Let's discuss the differing views of Biblical Election

[Iconoclast]

Of course not. So why do you find this so offensive? Could it be that you just don't like the cold hard facts about your actual system of belief?

Any of us who believe the doctrines of grace are fine with however God has chosen to bring His decree to pass.

The scriptures teaches a multitude are saved,and another multitude...not a few...will be lost....

Those who do not believe in the biblical doctrine of election the same way. tend to speak of it in negative or evil terms unlike the Apostles ,or biblical writers did. They thanked and praised God for it.

Most times I see this used as P4t ,jbh28 and others have said...is a futile attempt to diminish the strength of this very biblical teaching.

I have heard it portrayed as calvinists believe they are in an exclusive little pre-selected country club....and they delight that they are elected.....while they take delight in masses of fallen humanity being reprobated dying in sins and going on to second death at the white throne judgement.

Some have very ignorantly posted these ideas here on BB.This shows a lack of study,and a lack of proper respect of scripture.

you just don't like the cold hard facts about your actual system of belief

What seems like "cold hard facts " to you.....does not seem that way to us. We take great comfort in God's electing love.

3The LORD hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee.

6For thou art an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that are upon the face of the earth.
7The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye were the fewest of all people:

8But because the LORD loved you,

31What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?

32He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?

33Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect?

Moses,jeremiah, paul delighted in God's electing love...all in heaven do also rev19...

So where do you see "calvinists" who see it as cold hard facts???

 

[webdog]

Here is the why Calvinists get so offended by the "preselected few" comment:

Look at it this way. Suppose there are 1000 people on a boat that you knew was sinking due to their neglect and irresponsibility. Suppose you take a big raft that can hold all 1000 of them and you go to them and tell them all that the boat is sinking and you will take them all to safety but that they must get on now or be left to drown. Most don't believe you and rebel going on their merry way, but a few (about 100 or so) get on your life boat and go with you to safety. Now, it would be inaccurate to say that you preselected a few to save in this scenario, because in reality you sought to save them all and even provided the means for everyone of them to be saved. That is the biblical view of salvation. God makes an appeal to 'every creature' and calls all to repentance and faith. Some rebel and refuse to come to their own peril.

Now, lets look at it from the Calvinistic perspective. Suppose you go to that same sinking boat with a life raft that will only carry 98 people (its "Limited"). You get a list of the passengers and preselect 98 individuals that you are going to get off the ship (its "Unconditional"). You get on the sinking boat and go persuade those 98 people and leave (its "Effectual"). Now, it would be accurate to say that you decided to save a "preselected few." You only are offended by that statement because deep down you know that the first scenario is the more biblical model.

:thumbs: :thumbs: :thumbs:

 

[Iconoclast]

The scripture you offer have nothing to do with election unless you are finaly admitting that all men are chosen by God.
MB

Hello Mb,
Actually they do have to do with election. Those given as the the seed of Abraham are elected before time and given to THE ELECT Seed, The Servant of the Lord ...in a Covenant of Redemption.

unless you are finaly admitting that all men are chosen by God

That Jesus has already told us that multitudes perish in unbelief,Mt7....Mt25

Why would you or anyone else consider...or post such an absurdity that ALL MEN are chosen?

Do you understand the election of individuals is a revealed truth?

Do you understand the covenant of grace?

3._____ This covenant is revealed in the gospel; first of all to Adam in the promise of salvation by the seed of the woman, and afterwards by farther steps, until the full discovery thereof was completed in the New Testament; and it is founded in that eternal covenant transaction that was between the Father and the Son about the redemption of the elect; and it is alone by the grace of this covenant that all the posterity of fallen Adam that ever were saved did obtain life and blessed immortality, man being now utterly incapable of acceptance with God upon those terms on which Adam stood in his state of innocency.
( Genesis 3:15; Hebrews 1:1; 2 Timothy 1:9; Titus 1:2; Hebrews 11;6, 13; Romans 4:1, 2, &c.; Acts 4:12; John 8:56 )

 

[Iconoclast]

SKAN.
Here is why you always error on these topics;

Originally Posted by Skandelon
Here is the why Calvinists get so offended by the "preselected few" comment:

Look at it this way. Suppose there are 1000 people on a boat that you knew was sinking due to their neglect and irresponsibility. Suppose you take a big raft that can hold all 1000 of them and you go to them and tell them all that the boat is sinking and you will take them all to safety but that they must get on now or be left to drown. Most don't believe you and rebel going on their merry way, but a few (about 100 or so) get on your life boat and go with you to safety.

