Is Divine Election Unfair?
September 2nd, 2008
(By John MacArthur)
In spite of the clarity with which Scripture addresses this topic, many professing Christians today struggle in their acceptance of God’s sovereignty — especially when it comes to His electing work in salvation. Their most common protest, of course, is that the doctrine of election is unfair. But such an objection stems from a human idea of fairness, rather than the objective, divine understanding of true justice. In order to appropriately address the issue of election, we must set aside all human considerations and focus instead on the nature of God and His righteous standard. Divine justice is where the discussion must begin.
What is Divine justice? Simply stated, it is an essential attribute of God whereby He infinitely, perfectly, and independently does exactly what He wants to do when and how He wants to do it. Because He is the standard of justice, by very definition, then whatever He does is inherently just. As William Perkins said, many years ago, “We must not think that God doeth a thing because it is good and right, but rather is the thing good and right because God willeth it and worketh it.”
Therefore God defines for us what justice is, because He is by nature just and righteous, and what He does reflects that nature. His own free will and nothing else is behind His justice. This means that whatever He wills, is just; and it is just, not because of any external standard of justice, but simply because He wills it.
Because the justice of God is an outflow of His character, it is not subject to fallen human assumptions of what justice should be. The Creator owes nothing to the creature, not even what He is graciously pleased to give. God does not act out of obligation and compulsion, but out of His own independent prerogative. That is what it means to be God. And because He is God, His freely determined actions are intrinsically right and perfect.
To say that election is unfair is not only inaccurate, it fails to recognize the very essence of true fairness. That which is fair, and right, and just is that which God wills to do. Thus, if God wills to choose those whom He would save, it is inherently fair for Him to do so. We cannot impose our own ideas of fairness onto our understanding of God’s working. Instead, we must go to the Scriptures to see how God Himself, in His perfect righteousness, decides to act.
Good morning everyone,
I do understand what the election defines but I have been struggled to undertsand what the between of the election and free will are.I see many scriptures supports both of them. Thank you for willing to explain me about them. I deeply appreciate it very much.
God is the potter and he can do with the clay whatever he pleases.
Nothing unfair about that.
Ezekiel 18:30
““Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways,” says the Lord GOD. “Repent, and turn from all your transgressions, so that iniquity will not be your ruin.”
Romans 9:10-24
“And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac (for the children NOT YET BEING BORN, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), it was said to her, “The older shall serve the younger.” As it is written, “Jacob I have loved, but Esau I have hated.”
What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! For He says to Moses, “I will have MERCY on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have COMPASSION on whomever I will have compassion.” So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. For the Scripture says to the Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth.” Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.
You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?”
But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?
What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?”
This all starts arightly with our condemnation under the Law:
Romans 3:19
“Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and ALL THE WORLD MAY BECOME GUILTY before God.”
James 2:10
“For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in ONE point, he is GUILTY OF ALL.”
Deuteronomy 6:5; Mark 12:30
“You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your strength.”
- This being just ONE of the points in the LAW we are all by nature guilty of breaking individually before God.
Romans 3:23
“…for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God…”
In light of the unmerritted GIFT of GRACE and MERCIFUL COMPASSION in Messiah Jesus; what does any believer fear, if they have accepted this gift and appropriate it by Faith?
Romans 5:12-16
“Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to ALL men, BECAUSE ALL SINNED— (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had NOT SINNED ACCORDING to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. But the FREE GIFT is not like the offense. For if by the one man’s offense MANY DIED [Spiritually and physically], much more the grace of God and the GIFT by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, ABOUNDED TO MANY. And the gift is not like that which came through the one who sinned. For the JUDGEMENT which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the FREE GIFT which came from many offenses RESULTED IN JUSTIFICATION.”
This is compatible accross Scripture and I personaly cling to Ephesians 1 & 2; as I was self deceived for many years living a life of vice cliaming that I was “under grace” (Without even knowing how my sins offended God and that I needed to REPENT – Turn AWAY- from my personal sins and the love thereof.) To turn unto the LORD to accept His Free Gift of grace and mercy and appropriate and apply it by the Gift of Faith.
I was convicted of the Spirit of Truth through the past preaching of the Word of God and the desire to fulfill the LAW of God; to LOVE Him FIRST And FOREMOST was given unto me and has transformed my whole life since, as I have committed my heart and mind to obedience under the LORDSHIP of Christ Jesus, our ONLY Redeemer and Saviour from personal sin and the bodage of sin patterns and lusts.
I am convinced that the Doctrines of Grace (Also referred to as 5 Point Calvinism or TULIP) are central to the Good News of the Gospel of Grace that JESUS Himself preached and committed to the apostles.
For a good short overview of the Doctrines of Grace feel free to visit my Blog at – http://boerseuntjie.multiply.com/journal/item/4/The_Doctrines_of_Grace_In_the_Spirits_work_of_Salvation_
For a discussion named: Challenges on Election and Israel – http://uk.blog.360.yahoo.com/blog-QBgsaeEmcqqyhBI.H3vXsSt0osgMtk5_ewnoXP6nqfdu_VPEzEg-?cq=1&p=83#comments
For a short discussion on Dispensational and Covenant theology with Pastor John MacArthur please see the following:
http://www.biblebb.com/files/macqa/70-16-9.htm
This is very helpful when considering the Election of National Israel and their rejection of Messiah in this age.
Soli Deo Gloria!
For our King and Redeemer.
The judge of all the earth will do right.
I had issue with this because I was brought up with the Arminian Free Will concept – you know, the modern-day version of a god pining away at us and with us in control and in charge. Those scriptures regarding the potter and the clay, and Paul’s and Peter’s uses of the words “election” and “predestination” were big wakeup calls for me.
But what I think is so beautiful and what has stood out to me so much even beyond that is the whole of Ezekiel 36:22-38 where God goes into how he’s going to restore Israel for His own glory becuase they have profaned His Holy Name, and how He’s going to do something so beautiful as to regenerate them (and our hearts) to restore His Holy Name among them who have profaned it, and – and as if that weren’t enough – in verse 37, he’s even going to allow Israel to ask Him to increase the flock and He will do it.
Unfair? That’s the most beautiful, loving, kindest, thing possible. It’s amazing, His grace.
Barbara,
Yes, that is what is AMAZING;
Romans 5:8
“But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.”
1 John 4:10
“In this is love, NOT THAT WE LOVED GOD, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.”
HE KNEW us in our sin and He ordained that we WILL be freed therof and given spiritual life out of His gift of mercy applied by His Spirit of Truth.
Romans 5:5
“Now hope does not disappoint, because the love of God has been poured out in our hearts by the Holy Spirit who was given to us.”
1 Corinthians 2:9
“But as it is written: “ Eye has not seen, nor ear heard,Nor have entered into the heart of manThe things which God has prepared for those who love Him.””
1 John 5:3
“For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome.”
I might add to that 1 Corinthians 1 & 2.
This LOVE of God and His work of grace and mercy is so infectious and so strong that I cannot and will not stop bringing Him praise, adoration, honor, glory and the FEAR that is due Him when and if I should fall into temptation and sin.
Psalm 19:9
“The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring forever;T he judgments of the LORD are true and righteous altogether.”
Psalm 111:10
“The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom;A good understanding have all those who do His commandments.His praise endures forever.”
Proverbs 8:13
“The fear of the LORD is to hate evil; Pride and arrogance and the evil way And the perverse mouth I hate.”
Thankful and joyous at the work of the LORD in salvation.
As a pastor, I am often given the opportunity to explain (to the best of my limited and finite ability) the doctrine of Election to those who have questions. I can remember on one occasion, a woman who was vehemently opposed to this teaching. As we sat down with her husband and went through the Scriptures and dealt with issues such as the Total Depravity of man, the sovereignty of God etc. etc. there was a change in her demeanor. I will never forget the tears she shed as she said “Why me?”. As God clarified the word to her, she went from accusing God of being unfair to a woman humbled and left speechless by the realization that God had chosen her, according to the kind intention of His will, before the foundation of the world. Many do not accept the doctrine of election because the “god” being portrayed from contemporary pulpits is not sovereign and exists only to help men feel better about themselves. Election cannot be grasped until we see, from the Scriptures, man’s total inability to save himself, God’s grace in all of its glory and His sovereignty over His creation.
The Absolute Electing Sovereignty of God, far from being a problem for me, has always been among the most comforting doctrines in the scriptures. I have in the hardest times clung to the truth of God electing me.
“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.” Jn. 3:16
Tow misrepresantations:
1. That free-will is opposite to or limits God’s Sovereignty – nothing could be further from the truth
2. The character of God is misrepresented when His word is forced into a doctrinal system rather than letting it speak for itself. If there is “tension” recognize it, but don’t change His word to make one’s theological system fit
The Gospel of John has been called the “Gospel of belief.” Kind of curious it should be so called – perhaps it should be called the “Gospel of the Elect.”
“And trully Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book, but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in His name.” Jn. 20:30-31
People of the Armenian persuasion do not reject election. They try and be more honest with the verses such as John 3:16, Mark 16:16, Romans 10:9 and 2Peter 3:9 which do not limit God’s grace to a specific group of people but is very clearly available to EVERYONE. It does concern me when people say that scripture very clearly talks about an issue and summarily dismiss all of the verses which refute their point of view.
