An Even Closer Look at God’s Election

[Dougcho]

The apostles view of man
Paul and Peter explain to us that unredeemed man is just NOT able to believe in Jesus and the Gospel … due to a multitude of reasons! (Available in the opening post of the thread:
“Unable to Believe the ‘Foolish’ Gospel”)

No chance to be saved ---BUT --- With God it is possible!
“He (Jesus) said, “How hard it is for those who have riches to enter the kingdom of God! For it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” And those who heard it said, “Who then can be saved?” But He said, “The things which are impossible with men are possible with God.” (Luke 18:25-27)

Jesus explains Father God’s intervention
“All that the Father gives Me (Jesus) will come to Me … This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing … No one CAN come to Me unless the Father who sent Me DRAWS him.” … And He said, “Therefore I have said to you that no one CAN come to Me unless it has been granted to him by My Father.” (John 6:37-65)
● The word “CAN” refers to ability (or in this case, the lack of ability). Jesus was saying, “No one is able to come to Me unless the Father intervenes.”
● The Greek word for “DRAW” used here is “helko” (Strong’s #1670). Kittel’s Theological Dictionary defines “helko” as:
“to compel by irresistible superiority”.
Other New Testament uses of this word “helko” are …
“Do not the rich oppress you and drag you into the courts?” (James 2:6)
“… they seized Paul and Silas and dragged them into the marketplace” (Acts 16:19)
Man is not wanting to come, he is not even willing to come … he must be dragged!

More about Father God giving His people to Jesus
“My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish … My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all …” (John 10:27-29)
“… that He (Jesus) should give eternal life to as many as You (Father God) have given Him.” (John 17:2)
“Here am I (Jesus) and the children whom God has given Me.” (Hebrews 2:13)

Jesus gets to choose, not us!
“You did not choose Me, but I chose you ... I chose you out of the world” (John 15:16-19)

Paul defends God’s righteousness and His authority
“… that the purpose of God according to ELECTION might stand, not of works but of Him who calls … What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.” So then, it is not of him who wills (to be saved), nor of him who runs (works for it), but of God who shows mercy.” (Romans 9:11-16)
This last verse (9:16) is absolutely fatal to Arminianism
Man does not choose to believe and be saved … God chooses who will be saved … e.g. Lydia in Acts 16:14, where He “opened her heart” so she could believe what Paul was preaching.
*** Does God do this for everyone? ***
● Lydia was “a worshiper of God”, and if God needed to do this for her, surely He needs to do it for everyone!

We are saved by the power of God
“For the preaching of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.” (1 Corinthians 1:18)
This power of God starts with His giving the necessary faith to those He has chosen …
“To those who have received a faith of the same kind as ours …” (2 Peter 1:1 - NASB, NLT)

The above is part of the Reformed view of predestination
Some famous theologians who believed in the Reformed view of predestination are: St. Augustine, St. Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Jonathan Edwards.

 

[DaveXR650]

@Dougcho. I notice that you list Jonathan Edwards as a predestinarian, which he indeed was. In one of his sermons he said this:
"Salvation is already brought to your door; and the savior stands, knocks, and calls that you would open to him, that he might bring it in to you. There remains nothing but your consent. All the difficulty now remaining is with your own heart. If you perish now, it must be wholly at your door. It must be because you would not come to Christ that you might have life; and because you virtually choose death rather than life.......All that is now required of you is, that your heart should close with Christ as a Savior."

Can you reconcile that type of preaching with your opening post?

 

[Dougcho]

@Dougcho. I notice that you list Jonathan Edwards as a predestinarian, which he indeed was. In one of his sermons he said this:
"Salvation is already brought to your door; and the savior stands, knocks, and calls that you would open to him, that he might bring it in to you. There remains nothing but your consent. All the difficulty now remaining is with your own heart. If you perish now, it must be wholly at your door. It must be because you would not come to Christ that you might have life; and because you virtually choose death rather than life.......All that is now required of you is, that your heart should close with Christ as a Savior."
Can you reconcile that type of preaching with your opening post?

IMO, most of it lines up perfectly.
What part don't you agree with?

 

[37818]

1 John 5:1, Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . .

 

[DaveXR650]

IMO, most of it lines up perfectly.
What part don't you agree with?

If you agree with that type of preaching then you must agree that when the gospel is preached it is a well meant, true and actual offer to anyone who hears that if they come to Christ they will be saved. If that is what you believe then I have no problem with anything you said in your post.

