Questions on the Calvinist position on Particular election

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by MB, Feb 7, 2007.

  1. MB

    MB
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    2,535
    Likes Received:
    13
    Can someone explain how Calvinism's view of Particular election came to be?
    With scripture please?
     
  2. Brandon C. Jones

    Brandon C. Jones
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    Messages:
    598
    Likes Received:
    0
    I won't go into how it came to be, but Steinmetz's "Calvin in Context" and Muller's "The Unaccomodated Calvin" will help you there. By and large Calvin was part of an established theological trajectory and not a brand new innovator when it came to the content of his theology; this is true concerning his view of election. You could also read works by Peter Martyr Vermigli and Musculus (or even Bullinger) instead of Calvin because they are more obscure here in the states and people bring a lot less assumptions to their writings usually than to Calvin's writings-like the evil lawyer/murderer/melancholy killjoy/etc./etc.

    My guess is you want something shorter and online so this link has quite a bit of stuff from Reformed people past and present. I doubt any of the works linked on this page would answer the historical question, but I'm sure most of them are filled with Scripture references.

    http://home.earthlink.net/~calvinist/unconditionalelection.html
     
    #2 Brandon C. Jones, Feb 7, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 7, 2007
  3. Rippon

    Rippon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    17,403
    Likes Received:
    328
    Good resources Brandon . It's interesting that you mentioned Musculus . Someone on the BB thinks he believed in general redemption ( but had no quotes to back that charge up .) .
    Regarding the OP ... Calvinists didn't dream it up . Particular election is very Pauline . Synergists think that Christ died for no one in particular -- just everyone in general .

    However , Christ did not die for or atone for sinners who were not given to Him by His father . ( John 10 )

    Christ does not intercede for all people -- therefore , neither was His death for all people . ( John 17:9)

    Christ loves only his Church . He does not love those who are not of the Church . What Christ did for His own is how a husband needs to be with respect to his wife . Christ loves only His bride -- enough to die for Her . He does not love those outside the Church . In like manner a husband does not love anyone but His wife . ( see Ephesians 5:25)

    Christ said that He gives eternal life to them ( John 10:28 ) that refers to His own at that time and all His elect in the future .

    The sheep of Christ ( John 10:15 ) . Christ specifically laid down His life for them . He did not lay His life down ( die ) for anyone other than His sheep . It is so clear . It is really something how free-willists tamper with the Scripture to get around comforting and sobering biblical truths .

    All His redeemed ones are those ( and only those ) He intended to redeem . The Lord did not "intend" to save all with only some meeting some prequalifying conditions .

    Synergists limit the atonement ! With their theory Christ's death was anywhere from 25% to 50% effectual . They believe that He died for all yet acknowledge only those whose names are registered in the Lamb's Book of Life will enter glory . That is lame . Christ predestined his elect ones to come to a saving knowlege of Himself . He arranges everything ! He planned or purposed it . He gives faith to those He so chooses . God does not look down the corridors of eternity to see who would turn to him . That is so much mix-mash . God controls , He determines everything . He determines where we live , whether we will be rich or poor and even the exact time , manner and place of death . Don't you think ( according to the Bible ) that God orchestrates all that has to do with our salvation ? He is , after all , the author and finisher of it . He has set His love on some from eternity past . His will is not conditioned upon the worms of the dust . He reserves some unto Himself .

    I have gone long here but had to sound forth with a scriptural perspective .
     
  4. J.D.

    J.D.
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    8
    Yes, Brandon, that is quite a nice resource. I saved it to my favorites. I noticed a link to the Free Presbyterian Church. I've been looking at their web site this week and I'm really impressed with the way they state their beliefs. Very succinct but all bases are covered. They practice Believer's Baptism too. Only their curch government separates them from Baptists.
     
  5. Brandon C. Jones

    Brandon C. Jones
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2005
    Messages:
    598
    Likes Received:
    0
    If I'm not mistaken the OP is about election not atonement.

    A whole other thread is the universal atonement/particular redemption (sufficient/efficient) beliefs of sixteenth century Reformers like Bullinger and Musculus. Reformed theologians today try to filter these guys through the anachronistic Amyraldianism of a century later or even worse pretend that they never existed or were never part of the Reformed tradition.