In order to have a clearer understanding of this we must first grasp why the tree of knowledge of good and evil was placed in the garden of Eden. Did God have to place the tree there? NO. Was God required to make it sinful for Adam and Eve to eat of the tree? NO. Did God know Adam and Eve were going to eat of the fruit? YES. And it is the answer to this question people either ignore or get stumped on. Adam and Eve clearly had a choice to eat of the tree or not.
If God created evil then he isn’t a loving God, but if he gave us the choice of rejecting him which Adam and Eve did then we have our answer. We cannot accept him on our own merits, but we can reject him (Matthew 10:33).
I do not reject the doctrine of election, just this interpretation of it because it isn’t consistent with the whole of scripture. In order to have as clear a picture of scripture as possible we must have a straight forward understanding of Genesis 1-11.
I will never forget the tears she shed as she said “Why me?”.
But how do you respond to those who will say “Why not me?”
The arguments for election all seem to end with His incredible grace and mercy to save some of us even though we don’t deserve it. This is of course, all well and good for those on the happy side of the line.
We should have the guts to say plainly “Well, the others aren’t chosen. That’s how God does it.” and not play word games. We make justifications by quibbling definitions rather than saying “Look, some are going to Hell by God’s choice, we don’t know why and we can’t really understand it and we choose to believe this anyway.”
The problem is that this then opens up the even larger question of why to believe in a God that is so arbitrary. We avoid the topic so we don’t have to answer the hard ones.
I deal a lot with hostile unbelievers, and this is a big stumbling block for which the normal platitudes don’t cut it.
Hi Mike
Thanks for sharing that. It’s wonderful to hear how her heart was broken by the loving kindness of God. I can relate to her with regards the question she asked. “Why me?” That will be my first question for God when I get to heaven one day. But I suspect He will simply turn to me and say, “Because it was my good pleasure to do so.” Aaarrrgh!!!! Lol!!
“Instead, we must go to the Scriptures to see how God Himself, in His perfect righteousness, decides to act.”
I agree with the precepts and concept in this article. I do find it odd, though, that the article finished with the above statement, since there is not a quoted Scripture or specific Scripture reference to be found in the article. Why not make the case for the point with actual Scripture instead of logic and quotes from men? Does this mean that one cannot say with certainty what happens to infants that pass away?
As with any other doctrine, fairness is not the issue.
Also not at issue is whether we like it, whether its popular, or whether the majority believe it or not. The real issue is whether the doctrine is supported in the Scriptures when they are taken in context.
Another important thing is not whether you “believe” in election or not; it’s what you believe “about” it. For a non-related example, you can ask someone if they “believe in baptism.” A yes answer really doesn’t give you what you want. A Catholic “believes” in baptism as does a Baptist or Lutheran. The key is “what” do they believe about baptism: immersion or sprinkling or pouring and the theological significance of it.
All that to say, election is in the Scriptures. For someone to say they don’t believe in it is probably not accurate. They probably believe in it – but believe something different than you, me or various interpretations in Christendom.
I think both the Reformed and the Arminian view of election fall short of fully explaining this hairiest and most debated doctrine. Each of them do not fully explain Scriptures arbitrary to their position and to some extent, if you follow their logic to their respective conclusion, turn God into something he is not.
Therefore, there must be an explanation of these Scriptures that is more accurate. I do not claim to have it all figured out, but am trying. Probably the book that has helped me most with the applicable Scriptures is, “Reign of the Servant Kings,” by Dillow.
I doubt it is a doctrine we will completely understand until we see Him face-to-face. Thanks for the article.
Blessings, Owen
The unfairness is that someone who cannot believe cannot be judged. Unless God allows him to believe, and on “neutral ground’, where there is neither moral goodness, nor any merit whatsoever, a man has the option to reject the Gospel, or believe the good news of Christ. This is the unfairness I have bumped up against with my non-reformed brethren.
I simply say, “God will have mercy on whom He wills”, and He owes no one this mercy, and in fact owes us condemnation.
This is where the two minds shall forever divide. That of the Arminian, and of the Calvinist.
Its a good thing that human ideals of ‘fairnes’ are not the standard for election. The only ‘fair’ solution would be to give humanity what they deserve or what they have earned.
Praise the Lord for both his justice and mercy.
The writing at the door of the Church says “whomsoever will” and so you enter, when you look back at the door, the writing from the inside says “chosen before the foundation of the world”. No body accepts Christ because he knows that he is elected, we accept Christ as savior and Lord believing that we “willed” to accept him. It is only when we hear the doctrine of election that we realize that we are indeed chosen before the foundation of the world. And thats the time that we asked “Why me?”. As to the question of “Why not me”, I personally believe that no unbeliever ever asked that. When we were still unbelievers all we know upon being witnessed by some Christian is that salvation is there for the taking.
> As to the question of “Why not me”, I personally
> believe that no unbeliever ever asked that. When
> we were still unbelievers all we know upon being
> witnessed by some Christian is that salvation is
> there for the taking.
You can personally believe that all you wish, but reading it I suspect that you have not witnessed to enough people one-on-one. I have met plenty atheists and self-described “pagans” who are aware of Calvinism. I have been challenged with that very question.
I find it is not difficult for the rebellious mind to understand what unconditional reprobation means. It seems very difficult to convince a “reformed theologian” about it.
John didn’t really express the fairness question: If God elects someone to condemnation, then commands him to repent, then withholds the ability to obey, He is self-inconsistent. The God-given conscience rejects that idea immediately. This is why so many people wrestle with it when learning Calvinism — it takes some searing to grow comfortable with this doctrine.
I know that critics of Calvinism get very little respect from calvinists. It seems the only person who can understand it is the person who agrees with it. However, every calvinist on the planet owes it to himself to at least read the defining expression of the counter-argument of our time: Dave Hunt’s “What Love is This?”
I find it frustrating to discuss this issue because so few on the “reformed” side are willing even to read one book that presents a conservative treatment of the issue from the other side.
Andrew,
I am not following you. Your post seems to ignore Romans 9:19-25. God has the freedom of the potter to make whatever vessels He wants to make for whatever use to which He wants to put them. Nonetheless, He retains the right to hold those vessels accountable for their actions.
Of course Adam and Eve had a choice. Of course they bear the full weight of responsibility for the choice they made. Of course the choice they made is exactly what God intended for them to make. Ephesians 1:3-14. Of course the pharisees made a choice to reject Christ and to get Him crucified by the Romans. Of course they bear the full weight of responsibility for that choice. Of course the choice they made was fully intended by God from before the foundation of the world. Rev. 13:8
What interpretation of election do you believe? How does your interpretation fit with the whole of scripture?
Kirby
“The problem is that this then opens up the even larger question of why to believe in a God that is so arbitrary. We avoid the topic so we don’t have to answer the hard ones.”
What do you think? Is God arbitrary? who decides what the measuring stick is for arbitrariness? You? Your nonbelieving friends? Why? Why should God’s consistency or arbitrariness be measured by a finite human measuring stick?
The point of the article above these comments is that God is the measuring stick. Whatever He does is good, fair, righteous, holy, just, etc. by definition because He does it. Do you disagree with this proposition? If so, upon what scripture do you base your disagreement?
Keith
I agree that the BIble describes us as free will, but that is actually side stepping the real question – Does God elect from the foundation of the world?
It is clear from the Bible that God does indeed elect people from the foundation of the earth. What is not so clear, is the nature of free will.
I have a little summary here of Jonathan Edward’s “Freedom of the Will” here:
http://thepredestinedblog.blogspot.com/2007/01/jonathan-edwards-on-freedom-of-will.html
The question is irrelevant unless you buy into the determinism of the Calvinist system. Of course God is free to do as he pleases. That is without question.
What is worth challenging is the idea that the Calvinist construction of divine election is true to the Biblical witness of election. If one simply follows election from the Old Testament it is plain to see that divine election was related not to personal destinies but to the divine purpose of blessing all nations by the elect seed.
Properly conceived the election of Jacob over Esau was not God’s determination to damn Esau and save Jacob. Rather it was God’s sovereign determination to have the twisted Jacob carry the ’seed’ over against the unbridled Esau. Thus election is related to the means by which God will bring the covenant blessing to all peoples.
If one conceives election in the normal Calvinist construction what is unfair is not failing to be elect. The protest is with those who would say, ‘we did not choose to be born,’ and ‘we could not choose to be saved.’ One may conceive it to be fair within the Calvinist parameters but an outsider could hardly announce it as good and glorifying to the grace of God.
My problem with the article above is that it has so little in common with the fragrant witness to Christ within the scriptures.
The entire tone of the article completely misses the tone of the witness to God’s saving grace in Christ.
Kirby, I’m reminded of John 6:48-69 here. Jesus had just run off a lot of people by telling them that they had to eat of his flesh and drink of his blood in order to see the kingdom of heaven (and that no one could come to Him unless the Father sent them).
Then He turned to His twelve and asked them, essentially, “Are you leaving me, too?”
Peter: “Where would we go? You’re the one with the words of Eternal Life.”
Bingo.
