Individual Election

Don · Feb 13, 2012

Earth said:
Don....Forest is a Primitive Baptist, not a Calvinist.

Gotcha. Didn't look at his profile; my bad.

Van · Feb 14, 2012

As far as I know, PB's are Calvinists, adhering to the five points of the TULIP. They believe in total spiritual inability, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace and perseverance of the saints.

This of course, makes them mistaken in four of the five points.

Forest · Feb 14, 2012

Van said:
True but notice this does not address the issue of when or why God elects individuals for salvation, i.e simply mixing in truth as diversion.

Also true, and also beside the point.

Whose faith, ours or God's gift via irresistible grace? More code words and dancing around the issue.
We are saved by grace alone through our faith alone, and not by works.
Our faith provides our access to the grace in which we stand. It is God alone who credits our faith alone as righteousness or not. It is God alone who puts us in Christ, the sanctifying work by the Spirit.

We are not saved eternally by our faith, but by Christ's faith.

Tom Butler · Feb 14, 2012

Van said:
As far as I know, PB's are Calvinists, adhering to the five points of the TULIP. They believe in total spiritual inability, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace and perseverance of the saints.

This of course, makes them mistaken in four of the five points.

PBs are not Calvinists, because they believe that the elect will be saved whether they ever hear the gospel or not.

Calvinists believe that God saves the elect through the "foolishness of preaching" of the gospel. (I Cor 1:21)

Tom Butler · Feb 14, 2012

Forest said:
We are not saved eternally by our faith, but by Christ's faith.

This could be grist for a separate thread, but I contend that the Lord Jesus did not have faith because he didn't need it. He is the Creator of the Universe and is omnipotent. Omnipotence and faith are mutually exclusive.

Don · Feb 15, 2012

Van said:
As far as I know, PB's are Calvinists, adhering to the five points of the TULIP. They believe in total spiritual inability, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace and perseverance of the saints.

This of course, makes them mistaken in four of the five points.

I made the same mistake; I could have sworn Forest was a supralapsarian calvinist. Do a quick Google; there are plenty of articles by PB's that explain why they don't consider themselves calvinists.

kyredneck · Feb 15, 2012

Tom Butler said:
This could be grist for a separate thread, but I contend that the Lord Jesus did not have faith because he didn't need it. He is the Creator of the Universe and is omnipotent. Omnipotence and faith are mutually exclusive.

Your 'grist' on these?:

For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? Ro 3:3

Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: Ro 3:22

16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
20 I am crucified with Christ: neverthless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. Gal 2

But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. Gal 3:22

And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: Phil 3:9

Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus. Rev 14:12

Word: pistij

Pronounce: pis'-tis

Strongs Number: G4102

Orig: from 3982; persuasion, i.e. credence; moral conviction (of religious truth, or the truthfulness of God or a religious teacher), especially reliance upon Christ for salvation; abstractly, constancy in such profession; by extension, the system of religious (Gospel) truth itself:--assurance, belief, believe, faith, fidelity. G3982

Use: TDNT-6:174,849 Noun Feminine

Heb Strong: H530

1) persuasion in or conviction of moral truth; a firm belief in the truthfulness of God or religious truth, particularly reliance upon Christ for salvation;
1a) relating to God
1a1) the conviction that God exists and is the creator and ruler of all things, the provider and bestower of eternal salvation through Christ
1b) relating to Christ
1b1) a strong unwavering conviction that Jesus is the Messiah, through whom we obtain eternal salvation in the kingdom of God
2) the general quality or characteristic of being unwavering in such profession (fidelity, faithfulness, commitment)
2a) continuance of faith in one's profession.
2b) committing one's life to Jesus.
3) in addition or by extension, unwavering belief in the accepted creeds and religious beliefs of Christianity
3a) believing and upholding the creeds taught within scripture and by extension, the church.

DaChaser1 · Feb 15, 2012

Forest said:
We are not saved eternally by our faith, but by Christ's faith.

NOPE...

its by the atonement that he accomplished while on the Cross for the sin debts owed unto God for His people that would get saved by his act...

Christ is God Incarnate, does God need faith?

DaChaser1 · Feb 15, 2012

Van said:
As far as I know, PB's are Calvinists, adhering to the five points of the TULIP. They believe in total spiritual inability, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace and perseverance of the saints.

