Biblical Election and Predestination

[JayR]

Jesus died for the sins of the world, but only the elect will be justified. Faith is God given, so anyone who believes in God is granted faith by God by His grace as a gift. "By grace you are saved through faith, and not of yourselves..." faith isn't of ourselves. We aren't saved by our own capacity to believe in God, God gives us faith. Salvation is by grace, grace, grace, not human will, or decision, or effort.

The only ones who will believe in Jesus are the ones whom God has elected for salvation, and they will only believe in Jesus because God will regenerate their hearts and grant them repentance and faith.

He did choose me and all of His people, absolutely, without a doubt, "... vessels prepared for glory, even us..."

 

[JayR]

Moses said to Joshua, "Choose some of our men and go out to fight the Amalekites. Tomorrow I will stand on top of the hill with the staff of God in my hands."

Deuteronomy 30:19
This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live

These aren't explicitly teaching then men have a free will. They are commands from God, and anyone who obeys them is only capable of obeying them because God by His grace and power made them capable of doing so.

"What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Certainly not! Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one’s slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness? But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered. And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. I speak in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves of uncleanness, and of lawlessness leading to more lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves of righteousness for holiness.
For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. What fruit did you have then in the things of which you are now ashamed? For the end of those things is death. But now having been set free from sin, and having become slaves of God, you have your fruit to holiness, and the end, everlasting life. For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."

You are a slave. You always were a slave, and so was I, and so am I.

"“Therefore say to the house of Israel, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD: “I do not do this for your sake, O house of Israel, but for My holy name’s sake, which you have profaned among the nations wherever you went. And I will sanctify My great name, which has been profaned among the nations, which you have profaned in their midst; and the nations shall know that I am the LORD,†says the Lord GOD, “when I am hallowed in you before their eyes. For I will take you from among the nations, gather you out of all countries, and bring you into your own land. Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them. Then you shall dwell in the land that I gave to your fathers; you shall be My people, and I will be your God. I will deliver you from all your uncleannesses."

When God regenerates a man, He causes Him to do His will. Salvation is a supernatural work of God, and it has absolutely nothing to do with man's puny decisions, effort, or will. It has to do with God's will supernaturally regenerating a God-hating creature and causing Him to walk in His statutes and judgments, thus, we become slaves of God. Not free, but slaves.

 

[Drew]

These aren't explicitly teaching then men have a free will. They are commands from God, and anyone who obeys them is only capable of obeying them because God by His grace and power made them capable of doing so.

Let's address the Deuteronomy text:

This day I call heaven and earth as witnesses against you that I have set before you life and death, blessings and curses. Now choose life, so that you and your children may live

The command is a command to choose - and the word "choose", by its very meaning entails free will. If you are going to argue that "choose" does not imply free will, why don't humans say things like this:

1. The apple chose to fall from the tree.
2. The comet chose to come near the earth.
3. etc.

I am going to claim that one goes too far if one does not use words the proper way. Choice implies free will - free will is implicit in the very concept of "choice". You can no more have "choice" without free will than you can have a triangle without three sides.

The text does not say:

Now you will be elected to life, so that you and your children may live

It says

Now choose life, so that you and your children may live

The text reads as it reads - life and death are placed before "audience". They are asked to choose. The fact that this is a command does not let you change the meaning of the word "choose" - it is perfectly coherent to be commanded to make a choice.

 

[JayR]

I am going to claim that one goes too far if one does not use words the proper way. Choice implies free will - free will is implicit in the very concept of "choice". You can no more have "choice" without free will than you can have a triangle without three sides.

No, your wrong. Implicit in the concept of "choice" is will, but by no means must that will be free, and we know for a fact that it's not free because Romans 6 says that we are slaves to sin when unconverted, and therefore when we are saved and seemingly make a "choice" to obey God, it is because God causes us to do so, not of ourselves, it is a gift of God by His grace.

Isreal was under the law of God. If they disobeyed the law, they were cursed, if they obeyed the law, they were blessed. The choice had nothing to do with their free will because nobody has a free will, they were given the commandment to choose so that God would be just and right in judging them for doing wrong. The only ones who obeyed that command only did so because God gave repentance and faith, and caused them to obey. Salvation is supernatural, it has absolutely nothing to do with a puny human decision, will, or effort.

