Do BOTH Cals/Arms Affirm Doctrine Of Election?

[Skandelon]

The two statements seem to be in opposition to me... Either God does it, as in Article III or man does it as in Article I. I highly suspect that the reason the Remonstrance was declared heretical is in large part due to this sort of double-speak.

This only proves my point that you don't understand what they are saying or what we believe. You made the same mistake interpreting them as you did interpreting me. You presume that God's divine work of grace is always effectual which is just begging the question.

While I admit that different non-Calvinistic scholars use differing terminology to explain the process (as is true of Calvinistic scholars), the principles are basically the same. But, I do admit, that does make things confusing at times, but no more so for Arminians as for Calvinists.

 

[Skandelon]

Perhaps it is that I do understand, yet reject that view as deficient.

Perhaps if you restated my views accurately, then we would know. In that particular post you did not.

 

[Skandelon]

You all seem to miss that election is both corporate and individual:

Was Israel the elect nation? YES.
Was every individual Jew saved? NO.

So what does that mean? Every individual Jew was granted the opportunity to enter covenant with God, but not every one chose to do so.

So, election is about God's choosing to grant a group of people the opportunity to enter covenant with God, yet the individual in that group must respond according to the condition of the covenant agreement.

 

[psalms109:31]

Isaiah 44
Israel the Chosen
1 “But now listen, Jacob, my servant,
Israel, whom I have chosen.
2 This is what the LORD says—
he who made you, who formed you in the womb,
and who will help you:
Do not be afraid, Jacob, my servant,
Jeshurun,[Jeshurun means the upright one, that is, Israel.]
whom I have chosen.
3 For I will pour water on the thirsty land,
and streams on the dry ground;
I will pour out my Spirit on your offspring,
and my blessing on your descendants.
4 They will spring up like grass in a meadow,
like poplar trees by flowing streams.
5 Some will say, ‘I belong to the LORD’;
others will call themselves by the name of Jacob;
still others will write on their hand, ‘The LORD’s,’
and will take the name Israel.

John 1:11
He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him.

Matthew 10:
33But whoever disowns me before others, I will disown before my Father in heaven.

Romans 11:
17But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, although a wild olive shoot, were grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing root[Greek root of richness; some manuscripts richness
] of the olive tree, 18do not be arrogant toward the branches. If you are, remember it is not you who support the root, but the root that supports you. 19Then you will say, "Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in." 20That is true. They were broken off because of their unbelief, but you stand fast through faith. So do not become proud, but fear. 21For if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you. 22Note then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you too will be cut off. 23And even they, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God has the power to graft them in again. 24For if you were cut from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and grafted, contrary to nature, into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these, the natural branches, be grafted back into their own olive tree.

What is being chosen if you deny the one sent to save you. It is a bad thing when those who know(or to memorize) the scripture backwards and forwards, but can't recognize the promised one?

 

[Iconoclast]

You all seem to miss that election is both corporate and individual:

Was Israel the elect nation? YES.
Was every individual Jew saved? NO.

So what does that mean? Every individual Jew was granted the opportunity to enter covenant with God, but not every one chose to do so.

This again is error....they were in the covenant although the Old Covenant was breakable. They were said to be in the covenant,unless they broke it...

There was no "opportunity"


So, election is about God's choosing to grant a group of people the opportunity

So, this is also wrong denying God's New Covenant explanations Hebrews 8
Hebrews 10


to enter covenant with God, yet the individual in that group must respond according to the condition of the covenant agreement.

There is no condition of covenant agreement in the biblical covenant.
it is not a fifty /fifty deal.....It is of God.

 

[Iconoclast]

I wouldn't be so quick to throw "baloney" around when you equate calling with election

"Many are called but few are chosen"

WD......you might not be "so quick" to do it, because I am not certain that you hold to any distinction between a general call {outward} and the inward effectual call to the individual sinner.{the elect}
If you understand this ...we might agree on something.

What do you think takes place.....it is all up to man? there is no inward call to the elect sheep?

 

[jbh28]

I don't believe it is individuals being elected to be saved. It is about God electing to grant people entrance into covenant with him. In other words, God elects to send his special revelation by which they CAN respond. This is what Paul is speaking of in Romans 11 when he speaks about the Jews being "cut off" and Gentiles being "grafted in."

If that was a about individual salvation then you would have individuals being cut off from salvation...thus losing their salvation. That is not what either of us believe. Instead it is about being cut off from the revelation by which they might be saved.

God elects to send his message first the Jews and then to the Gentiles. That is election. He does also selects some individuals for noble divine purposes (like apostles), which causes some people confusion when then don't pay close attention to the context.

The problem is that the passages that speak of election, people are always the objects of the election. Your view has "to save people" being the object. He elected to saved, where as I believe that the people were the objects. Individuals are saved. 2 Thessalonians 2:13 says he chose us for salvation. Ephesians 1 says he chose us and in the context of salvation.

There is of course corporate election, but there is also individual election. Israel would be an example of corporate election. Salvation is an example of individual election.

 

[Tom Butler]

And that could be the reason for the resurgence of Calvinism, they think this is the only alternative. That's one of the reasons I was a Calvinist. The "foreseen faith" view is a weak, easy to explain view that appeases the masses, but it's no more biblical than Calvinism in my opinion.