It’s not about whether we like it, nor whether we “choose to believe in a god who….” – what we “choose” to believe in doesn’t change the reality of what is. It’s whether we accept the reality of and submit to the God of Scriptures – or not. The God who created the heavens and the earth and us can do and be whatever he pleases with all of creation. I, for one, am grateful that we are blessed with a loving God who sent us a Savior. He didn’t have to do that – He could have simply destroyed us all. He didn’t have to put up with us at all. He never sent a Savior for the angels that fell, yet He sent one for fallen man – and what do we do? We quibble over how He chooses to distribute that salvation. I just pray that my life is lived out in humble gratitude for it.
Oh, yeah. Hostile nonbelievers – no man and no man-made tactics will ever soften a heart, only the Holy Spirit can do that along with the Word of God. I’ve had to take a good hard look at Matthew 7:6, consider the stewardship of my time and energies and the condition my heart was getting into in such battles, and then prayerfully back down. If they can’t drink the milk of the Gospel, they’ll choke on the meat of it and they’ll do everything in their power to take you down with them.
Kirby asked:
“But how do you respond to those who will say “Why not me?”
The arguments for election all seem to end with His incredible grace and mercy to save some of us even though we don’t deserve it. This is of course, all well and good for those on the happy side of the line.”
The balance lies in the RESPONSIBILITY given by God through His LAW; which Christ confirmed in the sumary of the Law;
Deuteronomy 10:12-13
““And now…what does the LORD your God REQUIRE of you, but to fear the LORD your God, to walk in all His ways and TO LOVE Him, to serve the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, and to keep the commandments of the LORD and His statutes which I command you today FOR YOUR GOOD?”
Mark 12:29-31
“Jesus answered him, “The first of all the COMMANDMENTS is: ‘Hear…the LORD our God, the LORD is one. And YOU SHALL LOVE the LORD your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind, and with all your strength.’ This is the first commandment. And the second, like it, is this: ‘You shall love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no other COMMANDMENT greater than these.””
JESUS HIMSELF CONFIRMED THAT LOVING the LORD is the greatest COMMANDMENT to ALL mankind. It is NOt an OPTION to believe; it is a clear COMMAND from our Almighty LORD God and Father YAHWEH. He does not just desire us to believe He REQUIRES IT, to do less than LOVE HIM from a pure heart, ist to break the Divine LAW and to be guilty in all points of the Law. Thus the individual who breaks that COMMAND is guilty before Him and shall be deserving of eternal damnation; lest that person REPENT and Turn from sin to seek Him while He may be found. Faith itself is a gift of the Holy Spirit; one who is dead in sin cannot awaken himself, either physically or spiritually.
Thus the outcome of God’s justice and mercy is ALWAYS FAIR AND JUST:
Your question about those on the “wrong” side is refuted by the neglect of those of their God given command to LOVE HIM FIRST and FOREMOST with ALL their being. If they neglect so great a salvation and have a sincere contempt for the LORD of grace; then they have what they DESIRED at Judgement day. Just as much as IF I did NOT SUBMIT myslef in that area of RESPONSIBILITY and that measure of will that is free. Free will does not apply to the morally and spiritualy dead; in fact Scripture speaks of the “bondage to sin” for those who REMAIN unrepentant and who REJECT the merciful GIFT of grace in Christ Jesus.
My question is this:
Would it be JUST and RIGHTEOUSS for God to allow UNREPENTANT rapists, adulterers, murderers, child abusers and ANY other sinner; as JUDGED by HIS STANDARD of the LAW; to enetr into SINLESS Glory with Himself?
Would YOU desire such a an UNJUST god and king?
Would you desire to spend ETERNITY with UNREPENTANT, UNREGENERATE murderers, rapists along with that kind of god?
I believe that the LORD does NOT CONTRADICT Himself in the matter of “freewill” and effectual calling; in as much as “free will” is BY NATURE bound to sinful lusts and desires which ensnare us and which keep us in bondage, so as to result in our OWN WILLINGNESS to SIN, reject Christ and to make our own idols in the “likeness” of the TRUE One Living God, which suit us IN OUR SINS.
By grace ALONE, we are what we are, both in the flesh and in the soul. By grace ALONE are we freed from the bondage of sin and the PUNISHMENT we RIGHTLY deserve.
To end up in eternal damnation is the result of the willingness to be there; BECAUSE there was an unrepentant UNwillingness to obey the LORD and His Law of love for Him.
Another question to be asked is:
What makes me better or more wise unto salvation than my friends who NEVER repent and accept the gift of grace and mercy in Christ JESUS? Did I have more intelligence? Where did I receive that from? Was I more deserving than them? We all know the answer to that I hope (Hardly!).
Then HOW did I get to the point of accpeting Christ by Faith ALONE? Did I merrit it by Faith? Or was that Faith a GIFT of the Spirit of Truth?
WHERE THEN did that GIFT originate FROM? ME? My brian? My heart? was my sin not a barrier in my relationship with God? How then was that barrier broken? By me? or by God?
————————–
BTW – If anybody desires to learn more about the Doctrines of Grace and Reformation theology (Which is essentially a return to Biblical theology):
Dr R.C. Sproul of Ligonier Ministries has done a wonderful CD/DVD and book to study these issues of Church History and Biblical doctrine aswell as herectical theologies. we only disagree on Church traditions and agree on ALL essentials of the historic Christian faith and salvation.
The Title Is:
What is Reformed Theology? – Understanding the basics.
It is available here:
http://www.christianbook.com/Christian/Books/product?item_no=65593&netp_id=368739&event=ESRCN&item_code=WW&view=covers
For the glory of our most gracious and merciful King!
Divine election is a wonderful doctrinal reality. Those who have chosen to believe, the whosoever will , are the predestined. God planned a plan before the fondation of the world that those who would believe and be baptized would be saved. Mark 16 : 16 . Those who choose to confess will be saved Romans 10 : 9 and 10 and many other passages. Praise God that he has given us the free will to choose ! It causes me to rejoice that His grace is for all those who will accept Him. It gives great inward peace and comfort and assurance .
Dave asked:
“I agree with the precepts and concept in this article. I do find it odd, though, that the article finished with the above statement, since there is not a quoted Scripture or specific Scripture reference to be found in the article.”
We often make the mistake of taking ONE article to be the beginning and end of a matter. I would recommend that we search the entire resource catologue of Grace Community Church: The BIBLE, Grace to You’s resources, Team Pyro’s blogs, all the Pulpit Magazine blogs and even the Masters Seminary statements of Faith or belief. Therein you will find much reference to Scripture as the SOLE authority of spiritual life. (I am in no way accusing Dave of anything; I am just as dissapointed as he is.) But i am sure we would all do better not to expect someone else to study on our behalf, so that we get spoon fed truth.
There are masses of artciles and sermons available from these resources that are under the ministry of the Elders of Grace Community Church which inlcude Pastor John MacArthur. I am amazed that we do not use these resources prior to intelligent Christian discussions on what are basically Reformed blogsites that form part of these ministries. (I refer not to Dave in this)
Perhaps, just as with Scripture we would do well not to read anything in isolation; but to read all in complete synergy with each the other on the whole?
http://www.sfpulpit.com/category/salvation/page/4/
(Page 4 of 9 – currently)
http://www.tms.edu/sof.asp
http://www.gty.org/Resources
http://www.gracechurch.org/home/doclib.asp?ministry_id=1&dlcat=Distinctives
I hope we all can start on almost the same page when addressing these issues; and that ultimately we would refer to the UNITY of the VERY Word of our LORD God in all of sacred Scripture.
Some food for thought in commentry…
Who He will call He will (John 10), those who will reject him, will.
And both shall have the desires of their hearts and the consequences therof, as predestined, chosen and willed.
Soli Deo Goria!
I reread this article several times and want to comment on part of John’s most interesting first sentence…
“In spite of the clarity with which Scripture addresses this topic, many professing Christians…”
#1 – I respect John’s opinion, but if this doctrine and the related Scriptures were so clear would we have this ongoing debate? It’s really not new and dates before the Council of Dort – going back to Augustine and before.
#2 – It’s implied in the article that the only reason a person could disagree with the Reformed perspective of election is out of ignorance or a man-centered opinion that it is unfair. We know this is not the case. There are many educated theologians who simply disagree with the Reformed interpretation of the Scriptures. They know the Greek and Hebrew, have studied it, and come to a different conclusion.
#3 – The term “professing Christian” implies that someone who disagrees with the view this site or this author takes perhaps has a questionable salvation experience. This is a ploy used by often in theological debates to discredit an opponent. It really gets us no where in furthering the discussion.
I realize John probably did not mean for his article to be a thorough discussion of the subject as he has already done this many times. So I’m not suggesting this thread do such. I just wanted to point out that clarity may not be so clear as he thinks and that those who disagree with him may have informed reasons for doing so.
The grace of God is fair because it is available for all those who put their faith in Jesus Christ . Tius 2 : 11 and Eph. 2 : 8 and 9 .
William, I appreciate your comments. I also appreciate the spirit in which you made them. Thank you. I have read many articles, sermons, etc. on the topic. That is part of what concerns me. Too many of them, in my opinion, talk more about man made confessions, or sermons, than they deal with actual Scripture. Have the resources become too voluminous? Has the debate become the focus, instead of Scripture being the focus?
We that believe in the Doctrine of Grace need to remember to show grace to those with whom we differ. I think Owen makes some valid points worth considering.