 

[Drew]

I suggest that the following text from Romans 1 makes no sense if men do not have a measure of free will:

18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualitiesâ€â€his eternal power and divine natureâ€â€have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

The thrust of the claim here is pretty clear - God reveals Himself to men, they reject Him and are to be declared to be without excuse. Of course, "free will" is not explicitly stated, but the whole concept of being in a position where one is "without excuse" clearly necessitates that men indeed have some freedom to act.

Again, we need to unpack the relevant concepts and see where they lead us, and then be true to them. When we say a person is "without excuse", what do we mean? We mean, clearly, that they are in a state where they had:

1. The information needed to make the right decision;
2. The capacity to understand that information; and
3. The freedom to make the right decision.

It is simply a violation of the relevant concepts to say that an "agent" is "without excuse" if some external agent (or agents) fully determined what they did. Nobody thinks that way.

Let's say that poor Fred is strapped into a chair. Fred knows that a meteorite is coming right at him. Fred understands that he will be killed if hit by the meteoritre. However, Fred is not free to act - and this totally takes the air out of any claim that we can level against Fred to the effect that he is "without excuse'.

 

[JayR]

No, once again you are wrong. Why are men without excuse? Because they know that they are doing evil, and not only are they incapable of choosing to do right, but they wouldn't choose to do right even if they were able to in their unconverted state. This is why men hate God, because they are evil and God is good. They love evil, "... who, knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them."

Not only does this passage not teach free will, on the contrary, it further demonstrates how men are slaves to sin. If men know that God's judgment is coming against evil, and their consciences bear witness of that fact, like the Bible says, then why in the world would they continue to do those things and approve of them that practice them? That is the most irrational, idiotic thing anyone could possibly do. That is the equivalent to walking onto a highway, and seeing 3 miles down the road an 18 wheeler coming right at you, and rather than getting out of the way, you stand there fully knowing that you are going to be crushed for the sole purpose of finishing the game of jax that you began in the middle of the road. No being would do something that stupid unless they were slaves to what was keeping them on the road, and incapable of doing the will of any other than their master, sin. The Bible teaches that men are slaves to sin, and they are. The Bible teaches that converted men are slaves to obedience and to God, and they are.

 

[Orion]

Hey, JayR. . . .a few questions...

Can an elected person ever turn his/her back on God? If a person sincerely loved God, at one point in their life, yet became disingenuated with it all [Christianity in general], where they called before or not? How would a person, even though they have the highest sincerity of heart, the desire to do what is right, DO what is right, love God and people, yet were actually never chosen, how would that person know they were [in fact] chosen and not just "going through the motions], again even doing to in the sincerity of their heart? . . . . . . . . . . . . . How do YOU know you are "one of the chosen"? :-?

 

[Drew]

No, your wrong. Implicit in the concept of "choice" is will, but by no means must that will be free

This strategy does not solve the problem for you, since the concept of "will" also has "freedom of choice" bundled into it. I politely suggest that people "fall" for this way of thinking since they do not go to the trouble of analysing the concept of a "will" - thinking about the assumptions and pre-conditions that come "pre-packaged" as part of the concept.

A "will" is a thing that we ascribe to a certain subset of living beings - humans, cats, dogs, etc. We do not say that plants have wills, we do not say that rocks have wills. I suggest that the way we use the term will necessitates that "freedom is built in". There is no such thing as will that is not at least partially free - it ceases to be will.

Now there is a further trap that people fall into - they think that because a "totally depraved" person has a wide range of choices of "bad things he could do" - and can choose among them, that this means that the person has "choice" or some form of "free will". They then think something like this: "Since Fred could choose between sin A and sin B, and he selected A, this means that we can hold Fred accountable since he is 'choosing'".

This is sleight of hand, however. The issue is not freedom to choose among only evil options - it is freedom to choice among both good and evil options. This notion that we have a "will" that is free in respect to which evil thing we is not the issue. The issue is: do we have freedom to do something "good".

