Election Keeps No One Out Of Heaven

[Don]

you should add..."And Blessed to be"....without that, your in hell.

Oooookay...I think I missed something somewhere....

 

[quantumfaith]

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and has the DNA of a duck, then it's a duck, no matter how much you want to call it a fish.

The reformed confessions are illogical and unbiblical on this point. They rightly recognize the inability to reconcile a belief that God is the author of sin with Scripture, so they simply proclaim by fiat that God isn't, even as the rest of the theological framework points to it.

One example of a Calvinist basically making this point is R. C. Sproul, Jr., who said that "God created sin" in Almighty Over All. Of course he would probably deny that God is the "author" of sin, despite this logic.

Stefan,

You have demonstrated a very salient point. Sproul senior held the more traditional calvinist view, that being consistent with the confessions, Sprould Jr. for whatever reason felt the need to continue down that path of "logic".

 

[webdog]

:laugh::laugh::laugh: you dont listen to writing....you read it! Perhaps you need to start there! Anyway, I could care less what you think. We are done here Robert. Your just a rude individual.

if you don't listen to writing, why did you start it by stating you were done "talking" to him? Also, its couldn't care less. People who live in glass houses...

 

[Skandelon]

In the "2 Opposing Questions" thread, I referenced this article by Mark Altrogge.

Here is a link to the article at the blog "The Blazing Center"

http://www.theblazingcenter.com/2011/09/election-keeps-no-one-out-of-heaven.html

“After giving a brief survey of these doctrines of sovereign grace, I asked for questions from the class. One lady, in particular, was quite troubled. She said, ‘This is the most awful thing I ever heard! You make it sound as if God is intentionally turning away men and women who would be saved, receiving only the elect’ I answered her in this vein: ‘You misunderstand the situation. You’re visualizing that God is standing at the door of heaven, and men are thronging to get in the door, and God is saying to various ones, ‘Yes, you may come, but not you, and you, but you, etc.’ The situation is hardly this. Rather, God stands at the door of heaven with His arms outstretched, inviting all to come. Yet all men without exception are running in the opposite direction toward hell as hard as they can go. So God, in election, graciously reaches out and stops this one, and that one, and this one over here, and that one over there, and effectually draws them to Himself by changing their hearts, making them willing to come. Election keeps no one out of heaven who would otherwise have been there, but it keeps a whole multitude of sinners out of hell who otherwise would have been there. Were it not for election, heaven would be an empty place, and hell would be bursting at the seams. That kind of response, grounded as I believe that it is in Scriptural truth, does put a different complexion on things, doesn’t it? If you perish in hell, blame yourself, as it is entirely your fault. But if you should make it to heaven, credit God, for that is entirely His work! To Him alone belong all praise and glory, for salvation is all of grace, from start to finish.” –Mark Webb

The objection is not against "election" per se, the objection is toward the concept of natural "total inability" to do otherwise. If indeed the sinners rejection was "HIS OWN," and not according to the nature/desire decreed to Him by God from eternity past then their wouldn't be the objection.

The article above presents God as, "[standing] at the door of heaven with His arms outstretched, inviting all to come. Yet all men without exception are running in the opposite direction..." But it fails to acknowledge why all men without exception are running in the opposite direction and unable to turn even when God appeals for reconciliation. The answer for those who believe in the Calvinistic dogma is ultimately, "Because God so ordained it to be," thus not leaving any room for real human responsibility. In this system, men have the perfect excuse for their unbelief.

 

[Skandelon]

Plus, I'd like to address the final quote of your article:

If you know Jesus, praise him for rescuing you from your headlong rush toward hell. If you don’t know him, turn to him today. He awaits you with open arms.

Can a Calvinist really say this honestly to everyone? Is he really awaiting the non-elect with open arms?

 

[Iconoclast]

My apologies; almost forgot I posted in this thread.

You are comforted that you were elected to be saved; you do see the elitism in that statement, don't you?

Don,

You are comforted that you were elected to be saved; you do see the elitism in that statement, don't you?