This of course, makes them mistaken in four of the five points.

differs from mainstream calvinism in the fact they see elction/regeneration as being done directly by God, faith in jesus may/may not occur here on earth...

Also see more of all things are directly predetermined by god, not much allowance for 'free will"

Iconoclast · Feb 15, 2012

JL. DAGG ...has it correct and puts it simply:
The Scriptures teach expressly, that God's people are chosen to salvation. "Beloved, we are bound to give thanks always to God for you, because he hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation."[23] Some have been chosen by God[24] to peculiar offices; as Paul was a chosen vessel, to bear the name of Christ to the Gentiles, and David was chosen to be the King of Israel. The whole nation of Israel was chosen out of all nations to be a peculiar people to the Lord: but it is very clear that the eternal salvation of every Israelite was not secured by this national election; for to some of them Christ said, "Ye shall die in your sins; and whither I go ye cannot come."[25] The election to salvation is shown by the words of Paul in Rom. ix. 6, to be different from this national election: "They are not all Israel that are of Israel." "There is a remnant according to the election of grace."[26] The national election comprehended all Israel, according to the flesh: but the election of grace included those only who will finally be saved. It is not a choice merely to the means of salvation, for these were granted to all the nation of Israel: but it was a choice to salvation itself, and therefore respected the "remnant," and not the whole nation.

The Scriptures plainly teach that the election of grace is from eternity. "God hath, from the beginning, chosen you to salvation."[27] "According as he hath chosen us in him from the foundation of the world."[28] "According to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began."[29] Election is a part of God's eternal purpose. Had it been his purpose to save all the human race, there would have been no elect from among men; no peculiar people, no redeemed out of every nation. But his purpose to save did not include all the race; and therefore, on some principle yet to be inquired into, some of the race have been selected, who will receive the kingdom prepared for them from the foundation of the world. The eternity of God's election ought not to excite in our hearts any objection against it. If, in the final judgment, God will distinguish between the righteous and the wicked, whatever he will then do in righteousness, it was right for him to purpose to do from all eternity. In his final sentence, all his preceding dispensations toward the children of men, and all their actions under these dispensations, will be carefully reviewed, and the final doom of every one will be pronounced in righteousness. All that will then be present to the divine mind, was before it from all eternity; and what God will then do, he purposed to do from the beginning; and the reasons for which he will do it, are the reasons for which he purposed to do it. There can be no wrong in the purpose, if it does not exist in the execution. If God can fully justify at the last day, before the assembled universe, all his dispensations toward the children of men; all these dispensations must be right, and the purpose of them from eternity must have been right: and if a division of the human race can then be righteously made, that division was righteously made in the purpose of God; and consequently God's election was made in righteousness.

Iconoclast · Feb 15, 2012

Jp Boyce also saw it clearly;

(1.) Election is an act of God, and not the result of the choice of the Elect.

This is not now an inquiry into the reason of Election; but simply into the agent. Does God choose the elect, whether by his own purpose, or because he foresees that they will believe, or for any other reason? Is election an act of God?

The fact on this point would appear more clearly if we were to exchange the common word choice or chosen with the equivalent word elect.

The following passages are sufficient, though the examples are far more numerous.

John 13:18. "I know whom I have chosen."

John 15:16. "Ye did not choose me, but I chose you" (not to their offices as apostle, but), "that ye should go and hear fruit."

Rom. 8:33. "Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's chosen ones?"

Rom. 9:15. "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy."

Eph. 1:4. "Even as he chose us in him."

Eph. 1:11. "Having been foreordained according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his will."

2 Thess. 2:13. "God chose you from the beginning unto salvation."

2. This choice is one of individuals and not of classes.

This position needs to be explained. It is not denied that the Elect are to be true believers, and that true believers are the Elect. The character of the Elect does not, therefore, enter into this question. The issue is simply, does God choose all who shall believe, and are they, as such, his elect? or, does he choose his elect, and will they, as such, believe? Is belief the result of God's election, or is God's election the result of man's faith?

Acts 13:48. "As many as were ordained to eternal life believed." This is a historical statement made subsequent to the event, not by man's knowledge but by inspiration.

Eph. 1:4, 5. "Even as he chose us in him, . . . having foreordained us unto adoption as sons."

2 Thess. 2:13. "But we are bound to give thanks to God alway for you, brethren, beloved of the Lord, for that God chose you from the beginning unto salvation in sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth." Here the choice is made to salvation, and the means to salvation, sanctification and faith, are indicated; no prerequisite or means being stated as to Election. It is not as believers that they are elected; but as elected, that they are saved.

