Elected to be lost

There is an underlying presumption or perhaps assumption in this thread that God "wills" or "predetermines" the preterition of the non-elect. The Bible doctrine of election focuses on the salvation of the saints, never the preterition of the non-elect.

It should go without saying that God’s sovereign will shall prevail in that nothing shall finally happen that He does not allow. However, it is a mistake to say that people will burn in hell because God has so predestined them. The ones who are lost for eternity will be in that condition on the basis of the fact that they have rejected, at a minimum, the general revelation that God has given concerning Himself through creation. No one will be lost who has not consciously rejected the knowledge of His eternal power and Godhead; they will have no excuse (Rom 1:18-20).

They are lost because they refused to come to Him that they might have life! Does their inherent depravity figure into that equation? Of course, but it is their rejection of light that leaves them in darkness. To argue that they could not have come to the light almost serves to remove from the lost any personal responsibility for their lostness. Scripture presents both sides as true – men are indeed dead in their trespasses and sin, but they are also fully aware, at some point, of a conscious rejection of what light they have received.

IT IS A SERIOUS MISTAKE TO BLAME THE PRETERITION OF THE LOST ON THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD! Yes, admittedly, God chooses not to intervene to the degree that they get saved, but their lost condition is a result of their determined rebellion against what light they have received, not His intervention to keep them lost.

Revelation makes it clear that even when men are clearly aware of the judgement of God, they will continue in their sin and refuse to repent, ultimately even blaspheming His holy name (Rev 9:20; 16:9,11,21).

To argue that the lost are aware of their "election" to preterition is argue on the basis of a flawed presumption. Biblically, they are not "elected" to preterition. Could a lost person believe that he was elected to preterition? Of course, but that does not make it so. Could they believe that and still continue in their lost condition, I believe that a lost person can be very aware of their eternal destiny and not only continue in that condition, but "have pleasure" in that continuance (Rom 1:32).

One final note, personal stories, examples, and illustrations are nice, but divine truth must be determined and evaluated on the basis of the Word of God ALONE – NOT stories, examples, illustrations, tradition, or church history, no matter how interesting or apropos they may seem!

 

This sounds like you are just trying to let God off the hook. If He is the only one who decides our eternal destiny, then He, and He alone is responsible. If He truly makes us unable to resist sinning, and makes us unable to respond in faith and be saved from those sins, then we have no responsibility for our eternal destination.

Les

 

Is God responsible for the death of Job's wife and children?

 

God does not DETERMINE the eternal destiny of the lost in the sense of MAKING them unable to respond. God allowed the fall. He could have prevented the fall. He chose to allow Adam to sin. Why? I do not know, but God did not MAKE Adam sin nor does he make anyone reject Him. Follow the logical progression of "we have no responsibility" – this makes God the author and finisher of our sin not the "author and finisher of our faith".
Show me ONE passage that states that men are lost because God determines it to be so.

NO!

and

Of course!

No! in that God did not take Job’s property, animals, or children! Of course, in that God did allow Satan to do it.

All teachers are always responsible whenever a student fails a test! Any teacher should reasonably be able to understand that some students may fail the test. Therefore, by giving the test anyway, it is the teachers FAULT that the student fails. If the teacher had not given the test, the student would not have failed.

Does this relieve the student of his responsibility to pass the test? NO.

Does the fact that God allowed the fall, that He allows men to continue in their sins (according to their nature), that He saves some and not others make Him responsible for the preterition of the non-elect? Not to a degree that relieves men of their responsibility to come to the Light; nor to a degree that makes God responsible for their damnation. The lost will be condemned on the basis of their rejection of Christ and their works. Works can never save, but they can and will condemn!

 

Who predestined the "elect" and who predestined hell to hold all of the "non-elect", if your theology is true.

The end result being according to Calvinism, God chose the "elect" and turned his back to the "non-elect" and let them fall as you say right into hell.

You can't have it both ways and if Calvinism is true, I doubt if God would deny He prepared hell for all the non-elect.

