What is Election?

[Jethro Bodine]

...

I like short posts...but this may be too short.

 

[Chopper]

Dont' have time right now to read your last long post, but you are confusing me with this idea that man has free will to choose, but ultimately can only choose the way God intended for them to choose. That's not free will.

Irresistible will, as in 'I can't utltimately challenge God's will for my life in regard to salvation' is not free will. You're trying to have your cake and eat it to. Can't be done.

It's quite simple, the elect's will is captured by God's irresistible calling. There is a very slight chance that they could refuse, but God's power through the call just can't be rejected. Now, when that same person, who is now a part of the remnant, see's he must witness to the ones that God did not call to be a part of the remnant, the one who he is witnessing too he has full free will to choose, but is hampered by the evil one. One might say that God's power to choose has way more power to call the person than Satan has to hinder.

 

[ivdavid]

That doesn't make God unrighteous, or unjust.

Glad to agree upon this starting point.

It means he uses injustice and wrong to fulfill his plans.

Is God the root cause of the injustice and wrong that He uses to fulfill His plans? I'm expecting the answer to be "No" - because if He is the cause, then He would be found unrighteous and unjust.
I wouldn't be referring to Christ's sacrifice here - because though He was oppressed and treated unjustly, such was caused by unjust sinners like us and Not God Himself. God did Will Christ's oppression but only by permission[withholding His refraining Hand] and not by causation. The sin-nature in fallen man is the cause of all that is unjust and unrighteous - not God. Would you agree?

Then by the same evaluation, when you call fallen man's default condemnation as Unjust - is God the cause of that unjust plan/result? If not, what is the cause of that?

But what you can't do is somehow make pre-programming most of mankind to not believe, apart from their own will, a part of a righteous plan that is somehow consistent with a God who is good, and righteous, and holy. Especially, as I've pointed out, that goes entirely against what the Bible says, that God wants all men to be saved.

Brick by brick, my friend. To understand another's belief system, you must not insert your own beliefs into it and demand reconciliation - you must only evaluate it for internal consistency within its own tenets/first premises and its interpretation of the Bible. So for starters, I don't know what you mean by pre-programming - because I definitely haven't come across it. And there is the will of each man operational at all times - the word 'free' becoming irrelevant/redundant in concept. I shall explain all these once we reach the conclusions of what we're already currently discussing. And as to the Timothy verse, we'd only be beating a dead horse if we are to repeat exegesis on what the term "all" includes in the context of the surrounding verses.

 

[ivdavid]

Irresistible will, as in 'I can't ultimately challenge God's will for my life in regard to salvation' is not free will.

Not addressed to Jethro Bodine specifically, but a quick thought - does Jesus Christ have freewill as per the above observation? Because we do know Jesus will never challenge the Father's Will for His life regarding anything. Jesus irresistibly wills the Father's will - is that freewill?

 

[jasoncran]

kinda hard on that one since all are one and the idea of hierarchy is there but also a metaphor. its means to help us understand. jesus was aslo co eternal and could be worshipped by man. now we have gotten into the hyperstatic union.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

...when you call fallen man's default condemnation as Unjust - is God the cause of that unjust plan/result? If not, what is the cause of that?

The individual's own sin. I said this already. This is what Paul said.

Brick by brick, my friend. To understand another's belief system, you must not insert your own beliefs into it and demand reconciliation - you must only evaluate it for internal consistency within its own tenets/first premises and its interpretation of the Bible. So for starters, I don't know what you mean by pre-programming - because I definitely haven't come across it. And there is the will of each man operational at all times - the word 'free' becoming irrelevant/redundant in concept. I shall explain all these once we reach the conclusions of what we're already currently discussing. And as to the Timothy verse, we'd only be beating a dead horse if we are to repeat exegesis on what the term "all" includes in the context of the surrounding verses.

This is why I generally stay away from these kinds of arguments. These are doctrines that got over thought and developed into fleshly, man-made beliefs and reasonings bereft of the Spirit of God. It's why I do not read commentaries.

