The basis of God's predestination

I am entering this discussion late, but I still have some input.

For tenth grade persuasive writing (which was just last year, although it seems longer), I wrote a paper defending unconditional election. I can provide the whole paper if anyone would like (I have not read through it to see if I still agree with everything I said), but I have not figured a simple way to preserve my footnotes (of which I have over forty referencing the Bible, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination, and other sources) without leaving it in Word format. I structured the paper on three main arguments and then I answered two objections (a classical three-point, two-refutation argument). I have posted below my responses to the objections (it is not in quotation format to save space).

Some people would argue that Bible teaches that anyone can come to salvation. Unconditional election, however, states that God has chosen only some people for salvation and thus not everyone can come to salvation. Therefore, some would say, unconditional election is unbiblical. There are several places in scripture that support the idea that anyone can come to salvation. John says that “The Spirit and the bride say, ‘Come.’ Let each one who hears them say the same, ‘Come.’ Let the thirsty one come-anyone who wants to; let him come and drink the Water of Life without charge.” Peter says in 2 Peter 3:9 that “He [God] is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.”
There are several reasons why this is not a viable objection to unconditional election. The Bible does teach that everyone can come to salvation, but this does not have to mean every single person. Rather, it means everyone in the sense that God will no longer associate only with the Jews, but he will now associate with every nation, with everyone. The Bible does not teach that any person can come to salvation. Everyone is obligated to come, but not everyone can come. Fallen man is totally depraved, so he is not thirsty for God or seeking him, but he “hates the light.” Because of his spiritual death, man is unable to influence his salvation. As such, God does not keep anyone away from salvation; the only people who receive salvation are those whom He changes. It is not unfair for God to not give certain people salvation because no one deserves it. Additionally, there are many things that, on one level, God wants or does not want, such as sin. However, although God could eliminate sin, He chooses not to do so. In the same way, although God has the power to save everybody and wants to do so on one level, he does not do so in order to glorify his justice. An alternate interpretation is that, because second Peter was written to Christians, so the universal “all” can apply to all of the elect, all of whom will come to salvation. For these reasons, these verses do not contradict unconditional election, but rather they explain it.

Some people argue that unconditional election makes God unjust. Scripture clearly teaches that God is just, but saving some people and not saving others for doing what He predestined them to do seems unjust.
The Bible does teach that God is just. There are two main aspects of justice, punishment for sins and reward for merit. Because everybody deserves eternal damnation, God does not violate His justice by only saving some. In one of Jesus’ parables, a vineyard owner hires people for a whole day and pays them the same amount as those who he only hires for only an hour. When those that worked all day complain that they deserve more, the owner points out that he has the right to give his money away to whomever he chooses. Just as the vineyard owner has the right to give his money away, God has the right to give some people grace, allowing them to go to Heaven although they do not deserve it. After discussing election, Paul asks the rhetorical question, “Does not God have a perfect right to show his fury and power against those who are fit only for destruction, those he has been patient with for all this time?” God does have the right not to choose some people for salvation because everyone deserves to go to Hell. Paul also tells people not to question God in the same way that the clay cannot question the potter, for humans do not know God’s eternal purpose. Salvation is the result of grace, and, by definition, God has no obligation to give grace to anyone.


I saw that these issues had come up, and so I just wanted to provide my opinion on them. Now, I would like to hear comments, suggestions, and critiques on what I said.

Chris Temple,

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>God loves himself more than he loves his creatures. Because God is infinitely more worhty than anything else that exists, he must value his own infinite worth more than all else. God is not an idolator; he holds no other gods up before himself. God's purpose is to glorify himself, not to save sinners. Sinners are saved as a consequence of God's intense jealousy and love for his own name and glory, who in exhibiting hsi glory saves some who deserve damnation.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is something that modern hearers, even within the Church, find very offensive, yet is so true. We are so quick to forget that God does not “owe” us anything and that He is working things to bring glory to Himself, not to help us (although He certainly does that).

SeaKayaker

[ December 29, 2001: Message edited by: SeaKayaker ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chris Temple:


God loves himself more than he loves his creatures. Because God is infinitely more worhty than anything else that exists, he must value his own infinite worth more than all else. God is not an idolator; he holds no other gods up before himself. God's purpose is to glorify himself, not to save sinners. Sinners are saved as a consequence of God's intense jealousy and love for his own name and glory, who in exhibiting hsi glory saves some who deserve damnation.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What glory does God get out of "dead people"???

