Daniel B. Wallace on Election

[The Archangel]

Dr. Daniel B. Wallace--the noted and well-respected Greek scholar--shares his thoughts and understanding of Election.

Please read: http://bible.org/article/my-understanding-biblical-doctrine-election

Please comment.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[Tom Butler]

Pretty good stuff, there.

 

[Winman]

Dr. Daniel B. Wallace--the noted and well-respected Greek scholar--shares his thoughts and understanding of Election.

Please read: http://bible.org/article/my-understanding-biblical-doctrine-election

Please comment.

Blessings,

The Archangel

Well, I think it's total bunk, but I'm sure you would expect that from me.

At least he recognized three serious problems with the Calvinist view of election;

1) Is God fair?
2) Are we just robots?
3) Why should we evangelize?

He said all these are answered in Rom 9-11 but left it at that. Not very convincing for a scholar if you ask me, but what do I know?

I would say if Calvinism is true, then God is not fair. If we are all equally worthy of damnation, why should he only be gracious to some?

I would say if Calvinism is true, then everyone is a robot. The elect will be caused to believe, the unelect are enslaved by a sin nature they did not choose but were born with and cannot escape.

And why evangelize? God can simply regenerate you, you would automatically seek out a church or find a Bible and read the gospel. There is no need to preach, in fact, preaching would be man intruding into salvation. Salvation is 100% of God, you certainly don't want someone saying they got saved because they heard John Piper preaching, that might give glory to a man.

 

[jbh28]

I would say if Calvinism is true, then God is not fair. If we are all equally worthy of damnation, why should he only be gracious to some?

What part are you disagreeing with? I'm sure you agree with "all equally worthy of damnation" part? I'm also sure you would agree that only some are saved. So what makes God gracious with some and not others.

I would say if Calvinism is true, then everyone is a robot. The elect will be caused to believe, the unelect are enslaved by a sin nature they did not choose but were born with and cannot escape.

Well, you can say it all you want, but it's not true.

And why evangelize? God can simply regenerate you, you would automatically seek out a church or find a Bible and read the gospel. There is no need to preach, in fact, preaching would be man intruding into salvation. Salvation is 100% of God, you certainly don't want someone saying they got saved because they heard John Piper preaching, that might give glory to a man.

The means by which God saves his elect. That's why.

btw, did you read the whole article?

 

[agedman]

Well, I think it's total bunk, but I'm sure you would expect that from me.

At least he recognized three serious problems with the Calvinist view of election;

No, he said that those who don't accept the view have these three gripes and such persons are faulty in thinking as proved by the Romans reference.

I would say if Calvinism is true, then God is not fair. If we are all equally worthy of damnation, why should he only be gracious to some?

I would say if Calvinism is true, then everyone is a robot. The elect will be caused to believe, the unelect are enslaved by a sin nature they did not choose but were born with and cannot escape.

And why evangelize? God can simply regenerate you, you would automatically seek out a church or find a Bible and read the gospel. There is no need to preach, in fact, preaching would be man intruding into salvation. Salvation is 100% of God, you certainly don't want someone saying they got saved because they heard John Piper preaching, that might give glory to a man.

Paul faced your questions and dealt with them in Romans.

He faced the faulty thinking of some who considered puffing up the person who baptized them as being more superior than other baptism, and put that down, too.


Arm. folks just don't seem to consider that God is Sovereign.

What right do mere creatures have to dictate whether God is fair, or unjust?

What right do mere creatures have to fault God's method's of working in the creation to express His will and His way?

It is as if they are to say, "How dare God restrict my freedom of choice! I am in charge of my life, and He can just but out until I am ready."

 

[agedman]

Dr. Daniel B. Wallace--the noted and well-respected Greek scholar--shares his thoughts and understanding of Election.

Please read: http://bible.org/article/my-understanding-biblical-doctrine-election

Please comment.