I think that some of what you said is technically incorrect, for instance this:

So then, it is not of him who wills (to be saved), nor of him who runs (works for it), but of God who shows mercy

I
"To be saved" is what the Holy Spirit works to will in a person. Once at that point God is not going to interject his sovereignty - it was the Spirit that got the person to that very point. But that may not have been what you meant. The point I'm trying to make is that Edwards, and Spurgeon, and Bunyan, and even High-Calvinists like Owen, while having a high view of God's sovereignty also were aware of God's desire to save people. There is group of Calvinists like all of those guys who preached in a way that encouraged people to come to Christ. There is another group who likes to emphasize the right of God to save anyone he wants and damn anyone he wants which while technically true, is not God's will as he expresses it towards us.

If you have access to Edwards works, he has a complete sermon on Romans chapter 9 where he explains how that while God has the right to save who he wills and damn who he wills, arbitrarily based on nothing but his choice he instead encourages us to come, not presumptuously but humbly by faith and if that were not enough he even establishes covenants for our encouragement and comfort where he promises, even though he doesn't have to, but he promises to save all who come by faith. So that if we come like that, it is already according to his will that we come and that he will save us. As long as you believe that to me it matters not how deterministic you are in soteriology.

 

[DaveXR650]

1 John 5:1, Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . .

Yes. That is God's sovereign will. Some make it seem like God may just act upon his sovereignty and cast you into Hell anyway. He could and he has a right to. But he has revealed to us that he doesn't want to do that and promises he won't. Anyone who takes Romans 9 and tries to turn that into God saying he may just do that to us is malpractice in teaching.

 

[Dougcho]

If you agree with that type of preaching then you must agree that when the gospel is preached it is a well meant, true and actual offer to anyone who hears that if they come to Christ they will be saved.

There are NT Scriptures on both sides of several issues.
I'll mention two:
1) Calvinism vs. Arminianism
2) OSAS vs. anti-OSAS

 

[Dougcho]

Some make it seem like God may just act upon his sovereignty and cast you into Hell anyway.
He could and he has a right to. But he has revealed to us that he doesn't want to do that and promises he won't.

Get ready to be shocked ...
In the OT, God murders many thousands of Israel's enemies
... men, women, and children.
The Israelites were not evangelistic,
so there was no way these enemies were going to be saved.
Thus, these people were headed for hell, right?
So, God figured going to hell now is not
much worse than going a few years later.

The whole deal (from God's perspective) ALWAYS is ...
the human race deserves to be separated from God in hell ...
He won't be spending eternity with a bunch of habitual sinners.
Because we don't like this ... doesn't change a thing!

 

[DaveXR650]

So then, it is not of him who wills (to be saved), nor of him who runs (works for it), but of God who shows mercy.” (Romans 9:11-16)

I don't think you have a right to interpret that passage by adding "to be saved" as if someone may be turned down who comes asking to be saved. I always assumed that someone who wills in that passage would logically be someone who self determines what it is they should do or comes in a presumptuous manner.

In the OT, God murders many thousands of Israel's enemies
... men, women, and children.

Yes, enemies, but not those who honored God or tried to ally themselves with Israel. You are creating am image of God that I think is false and in addition, the question might be asked, even if Romans 9 was rhetorically stating this exactly as you say, does that mean God likes to and does do that to his creatures or that he has a right to do so, with the design being that we might come to Christ humbly and without presumption or self righteousness.

Thus, these people were headed for hell, right?
So, God figured going to hell now is not
much worse than going a few years later.

Maybe. Maybe not. We have no right to conjecture on this and I don't think anything is revealed elsewhere on that subject.

The whole deal (from God's perspective) ALWAYS is ...
the human race deserves to be separated from God in hell ...

There is truth in this but it's also true that we have been given a ministry of reconciliation. I think the problem in Romans 9 was that the Jews were offended at the idea that there was going to be such a ministry to gentiles also. Like I said earlier, technically, I concede that God has every right to send all of us to Hell, or some of us, and to choose who goes where. But is that what he wants to do and is that how he operates. Or, does he set this right aside and instead offer salvation to all that will come to him. It may well be that you are, by misinterpreting Romans 9, slandering God's message to men and misrepresenting his revealed truth.

He won't be spending eternity with a bunch of habitual sinners.
Because we don't like this ... doesn't change a thing!

This gets into a problem that I see with the theology of Calvinism in general and it bothers me and I don't see any way out for a strict determinist. What you are saying (and seemingly with some pleasure), is that God doesn't want to spend eternity with a bunch of habitual sinners so he is going to take some and remake into better people, against their will, and fry the rest of them forever and everyone is happy. And worst of all, any objection to this is what God is warning us not to question in Romans 9.

