Does unconditional election make God partial?

[whatever]

Bob,

Do you do the law?

 

[Pastor Larry]

Your child or grandchild is on baseball Team-B. Every time they come up to bat - whether they swing or not, and no matter where the ball is thrown the umpire calls a strike.

You get upset but the managers are all happy because they claim the umpire is not-partial and is completely objective.

You charge that the umpire is Biased so he walks up to the mic and say "I favor team A". The crowd asks what A has done to be favore and he says "nothing. It has nothing to do with either team - I just decided to favor A".

Everyone goes home claiming that the umpire was partial and was arbitrary.

All except the Calvinists.

Somehow, I am quite sure that you didn't post this seriously. Analogies never quite work great, but this one didn't even get started. Where in the world did you come up with this idea?

In the analogy, the umpire is not following the rules. God always follows his rules. And that was as close as your story came to being an analogy. From there, it was all downhill.

 

[BobRyan]

The "Rules"

Rom 2:11 "God is NOT partial"

 

[BobRyan]

Everyone goes home claiming that the umpire was partial and arbitrary.

All except the Calvinists.

By contrast 1Cor 6 tells us this about the impartiality of God in salvation

1Cor 6
9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals,
10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.

Rom 2 argues this point about the impartiality of God in salvation

Rom 2
5 But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,
6 who WILL RENDER TO EACH PERSON ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS:
...
11 For there is no partiality with God.
12 For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law;
13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.

Matt 7 tells us this about the impartial judgment of God in salvation

Matt 7
17 ""So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit.
18 ""A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit.
19 "" Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.
20 ""So then, you will know them by their fruits.

21 "" Not everyone who says to Me, "Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter.

Matt 5 tells us this about the impartiality of God in salvation

Matt 5
29 "" If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.
30 "" If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell.

 

[BobRyan]

Originally posted by whatever:
Bob,

Do you do the law?

Rev 12
17 So the dragon was enraged with the woman, and went off to make war with the rest of her children, who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus

Rev 14
12 Here is the perseverance of the saints who keep the commandments of God and their faith in Jesus.

John 14

15 "" If you love Me, you will keep My commandments.
..
21 "" He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me; and he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and will disclose Myself to him.''
..
24 ""He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father's who sent Me.



John 15
10 "" If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father's commandments and abide in His love.

 

[Timtoolman]

 

[BobRyan]

I meant to add the Romans 3 point that Paul makes in my previous post "Do we then make void the Law of God by our faith! God forbid! In fact we ...."Rom 3:31.

Now what was that word he used next .... ?

 

[whatever]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
I meant to add the Romans 3 point that Paul makes in my previous post "Do we then make void the Law of God by our faith! God forbid! In fact we ...."Rom 3:31.

Now what was that word he used next .... ?

Establish, or uphold. But I wasn't asking about Paul. Do you do the law?

 

[BobRyan]

By faith I "uphold" and "establish" the LAW as James says the saints are to be "effectual doers" and not judges of the Law.

But you say you do not want to focus on the words of Paul (scripture) with your statement
"I wasn't asking about Paul. Do you do the law? "

Does "my practice" change scripture?

Are you challenging the Romans 2 point about "hearers only not being justified?"

Are you challenging Christs statement about "Not everyone who SAYS Lord Lord but those who DO the will of My father"?? (Matt 7)

Are you challenging the pre-cross statement of Christ "IF you Love Me KEEP My Commandments"?

Are you challenging these texts is such a way that if anyone chooses obedience rather than rebellion - they are foolishly IN HARMONY with scripture??

What is your point in avoiding the text and asking about "my practice"?

In the mean time - God's Word says --

James 1
21 Therefore, putting aside all filthiness and all that remains of wickedness, in humility receive the word implanted, which is able to save your souls.
22 But prove yourselves doers of the word, and not merely hearers who delude themselves.
23 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks at his natural face in a mirror;
24 for once he has looked at himself and gone away, he has immediately forgotten what kind of person he was.
25 But one who looks intently at the perfect law, the law of liberty, and abides by it, not having become a forgetful hearer but an effectual doer, this man will be blessed in what he does.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Since we seem to be going through the NT teaching on HOW a born again Christian under the New Covenant "With the Law written on the tablets of the human heart" Heb 8 is to relate to the Law of God "and establish" it by faith (Rom 3:31) --

Might as well include this NT teaching on that point as well.

And here John shows us that the saints are still to keep the commandments of God AFTER the resurrection of Christ!

