1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

The "Non-elect"

Discussion in '2000-02 Archive' started by Michael Wrenn, Nov 19, 2001.

  1. Chris Temple

    Chris Temple New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    0
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chet:
    Hi Brother Chris!

    You said

    Could you please provide some information that parallels these differences. I would
    greatly appreciate it ;)

    God Bless
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Chet:

    See the good article,

    A Brief Critique of Hyper-Calvinism
     
  2. Kiffin

    Kiffin New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2001
    Messages:
    2,191
    Likes Received:
    0
  3. paul hadik

    paul hadik New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2001
    Messages:
    92
    Likes Received:
    0
    Michael Wren:

    your concern about those being damned who never had a choice in the matter used to bother me to. The "heathen in the jungles" argument. It is one used widely by the LDS church to back up their teaching on proxy work et al.
    It has only been in the last year or so, in studying the Bible as God-centered that I have realized damnation is not the punishment for some decision we have not made. We are eternally separated by God due to sin and His holy nature. We are in fact His enemies. When I read Genesis and see Adam acknowledging that God is a liar, the people at the Tower of Babel, with the earth still damp around them challenging God, I began to be amazed at a mercy that saved anyone.
    I see now that God owes us nothing. That He shows some any mercy at all is amazing to me.

    paul
     
  4. Michael Wrenn

    Michael Wrenn New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    4,319
    Likes Received:
    0
    Chris,

    The doctrine that God predestines some to hell rules out any free choice for those people. Consistent Calvinism doesn't believe in choice.

    You said that unregenerate sinners knowingly and willfully choose to reject God and choose hell. But the Calvinist doctrine of predestination makes such "choice" merely an illusion. If one cannot do other than reject God, then there is no choice involved at all. If effect and in reality, such doctrine rules out choice.

    If a person cannot do other than what he does, no choice ever existed in the first place.
     
  5. S. Baptist

    S. Baptist New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2001
    Messages:
    165
    Likes Received:
    0
    Lu 13:2 And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners
    above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things?

    3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.


    According to Jesus, these men had an option, they could repent and not perish, or perish for
    not repenting.


    Did Jesus lie to them, did they have a choice in their final destination??


    When charged with a "crime", the guilt or innocents rest solely upon the "Defendant", not
    upon the Judge.


    A person's sin, is their sin, and they along are responsible for committing that sin, as the
    defendant can't blame the Judge for their crime, neither can anyone accuse God of being
    responsible for their sins.


    Predestination teaches that God is responsible for the sins of some, having never given them
    the "same opportunity" to be saved as the "elect", and on Judgment Day, the argument that the
    Judge was "prejudice" against the defendant, denying them "Equal rights" to salvation, and consequently a "righteous"
    judgment could not be rendered.


    Joh 3:16 For God so loved the (WHOLE) world,

    Ro 10:13 For "WHOSOEVER" shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

    Re 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if "ANY MAN" hear my voice, and open the
    door,

    As Jesus said, we have a choice to repent or not, and that choice is extended to the "whole
    world", "whosoever", and "any man", none can accuse God of being responsible for their
    remaining sins on Judgment day.


    Predestination really teaches that "God has always loved me, but he has never loved you".


    Do you believe that???
     
  6. Michael Wrenn

    Michael Wrenn New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    4,319
    Likes Received:
    0
    S. Baptist,

    I don't, but it seems the logical conclusion of Calvinism, doesn't it?
     
  7. Joey M

    Joey M New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2001
    Messages:
    593
    Likes Received:
    0
    I just realized, Thank God I'm not a calvanist. [​IMG]
     
  8. Kiffin

    Kiffin New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2001
    Messages:
    2,191
    Likes Received:
    0
    As always what could be a thoughtfull exchange has people defining what we Calvinists believe. Calvinists do not deny "whosoever will"! Please spare me the John 3:16, Whosoever will referances. Calvinists have no problem with them. We Believe it! We see human responsibility

    My Church (a Reformed 5 point Calvinist Baptist church) each time around Christmas and Easter, canvass our town and area door to door with scripture, tracts and invitations to our Christmas Eve and Holy Week services. We have put Bibles, Gospels of John, tracts in almost every home in our area over the last 3 years. I say this not to brag. We certaintly need to do more in Evangelism but to say that we see no comflict in being 5 point Calvinists and Evangelism.

