Greetings my brother, Silverhair. Thank you for your edification.
I do hold to particular election. I understand that you hold to corporate election (I have no problems with this view...the result ends up being the same for me).
The confusion is that I just don't accept that God's atemporal foreknowledge, planning, and will is incompatible with man's will and temporal choice of faith (or not). I think it's like comparing apples to oranges. We as temporal beings tend to think of God temporally when He is atemporal. We confound logical atemporal order and temporal order.
So when I get to the dilemma of particular election and the concept of freedom of the will to have faith or not, submit or not...I don't fell I need to take a side. I'm not concerned with the difficulty of reconciling the two. Well...I am but I accept it because I think the Bible teaches both.
But the Son of God didn't come to be the Savior of all men from the law. Otherwise we have universalism. Those that would be taken out from under the law was known, planned, and willed to be temporal. Some want to contend that those that do not come out from under the law have 'potential'...I have no problem with this. Potential seems to attempt to counter Supralapsarianism. A position I have no problems in attempting to counter.
Peace to you brother
I do not hold to any form of Supralapsariansim. That being a decree by God that is the logical order of selecting the children of wrath prior to a fall. I deny the Calvinist's logical deduction that God predestines some for hell (although God surely knew it and allowed it and intended to use it toward His good).From this it seems your view holds that God picked out a select group to be saved and only those can be saved and all others are condemned from the start. Am I wrong in this understanding of your view?
I do hold to particular election. I understand that you hold to corporate election (I have no problems with this view...the result ends up being the same for me).
The confusion is that I just don't accept that God's atemporal foreknowledge, planning, and will is incompatible with man's will and temporal choice of faith (or not). I think it's like comparing apples to oranges. We as temporal beings tend to think of God temporally when He is atemporal. We confound logical atemporal order and temporal order.
So when I get to the dilemma of particular election and the concept of freedom of the will to have faith or not, submit or not...I don't fell I need to take a side. I'm not concerned with the difficulty of reconciling the two. Well...I am but I accept it because I think the Bible teaches both.
I agree with all this and think the Bible teaches it.From what I see in scripture God desires all to be saved, 1 Timothy 2:4, and Christ came so that all could be saved, John 3: 17. Man has the ability to trust in or to reject God and he will be held responsible for the choices he makes, John 3:18.
I agree with all of these under Christ's Cosmic Triumph on the cross. Christ is the savior of all men through the conquering of that which held mankind in bondage. Christ did something tangible for all men through His Cosmic Triumph. Because of this Cosmic Triumph those that turn to God in faith will be saved. Taken out from under the law and put under grace.Christ made provision for all to be able to be saved when He covered all sin at the cross, 1 John 2:2. Those that turn to God in faith will be saved, Romans 10:13. Those that have believed are then one of the elect as they are then in the "Elect One" Christ Jesus, Ephesians 1:13, through the sealing of the Holy Spirit.
As we are told it is by the grace of God that we are saved through faith, we do not deserve it and we can not earn it via good works, Ephesians 2:8-9. Those that turn to God in faith will be saved, Romans 10:13.
But the Son of God didn't come to be the Savior of all men from the law. Otherwise we have universalism. Those that would be taken out from under the law was known, planned, and willed to be temporal. Some want to contend that those that do not come out from under the law have 'potential'...I have no problem with this. Potential seems to attempt to counter Supralapsarianism. A position I have no problems in attempting to counter.
Peace to you brother