Election primer

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by menageriekeeper, Sep 14, 2006.

  1. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    The doctrine(s) of election isn't something I understand very well. I like to see some calm instruction on this issue.

    What is election all about? (I have an idea, but want to make sure it's correct)

    What is the scriptural basis? (especially important!)

    Is the drawing of the Holy Spirit essential to salvation? (how essential?)

    Does the Holy Spirit draw all men equally? (Did I have the same chance to be saved as the poor black child in Africa?)

    What does it mean if someone says NO to the Holy Spirit? Was that person being drawn by Him or not?

    Okay, hopefully you can see what I'm getting at. NO DEBATE for a while, please, though I'd appreciate different views appropriately referenced to the Bible so I can study them and ask questions. I don't care at the moment who Calvin was or who Armenia was or what they said, only what the scripture says. Only quote from other sources if it will add clarity to the instruction and please link to the material if possible.

    Fussy aren't I? :D

    Thank you!
     
  2. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    No debate?

    ;)

    OK for a quick down and dirty . . . those whom He forknew, these He predestined to become conformed to the image of Christ (loosely from Romans 8).

    Many Baptists have held to a 'new-light' calvinistic approach to election. It has often been taught that those whom He forknew (their decision to accept Christ) these (same ones) He elected to salvation.

    The 'elect' is usually used in reference to the 'True' believers that make up the True Church. Ephesians 2:8 & 9 is often used as a primary reference.
     
  3. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    No disrespect, but, since this is a debate board, it will be inevitable that those who oppose the Doctrine of Grace (Election, etc) will jump in either civilly or otherwise, and before you know it, your thread is hijacked way out of topic.

    If you're really serious about understanding Election, try a search of the net.

    Again, no disrespect intended, either to you, to those who hold to thie Doctrine of Grace, or those who oppose it.
     
  4. El_Guero

    El_Guero
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    Messages:
    7,714
    Likes Received:
    0
    PS

    Where one falls on the scope of predistination will affect how one chooses to define 'the elect'.

    Determinists (super hyper calvinists) define the elect differently than do Arminians (actual 'arminian' is close to charismatic in the doctrine of Grace & Salvation).

    I define the elect as those that God has chosen to spend eternity with Him in Heaven.
     
  5. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, I know eventually this thread will get hijacked and that'll be fine, so long as I can find a starting place before that happens.

    Really though, this my questions really aren't about Calvinists or Arminians as I understand the controversy between those two to be mostly about salvation by grace as opposed to a works salvation. Correct? Or am I totally confused?

    My questions are totally about how man is drawn to God. Does God choose man or does man choose God? What are the mechanisms of each?

    This is the definition of elect I've always held to, but I find there are those who differ both in definition and in how one gets to be a "true" believer.
     
  6. Dave

    Dave
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    275
    Likes Received:
    0
    Bad question...very bad :tonofbricks:

    The difference surrounds the question of whether man has the ability to freely chose to come to God independent of an irresistable call or not. To put it another way, must God regenerate the sinner before the sinner can respond to God, or does natural man have the capacity prior to regeneration. No arminian will call their view a works salvation, afaik.
     
  7. saturneptune

    saturneptune
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, and while it is good to search the net, there is absolutely nothing wrong with asking a question in this forum about free will and God's sovereignty. There are lots of very sharp minds here that have a good grasp of the subject. The debate is healthy.

    No disrespect intended.
     
  8. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Okay, I' back with a new question:

    Nah, got to keep you waiting for a moment. I have found that I had in my posession a better knowledge of election than I gave myself credit for. I simply didn't have the right name with the right subject. That's what happens when a person has no formal training. :eek:

    So after locating/reading/studying enough articles on both Calvinism and Ariminism to believe I was getting a clear picture of what each camp stand for I began to wonder:

    Does anyone else think that that both camps are only seeing part of the picture and they're ignoring the rest?
     
    #8 menageriekeeper, Sep 15, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 15, 2006
  9. Blammo

    Blammo
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,277
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes I do, and that is why I have participated in the C/A debates. I think both sides have excellent arguments backed by scripture. They can't both be right, but they are certainly not completely wrong. There must be a middle ground somewhere. I can't help but think it is beyond our comprehension. However, I will continue to study it, I have learned more lately than ever before.
     