Blessings,

The Archangel

I almost stumbled at the end thinking that he stated the doctrines of election hold the same authority as the inspired Scripture.

But, then I read it again and saw that the word was "analogous" and not the word my mind substituted - don't even remember what the word was I substituted it for even was.

Interesting read.

Glad he agrees with me....... :applause:

 

[MB]

Good answers Winnman
MB

 

[Winman]

What part are you disagreeing with? I'm sure you agree with "all equally worthy of damnation" part? I'm also sure you would agree that only some are saved. So what makes God gracious with some and not others.

I do agree all men are worthy of damnation, and in non-Cal theology God offers salvation to all. In Calvinism God passes over many men. He offers them salvation, but it is a meaningless and empty offer because he knows it is impossible for them to accept it.

Well, you can say it all you want, but it's not true.

I could say the same to you. If God regenerates a man, he has no choice, he must accept the gospel, it is impossible to do otherwise. If a man is passed by, he is utterly controlled by a sin nature imposed upon him at birth and through no choice of his own. It is impossible for him to be even willing to believe. I would call someone with a controlled will a robot, or maybe a zombie.

The means by which God saves his elect. That's why.

Maybe I'm missing something, but it sure seems like a contradiction to me. If salvation is 100% of God, why does he use men? Why does he even need the Bible printed and distributed by men? Just zap them with the knowledge of the gospel.

btw, did you read the whole article?

I thought I did, but perhaps I missed something.

 

[jbh28]

Maybe I'm missing something, but it sure seems like a contradiction to me. If salvation is 100% of God, why does he use men? Why does he even need the Bible printed and distributed by men? Just zap them with the knowledge of the gospel.

He could if he wanted to, but he choose to use men to spread the gospel just like he choose men to pen the Bible.

I thought I did, but perhaps I missed something.

You asked about more than just saying Romans 9-11. I haven't read it all yet myself, but it looked like he had more at the bottom which went into more detail.

 

[quantumfaith]

I do not think it "bunk", but I see nothing new. It is the same arguments and points of contention we always do and most likely always will disagree on. This view of election (calvinist) rests upon accepting the calvinist definition of many things, the most foundation being "their" definition of total depravity (total inability) et al.

 

[Winman]

He could if he wanted to, but he choose to use men to spread the gospel just like he choose men to pen the Bible.

Sorry, still seems like a direct contradiction to me. I guess I need to learn to think like a Calvinist, then I will realize it is not a contradiction. But I'm a pretty old dog to learn a new trick, and that sounds like a very difficult one to me.

You asked about more than just saying Romans 9-11. I haven't read it all yet myself, but it looked like he had more at the bottom which went into more detail.

Well, I read everything I saw, but I am on a phone and my browser doesn't always show everything. I can't open Real videos, stuff like that.

But I have read Romans 9-11 and I don't believe it would answer any of those 3 questions, but again, I can't think like a Calvinist.

 

[agedman]

I do agree all men are worthy of damnation, and in non-Cal theology God offers salvation to all. In Calvinism God passes over many men. He offers them salvation, but it is a meaningless and empty offer because he knows it is impossible for them to accept it.

If, it is true that God is all knowing, then of course He knows. Mere man is unknowing, so that is why the gospel is carried to everyone, and as many as receive Him are in that grouping.

Please don't consider God is using a Venn diagram. He doesn't have a group of will be, a group of never will be, and a mixed multitude.

God passes over none. He is just in that all deserve hell, and by his authority and grace some don't claim that prize.

If God regenerates a man, he has no choice, he must accept the gospel, it is impossible to do otherwise. If a man is passed by, he is utterly controlled by a sin nature imposed upon him at birth and through no choice of his own. It is impossible for him to be even willing to believe. I would call someone with a controlled will a robot, or maybe a zombie.

Problem is that according to the Arm view, God isn't in control but man makes the determination of when, how and to what degree Christ will influence his life.