There's no glory in sending people to hell where they can't
"give him glory".

God doesn't want "dead people", but "live ones".

Larry said:

let’s deal with the verses separately. In v. 37 and 65, No one comes unless the Father gives it to him and all that Father gives come. So how do we misunderstand this? It denotes those who are given by the father who then come. Those who are not given cannot come.

In v. 44, No one comes unless the Father draws, but the ones that that he draws will be raised up at the last day. How do ascribe drawing to all men without ascribing resurrection to all men (cf. v. 39). In other words, there is no way around it without distorting the meaning, even if you think they mean something different.


OK, no one comes to the father except he calls them, and if it's "Irresistable
Grace" (with equal calling)
how come only a "few" are chosen out of the "many" called"??

What is the deciding factor???

WHY???? does God call people he doesn't intent to save????

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by S. Baptist:
OK, no one comes to the father except he calls them, and if it's "Irresistable
Grace" (with equal calling)how come only a "few" are chosen out of the "many" called"??<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know. God didn't leave me in charge and he didn't tell me. I take him at his word.

There is a distinction between a general call that goes out to all and the effectual call that goes out to the elect.

By the way, read the verse you continually cite: Many are called but few are chosen. It does not say that few choose. It is passive: Few are chosen. Not even your own verse agrees with you.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>WHY???? does God call people he doesn't intent to save????<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again, I don't know. God has not revealed his infinite perfections and his secret will to us. We can only go with what he has said. I will rest with that. I don't try to figure it all out.

SBaptist wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>God doesn't want "dead people", but "live ones". <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Please read the following passage.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Ephes. 2:4-7 (ESV)
But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, [5] even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ— by grace you have been saved— [6] and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, [7] so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

God couldn't have or want any other kind. We were dead in our sins, then we are saved and made alive by God's grace for His glory.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by S. Baptist:


What glory does God get out of "dead people"???

There's no glory in sending people to hell where they can't"give him glory".

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I guess you don't get it and never will.

Rev. 6:10-11 (ESV)
They cried out with a loud voice, "O Sovereign Lord, holy and true, how long before you will judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?" [11] Then they were each given a white robe and told to rest a little longer, until the number of their fellow servants and their brothers should be complete, who were to be killed as they themselves had been.

Rev. 7:9-12 (ESV)
After this I looked, and behold, a great multitude that no one could number, from every nation, from all tribes and peoples and languages, standing before the throne and before the Lamb, clothed in white robes, with palm branches in their hands, [10] and crying out with a loud voice, "Salvation belongs to our God who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb!" [11] And all the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures, and they fell on their faces before the throne and worshiped God, [12] saying, "Amen! Blessing and glory and wisdom and thanksgiving and honor and power and might be to our God forever and ever! Amen."

Rev. 11:16-18 (ESV)
And the twenty-four elders who sit on their thrones before God fell on their faces and worshiped God, [17] saying,
"We give thanks to you, Lord God Almighty,
who is and who was,
for you have taken your great power
and begun to reign.
[18] The nations raged,
but your wrath came,
and the time for the dead to be judged,
and for rewarding your servants, the prophets and saints,
and those who fear your name,
both small and great,
and for destroying the destroyers of the earth."

Rev. 16:4-7 (ESV)
The third angel poured out his bowl into the rivers and the springs of water, and they became blood. [5] And I heard the angel in charge of the waters say,
"Just are you, O Holy One, who is and who was,
for you brought these judgments.
[6] For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets,
and you have given them blood to drink.
It is what they deserve!"

[7] And I heard the altar saying,
"Yes, Lord God the Almighty,
true and just are your judgments!"

Rev. 18:22-19:5 (ESV)
and the sound of harpists and musicians, of flute players and trumpeters,
will be heard in you no more,
and a craftsman of any craft
will be found in you no more,
and the sound of the mill
will be heard in you no more,
[23] and the light of a lamp
will shine in you no more,
and the voice of bridegroom and bride
will be heard in you no more,
for your merchants were the great ones of the earth,
and all nations were deceived by your sorcery.
[24] And in her was found the blood of prophets and of saints,
and of all who have been slain on earth."
[19:1] After this I heard what seemed to be the loud voice of a great multitude in heaven, crying out,
"Hallelujah!
Salvation and glory and power belong to our God,
[2] for his judgments are true and just;
for he has judged the great prostitute
who corrupted the earth with her immorality,
and has avenged on her the blood of his servants."
[3] Once more they cried out,
"Hallelujah!
The smoke from her goes up forever and ever."