Rom. 8:29. "Whom he foreknew he also foreordained to be conformed to the image of his Son." The foreknowledge here is of persons, not of personal acts, not of those whose faith he foreknew, nor, as would be essential to their theory, is it of the class of believers as such. The Arminian theory would require the substitution of the words "as believers" or "you as believers" instead of those which are used.

Iconoclast · Feb 15, 2012

Benjamin Keach added these thoughts;

Keach argued that the covenant of grace is a covenant of grace to the elect, but to Christ, it is a covenant of works and merit. Christ had to keep God's law in order to merit the blessing Adam forfeited. The elect benefit from the merits of Christ in the covenant of grace when the Spirit applies Christ's work to them.

He then discussed various ways in which the eternal covenant of grace is a well-ordered covenant (2 Samuel 22:5).[12] It is well-ordered with respect to God's attributes. It puts many of God's attributes on display, including God's sovereignty, showing that God has the right to choose those upon whom He would bestow His saving benefits. The covenant also displays God's infinite wisdom in designing such a covenant, His love for His people, His justice in upholding His holy law, His power in effectually calling the elect, and His faithfulness in keeping them to the end.[13]

Keach said the covenant of grace is well-ordered in that it magnifies the glory of the whole Trinity. The Father's glory is magnified because He is the efficient cause of redeeming grace. The Father sends the Son, and everything the Son does in the covenant ultimately redounds to the glory of God the Father. The covenant of grace also magnifies the glory of Jesus Christ as the covenant head. Christ's glory is manifest by His loving willingness to suffer and intercede for God's enemies and to be their high priest forever, purchasing justification and securing sanctification for the elect. The covenant also magnifies the glory of the Holy Spirit, demonstrating His divinity and distinct personality. He has His own terms to fulfill, convicting of sin, quickening the elect on the basis of Christ's work, clothing them in Christ's righteousness by faith alone, sanctifying them to the uttermost, and preserving them safely unto their glorification. Thus, Keach said that the covenant of grace is well-ordered to glorify the whole Trinity.[14]

Furthermore, the covenant of grace is well-ordered because it honors God's holy and righteous law. Keach insisted that Scripture shows God upholding and honoring the law by means of the covenant of grace. He taught that God cannot justly discard His law, nor can God justly accept imperfect obedience as any part of justification because justification requires perfect obedience to God's law.
Keach then showed that the covenant of grace is well-ordered for the good of the elect. It is the ground and cause of their reconciliation, quickening, justification, adoption, sanctification and salvation from hell. It is a dependable covenant, sure, and certain in every respect. Christ fulfills all of its terms. The covenant was formed in the eternal and immutable decree of God and is therefore sure. It is a sworn oath and promise for the elect. It was confirmed by Christ's blood and executed by the Holy Spirit. This covenant was witnessed by mighty miracles and attested by the Apostles. Therefore, the elect may trust that this is a sure covenant for their good.[15]

Tom Butler · Feb 15, 2012

kyredneck said:
Your 'grist' on these?:

For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? Ro 3:3

Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: Ro 3:22

16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
20 I am crucified with Christ: neverthless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. Gal 2

But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. Gal 3:22

And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith: Phil 3:9

Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus. Rev 14:12

I will always yield to clear scripture.

A couple of questions, if I may. Since I'm not a Greek scholar can you exegete the word "of?" Is there any room to render it as "from" or "in" or "by?"

The other question is one I raised earlier. Why does Jesus need faith?

Now, it we can understand it as faith given to us by Jesus Christ, that makes sense. I believe that even the saving faith we exercise was given to us by God.

But to understand it as Jesus' own faith given to us--or His having faith in the first place--just doesn't compute for me.

I can accept it if the Bible teaches it, even if I don't understand it.

So, anybody wanna 'splain those passages kyredneck quoted ?

DaChaser1 · Feb 16, 2012

Tom Butler said:
I will always yield to clear scripture.

A couple of questions, if I may. Since I'm not a Greek scholar can you exegete the word "of?" Is there any room to render it as "from" or "in" or "by?"

The other question is one I raised earlier. Why does Jesus need faith?

Now, it we can understand it as faith given to us by Jesus Christ, that makes sense. I believe that even the saving faith we exercise was given to us by God.

