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

[reformedbeliever]

No: God foresees all decisions and elects on that basis in simple words

God did not pick one out of many because all would not period.

Not all will but some will believe and not because they are regenerated first so they can believe. No they believe and are then regenerated.

That really is in the simplest form our difference.

Is man so depraved he has no ability to believe in Jesus or is it the other way. Those are the two main points put in simple language.

We both accept that the saved are the Elect. This is not an issue. It is how are they elect.

Simply put we disagree on the premise that God either arbitrarily picket some because they would not be saved or God picked them because they did believe freely.

Do those who God forsaw would not believe have a chance to be saved?

 

[npetreley]

Do those who God forsaw would not believe have a chance to be saved?

Ouch! Great question. I can't wait to see the "answers".

 

[examiningcalvinism]

Allan and Gordon

Allan and Gordon,

I'm progressing in order. After this discussion, I would like to take up a dialogue with you on 2 Peter 3:9 because God is patient you, and not just you, but God is patient everyone else, too, in that God is longsuffering with the "children of wrath." (Eph 2:3; Rom 9:22) As a quick note as for what to expect, If you limit "any", then you undermine God's universal patience.

I'm working in order, and trying to find Jarthur's post.

 

[Allan]

9. The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

The word "pantas" means all men in verse 9. The fact that it looks to repentance as well should be sufficient contextual data to explain that the reach is all mankind and specifically expressed so to the present audience, but applicable to all as it states.

If you force your position then you must conclude that the audience is lost or that some are lost.

If you take a position that any of the audience is lost then your view fails. It can't be both ways. That, however, is not contextual regardless, but is a point of emphasis that you are over looking some details.

So my kind return answer to you is re-think the passage in light of it context. The context supports my view 100 percent.

This is not any different form a pastor addressing the local church and in the address making statements that concern all man kind. This is what Peter did. The language and grammar support my position and the context is my position, which is clear

LOL, I'm sorry but that is just laughable.

Ok, let us begin again:
Long suffering to USWARD;
hemas {hay-mas'}
us, we, our etc.

Then we look at "ALL should come to repentence":
pas {pas}
individually
a) each, every, any, all, the whole, everyone, all things, everything

Now let us think carefully here. If we read this passage as you would have us beleive we would be espousing Open Theism. Why?
Let us put it together and see your context:
The Lord is not slack (slow) concerning His promise as some men count (consider) slackness (slowness) but is longsuffering (patient) to usward (all mankind) not willing that any (not one) should perish but that all (the whole of mankind) come to repentence (a change of mind - concerning his relationship to God).

So Gods desire is that the whole world would repent so they will not perish and He is patiently for it so He can fullfil His promise of all of mankinds redeption.
Open theism espouses the whole world being saved. Are you shifting theologies on us?

We have to remember the defining peramiter of the word 'all' (with regard to repentence) in the sentence structure is in direct proportion to 'us-ward'. For context to keep consistant with the Word IT MUST BE that the "usward" (as with the context of the whole chapter) is refering to believers; and that the "ALL" it speaks of (or whole) isn't the world of mankind but the believers!
for His promises are ONLY to the believers.

 

[GordonSlocum]

Gordon, you and several others, maybe examining Calvinism also, hold to God electing due to what you call foreknowledge or foresight. If God elects people to salvation due to what He foresaw they would do... then those who He did not foresee have absolutely no chance of salvation. Do you not see that your position is no different than the reformed position? You slam Calvinism and say that God sends some to heaven and some to hell......... well if He bases salvation on foresight..... He does the same thing!

If men are going to do what God foresees them doing....... then those He did not see repenting and believing are lost as can be, and have NO chance to be saved. Grace and peace.

If you understand my position to mean what I have underlined and put in bold print in your statement then you have misunderstood me.

God foresees, foreknows, all real and potential events and all the causes and effects both real and potential. God elects on the basis of foreknowledge not on the basis of an arbitrary picking and selecting whereby he then enables those He picks to believe by first regenerating them then infusing them with a so called special faith.

Man is a free moral agent and can freely respond to the message of Grace. God sees this in eternity past as we phrase it. Elects us on this basis, appoints us on this basis. All that were appointed believed. How? on the basis of God's Foreknowledge. We are elect in Christ on the basis of God's Absolute knowledge which we call foreknowledge, foresight, prescience.

One way of stating the difference is: Can man freely believe or disbelieve or is He made to believe. You see for me I see Calvinism as a philosophical fatalistic approach to Salvation and the defense of God’s Sovereignty. I reject this teaching. I do not dispute Calvinist are eager to defend God, God’s Sovereignty, etc. But I disagree with their understanding and see it as a philosophical attempt to solve it from a man’s perspective and not from a Biblical perspective. I very plainly see Calvinism as a false philosophy of the Bible.

I know you will disagree and I hope that you will defend the Scripture not Calvin or Augustine, or any so called reformer. Just defend the Bible and forget them.

 

[reformedbeliever]

If you understand my position to mean what I have underlined and put in bold print in your statement then you have misunderstood me.