[4] And the twenty-four elders and the four living creatures fell down and worshiped God who was seated on the throne, saying, "Amen. Hallelujah!" [5] And from the throne came a voice saying,
"Praise our God,
all you his servants,
you who fear him,
small and great."

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>In one of Jesus’ parables, a vineyard owner hires people for a whole day and pays them the same amount as those who he only hires for only an hour. When those that worked all day complain that they deserve more, the owner points out that he has the right to give his money away to whomever he chooses. Just as the vineyard owner has the right to give his money away, God has the right to give some people grace, allowing them to go to Heaven although they do not deserve it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

These two examples are very different. One would correspond to god giving one person in Heaven more than the other. In that case, one has no right to complain, but they are both in Heaven. The other example, of someone being in Hell, is very different. Being in Hell is nowhere near the same as receiving a smaller reward in Heave, so the analogy cannot be drawn. You next cite the old standby of Romans 9, but this is not referring to the lost as "vessels of clay", which are "raised" and then chosen for "destruction" for nothing they have done at all. The vineyard workers, also, like miost of the other similar parables, are referring to Israel compared to the Gentiles God was now reaching out to.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>God loves himself more than he loves his creatures. Because God is infinitely more worhty than anything else that exists, he must value his own infinite worth more than all else. God is not an idolator; he holds no other gods up before himself. God's purpose is to glorify himself, not to save sinners. Sinners are saved as a consequence of God's intense jealousy and love for his own name and glory, who in exhibiting his glory saves some who deserve damnation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is something that modern hearers, even within the Church, find very offensive, yet is so true. We are so quick to forget that God does not “owe” us anything and that He is working things to bring glory to Himself, not to help us (although He certainly does that).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

People keep forgetting that God has laid aside His divine rights in saving people. All of this philosophy acts as if God is just doing everything He has the right to do, but then if that were true He wouldn't be saving any sinners at all.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I don't know. God didn't leave me in charge and he didn't tell me. I take him at his word.

Again, I don't know. God has not revealed his infinite perfections and his secret will to us. We can only go with what he has said. I will rest with that. I don't try to figure it all out. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is my point. But we cross a line in trying to put together "what God says" based on His infinite knowledge with our timebound view of things, and then conclude that God allows people to be born just to inhabit Hell, and then, knowing how this irks many people, conclude "oh, you can't figure it all out". We need to take a couple of steps back. Then we could resolve the debate.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>God couldn't have or want any other kind. [i.e. dead] We were dead in our sins, then we are saved and made alive by God's grace for His glory. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think what S.Baptist meant by "dead" was not temporally dead as we all are, but eternally dead, as in "damnation", which some are saved from, while others are left for. This is the argument centering aroung Romans 9, where God is said to raise up the non elect and punish them "to show His glory". But how does sending people to Hell show His glory? "See, look what I can do"? That is more the ways of twisted human tyrants, and this is why people often caricature the Calvinist concept of Gos as such. The passage is talking about His glory in the present age anyway, so as we don't see anyone actually going into eternal destruction [don't know who they are] this passage cannot be applying to te eternal destiny of the lost.

Eric B,

Thanks for your insights.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>SeaKayaker: In one of Jesus’ parables, a vineyard owner hires people for a whole day and pays them the same amount as those who he only hires for only an hour…Just as the vineyard owner has the right to give his money away, God has the right to give some people grace, allowing them to go to Heaven although they do not deserve it. [The parable is in Matthew 20]

Eric B: These two examples are very different. One would correspond to god giving one person in Heaven more than the other. In that case, one has no right to complain, but they are both in Heaven. The other example, of someone being in Hell, is very different. Being in Hell is nowhere near the same as receiving a smaller reward in Heave[n], so the analogy cannot be drawn.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This is an interesting interpretation of this parable. As I do not recall having heard it before, I looked it up in some commentaries. According to the Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible, this section shows “That God is debtor to no man; a great truth, which the contents in our Bible give as the scope of this parable.” This is very similar to what I am saying, and I just directly apply it to the issue of salvation (no one deserves salvation and so God can bestow it upon whomever he wishes). The Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary and the Adam Clarke's Commentary both seem to focus on the aspect of the parable that you brought up, but do not seem to deny the possibility of what I am saying. Most sources seem to focus on the giving of grace, but I see no reason why this could not apply to the withholding of it. In short, I see no convincing reason why this parable cannot extend to salvation itself (if God has the right to give a gift, would he not also have the right to withhold it?), but if you have any, I would like to hear them.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>You next cite the old standby of Romans 9, but this is not referring to the lost as "vessels of clay", which are "raised" and then chosen for "destruction" for nothing they have done at all. The vineyard workers, also, like miost of the other similar parables, are referring to Israel compared to the Gentiles God was now reaching out to.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I do not quite understand your point here. I think that you are saying that Romans 9 refers to Gentiles just as Matthew 20 refers to Gentiles. If this is not the case, please clarify it for me. If so, do you have any reason why this would be so (at least to me, it does not seem the most logical reading of it, after all)