    Like so many teachings of the Bible( the Trinity, eternity, the two natures of Christ, the love of a holy God for rebellious sinners), this teaching seems contradictory and is incomprehensible to human reason. Calvinist however believe it not because it "makes sense" to human reason, but because this is what we find taught in the pages of God's holy Word.

    Predestination, Election is only one aspect of Calvinism that non Calvinists seem more fascinated with that we Calvinists. Yes, we believe it but Predestination is not all there is to Calvinism.
     
  9. Michael Wrenn

    Michael Wrenn New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    4,319
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's not all there is to Calvinism, but, like the other tenets, it is indispensable to Calvinist doctrine.

    I see great inconsistency in what many Calvinists teach and what they actually practice. The only consistent Calvinists I've seen here are the Primitive Baptists.
     
  10. Chris Temple

    Chris Temple New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    0
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Kiffin:
    Predestination, Election is only one aspect of Calvinism that non Calvinists seem more fascinated with that we Calvinists. Yes, we believe it but Predestination is not all there is to Calvinism.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Kiffin:

    Quite right. The foundation of Calvinism is not predestination (although that is a blessed truth of Scripture); it is the Sovereignty of God. The five points of TULIP are not founded upon predestination, but upon the total depravity of man. Arguments against predestination, election, limited atonement, effectual calling always stem from a conscious or unconcious denial of total depravity.

    BTW, Calvinists are not the only predestinarians, as Luther and Lutherans were and are, as well.
     
  11. Kiffin

    Kiffin New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2001
    Messages:
    2,191
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your right it is indispensable to Calvinism yet I don't understand the statement

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> I see great inconsistency in what many Calvinists teach and what they actually practice. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Please, explain. Answering this can be helpfull for both sides. Remember, also that most Calvinists do not try to explain how whosoever will and Unconditional election are both true, no more than we try to explain how God is 3 persons yet one God. We accept it because that is what scripture teaches.
     
  12. Chris Temple

    Chris Temple New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    0
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by S. Baptist:

    Did Jesus lie to them, did they have a choice in their final destination?? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Everyone has a choice; believe in Christ or be damned. The problem is, the unregenerate can only make choices according to their sin nature; they are unable to choose to repent. Deny that and you deny original sin, total depravity and the state of spiritual death that men are in. Again; who will "choose" to repent and trust Christ? All whom teh Father gives him, who cannot come to him unless the Father draws them (John 6).


    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>When charged with a "crime", the guilt or innocents rest solely upon the "Defendant", not upon the Judge.


    A person's sin, is their sin, and they along are responsible for committing that sin, as the
    defendant can't blame the Judge for their crime, neither can anyone accuse God of being
    responsible for their sins. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    OK - so?


    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Predestination teaches that God is responsible for the sins of some, having never given them
    the "same opportunity" to be saved as the "elect", and on Judgment Day, the argument that the
    Judge was "prejudice" against the defendant, denying them "Equal rights" to salvation, and consequently a "righteous"
    judgment could not be rendered. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    No, (again) predestination teaches that God chose in eternity past, by the goodness and mercy of His will to save some guilty, responsible defendants who deserved death.

    Eph 1:3 ¶ Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in the heavenly places in Christ, even as
    4 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 He hath predestined us to be His own adopted children by Jesus Christ, 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.
    7 In Christ 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 He hath made known unto us the mystery of His will, according to His good pleasure which He hath purposed in Himself,
    10 that in the dispensation of the fullness of times He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth, even in Him.
    11 In Christ also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestined according to the purpose of Him who worketh all things after the counsel of His own will,
    12 that we, who first trusted in Christ, should be to the praise of His glory.
    13 In Christ ye also trusted after ye heard the word of truth, the Gospel of your salvation. In Him also after ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise,
    14 which is the pledge of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession—unto the praise of His glory.

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Joh 3:16 For God so loved the (WHOLE) world, <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    This is blatant eisogesis, as the scripture neither says, nor means, the WHOLE world

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Ro 10:13 For "WHOSOEVER" shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Already answered above.