God foresees, foreknows, all real and potential events and all the causes and effects both real and potential. God elects on the basis of foreknowledge not on the basis of an arbitrary picking and selecting whereby he then enables those He picks to believe by first regenerating them then infusing them with a so called special faith.

Man is a free moral agent and can freely respond to the message of Grace. God sees this in eternity past as we phrase it. Elects us on this basis, appoints us on this basis. All that were appointed believed. How? on the basis of God's Foreknowledge. We are elect in Christ on the basis of God's Absolute knowledge which we call foreknowledge, foresight, prescience.

One way of stating the difference is: Can man freely believe or disbelieve or is He made to believe. You see for me I see Calvinism as a philosophical fatalistic approach to Salvation and the defense of God’s Sovereignty. I reject this teaching. I do not dispute Calvinist are eager to defend God, God’s Sovereignty, etc. But I disagree with their understanding and see it as a philosophical attempt to solve it from a man’s perspective and not from a Biblical perspective. I very plainly see Calvinism as a false philosophy of the Bible.

I know you will disagree and I hope that you will defend the Scripture not Calvin or Augustine, or any so called reformer. Just defend the Bible and forget them.

LOL.......... you are hard headed huh?

Can a person who God forsaw would never believe, have a chance to be saved?

If God in eternity past saw who would believe and who would not... then in time people are born who God forsaw ....... some to believe and some not, then how do they really have a chance or free will? Those who God forsaw not believe do not have free will to belive. Those who God forsaw believe, do not have a chance to not believe. ABSOLUTELY NO DIFFERENCE THAN CALVINISM.

I'll bet you will play politician and talk out of both sides of your mouth. And I'm not a betting man...........lol

 

[examiningcalvinism]

James

To James,

I have a 2:06 AM post to you from last night. If you would read over that, and then I hope to resume a discussion, but I'm hoping that you can stick with a conversation of just a couple points at a time, in order to avoid trading thesis'.

 

[reformedbeliever]

If you understand my position to mean what I have underlined and put in bold print in your statement then you have misunderstood me.

God foresees, foreknows, all real and potential events and all the causes and effects both real and potential. God elects on the basis of foreknowledge not on the basis of an arbitrary picking and selecting whereby he then enables those He picks to believe by first regenerating them then infusing them with a so called special faith.

Man is a free moral agent and can freely respond to the message of Grace. God sees this in eternity past as we phrase it. Elects us on this basis, appoints us on this basis. All that were appointed believed. How? on the basis of God's Foreknowledge. We are elect in Christ on the basis of God's Absolute knowledge which we call foreknowledge, foresight, prescience.

One way of stating the difference is: Can man freely believe or disbelieve or is He made to believe. You see for me I see Calvinism as a philosophical fatalistic approach to Salvation and the defense of God’s Sovereignty. I reject this teaching. I do not dispute Calvinist are eager to defend God, God’s Sovereignty, etc. But I disagree with their understanding and see it as a philosophical attempt to solve it from a man’s perspective and not from a Biblical perspective. I very plainly see Calvinism as a false philosophy of the Bible.

I know you will disagree and I hope that you will defend the Scripture not Calvin or Augustine, or any so called reformer. Just defend the Bible and forget them.

I'm not defending any theologian. I'm asking for you to defend your position. Now step up to the plate.

 

[examiningcalvinism]

Reformed Believer

Reformed Believer:

You wrote: "If God in eternity past saw who would believe and who would not... then in time people are born who God forsaw ....... some to believe and some not, then how do they really have a chance or free will? Those who God forsaw not believe do not have free will to believe. Those who God forsaw believe, do not have a chance to not believe."

Logically speaking, why would they not have a chance to believe? God's foreknowledge no more determines the future, than my knowedge of the past, determines the past.

 

[reformedbeliever]

Reformed Believer:

You wrote: "If God in eternity past saw who would believe and who would not... then in time people are born who God forsaw ....... some to believe and some not, then how do they really have a chance or free will? Those who God forsaw not believe do not have free will to believe. Those who God forsaw believe, do not have a chance to not believe."

Logically speaking, why would they not have a chance to believe? God's foreknowledge no more determines the future, than my knowedge of the past, determines the past.

Well that is not logical at all. If God's knowledge is perfect, then people will choose in a manner that will be consistent with His perfect knowledge. How can a person be born and have a chance to choose differently than what God perfectly knows? Your knowledge is not God's knowledge.

 

[GordonSlocum]

Do those who God foresaw would not believe have a chance to be saved?

Foreknowledge, foresight is not coercive. God's Absolute Knowledge is so Absolute He knows the end from the beginning. All decisions both real and potential are known. God knows that if a person were exposed to the truth weather they would believe or not.

The simple answer is Yes to your question.

There are two points here that should be address: God Planned. That is One

Two: Within God's over all plan God and only God has the capability to plan such a plan where by all freedom given to man will not hinder or turn aside the all encompassing plan of God.