SeaKayaker

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>This is an interesting interpretation of this parable. As I do not recall having heard it before, I looked it up in some commentaries. According to the Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible, this section shows “That God is debtor to no man; a great truth, which the contents in our Bible give as the scope of this parable.” This is very similar to what I am saying, and I just directly apply it to the issue of salvation (no one deserves salvation and so God can bestow it upon whomever he wishes). The Jamieson, Fausset, and Brown Commentary and the Adam Clarke's Commentary both seem to focus on the aspect of the parable that you brought up, but do not seem to deny the possibility of what I am saying. Most sources seem to focus on the giving of grace, but I see no reason why this could not apply to the withholding of it. In short, I see no convincing reason why this parable cannot extend to salvation itself (if God has the right to give a gift, would he not also have the right to withhold it?), but if you have any, I would like to hear them. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Because the implications of textending it to salvation is that God creates some people just to send to Hell, and then people cite Romans 9 suggesting that it is just His pleasure" when elsewhere He says/shows that He does not get pleasure in the death of the wicked. In fact, I am beginning to see that there is too much arguing about the meaning of "all", "any", "whoever", etc. Yes, those terms can mean either everyone in the world or everyone in a group. It is based on the context. But the real proof is that God shows He does not take pleasure in the death of the wicked. That leads to:
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I do not quite understand your point here. I think that you are saying that Romans 9 refers to Gentiles just as Matthew 20 refers to Gentiles. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Exactly.
But the main point in addition to that is that people use it to say that the "vessels of wrath" are only receiving what they "deserved" as evil beings, but the passage is saying that the vessels of wrath [neutral objects] are "raised" and fitted for destruction not because of anything they have done, (the "not of him who wills" of v. 16 commonly cited) but just because God happened to choose them for that. This cannot refer to individual sinners, being punished for their sins (denied even an opportunity to repent) but rather the whole context is talking about Israel as a group. They were no worse than any other group, but God chose (or "raised") them for His purpose, knowing they would fail, and punishes them, while raising up His church. This plus the first point that God is not busy looking to destroy people shows that this chapter is being used wrong.

Eric B,

I have enjoyed discussing this with you, but school starts back up tomorrow (Wednesday) and midterms are in a couple of weeks, so I will probably not be posting more on here, at least for the time being, although I will try to read the posts if I am able to do so.

SeaKayaker

Grace and Peace.
My name is Alex, I am the new kid on this block. Very interesting discussion. Trueliberty, let me see if I can help you...
you ask how the Calvinistic understanding of predestination is reconciled with Romans 8:29 and and 1 Peter 1:2 where we are told that God predestines "according to foreknowledge". There is no contradiction between absolute predestination and these verses of Scripture, what there is, is a misunderstanding of the word "foreknow". In this context, it is a mistake to understand foreknowledge as God's ability to know things before they happen. The foreknwledge spoken of here has nothing to do with God's ability to know things before they happen, or with God knowing the choice someone would make and then making His decision based on that person's choice. Foreknowledge has to do with relationship. In Genesis when we are told that "Adam knew Eve" it does not mean he knew who Eve was, it means he knew her in an intimate way, in a sexual union. This usage of the word "to know" is the basis for God's foreknowledge. When Jesus tells the unsaved "Depart from Me, I never knew you", it does not mean Jesus didn't know who they were, it means He never had an intimate relationship with them. Similarly, when we are told that God predestines an individual to salvation "according to foreknowledge" or that "whom he foreknew He also did predestinate" it does not mean at all that He is basing His predestination to salvation of individuals based on His knowledge ahead of time of their choice, that would annul the meaning of the word predestination. What it means is that God predestines according to a pre-determined relationship. Those with whom God predetermined a relationship, He predestined. This is also what God meant when He told Jeremiah "Before I formed you in the belly, I knew you and ordained you a prophet to the nations" Again, foreknowledge has absolutely nothing to do with the Arminian misinterpretation of knowledge ahead of time of an individual's choice, it has everything to do with a pre-determined relationship.

