Another Question for Calvinists

reformedbeliever · Aug 27, 2006

Hello again drfuss. The creative tension I was speaking of is the fact that whosoever will believe is taught in the Bible. God's unconditional election is also taught in the Bible. I think where hypercalvinism comes in, it tries to do away with the whosoever which is clearly taught. We have to believe and teach both. Most calvinist I know would believe that whosoever is true. They would simply say that the whosoever are the elect. No one who believes with their hearts are denied salvation... that is clearly taught. I believe all of Romans 10 and all the rest of the Bible. It is when we believe and teach one to the exclusion of the other that we get outside the doctrinal barrier which then becomes unbiblical. When we try to explain away the truths of the Bible with philosophy... we get into trouble. I loved the class on "Philosophy of Religion" although many of my pastor classmates hated it. I love to look into the deep things of God and deep knowledge which God has given us. Its when we as theologians try to go beyond the truth of the Gospel we get in trouble. How do we cause the deep truths of the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man come together? I don't think we ever will. These things have been debated since Paul brought this deep doctrine to us. I think they will continue to be debated until Jesus comes back. I just hope we can love one another and be as one as He and the Father are one. I think this creative tension keeps our iron sharp and we help keep each other in check. Without this we may become universalist or hypercalvinist and see no need for missions. This is exactly what happend to the General Baptist and the Particular Baptist in England. Grace and peace

drfuss · Aug 27, 2006

reformedbeliever said:

Hello again drfuss. The creative tension I was speaking of is the fact that whosoever will believe is taught in the Bible. God's unconditional election is also taught in the Bible. I think where hypercalvinism comes in, it tries to do away with the whosoever which is clearly taught. We have to believe and teach both. Most calvinist I know would believe that whosoever is true. They would simply say that the whosoever are the elect. No one who believes with their hearts are denied salvation... that is clearly taught. I believe all of Romans 10 and all the rest of the Bible. It is when we believe and teach one to the exclusion of the other that we get outside the doctrinal barrier which then becomes unbiblical. When we try to explain away the truths of the Bible with philosophy... we get into trouble. I loved the class on "Philosophy of Religion" although many of my pastor classmates hated it. I love to look into the deep things of God and deep knowledge which God has given us. Its when we as theologians try to go beyond the truth of the Gospel we get in trouble. How do we cause the deep truths of the sovereignty of God and the responsibility of man come together? I don't think we ever will. These things have been debated since Paul brought this deep doctrine to us. I think they will continue to be debated until Jesus comes back. I just hope we can love one another and be as one as He and the Father are one. I think this creative tension keeps our iron sharp and we help keep each other in check. Without this we may become universalist or hypercalvinist and see no need for missions. This is exactly what happend to the General Baptist and the Particular Baptist in England. Grace and peace
Click to expand...

Very good. I believe we are talking about the same creative tension except saying it differently. To me, praying for our loved ones is related to "the whosoever will believe" taught in the scriptures. Since this is new to me, I don't always use the accepted theological terms.

Thanks again.

webdog · Aug 27, 2006

Jarthur001 said:

Not so. Election is Gods mercy. He elects for He loves the church...His bride. If God were only just, we would all go to hell, for this is what is just.
Click to expand...

Why would it be justice for all men to go to hell? Is it because they are held accountable for their actions? If election is done so arbitrarily, there cannot be justice for those in hell. WE are held accountable for our actions...unless you are "elect"?

whatever · Aug 27, 2006

webdog said:

Why would it be justice for all men to go to hell? Is it because they are held accountable for their actions? If election is done so arbitrarily, there cannot be justice for those in hell. WE are held accountable for our actions...unless you are "elect"?
Click to expand...

We've all sinned and come short of God's glory, right? Of course it would be just for all of us to go to hell.

And no one said that election is done arbitrarily. God doesn't say that He chose arbitrarily so if we said that then we would be saying too much.

And we are accountable for our actions. The only way out would be for someone to take our punishment for us. Because our condemnation would be just our salvation would be unjust apart from the death of Christ. "It was to show his righteousness at the present time, so that he might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus."

webdog · Aug 27, 2006

And no one said that election is done arbitrarily. God doesn't say that He chose arbitrarily so if we said that then we would be saying too much.
Click to expand...

