• 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!

Calvinism - TULIP - "U"nconditional Election

jdlongmire

New Member
Allan said:
I will get to the OP later tonight but I wanted to post on this one now.

You are not talking past one another at all. He just is not accepting your version of things.

Then you go off with this, that no one has made any statements about yet you feel complelled for some reason to go into a complete misunderstanding of what synergism is. You have twice used in two different threads conjecture of what someone Noo-Calvinstic holds to and have been wrong both times. (well one was the original cut-paste that was wrong but your wrong here in understanding of synergism).
Allan - that's twice you have accused me of not understanding a term or concept.

Synergism in terms of soteriology means that Man cooperates with God to effectuate or accomplish his (Man's) salvation.

Not God alone (monergism), but God with Man (synergism).

Secondly, the phrase 'gift of God' is used repeatedly in scripture by only regarding two things - 1. salvation; 2. spiritual gifts (there is not one of these gifts which all believers have).
You are mistaken, it is used in several contexts - see here.

However, the phrase is never used for 'faith' in any manner. Just look for yourself:

And in relation to Eph 2:8 - the context of the surrounding passages establish that the gift which is being spoken of is salvation not faith.
You are mistaken:

Ephesians 2:8
For by grace you have been saved through faith;
First phrase - the action is "saved" the object is "faith".

and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
Second phrase "that" and "it" reference the object not the action.

I do believe that in a sense is a gift from God since without God intervening in mans life we would (and are justly so) bound for Hell. Thus God's outworking toward man that we might believe can be (in a sense) wrapped up in the whole aspect of it.
ok...


However, all men have the capcity for faith as we because they place it in all manner of non-salvic things.
You are confusing saving faith (the special gift of God) with experiential/experimental faith (which everyone has).


That is:

John 20:25
So the other disciples were saying to him, "We have seen the Lord!" But he said to them, "Unless I see in His hands the imprint of the nails, and put my finger into the place of the nails, and put my hand into His side, I will not believe."

vs

1 Peter 1:8
8and though you have not seen Him, you love Him, and though you do not see Him now, but believe in Him, you greatly rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory,



Question: Which type did Christ bless?

John 20:29Jesus said to him, "Because you have seen Me, have you believed? Blessed are they who did not see, and yet believed."

Now just a quick thought for you to ponder here:
On the premise that all men have the capcity of faith and the Calvinistic veiw of Regeneration -

Would not the 'regeneration' of man efficiently enable mans natural capcity of faith already there to recieve the salvation of God?
Why then does God need to give man faith (something he already has), when the truth is, the regeneration would enable that mans faith so that he would believe God savingly by his regenerated faith?
Again - "man's natural capacity for faith" is flawed - God's gift of saving faith is not.
 

Allan

Active Member
Jarthur001 said:
I thought we got to the bottom of this last month, and as I remember it, the Calvinist won.
Brother James, the Calvinist never 'won' that is why they are still trying to prove their point for the last 500 years (and it is still falling just as short) :laugh: :thumbs:
 

jdlongmire

New Member
Dear Brother, our "point" was proven when the canon was written. We just persevere in order to "bring along" the weaker brother. ";)
 

jdlongmire

New Member
webdog said:
At least we can see which side has the most pride :rolleyes:
?? I was commenting on my foolishness for starting 5 simultaneous threads. :D

Unless you meant the "high view of God"? - that ain't pride...that is praise! :) SDG!
 

Allan

Active Member
jdlongmire said:
Allan - that's twice you have accused me of not understanding a term or concept.

Synergism in terms of soteriology means that Man cooperates with God to effectuate or accomplish his (Man's) salvation.

Not God alone (monergism), but God with Man (synergism).
Well even Calvinists believe that unless the regenerate man believes he can not be saved. Thus you still have man cooperating with God regardless of if God gave him it, man's salvation is still dependant upon mans choice to believe.

Therefore it is not God alone (in the full scope of the salvation process) as is falsly stated for if that were true it would not matter if man believed or not. God alone saves a man but man alone must choose to believe God and what He said.


You are mistaken, it is used in several contexts - see here.
Your correct, I missed one.
3. The 'gift of God' is also what you receive from your labor.

But still it never means what you try force it to.

You are mistaken:

Ephesians 2:8

First phrase - the action is "saved" the object is "faith".


Second phrase "that" and "it" reference the object not the action.
I think you will find I am not.
First I said the context of the surrounding passages are clearly speaking of salvation. Now if you wish to remove the passage from the context to make it say something else that is your choice.
Secondly, there is a lot here I can say regarding this passage your .. rendering.

