Calvinists: Best Argument?

I love and respect a great deal of Spurgeons work, but even he was wrong at times, as seen above.

 

ok I can’t help myself.

I must ask? What does the bible mean when it says things like chosen, elect, and predestend? Are we trying to say that these words have a different meaning now today because of the way we feel or we some how are more enlightened than the men of the past?

When the bible says we were written in the lamb’s book of life before the foundations of the world, why did God write your name? Was it because he knew you would choose Him? Is there something special in you that would make Him turn to you? Make Him chose you over another? Were we not brought forth into iniquity, and conceived in sin?

 

The term 'predestined' in scripture deals not with a persons salvation itself but the effect that the culmination of that salvation will have. Remember - those whom He foreknew, He predestined .. to be conformed to the image of His Son. We are not more enlightened then some of those men of the past, they just misunderstood some aspects but also they were not the only men of God during those times either. None were perfect. For example - some believed in infant baptism, some held to sacrimental graces, et.. The point I am making is that they were Godly men much like many others and right on some things and not on others. Both the Cal view and non-Cal view has existed side by side since the early church and God has seen fit to keep them here. Who am I to change the purposes of God?

Of course not. We know there is nothing good in any of us (for we were all brought forth in inquity and concieved in sin) and so no one is better than another. Therefore God chose whom He will save arbitrarily because God is no respecter of persons, right? I mean it HAD to arbitrary because there is no reason God should save you over another since all are the same.

But if you claim He did not choose arbitrarily (The Great Cosmic Lotto - and yes I'm being silly here), then tell me specifically why He choose you over another to be saved?

 

These two verses have come to mind lately that may shed a little light on the reason for God's choice or non-choice of people for salvation.


Luk 16:29 Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
Luk 16:30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.
Luk 16:31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead.

Some people will not be persuaded no matter what proof is offered.


Jhn 6:64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.



Was their unbelief because they weren't chosen? Or were they not chosen because Jesus knew they wouldn't believe?

Could it be that because God can see everything all at once that He only chose those who would believe?

 

If Calvinism is the gospel then why isn't it's concepts found in scripture? MB

 

Careful Amy, your sounding like me :laugh:

 

I guess I've read too many of your posts. You're starting to influence me! :laugh:

 

I would like to volunteer to answer your question - IF you can answer this: why did YOU choose to believe and others choose to not believe?

Hint: "as many as were ordained to eternal life believed".
Another hint: "but ye believed not, because ye are not of my sheep; as I said unto you, my sheep hear my voice..."

 

Hay Rippon, you out there? Looks like it's "snippet" time again.

 

They choose to believe because they were elected, drawn and were His sheep before the foundation of the world.

I just have a problem with God's choosing being arbitrary, with no reason or purpose. I believe God's choice is based on a reason (see my previous post) because that's the God I see throughout the Bible. Everything He does is based on His reasons and purposes. We may not understand them, but I do not see God doing anything with no reason or purpose.

 

If by "arbitrary", you mean "according to His own purpose and will", then yes, election is arbitrary. But if by arbitrary you mean "by chance or unordered whim", then no, it's not arbitrary.

"known unto God are all His works from the foundation of the world"
God knows what He knows because He has decreed it. He did not learn it.
edited for typos.

 

Right - see my response to "arbitrary" I just posted. His secret will can not be revealed to us, else we would know the mind of God.

 

Doesn't this mean that "unconditional" election is incorrect?

I think election is conditional, but the condition is known only to God.

 

Rom 9:9 For this is the word of promise: "AT THIS TIME I WILL COME, AND SARAH SHALL HAVE A SON."
Rom 9:10 And not only this, but there was Rebekah also, when she had conceived twins by one man, our father Isaac;
Rom 9:11 for though the twins were not yet born and had not done anything good or bad, so that God's purpose according to His choice would stand, not because of works but because of Him who calls,
Rom 9:12 it was said to her, "THE OLDER WILL SERVE THE YOUNGER."
Rom 9:13 Just as it is written, "JACOB I LOVED, BUT ESAU I HATED."
Rom 9:14 What shall we say then? There is no injustice with God, is there? May it never be!



Gods election of those who are his sheep, those who hear His voice, is for His Glory. Notice These two were chosen before they had done anything good or bad.

 

The definition of Unconditional Election is "election not conditioned on any thing in man, but only on God's purpose and will". So you are right, election IS conditional in regards to God, but unconditional in regards to man.

I share your frustration with trying to understand the mystery of how God chooses what He chooses. "The secret things belong to the Lord, but those things revealed belong to us..." (paraphrase of a Ex 30 passage). If He told us all the secrets, they wouldn't be secrets anymore, would they?

 

Hello LS, that's some name you've got there. What's it mean?

I agree with your conclusion, but just for fun, and to sharpen the iron, how would you respond to those that say your passage refers to vocational election, not slavific?

 

Clever insight, Amy. :thumbs:

 

LORDs: Stands for our Lord Jesus Christ.
Strateuo: is Greek for soldier.

I'm a soldier stationed at Ft. Campbell so I looked in the bible using my concordance at the word soldier and whala ther your have it LORDs_strateuo.

could you please rephrase your question?

 

Since Romans 9 - 11 is in regards to Israel...are you stating they are His sheep? Two nations were being spoken of in context...not individuals.

 

It's good to have a soldier around. I may need your professional services when these ranting hereticks around here attack me. :laugh:

Some people say that the election of Jacob has to do with historical purposes rather than the individual's salvation. In other words, it's not that Jacob was chosen to be saved, but rather he was chosen to be the father of a loved nation; and parallel to that, Esau was chosen to be the father of a hated nation. Election to specific historic purposes and ministries is called vocational election.

Webdog's post represents corporate or national election. He thinks that it wasn't really Jacob the individual that was elected and loved, but Israel the nation, whom Jacob represents. And so Esau represented Edom, a hated nation.

What do you think about those theories?