Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
How do non-Calvinists reconcile Christ's High Priestly prayer where he is clearly saying that he is talking about the elect and not the whole world meaning every person?
Last edited by a moderator:
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The High Priestly Prayer
- Thread starter Reformed1689
- Start date
- Status
As a Classical Arminian, I have no problem with it. C.A.s have long held that though in general grace is resistable and election is conditional, God in His sovereignty did and at times still does choose to unconditionally elect and irresistably draw some to Himself.
Youre going to have to post the passage
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Really? Who doesn't know that the High Priestly Prayer of Christ is John 17?
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
You would still have a conflict. Jesus says those that were given to him. Those are the ones he is praying for. Those are the ones whom he is about to die for. This is verified by the rest of John as well. Nothing about a conditional election. Nothing about a resistable grace.
So God operates in salvation as a Calvinist at times, and then as CA in other times?
That prayer was specific for the 11. Everything to do with U and I.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Actually it was not specific, he even says not praying only for those.
David you assume to much... You've taken the meaning out of context... In John 16 Jesus is talking to his disciples, and not every elect disciple, that will walk on the face of the earth... Now unless you saw him bodily, this does not apply to you or us... These disciples were eyewitness to his resurrection and John 17 says so... This does not apply to Cals or Non-Cals, follow scripture... Brother Glen
John 17:12 While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled.
Nope. God operates as He wills.
Actually He doesnt until verse 20. 6-19 was for the 11 and most Bibles have titled that section as such for many, many years.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Are you really going to appeal to manmade pericopes for your argument? It is clearly one long discourse prayer. Jesus yes he talks about the eleven, but then throws in all future elect as well. Not the whole world.
I am going to appeal that the knowledge of the translators and editors is greater than your knowledge. Absent that, I personally read it as a separation at v 20.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
It makes no sense to separate it.
The ESV does not separate it. The NASB doesn't separate it. The NIV doesn't separate it. KJV doesn't have headings for it. The CSB doesn't separate it. What are all of these translators that separate this prayer? Who are they? Where are they?
Yes, Really. On this site people call all kinds of things all kinds of things. Never assume.
Further, just because He prays for He and the Father (1-5), then He and the disciples (6-19), then all would believe as a result of the witness of the disciples does not establish election as you see it (20-26).
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
It does when he specifically says they are the ones given to him by the Father.
That is a reference to the disciples
NIV, CSB, HCSB, NET, NIRV, NKJV are the ones that quickly come to mind.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Verse 24
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
NIV, CSB, HCSB do not separate it. No it doesn't.
- Status