However, I have been down this road many times and know that this will get very technical I will simply cut and past this - forgive me for doing so but I have done the whole let's examine the Greek thing to death in the past on here and don't particularly feel like writing it all again unless I have to. But I will elaborate on what you desire. I agree with the contents and examination done by GREGORY P. SAPAUGH
in his work "Is Faith a Gift" who examines both sides of the argument - here:

E. The Demonstrative Pronoun

The phrase kai touto ouk ex hymon (“and this not of yourselves”) occurs next in the verse. Kai touto is interpreted most simply as “and this,” although it may be understood adverbially as “and at that,” “and especially,” “and that too,” or “and indeed.”[22]

The demonstrative pronoun touto is the neuter singular nominative of houtos, “this.” Generally, a pronoun agrees with its antecedent in gender and number. In this sentence, neither chariti (“grace”) nor pisteos (“faith”) satisfy this requirement since both nouns are feminine in gender.[23]

A pronoun also may agree ad sensum (in meaning or sense) with the antecedent. If this is the case here, then the likely antecedent of touto is the nearest one, i.e., pisteos (“faith”). In this view, even the faith of the Ephesians has its origin in God.[24] Hanse comments:

God does not merely give to both Jews and Gentiles the possibility of faith; He effects faith in them. Eph. 2:8 makes it especially plain that all is of grace and that human merit is completely ruled out. To understand the Pauline and then the Lutheran doctrine of justification it is essential to make it clear that faith is not a new human merit which replaces the merit of works, that it is not a second achievement which takes the place of the first, that it is not something which man has to show, but that justification by faith is an act of divine grace. Faith is not the presupposition of the grace of God. As a divine gift, it is the epitome and demonstration of the grace of God
.[25]

A major problem with this position concerns the grammar. If Paul wanted to refer to pistis (“faith”), he could have written the feminine haute, instead of the neuter touto, and his meaning would have been clear. Why would he change the gender if he wanted to refer to pistis?[26]

A neuter pronoun may also be used to refer to a phrase or summarize a thought. This seems to be the best solution in Ephesians 2:8. Touto refers back to the entire phrase te gar chariti este sesosmenoi dia tes pisteos (“for by grace you have been saved through faith”). Therefore, the whole salvation experience, which occurs by means of the grace of God when a person believes, is what is referred to by kai touto ouk ex hyman (“and this not of yourselves”).[27]

This position is further supported by the parallelism between ouk ex hymon (“and this not of yourselves”) in 2:8 and ouk ex ergon (“not of works”) in 2:9. The latter phrase would not be meaningful if it referred to pisteos (“faith”). Instead, it clearly means that salvation is “not of works.” Therefore, these two clauses refer back to the introductory clause of 2:8 and the entire salvation experience.[28]

The preposition ex in the phrase ex hymon (“and this not of yourselves”) denotes source.[29] As a whole, the phrase means “not as proceeding from yourselves or of your own performance” (italics in original).[30] God is the Originator of salvation, not man. Justification is not based on personal righteousness but on the righteousness of Christ: “And be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith” (Phil 3:9). Calvin summarizes:

First, he asserts that the salvation of the Ephesians was entirely the work, the free work, of God; but they had obtained this grace by faith. On one side, we must look at God; and, on the other, at men. God declares that He owes us nothing; so that salvation is not a reward or recompense, but mere grace. Now it may be asked how men receive the salvation offered to them by the hand of God? I reply, by faith. Hence he concludes that here is nothing of our own. If, on the part of God, it is grace alone, and if we bring nothing but faith, which strips us of all praise, it follows that salvation is not of us.[31]


You are confusing saving faith (the special gift of God) with experiential/experimental faith (which everyone has).
Please show where scripture makes any such distinctions. Faith is faith.

You seem to forget the 'why' Jesus said what he said about that event..
Jhn 20:29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed.

Jesus make no such distinction between so called saving faith and experiential/experimental faith. - faith is faith -
However there is a special blessing toward those who have not seen and still believe.

Question: Which type did Christ bless?
Both faiths are acceptable and Jesus affirms this, but as I stated there is a special blessing toward those who have not seen and yet believe.