MOST?

Most don't believe you and rebel going on their merry way, but a few (about 100 or so) get on your life boat and go with you to safety.

No my friend...it is not ...most...it is ALL do not believe you...ALL.....

God saves from among all sinners.those he elects...He does not have to elect any....but For His perfect and righteous judgement, He elects from all fallen sinners a multitude who He makes willing to save...

You are always resisting this truth.....you do not like that God is the one who Elects....you would prefer man to elect himself.
We are happy with the fact that God is God...and not us.

 

[OldRegular]

The Doctrine of Grace, or Sovereign Election if you prefer, magnifies the Grace of God and that should be good enough for all of us!

 

[Iconoclast]

:thumbs:

The Doctrine of Grace, or Sovereign Election if you prefer, magnifies the Grace of God and that should be good enough for all of us!

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[Skandelon]

Icon, go back and re-read it. You took the analogy about OUR view and applied it to yours thus totally missing the point.

This thread was suppose to be about the individualization of the doctrine of election in the Western versus Eastern traditions and instead has once again resorted to quibbling over my choice of words regarding a 'preselected few' relative to the majority... oh well.

Would it help if I would have said "a whole bunch of preselected individuals were saved, but a whole bunch more unselected individuals weren't?" Does that help? Can we move on now?

 

[Iconoclast]

Icon, go back and re-read it. You took the analogy about OUR view and applied it to yours thus totally missing the point.

This thread was suppose to be about the individualization of the doctrine of election in the Western versus Eastern traditions and instead has once again resorted to quibbling over my choice of words regarding a 'preselected few' relative to the majority... oh well.

Would it help if I would have said "a whole bunch of preselected individuals were saved, but a whole bunch more unselected individuals weren't?" Does that help? Can we move on now?

I moved on from post 21 on down

 

[Martin Marprelate]

At the risk of oversimplifying the various views of scholars throughout the years allow me to summarize the two most basic approaches to this controversial doctrine:

From the time of Augustine, followed by the popularity of Calvin's teachings, Western Christianity has tended to interpret the doctrine of election from the perspective of and with regard to individual human beings. During that same time, however, the doctrine has been far less emphasized and controversial in Eastern Orthodoxy, as a more corporate/national view has been prevalent.

That is undoubtedly true and is one good reason why I am not Eastern Orthodox.

Questions for discussion:
1. Is it possible that Augustine and later Calvin, with the help of many others, has unnecessarily caused a hyper individualization of this doctrine that was hardly warranted by Romans 9-11, Eph. 1, and 1 Peter 2?

No. This is an unfortunate confusion of the Old and New Covenants. In the Old Covenant, everyone born to an Israelite was included, but only a tiny number were actually saved (Isaiah 1:9 etc.). In the New Covenant, everyone knows the Lord, and that knowledge comes to each person individually. 'Unless one is born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God' (John 3:3). Yes, Peter talks about a 'Nation of priests,' but he is not talking about an ethnic nation, but of believers, and each one comes to belief himself as God opens his heart (Acts 16:14).

2. Is it not true that the major emphasis in both the Old and New Testaments is on an 'elect people' (Israel in the OT; the church {along with the appointed leadership of the disciples} in the NT)?

No. 'I will take you one from a city and two from a family, and I will bring you to Zion' (Jer 3:14). Notice that these people do not take themselves to Zion; the Lord takes them there.