Owen,
I believe there needs to be some clarity on the issues of Intellectual accent to Scripture and Spiritual giftedness to the understanding of God:
1 Corinthians 1 & 2 would serve well as instruments thereunto.
Also to argue that all Theologians are true believers is folly. I know that many a learned Pastor/teacher (And surely Theologian) throughout history have been used by the LORD and His Spirit as the means of converting that self same Pastor/Teacher…
The argument is NOT about intellectual accent to real truths of Scripture; in fact I would say that these historical factst support the doctrine of Sovereign Grace in Election, even more so.
To hold a position that a person is qualified unto salvation by Intellectual accent is to agree with Rome that salvation is MERRITTED and gained by the person’s very OWN ability (Which we would do well to remind ourself is ITSELF a gift of grace). ANd that those who DO NOT come to saving Faith are dumb and of themselves condemned to destruction because they did not have such intellect. (Having seen intellectually poor true believers; I doubt that this is true).
The comment regarding Reformed doctrine deserve this much of an answer:
The REFORMERS sought to bring back the Church to her Root, to Devine Truth, to the VERY Word of God (The Scriptures) and they have and where willing to die a horrendous way for that truth to be freely preached.
It is thanks to Reformers obedience to God that we HAVE the right to discuss things freely in the Religious Liberty that flowed out of the Baptists’ protest against the Establishment religions of the Governments of Europe of that day. Will you be so brave for the Name of Christ to be freely shared by the preaching of the Cross, will you go into a hostile crowd for His sake? (With the Gospel which is foolishness to some and a stumbling block to others?) Do you love the LORD and the lost with that same zeal? If so, stop arguing against your Reformed brethren and start evangelising with the simplicity of the Gospel preached, just as we DO endevour. How many times have you sought the lost and created opportunity to speak the Gospel plainly and simply? (This being retorical)
As for the comment of “professing Christians”:
It is completely true and totally compatable with exeperiences throughout history and with Scripture, that many have called upon the name of Christ and have not been saved. Our LORD Jesus Himself said this in Matthew 7.
Yet, it is also true to say that there definately are Arminians who have been saved by grace ALONE and will be; whether they like it or not. I would hope that it would humble the heart of any person to trust the goodness of our Sovereign God who owes ME and YOU nothing BUT ETERNAL PUNISHMENT for our own choices; yet provides FREE GRACE without condition or MERIT required to appropriate it.
Only believe in His gift; as COMMMANDED; His works on our behalf and His Person, who took our wrath and who lived obediently to the LAW, that which we cannot.
Is it NOT wonderful that of all the objects of wrath WE ARE SAVED!?
Is it NOT WONDERFUL that He deserves all the PRAISE, HONOR and GLORY in the TOTALITY of this merciful WORK!?
What does it matter to you that He does it on our part; IF HE DOES DO IT? Would you rather trust that the fallen creature should believe; or that THE PERFECTLY GOOD AND MERCIFUL; JUST, HOLY, RIGHTEOUSS Father of all should INTERCEDE and DO WHAT WE ARE UNABLE TO DO AS FALLEN CREATURES who are drowning in our OWN PERSONAL DESIRES of SINS.
Is it NOT GOOD THAT HE DOES INTERCEDE ON OUR BEHALF FOR US, where we are UNABLE?
Dave,
I do appreciate your kindness.
But I KNOW that I have been self deceived for many years due to the “liberal” theology of salvation by mere “decisionmaking”.
It was when people told me that: “You are definately saved and indwelt by the Spirit” and then they left me to fend for myslef as a young man, that I felt so confident that I was saved.
Only after a licivous life and much sinfulness and drunken blashphemy, was it the Spirit that convicted me of my Total Sinfulnness and Complete Inability to save myself or to rely on a Person that I had rejected in my life and living; that I knew I needed to REPENT and TURN AWAY… TO BE SAVED FROM SOMETHING that was inside of me; something I LOVED… My own PERSONAL SINS.
I knew then that all my knowledge and all my good feeling counted for nothing, just as John Newton came to that point whilst continueing to be a “confessing Christian” Slaveship master. He expereince the convicting work of the Spirit of Truth and so did I.
What was I saved from before that…? I could not give you an answer prior to that great humbling and glorious day of salvation where the Spirit gave me the gift of His grace and mercy, UNMERRITTED, undefiled and clean … The Righteousness of Christ; NOT mine but HIS!
It was folly that I was taught and raised in because it made me the “CONTRACT master”; I told God where in MY life He was permitted and which DARK chambers of sinful lusts He was NOT ALOOWED entry into… I could lose my salvation SURE and had to keep to the “staight and narrow”; but I had NO such desire… I wanted FRIENDS IN AND OF THE WORLD, not a God who I could not relate to.
It was Him that found this stray sheep, He brought me to His fold and He keeps me safe. I was a stray sheep and lost my way, to be sure I was going my own way and I made all the rules of life and living… And if you asked me about God, I would have told you: “I am a Bible believing Christian”.
I know I am not the only one who has been made free from the “straight and narrow” legalism or from the liberty which ensnares in sins. But my account has proven the facts of Scripture to be true.
And I will be forever amazed at His grace.
Obviously the issue is not Election since it is stated in Scripture, but rather the understanding of how and when election occurs, and what is the human responsibility if any in salvation.
The problem with certain theological persuation is not that it makes God unfair – but rather that it makes Him a liar.
Knowning this is to be the case, such theological persuation redifines words and the understanding of clear verses because they do not fit THEIR theological scheme. Thus THEIR system takes priority over God’s Word.
Any system concerned about God’s glory would NOT tamper with His word. When that occurs, it demonstrates that the system is given priority over God’s word, thus making such a system man-centered and against God’s glory.
Obviously TULIP is such system and those who adhere to it are those who put their theological preference over the integrity of God’s word and His glory.
William,
Thanks for your passionate response. You went down many paths that I did not address; but I’m glad you shared your thoughts.
I’ll let others comment on your analysis.
Blesings to you…
It boils down to us having dead spirits. Some say we are deathly ill, and not dead. Or the dead spirit doesn’t mean we are dead as Lazarus was dead.
I say the dead is completely dead, and we need to be quicken, and God wills to quicken whom He will. He does the rescuing from beginning to end. His mercy comes to us; He seeks us; and He died for us, those whom He loved before He created Adam, those who are His elect.
It’s always a good thing to discuss God’s electing grace. It should humble us, for it takes away all our merit, and gives God all the glory that he deserves.
This is fantastic, thank you all for a good discussion of some of these issues. Thanks to those who have addressed my questions, you given me a lot to ponder.
Babylon’s Dread – “One may conceive it to be fair within the Calvinist parameters but an outsider could hardly announce it as good and glorifying to the grace of God.” My point exactly, but presented far more eloquently. Thank you.
William – Your arguments are well-spoken, but they don’t convince me of your point.
“Would it be JUST and RIGHTEOUSS for God to allow UNREPENTANT rapists, adulterers, murderers, child abusers and ANY other sinner; as JUDGED by HIS STANDARD of the LAW; to enetr into SINLESS Glory with Himself?” Absolutely. IF GOD WILLED IT. Because as was mentioned above, the very definition of just and fair is what God wills. You are attempting to play both sides of the argument by saying “You can’t say it’s not fair, God decides what’s fair” on one hand, and then saying “They aren’t in because they chose not to repent” on the other. Choose one, you can’t say both. If this type of election is in, they aren’t in because God chose that they wouldn’t be in.
The same goes for the point that is summed up “If they neglect so great a salvation and have a sincere contempt for the LORD of grace; then they have what they DESIRED at Judgement day.” Yes, we are definitely commanded to Love the Lord our God. But using “and they don’t so therefore they are judged” doesn’t say anything about election. It, in fact, places the salvation on the hands of the person who chooses to obey or not. You shoot your own election argument in the foot.
To plainly say “Who God wills is saved” is to plainly say “God wills some are not saved”. This is fine, and biblical and supportable. But don’t try to make God’s choice to damn some people their own fault for not obeying.
To believe in this sort of Election is believe that God sends some people to Hell through no action of their own, and with no possiblity of redemption. Again, that’s fine if you can support it (which some can), but at least be plain about what you believe.
Don,
You previously posted…
“…a man has the option to reject the Gospel…”
You then posted…
“…God wills to quicken whom He will…”
Therein lies the tension.
Owen,
My previous post was laying out what my non-reformed brothers believe. I disagree with them. They believe saving faith is within the heart of a sinner who is unregenerated. I believe faith is a gift from the sovereign Lord, along with a changed heart, godly sorrow, and repentance. All these are by His grace and mercy and power, but from within a human dead heart to the gospel, Christ, and the things of God.
Whoops. That should read “Not” from within a dead human heart.”
Faith comes from hearing the word of God. Romans 10 : 17
“But the fruit of the Spirit is …Faith..” Gal. 5:22
Thanks Don – I see now that you were stating how others would word their case. My mistake.
And the word of God is the aword of the Spirit. Eph. 6: 17.
A two-edged sword that cuts deep into the soul, and spirit.
*sigh*
Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it at all.” Mark 10:15, Luke 18:17
Barbara,
I would be curious as to the cause of your sigh. Is it that people are asking honest questions about Scripture and exegesis?
Or is it the one-line posts that don’t move the conversation along?
Or is it something else?
Vince and Ray B….Glad I’m not alone here.
