-
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!
Predestination unto salvation
- Thread starter JonC
- Start date
- Status
It is important to turn to Scripture when answering these questions.
Ephesians 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, 4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him. (Emphasis mine)
Romans 9:22-24 22 What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction? 23 And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, 24 even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles. (emphasis mine)
The Elect are predestined to reconciliation and eternal life in Christ. The reprobate? That is hotly debated among Monergists. Infralapsarians believe that God chose the Elect and passed over those who are not elect. Supralapsarians believe both the Elect and the reprobate are predestined to their ultimate ends. I have bounced between Infra and Supralapsarianism over the years but I tilt towards Supralapsarianism. The reason I tilt towards Supralapsarianism is that it seems like a theological copout for God to choose one group and then just give the other group the back of His hand.
Who is "us" here? Is it the elect (as a whole) or individuals? In other words, is the verse speaking of the elect as a whole (i.e., this is"God's people" or is it speaking of individuals who enter into that population)?
ημας (ἐγώ) "us" is a plural personal pronoun, in the first person in the accusative case. Paul does not introduce any other individual(s) in preceding verses except himself and the Ephesian believers. ἐγώ (eigo) is used by Paul to refer to both the believers in Ephesus as well as himself. In a larger sense, to "us" his extended audience, it means all believers. None of the epistles were written specifically to us today. They are all written to us today indirectly.
If it were for philosophical reasons I would not have confidence in my belief. I believe in the predestination of the Elect because I am convinced scripture clearly and unambiguously teaches it.
Thank you for your explanation. I agree it means "all believers" in a larger sense.
I agree in a sense. We do have to be careful how we stand on our beliefs, but we also need to be able to accept what part is philosophical or human understanding verses stated in Scripture. If philosophy (to include reasoning and interpretation) were involved then I would have more confidence in your position as we could discuss the reasons for your conclusions. In other words, you being convinced that Scripture teaches predestination to salvation is not exactly evidence no philosophy or reasoning is involved.
What I am trying to say is that if you were able to recognize that philosophy and interpretation was involved then we could discuss the validity of your reasoning. But if you believe that Scripture states (without the need of interpretation or reasoning) that men are predestined to salvation then you may be on weaker ground that I thought without any way of defending your position.
I point this out while I actually agree with your conclusions. I believe we are by necessity predestined to one fate or another (as vessels of mercy or vessels of wrath). But this is, for me, a very well thought out and reasoned position based on Scripture.
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
A few questions, ok?
Before God created anything did He know exactly who would be saved and who would not be saved? I believe He did.
If God wanted to, does He possess the power to intervene in any and every person’s life in such a way to bring them into a saving relationship with Himself? I believe He does.
So, if God knows the eternal outcome of all people, and He possesses the power to intervene to bring anyone to salvation, if He chooses to do so, then I believe the word “predestined” is an appropriate expression of that truth.
peace to you
Correct. Based on scripture which is the final authority for all matters of faith and practice. That does not mean I did not engage my mind or use the reasoning skills God endued me with.
Philosophy has its place in causing us to ask questions like "Who am I?" or "Do I have a purpose?" According to the Christian worldview, those questions are answered in the pages of scripture. Romans 1 is helpful as an example.
Romans 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
While creation alone does not reveal the Gospel, it does reveal the fact that there is a Creator. This fact is both philosophical and epistemological. Questions of being are asked as well as questions to gain knowledge. The answers to these questions are either God-given (through scripture) or man-given. But for the Christian, by necessity, there must be an appeal to scripture for answers to the great questions of life and existence.
I typically approach many of these topics using what is known as Systematic Theology (which incorporates Biblical Theology alongside philosophy/ reasoning, the primary source being Scripture). That is how we arrive at many doctrines, like the Doctrine of the Trinity (definitions like "persons" and "natures" are philosophical questions).
I guess every one of us has things they like to discuss and things that do not interest them. For me, the "how we arrive" at our conclusions are more interesting than the conclusions themselves. I'm just built that way I guess. So I am interested in the reasons one would arrive at predestination to salvation rather than just resting on Scripture as stating the view (I do not believe it does, but I do believe in your conclusion).
This is along my reasoning. I believe that everything that occurs is predestined to occur because God is God. Everything will occur as God knew before the foundation of the earth it would occur. And God decreed everything to occur by the act of creation.