 

This doesn't make sense. If God makes us in such a way that we are unable to respond without His electing us, and then He refuses to elect some folks, how can they then be held responsible for not doing something it is impossible for them to do?

Les

 

This stuff gets very old. Free-willers have their own conundrum. If God is not willing that any (person, ever) perish, yet some perish, then God is either unwilling or unable to save some. If it is the former, it contradicts the Bible. If it is the latter, it is blasphemy.

The problem really stems from the fact that we people don't like the idea that some are lost and spend eternity in hell. We make up excuses for God one way or another to clear Him of responsibility, but He is ultimately responsible whether we like it or not. And it doesn't matter if you are calvinist, arminian, free-willer, pelagian, or anything else. The problem is the same.

It's all HIS creation. Why do people find it so difficult to "allow" God to do whatever He pleases with it?

 

Paul answered this question in Romans 9:19. You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?''
20. But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, "Why have you made me like this?''
21. Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?
22. What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction,
23. and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory,
24. even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

 

Are you agreeing that God is responsible and those unable to respond are not?

Les

 

No. God can dispose of His creation as He sees fit. He is the potter, we are the clay. Men are responsible for their own actions/choices.

 

So you are admitting that God gave man a free will. That even in his sinful state he can choose to reject the call of God to repent and be saved? or that he can choose to trust Christ and receive eternal life?

 

Sorry, I missed your Bible reference on that...

Don't argue the label, argue the statement... with Scripture, please.

 

I'll admit that we are free moral agents. I deny we have free will. Our wills are slaves to our nature. God does not have free will to deny His nature.... why should we?

 

GOD DID NOT MAKE US IN SUCH A WAY THAT WE ARE UNABLE TO RESPOND!!! ADAM DID. Is the fault of the children who suffer abuse from an alcoholic parent? Is it God's fault? Or is the consequence of sins of the fathers? I contend the latter. Am I nit picking? I do not think so!

It is not true that God made unable to respond to His grace apart from His special grace. IT IS TRUE THAT WAS ARE DEAD IN OUR SINS BECAUSE OF ADAM.

 

I, on the other hand would agree that we have a free will, but that it is only free to act within the bounds of our nature.

A buzzard in the middle of a grain field is free to eat all he wants. But because of his nature, he will starve to death.

My understanding of His Grace is that God acts upon us in such a way as to draw us to Himself, vile and undeserving sinners that we are.

 

NOPE. This is not correct, IMO. God is willing in the sense that He desires their salvation. He is not willing in the sense that He does not sovereignly determine the salvation of all. The distinction is one of "desire" vss "sovereign will". The term is used both ways in Scripture and must be determined from the context and by comparing Scripture w/ Scripture.

This understanding prevents both the alleged blasphemy and the contradiction. That does not mean it is easy...

 

Here is my take on this:

God is responsible whenever anyone comes to Him for salvation, that no flesh should glory in His presence.

Unsaved man is responsible for knowingly rejecting the light that he has been given.

Those in heaven will have no one to praise but God and those in hell will have no one to blame but themselves!

 

I was speaking from the perspective of a free-willer. Regardless, if God desires all men to be saved, yet some perish, then God did not achieve what He desired. Either He was unwilling to make it happen, or He was unable to make it happen.

I suppose one can wiggle out of this by saying that God has a greater, overriding desire that men will be sovereign over their own eternal destinies, but where is the scripture to support that this is His will, and that this particular will overrides His desire that all be saved?

 

pardon my butting in here, but I have to leave for a meeting in 5 minutes to I am typing as fast as I can... hopefully not faster than I can think...

In his sinful state, man will choose to reject Christ; in his sinful state, man will not choose to trust Christ and be saved. The only time the outcome is different, it must attributed to grace of God, not the free will of man.

Are we dead in sins, or just a little sick?

 

I believe free-willers would argue that we're just sick. That's why they're actually semi-pelagians.