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!
Election is a matter of individuals act of faith.One advantage corporate election has is that the Bible never speaks of the elect except that they already are in Christ.
I agree. But at the same time it is also not (see the article in my last post).Election is a matter of individuals act of faith.
Matthew 22:14, ". . . For many are called, but few are | elect. |
2 Peter 1:4-10, ". . . giving all diligence, add to your faith . . . give diligence to make your calling and election sure: . . ."
Corporate Election.
I disagree.....depending on what we mean (I agree with you in the passages you mention).Scripture pronouns do not support 'corporate election'.
They do however support 'corporate regeneration'.
This parable does speak of an individual....but not the choosing of a lost person. It is also not individual election as opposed to corporate election.@JonC,
Twice.
Matthew 20:16, ". . . for many be called, but few | elect. | . . ."
Matthew 22:14, ". . . For many are called, but few are | elect. | . . ."
Only a few of the many are elect. More are lost than elect. Even though plural is used, the few versus the many involves individuals.
I think in a way it is intentionally impersonal (the focus being on Christ rather than individuals).I do not believe in corporate election, than is so impersonal...
Part of the difficulty here is that Scripture never speaks of a lost individual as being individually elected to salvation.
Yep. That's what I mean when I say that corporate election cannot negate individual election.15 But when it was the good pleasure of God, who separated me, even from my mother`s womb, and called me through his grace, Gal1
Interesting take.I think the danger with corporate election is it can lead to a theology of baptismal regeneration where every baby baptized into the faith is corporately a part of the New Covenant, not by personal faith, but by church fiat.
Where the whole of individual election does make a corporate body it seems that claiming a corporate election may bring in extra-biblical notions that may be dangerous.
I have studied it, but it does not make sense to me. It seems like the same double speak many Calvinists use when saying they don't believe in double predestination.Arminianism holds that God elected individuals based on foreseen faith. Calvinism holds that God elected individuals via decree based on His own will, not randomly but the reasons being a mystery to man.
There is a third view which has not been discussed on this forum....or at least not discussed much. And that is Corporate Election.
Corporate Election is the view that Christ Himself is God's chosen, or God's Elect. When we are saved we are numbered among the elect, or numbered among those who are "in Christ". Individuals are elect based not on God choosing them individually or God knowing that they would believe, but on their position in Christ.
The difference between unconditional or conditional election and corporate election is that corporate election holds that God has chosen us in Christ (rather than chosen us to be in Christ) before, or from, the foundation of the wold and as such we are predestined unto adoption by Christ Himself (our predestination is based on Christ rather than the prior knowledge or decree of the Father).
Anyway, I thought since this hasn't been discussed much it would be an interesting topic to examine.
What are the strengths and weaknesses of Corporate Election? Is it biblical (and why or why not)?
Well, maybe it depends on which Calvinists you ask, but Calvin himself taught that God's election was arbitrary...Arminianism holds that God elected individuals based on foreseen faith. Calvinism holds that God elected individuals via decree based on His own will, not randomly but the reasons being a mystery to man.
Well stated!There is a third view which has not been discussed on this forum....or at least not discussed much. And that is Corporate Election.
Corporate Election is the view that Christ Himself is God's chosen, or God's Elect. When we are saved we are numbered among the elect, or numbered among those who are "in Christ". Individuals are elect based not on God choosing them individually or God knowing that they would believe, but on their position in Christ.
There are many who teach it this way, however, the "The Lamb slain before the foundation of the world" is a cliche that has arisen from a misreading of two passages in revelation.The difference between unconditional or conditional election and corporate election is that corporate election holds that God has chosen us in Christ (rather than chosen us to be in Christ) before, or from, the foundation of the world and as such we are predestined unto adoption by Christ Himself (our predestination is based on Christ rather than the prior knowledge or decree of the Father).
I agree! Excellent topic! In my view, it is the only doctrine on election that is in keeping with scripture, sound reason and the righteous character of God. The other two options and their variants are either unbiblical, irrational or destroy any meaning to the word "justice" when applied to God, or a combination of the three.Anyway, I thought since this hasn't been discussed much it would be an interesting topic to examine.
What are the strengths and weaknesses of Corporate Election? Is it biblical (and why or why not)?
It does depend on what Calvinism we use - you are exactly correct.Well, maybe it depends on which Calvinists you ask, but Calvin himself taught that God's election was arbitrary...
“God is moved to mercy for no other reason but that he wills to be merciful.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 22, Paragraph 8)
“… predestination to glory is the cause of predestination to grace, rather than the converse.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 22, Paragraph 9)
“Therefore, those whom God passes over, he condemns; and this he does for no other reason than that he wills to exclude them from the inheritance which he predestines for his own children.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 1)
“We cannot assign any reason for his bestowing mercy on his people, but just as it so pleases him, neither can we have any reason for his reprobating others but his will.” (John Calvin, Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 22, Paragraph 11)
Regardless, the point is well taken. There is indeed a third option...