3. Granted, we each become Christians as individuals, as we enter into the family of Christ through faith, but does God's predetermined plan to justify, sanctify and glorify this family necessarily mean He has only predetermined a select few the ability to enter it, while at the same time appealing for every creature to be reconciled and declaring that 'whosoever will' may come?

I absolutely agree that God has not predetermined a 'select few.' He has predetermined a select many, a great throng that no man can number, as many as the dust of the earth (Gen 28:14). If He did not select, then there would be none saved, because 'There is none who understands; there is none who seeks God. They have all turned aside; they have together become unprofitable; there is none who does good, no not one......There is no fear of God before their eyes.' What stops people being saved is not election, but their own wickedly hard hearts. If there was only one person in heaven, God would still be to be praised for His mercy.

PLEASE STAY ON TOPIC AND AVOID PERSONAL ATTACKS.

Certainly. You too, please.

Steve

 

[Iconoclast]

That is undoubtedly true and is one good reason why I am not Eastern Orthodox.

No. This is an unfortunate confusion of the Old and New Covenants. In the Old Covenant, everyone born to an Israelite was included, but only a tiny number were actually saved (Isaiah 1:9 etc.). In the New Covenant, everyone knows the Lord, and that knowledge comes to each person individually. 'Unless one is born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God' (John 3:3). Yes, Peter talks about a 'Nation of priests,' but he is not talking about an ethnic nation, but of believers, and each one comes to belief himself as God opens his heart (Acts 16:14).


No. 'I will take you one from a city and two from a family, and I will bring you to Zion' (Jer 3:14). Notice that these people do not take themselves to Zion; the Lord takes them there.


I absolutely agree that God has not predetermined a 'select few.' He has predetermined a select many, a great throng that no man can number, as many as the dust of the earth (Gen 28:14). If He did not select, then there would be none saved, because 'There is none who understands; there is none who seeks God. They have all turned aside; they have together become unprofitable; there is none who does good, no not one......There is no fear of God before their eyes.' What stops people being saved is not election, but their own wickedly hard hearts. If there was only one person in heaven, God would still be to be praised for His mercy.


Certainly. You too, please.

Steve

Well said:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[Skandelon]

That is undoubtedly true and is one good reason why I am not Eastern Orthodox.

Neither am I, obviously, but that is not the point...obviously.

In the Old Covenant, everyone born to an Israelite was included, but only a tiny number were actually saved (Isaiah 1:9 etc.).

So a group as a whole might be elected while certain individuals within that group were not actually saved, right? Like when God elects to graft in the Gentiles yet not all are saved.

No. 'I will take you one from a city and two from a family, and I will bring you to Zion' (Jer 3:14). Notice that these people do not take themselves to Zion; the Lord takes them there.

I'm not sure how you think that addresses the point being made. We all agree that God is the one doing the 'taking' but we may take issue over the effectuality of the means regarding the preselecting of certain individuals...

I absolutely agree that God has not predetermined a 'select few.'

Why are Calvinists quick to quote 'many are called but few are chosen' but offended by this statement? Face it, a FEW were preselected relative to the number who remain unselected in your system.

He has predetermined a select many

Many relative to what? Not the total number of people, right? So, what's your point?

because 'There is none who understands; there is none who seeks God.

Granted, but we are talking about the lost's ability to respond to a God who is actively seeking to save the lost, remember?

They have all turned aside; they have together become unprofitable; there is none who does good, no not one......

Yet, in the follow chapter Paul concludes that Abraham believe and it was credited to him as righteous. So which is it? Is there righteous or isn't there? Read Romans 3:20-21 and notice the shift from Paul's discussion about the law of righteousness versus that which was now being revealed...the righteousness by faith. You seem to think that because no one is declared righteous according to the law, that there is no one declared righteous according to faith, which is just not true.

There is no fear of God before their eyes.' [/B] What stops people being saved is not election

Really? That implies that those not elect were provided the necessary means to be saved. Is that what you believe? Were the non-elect atoned for on the cross? Were the non-elect granted the faith by which to believe? Were the non-elect called by sufficient means?