    Anyways, I won't derail this thing but will help some fellow BB member out and supply a least one Musculus quote on the atonement that will back him or her up:

    "...for it is not for lacke of the grace of God, that the reprobate and desparatly wicked men do not receyve it: nor is it right that it should loose his title and glory of universal redemption because of the children of perdition, seying that it is ready for all men, and all be called unto it. So he redeemed the worlde, what soever do become of the reprobate, is most iustly called the Saviour of the worlde... And this redemption is also universal for this cause, it is so appointed unto all men, that without it no man is, nor can be redeemed."
    Wolfgangus Musculus, Common Places of Christian Religion [short title], trans., by Iohn Merton (London: Henry Bynneman, 1578), p., 305.

    For those with access to EEBO you can check out the context of this quote yourself although it's not an easy font to read.

    BJ
     
    #5 Brandon C. Jones, Feb 7, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 7, 2007
  6. npetreley

    npetreley
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    0
    I assume Calvin got it from the Bible, but I haven't read Calvin and I don't know how he justifies his position. Here's a quote from one of the resources linked above that uses scripture to show particular election:

     
  7. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wow, so ALL of Israel was saved because we KNOW the the Israel as a NATION was/is elect by/of God. You know, the one He choose from among the the NATIONS. By your contention EVERY Jew is saved regardless of what they do or believe. Election is NOT salvation but TO salvation. That brings a whole different ball game...
     
    #7 Allan, Feb 8, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 8, 2007
  8. skypair

    skypair
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    IOW, particular election = limited atonement, eh? That is probably the WEAKEST link of Calvinism, friend.

    No -- you basically misunderstand who is "given" to the Son. The ONLY ones given to the Son are BELIEVERS in and obeyers of the gospel. Col 1:13 says that once God "has delivered us from the power of darkness" by justification, then He "translates us [gives us] into the kingdom of his dear Son:" So those who are JUSTIFIED by God are given to Christ, rippon. Nothing like what you said. Christ died for ALL sin.

    At that particular time He didn't pray for the world. By what authority do you apply this to Christ NEVER praying for the world?

    Christ still loves the "foolish virgins" as well. They are prospective brides but they don't have His spirit.

    Where is the 100% standard set, rippon?

    Ah! So you know not only that you are "elect" but also how rich or poor God intends for you to be? where He wants you to live? where and when you are going to die? Let me suggest you know as much about these as you do about your salvation -- nuttin' honey! :laugh:

    skypair
     
  9. skypair

    skypair
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good one, allan! :D In truth, they DO lump unbelievers in with believers on account of this very misapplication.


    skypair
     
  10. russell55

    russell55
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2002
    Messages:
    2,424
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, Israel was the elect nation. But national election is not the only kind of election there is. Out of that elect nation there was/is a remant elected or chosen by God for salvation.

    You see both kinds of election in those verses:
    • The elect nation, Israel
    • The remant out of that elect nation which is chosen by grace, and as a result of that election actually obtains salvation.
     
  11. npetreley

    npetreley
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2002
    Messages:
    7,359
    Likes Received:
    0
    Let me quote some guy named Allan to answer this:

    The relevant quote is this...

    I can't speak for the author, but it seems pretty clear that his point was that when God elects, He elects a particular people based on His own decision of whom He approves, not based on anything He foresaw about what those people would do. He wasn't saying that in this case God was electing all Israel for salvation.
     
  12. MB

    MB
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2006
    Messages:
    2,535
    Likes Received:
    13
    I want to thank those of you who gave me some links. I want to study it. in order I understand it better.
    There are some other things I'd like to know and I'll put them on different post.
    MB
     
  13. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    That was pretty funny! :laugh:
    I said that God elected Israel for His purpose and NOT savlation. I thought I was pretty clear on that. Did I miss something in your meaning??
     
  14. Allan

    Allan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2006
    Messages:
    6,888
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree!

    You see both kinds of election in those verses:
    • The elect nation, Israel
    • The remant out of that elect nation which is chosen by grace, and as a result of that election actually obtains salvation.
    [/QUOTE]
    Yes, and actually a second type of election - the election by grace.
    And I agree that Chapter 11 starts talking about the election of grace and NOT 9 and 10. For in 11 we see Israel's blinding was that salvation would come to the Gentiles though they themselves (Nationaly) are not cut off for they WILL be brought back into the vine. And this is the culminstion and fulfillment of the purpose for their election. That they may come TO salvation.
     

Share This Page

Loading...