a million dollars which I will give to anyone who asks, but they have to ask, and they don't, it doesn't mean I have any less money or any less ability to give it.

If you have a million dollars to give away is it not your right to give it to whom you will and withhold it from whom you will? None deserve it plus everyone hates you and does all they can to destroy you. That would be the analogy that fits. Remember the Gospel isn’t God offers but God gives salvation by grace. An offer makes man the one who is in control and God must wait on man to do his part. But the true Gospel preaches a crucified Christ that has actually saved sinners. It is good news because it tells of a Savior that did what He set out to do. He saved sinners. If you can believe and look to Him alone for all that is both required and freely given then you are a saved sinner. God has set His electing love on you.

If the idea is that He had to have actually completed His work in some for it to be achieved, wouldn't that include sanctification as well? Wouldn't a fully complete work be from regeneration to sanctification. After all, Romans 8: 30 says "And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified." Or is simply the promise of final perseverance- that the elect cannot lose their salvation- considered complete?

it does include sanctification. This is getting far too long and I apologize.

 

[Don Maurer]

What about the non-elect, those created for eternal damnation? This all sounds beautiful, and it would be if we were talking about this for people who truly chose to be either elect or non-elect, but my election comes at the cost of so many going to hell through no fault of their own.

worshipjunkie, you seem like a pretty good chap, I hope you do not mind me jumping back in again. I am reading and following, but the bolded and underlined statement was shocking and it is the exact opposite of Reformed or Calvinistic thinking. If one is not elected, it is totally and completely their own fault. If one is elected to salvation, it is through no fault of their own.

In what sense can Christ have been said to have loved the world? ((we call it common grace)) It also means that God just randomly chose me, that there was nothing about me that led Him to love me. ((Exactly-- Nothing at all)) I happened to get the right number in the lottery and that's all. I realize I didn't do anything to earn His choice or His love, but I'd like to think it was more then just a chance passing over or picking. I'd like to think that someone loves me for who I am. (( If I can say, I feel your pain, its a bummer that we have no merit at all.... the problem is that the scriptures are clear and teach that there is nothing in us worthwhile... Romans 9:11 for the children being not yet born, neither having done anything good or bad, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth, it was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. Even as it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.)) God hated Esau before his birth?

That being said, I can see the strong Biblical case for limited atonement. And I can see the practical problem unlimited atonement leaves: in what sense did Christ's sacrifice actually accomplish what it was meant to do. I have not found any verses that state that Christ's atonement is applied upon believing. I've found "repent and believe", "repent and be baptized", "believe and be saved", but nothing about Christ's atonement being kind of latent until the person believes.
I have found verses that seem to make a point of stating that Christ's death was for all, believers and unbelievers.

1 Timothy 4:10—"For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe."
This verse does not have a big context, but not the limited extent of the verse in the pronoun "we." We labor... we trust... It is the we that Paul is referring to as all men."
* If I am in a Christ and say "I will buy all men a hamburger after the service." I would not be referring to all mankind, but all in the services. Paul is using the term "all men" in the same way. He is speaking of those who believe.

2 Peter 3:9- "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."
* Again a context issue. Follow the pronouns. God is longsuffering to "us." The pronoun can then follow the verbs... Not willing that any of us should perish, but that all of us should come to repentance.

Gotta go, thats my 2C

For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one has died for all, therefore all have died;15 and he died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for him who for their sake died and was raised.(2 Corinthians 5:14-15)

I Timothy is the one that seems the most compelling to me. But I'm really not trying to throw more Bible verses into the equation- that's not a good tactic. I'm just trying to talk out my thoughts, I guess. I've read a couple of books on this now and lots of articles, and I would have never thought the Calvinistic case was so Biblically strong. You guys have been able to explain your point of view on this far better then I have mine. This is probably the weakest argument I've ever given for anything.
But I find it repulsive. Just the unconditional election. If people got to choose, then I would even be fine with limited atonement. But the idea that people are created without their will, passed over without their choice or ability, and damned without their choice or ability; that goes against everything I've ever believed about God, who desires that none perish.