 

[jbh28]

Ad Hominem is a personal attack against the debater, not a factually based claim about ones actual belief.

Exactly, that that's what is being done. You are making an attack against the debater. Again, since neither of us have an issue over the amount of people, it is only being used as an attack. If it was really an argument, it would be kinda strange since you believe the same thing.

Look, there is approximately 30% of the current population who claims to be Christian, and that percentage is higher now than throughout most of human history. You and I would both agree that those who claim to be Christian is probably much higher than those who actually are, so I think it would be safe to say that only around 15-20% of the total world population currently believe in Christ (if that). Can we agree on this?

sure

How is that not a relative FEW? Even if millions were saved throughout history, it is still a relative FEW compared to the trillions who have remained in unbelief.

So then why do you bring it up? The only option is as an attack against someone else since you believe the same thing. Also, "few" is relative to the context. When compared to the total of people vs total saved, then few. But the word "many" is used in Scripture too to refer to those that get saved.

Think of it this way. If out of a group of 100 people you preselected 10 to 15 of them and gave them a gift, would it be inaccurate for me to say that you gave a gift to a preselected few? Of course not. So why do you find this so offensive? Could it be that you just don't like the cold hard facts about your actual system of belief?

It's because, as I already stated, you believe the very same thing! So to bring it up as an argument is a form of an attack. It's the only reason that you and anyone else brings it up. You are attempting to make Calvinism to look like they teach that God is mean by only selecting a few.

Now, we also have to remember that God wasn't obligated to save anyone. So even if God only saved one person, it would still be the great act of mercy. Man deserves hell, not heaven. So out of the 100 people, all deserve hell. If God only chooses 15 people, they didn't deserve it.

Also remember that both Calvinist and non-Calvinist like you believe that people will go to hell because they are a sinner that has rejected God's grace. We both agree that God knew this from the beginning and elected to not save that person anyway.

 

[Iconoclast]

Anyone wanting to learn about election in scripture read here;
http://www.founders.org/library/dagg_vol1/bk7c4.html#sec1

http://www.founders.org/library/boyce1/abstract.pdf

 

[preacher4truth]

Yes, it definitely is an attack against the debater as jhb28 so correctly asserts.

It is definitely ad hominem and anti-cal based.

Im not going to sit here and pretend it isn't what it so obviously is.

 

[Skandelon]

Exactly, that that's what is being done. You are making an attack against the debater.

Explain to me how my accusation of God preselecting a relatively few number of people to be saved is a personal attack upon you? Especially considering the fact that even Calvinists quote passages such as "many are called but FEW are chosen" in defense of their views?

Again, since neither of us have an issue over the amount of people, it is only being used as an attack.

I explained the distinction between the number in the analogy regarding the boat. If that doesn't make the difference clear, I don't know what will.

If it was really an argument, it would be kinda strange since you believe the same thing.

I don't believe God preselected a relative few for salvation. I believe God desires all to come to repentance and makes that appeal genuinely to all mankind, while actually making that response a viable option.

It's because, as I already stated, you believe the very same thing!

Again, see the boat analogy and you will see the clear difference in what I believe and what you believe. Nothing I have stated is a personal attack. It is simply a fact of your system: According to Calvinism, God has chosen to save a few preselected people from the mass of humanity. That should be common knowledge and nothing objectionable, if indeed you believe it. That number of people who are saved may be in the millions, billions or even trillions, but it is a small fraction of those not selected...and since scripture even uses the word 'few' I really don't see what all the fuss is about.

Man deserves hell, not heaven. So out of the 100 people, all deserve hell. If God only chooses 15 people, they didn't deserve it.

Not the point. The point is that 15 is a "few" relative to the 100 so there is no reason to object.

Also remember that both Calvinist and non-Calvinist like you believe that people will go to hell because they are a sinner that has rejected God's grace. We both agree that God knew this from the beginning and elected to not save that person anyway.