God didn't make humankind a robot, but He did have awfully high expectations that were not met. Therefore, He provided the way. Mere man has argued with Him ever sense.

Maybe I'm missing something, but it sure seems like a contradiction to me. If salvation is 100% of God, why does he use men? Why does he even need the Bible printed and distributed by men? Just zap them with the knowledge of the gospel.


I thought I did, but perhaps I missed something.

Because God is God.

It is He that established and establishes.

It is HIS plan and mere man has no authority to question God.

 

[Winman]

If, it is true that God is all knowing, then of course He knows. Mere man is unknowing, so that is why the gospel is carried to everyone, and as many as receive Him are in that grouping.

Please don't consider God is using a Venn diagram. He doesn't have a group of will be, a group of never will be, and a mixed multitude.

God passes over none. He is just in that all deserve hell, and by his authority and grace some don't claim that prize.



Problem is that according to the Arm view, God isn't in control but man makes the determination of when, how and to what degree Christ will influence his life.

God didn't make humankind a robot, but He did have awfully high expectations that were not met. Therefore, He provided the way. Mere man has argued with Him ever sense.



Because God is God.

It is He that established and establishes.

It is HIS plan and mere man has no authority to question God.

I'm not questioning God, I'm questioning how Calvinism interprets scripture. And really, I'm not questioning Calvinism, I know it is error.

 

[Herald]

I would say if Calvinism is true, then God is not fair.

You're correct. God is not fair.

If Calvinism is true, then everyone is a robot.

Then, by comparison, sinners are also robots. In God's eyes a sinner can only sin; he is not capable of acts of righteousness (Gen. 6:5; 1 Cor. 2:14).

And why evangelize?

Because God has ordained both the means the ends (1 Cor. 1:21).

 

[Winman]

You're correct. God is not fair.

Well, we disagree, I believe God is perfectly fair, the scriptures say God is just, and the very definition of just means fair, look it up in any dictionary.

Then, by comparison, sinners are also robots. In God's eyes a sinner can only sin; he is not capable of acts of righteousness (Gen. 6:5; 1 Cor. 2:14).

I would disagree again, God said Cain could do well, and if he did so he would be accepted. Who knows more, God or Calvin?

Because God has ordained both the means the ends (1 Cor. 1:21).

It's still a contradiction, it would be like Tim Tebow bragging he beat the Vikings all by himself. Of course he would never say that.

Go Tebow!

 

[jbh28]

Sorry, still seems like a direct contradiction to me. I guess I need to learn to think like a Calvinist, then I will realize it is not a contradiction. But I'm a pretty old dog to learn a new trick, and that sounds like a very difficult one to me.

How is it a contradiction? God uses people to spread the gospel. He can do that if he so chooses just as he choose to give us his word by men writing it down all.

Well, I read everything I saw, but I am on a phone and my browser doesn't always show everything. I can't open Real videos, stuff like that.

But I have read Romans 9-11 and I don't believe it would answer any of those 3 questions, but again, I can't think like a Calvinist.

You'll come around one day. :tongue3:

 

[Winman]

How is it a contradiction? God uses people to spread the gospel. He can do that if he so chooses just as he choose to give us his word by men writing it down all.

You'll come around one day. :tongue3:

I have been through this with you before, you do not seem able to recognize contradictions (or circular reasoning), there is really nothing I can do.

It is absolutely true that salvation is 100% of God, but that does not mean people are not involved.

Jn 1:12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name.

If God did not send Jesus to die for us, no one could be saved. And if God did not reveal Jesus through his Word and preaching, no one could be saved. And no man has the power to regenerate himself.

Nevertheless, man is involved in salvation. A man has to receive Jesus and believe on his name. And when a man believes, then and only then does God regenerate him.

Jesus is 100% from God.
The Word is 100% from God.
The power to regenerate is 100% from God.
Man has to believe. God does not believe for you.