We who (like Dave Hunt) are neither Calvinist nor Arminian will always object to the (man-made) axiom that God’s sovereignty and free will cannot coincide. At least MacArthur, unlike many rabid Calvinists, admits that the gospel offer is freely extended to all. Wherefore do we conclude that God witholds the grace from those He invites? Could it be, as the scripture says, He blinds them BECAUSE they receive not the love of the truth not SO THEY WON’t receive it?
Since there are, according to Calvinists, twin truths, that we “cain’t figger out nohow” WHY must we interpret the dichotomy to make God out a liar? How can we tell the sinner “God loves you” when He might really hate them? (Mac’s book The God Who Loves makes an excellent, albeit bipolar, case for the love and hate)or He wants you to repent when He Himself prevents this very thing?
Owen,
Good post. I too have been put off a little bit by some preachers who snootily dismiss those who reject Calvinism as ‘quasi_christians” (Robert Morey is the worst, snottiest example of this…see his You Tube Video Does God Love Everyone?). MacArthur is more tolerant, though he does accuse those who feel differently of ‘creating God in their image’, tantamount to idolatry.
No, Owen, it’s that there seems to be this whole mindset in many theological circles – particularly the reformed ones (with which I do identify, but my! what an unfriendly bunch) and largely in the comment sections – that you can’t be truly converted unless you believe a certain laundry list of doctrine that must be laid out after multiple debates and explained and people have to argue and puff up and study Greek and Hebrew and pick apart piece-by-piece any and all doctrine and other peoples’ perceptions of it until it just loses its simple beauty ….when the Scriptures consistently tell us not to “lean unto your own understanding” nor to kill ourselves following the letter of the law instead of the heart of it and without giving the Holy Spirit some real credit beyond lip service for the conversion (and keeping) of souls….when Jesus said, “unless you enter the kingdom of God like a child” — simply and earnestly trusting and obeying the Father – we won’t see it at all. Does that mean we receive it as a child and then grow up and dissect it? I kind of doubt it.
Don’t get me wrong – I have as much intellectual curiosity as the next person and I love to understand how things work, I find great value in Biblical exegesis and hermeneutics largely because the Greek and Hebrew languages had much richer meanings for many of their words and so it adds a wonderful depth to the layers of the experience of Christian study. I am very much a concrete thinker so this has challenged me a good bit here. I’m a preacher’s daughter and a grew up (unknowingly) unsaved and I am in the midst of a tiny, rural Southern Baptist community and now in charge of the women’s ministry at our 30-member church with a part-time preacher who works a full time job during the week – so I have very little guidance, a distinct interest in soteriology, and a God-given heart for these women – who, like me, have to work at least one, if not two jobs and who lead their families and who come to church because they simply love Jesus and it’s their “church family” and because they hunger and thirst for the Word. We can argue all day long about HOW salvation happens, and in what order, but how can we simply revere and enjoy our Christ and our God in all simplicity of Spirit and with the necessary childlike faith when we’re so busy picking Him (and each other) apart? It’s one thing to better understand and to defend, quite another to take it to the level that we quietly lose our first love which, I think, is a sign that too much study really is a weariness of the flesh – and that it contributes to the growth of the flesh if we’re not careful.
The sigh was just a sigh. I have to plead guilty to the above and I’ve been sorely convicted of it lately. I’ve had to sit back and wonder, “at what point is my pride getting in the way, here?” I was one who simply reached a breaking point and called out to God (not even to Jesus) in surrender when I had no faith of my own, and who then began to experience the illumination of the Scriptures and a sudden tremendous love for them as they came alive on the page and spoke so beautifully to me, and that love for the brethren came shining through, and I began to be led to pray for things that I would never have prayed for on my own (to be always surrendered to Him, to know Him as He is and not as people make Him out to be – within His will, things like that) – and then through that was brought to that place of being allowed to see who I really was in light of Him, genuine repentance brought on through His gentle means on His time and in His way – and right there at that place was the Cross I had grown up with and always avoided. I had no idea what was happening to me, only that something miraculous and amazing was. I know as I have known nothing else in my life, I *know* He came through and saved me and caused me to surrender to Him and I know that I did not have the capability nor the desire to do that even at the time. So, as I try to learn these things and prayerfully study, I have been surprised to find myself comfortably fitting into the Reformed view (which repulsed me at first too) but I am also finding that in the process I’m losing my first love. That grieves me and, I think, serves as a warning.
I have to go back and find my first love. And I go there by going back to the admonition to speak the truth in love, to the biblical definition of love as outlined in 1 Corinthians 13 and not the polar manmade versions I’ve seen all over the place; back to the fact that, for whatever reason He had, He pulled me out of myself and my pride and my brokenness and turned my face toward His. It would be distinctly ungrateful for me to spend my time mired in argumentation rather than – simply – living and speaking the Truth in love – and in that, there is no room for human Pride.
God bless. I hope this made sense.
Barbara,
Thank you for explaining what I could not. I have had similar convictions of late. We shall be known by our love. If we have doctrine, but have not love . . .
The word is a two-edged sword that does cut into the hearts of those who freely accept the grace and God and who understand the urgent need to repent and to obey the gospel. Like those at Pentecost who were cut to the heart . They needed to repent because thye had murdered the Messiah, along with the help of the Romans. And on that day 3000 freely obeyed the gospel in that they were immersed for the forgiveness of their sins and became those who are the predestined, the chosen who chose to believe in Jesus Christ and fully and freely trusted in His sacrifice on the cross and believed that he rose from the dead. Out of their belief in Jesus as revealed in the scriptures they chose to repent and to be baptized.
Put simply (and I know Calvinists hate that) if UNconditional Election is true, then God rewards men for what He does and condemns men for what they cannot help but do (thanks to the sin of another). This runs contrary to so many scriptural points it is staggering (in Wesley’s words, the whole tenor of scripture).
Owen and donsands,
Thank you for your kind and humble comments.
Let us be fools and God be just…
Why shall we take Scripture to fit doctrine – We take doctrine to fit THE WHOLE COUNCIL of God, not part and I agree this seems to be the problem.
Some of us are so full of pride (And we all would be; if left to spiritual death) that we cannot stand to share our salvation with the Holy Spirit.
The question in the final anaylsis is:
Shall we do the commands of YAHWEH? Shall we awken ourselves or shall we trust the Holy Spirit to awaken our herats of stone and death to be hearts of flesh and life?
Or will we i the final analysis be doing DIY?
David M,
Are you insinuating that YOU have NEVER committed any sin? Are you making God to be a liar?
Refrence the Scriptures that contradict our understanding of the Whole Council of God; we are certainly COMMANDED to believe, but does that command violate the work of the Holy Spirit as necessary?
My concern is that many of our brethren are seeking to be “black and white” on what seems a paradox, but is actually concurring, complementary and parallel doctrines, my deeper concern is that they tend to be legalistic to the letter of the LAW.
Grace is by definition what a person does NOT DESERVE; but what a Higher Authority will to give DESPITE what the person deserves. To argue that grace is not grace BECUASE it is not extended to those who will not to partake of it, as given, is senseless. NOBODY would accept GRACE at all of their own volition. God the HOLY SPIRIT MUST give the desire for God and the love FOR God, necessary to trust Him and believe in the Persona nd Work of Christ Jesus.
Make any Biblical reference that denies the NECESSITY of the HOLY SPIRIT’s work in awkening a sinner who is dead in trespasses and sins; and NOT VERY SICK in trespasses and sins. I seek the Scriptures Daily and see that these things be so – I speak not with MY wisdom or elequent speech (1 Corinthians 1 & 2).
My beloved arminian/semi-pelagian friends seem to miss the point; by themselves NOT REFERRING to SCripture that refute ELECTION BY GRACE ALONE, THROUGH FAITH ALONE, IN CHRIST JESUS ALONE (His Person and Complete Work).
Would God be fair and just to send His Son to die a sinners death to make it ONLY possible that SOMEONE MIGHT just POSSIBLY by “chance” be saved?
Or did Christ die that the ELECT WILL BE SAVED definately and securely (John 10) from eternity past untill eternity future?
Would you love a god that would just in HOPE ALONE sacrifice his son?
Or the God of Scripture who planned and executed His will for OUR GOOD?
Seen as we where ALL GUILTY OF PERSONAL SIN, with ETERNAL DEATH as our very own JUST reward, does that OBLIGATE grace from God?
If He is so pleased to turn over our DETAH PENALTIES and give us ETERNAL LIFE; ONLY BY HIS MERCY; doe sthat OBLIGATE Him to set all Prisoners FREE?
No indeed just like a State senator is NOT obligated to overturn the death penalty for ALL on death row; should his mercy warrant it for a single prisoner.
The Semi-palagian theory assumes MORAL ABILITY and SINLESS Virtue on the part of mankind, whereby we can exercise a desire toward God and love for Him out of our own… THIS IS NOT BIBLICAL Christianity.
What do some of you mean by grace alone and faith alone and Jesus alone ? Which “one” is the “one” ? And where do you find the scriptures that use the word “alone” ? The only time faith alone is used is in James 2 : 24 . If you mean salvation is not by human merit, ok .
I think Pelagianists think we are pretty “ok” but semi-pelagianists believe we ARE sinners but retain at LEAST the ability to do as God commands. Big difference.
“NOBODY would accept GRACE at all of their own volition.”
Well, I don’t know..God COMMANDS it. Would He command the impossible?
