1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

In Christ, Eph 1:4: A question for Reformed Baptists

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by examiningcalvinism, Jan 17, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Top Posters
Page 12 of 15
  1. examiningcalvinism

    examiningcalvinism New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2007
    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    0
    JD

    JD,

    I decided to check back in, and I saw your post. The verses you mentioned are on the website. You can look them up. http://www.examiningcalvinism.com/Examine.html

    Nevertheless, I persisted through the tiresome ramblings of RF trying to pass off Foreknowledge as Determinism, while patiently waiting for a forthright answer to my "in the Father" question derived from the OP, only to never receive a direct answer while having to wade through irrelevant Mayor analogies. For now, I've documented the sad event on the Examining Calvinism Blog.
    http://examiningcalvinism.blogspot.com/
     
    #221 examiningcalvinism, Jan 24, 2007
  2. Blammo

    Blammo New Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,277
    Likes Received:
    0
    No, the answer to your question is no, and everyone here knows it. However, the fact that God will not be suprised by anything we choose to do does not mean He caused our choices, it means He knew what our choices would be before we made them. Our choices can not and will not change from what God, in His perfect knowledge, has already foreseen. You seem to be afraid that, if God does not cause our choices, He can not know what we will choose.

    God can, and does, cause certain things to occur in accordance with His perfect plan. He also allows certain things to occur, because He can use them in accordance with His perfect plan, or they have no effect on His perfect plan. He sees the beginning to the end. He does not have to wait and see what happens, and He does not need to look into the future to see what He will need to do. Everything is predetermined, predestined, foreknown, because He has already seen it. That does not mean He is the cause of all events, though He is the creator of all things. The reason sin happens is not because God created it, it is because God allowed it.

    1 John 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
     
    #222 Blammo, Jan 24, 2007
  3. J.D.

    J.D. Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    11
    I hope I'm not wrongfully impugning your motives, but I ain't goin for the bait on this. If you want to interact here, then interact here. Visiting forums and stirring something up is a cheap and easy way to increase traffic on your web site.

    As I said, there's nothing new about the corporate theory of election, which is basically what you're espousing.

    Allan or reformedbeliever or someone along the way used the word gobbledygook to describe your posts. I agree. But let's dress it up and call it sophistry. You're theory of primary and secondary election is just a fancy way of saying that God chose those who would in time choose Christ. This was Arminius' argument four hundred years ago. I didn't work then and it doesn't work now.
     
    #223 J.D., Jan 24, 2007
  4. examiningcalvinism

    examiningcalvinism New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2007
    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    0
    JD

    JD,

    You missed the boat for several reasons.

    1) I'm not interested in increasing traffic on my website. I have no advertising. What benefit would it do me? The truth is that you've asked if I was aware of certain verses and therefore I pointed you to the articles on my website.

    2) In terms of the "corporate" aspect of Predestination, I agreed with Allan that we are individually elect in Christ, individually foreknown in Christ by name, but that a corporate aspect may be seen in the fact that the Body of Christ is also predestined for all that which God the Father has sovereignly planned to bless it with, in Christ.

    3) The primary/secondary issue deals not with Arminian Election, but with Calvinistic election. For if you believe that Eph 1:4 means that "the elect" are chosen "to be" in Christ, then logically speaking, it inevitably sets up a primary election in the Father with a secondary election in the Son, because if "the elect" are chosen to become Christ, then in whom were these chosen, in order to receive the secondary election to be chosen in Christ? That question is the whole point of my visit to this website. I've documented the responses on the Blog.

    http://examiningcalvinism.blogspot.com/

    Best wishes in Christ,
    Adios
     
    #224 examiningcalvinism, Jan 24, 2007
  5. J.D.

    J.D. Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    11
    Well I don't have time to go to your web sight and search for your comments on the verses. A reply would have been nice.

    So you don't have ads. Fair enough. Thanks for coming back to answer me. But don't you have a book for sale?
     