 

[worshipjunkie]

This paragraph tells me a great deal. Is this what you have been taught? I am not sure where to start. First let me be clear: I am not trying to make a Calvinist out of you. If I did so all that I would be doing is get you to change your theology but will have done your soul no real good. I am interested in showing you the things of Christ not the theological concepts of Calvinism.

The first thing you need to see is who God is. He is not just the Creator but the King who rules with authority and power. He is supreme, self sufficient, sovereign and self satisfied. Here is a link to a couple of books that you should probably read.
The Attributes of God

Picked up rather then taught. I can't blame anyone for my bad theology but me. I've bounced around a lot, as you can see from my OP, but probably my major theological influence comes from my years as a traditional Catholic.

I got the above recommended book (it's on Kindle for 1.99) I just haven't read it yet. I'll have to do that.

You also need to find out who man is. Once you see who God is in truth then you will see that man is a worm, maggot, and drink iniquity like water.....
Your comments about people going to Hell through no fault of their own and being created for damnation are way off. If you understood that man not only is a sinner in Adam but one in practice because of his depraved will and deserves all that eternal damnation brings you couldn’t say such a thing. Moreover your idea that the Lord saw something in you to draw His love speaks volumes about ill informed you are. You have been taught to think highly of man and very lowly of God. We will work to make you better informed.

But his depraved will is at least maintained by God, right? Since God chose to pass him by he has no control over what he is. That's what I don't get.
Not that God saw something in me to draw His love- that was ill worded. I realize we are in the exact situation God describes in Ezekiel 16. But not that it was just random either. That God created you and loves you as you- that you are irreplaceable to Him. That He sees who you will become in Christ. That He sees you as someone His Son died for. That if you would have been the only one who would be saved, Christ still would have done everything exactly the same for you. When I was in school we'd choose for PE teams by everyone lining up and then we'd take turns going down the line saying "one", "two", "one", "two". All the ones ended up on one team and the twos on another. Surely God's love for us, surely redemption isn't like that, is it?

None of the conditions that you speak of actually occur or even exists. Man is not created without a choice. God made Adam and He put him in the Garden with one simple rule: don’t eat of the fruit of the tree off knowledge of good and evil. God entered into a covenant with Adam. Now Adam was our Federal head as in our representative head a type of Christ. Whatever he did was counted as though we did it in him. Now we read in 2 Tim. 2:14 that Adam wasn’t deceived. It is therefore a simple conclusion that Adam took of the fruit knowing full well what would happen. When he did we sinned in him and the Fall affected us all. But because we are children of Adam we are born with a nature that loves sin. That is why we are without ability to come to Christ. But the Bible doesn’t stress our inability but our wicked will. The reprobate wouldn’t come if he could. We love our sin too much to come to Christ. Oh we will come to religion but not to Christ. We will not bow before Him and take our place in the dust at His feet. Our will is bent to evil and our depraved minds conjure up a god that we can worship. We will not worship the one true God of the Bible. Therefore it isn’t that man has no choice but that he chooses sin over salvation.

Something's bothering me about the above but I can't put my finger on it. It seems like a definition of original sin that both Calvinists and non-Calvinists would accept. Maybe that's it; maybe I've never thought through the implications of original sin like that. I've always known and believed we shared in Adam's guilt, and I've always believed that every part of our being is corrupted by original sin. But I've never believed that prevented you from choosing Christ. I've believed that God still maintained the ability for guilty sinners to come and not only that but gave them the grace to do so. I guess, though, that would basically mean original sin didn't affect us very much at all if every part of us can be corrupted and yet we can still make the right choice.

If you have a million dollars to give away is it not your right to give it to whom you will and withhold it from whom you will? None deserve it plus everyone hates you and does all they can to destroy you. That would be the analogy that fits. Remember the Gospel isn’t God offers but God gives salvation by grace. An offer makes man the one who is in control and God must wait on man to do his part. But the true Gospel preaches a crucified Christ that has actually saved sinners. It is good news because it tells of a Savior that did what He set out to do. He saved sinners. If you can believe and look to Him alone for all that is both required and freely given then you are a saved sinner. God has set His electing love on you.

