Calvinism/Arminianism Forum - Finally Imploded?

[HankD]

What?!?! You mean John Calvin didn't originate Calvinism.....

Uh, what he said was that he was not the originator of the doctrines of grace.

HankD

 

[jbh28]

This is where we disagree. I believe (as do many Christian scholars), that this verse indeed shows we are elected "in Christ". We are not elected "to be in Christ". That is a major difference between us.

Were you there before the foundation of the world? No, you were not. It doesn't say we are elected to be in Christ. Our election by the Father was in Christ. The election is what is in Christ- as most Scholars say---since you can use a local fallacy I thought I would too. (appeal to popularity)

If we are elected WHEN we are in Christ, then either the Scriptures are in error by saying that election was before the foundation of the world, or you are really old.

We have no righteousness, merit, or anything of value of our own to offer God the Father. It is only "in Christ" that we are imputed His righteousness and merit and therefore are made acceptable to God. And that is what Ephesians 1:6 says:

Eph 1:6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

agreed

"The beloved" means Jesus, Jesus is God's elect or beloved.

Actually, Paul uses beloved to refer to the Christians he is speaking to. The Family of God would be more specific.

Matt 3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Yes, Jesus is the beloved son, but that doesn't mean that Paul is using the term the same way.

And this is how it works for us as Christians. God elects us not for any merit we have, and not for some "secret love" that Calvin spoke about. God elects us because we are "in Christ". He shows us favor because of the merit of Jesus, for His sake, not because we deserve any favor or grace from God.

You just contradicted yourself. Never does the Scriptures say the Father elected us because we are "in Christ." If God elects because we are "in Christ" then it is because of some merit in us. God chooses us because we chose Him. We have something to show now as merit for our election.

And you cannot be "in Christ" unless you have believed in him.

Said that earlier and agreed. WE are not "in Christ" until we believe.

God in his foreknowledge knows who will believe on Jesus. It is those he elects or chooses. Not because of any merit we have, but because of Jesus's merit, and for his sake.

Technically, you are correct here, but you apply it wrong.

1. Does Jesus know who will believe - yes, otherwise he wouldn't be Omniscient
2. Are the ones that God elects or chooses the ones that believe - yes
3. Is this choosing based on any merit on our part - no

So God chooses us, not based on anything we do, but because of His love for us. If God chooses us because we chose him, we now have merit.

 

[jbh28]

Uh, what he said was that he was not the originator of the doctrines of grace.

HankD

I know, i was being sarcastic.

 

[RAdam]

Genesis 3
The Fall of Man
1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'You must not eat from any tree in the garden'?"

This is what I see, that is why we can't come to agreement. Men trying to bring doubt in the word of God. The Devil is still using the same tactics.

This is a chief example of the intellectual dishonesty that is evident on all sides in these kinds of debates. While I may not agree with some who don't hold to the doctrines of grace, I wouldn't dare charge them with trying to bring doubt into the word of God. I fully believe that winman believes the bible, and moreover believes it to be complete, inerrant, and preserved, because I've seen him advance that position. While I don't agree with many of his positions on things like election, I will not say he doesn't believe the bible. This is why the debate forum for Arminianism vs. Calvinism is closed. This is why so many debates on these forums between these two sides typically go bad. It is because people do these things: they erect straw man arguments, they are intellectually dishonest regarding those that don't agree with them, they put down the other side, and such tactics as this. Both sides are guilty. It is most unprofitable.

 

[jbh28]

This is speaking of God's word, this has been shown many times. Calvinists love to quote John 6:37 and John 6:44, but ignore John 6:45 which explains how they are given.

John 6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

John 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

You can't simply pull verse 37 out of the context of the passage. In verse 45 Jesus explains how believers are given to Jesus, and how they are drawn. They are drawn through the Word of God. No man can come to Jesus unless he has heard, learned, and been taught of the Father. And how do we learn from the Father? The scriptures.