In the Deuteronomy text we are told to choose between life and death. If our will is not "free" to select the "life" option, then the instruction is meaningless and incoherent. It would be like asking me to choose between running 1 kilometre in 10 minutes (something I can do) and running 1 kilometer in 10 seconds (something I cannot). Whether you want to say that "choice implies a will" or "choice implies freedom", the fact remains - it is nonsensical to set 2 options before someone, order them to make a choice, and yet claim that they do not have the freedom to choose one of the options.

 

[JayR]

Can an elected person ever turn his/her back on God?

Yes. But Jesus will in NO WISE CAST out the ones who the Father gives to Him. If anyone is part of the elect, then they are within the hands of God and in His infinite saving power. The elect can turn from God, but God will come in discipline and bring them back onto the narrow path. I experienced this a couple weeks ago. God crushed me under His disciplining hand when I sinned, and by His grace He brought me back to Him.

If a person sincerely loved God, at one point in their life, yet became disingenuated with it all [Christianity in general], where they called before or not?

If someone seemingly follows God for a season, and then falls away without God's disciplining hand coming and bringing them back to Him, then they never knew Him, because God will not leave His children to live in constant carnality. Scripture testifies against parents that don't discipline their children that they hate their children, and God absolutely without the shadow of a doubt loves His children, and He will discipline them.

You can know that you are saved. 1 John was written so that we might know we have eternal life. It contains a series of tests of what makes a true Christian. There is a powerful sermon called "Examine Yourself" I suggest that you listen to it. You can know that you are saved, and by God's grace this sermon will expose to you the state of your soul:

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.a ... 5220621750

Also, here is another sermon on Regeneration that is very, very good. I suggest that you listen to both of these when you get a chance:

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.a ... 1708103644

 

[JayR]

You don't understand Romans 6 Drew. It is useless arguing with you about free-will if you won't submit yourself to Scripture.

 

[Drew]

Why are men without excuse? Because they know that they are doing evil, and not only are they incapable of choosing to do right, but they wouldn't choose to do right even if they were able to in their unconverted state.

This kind of reasoning is not simply true to the meaning of the relevant concepts. When we read scriptures, we read words. And words have meanings. We cannot twist and distort the meaning beyond recognition. Is there anyone out there besides JayR who would claim that a person who is incapable of doing "X" can be deemed as "without excuse" in respect that person's failure to do X?

The very concept of being "without" excuse necessitates that choice be in there somewhere. This is why we laugh our heads off when someone angrily yells at the car for running out of gas - as if the car had some "freedom" to do anything about that situation. The concept of having "no excuse" means that one had the self-deteriminative capability to do something other than what one actually did.

 

[JayR]

You don't understand Romans 6 drew, and until you understand that men are slaves to sin and incapable of doing righteousness aside from the grace of God, you are going to misinterpret a lot of the Bible accordingly.

 

[GraceBwithU]

Jesus died for the sins of the world, but only the elect will be justified. Faith is God given, so anyone who believes in God is granted faith by God by His grace as a gift. "By grace you are saved through faith, and not of yourselves..." faith isn't of ourselves. We aren't saved by our own capacity to believe in God, God gives us faith. Salvation is by grace, grace, grace, not human will, or decision, or effort.

The only ones who will believe in Jesus are the ones whom God has elected for salvation, and they will only believe in Jesus because God will regenerate their hearts and grant them repentance and faith.

He did choose me and all of His people, absolutely, without a doubt, "... vessels prepared for glory, even us..."

He only offered you His grace. To believe in the “I†in TULIP is to ignore the existence of Satan. Satan only exists because God allows it. He has allowed it because He wants willing servants….not slaves or puppets. The greatest trick Satan has ever pulled was to convince some that he does not exists or have any role in God’s plan.

It is obvious that you have no clue who the elect are or how they become the elect. It is true that it all comes from God, but you simply miss how it comes.