Again - "man's natural capacity for faith" is flawed - God's gift of saving faith is not.
You apparently didn't understand what I meant (probably my fault - sorry)
Man has a flawed faith - so when God regenerates a man (in the Calvinistic view) does not that mans faith become renewed or does his faith stay flawed even though he is a new creation and old things are now gone?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

canadyjd

Well-Known Member
First, he asserts that the salvation of the Ephesians was entirely the work, the free work, of God; but they had obtained this grace by faith. On one side, we must look at God; and, on the other, at men. God declares that He owes us nothing; so that salvation is not a reward or recompense, but mere grace. Now it may be asked how men receive the salvation offered to them by the hand of God? I reply, by faith. Hence he concludes that here is nothing of our own. If, on the part of God, it is grace alone, and if we bring nothing but faith, which strips us of all praise, it follows that salvation is not of us.[31]

Hi Allan. I appreciate your look at scripture. I have heard other Greek scholars argue convincingly that "this" is referring to God's "Grace" on the one hand and "faith" on the other. I guess it depends on which scholar you prefer, and that may not help us much to decide which is the best translation.

Concerning the above quote. He interchanges the words "salvation" and "grace" in his explanation.

They should be considered two different things. The "Grace" of God (unmerited favor) results in the "salvation" (positional security before God) of men, which is appropriated by men by their "faith".

Therefore, they did not obtain "grace" by their faith; they obtained salvation by their faith. The Grace was the work of God that initiated the salvation process, while we were spiritually unable to respond to Him.

This is made clear by the context. Eph. 2:3-7 "Among them we too all formily lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest. (4) But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, (5) even when we were dead in our transgressions, 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 ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus...."

Please notice how Paul equates being made "alive together with Christ" with the Grace of God that results in salvation. The being "made alive" is passive on our part. It is the result of God's grace, though no further details are given concerning the "how", but much detail concerning the "why".

peace to you:praying:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Allan

Active Member
canadyjd said:


Hi Allan. I appreciate your look at scripture. I have heard other Greek scholars argue convincingly that "this" is referring to God's "Grace" on the one hand and "faith" on the other. I guess it depends on which scholar you prefer, and that may not help us much to decide which is the best translation.
I can understand you point. To me I see the one way but what helps establish this (for me) is the context of the surrounding passages as well as the systamitic breakdown of the verse to better understand it. As I said - I do see saving faith as a gift in a sense because if it had not been for God choose to intervene man deserved at the very least the worst of Hell.

Concerning the above quote. He interchanges the words "salvation" and "grace" in his explanation.

They should be considered two different things. The "Grace" of God (unmerited favor) results in the "salvation" (positional security before God) of men, which is appropriated by men by their "faith".

Therefore, they did not obtain "grace" by their faith; they obtained salvation by their faith. The Grace was the work of God that initiated the salvation process.

peace to you:praying:
That was a quote by John Calvin

His point however was that they obtained or received His 'grace' (concerning salvation) through faith.
His grace without their faith has no effect regarding salvation because He has chosen to save by faith. So here 'grace' is seen as the work of God toward and in salvation.

Not sure if that answers anything for ya.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

canadyjd

Well-Known Member
I edited my above post while you were responding. I hope this makes my position a little clearer.

peace to you:praying:
 

J.D.

Active Member
Site Supporter
Well even Calvinists believe that unless the regenerate man believes he can not be saved. Thus you still have man cooperating with God regardless of if God gave him it, man's salvation is still dependant upon mans choice to believe.

Therefore it is not God alone (in the full scope of the salvation process) as is falsly stated for if that were true it would not matter if man believed or not. God alone saves a man but man alone must choose to believe God and what He said.
Allan, you amaze me how right you can be at times and how wrong you can be at times. God regenerates (cause), then man believes (effect). God alone. That's Monergism brother!
 

Allan

Active Member
canadyjd said:
I edited my above post while you were responding. I hope this makes my position a little clearer.

peace to you:praying:
Here is the full quote from Calvin Commentaries on Eph 2:8
8. For by grace are ye saved. This is an inference from the former statements. Having treated of election and of effectual calling, he arrives at this general conclusion, that they had obtained salvation by faith alone. First, he asserts, that the salvation of the Ephesians was entirely the work, the gracious work of God. But then they had obtained this grace by faith. On one side, we must look at God; and, on the other, at man. God declares, that he owes us nothing; so that salvation is not a reward or recompense, but unmixed grace. The next question is, in what way do men receive that salvation which is offered to them by the hand of God? The answer is, by faith; and hence he concludes that nothing connected with it is our own. If, on the part of God, it is grace alone, and if we bring nothing but faith, which strips us of all commendation, it follows that salvation does not come from us.