And later in the scriptures Jesus reemphasizes this. He explains his words are spirit and life. But because some men will not believe his words, they therefore cannot come to Christ.

Where have I ever denied this. Of course this is How God draws the sinner to himself. I'm not quite sure why you keep bringing this up. Verse 45 shows how we are drawn to Christ, not how we are given. The giving has already taken place.

John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.

You have to understand what Jesus is saying here. He is telling these Jews directly that his words are spirit and life. You cannot save yourself through any effort or merit of your own (flesh). Life must be given you of the Father through his word. But you must believe his Word.

Agreed

#1 The words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life
#2 But there are some of you that believe not (they would not receive or accept his words).
#3 Therefore (because they believed not) said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it (his words) were given unto him of my Father.

If you are saved, it is because God revealed Jesus to you through his word. It was given you. But it is not forced on you, you must receive his word willingly. You can offer a girl an engagement ring, and if she accepts it, it was given to her from you. But if she refuses it, then it was not given to her from you. Do you understand that?

Well, your example isn't quite the same, but I do agree that we come to Christ willingly.

Notice Jesus repeats that no man can come to Jesus unless it were given him by the Father. And notice in both instances that Jesus is speaking of his word, the scriptures.

You can only come to God through Jesus, and Jesus is the Word of God.

Jesus is not saying that you cannot come unless the word of God is given to him. The Word had already been given. The Bible is what is used to give life and spirit, but God is the one giving the life and spirit.

 

[Winman]

Were you there before the foundation of the world? No, you were not. It doesn't say we are elected to be in Christ. Our election by the Father was in Christ. The election is what is in Christ- as most Scholars say---since you can use a local fallacy I thought I would too. (appeal to popularity)

I really don't understand what you mean by the election being in Christ. What does that mean?

I do understand what some Calvinists say. They say God chose or elected us before the foundation of the world and then gave us to Christ. This would place election before being "in Christ".

Charles Spurgeon said (and I completely disagree here):

“That God saves from corruption and damnation those whom he has chosen from the foundations of the world, not for any disposition, faith, or holiness that he foresaw in them, but of his mere mercy in Christ Jesus his Son, passing by all the rest according to the irreprehensible reason of his own free-will and justice.”

Spurgeon says God chose us not for any "disposition, faith, or holiness" that he "foresaw" in people.

But this contradicts scripture, for 1 Peter 2:1 says election is "according" to God's foreknowledge. So, it cannot be denied that God's election is conditioned upon something that God "foreknew". So Spurgeon is wrong here.

You can argue what this foreknowledge of God is, but you cannot say election is not conditioned upon God's foreknowledge.

Now, I say that the scriptures clearly demonstrate that God knows who will believe from the beginning.

John 6: 64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.

This verse clearly shows Jesus knew "from the beginning" who would believe and who would not.

We see an example of Jesus's foreknowledge with Nathaniel. Even before he was "called", Jesus said he "saw" him.

John 1:47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile!
48 Nathanael saith unto him, Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered and said unto him, Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.
49 Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.
50 Jesus answered and said unto him, Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig tree, believest thou? thou shalt see greater things than these.

Notice that Nathaniel asked Jesus how Jesus knew him, and that Jesus answered that even before he was called Jesus saw him.

Was Nathaniel a believer before he met Jesus? Yes. He believed in the promised Messiah just like his brother Philip.

John 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

Jesus knew all of the apostles and whether they believed before he chose them. Eleven were believers, one (Judas) was not.

John 6:70 Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?
71 He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve.

Jesus knew that Judas would not believe him, but he chose him anyway to fulfill the scriptures.

John 13:18 I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me.

So, here we see several examples from scripture that shows God's foreknowledge is that he knows beforehand who will believe and who will not.

You, on the other hand, have no idea what this foreknowledge of God's is and cannot offer any explanation.

