Truth or Calvinism - That should do it.

Or rather you reject the answer anyway. :BangHead:

Darren

 

I don't agree with "Once Saved, Always Saved" though I don't believe a person can lose his/her salvation. I hold to the "Final Perseverance of The Saints". According to the Southern Baptist Abstract of Principles it can be defined the following way:

Perseverance is a sign (result) of true conversion (Jn 8:31, Col 1:21-23, 1Cor 1:8).

==That would certainly solve the dilema of election. The only problem is that whole idea is not found in Scripture. It is certainly not found in John 6:37. In that passage people only come to Jesus because the Father has given them to Him.

"All that the Father gives Me will come to Me..."

Who comes to Jesus? Those the Father gives to Jesus. These are the ones who come to Jesus and recieve eternal life (Jn 17:1-3). In fact, only those the Father gives to Jesus and draws to Jesus can come to Jesus (Jn 6:44). Jesus clearly states that "no one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him" (Jn 6:44a). That eliminates the view you expressed above since the choice is not placed in man's hands. It is impossible for a person to express saving faith in Christ without the Father first giving them to Christ and drawing them to Christ. Those who are given, those who are drawn, are never turned away or lost and will be raised up on the last day (also see Rom 8:29-30).

==Foreknowledge refers to individuals, not faith or works. Paul clearly states that the saved were foreknown.

"For those whom He foreknew..." (Rom 8:29a)

God foreknows individuals. That means He knew us beforehand. This does not refer to the non-saved (non-elect) since Christ clearly tells them He never knew them (Matt 7:23). God only foreknows the saved. The Bible never states that He foreknows them based on their forseen faith and repentance. Instead the Bible tells us that God's electing work is based on His good pleasure (Eph 1:4-6).

==That is, of course, assuming that God is like us in everyway. However He is not. The Bible clearly teaches that God desires all men to be saved (1Tim 2:3-6). Because of that desire, He gave His Son to be "a ransom for all" so that anyone who believes in Him would have eternal life (Jn 3:16, etc). However the Bible is very clear that left to ourselves no man would seek the True God (Rom 3:9-12). What does man "naturally" do apart from the work of God in his life? Idolatry (Rom 1:18-32). The history of world religions plays this truth out for us. Apart from the drawing of the Father men do not seek the True and Living God on His Holy and Righteous terms. Rather, left to oursleves, man creates his own gods. That is why Jesus said that "no one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him" (Jn 6:44a). In order to be saved a person must first be given to and drawn to the Son by the Father and only then they will come to the Son in faith. So, apart from election nobody would or could be saved. There is no contradiction here. The offer of salvation is open to all, but only those who believe (the elect) will respond to that offer. The rest go on their natural way.

==Denying special election does not solve that apparent contradiction. After all, if God desires all men to be saved why does He not draw all men to Christ in a saving way. Certainly that is not beyond His ability. Yet He has choosen not to do that. Simply because God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked, simply because God desires that all be saved, does not mean that He will save everyone or elect everyone. That is clear in Scripure and it should be clear in daily life (ie...not everyone is saved).

==In other words, you wish to explain them away. John 3:16 only states that "pas ho pisteuwn" (everyone believing) "shall not perish, but have eternal life". The passage does not in anyway contradict unconditional election. Everyone who believes in the Lord Jesus Christ will have eternal life. Nobody in the Calvinism discussion disagrees with that. The question is "who" will believe? The Biblical answer is those the Father has given to the Son (the elect).

==Corporate election does not work. Clearly in passages like John 6, 10, 17, Romans 8, etc, are refering to individuals and not a corporate group.

It sounds to me like you, and others, are trying to find a way to understand election that causes you no problems. Therefore you water down the Biblical teachings creating this idea of corporate election and/or forseen faith election. However if we simply let the Scriptures speak neither of those options work. I can't explain election any more than to simply say it is Biblical. I don't know why God does what He does and I doubt I ever will (Deut 29:29). Why God elects one and leaves another alone is a mystery to me (and to all). However I would never dare to accuse God of unrighteousness. After all, He is God and He determines what righteousness and holiness is. I don't. He is perfect, Holy, Loving, and Just. Therefore I know that all of His decisions and judgments are final, correct, righteous, just, and right. Even if I can't understand them. Thus I agree with the Apostle Paul in Romans 11:33-36 when he proclaims (in part), "Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways".

"For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen" -Romans 11:36

Amen.

 

Christ sacrificed Himself for all mankind that anyone whom (chooses to) believes in Him will be saved. Good for all mankind, beneficial, effective, substitutionary vicarious atonement ONLY to those whom believe. All are drawn (whosoever will), some respond. Bottom line.

Darren

 

And here is one that Calvinists cannot answer.

Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, [thou] that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under [her] wings, and ye would not!