Nobody has to say it's arbitrary...it is by definition of arbitrary.

whatever · Aug 27, 2006

webdog said:

Nobody has to say it's arbitrary...it is by definition of arbitrary.
Click to expand...

Actually Paul said it was "according to the purpose of his will" - are you saying that the purpose of God's will is arbitrary?

webdog · Aug 27, 2006

whatever said:

Actually Paul said it was "according to the purpose of his will" - are you saying that the purpose of God's will is arbitrary?
Click to expand...

It would be if it went against the requirements He set forth in Scripture.

whatever · Aug 27, 2006

The purpose of God's will is to save His people. How does that go against the requirements He set forth in Scripture?

webdog · Aug 27, 2006

whatever said:

The purpose of God's will is to save His people. How does that go against the requirements He set forth in Scripture?
Click to expand...

2Pe 3:9 The Lord does not delay His promise, as some understand delay, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance.

whatever · Aug 27, 2006

webdog said:

2Pe 3:9 The Lord does not delay His promise, as some understand delay, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance.

Click to expand...

So because of 2 Peter 3:9, Ephesians 1:6 doesn't count, or it doesn't mean what it plainly says, or what?

webdog · Aug 27, 2006

whatever said:

So because of 2 Peter 3:9, Ephesians 1:6 doesn't count, or it doesn't mean what it plainly says, or what?
Click to expand...

If it contradicts, something doesn't count...either your exegesis of 2 Peter or that of Ephesians 1:6 (which by the way says "in the Beloved"...in Christ...faith...belief).

Jarthur001 · Aug 27, 2006

webdog said:

2Pe 3:9 The Lord does not delay His promise, as some understand delay, but is patient with you, not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance.

Click to expand...

Piper makes it clear....if one would read this in context

(2 Peter 3:1-10)

But if the promise of Christ's second coming and the new world of joy and righteousness is going to fill us with hope and power for godliness we have to really believe its going to happen. And the churches to which Peter was writing were being infiltrated by false teachers (2:1) who did not believe it was going to happen. Probably these teachers were like Hymenaeus and Philetus (2 Tim. 2:17,18), who taught that the resurrection of believers was already past. That is, there won't be a bodily resurrection, only a spiritual one, here again twisting the letters of Paul which said, "You were buried with him through baptism in which you were also raised with him through faith" (Col. 2:12) . And since we have already been raised like Christ then Christ did not really experience a bodily resurrection but only a spiritual one; and therefore this notion of a powerful, glorious bodily return is a cleverly devised myth. And with the rejection of Christ's glorious bodily coming the false teachers swept away the reality of judgment for things done in the body. And in this way they provided a theological basis for their indifference to sexual morality. The body is canceled out of all moral considerations except as one can demonstrate his spiritual freedom by defying physical, sexual restrictions.

In chapter one, verse 16 Peter had already taken the offensive against the denial of the second coming. He said, "We did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty." That is, Christ certified to us that he was indeed going to return in bodily glory, by revealing to us the glory of his transformed body in a preview on the mount of transfiguration. Therefore we have the prophetic word of the second coming made more sure and we should keep it before us like a lamp shining in a dark place until the day of his coming dawns, and the day star of glory rises in your hearts.

Now in chapter three, verses 1-9, Peter confronts the denial of the second coming head on. He says in verses 1 and 2 that he wants the believers to have a sincere and lively memory (cf. 1:13) of what the prophets predicted and what Jesus commanded. He probably has in mind prophetic words like Malachi 4:1,2: "Behold the day comes burning like an oven when all the arrogant and evildoers will be stubble … But for you who fear my name the sun of righteousness shall rise with healing in his wings. You shall go forth leaping like calves from the stall." And when he speaks of the commandment of the Lord and Savior (in v. 2), he probably has in view words like Matthew 24:42: "Watch, therefore, for you do not know what day your Lord is coming."