 

[jbh28]

I really don't understand what you mean by the election being in Christ. What does that mean?

all parts of our salvation was done in Christ. Nothing was done outside of Christ. We personally were not in Christ before we were born, but our election, before the foundation of the world, had already taken place.

I do understand what some Calvinists say. They say God chose or elected us before the foundation of the world and then gave us to Christ. This would place election before being "in Christ".

Election before us being in Christ? Yes, unless you were around before the foundation of the world. Actually, Paul says that God chose use before the foundation of the world. John says that we have been given to Christ and those that have been given will come. So, election, giving, coming...

Charles Spurgeon said (and I completely disagree here):

“That God saves from corruption and damnation those whom he has chosen from the foundations of the world, not for any disposition, faith, or holiness that he foresaw in them, but of his mere mercy in Christ Jesus his Son, passing by all the rest according to the irreprehensible reason of his own free-will and justice.”​

Spurgeon says God chose us not for any "disposition, faith, or holiness" that he "foresaw" in people.

But this contradicts scripture, for 1 Peter 2:1 says election is "according" to God's foreknowledge. So, it cannot be denied that God's election is conditioned upon something that God "foreknew". So Spurgeon is wrong here.

You can argue what this foreknowledge of God is, but you cannot say election is not conditioned upon God's foreknowledge.

Spurgeon wasn't wrong and your verse didn't refute what he said. Did Spurgeon say that God's election was outside his foreknowledge? No, but notice that I Peter 2:1 doesn't say that God elected us on foreknown "disposition, faith, or holiness." Also, 1 Peter doesn't say that election is "conditioned" on God's foreknowledge. It says, "Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father." Not "elect conditioned to the foreknowledge of God." Not "Elect conditioned to the foreknowledge of faith of God the Father. "According" means to be in agreement, in harmony. God's election and his foreknowledge are in perfect harmony.

Now, I say that the scriptures clearly demonstrate that God knows who will believe from the beginning.

John 6: 64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.

This verse clearly shows Jesus knew "from the beginning" who would believe and who would not.

We see an example of Jesus's foreknowledge with Nathaniel. Even before he was "called", Jesus said he "saw" him.

John 1:47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile!
48 Nathanael saith unto him, Whence knowest thou me? Jesus answered and said unto him, Before that Philip called thee, when thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee.
49 Nathanael answered and saith unto him, Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the King of Israel.
50 Jesus answered and said unto him, Because I said unto thee, I saw thee under the fig tree, believest thou? thou shalt see greater things than these.

Notice that Nathaniel asked Jesus how Jesus knew him, and that Jesus answered that even before he was called Jesus saw him.

Was Nathaniel a believer before he met Jesus? Yes. He believed in the promised Messiah just like his brother Philip.

John 1:45 Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.

Jesus knew all of the apostles and whether they believed before he chose them. Eleven were believers, one (Judas) was not.

John 6:70 Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?
71 He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve.

Jesus knew that Judas would not believe him, but he chose him anyway to fulfill the scriptures.

John 13:18 I speak not of you all: I know whom I have chosen: but that the scripture may be fulfilled, He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me.

So, here we see several examples from scripture that shows God's foreknowledge is that he knows beforehand who will believe and who will not.

You, on the other hand, have no idea what this foreknowledge of God's is and cannot offer any explanation.

Well, you can cut the insults and the misrepresentation. I know know what God's foreknowledge is. As I have said many times over, God does know who will believe and who won't believe. Again, not sure why you keep posting this same thing as I have never denied it. However, in election, it doesn't say it is conditioned on faith. If it was, then we would have something to boast about.

 

[HankD]

I know, i was being sarcastic.

I thought so, I chuckled.

HankD

 

[Winman]

Jesus is not saying that you cannot come unless the word of God is given to him. The Word had already been given. The Bible is what is used to give life and spirit, but God is the one giving the life and spirit.

You are getting close now. Can a person come to Jesus without hearing God's word?

Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

You agree that nobody can believe or come to Jesus unless they have heard of him, and that is by the scriptures. Who gave the scriptures?

John 17:8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.

God's word is what is given to men. This is why Jesus says no man can come to him unless it were given him by the Father. Jesus is speaking of the Word of God. Without God's word, you would not know of Jesus and could not possibly come to him (Rom 10:14).

If you can grasp this, all these scriptures will make perfect sense.

 

[Winman]

However, in election, it doesn't say it is conditioned on faith. If it was, then we would have something to boast about.

What you said is an absolute contradiction of scripture. Because we believe, we cannot boast.

Rom 3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

Believing is not a work. This is where you are going off the trail, because many teach faith is a work. It is not.

Faith is trusting or relying upon another. It gives honor to them, not to ourselves. An example:

You could be the biggest liar and thief in town. You could be absolutely untrustworthy. But your mother is a true believer in God and is as honest as a human being can be.

You could trust in your mother, even though you are absolutely untrustworthy yourself. Does believing your mother to be an honest and trustworthy person make you a good person yourself? Of course not.

We trust in Jesus, not ourselves. Believe me, I am a terrible sinner. I try to be honest, but I slip up sometimes. I am not always 100% trustworthy.

But I can believe in Jesus. I can believe that he is 100% trustworthy. How does that give honor to myself? It doesn't, it gives honor to Jesus.

Believing is not a work, the scriptures absolutely show that.

Rom 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Don't listen to those who say believing is a work, it is not.

 

[psalms109:31]

All

This is a chief example of the intellectual dishonesty that is evident on all sides in these kinds of debates. While I may not agree with some who don't hold to the doctrines of grace, I wouldn't dare charge them with trying to bring doubt into the word of God. I fully believe that winman believes the bible, and moreover believes it to be complete, inerrant, and preserved, because I've seen him advance that position. While I don't agree with many of his positions on things like election, I will not say he doesn't believe the bible. This is why the debate forum for Arminianism vs. Calvinism is closed. This is why so many debates on these forums between these two sides typically go bad. It is because people do these things: they erect straw man arguments, they are intellectually dishonest regarding those that don't agree with them, they put down the other side, and such tactics as this. Both sides are guilty. It is most unprofitable.

When men say all doesn't mean all and world doesn't mean world, I am being honost with what was said. I have dealt with this since 1993, and being belittled for believing the word and the hope the world has. I know what it is like being me against everyone. I have come to embrace calvinist and they are my brothers in Christ. I love them with all my heart. I believe what they teach, until the Christ is preached and then anyone can come who trust in Christ and He will in no wise cast them out. There is so much more to learn, but in a box we are confined. We must embrace every word that comes from the mouth of God. Calvinism is good, but it is an incomplete work, because the only complete work can only be found in every word that comes from the mouth of God.

I love you brother and desire every riches from God to you.

 

[RAdam]

When men say all doesn't mean all and world doesn't mean world, I am being honost with what was said. I have dealt with this since 1993, and being belittled for believing the word and the hope the world has. I know what it is like being me against everyone. I have come to embrace calvinist and they are my brothers in Christ. I love them with all my heart. I believe what they teach, until the Christ is preached and then anyone can come who trust in Christ and He will in no wise cast them out. There is so much more to learn, but in a box we are confined. We must embrace every word that comes from the mouth of God. Calvinism is good, but it is an incomplete work, because the only complete work can only be found in every word that comes from the mouth of God.

I love you brother and desire every riches from God to you.

See, here's what I mean. You charge believers in the doctrines of grace of denying or doubting the word, but really what they are denying is your interpretation of it. I've never yet had a believer in the doctrines of grace say all doesn't mean all or that world doesn't mean world. I have seen them, and I do myself, try to understand the meanings of these words as they are used in scripture and in the context. That isn't dishonoring or doubting the word of God, indeed it is the opposite. You and I disagree in our definition of those words as they are used in scripture, but I wouldn't charge you with doubting God's word.