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Predestination really teaches that "God has always loved me, but he has never loved you".

    Do you believe that???<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    The Bible teaches that God loves benevolently all of His creation; that He loves especially His chosen; and he hates sinners. Those are biblical facts.

    Eph 5:25 Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for it,
    26 that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the Word,
    27 that He might present it to Himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing, but that it should be holy and without blemish.

    Psalm 5:5 The foolish shall not stand in Thy sight; Thou hatest all workers of iniquity.
    6 Thou shalt destroy them that speak lies; the LORD will abhor the bloody and deceitful man.


    [ November 19, 2001: Message edited by: Chris Temple ]
     
  13. Michael Wrenn

    Michael Wrenn New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    4,319
    Likes Received:
    0
    Chris,

    Actually, you are not correct; Arminians affirm total depravity but deny the other points of Calvinism.
     
  14. Michael Wrenn

    Michael Wrenn New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    4,319
    Likes Received:
    0
    Chris,

    What you say in the first paragraph of your last post is not a description of true choice. If a person can do only one thing, then no real choice exists.
     
  15. Chris Temple

    Chris Temple New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    0
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Wrenn:
    Chris,

    Actually, you are not correct; Arminians affirm total depravity but deny the other points of Calvinism.
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Michael:

    you are correct, many do affirm total depravity by word, yet their practice denies it. As you have often reminded us, many are inconsistent in their beliefs (i.e., believe like an arminian and pray like a Calvinist)

    ;)
     
  16. Chris Temple

    Chris Temple New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    0
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Wrenn:
    Chris,

    What you say in the first paragraph of your last post is not a description of true choice. If a person can do only one thing, then no real choice exists.
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Not so, Michael. We all make decisions based upon our abilities. A person without hands cannot decide to type (at least with hands). A person without legs cannot decide to walk or run. If they become able to walk, or run or type it is through the enablement of prosthetic means.

    Similarly, animals make decisions based upon their nature. A hyena is a scavenger. It is born a pup, has not yet eaten a dead carcass, but as soon as it is able, by its nature, it will assuredly decide to eat dead meat, even though it chooses to do so "of its own free will".

    Dogs as well. Wave a rare steak in front of a dog, and he will salivate. Throw it in the yard and he will be unable not to go chase it and eat it. Yet he has made a free choice to do so, but due to his nature, he is unable to choose not to.

    Man is the same. In his sin nature, he is unable to resist sin. Wave temptation in front of his face, and he will bite every time. He is unable not to. He is also unable to choose right and choose God. Yet he makes these choices in his free will. Only when God regenerates a heart, and rebirths a man from above, is he enabled to desire to choose God - God is made irresistible to him, and God calls him effectually so that he will choose to repent and accept forgiveness.

    [ November 20, 2001: Message edited by: Chris Temple ]
     
  17. Michael Wrenn

    Michael Wrenn New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    4,319
    Likes Received:
    0
    Chris,

    In these postings here, it has been impressed upon me more strongly and cearly than ever before just what the problem and difference is between Calvinists and non-Calvinists: The respective definitions of "choice" are diametrically opposite to each other and irreconcilable.

    I "choose" ;) the non-Calvinist definition, and I still contend the Calvinist notion of "choice" in reality involves no choice at all.

    BTW, to you and to all who have participated on this thread, I am glad we have been able to do so without animosity, even though the disagreement remains great and, dare I use the term, fundamental. ;)
     
  18. Chris Temple

    Chris Temple New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2000
    Messages:
    2,841
    Likes Received:
    0
    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Wrenn:
    BTW, to you and to all who have participated on this thread, I am glad we have been able to do so without animosity, even though the disagreement remains great and, dare I use the term, fundamental. ;)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Michael:

    I too, am thankful for the tone most of held to on this thread, and especially thank you for the gentlemanly manner in which you have participated. This is what the BB shoudl be about.

    Just this morning I ran across a Q&A from probe.org about this subject. I thought the answer was very good, and pass it along here:

    *****************************
    "Does Calvinism Make People into Choiceless Puppets?"

    Q: When I look at the doctrine of predestination from the Calvinistic perspective I seem to come to the same final conclusion. It appears to me that in the Calvinistic approach, man is only an observer. Which would mean that my actions, thoughts, hopes, dreams, relationships, etc., are all meaningless. I call man an observer because, according to Calvin, ALL is predetermined.