  10. Hope of Glory

    Hope of Glory
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's why I can't figure out why either camp is so popular. It seems pretty obvious that both sides have some of it right. But, by the same token, it seems equally as obvious that both sides have some of it wrong.
     
  11. whatever

    whatever
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    2,088
    Likes Received:
    0
    Only to the extent that every single person only sees part of the picture and ignores the rest. Some see more than others, and some ignore more than others.

    Since I am a curious Calvinist I would like to know what it is that Calvinists are ignoring. I sure hope you don't say John 3:16 or some other comman passage like that, because 1) we do not ignore it and 2) it would likely start a debate.
     
  12. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well so far, I haven't seen a good explaination for why the word 'world' in John 3:16 doesn't mean world. Explain away. But I'm more concerned with verses like this:

    Re 3:20Behold, I stand at the door and knock: if any man hear my voice and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

    1jo 2:1My little children, these things write I unto you that ye may not sin. And if any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:1jo 2:2and he is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole world.

    Ac 13:47For so hath the Lord commanded us, [saying], I have set thee for a light of the Gentiles, That thou shouldest be for salvation unto the uttermost part of the earth.Ac 13:48And as the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of God: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

    Mr 16:15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.Mr 16:16He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

    Joh 1:29The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

    Of course, these verses are only dealing with the specific issue of election.

    Feel free to debate!
     
  13. Calvibaptist

    Calvibaptist
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2006
    Messages:
    892
    Likes Received:
    0
    I must jump in here... The word "world" in John 3:16 doesn't mean every single person who has ever or will ever live for the very same reason that it doesn't mean that in John 17:9 where Jesus says he prays for His followers and those who will believe on Him through their witness but He does not pray for the world. Or 1 John 2:15, where John tells us not to love the world.

    I happen to believe that John 3:16 is telling us that God loved Gentiles as well as Jews and anyone in either of those groups who believes will be saved. It is a universal text as far as the offer of salvation. Not a problem for Calvinists.

    Written to a church talking about re-establishing fellowship, not talking about salvation of individuals.

    A problem exists for anyone in this passage. If Jesus is in fact the propitiation (or satisfaction of God's wrath) for the sins of every person who ever existed, then God is unjust for punishing anyone in hell. Everyone must be saved.

    You either have to re-define propitiation to mean "possible propitiation if they will take advantage of it" or you have to understand world to mean "Gentiles as well as Jews." I opt for the second, since it is possible to use it this way, whereas it is not possible to use the word propitiation this way.

    The gospel goes out to the uttermost parts of the earth (all the Gentiles) and those whom God has elected (ordained to eternal life) will believe. This is one of the strongest passaged that talks about God's sovereignty and man's responsibility and how it works.

    Is your question about the extent of the preaching of the gospel or the requirement for salvation?

    Same understanding as John 3:16. World means people from every tribe under heaven, not just Jews.

     
  14. whatever

    whatever
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    2,088
    Likes Received:
    0
    It does mean world. The big question is, as all throughout the gospel of John, is what does John mean by "the world"? Check out how many other times John uses the term where it cannot possibly mean "every single person without exception".

    Keep in mind what Revelation 7 says about the elect - "After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands, and crying out with a loud voice, 'Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!'" This is what we think John meant by "the world", a multitude which no man can number, not just a few that God picked while letting most of mankind go to hell.
    Well, that was written to a church, so maybe it is not best to read it as though it were written to all of unbelieving mankind. But the invitation really is there for all of mankind, and all who repent and believe will be saved.

    See above on John 3:16.

    I do believe that salvation is for the uttermost part of the earth and that all who are ordained to eternal life will believe. I am not sure why you brought this one up - what are you thinking?

    Absolutely true, and does not negate election unto salvation at all.

    See above on John 3:16.

    I will discuss but I do not want to debate. I will tell you what I believe. I will not tell you what you should believe. I hope you don't mind. :flower:
     
  15. Hope of Glory

    Hope of Glory
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, how about a quote?