No...it is not eliteism, arrogance, pride , or anything else other than God saving a depraved sinner by His grace. When someone is a christian and learns that God has elected all or everyone who believes,every sinner that savingly comes to Christ by the work of the Spirit drawing and quickening them...it is great comfort and joy...knowing in the words of the gospel of John .....we shall never perish, but have passed from death unto life.

The fact that salvation is the result of God's decree to elect multitudes of unwilling rebels and work in them to be made willing is something to rejoice in. it happened in eternity past....the cross happened 2000 yrs ago.
The sins of the elect were paid at that time.Spirit baptism happened at pentecost and when we are quickened at regeneration it is all given or graced to us....

I am glad you rejoice to be saved...that is great...but without God having elected you ...[even if you do not understand it} you would yet be in your sins.

Your statements about trying to make calvinism say God has to be responsible for sin ...are your own flawed thinking in that we all have to understand that if sin exists and it does.......nothing can exist or happen outside of God's direct control......a biblical example is Job and the testing and attack by Satan......God knew of it and allowed it, and yet Job never ascribed sin unto a Holy God.
This obsession to try and defeat calvinism with this wicked idea is a falsehood and confused thinking at best...I would suggest you remove that kind of flawed idea from your mind.
The puritans never even got anywhere close to this idea. No one in their right mind goes there. It is not any doubleminded statement either.
You are missing something.I will help you if I can. Nothing exists outside of God ...or God is not God...not one random molecule. Yet God is not the author of sin.

http://www.sgbcsv.org/literature/ProblemOfEvil.pdf

 

[Don]

Don,
No...it is not eliteism, arrogance, pride , or anything else other than God saving a depraved sinner by His grace. When someone is a christian and learns that God has elected all or everyone who believes,every sinner that savingly comes to Christ by the work of the Spirit drawing and quickening them...it is great comfort and joy...knowing in the words of the gospel of John .....we shall never perish, but have passed from death unto life.

The fact that salvation is the result of God's decree to elect multitudes of unwilling rebels and work in them to be made willing is something to rejoice in. it happened in eternity past....the cross happened 2000 yrs ago.
The sins of the elect were paid at that time.Spirit baptism happened at pentecost and when we are quickened at regeneration it is all given or graced to us....

I am glad you rejoice to be saved...that is great...but without God having elected you ...[even if you do not understand it} you would yet be in your sins.

The semantics of this is: I state that I rejoice that God saved me. You endeavor to convince me that I should rejoice that I was elected, as if somehow it is not enough to rejoice that He saved me; I must, for some reason, be further comforted by and rejoice in the fact that He chose me from the beginning to be saved.

The elitism that I mentioned is because: Do you mourn for the un-elected? Or do you rejoice that you're not one of the un-elected?

Those that revel in their being chosen must be cautious that this does not result in a different, lesser viewpoint of those God has not chosen. Therein lies the path of the Pharisees. I am not accusing you of having this viewpoint; merely expressing that the result of your language leads to the question of what you mean by emphasizing your election as opposed to those that are not.

It is plain to me that we both are saying the same thing, but from a differing point of view from a similar, but somewhat differing view of scripture. I would remind you that the main difference between calvinists and arminians is not about grace being sufficient, or that God is the savior; but really only about the doctrine of predestination.

Your statements about trying to make calvinism say God has to be responsible for sin ...are your own flawed thinking in that we all have to understand that if sin exists and it does.......nothing can exist or happen outside of God's direct control......a biblical example is Job and the testing and attack by Satan......God knew of it and allowed it, and yet Job never ascribed sin unto a Holy God.
This obsession to try and defeat calvinism with this wicked idea is a falsehood and confused thinking at best...I would suggest you remove that kind of flawed idea from your mind.
The puritans never even got anywhere close to this idea. No one in their right mind goes there. It is not any doubleminded statement either.
You are missing something.I will help you if I can. Nothing exists outside of God ...or God is not God...not one random molecule. Yet God is not the author of sin.

Not sure who you were actually addressing this to. I don't believe I've made such statements in this thread.

 

[preacher4truth]

There is no "elitism" in acknowledgement of being "elect" anymore than there is in any NT Epistle acknowledging such towards those saints, ourselves included to which they are addressed and to which they do apply.