    There is no "choice." There is double predestination. Life would end up being deterministic and fatalistic. I am merely a linear program executing my own destruction. What's the use in doing anything? To me love then becomes meaningless. More importantly, how do I know for sure that I am really one of the "chosen"? Since every part of my being is totally deprived, how do I know if I really believe what I need to believe since my intellect is deprived also? I have talked to some Calvinists about this. They seem to ignore the philosophical problems I pose and move on without ever answering my questions. I get the old "That's the way it is," answer. It appears to me that if you follow Calvin's view to its logical extreme, man becomes only an observer who can affect nothing. My problem arises when I conclude that if this is the case, then God sends a person to Hell for sins that God determined and orchestrated for the observer to "commit." Why would God hold me responsible for a sin that He "programmed" me to commit? Perhaps I am misunderstanding Calvinism but this is the way I see it. Please correct me if I am mistaken. Thank you for you time. Sorry about the length of my question. I am in search of knowledge. I have changed my mind many times on this issue. HELP!



    A: You ask a very important question. Unfortunately, it cannot be adequately answered in an e-mail (not by me, at any rate). I will attempt to sketch out a few lines of thought for your consideration, but let me also recommend a couple books that might help you think through some of these issues in a little more detail.

    On the side of what might be called "theistic determinism" you may want to look at Jonathan Edwards' Freedom of the Will. On the other hand, Norman Geisler's Chosen but Free presents a position which some might call "moderate Calvinism," insofar as he does not embrace all five points of Dortian Calvinism and argues for genuine, self-determining, human freedom and responsibility. There are also some good articles in the Evangelical Dictionary of Theology on "Calvinism," "Predestination," and "Freedom, Free Will, and Determinism".

    In my response, I will simply try to set forth a few passages from the Bible which seem to shed some light on this difficult and controversial issue.

    In the first place, there are certainly verses which teach that God "works all things after the counsel of His will" (Eph. 1:11). Without doubt, then, God is sovereign and is providentially guiding history to its predetermined end. But as W.S. Reid (himself a Calvinist) correctly observes in his article on "Predestination" in the Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, "At this point the question arises of the possibility of individual freedom and responsibility if God is absolutely sovereign. How can these things be? Yet the Scriptures repeatedly assert both. Joseph's remarks to his brothers and Peter's statement concerning Christ's crucifixion highlight this fact (Gen. 45:4ff.; Acts 2:23). Man, in carrying out God's plan, even unintentionally, does so responsibly and freely" (871). This statement makes it plain that at least some Calvinists do indeed make room for a degree of genuine human freedom and responsibility, while at the same time affirming the full and unmitigated sovereignty of God. Although it may certainly be a mystery (at least from man's perspective) how both of these things can be simultaneously true, I agree with Reid that the Bible does indeed "repeatedly assert both."

    But doesn't the Fall of man affect human freedom? Indeed it does! Before the Fall, man's will was perfectly free both to obey and disobey God. However, after the Fall the freedom to obey was lost (whether partially or completely need not concern us here). Nevertheless, through His gift of salvation (including both regeneration and sanctification), God is restoring this original freedom in His people (2 Cor. 3:16-18). In addition, however, it must also be kept in mind that even unregenerate men are acting freely when they sin. They freely CHOOSE to sin because their nature is now depraved, fallen and sinful. But when someone becomes a new creature in Christ, the freedom to do good and obey God is, to some degree, restored. And through the process of sanctification, God is progressively restoring this freedom in His children more and more.

    Again, as Norman Geisler points out in his article on "Freedom, Free Will, and Determinism" in the Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, even fallen man retains a degree of genuine human freedom. This is taught in many passages of Scripture (e.g. Matt. 23:37; John 7:17; 1 Cor. 9:17; 1 Pet. 5:2; Philem. 14). Thus, even if it is not fully explicable (for man at any rate), the Bible clearly teaches both Divine Sovereignty and a degree of genuine human freedom and responsibility. Indeed, in some passages, both ideas appear virtually side by side. For instance, in Prov. 16:9 we read, "The mind of man plans his way, but the Lord directs his steps." Passages such as this may teach that man has a measure of self-determination, while at the same time indicating that what man freely chooses is also (on some level) directed by God.