Is that really the message you get from the Bible?

 

[Scarlett O.]

Get ready to be shocked ...
In the OT, God murders many thousands of Israel's enemies
... men, women, and children.
The Israelites were not evangelistic,
so there was no way these enemies were going to be saved.
Thus, these people were headed for hell, right?
So, God figured going to hell now is not
much worse than going a few years later.

Get ready to be shocked, Dougcho....in the OT, God spared many people in the Land of Canaan. The first? A whore - and her whole family.

God told Abraham that his descendants would one day live in a strange land [Egypt] and be cruelly treated for 400 years, but that they would one day come back to the Promised Land. It would take a long time because the "sins of the Amorites [people living there] was not yet full."

God gave the time from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and then 400 MORE years for the people in the land of Canaan to repent.

God was merciful, patient, and loving in giving that amount of time for people to repent. Most did not. Many did.

Just like giving Cain an opportunity to change and Jesus giving the rich, young ruler a time to follow him.

I know you believe us non-Cals believe a "foolish" gospel. To me that means a false gospel and that you believe non-Cals are going to hell.

I just don't get it.

 

[Rye]

I try to stay out of these discussions but can I present an explanation that we can all agree on? The note in my study bible puts it this way...

You may say, "what if God didn't choose me?" Have you accepted Jesus Christ? If so, then He chose you. If you haven't accepted Him, do so and you'll find out you were chosen.

 

[Dougcho]

I know you believe us non-Cals believe a "foolish" gospel. To me that means a false gospel and that you believe non-Cals are going to hell.
I just don't get it.

All of this "foolish" Gospel business
comes out of 1 and 2 Corinthians ...
where unbelievers consider the Gospel "foolishness".

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

I try to stay out of these discussions but can I present an explanation that we can all agree on? The note in my study bible puts it this way...

You may say, "what if God didn't choose me?" Have you accepted Jesus Christ? If so, then He chose you. If you haven't accepted Him, do so and you'll find out you were chosen.

See: https://www.baptistboard.com/thread...ne-person-by-showing-mercy-to-another.130852/

 

[37818]

. . . and be cruelly treated for 400 years, . . .

That 400 years began with Genesis 21:9, . . . And Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyptian, which she had born unto Abraham, mocking.

And the 430 years with God's promise to Abraham per Galatians 3:16-17, Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ. And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect. . . .

 

[Alan Dale Gross]

But he has revealed to us that he doesn't want to do that and promises he won't.

I haven't ever seen any verses indicating God doesn't want to do what?, for sure,

and what is it that He Promises He won't do?

Some make it seem like God may just act upon his sovereignty and cast you into Hell anyway. He could and he has a right to.

Anyone who takes Romans 9 and tries to turn that into God saying he may just do that to us is malpractice in teaching.

All are worthy and Justified to suffer in Hell Forever, for our Eternal sins against The Eternal Holy God of the Universe.

God chose to Love, Have Mercy on, and Save a portion of the Human Race, for which we ought to be thankful and Worship the God Who Provided a Lamb.

That is the Only God that He has Revealed that He is.

Like I said earlier, technically, I concede that God has every right to send all of us to Hell, or some of us, and to choose who goes where. But is that what he wants to do and is that how he operates.

I'm sure God is glad to see you conceding to allow God to do what He pleases, with what is His.

Then, the question becomes;

"Will I worship a God like that?"

Or, does he set this right aside and instead offer salvation to all that will come to him.

That is not what He has said is ultimately behind those who will come to Him.

You know that.

It may well be that you are, by misinterpreting Romans 9, slandering God's message to men and misrepresenting his revealed truth.

“Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?” (Romans 9:21).
​

God doesn't want to spend eternity with a bunch of habitual sinners so he is going to take some and remake into better people, against their will, and fry the rest of them forever and everyone is happy. And worst of all, any objection to this is what God is warning us not to question in Romans 9.

Is that really the message you get from the Bible?

"Many people who read the Bible have a problem with certain statements that go contrary to what they assume to be true.

"This is due in part to the natural inclination of man towards pride: thinking he can do what he cannot do. It is also due in part to the popular preachments of humanism sounded forth from most pulpits today.​

"One such Bible passage that is a problem to many folk is that of Jacob and Esau, ancient fathers of the Jews and Edomites respectively.

"The problem is seen in this quotation: “And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even by our father Isaac;

"(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger.

"As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. What shall we say then?

"Is there unrighteousness with God?

"God forbid.

"For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.