Just show me using the Bible that election means that God predetermines, by his design of the individual, who will be saved and who will not be saved because God made them that way. I have shown how to interpret the verses of election and predestination so they do not have to mean that as some insist. That's what you have to do now with your doctrine.

So do that. Take the scriptures where election and predestination are taught and using those and other scriptures prove that they mean God has determined ahead of time who will believe, and who will not, because he has purposely manufactured them that way according to his own will, not the will of the person (in complete defiance to what the Bible says that he wants men to be saved, not condemned to hell).

 

[Deborah13]

The individual's own sin. I said this already. This is what Paul said.

This is why I generally stay away from these kinds of arguments. These are doctrines that got over thought and developed into fleshly, man-made beliefs and reasonings bereft of the Spirit of God. It's why I do not read commentaries.

Just show me using the Bible that election means that God predetermines, by his design of the individual, who will be saved and who will not be saved because God made them that way. I have shown how to interpret the verses of election and predestination so they do not have to mean that as some insist. That's what you have to do now with your doctrine.

So do that. Take the scriptures where election and predestination are taught and using those and other scriptures prove that they mean God has determined ahead of time who will believe, and who will not, because he has purposely manufactured them that way according to his own will, not the will of the person (in complete defiance to what the Bible says that he wants men to be saved, not condemned to hell).

All men have a will. The question, it appears to me is, is man a free agent? If so, completely? or is he confined, are there limits? Is the Calvinist or Calvinist type teaching of election and predestination one of those limits?

 

[Deborah13]

Not addressed to Jethro Bodine specifically, but a quick thought - does Jesus Christ have freewill as per the above observation? Because we do know Jesus will never challenge the Father's Will for His life regarding anything. Jesus irresistibly wills the Father's will - is that freewill?

Jesus' own will was to do the will of the Father.
Jesus was a man, with the nature of man. But not the sinful nature of Adam.
Jesus was God come in the flesh, with a divine nature.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Some argue that there has to be some activity in man, and that their election can't be just God's decission. Ever since the Law of Moses, people feel that they must contribute something to their Salvation, I have met some.

Show me in the scriptures that the 'work' of believing is included in the work that Paul says can not justify.

This one error of doctrine all by itself has caused more error of doctrine in the church than probably anything else.

But if you are sure the work of 'believing' is included in the works that man does that can not justify then show me where the Bible says that.

This is one of the foundational premises that has to be laid aside--as you say you want to do--in order for you to see the error of election/predestination as you are putting it forth here. Are you open to the possibility that you, along with the bulk of the church, has misunderstood Paul's doctrine of works/grace?

 

[ivdavid]

when you call fallen man's default condemnation as Unjust - is God the cause of that unjust plan/result? If not, what is the cause of that?

The individual's own sin. I said this already. This is what Paul said.

We're simply facing the usual semantic issues in such discussions - whenever I was asking you if a particular thing was unjust and wrong, I was actually asking if God was unjust or wrong in planning or doing that while you were responding to whether it was unjust or wrong on man. So, here is the restated argument -

That's your conclusion. And you haven't shown how it's possible to come to that conclusion.

It's not my conclusion per se - it's just mathematical logic. A computer would process it this same way when fed into it. We only need check the initial premises and the correctness of logic here, and we can be assured of the correctness of the conclusion.

Premise 1. God is not wrong or unjust in any part of whatever He plans or does, at any point in time/sequence. True/False?
From your last post, you have responded in the affirmative. So, we've got this marked as True.

Premise 2. God plans to judge/save man using a combination of 2 parts - a) the old covenant of holding fallen man responsible to the Law of works and (potentially) condemning him for his sin which is inevitable, apart from free choice - and b) the new covenant of offering free choice and other mitigating factors by grace, to result in the final (real) condemnation, then salvation. True/False?
This is merely spelling out the 2 covenants of God's plan of salvation. I've included your recommended change here - so as per your earlier response, I'm assuming this too would get marked as True.