1 John 2
1 My little children, I am writing these things to you so that you may not sin. And if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous;
2 and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.
3 By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments.
4 The one who says, "" I have come to know Him,'' and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him;
5 but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him:
6 the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.


1 John 3
21 Beloved, if our heart does not condemn us, we have confidence before God;
22 and whatever we ask we receive from Him, because we keep His commandments and do the things that are pleasing in His sight.
23 This is His commandment, that we believe in the name of His Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, just as He commanded us.
24 The one who keeps His commandments abides in Him, and He in him. We know by this that He abides in us, by the Spirit whom He has given us.



1 John 5
Overcoming the World

2By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and observe His commandments.
3For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments; and His commandments are not burdensome.

Is it any surprise that Paul is in full agreement with John on this post-cross requirement to ”keep the commandments of God”?

1 Cor 7
19 Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing, but what matters is the keeping of the commandments of God.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

So getting back to Romans 2 -- and the IMPARTIAL God whose process of judging in the matter of salvation (and IN the context of the call to repentance (Rom 2:4)) "results" in some saved and some lost JUST as He describes IN Romans 2...

Rom 2
5 But because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,
6 who WILL RENDER TO EACH PERSON ACCORDING TO HIS DEEDS:

7 to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life;
8 but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.
9 There will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek,
10 but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.

11 For there is no partiality with God.
12 For all who have sinned without the Law will also perish without the Law, and all who have sinned under the Law will be judged by the Law;
13 for it is not the hearers of the Law who are just before God, but the doers of the Law will be justified.

Let "the text" speak.

They are all judged "According to deeds".
They are ALL judged and it is not the "HEARERS of the law but the DOERS that WILL be JUSTIFIED".

Why treat ALL in this way?
Because "God is not partial"??

How then does Calvinism accept this chapter?

It does not.

 

[whatever]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
But you say you do not want to focus on the words of Paul (scripture) with your statement
"I wasn't asking about Paul. Do you do the law? "

I did not say that. I simply wanted you to answer the question.

You have borne false witness against me (again). What does the law say about that?

 

[King James Bond]

whatever,

Ah, I think I see what you are getting at!

Regards, KJB

 

[BobRyan]

Please consider any one (or all) of those texts as "my answer".

If you need me to pick one for your answer - take James 1.

In the mean time - the "details" of Romans 2 "remain" and the point remains from Romans 2 about God being impartial when it comes to salvation.

Odd as that might seem.

In Christ,

Bob

 

[whatever]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
Please consider any one (or all) of those texts as "my answer".

If you need me to pick one for your answer - take James 1.

In the mean time - the "details" of Romans 2 "remain" and the point remains from Romans 2 about God being impartial when it comes to salvation.

Odd as that might seem.

In Christ,

Bob

I cannot see where James 1 says anything about what the law says about bearing false witness. However, other Scriptures make it clear that we are not to do so. Since you have done so, I suppose your answer must be "no".

Romans 2:11 is speaking of God not being partial to Jews over Gentiles. This would be clearer if you would post verses 8-10 too, instead of skipping from verse 7 to verse 11.

By your own definition, posted earlier, if those who keep the law are saved and if those who do not keep the law perish, then God is indeed partial toward those who keep the law. May I remind you?

Impartiality demands that God NOT "favor the FEW over the many" for ANY reason -- not even arbitrary reasons.

Not even for keeping the law.

 

[BobRyan]

Since you appear to want to flee the actual topic on the impartiality of God in salvation as described in Romans 2 (AND the BASIS for that partiality SHOWN to deal with the actions of the those saved and/or lost) -- I will remind you "again" of the consistency of that theme in the NT text. (since it is basic to the New Covenant promise of the Law of God written on the heart).

Originally posted by BobRyan:

What is your point in avoiding the text and asking about "my practice"?

In the mean time - God's Word says --

James 1
21 Therefore, putting aside all filthiness and all that remains of wickedness, in humility receive the word implanted, which is able to save your souls.
22 But prove yourselves doers of the word, and not merely hearers who delude themselves.
23 For if anyone is a hearer of the word and not a doer, he is like a man who looks at his natural face in a mirror;
24 for once he has looked at himself and gone away, he has immediately forgotten what kind of person he was.
25 But one who looks intently at the perfect law, the law of liberty, and abides by it, not having become a forgetful hearer but an effectual doer, this man will be blessed in what he does.