Some were truly chosen by name. Why would you be so cruelly self-centered to think that somehow you deserve salvation and others don’t? How could you believe that all of God’s word is not true? But only what you can twist to your own belief. There is absolutely nothing biblically truthful about anything about the elect in the way that the TULIP defends it. The TULIP is a clever acronym…nothing more. It was created by man not God. So that one might believe that he does not have to do anything or believe anything, just wait for God to do it all. God’s grace is what saves us. But there is more to it than just hanging out waiting for God to do His will for you because you are somehow better than the person next to you. Rubbish…all rubbish.

How do you even witness to a lost person, if you have this attitude? Do you tell them that if you believe in Jesus, this will not mean anything unless you are on this list that you pretend exist? The Book of Life my friend has been written in “FROM†the foundation of the world. Not all of it was written “BEFOREâ€Â. Big difference!

Rev 17:8
8 The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
KJV

The phrase “world began†6 times in the KJV of the Bible and only 2 times referring to the election. And you base what you believe on your misinterpretation of these verses.
:smt102

 

[Drew]

You don't understand Romans 6 drew, and until you understand that men are slaves to sin and incapable of doing righteousness aside from the grace of God, you are going to misinterpret a lot of the Bible accordingly.

I think that your argument here about Romans 6 backfires:

But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted. 18You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.

It appears that the essence of your argument is that Romans 6 shows that we were slaves to righteousness, and in fact so enslaved that we are incapable of doing good. If you are going to be consistent, you are forced into a position of asserting that, as the text says in parallel fashion, believers are so enslaved to righteousness that they are incapable of sinning.

We know that this is simply not true.

 

[GraceBwithU]

JayR,
Just for the record...The phase "before the world began" never refers to individual salvation, but God's promise of salvation.

Titus 1:2
2 In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began;
KJV

Here it is clearly speaking or eternal life...not an individual.

2 Tim 1:9-10
9 Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,
10 But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:
KJV

Here Paul is speaking of Jesus not the individual. It even goes further to explain that Paul is speaking of the gospel of Jesus. Whom was in the begining with God and He was God.

 

[mondar]

Here we get into a different aspect of this discussion. I think that God "predestined" or "elected" the existence of a category of people who will be saved - those who place faith in Jesus. But, I submit, and will argue (though not in this post) - that he does not elect the specific members of that category. So yes, God "elects" true Israel, but he does not "elect" its individual members.

How is it that God elects true Israel without also electing it's individual members which is exactly the principle that is given in verses 11-13? Which is exactly the principle that is given when God says that He hardened Pharoah for a purpose, who is an individual?

God elects individuals my friends. "All that the father gives to me will come to me, I will in no wise cast him out." "No man can come to me except the Father draw him."

Election is precisely done by God's own selection of individuals. Are you suggesting that He put names in a hat and drew His desired number? Absolutely not. He chooses His elect based on His own will and mercy and compassion, as is the principle in verse 15,16, and 18, and He gives them to the Son to be saved.

But it doesn't stop there. He also elects those who aren't going to be saved in not giving them to His Son. Once again it isn't a mass drawing from the hat of God, God in His omniscience, providence, and mercy, chooses His elect according to His will and His mercy, and He hardens the rest against Him as individuals, which is the principle in verse 18. No man can resist His hardening, as is the principle in 19-21. God can do what He pleases in election and predestination and be absolutely righteous and just in doing so.

JayR,
You have spoken correctly. In John 6:44 it says "No man." I sit here and watch Arminians try to get some wiggle room with that text. They complain that you are not reading who the text is written to, they complain you are taking it out of context, the make many accusations and try to turn the words "No man" in John 6:44 into "maybe a few can come to me."

The entire context of John 6:44 demands your interpretation. In John 6:37 says...
"All that which the Father giveth me shall come unto me"

Now the question in verse 37 is this... By the word "All" iS every single person in the universe given to Christ by the Father? If every single person is given, then we have universalism, because the text clearly says that all who are given will come to Christ. The text does not say "some who are given will find the faith to come." The text does not say "most who are given by the Father will come. The text does not say "just about everyone given by the Father will come to Christ.

Now the way Arminians manipulate this text is to reverse what is said. They read it that "all who come will be given." Notice how arminians reverse the order in verse 37 and say that God will give us to Christ if we come. Such a thought is an oxymoron. If I can come to Christ, I dont need God to draw me (verse 44). That is not the order, but we come to Christ only because we are given by the Father (37).