In strict justice, yes, it's my right. But mercy would seem to do something different. I would never do that to my kids, for instance. Even if they all hated me. If one loved me and the rest hated me, then yes, but no one loves God in a state of original sin. But it is my right to do so, I must admit.
Yes, I can believe and look to Him alone for all that is both required and freely given. He certainly did it all; I did nothing but mess things up and sin and reject Him. He left the 99 and came after me. He did for me what He did in Ezekiel 16. And my response should be as in these verses from 62-63. "I will establish my covenant with you, and you shall know that I am the LORD, that you may remember and be confounded, and never open your mouth again because of your shame, when I atone for you for all that you have done, declares the Lord GOD.”

 

[twin1954]

worshipjunkie, you seem like a pretty good chap, I hope you do not mind me jumping back in again. I am reading and following, but the bolded and underlined statement was shocking and it is the exact opposite of Reformed or Calvinistic thinking. If one is not elected, it is totally and completely their own fault. If one is elected to salvation, it is through no fault of their own.

She is a female.

 

[worshipjunkie]

worshipjunkie, you seem like a pretty good chap, I hope you do not mind me jumping back in again. I am reading and following, but the bolded and underlined statement was shocking and it is the exact opposite of Reformed or Calvinistic thinking. If one is not elected, it is totally and completely their own fault. If one is elected to salvation, it is through no fault of their own.

No, I don't mind at all. I appreciate everyone's patience while I try to grasp this. Ok, I guess I don't understand how it can be their own fault when nothing about them led to being not one of the elect. Person A is elect, Person B is not; there is no intrinsic difference between person A and B, so why is Person A chosen and Person B is not when both are equally guilty?

If I can say, I feel your pain, its a bummer that we have no merit at all.... the problem is that the scriptures are clear and teach that there is nothing in us worthwhile... Romans 9:11 for the children being not yet born, neither having done anything good or bad, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth, it was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. Even as it is written, Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated. God hated Esau before his birth?

I've always been taught that God loves us with a personal, and not an impersonal love. Not that there is anything in us worthwhile, but that God knows us and loves us as who we are. Not that God loves me in the sense of "God loves mankind and I am part of mankind" but "God loves a bunch of individuals who make up mankind, therefore God loves mankind." Does that make sense? Think Psalm 139. I'm not going to quote it because it's too long, but that's the way I'm thinking of when I think of God's love for us- for me. When I think "God loves me"; that's what I'm thinking of.

"1 Timothy 4:10—"For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe."
This verse does not have a big context, but not the limited extent of the verse in the pronoun "we." We labor... we trust... It is the we that Paul is referring to as all men."
* If I am in a Christ and say "I will buy all men a hamburger after the service." I would not be referring to all mankind, but all in the services. Paul is using the term "all men" in the same way. He is speaking of those who believe."

If he is speaking of those who believe, then how come the "Especially those who believe" part. It seems like if he was referring to "we" there would be no need to emphasize the believers, because of course Paul and Timothy believe. The most obvious meaning seems to be that God is the Savior of all men, but in a special way of those who believe. The context seems to be a saying Timothy should accept. "6 If you put these things before the brothers, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, being trained in the words of the faith and of the good doctrine that you have followed. 7 Have nothing to do with irreverent, silly myths. Rather train yourself for godliness; 8 for while bodily training is of some value, godliness is of value in every way, as it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come. 9 The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance. 10 For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe." (I Timothy 4: 6-10)"

 

[twin1954]

Picked up rather then taught. I can't blame anyone for my bad theology but me. I've bounced around a lot, as you can see from my OP, but probably my major theological influence comes from my years as a traditional Catholic.

I see. That explains it.

I got the above recommended book (it's on Kindle for 1.99) I just haven't read it yet. I'll have to do that.

The links were to the books free online if you want. Author Pink wrote several good books but these 2 are the best to begin with. I usually recommend the second book first but it seemed as though you needed the one I linked to first. Many of his books are on Kindle, some for just .99. You can get the second one for that price.
https://www.amazon.com/Sovereignty-...ur+pink&qid=1555097569&s=digital-text&sr=1-30

But his depraved will is at least maintained by God, right? Since God chose to pass him by he has no control over what he is. That's what I don't get.