Salvation is NOT man’s initiative. God intiates. Man does not seek, he allows himself to be saved. Big difference. Man has nothing to boast about and this is the most tiring claim Calvinists make…that we “take credit” for our salvation…NEVER!
How many times do the scriptures say…”Ye were not willing”?
Many of the DOCTRINES of Scripture are by nature Bi-Polar or rather PARADOXICAL but COMPLIMENTARY. Such as that of our One True Living God the Triune person.
There are no simple answers and no simple single lines explenations; also many doctrines seem (At least to the natural mind) contradictory, when in fact they are not.
I will apply the science of magnetism to illustrate:
—————————————————-
1) If you look at the Doctrines of salvation in Palagianism, Semi-Palegianism, Armeniansim and or religions of “Election” by works:
Equate the Doctrines of:
1.1) Salvific Election as a NEGATIVE magnet and;
1.2) Salvific Faith as a Positive magnet,
In Magnetics under experiments of attaction;
The two magnets oppose and push each other away.
The conclusion according with the doctrines of Semi-Palagianism and it’s “cousin” Armenianism is that the TWO OPPOSING DOCTRINES do not attract and are CONTRARY each to the other and thus INCOMPATIBLE.
THEN;
2.) If you look at the Doctrines of salvation by Grace ALONE through Faith ALONE in Christ Jesus ALONE; as defined by Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Toplady, Newton, Spurgeon, Edwards and many other Bible scholars and lay people over the centuries (And us we would confirm in Scripture as ONE WHOLE UNIT):
Equate that to the Doctrines of:
2.1) Salvific Election as a POSITIVE magnet and;
2.2) Salvific Faith as a Positive magnet,
In Magnetics under experiments of attaction;
The two magnets compliment and pull each other together.
The conclusion according with the Doctrines of Grace and it’s “cousin” HISTORIC Calvinism (NOT Hyper or extreme “calvinism”, which is contrary with Christ) is that the TWO COMPLEMENTARY DOCTRINES do not oppose each other and are attractable each to the other and thus COMPATIBLE.
We will NOTE that:
Faith remains positive in both examples and thus remains consistantly the same for those that will be Elect.
We may and will however disagree about the way in which Faith is obtained; which in Reformed understanding is ITSELF a GIFT which is applied by neccesity through the HOLY SPIRIT and is thus not by the volition of man.
I am sure you would not deny that the Spirit is required to exercise Faith savingly?
———————————-
In grammar we must examine the meaning of the term ELECT: which is selected, chosen, taken out by an higher authority or moveb by a higher auhority…
It is then NOT self willed or self enabled; but chosen OVER others.
In the sinful human natures’ case we are ALL equal and thus each and EVERY one merits nothing in and of themselves to be chosen or Elect; rather the good and perfect will of the Sovereign Father decides to whom He will dispence by His Holy Spirit the ABILITY to accept the GIFT of Repentance, Faith and obedience AND APPLY IT MOST Willingly by that GIFT of Faith.
TO ELECT or SELECT is not of the one being selected, but of Him who chooses or WILLS, and this is in line with grammar and language used in Scripture.
The BIBLICAL Stress and Bi-Polar or Paradoxical but COMPLEMENTARY truth is well presented in John 1:12-13:
“But as many as RECEIVED Him, to them He GAVE the right to become children of God, to those who BELIEVE in His name: WHO WHERE BORN, not of blood, NOR of the will of the flesh, NOR OF THE WILL OF MAN, BUT OF God.”
So we see the example of BIRTH in nature, natural birth does not occur by the will of the one being born; but by the will of the Creator. Such it is in spiritual birth, it is not of OUR will but of God.
Paul’s answer in Romans 9 to the whole issue of Election (As by example exampled of Jacob a& Esau in the WOMB, being hated and loved seperately as twins, by God) is that WE ARE NOT in any position to ARGUE AGAINST the will of God in ELECTION. (Romans 9:10-20)
Romans 9:14-15
“What shall we say then? IS THERE UNRIGHTEOUSNESS WITH GOD? Certainly NOT! For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.””
Romans 9:19-20
“You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?””
Paul actually foresaw YOUR argument AGAINST God’s fairness and justice in this section that deals specifically with ELECTION and Salvation.
And he makes this MOST IMPORTANT POINT:
Romans 9:16
“So then it is NOT OF HIM WHO WILLS, nor of him who runs, BUT OF God who shows mercy.”
Can we make an argument against this section of Scripture and still see it as the innerrant, sufficient counsel of God’s VERY Own Word to us?
I guess Augustine, Calvin, Luther, Toplady, Spurgeon, Edwards, Newton etc.. can have his cake and eat it after all?
—————————-
Faith is a GIFT, so is Repentance, so is Love for God – BUT GOD GIVES US the RESPONSIBILITY to do according with the will He gives us unto the commands He gives us. Does your will really, at the end of the day depend COMPLETELY ON YOURSELF, NO.
Even Gnostics and “Athiests” affirm that OUTSIDE influences have the power to change our wills and abilities to assist our worldview , morals and thinking or not.
Why would we deny this? Does that make us less Responsible – NO. Does that mean to say we are doomed? How do you know?
Scripture commands:
Philippians 2:12
“Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, WORK OUT YOUR OWN SALVATION WITH FEAR AND TREMBLING…”
2 Peter 1:10
“Therefore, brethren, be even more diligent to MAKE YOUR CALL AND ELECTION SURE, for if you do these things you will never stumble…”
Ten why must I question it? I can accept it most gladly and share the joy of my slavation iwth others and subject myslef most willingly (As gifted by the Spirit) unto obedience and love for the LORD, the lost and the brethren. To share the Gospel of God’s merciful UNMERRITTED grace and prayerfully trust Him to do that which I am unable to do, change the hearts of stone and spiritual death, into hearts of flesh and spiritual eternal life…
In evangelism we can see the truth of this when people see the Gospel as foolishness and as an offense (1 Corinthians 1 & 2)
Any further discussion MUST refute these CRITICAL SCRIPTURES, not face it’s argument against the embodiment of these truths by the Reformers. Needless to say that the Reformers themselves where the ones who Reformed the Church back to the concept of SOLA SCRIPTURA (Scripture ALONE), SOLA CHRISTUS (Christ ALONE), SOLA FIDE (FAITH ALONE), SOLA GRATIA (Grace ALONE)and SOLI DEO GLORIA (All for the Gloy of God ALONE). Therein I find NO FAULT and NO disregard for Scripture and it’s being the VERY Word of God as “breathed out” from Himself being validated and spread by their obedience and love for God nad the lost.
I honestly do not understand why there is so much anamosity with these Scriptural teachings which have multiple Biblical references to each of the Concepts as taught out of Scripture.
I see hardly any Scripture refrences from Palagians, Semi-Palagians and those who cliam no allegiance to doctrines as taught by Scripture, used in their refuting the Reformation principles or doctrines…
I wonder why and I also wonder why so often thay are aggressive AGAINST their Christian brothers and sisters in Christ who confirm that by FAITH ALONE and GRACE ALONE in CHRIST ALONE we are brought to eternal salvation.
I see much hatred in those who purport to have found fault with their Reformed brethren and usually find them attacking their brethren whenever the opportunity arises; yet seldom do I see Reformed brethren AGGRESSIVELY persue their Semi-palagian brethren in open forum (Unless agreed by both parties). This to me is sad, is Christ devided? Are we NOT ALL BORN OF GOD? Are we not all in Christ?
Again that refers back to 1 Corinthians 1 & 2…
I wonder what would happen if we spent less time trying to refute each other and more time preaching the Gospel of grace to the lost? (Again reference these Scriptures).
I DO agree that some Reformed and Semi-Palagians are very UNLOVING and are so divisive that their love for Christ is greatly deminished; but then again is our LOVE FOR CHRIST the REASON for our discussions or arguments? Is HE paramount or is our defence of the people we like most, even ourselves?
That is a very important thought that I will finish upon.
Ray,
ALONE refers to “Nothing else added”
What does spiritually dead mean?
Some equate “spiritually dead” to a corpse, and thus a person had to be regenerated before he can believe, and he cannot believe until he is given the faith to do so.
But is this an accurate picture? Perhaps not. For one, a corpse cannot be convicted. And as we know the Spirit convicts the world of sin. So for conviction to take place there has to be something there.
In addition, man was created in the image of God. Even though the image was marred by sin – he still a God-image bearer. What this means is that God created man as an eternal being. Man will spend eternity some where. If the analogy of the corpse is true, then hell means nothing since corpses have no feelings.
“Spiritually dead” means that man is separated from God due to his sin (Isa 59, Rom 1. Death is separation. Furthermore there is nothing, no work, that man can do to bridge that separation. Men’s merits and justices are described as a “filthy rag” (Isa. 64). The only work that is acceptable to God is the work of Jesus on the cross (1 Jn. 2, 1 Cor. 15, etc, etc, etc).
Yet the gospel is not preached to spiritual corpses, rather to people who are spiritually separated from God, but who still bear His image, and thus are an eternal being, with eternal existance – not a spirtual corpse.
Furthermore, contrary to the perposeful neglect of many, there are quite a number of scriptures that indicate that the spiritually dead man has the ability and is expected to respond to the Gospel (ie Acts 17:30-31).