The apostles plainly called those saints, and we ourselves "elect." Were they, and the recipients thereof, also embracing elitism by doing so? No. They were embracing truth.

To continue on the contrary path is to show fear towards and of the doctrine of election.

 

[Don]

There is no "elitism" in acknowledgement of being "elect" anymore than there is in any NT Epistle acknowledging such towards those saints, ourselves included to which they are addressed and to which they do apply.

The apostles plainly called those saints, and we ourselves "elect." Were they, and the recipients thereof, also embracing elitism by doing so? No. They were embracing truth.

To continue on the contrary path is to show fear towards and of the doctrine of election.

Funny. Amusing. They use the same argument about homosexuality. "If you're opposed to it, you must be afraid of it." Suffice to say, I'm not election-phobic. Why should I fear it? My comfort is in the fact that Jesus died for my sins, and that I am His. Whether I believe in election or not has no impact on my salvation.

Here's the problem with what you've written: The apostles didn't emphasize election. You are.

What's the opposite of election? Especially in light of the illustrations used here? Rejection. Following the illustration of God standing in a door, arms outstretched, offering His salvation; yet the masses stumble blindly by, so He starts choosing one here, one there ... necessarily leads to the conclusion that all others are rejected by Him.

How do you explain that rejection, using scripture?

The case has been made in another thread that those who are elected, become believers; the yin of that yang is: Those that believe, become elected. The argument you put forth is that election precedes belief; while some non-cals put forth that belief precedes election.

As I stated here, whether you believe in election is not a determination of your salvation. And as I stated in that other thread, we'll know for certain when we sit at the throne, and get the explanation from the author Himself.

 

[quantumfaith]

Funny. Amusing. They use the same argument about homosexuality. "If you're opposed to it, you must be afraid of it." Suffice to say, I'm not election-phobic. Why should I fear it? My comfort is in the fact that Jesus died for my sins, and that I am His. Whether I believe in election or not has no impact on my salvation.

Here's the problem with what you've written: The apostles didn't emphasize election. You are.

What's the opposite of election? Especially in light of the illustrations used here? Rejection. Following the illustration of God standing in a door, arms outstretched, offering His salvation; yet the masses stumble blindly by, so He starts choosing one here, one there ... necessarily leads to the conclusion that all others are rejected by Him.

How do you explain that rejection, using scripture?

The case has been made in another thread that those who are elected, become believers; the yin of that yang is: Those that believe, become elected. The argument you put forth is that election precedes belief; while some non-cals put forth that belief precedes election.

As I stated here, whether you believe in election is not a determination of your salvation. And as I stated in that other thread, we'll know for certain when we sit at the throne, and get the explanation from the author Himself.

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[preacher4truth]

Funny. Amusing. They use the same argument about homosexuality. "If you're opposed to it, you must be afraid of it." Suffice to say, I'm not election-phobic. Why should I fear it? My comfort is in the fact that Jesus died for my sins, and that I am His. Whether I believe in election or not has no impact on my salvation.

Here's the problem with what you've written: The apostles didn't emphasize election. You are.

What's the opposite of election? Especially in light of the illustrations used here? Rejection. Following the illustration of God standing in a door, arms outstretched, offering His salvation; yet the masses stumble blindly by, so He starts choosing one here, one there ... necessarily leads to the conclusion that all others are rejected by Him.

How do you explain that rejection, using scripture?

The case has been made in another thread that those who are elected, become believers; the yin of that yang is: Those that believe, become elected. The argument you put forth is that election precedes belief; while some non-cals put forth that belief precedes election.

As I stated here, whether you believe in election is not a determination of your salvation. And as I stated in that other thread, we'll know for certain when we sit at the throne, and get the explanation from the author Himself.

You've completely dismissed the testimony of Scripture and have instead ran to the secular political correctivism of our world as a defense, and on a completely different subject.

Your cheerleaders will now blindly carry you on their shoulders to your fallacious, unthought victory.

Congrats.

Carry on.

 

[Van]

Reply to 12Strings,

-Once more, so I understand you, Are you saying that people ARE able in their fallen state to seek and believe in God, but only because he draws them?

Close but not close enough.