Then you may need more experience.

I guess I do need to get out more. You're the first non-Cal that I have ever read who did not appeal to foreseen faith as the ground of election. More than that, you're the first non-Cal I've read who opposes that view.

 

[Allan]

I guess I do need to get out more. You're the first non-Cal that I have ever read who did not appeal to foreseen faith as the ground of election. More than that, you're the first non-Cal I've read who opposes that view.

Not so.. I never have and nor has Webdog (to my knowledge)

 

[Skandelon]

The problem is that the passages that speak of election, people are always the objects of the election.

I never said they weren't, please go back and re-read what I wrote.

 

[jbh28]

I never said they weren't, please go back and re-read what I wrote.

And people are individuals as I stated in the other part of my post.

 

[Skandelon]

And people are individuals as I stated in the other part of my post.

...and your point is.....????

 

[jbh28]

...and your point is.....????

Read my post that I made. I said that it is individuals and then explained further.

The problem is that the passages that speak of election, people are always the objects of the election. Your view has "to save people" being the object. He elected to saved, where as I believe that the people were the objects. Individuals are saved. 2 Thessalonians 2:13 says he chose us for salvation. Ephesians 1 says he chose us and in the context of salvation.

There is of course corporate election, but there is also individual election. Israel would be an example of corporate election. Salvation is an example of individual election.

The objects of election are the people. The result is salvation. He choose individuals to be saved. This wasn't based on any foreknowledge of faith.

 

[Tom Butler]

Not so.. I never have and nor has Webdog (to my knowledge)

My mistake, Allan. I must not have been paying attention.

So, refresh my memory, so I don't have to review your posts. What do you hold is the ground of election, if it is not foreseen faith?

 

[Skandelon]

Read my post that I made. I said that it is individuals and then explained further.

And as my post explained, we don't deny the application of election for individuals as your post seems to presume.

The objects of election are the people. The result is salvation

I agree with the first sentence, but if the second sentence is accurate then every Jew should be saved because clearly God elects the people of Israel. Election, as Paul explains in Romans 11 is being grafted in to the revelation of God by which one may be saved, it is not salvation itself otherwise you would have individuals being "cut off" and thus losing salvation. They aren't being cut off from salvation itself, they are being cut off from the means by which they might be saved.

 

[Skandelon]

My mistake, Allan. I must not have been paying attention.

So, refresh my memory, so I don't have to review your posts. What do you hold is the ground of election, if it is not foreseen faith?

The concept of foreknowledge and election is not about God looking down the corridors of time to see what individuals will choose and then choosing them. There may be aspects of that going on in the process, but I don't believe that is what Paul is speaking of when he teaches these doctrines.

Election is about a group or nation being "grafted in," as Paul puts it in Romans 11. The Gentiles were being "grafted in" while the Jews were being cut off. The revelation by which the Gentiles might believe unto salvation was being made clear to the Gentiles, but it was being hidden from the Jews. The Jews, known as the elect nation, were now being cut off from the special revelation of God and it was being sent to the Gentiles. "I will make for myself a nation that is not a nation..."

It is NOT about individuals, it is a cooperate concept being discussed. Now, there are times when God chooses (or elects) an individual for a special purpose (apostles/prophets), but this should not confuse people about the cooperate aspects Paul clearly explains.

The error in understanding biblical election comes when (1) the reader fails to understand the corporate nature of divine election in the covenants of God and (2) when people fail to distinguish between God's choosing of individuals for noble purposes (like apostleship) and the corporate aspects mentioned in the first point.

 

[jbh28]

And as my post explained, we don't deny the application of election for individuals as your post seems to presume.

I agree with the first sentence, but if the second sentence is accurate then every Jew should be saved because clearly God elects the people of Israel. Election, as Paul explains in Romans 11 is being grafted in to the revelation of God by which one may be saved, it is not salvation itself otherwise you would have individuals being "cut off" and thus losing salvation. They aren't being cut off from salvation itself, they are being cut off from the means by which they might be saved.

Not all Jews have been elected to salvation.

 

[Skandelon]

Not all Jews have been elected to salvation.

And that was my point... Israel was elected corporately, but only those within Israel who believe will be saved. Their election didn't guarantee their salvation, it granted them the opportunity to be saved. It grafted them into the tree of God's revelation.

 

[Iconoclast]

And that was my point... Israel was elected corporately, but only those within Israel who believe will be saved. Their election didn't guarantee their salvation, it granted them the opportunity to be saved. It grafted them into the tree of God's revelation.

No...you miss it;

5Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
6And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

7What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.

Among the nation...there was an election of grace
Today...among the world, there is also an election of grace...

Not everyone in Israel
Not everyone in the world

 

[Skandelon]

Among the nation...there was an election of grace
Today...among the world, there is also an election of grace...

Not everyone in Israel
Not everyone in the world

Neither of us believe everyone in Israel or everyone in the world will be saved. But we all agree the gospel was sent to all the world...in my view that is evidence of God's election of all. Election is about God's grafting them into the tree or cutting them off of the tree as Paul explains in Romans 11. Now, if you believe election is unto salvation then you MUST believe men can be saved and then lose their salvation because Pauls says they are cut off.