But to understand it as Jesus' own faith given to us--or His having faith in the first place--just doesn't compute for me.

I can accept it if the Bible teaches it, even if I don't understand it.

So, anybody wanna 'splain those passages kyredneck quoted ?

Do not think the Son of God would need to "exercise" faith to get things done, so my understanding would be that the Apsotle paul , because of the faithfulness of Christ in His atoning work, was exhorting us to follow Him by placing our faith in Him!

MB · Feb 16, 2012

Tom Butler said:
I will always yield to clear scripture.

A couple of questions, if I may. Since I'm not a Greek scholar can you exegete the word "of?" Is there any room to render it as "from" or "in" or "by?"

The other question is one I raised earlier. Why does Jesus need faith?

Now, it we can understand it as faith given to us by Jesus Christ, that makes sense. I believe that even the saving faith we exercise was given to us by God.

But to understand it as Jesus' own faith given to us--or His having faith in the first place--just doesn't compute for me.

I can accept it if the Bible teaches it, even if I don't understand it.

So, anybody wanna 'splain those passages kyredneck quoted ?

Galations 2:16 in my humbled opinion shows who's faith it is we are saved by.
Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

This passage says we are justified by the Faith of Jesus Christ and just so we don't forget that, Paul makes it even clearer in him saying "even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, "
MB

DaChaser1 · Feb 16, 2012

MB said:
Galations 2:16 in my humbled opinion shows who's faith it is we are saved by.
Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

This passage says we are justified by the Faith of Jesus Christ and just so we don't forget that, Paul makes it even clearer in him saying "even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, "
MB

Does God even need faith though!

TCGreek · Feb 16, 2012

Romans 16:13 seems to be teaching individual election. Hard to deny this.

kyredneck · Feb 16, 2012

Tom Butler said:
I will always yield to clear scripture.

Yes, but it's not always so clear, cut, and dried is it? There's many passages that I remain non committed on (read 'I don't know' or I'm not sure').

A couple of questions, if I may. Since I'm not a Greek scholar can you exegete the word "of?" Is there any room to render it as "from" or "in" or "by?"

No, I can't exegete the word, but I believe the KJV is superior to the other translations in this regard ('faith of' vs. 'faith in'). I've done some searching, I was a bit surprised to see that the 'faith ofs' actually outnumber the 'faith ins', by about 2 to 1. There's only four ''faith ins':

And after certain days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla, which was a Jewess, he sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith in Christ. Acts 24:24 KJV
And after certain days, Felix having come with Drusilla his wife, being a Jewess, he sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith toward Christ, Acts 24:24 YLT

For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. Gal 3:26 KJV
for ye are all sons of God through the faith in Christ Jesus, Gal 3:26 YLT

Since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and of the love which ye have to all the saints, Col 1:4 KJV
having heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and of the love that is to all the saints, Col 1:4 YLT

For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ. Col 2:5 KJV
for if even in the flesh I am absent -- yet in the spirit I am with you, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in regard to Christ; Col 2:5 YLT

Excerpt from By the Faith of Christ, or our faith in Christ?
by Tony Warren

“The most common distortion in the Church today of 'the doctrine of Grace' is in Christians attempting to make faith an action of conscience on our part, rather than humbly accepting that the faith we have is by the sovereign action of God alone. No one has faith of their own free will, faith comes by the divine will of God, through the gracious work of Christ. Yet in most circles today we are continually told that the old Bible versions are mistranslated and the scriptures should read, our 'faith in Christ,' rather than the 'faith of Christ.'”

Excerpt from 'Justification By Faith Alone':

“It is critical to note that in none of these cases, nor anywhere else in Scripture, is faith (or any other grace) represented as constituting some ground of merit for justification. And this is all the more remarkable when one considers that dia with the accusative would mean "on the ground of" or "on account of." Thus, dia ten pistin would convey the notion of "on the ground of or on account of faith," thereby making faith the meritorious reason for the believer's acceptance with God. Yet such is the precision of the Spirit's oversight of the New Testament scriptures that nowhere does any writer ever slip into using this prepositional phrase. On every occasion faith is presented as the means of justification. Justification by faith alone is never justification on account of faith (propter fidem), but always justification on account of Christ (propter Christum), i.e. on account of the blood-satisfaction of the Lamb of God being graciously imputed to and received by an undeserving sinner (Galatians 3:6; James 2:23). Ultimately, the ground of justification is Christ and His righteousness alone.”