Inference. From the above 2 premises, the logically derived inference is that God is Just and Right at any point in time/sequence in planning/carrying out each of these above parts of judging/saving man.

Conclusion. Applying the above inference to the old covenant, we get - God is Just and Right at any point in time/sequence in planning/carrying out the old covenant of holding fallen man responsible to the Law of works and (potentially) condemning him for his sin which is inevitable, apart from free choice.

The above is a single system of premises and logic. Once established, we can then apply its conclusion to other parts of our discussion. Do you see how I have arrived at this conclusion now? State your reservations on this before I proceed - Again, I am not referring to whether it is unjust on man or not - simply whether God is unjust/wrong in any part of His plans/actions at any point in time?

 

[Chopper]

Jethro, you are asking for Scripture that proves that God determined ahead of time who will believe according to His own will. Ephesians 1:4,5 is such a Scripture. "according as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love. Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will".

1. Notice, "He hath chosen us in Him" Do you see? He has chosen in Him. That is Him alone!
2. That He chose before the foundation of the world and not on anything He could see in the future, is found in v.4 "that we should be" not that we were.

 

[Chopper]

Show me in the scriptures that the 'work' of believing is included in the work that Paul says can not justify.

This one error of doctrine all by itself has caused more error of doctrine in the church than probably anything else.

But if you are sure the work of 'believing' is included in the works that man does that can not justify then show me where the Bible says that.

This is one of the foundational premises that has to be laid aside--as you say you want to do--in order for you to see the error of election/predestination as you are putting it forth here. Are you open to the possibility that you, along with the bulk of the church, has misunderstood Paul's doctrine of works/grace?

Jethro, I simply said that people think they need to do something to secure their Salvation. Not that there is some kind of work we must do. Although some theologians feel that the thinking process and having to make a decision is work. I don't believe that, Salvation is by grace and faith period.

 

[Chopper]

Show me in the scriptures that the 'work' of believing is included in the work that Paul says can not justify.

This one error of doctrine all by itself has caused more error of doctrine in the church than probably anything else.

But if you are sure the work of 'believing' is included in the works that man does that can not justify then show me where the Bible says that.

This is one of the foundational premises that has to be laid aside--as you say you want to do--in order for you to see the error of election/predestination as you are putting it forth here. Are you open to the possibility that you, along with the bulk of the church, has misunderstood Paul's doctrine of works/grace?

Some where along the line you think I believe in some kind of works for Salvation, I have not! and will not.

 

[reba]

alright guys remember much gets lost cause we are not "seeing" each other .

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Chopper, the predestination Paul is speaking of is the predestination of those who believe. Each of us has the choice (with lots of God's gracious help) to be a part of that predetermined plan for a body of believers conformed to the image of Christ, or not. But you are reading it as God predetermined by pre-programming who will believe and who will not.

Don't you realize that by saying that you're saying most people have been programmed purposely by God himself, to NOT believe and be cast into hell? Do you further realize this is exactly contrary to what God himself says about his desire that all men be saved, not destroyed? But you're doctrine says the exact opposite, that God's will was to actually condemn all men except an elect few pre-porgrammed by him to respond to the gospel. I don't know how you can deny this is the logical conclusion of your doctrine.

And don't forget, if you truly think the work of 'believing' is included in Paul's teaching about works not being able to justify show me the scripture that says that. For this is the very foundation of the predestination argument. And as I say, if the foundation is flawed, so will everything built on it be flawed. If you are truly interested in the truth about this you will ask yourself why you think the work of believing is somehow included in the damnable works that Paul says can not justify, when in fact he contrasts the works that can't justify with the work of believing.

 

[Chopper]

Chopper, the predestination Paul is speaking of is the predestination of those who believe. Each of us has the choice (with lots of God's gracious help) to be a part of that predetermined plan for a body of believers conformed to the image of Christ, or not. But you are reading it as God predetermined by pre-programming who will believe and who will not.