People are able in their fallen state to seek and believe in God. This is supported by 1 Corinthians 2:14-3:3. Men of flesh, i.e. fallen people, are able to understand the milk of the gospel.

But unless they hear the gospel with understanding, they will not believe in Him.

The OT tells us how God draws people, by lovingkindness. So when we hear with understanding the gospel - which includes God sending His one of a kind Son to save us, we are drawn to God by His lovingkindness. No one comes to God unless drawn by understanding the gospel.

So "drawing" is not code for "irresistible grace." It is the attraction God provides through our awareness of His lovingkindness. Everyone "drawn" is not saved, see Matthew 13.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Stefan,

You have demonstrated a very salient point. Sproul senior held the more traditional calvinist view, that being consistent with the confessions, Sprould Jr. for whatever reason felt the need to continue down that path of "logic".

Oh you mean the drunk! the one kicked out of a Presbyterian Church.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

if you don't listen to writing, why did you start it by stating you were done "talking" to him? Also, its couldn't care less. People who live in glass houses...

Ha Ha.....wood shingle:tongue3:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Is election in the bible....just turn to Romans 8:33, 1st Peter 1:2, Ephesians 1:3-4 & you will find it's taught in the Scriptures...that ought to be enough for anyone.
So Im totally with Archangel on his election belief that is it wasnt there then heaven wouldnt have saved people....I get that!

But this "Free Will"—where you choose God, that I dont understand. What if I choose God but he doesn’t want me? Doesn’t God have free will too? Can he not reject also?

 

[Iconoclast]

The semantics of this is: I state that I rejoice that God saved me. You endeavor to convince me that I should rejoice that I was elected, as if somehow it is not enough to rejoice that He saved me; I must, for some reason, be further comforted by and rejoice in the fact that He chose me from the beginning to be saved.

The elitism that I mentioned is because: Do you mourn for the un-elected? Or do you rejoice that you're not one of the un-elected?

Don,
No believer is happy about people who resist the gospel. No believer rejoices when people turn away from truth. God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked.

Those that revel in their being chosen must be cautious that this does not result in a different, lesser viewpoint of those God has not chosen. Therein lies the path of the Pharisees. I am not accusing you of having this viewpoint; merely expressing that the result of your language leads to the question of what you mean by emphasizing your election as opposed to those that are not.

This is a valid and good caution. believers rejoice in election in a positive way not an elite ,condescending way;

7For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?

It is plain to me that we both are saying the same thing, but from a differing point of view from a similar, but somewhat differing view of scripture. I would remind you that the main difference between calvinists and arminians is not about grace being sufficient, or that God is the savior; but really only about the doctrine of predestination.

Well Don...as believers we should be able to agree on alot:thumbs:


Not sure who you were actually addressing this to. I don't believe I've made such statements in this thread.

What's the opposite of election? Especially in light of the illustrations used here? Rejection.

Election in scripture is spoken of in a positive way

Following the illustration of God standing in a door, arms outstretched, offering His salvation; yet the masses stumble blindly by, so He starts choosing one here, one there ...

Don...this illustration does not fit the biblical truth at all
God does not "stand in a door" and offer His salvation. He came to earth to accomplish redemption that the Spirit applies in time. the death was a covenant death, and everyone who it was intended for will be saved...that is the whole point!


necessarily leads to the conclusion that all others are rejected by Him.

How do you explain that rejection, using scripture?

All men were considered as dead and fallen in Adam. The world is condemned already. if God does not intervene all perish.
God was not caught by surprise at mans fall into the realm of sin and death.
God's covenant is His provision for all believers throughout time. it is certain because God has elected out from all fallen mankind those He Has designed to save. He did not have to save anyone. He saved all He could wisely save according to His eternal purpose.
he does not try and save.....he saves all he plans to....not one is lost.
If God passes over others...he has a Holy and just reason to do so.
the fact that we see in scripture that multitudes perish ...as well as multitudes being saved...is God's revelation to us and we are to understand why it is Just and righteous .

21Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

22Many[multitudes] will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

 

[psalms109:31]

I am glad God will in no wise cast us out those who put their trust in His Son to know Jesus will not lose one that He has been given . That they are the elect because God said that those who trust in His Son, will be saved not maybe but will be saved. To say God might not save us do you think you are the elect of God because you don't trust in His Son to finish what He started. Do not doubt but believe.