We are not robots or puppets. We do exactly as we want to while doing exactly what God has ordained for us to do. Man can choose to do things that serve others and things that are good to the world’s view but he does them for the wrong reasons. He wants that pat on the back and for people to think him a good person.

Not that God saw something in me to draw His love- that was ill worded. I realize we are in the exact situation God describes in Ezekiel 16. But not that it was just random either. That God created you and loves you as you- that you are irreplaceable to Him.

If you read Isa. 40 you can see how irreplaceable you are. We add nothing to God. He doesn’t need us in any way. That is why I wrote earlier that He is self sufficient and self satisfied. He chose to create not because we add something to Him that He didn’t have before He created us. He created us simply because it was His will to do so.

That He sees who you will become in Christ. That He sees you as someone His Son died for. That if you would have been the only one who would be saved, Christ still would have done everything exactly the same for you. When I was in school we'd choose for PE teams by everyone lining up and then we'd take turns going down the line saying "one", "two", "one", "two". All the ones ended up on one team and the twos on another. Surely God's love for us, surely redemption isn't like that, is it?

God doesn’t look down through time to see what will happen because if He did then He would learn something He didn’t already know and would be reacting to what He learned. That would mean that He can change and we couldn’t trust Him. God doesn’t plan He purposes. He purposed to glorify Himself in sovereign mercy and electing love in Christ Jesus the Lord. He now brings to pass all that is required to wisely make His purpose happen. We exist to serve His purpose, both the elect and the reprobate. It is all about Him not us.
Colossians 1:18 (KJV) And he is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all [things] he might have the preeminence.
Christ is the glory of God.
2 Corinthians 4:3-6 (KJV) 3 But if our gospel be hid, it is hid to them that are lost: 4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them. 5 For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake. 6 For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to [give] the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

Something's bothering me about the above but I can't put my finger on it. It seems like a definition of original sin that both Calvinists and non-Calvinists would accept. Maybe that's it; maybe I've never thought through the implications of original sin like that. I've always known and believed we shared in Adam's guilt, and I've always believed that every part of our being is corrupted by original sin. But I've never believed that prevented you from choosing Christ. I've believed that God still maintained the ability for guilty sinners to come and not only that but gave them the grace to do so. I guess, though, that would basically mean original sin didn't affect us very much at all if every part of us can be corrupted and yet we can still make the right choice.

Good thinking.

In strict justice, yes, it's my right. But mercy would seem to do something different. I would never do that to my kids, for instance. Even if they all hated me. If one loved me and the rest hated me, then yes, but no one loves God in a state of original sin. But it is my right to do so, I must admit.

We are not all God’s children. Those whom He chose in electing love become His children.
Ephesians 1:3-6 (KJV) 3 Blessed [be] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly [places] in Christ: 4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: 5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will, 6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

Yes, I can believe and look to Him alone for all that is both required and freely given. He certainly did it all; I did nothing but mess things up and sin and reject Him. He left the 99 and came after me. He did for me what He did in Ezekiel 16. And my response should be as in these verses from 62-63. "I will establish my covenant with you, and you shall know that I am the LORD, that you may remember and be confounded, and never open your mouth again because of your shame, when I atone for you for all that you have done, declares the Lord GOD.”

Wonderful! You are on the right road to the City of Refuge.

 

[worshipjunkie]

The links were to the books free online if you want. Author Pink wrote several good books but these 2 are the best to begin with. I usually recommend the second book first but it seemed as though you needed the one I linked to first. Many of his books are on Kindle, some for just .99. You can get the second one for that price.
https://www.amazon.com/Sovereignty-...ur+pink&qid=1555097569&s=digital-text&sr=1-30

Thanks for the recommendation! I had already bought the "Attributes of God" one night when I was just browsing and I've just never got around to reading it.