Don't you realize that by saying that you're saying most people have been programmed purposely by God himself, to NOT believe and be cast into hell? Do you further realize this is exactly contrary to what God himself says about his desire that all men be saved, not destroyed? But you're doctrine says the exact opposite, that God's will was to actually condemn all men except an elect few pre-porgrammed by him to respond to the gospel. I don't know how you can deny this is the logical conclusion of your doctrine.

And don't forget, if you truly think the work of 'believing' is included in Paul's teaching about works not being able to justify show me the scripture that says that. For this is the very foundation of the predestination argument. And as I say, if the foundation is flawed, so will everything built on it be flawed. If you are truly interested in the truth about this you will ask yourself why you think the work of believing is somehow included in the damnable works that Paul says can not justify, when in fact he contrasts the works that can't justify with the work of believing.

Jethro, I love you in the Lord. I'm not going to take part in this thread any longer. For some strange reason you are completely misrepresenting my post. You are putting words into my post that are not there. That is upsetting me very much! I will not reply to any more posts. I love you too much to have this topic be something that divides us. If I keep on with this thread, I know I'll say something that I'll regret later. I'm sorry but we will have to agree to disagree and leave it like that. Besides, I'm afraid of Reba! I don't want her to spank me.

 

[reba]

watching friends get to fussing hurts

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Why is the church afraid to take any credit whatsoever for choosing to believe the gospel? I know why. I'm hoping the church will honestly ask herself that question.

I know it's utterly impossible for us humans to come to faith and trust in God on our own. But Paul's argument against works has been misunderstood to mean we are to take no credit whatsoever for choosing out of a free will to accept God's plan of redemption, as if that is the definition of the works Paul says can not justify. They have been taught that any and all works purposely done by a person damns them to hell as a works salvationist eager to save his own soul by what he does. That is hardly what the Bible says about the 'work' of believing.

And as long as the church is blinded by this indoctrination about works it will continue in this and other misguided doctrines that she propagates generation to generation which has led to the deceived church that we have today that thinks 'faith minus works' can save a person, and that you can take comfort in that, in direct contradiction to James.

The truly sad part is, no matter how much I explain it this will be heard by all as meaning Jethro thinks a person is justified (made righteous before God) by what he does. That's the truly sad and frustrating part of all this. But that's how deep and entrenched this indoctrination about works goes in the church.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

watching friends get to fussing hurts

What hurts is people not responding to simple requests to explain their doctrine. This surely isn't the first time someone has bailed out of a discussion when asked to explain what they believe.

Anybody? Where does the Bible say the work of believing is itself a work of the law that if we do it we are condemned as trying to justify ourselves? Anybody?

It's important for those that hold to the 'predestined election' doctrine to explain how taking credit for receiving God's gracious plan of redemption of one's own free will is the same as thinking you saved yourself.

You who believe in this doctrine, can't you see how that doctrine is predicated on the belief that even the work of believing can't be ours or else that would be a damnable works gospel? So if we can't believe in God ourselves to any extent whatsoever (because that would be 'works') we have no choice but to believe that God did our believing for us apart from our own will. So we have the predestined election doctrine to explain something that isn't even true in the first place that it needs to be explained anyway.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

All men have a will. The question, it appears to me is, is man a free agent? If so, completely? or is he confined, are there limits? Is the Calvinist or Calvinist type teaching of election and predestination one of those limits?

Man is made a free agent during the time the Spirit of faith proclaims the truthfulness of the message of Christ to their heart and is at work in that person's life trying to bring them to a decision for Christ.

Up until then that person had no choice but to be confined to the boundaries of ever-increasing unrighteousness. After he gets saved he is confined to the boundaries of every-increasing righteousness. But in between, in the time of God's revelation of Christ through the ministry of the Holy Spirit a person is at the crossroads of righteousness and unrighteousness and is prepped by the gracious gift of faith (the sure testimony of the Holy Spirit) to not only know the gospel is true, but to place their trust in it too. Most people--of their own free will--refuse the offer and are eventually cast back into the boundaries of unrighteousness. But this time all the more in bondage to that unrighteousness.