 

[quantumfaith]

Give me a "D"
Give me an "O"
Give me an "N"


Yay team. I must live up to the drivel.

Just in case you miss it, there is sarcasm in spades here.

 

[Winman]

Election is by grace.

Rom 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

Verse 6 explains verse 5. We are elect, not according to any works we have done but by grace. However, grace is accessed by faith. Calvinism teaches the exact opposite, Calvinism teaches that faith is accessed by grace. This is error.

Rom 5:2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

The elect are chosen "in him" or "in Christ".

Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

No one is "in Christ" until they believe. Paul said Andronicus and Junia were "in Christ" before him.

Rom 16:7 Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

Clearly, Paul was not "in Christ" until his lifetime. So how could he be chosen "in him" before the foundation of the world? Just as the scriptures show, according to God's foreknowledge.

1 Pet 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

It cannot be denied that we are elect according to foreknowledge. Election is based on something God knows in advance. We also know we are chosen "in him" or "in Christ". We see from Romans 16:7 that a person is not "in Christ" until they believe in their lifetime. So, obviously this foreknowledge is of those who will believe in their lifetime. When a person believes on Christ, they are known of him.

Gal 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

A person is not known of God in a personal, intimate relationship until they believe. Gal 4:9 says that NOW ye are known of God. So, if foreknowledge means a personal intimate knowledge of a person, this is also shown not to occur until a person believes in their lifetime. Thus foreknowledge is God simply knowing this intimate relationship before it actually occurs.


There is nothing wrong with the doctrine of election, it is scriptural. But Calvinism does not accurately represent election as shown in scriptures.

 

[Iconoclast]

Election is by grace.

Rom 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.
6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

Verse 6 explains verse 5. We are elect, not according to any works we have done but by grace. However, grace is accessed by faith. Calvinism teaches the exact opposite, Calvinism teaches that faith is accessed by grace. This is error.

Rom 5:2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

The elect are chosen "in him" or "in Christ".

Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

No one is "in Christ" until they believe. Paul said Andronicus and Junia were "in Christ" before him.

Rom 16:7 Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellowprisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.

Clearly, Paul was not "in Christ" until his lifetime. So how could he be chosen "in him" before the foundation of the world?


The same way as Paul teaches this:
2tim1

9Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

10But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel:

God elected us, gave us grace,in the exact same way as eph1 states.


Just as the scriptures show, according to God's foreknowledge.

You are mis-using the word foreknowledge once again


1 Pet 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

It cannot be denied that we are elect according to foreknowledge.

If you use foreknowledge like the bible uses it ...you would then also be a calvinist!

Election is based on something God knows in advance.

Election is based on God's eternal decree. If that is what you mean...yes
If you mean God looks forward and takes a look to see who may or may not choose him and then picks them...no....this would mean God is not God at all as he would have to learn something.

We also know we are chosen "in him" or "in Christ". We see from Romans 16:7 that a person is not "in Christ" until they believe in their lifetime.

No...they are chosen in Christ before creation...at regeneration they pass from death to life.
So, obviously this foreknowledge is of those who will believe in their lifetime. When a person believes on Christ, they are known of him.

Gal 4:9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

A person is not known of God in a personal, intimate relationship until they believe.

wrong again....

3The LORD hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee.

Gal 4:9 says that NOW ye are known of God. So, if foreknowledge means a personal intimate knowledge of a person, this is also shown not to occur until a person believes in their lifetime. Thus foreknowledge is God simply knowing this intimate relationship before it actually occurs.

Wrong.....once you go wrong...all your thoughts are going to follow down the wrong path. romans 8:29-30


There is nothing wrong with the doctrine of election, it is scriptural. But Calvinism does not accurately represent election as shown in scriptures.

Winman,
Thank you for changing your avatar:thumbs::thumbs:
Thank you for offering scriptures with your reply.
Thank you for acknowledging that election is scriptural

I do not think the scriptures you offered are being used correctly and as a matter of fact.....I think they show clearly that calvinism has it quite correctly.