I'm starting to understand!

Thank you for posting that. It was very encouraging. Perhaps this section of the forum serves a good purpose on occasion.

 

i'm not a calvinist but i am encouraged by that post! i am getting closer to being one, as far as being as objective as i can be.

regarding election, non-calvinists in general treat it practically with less enthusiasm and attention as compared to how the new testament writers emphasize the big deal and joy in it. and no, it is not in scriptures that God saw the believers faith that is why God elected them. it simply said based on God's foreknowledge, nothing more.

having said that, i still cannot get the same joy, for, as i may have said a bit too many times here, the non-elects' condemnation are of the same cause as those of the elects' salvation. that is, by God's sovereignty. i simply cannot look on how great election is and then be narrow minded enough to be happy with it, knowing that it was the same God who chose to make the first move to get the non-elects condemned.

i heard of a calvinist who said that he would rather not think of how the non-elects got their condemnation but would simply look on how God elected and saved His elects, which comes with everything that are more than wonderful. imagine yourself shaking hands with your president in front of the media. wouldn't it be so great? but that is nothing compared on how God treats his elects. first he elected, predestinated, called, saved, justified, etc, and not simply that. those were all planned before the foundation of the world! and guess what, not one of the elects deserve any of that. i guess it would be near impossibility to realize the full greatness of God with what He has done for His elects in one's lifetime.

however with all these it remains that God made the first move for the elects' condemnationx and that would require a negative conclusion about God with the same extent of the positive conclusion about God regarding His election. to avoid that, one must either: convince himself that it not God who caused the non-elects' condemnation, but the non-elects themselves; or one might simply ignore the fact...

 

Dear Aki

It is nice to see you here again. Whether you believe it or not, what you wrote here is something that I went through years back when I first heard about 'calvinism' and its doctrines. At first I hushed it away as something unbiblical but later as I studied it more, gradually I could not see how this whole election issue can work otherwise. And as a sidenote, I learned it the hard way, it took me literally years to become fully convinced and rooted in it in such a degree that would give me unspeakable joy. Again, thank you for writing this, I read it like one of my heart's outcries long ago.

Think of it this way; at least this is what helped me a lot. God would be perfectly just and right in His absolute holiness to condemn every one of us and not just those who will ultimately be damned. It is He who rules and does everything according to His own pleasure. But (and this 'but' is a great, awesome and blessed little word in Scripture)Christ, while we were yet sinners, died for the ungodly. That some will be damned should not be a surprise to us. We should stand and bow in awe much due to the fact that some will be saved at all!!!

Thank you
P.S. I honestly and joyfully pray and wish that you do not give up this wonderful study on 'calvinism'. And you may not realize this now, but your entire concept of God, Christ, and Salvation in general will be radically changed towards the good ===> and consequently toward an unspeakable 'joy'. Oh man, I could speak for hours...sorry. And don't forget: 'calvinism' never never never kills evangelism [at least not the one I believe in ]

Your brother in Christ

Pardi

 

hi Pardi

thanks. i can imagine what you said. however, i see you are quite new here, and apart from the discussion of divine decrees, this is the first time we'll meet regarding calvinism.

i'm wondering, do we have the same story in mind when it is said that God would still be just even if He does not save any and let all people recieve condemnation?

you're a baptist, and come soteriology most baptist, calvinist or not, teach Adam's imputed sin. that is, God chose to impute Adam's sin to everybody. this got everybody condemned. in effect, God is the one who caused each one's condemnation. and that is apart from anyone's volition to recieve such condemnation. moreover, each one is born with the sin nature, which gets everyone to sin. and so everybody sins, but it is to be noted that it was nobody's decision to recieve such nature to sin.

in effect, each born individual will recieve two things without any regards from his volition. these are:

one, the sin nature, which get him to be inclined in commiting sins. two, Adam's sin, which got him his very first reason to recieve condemnation.

in effect, a non-elect did not cause his own condemnation. he is not to be blamed. he is not worthy. rather, he is made worthy. and thus he gets condemned. as much as a calvinist can say that God is still just in not saving the non-elects, he, on the other hand, cannot blame the non-elects for getting condemned. they had no choice but to recieve condemnation. again, they are not to be blamed personally since they did not cause their own condemnation. they are so condemned apart from their choice. they were made guilty, though God remains just...

 

This may sound funny from me if you have read my posts but be careful not to go too far. It would be wise to read folks with balance on this issue like Spurgeon or John MacArthur. Hyper-calvinism is no more biblical and much more detrimental than even arminianism as it disdains evangelism. The ideas of faith, confession, repentance, salvation, etc. are still in the Bible and are incorporated into calvinism.

My last pastor attended a funeral in a hyper-calvinist church. The deceased had never given any evidence of salvation whatsoever. During the funeral, the preacher stated a hope that the man was elect so that they could have hope of seeing him again. He said this knowing that the man had never professed faith in Christ.