Finally, if the unbeliever is a “spiritual corpse” then the judgements of Hebrews 6 and 10 make little sense. Why is the punishment so severe? It is because they were enlightened, tasted, and rejected.
One last note – contrary to the “insight” of many, there is no exegetical grounds to support “faith” is a gift of God in Eph. 2:8-9. That is an aberration that does great violence to the Word of the God who they claim to glorify.
God does not need us to defend His sovereignty by doing violence to His word. When such is the case, it can be guaranteed that it is not God’s glory that is been sought out.
” ..into the hearts of those who freely accept the grace and God and who understand the urgent need to repent and to obey the gospel.”
Why did my callous evil self-centered heart believe and repent, and another human not ?
What’s makes the difference? Why did such a sinner as me, who hated God, and used His name in vain, become a person who loves the name of Christ?
And why do others who are basically good people hear the gospel, and say they don’t need it?
William ,
Thanks for your definition. I am still asking for the passages that teach alone. Acts 17 : 30 teaches that God commands all men to repent. But I do not read where we are taught repent alone or baptism alone or confession alone , because all are commanded as necessary for salvation.
Ray,
Would you say all those things are “conditional” or necessary or both.
Because most statements of faith say that faith is the only condition for salvation.
If they are conditional, then we start having problems because where do you stop the list?
Conditions:
Repentance
Baptism
Confession
Obedience
Sacrifical Christian living
Submission
Communion
Heartfelt Sorrow
etc
etc
Paul tell us that it is faith which justifies us.
Romans 5:1 Therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
This is where the problem comes in with the Reformed and Lordship position. It confuses conversion with Christan growth.
Owen ,
My only point is that even though you give Romans 5 : 1, someone else will say but what about grace alone, etc. And Romans 5 : 1 does not say faith alone. In Mark 16: 16 our Lord commanded belief and baptism as essential for salvation. But I do not read alone in the passage. Why not teach the whole will of God about salvation ?
Barbara, Thank you for your heartfelt response. It really helps to see your background and where you are currently in your faith and service. I appreciate hearing about your church and the sacrifices of the leaders to serve there. Being a PK yourself, you know the difficulty of the ministry.
I too, like your pastor, was in a bi-vocational ministry. It’s is brutally difficult to balance a secular job, with ministry, and with family. It was probably the most difficult thing I ever did. I thank the Lord I can now serve him with all of my time.
You made a couple of comments that stand out to me as related to this discussion. Some of these are yours and some are comments you made regarding others in the debate (just so you know I’m not saying you said all these things about your own beliefs).
I’ve listed your quote and then my response:
#1 “… that you can’t be truly converted unless you believe a certain laundry list of doctrine…”
Many people in this movement have conditions other than faith for Salvation. I have a serious problem with that. The Scriptures tell us it is “faith alone” that justifies us. When the line is crossed to including “discipleship” and “growth” as conditions (as opposed to evidences), faith no longer is the only condition.
They will say otherwise, that they believe in faith alone. But their writing and preaching show otherwise.
For example: I heard John Mc give a sermon on John, chapter 3 several years ago. He went through the passage thoroughly. His summary was, “And what did Jesus tell Nicodemus to do? He told him he had to give it all up.”
I was stunned. I looked at the passage – it didn’t say that. I looked at everyone else in the audiance, no one was disagreeing. I leaned over to my friend and said, “just for the record, Jesus didn’t say that. He said to believe to recieve the new birth, not to give it all up!”
To be in a room of men (shepherds conference) who are exegeting the Word every week to feed their flocks, and not have anyone display a problem with that summary was shocking.
#2 “…it just loses its simple beauty…”
I agree completely! The Gospel is a simple, beautiful truth that even a child can be presented with and put their faith in (as you have pointed out). The additional elements tacked on by the Reformed and Lordship positions complicate it beyond what the Scriptures say.
# 3 “We can argue all day long about HOW salvation happens, and in what order, but how can we simply revere and enjoy our Christ and our God in all simplicity of Spirit and with the necessary childlike faith when we’re so busy picking Him (and each other) apart?”
The reason this debate is so important is that it defines how we do Evangelism. A friend and are were lamenting over the same things you express while at breakfast one day (including a discussion of Election). I asked, “Why does all this matter?”
He pointed to the waitress and said, “She is why it matters. How are you going to talk to her about the Gospel. Are you going to explain the simple Gospel: That God loves her, Christ died for her sins and rose again, and that if she puts her faith in him for forgiveness and eternal life, He will give it to her?
Or, are you going to tell her 14 different things she must do instead? Are you going to tell her she must change her life, dedicate her entire life to serving Him, throw out her cigarettes, clean up her life, confess every one of her sins, etc, etc, etc.
The Bible says in John 6:47 “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.”
There are over 100 verses that talk about faith providing justification. Why do we complicate it by confusing Christian growth with the condition of faith?
Yes, it is tiring. But it is a critical discussion. And the more I study it, the less I see that Reformed theology is the answer.
Thanks again for such a thoughtful response.
Ray,
Yes, we should use the entire counsel of God to determine correct doctrine.
We should also use the verses which are abundant regarding a doctrine to intrepret those which are less clear. Thus my comment about the quantity of Scriptures that talk about faith being connected to justification – exclusively.
Notice all of what Mark 16:16 says…
“He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.”
The condemnation comes from ‘not believing’, thus indicating that belief is what brngs salvation not baptism.
There are also some questions from textual critics about the source of this part of Mark – but that’s another discussion.
Regarding Romans 5:1 – I’ve heard that argument before. However, Paul says justification comes by faith. He doesn’t say “faith and”; for such a critical issue he certainly would not leave out conditions if there were more. That plus the numerous other verses that talk about faith being the only condition for eternal life led to doctrine of sola fide (faith alone).
Owen ,
Jesus said that belief and baptism is what will save. It is in the passage. Sure disbelief will condemn becuase those who do not believe will never submit to being baptized. I can state a number passages that only use baptism , or repentance in a passage for salvation.It must all be taught, not just isolate faith only.
Owen, first of all, God bless you – and I hope that my above comment was not construed to be a jab at my pastor for being bi-vocational – it is not, but rather a means to explain why there is little available guidance; but in fact he teaches Bible at a private Christian school – and my 16-year-old son is one of his students. I feel doubly blessed by that.
That said, and moving on, may I submit this possibility:
Many people – Christians and otherwise, clergy and lay – simply don’t trust God enough in matters of Salvation. And if we don’t trust Him in matters of the salvation of others, it behooves us to consider whether we genuinely trust Him with our own.
I do believe in Lordship salvation, although perhaps the definitions may vary. I believe we must be at a point of surrender to Him…the rest comes through the lifelong process of sanctification through continued surrender which He provides the means and the desire to do. If one believes that a person pre-conversion is dead in his/her sins, a legalistic approach is going to be not only erroneous, but also detrimental…but so easily a trap we fall into. I follow the point of view of regeneration because that is what the Bible teaches and that that is what happened to me – new heart, new desires, including new desire to bear fruit and to be obedient and to follow Him; and being grieved and humbled daily through my utter imperfection, thus all the more grateful for Christ’s blood which redeems…I just believe that He brings us to that place through different means, but ultimately it comes down to the revelation of Himself to the individual believer – through His word and through a palpable outpouring of Grace. Which may not be immediately recognized but which will become unmistakeable before long.
Maybe it’s a prevenient grace. I know that I was dead and had no faith; I was numb and yet angry at Him; I was broken to the point of having no will of my own left when I called out to Him in utter surrender – which was the last thing that I wanted to do – but it was all I had left and to this day I do not believe that that came from my own will. Indeed, I wasn’t even asking to be saved from my sin. I simply surrendered to Him. Here you go – written the next day in an old blog I used to keep: http://lovethesunlight.wordpress.com/2008/02/12/better/
As you can see, it’s still quite recent. A LOT has happened since then. I am no theologian; I am merely a Christian who often finds herself in Peter’s shoes: “Where else would I go? You’re the one with the words of eternal Life.” But I trust Him to keep me. I have to. I sure can’t trust myself to do it. And if I trust Him to keep me, then I have to trust Him to keep the rest, too. I work at following the truth, as you can see above I have had to repent and work on simply speaking the truth in love to those I know who are venturing into error, and I pray for them. Is that not what we’re to do – whether we’re evangelizing or simply living out our day to day lives?
I had left it at surrender, did not even pursue anything until I followed the inner urgings to go to church two weeks later – after sitting at my desk trying to talk myself out of it because I still didn’t see what good it would do – and it was at that point that everything began to really unfold. A few times I have ventured closely on the edge of error but He used that to teach me something about Himself and to bring me back into Himself. He does that, and through His doing that I’ve learned that degree of security with Him. He is active in my life – not just a passive creature we read about in a book and pray to for whatever reason. He works these wonderful miracles and every time I go to Him with a question about Himself and what I need to learn, He shows me through His word or through a message or an article or something that addresses the matter, almost immediately. I feel like He has me in a little “school” to prepare me for the day when the faith of a martyr (which I also pray for) may be needed.
I really believe that surrender is of vital importance – but the question is – what does it take to get to that point? I do not believe that one can receive the fullness of His grace (i.e. with both hands) when one hand is clinging on to self/pride/world/will. And some of us are hardheaded and prideful enough on our own that we have to be brought down over and over again in order to finally give up. I praise God that He did that. I pray that He breaks me every single day if that’s what it takes to have that kind of fellowship with Him.