The other question is one I raised earlier. Why does Jesus need faith?

Now, it we can understand it as faith given to us by Jesus Christ, that makes sense. I believe that even the saving faith we exercise was given to us by God.

I agree with Gill, “not by that faith which Christ himself had as man, but by that faith, of which he the author and object....”

But to understand it as Jesus' own faith given to us--or His having faith in the first place--just doesn't compute for me.

Well, He was our example in every way.

Paul from Antioch · May 17, 2021

kyredneck said:
Yes, but it's not always so clear, cut, and dried is it? There's many passages that I remain non committed on (read 'I don't know' or I'm not sure').

No, I can't exegete the word, but I believe the KJV is superior to the other translations in this regard ('faith of' vs. 'faith in'). I've done some searching, I was a bit surprised to see that the 'faith ofs' actually outnumber the 'faith ins', by about 2 to 1. There's only four ''faith ins':

And after certain days, when Felix came with his wife Drusilla, which was a Jewess, he sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith in Christ. Acts 24:24 KJV
And after certain days, Felix having come with Drusilla his wife, being a Jewess, he sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the faith toward Christ, Acts 24:24 YLT

For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. Gal 3:26 KJV
for ye are all sons of God through the faith in Christ Jesus, Gal 3:26 YLT

Since we heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and of the love which ye have to all the saints, Col 1:4 KJV
having heard of your faith in Christ Jesus, and of the love that is to all the saints, Col 1:4 YLT

For though I be absent in the flesh, yet am I with you in the spirit, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ. Col 2:5 KJV
for if even in the flesh I am absent -- yet in the spirit I am with you, joying and beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in regard to Christ; Col 2:5 YLT

Excerpt from By the Faith of Christ, or our faith in Christ?
by Tony Warren

“The most common distortion in the Church today of 'the doctrine of Grace' is in Christians attempting to make faith an action of conscience on our part, rather than humbly accepting that the faith we have is by the sovereign action of God alone. No one has faith of their own free will, faith comes by the divine will of God, through the gracious work of Christ. Yet in most circles today we are continually told that the old Bible versions are mistranslated and the scriptures should read, our 'faith in Christ,' rather than the 'faith of Christ.'”

Excerpt from 'Justification By Faith Alone':

“It is critical to note that in none of these cases, nor anywhere else in Scripture, is faith (or any other grace) represented as constituting some ground of merit for justification. And this is all the more remarkable when one considers that dia with the accusative would mean "on the ground of" or "on account of." Thus, dia ten pistin would convey the notion of "on the ground of or on account of faith," thereby making faith the meritorious reason for the believer's acceptance with God. Yet such is the precision of the Spirit's oversight of the New Testament scriptures that nowhere does any writer ever slip into using this prepositional phrase. On every occasion faith is presented as the means of justification. Justification by faith alone is never justification on account of faith (propter fidem), but always justification on account of Christ (propter Christum), i.e. on account of the blood-satisfaction of the Lamb of God being graciously imputed to and received by an undeserving sinner (Galatians 3:6; James 2:23). Ultimately, the ground of justification is Christ and His righteousness alone.”

I agree with Gill, “not by that faith which Christ himself had as man, but by that faith, of which he the author and object....”

Well, He was our example in every way.

Paul from Antioch · May 17, 2021

As I see it, IMHO God chose not to tell us so that we would stick to what Jesus told us to do in Acts 1:8a: "...... You will be My witnesses, telling people about Me everywhere...." He didn't say who would respond to our witnessing, but He DID say to do it regardless. IOW, IMHO, it is NOT up to us to decide who exactly will respond in a positive way, i.e., who will actually receive Jesus Christ as his/her Personal Savior, but OTOH HE DID tell us to WITNESS about HIM, EVERYWHERE. If God wanted to tell us who would respond to out witnessing, IMHO, He would have told us so. IOW, we're to witness about Jesus & let people's response to our witnessing up to HIM......PERIOD!! If I'm wrong in my assessment of what the NT instructs me to both Do & what NOT to DO, please forgive me & supply VERY SPECIFIC NT verses that support your conclusion(s). I do not claim to know exactly everything about what God's Word tells me both what to do & what not to do, so I welcome anyone's positive input on this. Thanks in advance for your help!! :Thumbsup

Individual Election

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member