We are not robots or puppets. We do exactly as we want to while doing exactly what God has ordained for us to do. Man can choose to do things that serve others and things that are good to the world’s view but he does them for the wrong reasons. He wants that pat on the back and for people to think him a good person....
God doesn’t look down through time to see what will happen because if He did then He would learn something He didn’t already know and would be reacting to what He learned. That would mean that He can change and we couldn’t trust Him. God doesn’t plan He purposes. He purposed to glorify Himself in sovereign mercy and electing love in Christ Jesus the Lord. He now brings to pass all that is required to wisely make His purpose happen. We exist to serve His purpose, both the elect and the reprobate. It is all about Him not us.

I certainly agree that we do not do good for the right reasons. I am in total agreement with total depravity. I'm a psychology student and that was always enough to convince me, from a wordly perspective, of who man is. And if not, I know enough of my own heart and mind. I know my secret motivations, the words I leave unsaid, the thoughts I think when no one's around.
I never believed He looks through time; you're right, that means He learned something and is reacting to it. I believed He is all of time; kind of like C.S. Lewis' example that we see time as a line but God is the piece of paper the line is drawn on. God doesn't learn what will happen because He is there at the beginning, middle, and end of the action. Eternity past and eternity future are as the same to God...but I'm probably not wording this correctly. And in one sense if God knows something will happen He is choosing it (because He could have prevented it) just as much as if He directly willed it. If I know someone will kill someone and I do nothing I'm as guilty of the murder as if I pulled the trigger.
That must be why it has to be about His will. There's no escaping that God willed something unless you deny His omnipotence and omnipresence. It happens because He willed it. That makes sense.
"5 I am the LORD, and there is no other,
besides me there is no God;
I equip you, though you do not know me,
6 that people may know, from the rising of the sun
and from the west, that there is none besides me;
I am the LORD, and there is no other.
7 I form light and create darkness;
I make well-being and create calamity;
I am the LORD, who does all these things. (Isaiah 45:5-7)"

We are not all God’s children. Those whom He chose in electing love become His children.

You're right. I should have said we're all God's creation.

A question about that, though. If the elect will come no matter what, and the reprobate will not come no matter what, then why evangelize? Why did God command it? Why did so many risk their lives for it? It seems like you no longer have to worry about countries without Bibles and churches, because the outcome will be the same no matter what.

 

[twin1954]

No, I don't mind at all. I appreciate everyone's patience while I try to grasp this.

Love is patient love is kind.

Ok, I guess I don't understand how it can be their own fault when nothing about them led to being not one of the elect. Person A is elect, Person B is not; there is no intrinsic difference between person A and B, so why is Person A chosen and Person B is not when both are equally guilty?

Because it pleased God to do so. Again, as you state, there is no difference between the elect and the reprobate. We are all God hating sinners by nature. But God, who is rich in mercy, chose to save some who are a multitude as the sand of the sea and the stars of the sky. Notice that it doesn’t say as the sand of the sea or the stars of the sky.
Ephesians 1:7-9 (KJV) 7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace; 8 Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence; 9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:

I've always been taught that God loves us with a personal, and not an impersonal love. Not that there is anything in us worthwhile, but that God knows us and loves us as who we are. Not that God loves me in the sense of "God loves mankind and I am part of mankind" but "God loves a bunch of individuals who make up mankind, therefore God loves mankind." Does that make sense? Think Psalm 139. I'm not going to quote it because it's too long, but that's the way I'm thinking of when I think of God's love for us- for me. When I think "God loves me"; that's what I'm thinking of.

God’s love is found in Christ alone. If you are not in Christ He must hate, in a judicial sense, you. His righteousness demands it. When God says that He hates, as in Prov. 6:16 or Rom. 9:13 we must understand His hate. In the case of the reprobate and Esau we know it to mean that He simply gives them no consideration.