Then in verses 3 and 4 he introduces the false teachers again. They themselves are part of prophetic fulfillment and their presence shows that the last days had arrived (cf. Heb. 1:1,2). In verse 4 Peter lets them make their case: "Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all things have continued as they were from the beginning of creation." This is an amazingly modern argument for rejecting the supernatural, bodily second coming. It simply says, the laws of nature are constant and unchanging. The sun has come up and gone down, the seasons have followed each other, the tides have risen and fallen for thousands of years in perfect order. Therefore we must expect this constancy for the future, and any thought that the sky might be rolled up like a scroll and the earth purged with global, fiery judgment by the returning Christ is unimaginable and unwarranted. This is exactly the position of much modern science and there are hundreds of pastors and theologians in the churches and seminaries today who reject a physical second coming and future judgment for the same reason (e.g. Ernest Best, in his commentary on 1 and 2 Thessalonians, 1972, pp. 363 and 367).

Peter responds to this skepticism in three ways. First in verses 5-7: "They deliberately ignore this fact, that by the word of God heavens existed long ago and an earth formed out of water and by means of water, through which the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist have been stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men." The first thing the false teachers ignore is that the world was made by God and that its order hangs on his word. If they were willing to think about this they would realize that the course of natural events is no more locked into one pattern than God is. If God is free to speak a new word then nature is free to change. We need to guard ourselves against the pseudo-scientific notion that nature is a law unto itself. It is not. The laws of nature are the tireless whisperings of the Almighty. And if he should choose to raise his voice, the cataclysm will come.

And the other thing the false teachers ignore is that things have not continued as they were from the beginning of creation. Peter argues here like he did in 2:5-9. God brought judgment on the world in the flood of Noah's day with a great upheaval in the natural flow of events. God has shown, therefore, that he can and will alter the course of history in judgment. In the past he did it with water. In the future it will be with fire at the coming of Jesus Christ. If the false teachers were not so blinded by their own desire (v. 4), they could see that it is utter folly to deny the future cataclysm of Christ's coming just because the course of the world has been so constant for so long.

The second response to the false teachers comes in verse 8: "But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day." Here Peter is answering the criticism that Christ has delayed so long that we can't really believe he is coming back. Peter's answer is that from God's experience of time it hasn't been very long. I doubt that it is a Biblical notion that God is outside time. But since he is immortal and does not age and does not forget and sees all history at a glance, and is never bored, clearly he does not experience time like we do. But even so, since we are in God's image, there is in us something like God's experience of time. The older we get the faster it seems to go. How many older people say, "It just seems like yesterday I was in school." "It just seems like yesterday we got married." "It just seems like yesterday the kids were young." And not only age, but joy makes us experience time like God. If you are bored at a program, it seems to drag on forever. But if you go on a vacation for a couple weeks and have a terrific time, you come to the end and say, "It seems like we just got here." Every moment was rich and full of unself-conscious life (like a thousand moments packed into one) and you were so taken up in the joy and beauty and love of those weeks that you never paused to be self-conscious about the passing of time. And at the end of those weeks, it was like yesterday that you arrived. When Jesus comes back and stands on this earth to make it his own, he will say, "It just seems like yesterday that I was here." O people, do not be deceived. It is no argument against Christ's second coming that 1,950 years have passed since his departure. From God's experience of time it is as though Christ arrived at his right hand the day before yesterday.

And finally Peter responds to the problem of Christ's delay in verse 9 with these words: "The Lord is not slow about his promise as some count slowness, but is forbearing toward you, not wishing that any should perish but that all should reach repentance." The apostle Paul speaks in Romans 11:25 of "the full number of the Gentiles" who must come into the Kingdom before the end arrives. Therefore we should count the delay of Christ's coming as an act of mercy and patience until all the sheep are gathered into the fold and not one is lost (John 10:16, 26-30). The tragic irony is that the false teachers take God's patience, which is giving them an opportunity to repent, and turn it against God as an evidence that Christ is not coming. It will be an unanswerable indictment on the judgment day when God asks the false teachers of Peter's day and ours, "Why did you take my gift of time for repenting and use it as an argument for unbelief?"

The Lord is good to us today to address our 20th century doubts in this way. Let us not lose heart or grow weary. Christ is coming. The delay is meant to lead to repentance, not to unbelief. In God's mind it has been only a couple of days. If this world order rests on the word of God, he can and he will bring judgment upon the unrepentant as surely in the future as he did in Noah's day. But for those who repent it will mean glory, honor and immortality.
Click to expand...