Then you misunderstand our view of election. God elected to invite all, but only chooses to save those who are clothed in righteousness of Christ through faith, thus, "many are called but few are chosen."

 

[OldRegular]

I absolutely agree that God has not predetermined a 'select few.' He has predetermined a select many, a great throng that no man can number, as many as the dust of the earth (Gen 28:14). If He did not select, then there would be none saved, because 'There is none who understands; there is none who seeks God. They have all turned aside; they have together become unprofitable; there is none who does good, no not one......There is no fear of God before their eyes.' What stops people being saved is not election, but their own wickedly hard hearts. If there was only one person in heaven, God would still be to be praised for His mercy.

Steve

Very well said!:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[Skandelon]

Anyone wanting to learn about election in scripture read here;
http://www.founders.org/library/dagg_vol1/bk7c4.html#sec1

http://www.founders.org/library/boyce1/abstract.pdf

And anyone wanting the CORRECT view of election IN SCRIPTURE should read here:

http://www.schooleyfiles.com/2006/10/arminian-perspective-on-election-gods.html

 

[Iconoclast]

Explain to me how my accusation of God preselecting a relatively few number of people to be saved is a personal attack upon you? Especially considering the fact that even Calvinists quote passages such as "many are called but FEW are chosen" in defense of their views?

Why not let BB calvinists post their own verses.We do not need you to tell us what we believe, or what verses we use.:thumbsup:

I explained the distinction between the number in the analogy regarding the boat. If that doesn't make the difference clear, I don't know what will.

Your anologies are most always flawed, so no one wants to respond to them.

don't believe God preselected a relative few for salvation

We do not believe that either. We believe in God's grace and mercy as expressed many times in scripture...

1And after these things I heard a great voice of much people in heaven, saying, Alleluia; Salvation, and glory, and honour, and power, unto the Lord our God:

2For true and righteous are his judgments: for he hath judged the great whore, which did corrupt the earth with her fornication, and hath avenged the blood of his servants at her hand.

According to Calvinism, God has chosen to save a few preselected people from the mass of humanity. That should be common knowledge and nothing objectionable

No,,,according to you and your negative view of God...not according to Calvinism. Show where any of us say this.....you cannot help express yourself in these terms....again no one is asking you to give your mistaken view of what calvinism is.
Is it possible that a calvinist here or there might have an opinion that less will be saved, than perish....sure.....but that does not of necessity speak for all or most calvinists.
You keep stating it as you think it elevates your view....but your view is biblically flawed, inconsistent, and man centered......so again we do not accept your premise.:thumbsup:

 

[Aaron]

Again, you reveal you lack of understanding for the dogma you so vehemently disagree. The idea that God elects an individual based upon a particular 'quality' is not an accurate representation of our belief.

Of course it is. If God did not elect an individual according to His own will, the only will left is the will of the elected one. God then provided salvation for those who will believe. That's the election of a quality. You can argue that two plus two doesn't equal four, but that doesn't change the facts.

Actually, both camps believe salvation is conditional. Your view believes ELECTION is unconditional, and actually some non-Calvinistic scholars would agree in that election is about God's unconditional appeal for whosoever will.

If you call a dog's tail a leg, how many legs does it have? It only has four. Calling the dog's tail a leg doesn't make it a leg. Transferring the term election to things it doesn't describe doesn't make the concept election.

 

[preacher4truth]

And anyone wanting the CORRECT view of election IN SCRIPTURE should read here:

http://www.schooleyfiles.com/2006/10/arminian-perspective-on-election-gods.html

Not at all, Arminianism is laden with error, and is an INCORRECT view. The romanticism of arminians and non-cals to believe somehow that "non-elect" can also be saved is rebellious against solid truth, and one glaring error held by these.

Another obviously is that they believe Cals believe in only a "select few" when Cals ACTUALLY believe in a select multitude beyond number, or, innumerable.

To say otherwise is to misrepresent these gracious brothers beliefs which is what is taking place.