1If he is speaking of those who believe, then how come the "Especially those who believe" part. It seems like if he was referring to "we" there would be no need to emphasize the believers, because of course Paul and Timothy believe. The most obvious meaning seems to be that God is the Savior of all men, but in a special way of those who believe. The context seems to be a saying Timothy should accept. "6 If you put these things before the brothers, you will be a good servant of Christ Jesus, being trained in the words of the faith and of the good doctrine that you have followed. 7 Have nothing to do with irreverent, silly myths. Rather train yourself for godliness; 8 for while bodily training is of some value, godliness is of value in every way, as it holds promise for the present life and also for the life to come. 9 The saying is trustworthy and deserving of full acceptance. 10 For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Savior of all people, especially of those who believe." (I Timothy 4: 6-10)"

You might note that the word Savior there in the Greek simply means preserver. It doesn’t mean deliverer. The Lord is the Preserver of all men. He gives us life and breath. But that in no way means that He saved them from the wrath of God.

Revelation 6:15-17 (KJV) 15 And the kings of the earth, and the great men, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and every bondman, and every free man, hid themselves in the dens and in the rocks of the mountains; 16 And said to the mountains and rocks, Fall on us, and hide us from the face of him that sitteth on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb: 17 For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?

 

[twin1954]

Thanks for the recommendation! I had already bought the "Attributes of God" one night when I was just browsing and I've just never got around to reading it.




I certainly agree that we do not do good for the right reasons. I am in total agreement with total depravity. I'm a psychology student and that was always enough to convince me, from a wordly perspective, of who man is. And if not, I know enough of my own heart and mind. I know my secret motivations, the words I leave unsaid, the thoughts I think when no one's around.
I never believed He looks through time; you're right, that means He learned something and is reacting to it. I believed He is all of time; kind of like C.S. Lewis' example that we see time as a line but God is the piece of paper the line is drawn on. God doesn't learn what will happen because He is there at the beginning, middle, and end of the action. Eternity past and eternity future are as the same to God...but I'm probably not wording this correctly. And in one sense if God knows something will happen He is choosing it (because He could have prevented it) just as much as if He directly willed it. If I know someone will kill someone and I do nothing I'm as guilty of the murder as if I pulled the trigger.
That must be why it has to be about His will. There's no escaping that God willed something unless you deny His omnipotence and omnipresence. It happens because He willed it. That makes sense.
"5 I am the LORD, and there is no other,
besides me there is no God;
I equip you, though you do not know me,
6 that people may know, from the rising of the sun
and from the west, that there is none besides me;
I am the LORD, and there is no other.
7 I form light and create darkness;
I make well-being and create calamity;
I am the LORD, who does all these things. (Isaiah 45:5-7)"


You're right. I should have said we're all God's creation.

A question about that, though. If the elect will come no matter what, and the reprobate will not come no matter what, then why evangelize? Why did God command it? Why did so many risk their lives for it? It seems like you no longer have to worry about countries without Bibles and churches, because the outcome will be the same no matter what.

I am quoting the whole of your post because most of what you said in it needs no answer. You are on the right track. But the last part where you ask a question needs an answer.

We preach the Gospel of the sovereign grace of God in Christ Jesus the Lord alone because God, in His wisdom, ordained the by the foolishness of preaching to bring His loved ones to faith in Christ. We preach because we desire with all our hearts that people come to faith in Christ.

What you are describing is Hyper-Calvinism. I was raised as one but the Lord made me question why we preach and what is the Gospel. The Scripture convinced me that election is not salvation but unto salvation.
2 Thessalonians 2:13 (KJV) But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

 

[worshipjunkie]

Because it pleased God to do so. Again, as you state, there is no difference between the elect and the reprobate. We are all God hating sinners by nature. But God, who is rich in mercy, chose to save some who are a multitude as the sand of the sea and the stars of the sky. Notice that it doesn’t say as the sand of the sea or the stars of the sky.

Why not all, then? But I guess that's where we get into Romans 9.

God’s love is found in Christ alone. If you are not in Christ He must hate, in a judicial sense, you. His righteousness demands it. When God says that He hates, as in Prov. 6:16 or Rom. 9:13 we must understand His hate. In the case of the reprobate and Esau we know it to mean that He simply gives them no consideration.