JayR, you have spoken correctly about John 6:44, and the context.

 

[JayR]

If you are going to be consistent, you are forced into a position of asserting that, as the text says in parallel fashion, believers are so enslaved to righteousness that they are incapable of sinning.

No that's not what the text is saying. We know that isn't what the text is saying from the context of the rest of the Bible. We also do know in the context of the rest of the Bible that unregenerate sinners are incapable of doing righteousness, because even our righteousnesses are as filthy rags, and no unregenerate man does anything for the glory of God, and therefore all his deeds are sinful, selfish, and bent towards evil. Men are slaves to sin before conversion, absolutely. Men are slaves to God when they are converted, and God even uses our sin to conform us into the image of Christ.

 

[GraceBwithU]

You don't understand Romans 6 drew, and until you understand that men are slaves to sin and incapable of doing righteousness aside from the grace of God, you are going to misinterpret a lot of the Bible accordingly.

Drew understands Romans 6 in the way that it was written. You want to it to say something that it does not say. I'm not sure you understand what God's grace is? Until you understand this you will not understand what drew is saying.

 

[JayR]

He only offered you His grace.

No, He gave me grace as a gift. He gave me repentance. He gave me faith, and He gave me His holy Spirit and caused me to walk in His statutes and judgments. Why? Because for some reason unknown to me He chose me as part of His elect. He chose to have mercy on me and have compassion on me, and it has nothing to do with my worth, but it has much more to do with God's glory, because I was a filthy sewer rat not worthy of being stepped on before God saved me, and God will therefore get a higher degree of glory out of giving His rich graces to me.

Why would you be so cruelly self-centered to think that somehow you deserve salvation and others don’t?

I don't deserve salvation. Salvation is a gift by His grace. The only thing I could motivate a holy God to do is to damn me to hell for all eternity, or to have mercy and compassion on me because I am so pathetic. I deserve damnation, but Jesus drank my wrath on the cross, so there is no longer any condemnation for me.

You are the one twisting God's word and denying clear obvious doctrine that Jesus Himself taught. "All that the Father gives to me will come to me, and he that comes to me I will in no wise cast out." "No man can come to me except the Father draw him."

These are individuals whom God has chosen according to His own mercy and His own compassion as vessels prepared for glory, and those whom He hasn't chosen to draw to and give to the Son He has prepared as vessels of destruction, and they are damned without a single shred of hope, because God's word declares it.

 

[Drew]

If you are going to be consistent, you are forced into a position of asserting that, as the text says in parallel fashion, believers are so enslaved to righteousness that they are incapable of sinning.

No that's not what the text is saying. We know that isn't what the text is saying from the context of the rest of the Bible. We also do know in the context of the rest of the Bible that unregenerate sinners are incapable of doing righteousness, because even our righteousnesses are as filthy rags, and no unregenerate man does anything for the glory of God, and therefore all his deeds are sinful, selfish, and bent towards evil. Men are slaves to sin before conversion, absolutely. Men are slaves to God when they are converted, and God even uses our sin to conform us into the image of Christ.

You are simply not arguing fairly here.

You use Romans 6 as "proof-text" for our lack of freedom to do good in our unregenerate state. You seem to rather clearly ground that argument in the fact that we are slaves to sin. Fair enough.

But here again is the clip from Romans 6:

Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obeyâ€â€whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted. 18You have been set free from sin and have become slaves to righteousness.

You cannot have it both ways here. If in our unregenerate state we cannot choose to fo good since we are slaves, then it follows that in our regenerate state, we cannot choose to sin, since we are again slaves. And we all know we can and do choose to sin.

You have to be consistent in your treatment of what the implications of being a "slave" are. Paul gives us no choice here - his language clearly shows that slavery works the same both ways.

So unless you deny that slaves to righteousness still sin, you need to revoke your argument that slaves to sin cannot choose to do good.

Your agument about God using our sin to confrom us is good, but it is not relevant to the matter at issue. The issue is what slavery means.