Ought we not then to be silent about free-will, and good intentions, and fancied preparations, and merits, and satisfactions? There is none of these which does not claim a share of praise in the salvation of men; so that the praise of grace would not, as Paul shews, remain undiminished. When, on the part of man, the act of receiving salvation is made to consist in faith alone, all other means, on which men are accustomed to rely, are discarded. Faith, then, brings a man empty to God, that he may be filled with the blessings of Christ. And so he adds, not of yourselves; that claiming nothing for themselves, they may acknowledge God alone as the author of their salvation.
So I'm still not following you though.

Salvation is a work of God's grace and that was what he was referencing by the interchange.

You stated previously:
Please notice how Paul equates being made "alive together with Christ" with the Grace of God that results in salvation. The being "made alive" is passive on our part. It is the result of God's grace, though no further details are given concerning the "how", but much detail concerning the "why".
But in your selected verses you stop short of the 'how' which Pauls explains it simply in verse 8 - through faith.
 

Allan

Active Member
J.D. said:
Allan, you amaze me how right you can be at times and how wrong you can be at times. God regenerates (cause), then man believes (effect). God alone. That's Monergism brother!
I understand that.. however if God does it alone then man's belief is of no consequence negitively or positively. That is true Monergism.

Yet man even a regenerate man who has not yet believed is not saved until he believes. I know that in your view he 'will' eventually believe (I'm just using the space of time as an example here). Thus man still cooperates with God because it was God's choosing to be done in such a way. God does not believe for the man but man himself must believe that he might be saved. This is crux that unhinges (to me at least) this argument.

It is indisputable that God alone saves, but it is also indisputabel that man must believe for God to save him.

According to scripture belief/faith has no merit in and of itself and is why it is not considered a work. Thus using faith still give man any reason to boast for he has not saved himself but has trusted in that God will do what God said He would. Thus God alone saves man.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

skypair

Active Member
jdlongmire said:
Skypair, I won't try and play word games with you - God's choosing any sinful person for salvation is a mystery.
It is a "mystery" only to those who are blinded to what scripture says, jdlong. And I would further assert that it is the work of the devil who desires just that blindness in his "subjects." But scripture doesn't get any clearer than " believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved and thy house." There is absolutely no other conclusion that can be made than that salvation hinges upon your personal decision/choice!

Belief and trust originate as a gift from God. A blind man cannot restore his own sight. A dead man cannot raise himself.
Totally inappropriate analogies, jd (except to a Calvinist for whom all the unregenerate are "brain dead.") And as webdog points out, belief and trust are a gift to ALL mankind as ALL believe and trust in something. The point is that belief and trust in Christ are NOT gifts but are the appropriation of them to one's Savior.

Please show me the words or concept "free will" as it is used in respect to salvation. Anywhere. Please. First, do me a favor and define "free will".
You quite obviously are "brainwashed" into one specific way of thinking about "free will" if the simple words are not self-explanatory. The "will" is the conclusion of our deliberations of intellect, emotions, and flesh regarding a perceived choice. The "will" is "free" in that it has unrestricted ability to choose from among the options.

And please don't tell me you can't find a place where freedom of the will is expressed in scripture. Surely any time salvation is offered, there is the presumption of free will on the part of everyone and anyone to respond freely.



You are confused - He justifies apart from works and sanctifies through works. He saves as He wills.
You almost got that exactly backwards, jd. Not that God justifies by "works," but that there IS something we must do to be justified and that something is repent and trust/obey. In sanctification, though, it is the Spirit that works in us to do His will that sanctifies.

And I think this is where Calvies have it wrong. They believe that the Spirit works in them to do His will unto salvation (they are quite willing to be "sanctified") but they are balk at obeying (saying a "sinner's prayer," for instance) because they have been taught that them having anything to do by way of choice or decision is a "works" salvation.

Did Abraham chose God or did God chose Abraham?
You are going way "downstream" from the actual time of the choosing, jd. Go back to Ur. God chose Abram and Abram chose to obey God. That is where Heb 11 says "by faith Abram ... obeyed; and went out..." God spoke to (chose) Abram and Abram chose (obeyed) God. There was a "covenant" there.

skypair
 

jdlongmire

New Member
Skypair - you offer much presuppositional speculation and little Scriptural proof. I am having a difficult time convincing myself that it is not folly to interact with your ... apologetic.