Whatever Said -

I cannot see where James 1 says anything about what the law says about bearing false witness. However, other Scriptures make it clear that we are not to do so. Since you have done so...

Your focus on ad hominem "tactic" is I suppose "to be expected" once your argument has run aground.

But if you choose to come back to the topic - the points raised in favor of the impartiality of God "remain".

In Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Whatever said -
Romans 2:11 is speaking of God not being partial to Jews over Gentiles. This would be clearer if you would post verses 8-10 too, instead of skipping from verse 7 to verse 11.

Many times Calvinists on this board get lost in details and complain that the scriptures posted are "too long" to read. They gloss over the details in their responses and are loathe to focus on those "inconvenient specifics" so devastating to Calvinism. Your recent posts being no exception.

In an effort to sharpen the focus between vs 4-13 I tried to JUST LEAVE IN those specifics you were trying to dodge and gloss over. (Which even so - you have done "once again" )

But on the off chance that your feigned interest in more of the text "is real" here it is "Again".

Romans 2
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />
4 or do you think lightly of the riches of his kindness and tolerance and patience, not knowing that the kindness of God leads you to repentance?[/b

(Note: This kindness, tolerance and patience of God is seen as "long suffering" and patience in Romans 9)

Vs 4 shows us that the mercy - kindness - grace leads us to repent. This chapter starts with the Gospel basics of God's offer to grant repentance and that all need to repent.

The Context for Romans 2 is STARTING with judgment, AND of the mercy of God that leads to repentance.

Let's continue letting the scripture speak for itself;

Rom2:
5 but because of your stubbornness and unrepentant heart you are storing up wrath for yourself in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God,
6 who will render to each person according to his deeds:

Paul is adamant that there is a future judgment “according to deeds”. Paul here identifies the “impartial” basis of God’s judgment. Instead of His simply “arbitrarily selecting” some to favor and others to ignore – ALL are judged according to deeds IN the context of the “call to repentance” of vs 4.

He speaks of this again in 2Cor 5 talking about future judgment and judged based on deeds “whether they be good or evil”.

Notice that in these first 6 verses we have an Arminian-style motivation - not to engage in man's faulty judgment of others. And there is no sense or expectation that this sin is not to stop or just to continue because we are totally depraved. Rather the argument is to stop.

Further - if this chapter is only about the failing case, only about the wrath of God - then we will not find success, mercy, reward but only condemnation, wrath, punishment. Let's now let the text reveal which way it will go.

Rom 2:
7 to those who by perseverance in doing good seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life;

Here is the “succeeding case” explicitly listed by Paul. And it is in the context of God - leading to repentance. We also have the people of God - persevering, doing good and seeking glory and honor. What is the result? The text says immortality and eternal life.

Some have supposed that a “judgment” that is impartial as Paul points to in vs 6 and 11 must “only have failing cases”. But Paul shows in vs 7 that such is not the case. The “Good News” does not require God to arbitrarily be “partial to the FEW of Matt 7” as some have supposed. Rather it allows for God to be “impartial” and to SAVE mankind on that basis!

Rom2:
8 but to those who are selfishly ambitious and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, wrath and indignation.

The “Failing case”: Clearly a contrast is being introduced "but to those who are selfish" - contrasted with what? Those who repent, seek eternal glory and honor and persevere. Persevere in what?

You must be on the right path to be approved in perseveringly staying on the right path. It is obvious I know, but worth noting.

So God has now contrasted the good and the wicked, those who persevere on the right path and those who are not even on it.

We already know that in the judgment there are two classes - those that receive immortality and those that do not. If it is not clear to us by now that this chapter is dealing with both classes - we need to engage in some remedial reading comprehension.

Rom2:
9 there will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek,
10 but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
11 for there is no partiality with God.

At this point Paul seems to ask that we "be not deceived" into thinking that some can do evil but find "preferred treatment" because God will “favor the few over the many”. He does not let us suppose that others are lost for doing evil while the “favored” ones do evil and go to heaven. Rather Paul argues that God has called all to repentance and all must comply - there will be no preferred treatment based on status (or magic phrase) allowing some of the rebels in.

But basic to Paul’s solution is the affirmation that God is NOT partial when it comes to the Gospel – when it comes to Salvation. That means that He is NOT favoring the “few” of Matt 7 over the “many” so that He can save the “Few”. Rather – impartiality demands that ALL be given the same salvation-sequence. ALL have the Holy Spirit convicting of sin and righteousness and judgment (John 16:8) and ALL have the Drawing of God (John 12:32) and ALL have the Lord Jesus Christ standing at the door and knocking – and ALL have the SAME promise of the New Covenant that “changes the TREE itself” Matt 7 and writes the Law of God on the heart (Heb 8).