"So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy,” (Romans 9:10-16).

"In spite of what some claim, the problem is not that God hated Esau before he was born. He was worthy of God's hatred as his life proved. God was not unrighteous to view him as a sinner because that is what he was.

"The problem is not really with the other fellow, Jacob either: God chose to love him. He was a crook and a scoundrel of the worst sort as the first part of his life proved also.

"No, the problem most people find with this passage and many others like it is this: God does as He pleases with His creation whether animal, vegetable or mineral – including humans.

"God has mercy on whom He wills to have mercy: compassion upon whom He wills to have compassion, etc., and asks no permission from anyone for what He does.

“Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?” (Romans 9:21).

"Such a statement as this is indeed a problem to the carnal mind - the minds of rebellious men: “Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be,” (Romans 8:7).

"Unless and until God intervenes in an individual's life by regenerating them, that person is totally unable to submit himself or herself to God and His purpose. His carnal (fleshly) mind is of such a nature as to continually rebel against God.

"That is why Jesus said,

“Marvel not that I said unto thee,
Ye must be born again,” (John 3:7)."
​

THE PROBLEM WITH JACOB AND ESAU.

By Curtis Pugh

http://sovereigngrace.ddns.net:81/PughsCorner/TheProblemWithJacobAndEsau-Pugh.html

 

[DaveXR650]

I haven't ever seen any verses indicating God doesn't want to do what?, for sure,

and what is it that He Promises He won't do?

God promises, by numerous scripture, and by covenant, that anyone who comes to him by faith will be saved. Anyone who believes on him will be saved. What he promises he will not do is he promises that he will not send anyone to Hell, who believes. So specifically, in Romans chapter 9, if Esau was a believer he would be saved. Anyone, Calvinist theologian or not, who teaches that Romans 9 over rides that promise is only teaching part of the doctrine.

God chose to Love, Have Mercy on, and Save a portion of the Human Race, for which we ought to be thankful and Worship the God Who Provided a Lamb.

That is the Only God that He has Revealed that He is.

I have no problem with that - as long as the above is also kept in mind. Anyone who believes, is part of the human race that is being saved. You have God's word on that. Once again, those who make Romans 9 seem like God is teaching the opposite are wrong.

That is not what He has said is ultimately behind those who will come to Him.

True. It is not what is ultimately behind or the cause of the matter - but it is the promise to those who do come. It is not up to us to preach the ultimate cause behind the matter - only to preach the problem and the condition on the part of men to remedy the situation. Even high Calvinists like Owen taught that whenever the attributes of Christ and God are taught, even the severities and judgements and sovereignty, it is usually accompanied by an invitation of a true offer to come by faith. A careful reading of Romans 9 shows that this is included here too.

 

[Darrell C]

I follow neither the Calvinist nor Arminian systems, though I'd probably be found to agree with certain doctrines of both groups (at least to an extent). I just want to clarify that my participation is in regard to the following statements.

In the OT, God murders many thousands of Israel's enemies
... men, women, and children.

At no time does God murder.

What befell the inhabitants of Canaan was judgment.

The Israelites were not evangelistic,
so there was no way these enemies were going to be saved.
Thus, these people were headed for hell, right?

Forgive me for saying, this is quite an assumption.

First, the Gospel had not been revealed to Israel, that is why they were not evangelizing.

Second, that God destroys a man or woman physically doesn't preclude His grace. Nor should we assume the one put to death has been condemned on an eternal basis. Among those partaking of Communion unworthily, for example, were put to death for their sin, but one assumption we can make (and reasonably so, I believe) is that at least some of the were born again believers. Their fate will not be Hell.

Third, as one member pointed out, we do see justification still at work, even during national judgment:


Hebrews 11:31
King James Version

31 By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace.

So, God figured going to hell now is not
much worse than going a few years later.

The Lord didn't seem to imply that in regards to the rich man of Luke 16. I think an implicit conclusion could be drawn that dying and ending up in torment—is not desirable.

If God is not willing that any should perish, could we imagine that He has a "Oh, well, better luck next time" attitude toward Eternal Separation? Doesn't this notion conflict with the Gospel itself?

John 3:16
King James Version

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.


It seems Eternal Judgment is extremely important to God, enough so that He would die in our stead that we might not perish.

 

[Dougcho]

What befell the inhabitants of Canaan was judgment.

... the Gospel had not been revealed to Israel, that is why they were not evangelizing.

Okay, He killed ... not murdered.

Israel did not evangelize re: the One and Only Living God.
Of course, we're not talking about the Gospel.