 

[psalms109:31]

Creditability

I have seen a lot where men try to destroy a man's creditability because they don't want to deal with what they are talking about.

Show me where I doubted God's word and I will humble myself before God.

I am not a grace only because that is not what the scripture teaches, but grace through faith, trusting in God and not working.

 

[psalms109:31]

Psalm 146

Psalm 146
1 Praise the LORD.
Praise the LORD, O my soul.

2 I will praise the LORD all my life;
I will sing praise to my God as long as I live.

3 Do not put your trust in princes,
in mortal men, who cannot save.

4 When their spirit departs, they return to the ground;
on that very day their plans come to nothing.

5 Blessed is he whose help is the God of Jacob,
whose hope is in the LORD his God,

6 the Maker of heaven and earth,
the sea, and everything in them—
the LORD, who remains faithful forever.

7 He upholds the cause of the oppressed
and gives food to the hungry.
The LORD sets prisoners free,

8 the LORD gives sight to the blind,
the LORD lifts up those who are bowed down,
the LORD loves the righteous.

9 The LORD watches over the alien
and sustains the fatherless and the widow,
but he frustrates the ways of the wicked.

10 The LORD reigns forever,
your God, O Zion, for all generations.
Praise the LORD.

 

[RAdam]

What I posted was that I wouldn't dare charge you with doubting God's word. I never charged you with that and wouldn't do so just because you and I disagree.

 

[psalms109:31]

What I posted was that I wouldn't dare charge you with doubting God's word. I never charged you with that and wouldn't do so just because you and I disagree.

If I did I would want you to show me. I do still believe the devil is still trying to get men to doubt the scripture, but if the person is sure and do not doubt how the scripture is and that it is the word of God. Then my words mean nothing to them, they are not the devil. I will not doubt the scripture the way God had them translated for me.

1 Timothy 2
Instructions on Worship
1I urge, then, first of all, that requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone— 2for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, 6who gave himself as a ransom for all men—the testimony given in its proper time. 7And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a teacher of the true faith to the Gentiles.

 

[jbh28]

You are getting close now. Can a person come to Jesus without hearing God's word?

Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

You agree that nobody can believe or come to Jesus unless they have heard of him, and that is by the scriptures. Who gave the scriptures?

John 17:8 For I have given unto them the words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst send me.

God's word is what is given to men. This is why Jesus says no man can come to him unless it were given him by the Father. Jesus is speaking of the Word of God. Without God's word, you would not know of Jesus and could not possibly come to him (Rom 10:14).

If you can grasp this, all these scriptures will make perfect sense.

Are you saying that if a person never sees a Bible, they cannot possibly be saved? For the most part, I would agree, but I wouldn't say 100%. Look at Romans 1:20 for instance. It says that even creation itself speaks about God. I don't think romans 10 is saying 100%. (if a person reads a track without a preacher they can't be saved?) I don't think it should be interpreted 100% literally here. the point of the passage is to spread the word so people can hear the gospel. However, that isn't what is meant by "it was given him" in John 6. The word has already been given.

Romans 1:20
For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:​

You said that God's word is given to men, yes, but that isn't was it being talked about in John 6. God's word has already been given and it wouldn't make any sense in the context of John 6. Dr. Walter has already gone over this before, so there is no need for me to say it again.

 

[jbh28]

What you said is an absolute contradiction of scripture. Because we believe, we cannot boast.

Rom 3:27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith.

Believing is not a work. This is where you are going off the trail, because many teach faith is a work. It is not.

Faith is trusting or relying upon another. It gives honor to them, not to ourselves. An example:

You could be the biggest liar and thief in town. You could be absolutely untrustworthy. But your mother is a true believer in God and is as honest as a human being can be.