Paul warns us to “work out your salvation in fear and trembling” – Grace saves us, Faith is the instrument; both are tremendous, incredible gifts. But faith without works is dead – we must bear the fruit of repentance, which includes His Lordship over our lives. He has brought me from the place in my life of looking to Him as a “cosmic Santa Claus” — to actually praying to be weeded and tilled and brought to continued repentance. Because He has made known to me just an inkling of the magnificence of His glory and His love, He has made Himself so very real to me and shows Himself by actually directly answering my questions through His Scriptures, through timely sermons, through such articles and comment discussions as these – and that helps to build my faith.
The whole thing shows me and teaches me this one, very important thing: Yes, it’s important to know what it takes to be saved – if for no reason other than to be able to look back on the experience and realize that what has happened to you was an incredible miracle that leads you to live out your life in prayerful gratitude for the gift – and which puts everything else – including these kinds of discussions as well as some less civil discussions in the theological world – into perspective. Now granted, I grew up in the church and thought I was saved already, I had prayed the prayer when I was five (and I don’t know how many times since then, all very sincerely and with much earnestness) and been baptized, I avoided those haunting passages about being excluded just as much as I could, and I had been just as lost as lost could be. I had never been reborn – nor did I even know that such a thing was real and not just allegorical – until I reached the point of broken surrender. Jesus spent a good bit of time explaining that in one form or another. Paul, Peter, James and John help us work that out with wonderful – and occasionally stern – words regarding our sanctification – but those words were addressed to the already formed churches – not evangelistic efforts. But ultimately, it’s all in the hands of our wonderful, glorious, incredible heavenly Father and His Son our Savior and this incredible indwelling Holy Spirit who together as one have things perfectly well under control…whether we like it or think we can add anything to it…or not. I vote we just delight in Him, trust Him to provide the grace and the words needed when we are called to be a vessel for Him, and be able to give an account to others for the joy – and the love – that we have.
Ray,
My guess is you have heard all the explanations that evangelicals give against baptismal regeneration. You’ve probably also read the commentary on the verses you mention.
Anything I say probably won’t convince you otherwise.
Baptismal regeneration is quite different from the topic of this thread, thus I’ll leave it alone.
If this is not the case, and you’d be interested in what I think of the verses that seem to connect baptism and salvation, let me know. I’d be glad to discuss it.
Romans 1 and the “spiritual corpse”
I would like to continue to examine the idea of a “spiritual corpse”. To review, the point some make is that “spiritually dead” means that man is incapable of responding, just like a physical corpse isn’t. Yet, it seems that this analogy is false in light of Scripture.
Earlier was noted that man was created in God’s image. That involves eternity. Man is an eternal being, with eternal conciousness. Again, if man were a spiritual corpse then eternal punish would make no sense at all. No matter how hard or how often one beats a corpse – the corpse won’t be bothered.
In Romans 1 Paul states, “because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.” (1:19-22).
The above description doesn’t sound at all as that of an unresponsive corpse. Notice the language: “manifest in them,” “God has shown it to them,” “attributes clearly seen” by whom? obviously the spiritually dead; “being understood;” “because the knew God, they did not glorify Him as God.” Certainly not the description of a spirtual corpse.
Thus God’s condemnation is justified – His “wrath is revealed,” (18).
Then, God’s judgment is more than fair, because they rejected the revealed truth. Rejection indicates a voluntary response – something a corpse cannot do.
If God were dealing with “spirtual corpses” then none of this would make sense. Romans 1 would mean nothing. God’s wrath would be out of place and in would be senseless and useless. But it is not, and the reason is because the unbeliever is not a spiritual corpse, but rather a person who is responsible before God concerning his actions and choices regarding God.
Owen ,
That is ok. I do not believe in baptismal regeneration. I have never used that expression in any of my teaching. I only used baptism as an example of why using alone is confusing. Also , it makes no difference how many passages are used on a subject. Only one from the Master is enough. It is necessary to fit into the reformation tradition about salvation to use the word “alone”.
It has been a good discussion.
Barbara,
Wow! God is doing some great works in your life. Again, thanks so much for sharing what He’s doing. It’s exciting to hear from someone who is growing so richly and deeply in the Word and things of God.
I would love to comment thoroughly on everything you wrote to honor your efforts. Time is my enemy though today.
Just one clarification: I believe surrender is important. Especially if one is going to be obedient to the commands of Christ.
However, I don’t see surrender and submission as being conditions for justification. Not that they’re not important, let me say that again. Just that it’s not connected to receiving eternal life.
Why is this?
Surrender and Submission require works. Obedience is a work. We know in Ephesians 2:8,9 that works is not a part of being regenerated. It is not a condition. Faith is the condition.
It’s a simple matter of definition and order; getting the cart before the horse. And it’s important because it affects how we present the Gospel.
My wife came to faith in Christ during a VBS program when she was 7. She heard a simple message of Christ, what He did for us, and that by believing in Him she could be forgiven and receive eternal life. She believed in Him that day. However, she did not make a commitment to be a missionay, serve Him all of her life, quit every sin, etc. She was seven. But as you said, she received Christ in childlike faith. What follows after that is a process of discipleship and sanctification.
This then turns into legalism because everyone is constantly looking at a person’s works to verify his or her salvation. Instead of seeing if the person is looking at the Savior, they look at their life. Our lives are going to waver. We’ll be strong one day and weak the next. We will have irregular obedience.
Chuck Swindoll discusses this in his book, “Grace Awakening”. Although he doesn’t mention names or groups. The type of theology which started this article is what he’s talking about.
Thanks again for the ongoing discussion.
Ray,
Be definition baptismal regeneration means that a person believes you MUST be baptized to be saved.
If a person ties baptism to faith as a condition, they are holding to this definition.
Thus, even though you are using Mark 16:16 as an example in our discussion, it sounds like you are saying you believe baptism is a condition for salvation.
By definition you would then be holding to baptismal regeneration.
One of my concerns in all of these discussions is how we sometimes abuse certain biblical words. It is not human merit to obey. Obedience is connected with faith and trust in Jesus Christ. Jesus once said the work of God was to believe, John 6 : 25 – 29.When a person does beleive , repent and confess and is baptized all of those are expressions of faiith,trust and beleif in Jesus Christ and what He did for us at Calvary. And those who are obedient , who trust , are the elect , the chosen . They completely trust in the blood of Jesus. They trust /believe/put their faith in Christ. But there is free will . Free will is expressing total dependence on the Savior.
Owen ,
All I know is what Jesus said and He said baptism was essential for salvation. Baptismal regeneration is a defintion from human tradition.
Ray,
Let me comment on one of your statements, “…abuse certain biblical words…”
I agree and I think you have hit the nail on the head. It’s important to interpret words and texts carefully and correctly. A word used in one place may not have the meaning in another place. For example, consider the name of “John” (not the disciple or Johnny Mc). Just John in general.
If I made the statement:
“John went into the John to read his Dear John letter.”
The word John has three different meanings in one 11 word sentence. It includes a proper name, a genre of letter, and a bathroom.
A biblical example is the word salvation. It can mean temporal salvation or eternal salvation from hell. David often uses it to mean temporal salvation: he was saved from his enemies. It means two completely different things depending upon the context.
Without going into tremendous detail, I think this is part of the problem with the Reformed and Lordship views of salvation. I think the word election, among others, has probably been assigned a meaning that is deficient of what the text indicates.
Ray,
Trinity is also a word made up by men, but one we use to define a docrine that is biblical.
Whether you agree with the term baptimal regeneration, you are saying a person who puts their faith in Christ but hasn’t been baptized is not saved.
I would suggest you find some good commentary on this subject to test your position. And before you tell me, “the Bible is enough for me,” I agree
It’s determine what the Bible means. It also told Israel at times to go into another city and destroy all the inhabitants – that command is not for us today.
Finding the appropriate meaning, within the context, is what is important to us.
I know you would agree with this.
Owen ,
Thank you. You have stated basically what I am trying to say. I am not trying to just disagree but get a better defintion of certain words.
Owen ,
I am only saying what Jesus said about baptism. And yes , I have read numerous commentaries and there is a mixed interpretation. Some say it is essential , others say it is not. The text says it is. I agree with context and yes some things God commanded of ancient Israel is not for the Christian in the new covenant. Thanks for the discussion and thank you for being kind and patient with my slow mind.
People can spin this election doctrine any way they want but the Bible says that it is the will of God that all men be saved and that whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord will be saved.
It has nothing to do with whether a person thinks election is fair or not. The Calvinist doctrine of election is a misinterpretation of the scripture.
It would seem to me, if the Calvinist interpretation of election is the correct one. the kindest thing I could ever have done for my children would have been to never have them, rather than to possibly, or probably produce fodder for the fires of hell, seeing as their fate may be to be “doomed from the womb”, regardless of their desire. To be unable to choose Christ, unless that choice was predetermined for them, is no gospel, but rather the worst news possible. Would a loving God produce childern for no other reason than to gain glory from their eternal punishment for sins which they were unable to refrain from, because of their fallen nature, a nature which they were born to without any choice, and for which they were offered no remedy?
Jesus loves some little childern, some little children of the world.
Red or yellow, black or white, some are precious in his sight. Jesus loves some little children of the world.
Some but not all.