That makes sense, otherwise no one would go to hell. So then is this verse referring to the elect? "But God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:8)"

We preach the Gospel of the sovereign grace of God in Christ Jesus the Lord alone because God, in His wisdom, ordained the by the foolishness of preaching to bring His loved ones to faith in Christ. We preach because we desire with all our hearts that people come to faith in Christ.

What you are describing is Hyper-Calvinism. I was raised as one but the Lord made me question why we preach and what is the Gospel. The Scripture convinced me that election is not salvation but unto salvation.
2 Thessalonians 2:13 (KJV) But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

So, in other words, it is through hearing the Gospel that grace is "triggered", for lack of a better term, and the elect come to salvation? Like in my situation, the turning point for me was reading a book I had read probably fifty times- but this time it triggered something in me and a few weeks later I repented and came to Christ (or came back to Christ, if I was saved as a child). I have heard the Gospel on and off since I was young, but for whatever reason, this one book put in me a longing to know Jesus. Would that be an example of why we preach; because we never know what God is going to use to bring a person unto salvation (that, and we don't know who the elect are, so we preach to everyone)?

 

[twin1954]

Why not all, then? But I guess that's where we get into Romans 9.

Along with many other passages.

That makes sense, otherwise no one would go to hell. So then is this verse referring to the elect? "But God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. (Romans 5:8)"

Yes. Think about who the letters are written to. They are written to believers not unbelievers. When you read words such as us and we it is talking about believers.

So, in other words, it is through hearing the Gospel that grace is "triggered", for lack of a better term, and the elect come to salvation? Like in my situation, the turning point for me was reading a book I had read probably fifty times- but this time it triggered something in me and a few weeks later I repented and came to Christ (or came back to Christ, if I was saved as a child). I have heard the Gospel on and off since I was young, but for whatever reason, this one book put in me a longing to know Jesus. Would that be an example of why we preach; because we never know what God is going to use to bring a person unto salvation (that, and we don't know who the elect are, so we preach to everyone)?

You got it.

 

[twin1954]

I am sorry that my last post seemed short but you seemed to be grasping what we are saying. I just wanted to let you think on these things and look at the Scriptures again in the light of what you now know.

Let me know when you can how you are coming along. I thank the Lord for giving me to you in order to show you the things of Christ, twin.

Just remember that all theology that is not all about Him is not worth studying.

 

[worshipjunkie]

I am sorry that my last post seemed short but you seemed to be grasping what we are saying. I just wanted to let you think on these things and look at the Scriptures again in the light of what you now know.

Let me know when you can how you are coming along. I thank the Lord for giving me to you in order to show you the things of Christ, twin.

Just remember that all theology that is not all about Him is not worth studying.

No worries. Thank you so very much for all your help.
I've been re-reading the Scriptures and doing some writing, trying to sort through what I've learned. I read a couple of books that, combined with the discussion here, really is helping me work through this.
It's a big paradigm shift for me, to think of it this way.
I'm leaning very much towards Calvinism. I'm working my way through a book on the traditional/Arminian point of view, and the difference in the strength of the Biblical positions is evident. The Arminian position seems to rely a lot on philosophical reasoning: I do have a couple of questions, one I'm going to post about here. Again, thank you, and God bless you for all your help- you and everyone who responded to this thread.

 

[twin1954]

No worries. Thank you so very much for all your help.
I've been re-reading the Scriptures and doing some writing, trying to sort through what I've learned. I read a couple of books that, combined with the discussion here, really is helping me work through this.
It's a big paradigm shift for me, to think of it this way.
I'm leaning very much towards Calvinism. I'm working my way through a book on the traditional/Arminian point of view, and the difference in the strength of the Biblical positions is evident. The Arminian position seems to rely a lot on philosophical reasoning: I do have a couple of questions, one I'm going to post about here. Again, thank you, and God bless you for all your help- you and everyone who responded to this thread.

Your are more than welcome. I am nothing but a lowly uneducated servant of Christ Jesus the Lord. My hope is that He will open your eyes and mind to His truth.

Remember that I am not trying to make a Calvinist of you but someone who sees the light of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.

 

[StillGods]

For we all like sheep have gone astray each of us to his own way , and He has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.