• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Those who are not 'chosen'

C

Cassidy

Guest
Hi, I've been interested in the calvinist viewpoint for a while now, but there are still some bits and pieces that I'm having trouble with....

One is in reference to the 'chosen'. I'm a bit confused here because I've been referred to the parable of the wheat and the tares, which seems self explanatory to me. However how can God choose his own children? Do you know what I mean?

Like, the wheat belong to God because he planted them, and the tares belong to the enemy because he planted them. So who is there to choose? Aren't God's children who they are and the enemy's children who they are?

I hope I explained myself clearly, I'm not too good with words, but I try :sorry:
 

mlqurgw

Well-Known Member
Aug 19, 2005
5,828
540
70
kain tuck ee
✟8,844.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Hi, I've been interested in the calvinist viewpoint for a while now, but there are still some bits and pieces that I'm having trouble with....

One is in reference to the 'chosen'. I'm a bit confused here because I've been referred to the parable of the wheat and the tares, which seems self explanatory to me. However how can God choose his own children? Do you know what I mean?

Like, the wheat belong to God because he planted them, and the tares belong to the enemy because he planted them. So who is there to choose? Aren't God's children who they are and the enemy's children who they are?

I hope I explained myself clearly, I'm not too good with words, but I try :sorry:
Both the wheat and the tares are men. That being the case all are fallen and sinners by nature. The chosen, elect sinners, differ only from the un-elect in that they were chosen by the sovereign mercy of God to be the objects of His love and grace. God makes them His children by adoption and by regeneration. I think a better example in the Scriptures is found in Rom. 9:8-24. We all are of the same lump of clay and God sovereignty makes of us as He sees fit. Again in Eph. 1:3-11 we find that all believers were chosen by God in sovereign mercy and predestinated unto adoption by Jesus Christ. We are the children of God not by natural generation, as a father begets sons and daughters, but by a new creation in Christ Jesus. God chooses His children not because of any good in them or done by them but by the good pleasure of His will. He chose us because it pleased Him to do so. That is the wonder and beauty of the doctrine of election: It humbles the sinner and shuts him up to the sovereign mercy of God. It forces sinners to fall at the feet of the Savior seeking mercy. It destroys all the supposed worth and work of men and makes him rely totally on the mercy of God in Christ.
 
Upvote 0

heymikey80

Quidquid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur
Dec 18, 2005
14,496
921
✟41,809.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Hi, I've been interested in the calvinist viewpoint for a while now, but there are still some bits and pieces that I'm having trouble with....

One is in reference to the 'chosen'. I'm a bit confused here because I've been referred to the parable of the wheat and the tares, which seems self explanatory to me. However how can God choose his own children? Do you know what I mean?

Like, the wheat belong to God because he planted them, and the tares belong to the enemy because he planted them. So who is there to choose? Aren't God's children who they are and the enemy's children who they are?

I hope I explained myself clearly, I'm not too good with words, but I try :sorry:
I'm unsure your point.

God chooses His own children because He made them. If you or I could truly make wheat, well, we planted them. God's children are not all those who hear. "For many are called, but few are chosen."

The Bible has something to say about the "chosen", but since this word is so offensive to egalitarian ears now, many Bible translators prefer a different word: "elect". It may be worthwhile to search on "choose", "chosen", and "elect". Then maybe a rephrase of the question would help us understand the significance of what you're asking.
 
Upvote 0

Theognome

Junior Member
Oct 8, 2008
43
8
57
Kansas City
✟22,703.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Hi, I've been interested in the calvinist viewpoint for a while now, but there are still some bits and pieces that I'm having trouble with....

One is in reference to the 'chosen'. I'm a bit confused here because I've been referred to the parable of the wheat and the tares, which seems self explanatory to me. However how can God choose his own children? Do you know what I mean?

Like, the wheat belong to God because he planted them, and the tares belong to the enemy because he planted them. So who is there to choose? Aren't God's children who they are and the enemy's children who they are?

I hope I explained myself clearly, I'm not too good with words, but I try :sorry:

We must first start with a premise- God is the creator of everything. God owns the whole kit and kaboodle, and can do what He pleases with anything on and off the earth.

That being said, let's take a look at Matthew 13:24-30 and 13:36-43. According to Jesus, the players in this parable are the following:

The Man who sowed good seed- Christ Jesus
The field the seed was sown in- The world
The good seed- Believers in Christ
The tares- God haters
The dude that spread tares- Satan
The harvest- The second coming of Christ
The reapers- Various angels

Now there is one group that Christ doesn't identify- the men, or the servants of the one who planted good seed. If you notice in the parable, it's the men who were sleeping on the job and thus gave the evil one the opportunity to mess with the field. The implication of the parable is clear- it is the servants of Christ in this age (the leaders of the Church) who have the responsibility to work the field and keep it pure, and they, of course, failed. This is nothing new- the Scripture is replete with men who failed to be faithful to the work the Lord has given them. Ezekiel and Jeremiah are chock full of such examples.

So by the time we get to the second coming of Christ, there will be found in the world of God both believers and unbelievers, and God will deal with both accordingly. Matthew 24:1 through 25:46 goes into even greater detail concerning the end of the age.

But one thing that this parable does not address is the mechanics of God's methods of chosing, or election. Christ does discuss this principle, as do other NT writers and of course the OT. If you turn to this parable and strive to understand how God sovreignly chooses some people for honor and others for dishonor, you will end up spending your time head scratching- that's not what Christ was talking about. To hear references to Gods election or choosing of His people in the Gospels, try Matthew 16:13-17, 24:15-31, 20:1-16, Mark 13:14-20, John 13:18-21 and 15:9-17. There are other references in the gospels, too- plus scads more in the OT and the epistles.

Theognome
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Theognome

Junior Member
Oct 8, 2008
43
8
57
Kansas City
✟22,703.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Christ also said that he was a door. Does that mean He's made of wood and has a big brass knob?

To put it another way, this parable is a polemic concerning eschatology, not election. The parable may reflect some aspects of election, but it is definitely not about it.

Theognome
 
Upvote 0