Go back and bring specific scripture in to support your statements and I will interact. Otherwise, we are just debating your opinion, not the truth of God's Word.
 

canadyjd

Well-Known Member
Allan said:
Here is the full quote from Calvin Commentaries on Eph 2:8
Yes, I understood it was Calvin. I notice Calvin emphasized the previous verses as well, which described the election and calling of God's people as "Grace".
So I'm still not following you though.
I guess I'm not being very clear. I wanted to make the distinction which I see in the passage, between the "Grace" (unmerited favor) of God (as seen in His election and calling) and the salvation of men that is appropriated by faith.

The "grace" of election and effectual calling is a work of God and is not appropriated by faith. That "grace" has already been poured out by God. The "unmerited favor" came (or behaps we should say "began") with the work of election and calling. It continues until the person has reached a right standing before God, i.e salvation.

The result of this Grace from God is what is appropriated by faith. The person responds with faith and salvation (right standing before God) is gained.

I believe it is OK to refer to the entire work of Grace as the "salvation process" (which you have), as long as you don't confuse the process with the end result (salvation...i.e. right standing before God). In other words, the "grace" of election and effectual calling is not appropriated by faith.

I don't believe Calvin was saying that when people believe the gospel, God shows grace to them for the first time in granting salvation. It is clear that Calvin saw in this passage that God was already at work in the person's life and Paul had referred to that work as "grace".
But in your selected verses you stop short of the 'how' which Pauls explains it simply in verse 8 - through faith.
The previous verses give the context to verse 8 (already being discussed BTW) and focus on "why".

It is clear, though, that salvation is appropriated through faith.

I see we are very close in our understanding here. I think the key may be what I have described above.

Do you see the "grace" of God in "election" as being given to the person after they have exercised "faith"? If you do, is that consistent with the passage we are discussing?

peace to you:praying:
 

Allan

Active Member
canadyjd said:
Yes, I understood it was Calvin. I notice Calvin emphasized the previous verses as well, which described the election and calling of God's people as "Grace".
I was just giving the full quote so it could be seen in context is all.

I guess I'm not being very clear. I wanted to make the distinction which I see in the passage, between the "Grace" (unmerited favor) of God (as seen in His election and calling) and the salvation of men that is appropriated by faith.

The "grace" of election and effectual calling is a work of God and is not appropriated by faith. That "grace" has already been poured out by God. The "unmerited favor" came (or behaps we should say "began") with the work of election and calling. It continues until the person has reached a right standing before God, i.e salvation.

The result of this Grace from God is what is appropriated by faith. The person responds with faith and salvation (right standing before God) is gained.

I believe it is OK to refer to the entire work of Grace as the "salvation process" (which you have), as long as you don't confuse the process with the end result (salvation...i.e. right standing before God). In other words, the "grace" of election and effectual calling is not appropriated by faith.
Ok. I see what you're saying now.

I see nothing in what you wrote above that I would disagree with, with maybe some clarification on this sentence "The "grace" of election and effectual calling is a work of God and is not appropriated by faith." To an extent I agree but I'm not sure I know exactly what it is you are meaning. It is pretty much what I believe though I might see the scope of a few aspects a little more so than you do. But yes, I agree as far as I understand you. :)


I don't believe Calvin was saying that when people believe the gospel, God shows grace to them for the first time in granting salvation. It is clear that Calvin saw in this passage that God was already at work in the person's life and Paul had referred to that work as "grace".
I completely agree.

Do you see the "grace" of God in "election" as being given to the person after they have exercised "faith"?
Understand that we see election somewhat differently though my view is still more similar to yours than some other non-cals. In relation to you question the answer 'No'.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

canadyjd

Well-Known Member
Allan said:
Understand that we see election somewhat differently though my view is still more similar to yours than some other non-cals. In relation to you question the answer 'No'.
OK. Could you explain how we differ in our view of election? Do you follow, as the OP states, that election is "unconditional" upon anything a person does or will do in the future?

peace to you:praying:
 

skypair

Active Member
jdlongmire said:
Skypair - you offer much presuppositional speculation and little Scriptural proof.
OK, when the BIBLE says, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved,...", is believing not a "condition" for being saved? "If thou wilt confess with thy mouth... and believe in thy heart..., thou shalt be saved." Rom 10:9

Which is the precondition to being saved so far as scripture tells us, jd -- "election" or "believing?"

It's just that simple. "Election" is not a precondition of salvation; salvation is a precondition of "election." Therefore, God does tell us (vice RC Sproul's/Calvinism's assertions to the contrary) "how He chooses whom He does to election." He chooses BELIEVERS. And if you don't think that God can foresee who will believe, you don't believe in an omniscient God.

skypair
 
Top