    Finally, the Scriptures clearly indicate that God is graciously working in His people "both to will and to work for His good pleasure" (Phil. 2:13). I don't think that this work of God should be viewed as a coercion of our wills. Rather, it seems to me that it would be more properly understood as a persuading and empowering of our wills so that we freely choose to do what God wants us to do. We may not have chosen to do such things apart from this work of God in our lives, but it is nonetheless WE OURSELVES who choose them in response to this gracious work. In a similar way, Satan is described as "working in the sons of disobedience" (Eph. 2:2) with the result that fallen, unregenerate men "want to do the desires" of the devil (John 8:44). But of course even here such men freely choose to follow Satan in his disobedience and rebellion against God (even if unconsciously). In addition, one must also keep in mind that even Satan's sin and rebellion against God is part of the plan and purposes of God (though freely chosen on Satan's part). And while Satan can only carry out his malicious intentions to the extent that God permits (see Job 1-2 and 2 Cor. 12:7-9), they are nonetheless Satan's (NOT God's) malicious intentions.

    Thus, the biblical position (as I see it) affirms BOTH Divine Sovereignty AND some degree of genuine human freedom and responsibility. There is, I will certainly grant, a mystery here, but (at least in my opinion) no contradiction. Man is finite in his understanding and limited in his actions by time and space, but God is infinite in His understanding and not limited in His actions by time and space. It is therefore not unreasonable to think that what man may be incapable of comprehending (e.g. Divine Sovereignty and human freedom operating simultaneously and harmoniously) might nonetheless still be true. I therefore think that we are safest to stick closely to the express affirmations of Scripture, even if we cannot formulate a mathematically precise explanation of the relationship between Divine Sovereignty and human freedom. The Scriptures seem to affirm both and we must be content with this. This, at any rate, is my opinion on the matter.

    Wishing you God's richest blessings!

    Shalom,

    Michael Gleghorn
    Probe Ministries
     
  19. JAMES2

    JAMES2 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2001
    Messages:
    633
    Likes Received:
    0
    Most people, unless you are a 5-point Calvinist, take the scriptures above that refer to "whosoever," the "World," "All" to mean, for example "all" without exception. God desires "all" to be saved so "all" have a choice to be saved. Obviously, if God desires "all" to be saved and "all" means without exception, then you have universalism, which I think we agree cannot be true. So, I would like to add this dilemma to our Universalists:--- "God imposed his wrath due unto, and Christ underwent the pains of hell for, either all the sins of all men, or all the sins of some men, or some sins of all men. If the last, some sins of all men, then have all men some sins to answer for,and so shall no man be saved?... If the second, that is it which we affirm, that Christ in their stead and room suffered for all the sins of all the elect in the world. If the first, why are not all freed from the punishment of all their sins? You will say, Because of their unbelief; they will not believe. But this unbelief, is it a sin, or not? If not, why should they be punished for it? If it be, then Christ underwent the punishment due it, or not. If so, then why must that hinder them more than their other sins for which he died?..If he did not, then he did not die for all their sins. Let them choose which part they will." John Owens, "The Death of death in the Death of Christ," pp 61-62.
    Praise God. Our salvation depends solely on Another -- God. We can do NOTHING toward our salvation. Talk about a limited or unlimited atonement. The people that say salvation depends on the individual's "choice" to "accept Jesus" are the one's that really, really limit the atonement. If that were they case, not one single person would be saved. Not, that's limited atonement. The wonder is that God saves ANYBODY.
     
  20. qwerty

    qwerty New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2001
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    0
    The problem with Calvinist theology is like many others:

    State an assumption, and treat it like a fact.

    Instead of saying that we really don't understand how God is working all of this out, Calvinists declare that they have it all figured out. There won't be any conclusion to this discussion before heaven.

    But, in my opinion, Calvinists will be very surprised when they really understand God's plan.
     
Loading...