You could trust in your mother, even though you are absolutely untrustworthy yourself. Does believing your mother to be an honest and trustworthy person make you a good person yourself? Of course not.

We trust in Jesus, not ourselves. Believe me, I am a terrible sinner. I try to be honest, but I slip up sometimes. I am not always 100% trustworthy.

But I can believe in Jesus. I can believe that he is 100% trustworthy. How does that give honor to myself? It doesn't, it gives honor to Jesus.

Believing is not a work, the scriptures absolutely show that.

Rom 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

Don't listen to those who say believing is a work, it is not.

Nice straw man, but I never said faith is a work. Of course faith isn't a work. Otherwise Salvation would be of works because faith is required for Salvation. That is clear from Scripture. What Scripture doesn't say is faith is required for election. Election and Salvation are not the same thing.

 

[Winman]

Election before us being in Christ? Yes, unless you were around before the foundation of the world. Actually, Paul says that God chose use before the foundation of the world. John says that we have been given to Christ and those that have been given will come. So, election, giving, coming...

No, election is according to foreknowledge. What does the word "foreknowledge" tell us? It tells us that election is based or conditioned upon something God knew before it happened. What could that be? I say it is faith, and I have shown several examples from scripture that shows God knows who will believe on Christ before they actually do. He also knew Judas would betray him before it actually happened. So, it doesn't matter that we were not born or created before the foundation of the world, God could see ahead in the future and knows who will believe and who will not.

Nice straw man, but I never said faith is a work. Of course faith isn't a work. Otherwise Salvation would be of works because faith is required for Salvation. That is clear from Scripture. What Scripture doesn't say is faith is required for election. Election and Salvation are not the same thing.

You didn't come right out and say faith is a work, but you certainly implied it when you said this:

However, in election, it doesn't say it is conditioned on faith. If it was, then we would have something to boast about.

You say if election is conditioned on faith then we would have something to boast about. So you view faith as a work performed by us.

You will be offended by this, but you have to do something to be saved, you can't do absolutely nothing. When the Philipian jailer asked Paul what he must do to be saved, did Paul say "Do nothing!"? No, he gave him a definite answer, he told him he must believe on Jesus to be saved.

Acts 16:30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

If Calvinism were true, then Paul actually told the Philipian jailer a lie that would damn him to hell. He should have told the Philipian jailer he could do absolutely nothing whatsoever, and that if he was fortunate he might be one of the elect, and that God would regenerate him. He should perform no action whatsoever, because that would be a work that would forfeit salvation.

It is amazing, Calvinism actually makes people afraid to perform what is necessary to be saved.

 

[Winman]

And choosing God is not a work, because God first chooses us. He initiates the whole process. If he did not send his word into the world, you could not be saved.

Deut 10:15 Only the LORD had a delight in thy fathers to love them, and he chose their seed after them, even you above all people, as it is this day.

God chose the Jews, but were all the Jews saved? No, only those who believed were saved. Does this not prove that election is conditioned on faith?

I have heard this analogy, and though all analogies fail at some point, it is pretty good.

Election is similar to a company looking for an employee. They start the whole process by listing a job in the paper. You see the ad and go down and apply. You go through the interview, and they tell you they need to conduct more interviews and will get back to you.

Two days later they call you up and say they liked you and have decided to hire you. So, they chose you.

But do you have a choice in the matter as well? Of course, you must also choose them. You might tell them you are not interested in working for them.

But if you do choose them, does that negate that they first chose you? Of course not, that would be ridiculous. You could not possibly choose them unless they had first chosen you. Does that make you the boss? Does that take away their sovereignty? Of course not.

What if they called and said they had chosen someone else for the job? Could you tell them that they have to hire you because you had chosen them? Of course not, that would be ridiculous as well.

So, God first chooses us, but we also have to respond by choosing him. If he did not first choose us, then it would be impossible for us to choose him.

And can you see that choosing God does not rob his sovereignty over you?