Well stated!
A decent analogy I've heard many times likens it to a passenger aircraft where the owner of the plane has set the plane's destination (i.e. it's destiny) well in advance. If anyone gets on board, they share the plane's destiny, not because the owner had any idea which particular persons would get on board but simply by virtue of their having done so.
There are many who teach it this way, however, the "The Lamb slain before the foundation of the world" is a cliche that has arisen from a misreading of two passages in revelation.
Revelation 3:8 All who dwell on the earth will worship him, whose names have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.
Revelation 17:8 The beast that you saw was, and is not, and will ascend out of the bottomless pit and go to perdition. And those who dwell on the earth will marvel, whose names are not written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world, when they see the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.
The "Book of Life" is the title of a book in God's possession. (See below for the other places it shows up in scripture.)
"Of the Lamb Slain" is the subtitle, the Lamb slain of course being Christ crucified.
Names are written in it, and have been written in it, "from the foundation of the world."
Those whose names are NOT written in this book will worship the beast, and will marvel.
You could, in fact, write that part of 13:8 in this way, and not change the meaning:
"whose names have not been written from the foundation of the world in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain"
You could also write that part of 17:8 in this way, and not change the meaning:
"whose names are not written from the foundation of the world in the Book of Life"
Christ, the Lamb, was not slain from the foundation of the world (as Revelation 17:8 should have made clear). He died once for all!
Romans 6:8-11 Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him. For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Hebrews 7:26-28 For such a High Priest was fitting for us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and has become higher than the heavens; who does not need daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the people’s, for this He did once for all when He offered up Himself. For the law appoints as high priests men who have weakness, but the word of the oath, which came after the law, appoints the Son who has been perfected forever.
Hebrews 9:11-15 But Christ came as High Priest of the good things to come, with the greater and more perfect tabernacle not made with hands, that is, not of this creation. Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His own blood He entered the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption. For if the blood of bulls and goats and the ashes of a heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifies for the purifying of the flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered Himself without spot to God, cleanse your conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.
Hebrews 10: 8-14 Previously saying, “Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them” (which are offered according to the law), then He said, “Behold, I have come to do Your will, O God.” He takes away the first that He may establish the second. By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified.
Jude 1:3 Beloved, while I was very diligent to write to you concerning our common salvation, I found it necessary to write to you exhorting you to contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.
The book appears in Philippians 4:3 and Revelation 3:1-6 without its subtitle. (Passages not directly quoted here because of a limit on the size of the post.)
Then of course, the two passages I quoted above, followed by...
Revelation 20:11-15 Then I saw a great white throne and Him who sat on it, from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away. And there was found no place for them. And I saw the dead, small and great, standing before God, and books were opened. And another book was opened, which is the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to their works, by the things which were written in the books. The sea gave up the dead who were in it, and Death and Hades delivered up the dead who were in them. And they were judged, each one according to his works. Then Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death. And anyone not found written in the Book of Life was cast into the lake of fire.
Revelation 21: 22-27 But I saw no temple in it, for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. The city had no need of the sun or of the moon to shine in it, for the glory of God illuminated it. The Lamb is its light. And the nations of those who are saved shall walk in its light, and the kings of the earth bring their glory and honor into it. Its gates shall not be shut at all by day (there shall be no night there). And they shall bring the glory and the honor of the nations into it. But there shall by no means enter it anything that defiles, or causes an abomination or a lie, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s Book of Life.
Revelation 22:18-19 For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
Note the passage in Revelation 21, where it refers to the book as "the Lamb's Book of Life."
No, the Lamb was not slain, literally or figuratively, from the foundation of the world. He was slain around AD 30, hanged on a tree, was buried, and rose again on the third day.
I agree! Excellent topic! In my view, it is the only doctrine on election that is in keeping with scripture, sound reason and the righteous character of God. The other two options and their variants are either unbiblical, irrational or destroy any meaning to the word "justice" when applied to God, or a combination of the three.
If anyone gets on board, they share the plane's destiny, not because the owner had any idea which particular persons would get on board but simply by virtue of their having done so.
This sounds to me like you just not wanting to wear the Calvinist label.It does depend on what Calvinism we use - you are exactly correct.
Historic Calvinism would reject Reformed Baptists. But what I was speaking of was merely the "five points". And these are just a response to the five articles.
Terms like Calvinism, Reformed, and Protestant can cause people to talk past one another. But I mean the five points (only Calvinistic soteriology that has crossed out from Presbyterian theology into other denominations).
It's open theism, if it's coming from me. It most definitely is not Pelagiansim.God doesn't know who will choose to hop aboard?
Is this a variant of the typical Arminian take of God's 'foreknowledge'?
Is this Pelagianism?