Why didn't they? Jesus makes it clear He would have gathered them as a hen gathers her chicks. He was willing but they were not. Why?

 

Yes, I am going through this same discussion on another thread.

Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

1) They heard the word of truth (the gospel)
2) They trusted after that they heard the word of truth
3) After believeing on Jesus they were sealed with the Holy Spirit.

 

Don't worry about my "spellen", worry about my "doctrine". :laugh: :laugh:

If you had my "present" problems, empty room where the kitchen uses to be, (remodeling) and the better half asking, "Are we there yet",

Your brain would be scrambled too.

 

Quite the contrary, calvinists have answered that one many times.

You are not even taking that passage in context.

By the way, you still did not answer the question.
If you are not comfortable answering it yourself, get the opinion of a pastor or theologian that you agree with. I would be interested in hearing what a synergist would say why he believed yet others do not.

Was he smarter?
More righteous?
More soft hearted?

Did God Draw him more?
Did God place him in more favorable circumstances?

 

==I'm not really sure why you would think that Matthew 23:37 is a passage that "Calvinists cannot answer". If you have read any Calvinist writings (etc) you would be aware of the fact that this verse causes no problem for Bible based Calvinism. As discussed above in response to Benefactor, the Bible clearly teaches that it is God's desire that all men be saved (1Tim 2:3-6). The Bible is also clear that God takes no joy in the death of the wicked (Ez 18:32). God desires that people repent and live. However the Bible is also clear that He has not chosen to save everyone. In fact, Jesus directly stated that apart from the Father's drawing nobody can come to Him (Jn 6:44). However those the Father draws to Him, those the Father gives to Him, will come to Him and will be raised up on the last day (Jn 6:37-39, 44). God did desire the people of Israel to turn to Him, and He was sad over their rejection and the consequences it would bring (Matt 23:37-38), however their refusal was part of His sovereign plan (Acts 4:27-28). God offers salvation to all, however only those He has elected will take advantage of that offer. The rest go their own way.

 

==Who are you responding to? I can't tell, though it does not look like a response to my reply.

 

I have never heard so much double talk in my life! :laugh:

God desired for Israel to turn to Him but He "passed them over" as Cal's say. Calvinists use this argument against non-cals all the time. They say if God desires someone to be saved, then they will be saved. Yet you are saying quite the opposite. You are actually making the case for non-cals. God desired Israel to turn to Him, yet did not choose them or elect them for salvation. ?????? That does not make sense in the Calvinist view. It does make sense to me though. God desires that all be saved, but not all will believe, because He has given us free will to choose or reject. As was the case with Israel. They chose to reject their Messiah. God came to them, yet you are saying that He had no intention of saving them, (they were not the elect) or He would have. Quite confusing.

 

Humor me. How do you answer it? Why did Israel reject their Messiah even though it was His desire to save them?

And I did answer your question. I told you what Jesus said. I can't do any better than that.

 

You are correct Amy, God wanted Israel saved, he literally begged them to be saved. But they refused.

Rom 10:21 But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.

What does disobedient mean?

 

I do not believe you are taking that verse in context. It does not even seem to be a soteriological text but before I answer I do need to study that in more detail.
Also, other, more studied calvinist than myself have responded to this in detail.

I will say that though God does not take pleasure in the death of the wicked, neither does He desire there repentance in the same way that He desires the salvation of His elect.
Otherwise they would be saved.


Oh, and I must have missed you answer: where did you answer why you believed and others did not?

I think you mentioned that they loved darkness.
So did you.
Why did you stop loving darkness?

Let me ask it another way: Did God do anything to you, bring about circumstances, etc in your life that brought you to Christ that was different than some who did not believe? Or was that merely coincidence.

 

It's the "passing over" part I cannot accept for any good reason. You mean God saves ANYONE He chooses? Once they are regenerated they can't resist and will believe 100 times out of 100, no exceptions. Then why doesn't God choose to save everyone if He desires it and HE can if HE wanted to? So why doesn't HE?? To show what mercy is on those whom are elect?? Too bad for the non elect?? I don't buy it.

:jesus:

Darren

 

Agreed.

Darren

 

Are you saying that the triune God of scripture is unable to save someone who does not want to be?
Is He unable to save the entire world if that was His plan?
Is he not really omnipotent after all?

 

Your line of questioning is amusing really. Shall I apply the law of excluded middle to your questions? Do I have to take A or B but not C? IF not A than B? Now since God planned NOT to save everyone but only some WHY?? did God not plan to save ALL? That was my question. Since when does omnipotence have anything to do with accept or reject or deny, obey or disobey, love or don't love, on the part of man?

Seems to me God's omnipotence functions as it does when man has been given the responsibility to respond to God, especially to the call of the gospel. I see no contradiction at all.

Darren