    #225 J.D., Jan 24, 2007
  6. reformedbeliever

    reformedbeliever New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,306
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hello Blammo. Nice to *see* you again. I never said that God directly causes sin. I even used the story of Joseph to show how God can use evil for His good purposes. Thanks for your reply however.
     
    #226 reformedbeliever, Jan 24, 2007
  7. reformedbeliever

    reformedbeliever New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,306
    Likes Received:
    0
    If your view of foreknowledge is not determinism.... what is it?
     
    #227 reformedbeliever, Jan 24, 2007
  8. Blammo

    Blammo New Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2006
    Messages:
    1,277
    Likes Received:
    0
    How do you explain this statement of yours?

    "I understand that God is present in the future.... way after we have chosen what we choose. But I am in the present... and His perfect knowlege will still cause me to choose the way He knows I will choose. Changes nothing."

    I agree with you that we do not suprise God with our choices, but that does not mean God causes them.

    God's perfect knowledge means He already knows what I will choose, His knowledge does not cause me to choose the way He knows I will choose.

    Do you see the difference... yet?

    God's knowledge of our choices means He knows them, not that He causes them.
     
    #228 Blammo, Jan 24, 2007
  9. reformedbeliever

    reformedbeliever New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2004
    Messages:
    2,306
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi again Blammo. God can and does effect people's choices through His providence. If you look up providence, if you have not already, you will see that it involves quite a lot of different ways that God *causes* things to happen. God can use individuals or the environment or laws of society etc.... even satan in the case of Job... to cause what ever it is that is in accordance with His plans. God caused Joseph's brothers to do what they did. He did it indirectly through His sovereign providence, in a way that does not make Him the author of their sins. I hope this explains it. I do not believe that God directly causes anyone to sin or even tempts them. He does not have to....... we do that very well upon our own.
     
    #229 reformedbeliever, Jan 24, 2007
  10. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    But of him are ye in Christ
    But of him are ye in Christ

    If it's not to late, I would stop the printing of that book.

    It is just bad doctrine to say that God chose us “in Him” and mean we are the ones who place ourselves “in Him”. We did not chose to be born, but we still was born. In 1 Cor 15:22 we are told that we fell into sin and death because we are “in Adam”

    Just like our natural birth we do not place ourself in the new birth. Salvation is by God. Salvation is Gods plan and in His hands. It is Christ that choses His bride.

    But of him are ye in Christ


    God is the one who decides who becomes "in Christ," and he is the one who then puts us in Christ by his will and power. Therefore divine election is a selection of individuals for salvation.

    But of him are ye In Christ...James
     
    #230 Jarthur001, Jan 24, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 24, 2007
  11. examiningcalvinism

    examiningcalvinism New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2007
    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    0
    To JArthur

    James,

    And just when you think that the conversation is dead.

    You wrote: "It is just bad doctrine to say that God chose us “in Him” and mean we are the ones who place ourselves 'in Him'."

    Then explain Ephesians 1:13:

    Ephesians 1:13: "In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation--having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise."

    Arminianism:
    Step 1) Hears Gospel
    Step 2) Believes Gospel
    Step 3) Sealed in Christ
    Step 4) Born Again, New Creature, Indwelling of the Holy Spirit, made one spirit with God. (1Cor 6:16-17)

    Hence: when we believe in Christ, we become sealed in Christ.

    Calvinism:
    Step 1) Born again in Christ
    Step 2) Hears Gospel
    Step 3) Believes Gospel
    Step 4) Sealed in Christ

    Step 1 and Step 4 shows just how disfunctional Calvinism is.
     
    #231 examiningcalvinism, Jan 24, 2007
  12. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    But of him are ye in Christ

    Why in the world would you say this?

    The understanding is not there to hear...to believe..until..The new birth comes. right?

    Just as it says in John 8....
     