Rather than simply “favoring some over others” the system defined above is “impartial” as God HIMSELF is “Impartial”. This Gospel truth was a huge problem for the Jews and is a big problem for Calvinism.

</font>[/QUOTE]

 

[Jarthur001]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Whatever said -
Romans 2:11 is speaking of God not being partial to Jews over Gentiles. This would be clearer if you would post verses 8-10 too, instead of skipping from verse 7 to verse 11.

Many times Calvinists on this board get lost in details and complain that the scriptures posted are "too long" to read. They gloss over the details in their responses and are loathe to focus on those "inconvenient specifics" so devastating to Calvinism. Your recent posts being no exception.


</font>[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
hummm

well, i see it this way. many PASSOVER verses and somehow call this looking at the details.

When Calvinist read...well..let me say this...when most Calvinist read the text, they uphold the WHOLE text. Each verse is taken into account.

*******************************
Calvinist look at...

The verses on God is holy and to be feared and the verses on man sin nature and mans need.

They look at verses that says God will is non-partial and verse that say God shows partiality.

They look at Gods love of the world and also see verses that God can hate.

They see verse that tell of Christ coming into the world as the light...and also man that stays in the his darkness.

They look at the Gods call to all man to be saved...and also that man does not seek God.


*********************************

Arminianism looks at..Gods love and says...

Forget God can hate...
Forget man has a sin nature..
Forget NO man does not seek God...
Forget God has showen partiality when choosing/electing a nation, groups and people.
Forget man it is NOT by the will of man salvation comes


One must deal with the whole Bible and not run from it.

Do not pick and choose your verse..take on the whole bible as truth....the whole truth...nothing but.


In Christ...James

 

[Andre]

Greetings all:

I would like to point something out - not so much about the point under discussion, but rather about how the issue is argued. Consider the following statements made several days ago:

Originally posted by Scott J:
If it was my faith that caused God to accept me then He didn't pick me out... I picked Him out.

Elect directly implies a choice. Your proposition comes very close to non-sensical since it denies that God had a choice. He could only select us after we decided to have faith... and ostensibly could not reject us if we had faith. You have made a statement that is self-contradictory.

and

Originally posted by 4His_glory:
If we are elect before the foundation of the world, as the Bible says believers are, then how on earth can election be based upon faith? Did we produce faith before the world began?

These snippets of arguments make very clear appeals to what I will call the "legitimate tools of rational argument". Scott_J objects based on inconsistency whereas 4His_Glory objects based on the nonsensical idea that we can violate causality and produce faith before we even existed.

Fine. I am completely OK with deploying such "rational" arguments. I like to think I am committed to a rational style of argumentation.

However, I have used the same general principles of argumentation to make a case that the very idea of truly unconditional election (election which is not based on our characteristics) cannot work logically. I will repeat a tiny part of my argument as follows:

Originally posted by Andrew:
The point is that it is in the very foundational nature of "selection" or "choice" that such choice must be based on criteria that discriminate among the available options - and these discriminating properties must inhere in the objects being arbitrated among, not in the agent who is doing the arbitrating (selection). If there really is nothing inherent to A and B that distinguishes A from B then, in a very real sense, they cannot be claimed to be individuals.

To the best of my recollection, the response to my arguments were mostly of the form "you are over-thinking" or "you are using human reasoning that cannot be trusted" (I acknowledge that Pastor Larry attempted to explain how revelation through scripture can be integrated with rational thinking).

I suspect that you know where I am going: How do we determine when logical and rational argumentation is "OK" and when it is "deceitful human thinking"? Now I am not saying there is not an answer here. I am just saying that a lot more work needs to be done to "justify" the deployment of a rational argument. In the secular world, no one requires such justification since logical, rational argument generally carries the day.

To be fair to Scott_J: He has adopted a consistent position (to my mind): he has openly declared that, yes, God is partial as per the Scriptures.

To be fair to 4His_Glory: I have quoted you as a representative example of the use of "rational argument" on the part of someone who believes that God is,in fact, not partial. Other people could have been quoted just as easily.

 

[Scott J]

Originally posted by BobRyan:
The "Rules"

Rom 2:11 "God is NOT partial"

Concerning who is made guilty by the law...

The "Context".