     
  16. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Aww, that's so nice. Not that you'd get very far trying to tell me what to believe. :D :smilewinkgrin:

    Okay from the top (I may not be successful in keeping everyone's arguements separate so forgive me now for any mix ups):

    The word world is used in several different forms throughout the Bible, context, context. Now, tell me why it can't mean exactly what it says: that anyone throughout the world, Jew or Gentile, who believes will be saved. There are no qualifiers anywhere in this passage that says, "Oh wait, only those that I choose AND believe will be saved. Oh, wait again. If I choose the man he won't be able to resist me!" (sorry for crossing into the irresistable grace issue)

    God created Adam specifically. He knew that despite His coming down and walking and talking with Adam in the garden that eventually Adam would choose to disobey. God created man anyway (makes Him sovereign enough to create man with the ability to choose for himself).

    Rev 3:21 was indeed written to a church. A church filled with people who were rich and thought they had need of nothing. IMO, this church was filled with folk who were Christian in name only and hadn't really accepted Christ's sacrifice. (therefore they are unsaved) Saved folk don't need Christ to come to supper, He's already here!

    The Acts passage: Why were the Gentiles glad? Because salvation had been extended to them also. Those who were worried about it were that group identified as "ordained unto eternal life". They had already made the choice to follow Christ, but were being rebuked by the Jews and so doubted their salvation. Paul says "not so, God has sent me to assure you that His gift applies to you too."

    Mark 16, say he who believes, not he who I have chosen AND believes. You can't add a qualifier to the verse that isn't there.
     
  17. whatever

    whatever
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    2,088
    Likes Received:
    0
    I will only respond to this for now. I did not add a qualifier to that verse. In fact, what I had said earlier was "the invitation really is there for all of mankind, and all who repent and believe will be saved", and I encourage you to read my response to the Mark passage and find where I added anything.

    This kind of false charge is one reason that C/A debates usually turn bad here. If you want to talk about what Calvinists really believe and reply to what we actually say then I am game. If you don't then that's fine too, but I would like to know which it is going to be.
     
  18. menageriekeeper

    menageriekeeper
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2004
    Messages:
    7,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    You and I have a communication problem somewhere. Let's see if we can find it.

    I used the above passage to argue against election. You say it doesn't. We're clear so far?

    Allright, let me then explain how I arrived at the idea that you are adding to the passage: If a passage doesn't negate an idea than it must advocate the idea. The only way this passage can advocate the idea of election is if you add to/qualify it (whether purposly or because you are drawing from a different passage and applying it here without being clear).

    So explain how this passage doesn't negate the idea of election and I thing you and I will be back on track. Apologies for misunderstanding what you were saying.

    This is my last post for the night as I have to deal with dozens of children in the morning and if I don't get some sleep they won't like me. :smilewinkgrin: :saint: :sleeping_2:
     
  19. mcknight0315

    mcknight0315
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would argue that Calvinists and Arminians are both right, one is God's point of view and the other is man's point of view. The most common misconception is that free-will and predestination are mutually exclusive. Does the Bible not clearly teach both? The free-will is much more practical to the everyday Christian struggle, but God wants us to realize that He is the one who has chosen us. It makes the relationship alot more personal I think.
     
  20. whatever

    whatever
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2004
    Messages:
    2,088
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi mk,
    There is another possibility - that the passage doesn't say anything about the idea either way.

    Whe I speak of election I am speaking strictly of God's choice to save certain people. Election and predestination are not the same thing (as in "whom He foreknew He predestined ..."), and election is not concerned with how God brings His plan about, only with the fact that He will bring it about.

    Maybe this will help. I do believe that all who believe will be saved, and that all who refuse to believe will be damned. The cause of unbelievers damnation is their refusal to believe, according to John 3:16-18. I affirm this wholeheartedly without adding any words to what John recorded. But this does not contradict the fact that God chose who would believe and passed over the rest, leaving them to receive the end that they choose by their refusal to believe.

    1. God chose who would believe and be saved.

    2. All who believe will be saved and the rest will be condemned.

    I still do not see why you think there's a contradiction in these two statements. Can you clarify?
    I hope this clarifies the issues for you, and I hope the kids like you. :)
     
    #20 whatever, Sep 17, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 17, 2006

Share This Page

Loading...