God is no respecter of persons, He knew Jeremiah and chose him before he was born, He separated Paul from his mother's womb, He said "Jacob have I loved, Esau have I hated" before they were born that the purpose of election might stand. If God does not chose every individual for that individual's eternal destiny before the individual is born, then God would be a respecter of persons, because He chose Jeremiah, Paul Jacob and Esau and John the Baptist before they were born, before they had done any good or evil, before they had or could have any say on the matter. God is no respecter of persons, He treats all the same, He therefore predestines all before they are born, before they have done any good or evil that purpose of election might stand. So that it is not of him who runs or of him who wills, but of God that shows mercy.
Happy New Year! (Don't worry, all your days were written in His book before there ever was one of them)
Grace and Peace.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Pastor Larry said:
There is no twisting to be done. God does love the whole world; Christ’s death was sufficient for the sins of the whole world; God is not willing that any should perish and a person’s faith or unbelief does determine whether they answer the call or not. I do not deny any of that.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you saying the elect can refuse the call? If you have talked about this on another thread, just point me to it. I know you must get tired of going over and over it. I'm trying to understand the Doctrine of Election but I'm struggling with it in some parts.

In His Grace
KayDee

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> God is no respecter of persons, He knew Jeremiah and chose him before he was born, He separated Paul from his mother's womb, He said "Jacob have I loved, Esau have I hated" before they were born that the purpose of election might stand. If God does not chose every individual for that individual's eternal destiny before the individual is born, then God would be a respecter of persons, because He chose Jeremiah, Paul Jacob and Esau and John the Baptist before they were born, before they had done any good or evil, before they had or could have any say on the matter. God is no respecter of persons, He treats all the same, He therefore predestines all before they are born, before they have done any good or evil that purpose of election might stand. So that it is not of him who runs or of him who wills, but of God that shows mercy. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Once again, we're confusing eternal destinies with eartly ones. God raised those men for specific purposes in this age, but this principle does not necesarily carry over to salvation or condemnation.
The fact that it was before they were born or did anything wrong (tying in with the "vessels of clay" concept) contradicts the idea that they are only "getting what they deserved" (if this is talking about eternal punishment for sin), and could raise the question if the "elect" were ever really condemned sinners ["before they received Christ"] to begin with.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SeaKayaker:
SeaKayaker: In one of Jesus’ parables, a vineyard owner hires people for a whole day and pays them the same amount as those who he only hires for only an hour…Just as the vineyard owner has the right to give his money away, God has the right to give some people grace, allowing them to go to Heaven although they do not deserve it. [The parable is in Matthew 20]
SeaKayaker<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The parable tells of the "Church" bearing the "heat of the day" for the Gospel, while the "Jews" are blinded until the "fulness of the Gentiles" come in, (rapture), the Jews will then work "one hour" for the Gospel, (tribulations) but receive the "same reward". (pay)

The Jews lost "first place" with God when they rejected Jesus, and have been in last place, but they will be restored back to "first place".

Mt 20:16 So the last shall be first, and the first last:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KayDee:
Are you saying the elect can refuse the call?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No. The call is effectual. It will accomplish its intended purpose.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chris Temple:


Your objection works against your point you are trying to make. It is precisely because God is no respecter of persons that he elects undeserving sinners to salvation. If God were a respecter of persons, he would have to respect the fact that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God, and leave all in their damnable sin. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If God doesn't "respect" one from the next, what's the criteria used in selecting some for salvation and some for damnation???

Faith of the person??

Salvation is a "three step process".

1. Hearing
2. Faith
3. salvation

Calvinist alway leave out the "Second step" in their doctrine, a person's "free will" to believe or not believe doesn't "fit in".

Not understanding this is the reason why Evangelicalism is in the abysmal shape it is in today. The whole purpose of Christianity is considered to be "getting people saved", when God's purpose in religion is to glorify his name among the nations.[/QB][/QUOTE]

Hey, I agree with ya, and to do that, you'll have to "teach his word", "His doctrine" as the "Holy Spirit teaches".

No other way.

SBaptist wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Salvation is a "three step process".