I am interested in how people arrive at their conclusions, but I do rest on scripture. As far as whether we agree on scripture, that is another matter for another thread.
Jon, how do you defend that view biblically?
"Just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world,"
The point ignored here is "IN HIM".
The condition of being IN CHRIST was not since before creation.
Ephesians 2
12remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. 13But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ. (emphasizing BUT NOW IN CHRIST)
This implies quite clearly you were not in Christ.
Also the chose US doesn't automatically mean exclusively us.
This stupid idea of exclusivity based on being God's select aside from any quality or character was already exhibited in the attitude of the pharisees.
There is absolutely ZERO difference between a pharisees attitude and a Calvinist.
I would challenge can you name one difference? Its only a different brand/logo. One has a Yaweh T shirt the other has a Jesus T shirt.
11“The Pharisee stood and was praying this to himself: ‘God, I thank You that I am not like other people: swindlers, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector.
11“The CALVINIST stood and was praying this to himself: ‘God, I thank You that I am not like other people: UNELECT and Totally Depraved.
The two would share exact same teaching. Can't do nothing about it. Born into it, Either chosen or not.
In fact Jesus tells story. Points out sincerity of character. The Tax collector didn't go home patting himself on the back claiming to be chosen.
9And He also told this parable to some people who trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and viewed others with contempt: 10“Two men went up into the temple to pray, one a Pharisee and the other a tax collector. 11“The Pharisee stood and was praying this to himself: ‘God, I thank You that I am not like other people: swindlers, unjust, adulterers, or even like this tax collector. 12‘I fast twice a week; I pay tithes of all that I get.’ 13“But the tax collector, standing some distance away, was even unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven, but was beating his breast, saying, ‘God, be merciful to me, the sinner!’ 14“I tell you, this man went to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted.”
Folks who trust in themselves as righteous and view others with contempt.
Now Jesus points out the tax collector went to his house justified. In Calvinism thats a lie. You might as well flip a coin between both men.
First I point out that the question itself is philosophical, not biblical.
Then I explain that God is omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, and eternal. God does not "choose" as men would choose between people or courses of action.
If the person I am talking to is still in agreement I point out that everything has to be predestined to occur in accordance with God's counsel. It is decreed to occur (that potential is made a certainty) by God's act of creation.
Biblically my argument rests on the nature and act of God.
Let me ask this a different way. Are you in agreement with the maxim that "scripture* is the final authority for all matters of faith and practice?" In other words, when it comes down to matters like that nature of man, the nature of God, sin, righteousness, salvation, Christian conduct, morality et. al; that the final source of truth on these subjects is revealed in the pages of scripture?
I ask these things not because I think philosophy is inherently wrong (it is not). I ask these things to determine what is Jon's final authority for faith and practice.
*By "scripture" I mean the 66 books of the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation (no apocryphal writings).
True. I assumed that we both held predestination to be absolute (extending to the lost and the saved). Apologies. I look forward to that thread.
I share your interest.
What I believe about Scripture is that it ls "God breathed" and sufficient, without error. It is, IMHO, God's revelation of Himself to mankind in the context of redemption.
When it comes to doctrine we will have different interpretations, but I believe Scripture itself is objective (it is not what Scripture means to you or me but what Scripture means).
I say it here because it is something that, for me, is not up for debate (I am not interested in discussing other views of Scripture but argue with my view presupposed).
I apologize for my lack of clarity. The intent of my statement was whether we agree on any specific part of scripture is fodder for another thread, not that we are or are not in agreement on predestination.
See my question in post #16. What I am trying to determine is whether you consider scripture to be the final authority.
The final authority is Scripture. But I do not believe Scripture answers all of the questions we come up with.
Thank you.
Having agreement on whether the 66 books of the Bible ("scripture") is the final authority for all matters of faith and practice is the prerequisite for fruitful discussions on all matters of doctrine and theology. Sometimes it is necessary, like on a message board, to fly our colors up the mast occasionally for others to see. Message boards gain new members and lurkers all the time and they may not know what we truly believe.
But you are right, scripture does not answer all our questions. Apple or Android? Thai or Chinese food? Bitcoin or precious metals for investments? Mets or Yankees? I know I am being a bit humourous but even in those things, we may find direction in scripture.
- Status