Jarthur001 · Aug 27, 2006

webdog said:

If it contradicts, something doesn't count...either your exegesis of 2 Peter or that of Ephesians 1:6 (which by the way says "in the Beloved"...in Christ...faith...belief).
Click to expand...

If you read it in context, it all FITS.

Anyone can pick and choose a verse here and there. Context RULES....not one verse

webdog · Aug 27, 2006

Jarthur001 said:

Piper makes it clear....if one would read this in context

(2 Peter 3:1-10)
Click to expand...

I think Anthony Badger makes it even clearer...

What God knows He determines, and what He determines He knows. This being so, those who God eternally and unmistakably knows as believers He chooses. Consequently, those who believe are those who He chooses or elects. There need be no before or after, no logical or chronological progression in His eternal knowledge, no decision to elect based on anything except for the carrying out of His eternal decree, which decree was always in place. Therefore, there is no need to 1) postulate an eternal covenant between the members of the Godhead, 2) propose a logical order in relation to whether God’s decisions followed one or the other, 3) ask the question whether or not election is based on foreknowledge or whether foreknowledge of one’s salvation is based on election. As God elects, from His eternal, present tense perspective, He also works out His sovereign purpose within the framework of history on a moment- by-moment basis. His eternal electing activity is applied throughout the progression of history, which He is controlling, and He does so in accord with the ability of men to believe (and without coercion) when the gospel message is clearly presented, when we perceive the free offer of eternal life as most valuable and beneficial to us, and when we are fully assured and convinced by His Spirit that what God has promised, He is able to perform (cf. Rom 4:21).
Click to expand...

whatever · Aug 27, 2006

webdog said:

If it contradicts, something doesn't count...either your exegesis of 2 Peter or that of Ephesians 1:6 (which by the way says "in the Beloved"...in Christ...faith...belief).
Click to expand...

Sorry, meant 1:5. Otherwise, nevermind and have a good evening.

webdog · Aug 27, 2006

whatever said:

Sorry, meant 1:5. Otherwise, nevermind and have a good evening.
Click to expand...

That's OK. At any rate "in Christ" is found about a dozen times in the first 14 verses, anyway.

Jarthur001 · Aug 27, 2006

webdog said:

I think Anthony Badger makes it even clearer...
Click to expand...

???

this says nothing about 2 pet 3.

you keep changing verses on me.

Jarthur001 · Aug 27, 2006

webdog said:

That's OK. At any rate "in Christ" is found about a dozen times in the first 14 verses, anyway.
Click to expand...

indeed...but as shown before the passages means election.

according to the good pleasure of his will

according to the good pleasure of his will

according to the good pleasure of his will

according to the good pleasure of his will

You will always find this when it speaks of election. Some people hate that....for they do not want God having His way. They want their own way.

Another Question for Calvinists

reformedbeliever New Member

drfuss New Member

webdog Active Member
Site Supporter

whatever New Member

webdog Active Member
Site Supporter

whatever New Member

webdog Active Member
Site Supporter

whatever New Member

webdog Active Member
Site Supporter

whatever New Member

webdog Active Member
Site Supporter

Jarthur001 Active Member

Jarthur001 Active Member

webdog Active Member
Site Supporter

whatever New Member

webdog Active Member
Site Supporter

Jarthur001 Active Member

Jarthur001 Active Member

Useful Searches

Another Question for Calvinists

reformedbeliever New Member

drfuss New Member

webdog Active Member Site Supporter

whatever New Member

webdog Active Member Site Supporter

whatever New Member

webdog Active Member Site Supporter

whatever New Member

webdog Active Member Site Supporter

whatever New Member

webdog Active Member Site Supporter

Jarthur001 Active Member

Jarthur001 Active Member

webdog Active Member Site Supporter

whatever New Member

webdog Active Member Site Supporter

Jarthur001 Active Member

Jarthur001 Active Member

webdog Active Member
Site Supporter

webdog Active Member
Site Supporter

webdog Active Member
Site Supporter

webdog Active Member
Site Supporter

webdog Active Member
Site Supporter

webdog Active Member
Site Supporter

webdog Active Member
Site Supporter