    #232 Jarthur001, Jan 24, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 24, 2007
  13. examiningcalvinism

    examiningcalvinism New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2007
    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    0
    James

    Of course, it is by Him that we are in Christ, because it is by grace that are we saved through faith. He initiated it in terms of seeking, drawing, knocking, convicting, pricking, piercing, opening hearts to respond to the Gospel. He made the provision of salvation by way of the cross. We have redemption because of what HE did.

    I love how Calvin describes our part: “Now it may be asked how men receive the salvation offered to them by the hand of God? I reply, by faith. Hence he concludes that here is nothing of our own. If, on the part of God, it is grace alone, and if we bring nothing but faith, which strips us of all praise, it follows that salvation is not of us. … When, on man’s side, he places the only way of receiving salvation in faith alone, he rejects all other means on which men are accustomed to rely. Faith, then, brings a man empty to God, that he may be filled with the blessings of Christ.” (Calvin’s New Testament Commentaries: Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians, p.144, emphasis mine)

    That is brilliant. We don't come knocking on the door of His heart. He comes knocking on the door of our heart. This is why we have no reason to boast before God: This is why Romans 3:27 says: “Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith.”

    Here is my writeup on 1 Cor 1:30. Feel free to check it out.

    http://www.examiningcalvinism.com/files/Paul/1Cor1_30.html

    In terms of John 8, also recognize v.42. "If God was your father (as they claimed), then you would love Me." God was not their Father, as they claimed. Had God been their father, like Nathaniel, then like him, they would have received Christ. These people rejected the Father (Isaiah 65:2), rejected John the Baptist. These were not Jesus' sheep because they were not the Father's sheep either.
     
    #233 examiningcalvinism, Jan 24, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 24, 2007
  14. examiningcalvinism

    examiningcalvinism New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2007
    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    0
    James

    I'm not going to stay up until 2:00 am again.

    I recommend that you post your exegesis on Ephesians 1:13
    I recommend that you also explain how being, allegedly, chosen "to become" in Christ does not logicially presuppose a primary election in the Father, as I insist that it logically would require.

    Best wishes in Christ,
    Richard
     
    #234 examiningcalvinism, Jan 24, 2007
  15. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    And...who does the chosing to place the person "in Christ?"

    If you are posting calvin for me..your wasting your time. :)
    I know what he held. Being you do not, would you like for me to show you?

    Hold that thought. I'll take you up on your site next month..Lord willing.
     
    #235 Jarthur001, Jan 24, 2007
  16. examiningcalvinism

    examiningcalvinism New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2007
    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    0
    James

    You wrote: "And...who does the chosing to place the person "in Christ?"

    We're going in circles. See Eph 1:13: hears, believes, sealed.

    In terms of Calvin, he believes that "faith" is the product of regeneration in Christ. Hence, he stumbles over Romans 10:17 which says that faith comes from the hearing of the word of Christ. I've already listed above why regeneration in Christ, prior to being sealed in Christ, is a dysfunctional mess.
     
    #236 examiningcalvinism, Jan 24, 2007
  17. examiningcalvinism

    examiningcalvinism New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2007
    Messages:
    166
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good night

    Good night.
     
    #237 examiningcalvinism, Jan 24, 2007
  18. J.D.

    J.D. Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    11
    Here is someone's explanation of Eph 1:4 that I can actually understand:

    (Gill)


    ​
    ​
     
    #238 J.D., Jan 24, 2007
  19. Jarthur001

    Jarthur001 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2005
    Messages:
    5,701
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thanks JD..

    I posted the "by Him" a few pages back, with no reply. Its been said before the Greek tells how silly this view is.
     
    #239 Jarthur001, Jan 24, 2007
  20. J.D.

    J.D. Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2006
    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    11
    And some thoughts on being sealed from Dr. Voluminous:

     
    #240 J.D., Jan 24, 2007
Page 12 of 15
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...