 

This happens very, very often in "Arminian" SBC funerals. That is, because one simply made some sort of "profession of faith" (regardless of the fact that they died from a drug overdose in the middle of an illicit affair sort of thing). Regardless of who is doing it, an "Arminian" or a "Hyper-Calvinist," it is tragic. Having said that, I'm thankful that the theology of the Calvinist prevents such an error.

 

I have been busy with VBS this week and not able to read this board. But I praise God for what I read on the above posts tonight. It is so wonderful to here about those whose eyes are being opened to God's truth.

By His Grace

mike

 

In fact 4 and 5 point Calvinism requires a heartless disregard for anyone that is truly not among the elect - as this post shows...

Yelsew's excellent point about the monster known as Saddam and Pastor Larry’s point about our Joy that God would arbitrarily select US to be saved - deserves a follow up illustration.

All well and good for the Cavlinist position - but what about the Arminian view?

In Christ,

Bob

 

Amen. I have seen that one too.

 

Bob, I am not really sure which would be sadder- that you really misunderstand calvinism this badly but feel justified in your criticisms or that you really understand calvinism and are this dishonest about it.

 

Many thanks to Glenn for his post that has been "Added to the scenario above" so that I can show "via quotes" the point made in yet another section of that scenario.

Obviously calvinists ARLREADY believe in heaven, ALREADY believe in hell, ALREADY believe that the MANY of Matt 7 go to hell, ALREADY believe (as the existing quote and the one NEW quote show) that God does not "CARE" for the lost that are not elect, and ALREADY believe that NOTHING about the person (like family position) makes them MORE disposed to being selected over another person.

This is so "obvious" that the continual Calvinist response of "pretending we can't all see this and only a Calvinist can know it" - is just silly.

But I appreciate your going there "again".

In Christ,

Bob

 

Can I ask a couple of questions?

1. Who are the 'non-elect' that are spoken of in this thread?

2. Where does the bible ever speak of these 'non-elect'?

Thanks

 

No answer to these two simple questions?


Revealing.

 

Bro. Bills ?

1. (non-elect) Those whose name have not been written in the Book of Life of the Lamb.

2. Rev.13:8; 17:8; 20:15;

 

And what about the names in that book that may be erased?

 

Exodus 32:32
Yet now, if You will forgive their sin-but if not, I pray, "blot me out of Your book which you have written."
Exodus 32:33
And the Lord said to moses, "Whoever has sinned against me, I will blot him out of My book.

Paul displayed a similar passionate devotion for his kinsmen (Rom.9:1-3)
We should express this kind of love for the lost.
The book to which Moses referred, the psalmist entitled "the book of the living."

Psalm 69:28
Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and not be written with the righteous.

I understand this to be the book of the living, not the Lambs Book of Life.

mike

 

Ps 69:28 - Show Context
Erase their names from the Book of Life; don't let them be counted among the righteous.

Re 3:5 - Show Context
All who are victorious will be clothed in white. I will never erase their names from the Book of Life, but I will announce before my Father and his angels that they are mine.


Php 4:3 - Show Context
And I ask you, my true teammate, to help these women, for they worked hard with me in telling others the Good News. And they worked with Clement and the rest of my co-workers, whose names are written in the Book of Life.

Re 3:5 - Show Context
All who are victorious will be clothed in white. I will never erase their names from the Book of Life, but I will announce before my Father and his angels that they are mine.

Re 13:8 - Show Context
And all the people who belong to this world worshiped the beast. They are the ones whose names were not written in the Book of Life, which belongs to the Lamb who was killed before the world was made.

Re 17:8 - Show Context
The beast you saw was alive but isn't now. And yet he will soon come up out of the bottomless pit and go to eternal destruction. And the people who belong to this world, whose names were not written in the Book of Life from before the world began, will be amazed at the reappearance of this beast who had died.

Re 20:12 - Show Context
I saw the dead, both great and small, standing before God's throne. And the books were opened, including the Book of Life. And the dead were judged according to the things written in the books, according to what they had done.

Re 20:15 - Show Context
And anyone whose name was not found recorded in the Book of Life was thrown into the lake of fire.

Re 21:27 - Show Context
Nothing evil will be allowed to enter – no one who practices shameful idolatry and dishonesty – but only those whose names are written in the Lamb's Book of Life.

These are references to "The Book of Life." Are you arguing that there are two books? What is the difference between these books? Which passages above are talking about the Life book and which one is talking about the Lamb's book? How do you make that distinction?

 

Very much so. It reveals that God elects those who will be saved but does not elect those who will not be. They are hardened, blinded, disobedient deniers of Christ by their own sinful will.

Non-elect simply refers to that class of people who will not accept Christ as their Savior. It says nothing of ability. Simply that they will not repent and believe.