Think of it this way. God planned to create. If God did not see Adam sin then God would not have within this perfect plan to create Adam been able to have within this plan the provision of Grace for man kind. It does boggle the mind. But If you or I take form God the ability to tell us that in eternity pass or before the foundation of the world Christ was slain which means God knew that Adam would sin and thus provided the solution in Christ and declared it so in eternity. It is this same Absolute Knowledge that is only possible with God that allows Him to see, do and maintain His One Grand Purpose for His creation. To say that He does not save on the basis of foreknowledge would be to say He can not provide for man’s sin by crucifying Christ before the foundation of the world. Paul clearly places us in Christ before the foundation of the world. So for God to know a need and provide the need before the foundation of the world on the basis that he foresaw, foreknew Adam’s sin clearly states likewise that we are saved on the basis of our personally having faith in Him and not forced to believe in Him .

To tell me that a person can not freely in time and space believe and that his believe is totally a free choice would be to tell me that God could not in His plan crucify Christ before the foundation of the world.

Calvinism is, to me, completely out in left field and while Calvinist are wanting to champion the Sovereignty of God they do so in error. I applaud the enthusiasm and zealousness but it is miss directed, and the Scripture is misinterpreted. Philosophy is the foundation of Calvinism not Biblical Truth.

If God is going to hold anyone responsible for a decision there most be a real capability to freely decide to follow God or not.

I know that one brother is not happy with the 2 Peter 3 position I take but the grammar and context support the motive - purpose - wish of God. This purpose can not exist if God is arbitrary in his dealing with man concerning salvation. It will destroy His holiness. This in and of itself is a major problem with the Calvinist position - not to say all the other points are not as rattled with Scriptural error and thinking, because they are.

 

[examiningcalvinism]

Reformed Believer

Reformed Believer:

Are you making God's foreknowledge into something that shapes, determines and causes a person's free choice?

It seems that you are saying that God foreknowledged all of my choices.

 

[examiningcalvinism]

Gordon

Gordon,

One cause of concern. If you are a willing participant, then God has a basis to hold you accountable. However, my question is how would this not make God culpable for sin? The "secondary causes defense" is a horrible defense by Calvinism. Consider this article that I've written which evaluates that very issue: http://www.examiningcalvinism.com/files/Complaints/ac_sin.html

 

[examiningcalvinism]

Alan

Alan,

In terms of my "gobbadly gook," consider this statement and let me know whether it meets with your approval.

Calvinistic Election is overthrown by the fact that Jesus stated: “no one comes to the Father but through Me.” (John 14:6) The “to be” Election of Calvinism inevitably places one in the Father with the result that these in Himself are chosen “to be” in Christ. To suggest that we have an election “to be” in Christ, undermines Christ Himself when He stands as our Mediator before the Father. After all, why would we need to have Jesus as our Mediator if we were secretly plugged in with the Father from all eternity?

What is the election of the Body of Christ but the election of so many units in Him, which is tantamount to the same thing as individuals? Indeed, God foreknew each individual in Christ by name. The corporate aspect is simply that God has predestined that this Body of Christ (in union with Christ, as per 1st Corinthians 6:16-17), will receive all the glory that God has in store for it.

 

[webdog]

Do those who God forsaw would not believe have a chance to be saved?

Can a movie you foresaw end any differently than how you saw it? Did the fact you knew what the ending would be mean you caused it to end the way it did?

 

[reformedbeliever]

Can a movie you foresaw end any differently than how you saw it? Did the fact you knew what the ending would be mean you caused it to end the way it did?

I'm not God with perfect knowledge. No one has been able to answer me. Gordon and examiningcalvinism included. Seems we need an examiningarminianism.......lol

Gordon, just because you say so doesn't make it so. Prove it. Show how man can choose in a manner that is *NOT* consistent with God's perfect knowledge.

 

[webdog]

Foreknowledge does NOT = foreplanning or foredetermining.

Foreknowledge
FOREKNOWL'EDGE, n. Knowledge of a thing before it happens; prescience.
If I foreknew, foreknowledge had no influence on their fault.

 

[examiningcalvinism]

Reformed Believer

Trust me, when the book, Calvinism Answered Verse By Verse comes out, in short order, expect, Arminianism Answered Verse By Verse to follow.

Knowledge knows, not determines.

"In the beginning, God foreknowledged the heavens and the earth."

Do you see how bizarre that logic is, when you carry it out?

 

[reformedbeliever]

Foreknowledge does NOT = foreplanning or foredetermining.

Foreknowledge
FOREKNOWL'EDGE, n. Knowledge of a thing before it happens; prescience.
If I foreknew, foreknowledge had no influence on their fault.

Prove it. I say that if God has perfect knowledge, and He does, then we will always have to choose in a manner that will be consistent with His perfect knowledge. You might say that is philosophical.... so prove it is not true philosophically. I have bible that backs me up. Psalms 139 for one. Where are your bible verses that says it is not true? Defeat it philosophically.

 

[reformedbeliever]

Trust me, when the book, Calvinism Answered Verse By Verse comes out, in short order, expect, Arminianism Answered Verse By Verse to follow.

Knowledge knows, not determines.

"In the beginning, God foreknowledged the heavens and the earth."

Do you see how bizarre that logic is, when you carry it out?

Not at all. I can't wait for the book. I'll wait till it goes on sale.......lol