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

Tom

Tom:

In terms of Numbers 21:6-9, do you suppose that the scope of the healing offered by the standard was limited to a subset within Israel? Remember, this is the Lord's own illustration. On that basis, I wouldn't want to adopt any view of the Atonement that conflicted with such a passage. Would you?

 

Reformed Believer

The disciples who shook up the world were also simple men.

Indeed, you were sealed in Christ. But what do you suppose is in Christ?

Here is what I think. In think that in Christ, I am made a new creature. (Compare 2nd Corinthians 5:17) As a new creature, I get a "new heart" and a "new spirit." (Compare Ezekiel 36:26) In Christ, I receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. (1 Cor 3:16) What is the new creature but a reborn creature?, or should I say, a born again creature. I believe that when I am sealed in Christ, I am made born again. I believe that what John 1:12-13 is telling me, is not what I am born "by' but what I am born "of". I have a heavenly birth. In other words, when I trusted in Christ, I was given the right to become His child, and in becoming His child, I was born "of" something not of this world.

 

My apologies to James Arthur

James: Give me 15 minutes.

 

Reformed Believer

Reformed Believer: Certainly, we are chosen BY God.

Let's suppose that the Bible said: "God chose us in Himself before the foundation of the world."

What would that mean? What would it imply?

 

James

James:

My apologies. I've skipped over your other posts tonight. I will go back to them now, but let me first ask: Was the atonement for those who were bitten?

 

James

James,

Going back to your 9:05 PM post, yikes! I have some catching up to do :type:

I do not expect you to have to defend "men." In quoting James White, and Bradford (the anonymous post), I simply wanted to try to capture the essense of what you believe.

I realize that the following statement is NOT in the Bible. The only reason why I ask it is because I'm trying to see if I have captured the essense of what you believe. Here goes: "I James Arthur believe that before the foundation of the world, God the Father chose me in Himself. I believe that in having chosen me in Himself, God the Father chose to give me to His Son, whereupon I was chosen to become in Christ." ???

Yes, or no: Is that statement consistent with your theology? If you've already answered it in the affirmative, in a round-about way and I missed it, then I apologize for asking it again. (out of breath)

 

Reformed Believer

Reformed Believer:

In terms of John 1:12-13, tell me if this paraphrase, captures the essense of what you believe about that verse:

“But as many as [were born of God] received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not [because] of blood, nor [because] of the will of the flesh, nor [because] of the will of man, but [because] of God.”

Do you agree with this paraphrase?

The actual verse says, last half: "...who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God."

I believe that people are subconsciously reading the wrong thing into this verse. Becoming the sons of God means becoming born of God, that is, not an earthly birth, but a heavenly birth. In other words, when you receive Christ, that is, when you believe on His name, the power that you are given by the hand of God is the power to become born of something not of this world.

 

Reformed Believer

I believe in the omnitemporal view. I believe that on your deathbed, God is already there watching over you and listening to you pray. I believe that in eternity future, He is already there talking with you, and interacting with you. Therefore, the "crystal ball" explanation just doesn't fit, and therefore you must ... (wait who said that?)

My question is this: If "the elect" are chosen in Christ, doesn't it inevitably presuppose a primary election in the Father, with a resulting, secondary election in the Son, that is, chosen "to be" in Christ? I'm hoping for a yes/no on that one. It's not a trap question. I was called "nuts" when I even suggested that Reformed Theology teaches it. (I think its EXACTLY what Calvin described, though he never came right out and directly said it in just so many words.)

 

Reformed Believer

Reformed Believer: I didn't come here to convert Calvinists to Arminians. However, I have read many things from Reformed Believers that have led me to want to ask questions. For instance, look at the following statement by James White:

White writes: “When the time comes in God’s sovereign providence to bring to spiritual life each of those for whom Christ died, the Spirit of God will not only effectively accomplish that work of regeneration but that new creature in Christ will, unfailingly, believe in Jesus Christ (‘all that the Father gives Me will come to Me’). Hence, we are not saved ‘without’ faith, but at the same time, Christ’s atonement is not rendered useless and vain without the addition of libertarian free will.” (Debating Calvinism, p.191, emphasis mine)

Here is my question: Doesn't it appear that White suggests that people are preemptively made "in Christ"? Here is what I think that Calvinism teaches, and you can correct me if I've misinterpretted it.

Here goes...RF Theology requires that a person be preemptively made in Christ in order to access what is in Christ, namely the "new heart" and the "new spirit" of the "new creature" through "new birth" so that by it, he might use that "new heart" to irresistibly choose Christ. Without the "new heart", then the decision cannot be 100% irresistible or 100% certain. Therefore, merely opening hearts, convicting hearts, popping faith in a person, all those things are Illumination, but not Regeneration because RF Theology requires the all-essential "new heart." Hence, a person MUST be made preemptively in Christ. However....the Bible says that we are sealed in Christ, after what....after we listen to the Gospel and believe in it, then we are sealed in Christ with the Holy Spirit. So my point is that it appears that RF Theology has the cart of "in Christ" ahead of the horst "believing in the Gospel." Now, you can easily raise the issue of Total Inability and raise a case for Arminianism and the cart before the horse, but my argument stems from Ephesians 1:13.

Therefore, you may need to take a closer look at Ephesians 1:13.

 

Reformed Believer

Reformed Believer: I believe that we were foreknown in Christ. I believe that the essense of Romans 8:29 is that for those in Christ whom God did foreknow (foreknowing a people), He did predestinate.... The rest characterizes what is in Christ. Eventually we'll get around to discussing the calling of God.

James White stresses that what is foreknown is not a plan, not an act, but a "people" and Arminianism couldn't agree more. A people in Christ were foreknown by God, and in Christ, were predestined for all that is in-store for Christians. Hence: God's eternal plan in Christ.

As for the new birth. I could not agree more, in that being in Christ & being born again, go hand in hand. Hence, James White stated that the "new creature in Christ will unfailingly...." The question is whether or not the order gets inverted in the Reformed paradigmn, relative to Eph 1:13. Calvin intepreted two phases of the Holy Spirit in his commentary, and I would be glad to adress that point, and I can quote it, if anyone is interested in seeing it.

In other words, you were not in Christ from before the foundation of the world, and only Christ was "in the Father" from before the foundation of the world. What was before the foundation of the world was God's choice, and when you believe in the Gospel, you are sealed in Christ, and what I infer, becoming in Christ. The question is whether Calvinism has the sealing inverted.