1. Hearing
2. Faith
3. salvation

Calvinist alway leave out the "Second step" in their doctrine, a person's "free will" to believe or not believe doesn't "fit in".
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow, a pretty outstanding leap. You equate faith with free will and assume man has the ability to exercise it. The Bible disagrees with you:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Ephes. 2:8 (ESV)
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God,
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think I'll trust the Bible's claim here.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>If God doesn't "respect" one from the next, what's the criteria used in selecting some for salvation and some for damnation???<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The same thing we have said all along. The criteria is God's sovereign pleasure. It has nothing to do with anything else.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Calvinist alway leave out the "Second step" in their doctrine, a person's "free will" to believe or not believe doesn't "fit in". <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Calvinists never leave out the second step. You continue to say that but it only shows that don't know what you are talking about. A "Calvinist" who leaves out the second step does not believe in salvation at all for there is no salvation without faith.

You must deal with the question of why does someone exercise faith? The answer in found in Acts 13:48: The ones who exercise faith are those who are appointed to eternal life.

It's good to revisit my original question, and original premise: that God's predestination is based on foreknowledge.

Conclusions that people have given about foreknowledge:

1. Foreknowledge is causative--or determinative
2. Foreknowledge is God's loving us from the foundation of the world and therefore ordaining us to eternal life
3. Foreknowledge is foreordination.

As you can tell, I especially have big problems with #1 and #3. Alex, (welcome to our fine discussion by the way) you have a way with words but I don't think you can equate the intimate definition of "knowing" in the scripture to the use of "foreknowledge"

Acts 2:23 "Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God..."
The verse uses the word determinate, which modifies counsel and not foreknowledge. They are two items. Foreknowledge is not determinative (sp?). Jesus is said to be foreordained AND foreknown by God the Father (operating within the mystery of the Trinity of course)

1 Peter 1:20 "Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world..."
A cross-reference verse about Jesus. He was foreordained. Foreordained as a word in scripture is never used in reference to believers

Galatians 4:4 "But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son..."
God had a specific time in mind and a plan from before the foundation of the world when to send forth Jesus into the world. This is foreordination. Foreordaination is causative, not foreknowledge.

Of course, if foreknowledge is causative, then there is no such thing as resisting the Holy Spirit and the doctrine of "Irresistable Grace" would be truth.

John 5:40 "And YE WILL NOT COME to me, that ye might have life."
Acts 7:51 "Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, YE DO ALWAYS RESIST THE HOLY GHOST: as your fathers did, so do ye."
Matthew 23:37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, AND YE WOULD NOT."

These 3 scriptures have no meaning if people can't resist the Holy Spirit's conviction. You believe in perseverance of the saints and therefore one can't lose his/her salvation. So do I! So then, how do you then interpret or reinterpret Hebrews 6:4-6 and 2 Peter 2:20-22? What is your view then of the last part of Hebrews 10:29--"done despite unto the Spirit of grace."?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by TomVols:
SBaptist wrote:

I think I'll trust the Bible's claim here.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

For by grace you have been saved through (your)faith.

Ga 3:6 Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.

7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.

9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.

A person's "HEARS" the "call", but it's because of "THEIR FAITH" God elects to save them, and "their unbelief" prevents their election.

As with Abraham, "YOUR FAITH" (belief in God) is why "righteousness is counted to you".

How anyone can read the Bible and "NOT UNDERSTAND" that God requires "US" to have "FAITH" as a condition for him to save us, shows the depth of "darkness" Calvin has lead people into with his doctrine.

None have to believe me, Jesus sent the "HOLY GHOST" to bear witness to "all truth", and against "every lie".

And "every man" will give an account for every "idle word spoken", if that doesn't instill enough "fear of God" in a person to "follow only the Spirit", then they're hopeless.


I chose to believe the "SPIRIT", not calvin.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by S. Baptist:
A person's "HEARS" the "call", but it's because of "THEIR FAITH" God elects to save them, and "their unbelief" prevents their election.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Please cite a verse where election is dependent on belief. You have yet to prove this from teh Scripture you say your belief.

And while you are at it, deal with Acts 13:48 where belief is clearly predicated on being appointed to eternal life.

You have given no Scripture that supports you; I have given Scripture that refutes you.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>How anyone can read the Bible and "NOT UNDERSTAND" that God requires "US" to have "FAITH" as a condition for him to save us, shows the depth of "darkness" Calvin has lead people into with his doctrine. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

How can anyone read anything written here and believe that God saves people without faith?

S., you are in danger of having your posts deleted for this reason. We have repeatedly said that we do not believe God saves people without faith. Yet you continue to willfully misrepresent the truth.

Let me be very clear and let this serve as your final warning: Calvinism does not believe that God saves people without faith. Faith is absolutely necessary for salvation.