M.R. Vincent re: Election

[Craigbythesea]

1 John 4:19. We love, because He first loved us.

19. Hemeis agapomen, hoti autos protos egapesen
hemas.

We choose to love God because he first chose to love us.

 

[whatever]

I forgot - thanks for the welcome.

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> But you say I don't truly love Him.

No, I do not. I know almost nothing about you.

</font>[/QUOTE]Here's your original quote: "And most certainly if the ONLY reason for anyone loving God is that God made them as creatures who love Him, God is NOT truly loved at all by anyone, but very greatly despised by those who were NOT made by God as creatures who love Him."

The only reason that I love God is that God first loved me, and made me into a new creature who loves Him. So, I fall into that category of one of those who don't truly love God, if you are correct. I am still not sure whether that is what you meant, but it is what you said.

I'm still trying to get my head around the nature of the problem you are proposing. Does it have to do with causality - if God makes A do B then it really isn't A that does B? Or does it have to do with volition - if A must do B then A cannot freely do B? Or is it both, or something else?

 

[reformedbeliever]

God is sovereign and does not need anyone to accomplish His purposes. It is a privilege and a responsibility to pray, as God is pleased to use our prayers and evangelism to accomplish His purpose of bringing us to faith in Jesus Christ.
How can anyone who does not believe in sovereign grace expect God to hear their intercessory prayers for the lost? Do they believe that God should violate the lost person's free will and bring them to faith? God is pleased to use our prayers to accomplish His predetermined plan of salvation for lost dead sinners. Thank you Lord for choosing me....... and give me the passion to bring to you all you have chosen before the foundation of the world.

 

[Craigbythesea]

reformedbeliever,

Welcome to the Baptist Board!

Personally, I do not believe that the Bible was so poorly written that no one was able to understand it until the 16th century . I also believe that we need to realistically view the Reformation and the men behind it and the fact that the Church was just beginning to come out of the dark ages and none of the reformers had access to the Bible study tools that even the teenagers in our churches take for granted today when studying the Bible. Most certainly if Calvin and the other reformers had access to 21st century technology to study the Bible and the 400+ years of Biblical scholarship that was accomplished after they died, they would have believed something radically different than they did, and we would not be debating their misunderstanding of the doctrine of election.

 

[Daniel David]

reformedbeliever, Craig believes man is sovereign over God. I encourage you to seek Christian debate.

 

[Craigbythesea]

I believe that the Bible says that God, by His own sovereign will, set before each one of us a choice.

Deut. 30:19. "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants,
20. by loving the LORD your God, by obeying His voice, and by holding fast to Him; for this is your life and the length of your days, that you may live in the land which the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give them." (NASB, 1995)

And I choose life in Christ and I choose to believe the Bible rather than James Boyce, John Calvin or any other man, no matter how famous or infamous.

 

[OldRegular]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
I believe that the Bible says that God, by His own sovereign will, set before each one of us a choice.

Deut. 30:19. "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants,
20. by loving the LORD your God, by obeying His voice, and by holding fast to Him; for this is your life and the length of your days, that you may live in the land which the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give them." (NASB, 1995)

And I choose life in Christ and I choose to believe the Bible rather than James Boyce, John Calvin or any other man, no matter how famous or infamous.

Adam and Eve were the only two humans who ever lived that were able to exercise "free will". Eve yielded to temptation and Adam deliberately chose to sin. Since that time mankind has been a slave to sin. Jesus Christ tells us in John 8:34 “Most assuredly, I say to you, whoever commits sin is a slave of sin."[NKJV] The Apostle Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.[KJV] The "natural man" is the unregenerate man, the man who is a slave to sin. Now a slave is unable to free himself, someone else must do that for him. That is what the Holy Spirit does in regeneration [born again, born from above, rebirth, etc].[Ephesians 2:1-10]

We cannot pick and choose what we want to believe in Scripture. I can find a passage that intimates universal salvation, but to believe that I have to ignore Scripture that teach otherwise. Each verse of Scripture must be interpreted in the context of the particular passage, in the context of the particular book or letter, and finally in the context of all of Scripture. Context, Context, Context,

.

The Apostle Paul tells us in Acts 20:27 For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God. We must take Scripture in its entirety, not piecemeal.

 

[OldRegular]

The following question was asked of John MacArthur and is taken from the following site: www.biblebb.com/macqa.htm. Perhaps it will shed some light.

“Can you talk a little bit about Arminian theology? Is it biblical? And, if a church embraces that theology, are they saved? [Can somebody who holds an Arminian view be a Christian?”]

Answer

“Yes, if you’re talking about Arminian theology. We always want to make the distinction between Armenians and Arminians. Armenians [are] a people; Arminian is a theology from Arminius. Let me just say this. This debate comes up all the time, and I like to answer the thing by saying I really don’t land, necessarily, with labels very comfortably. You know, you can be called a Calvinist or a Hyper-Calvinist or a Four-point Calvinist or…I’ve been called a Four-and-a-half-point Calvinist… One guy called me a One-point Calvinist--I don’t know how he came up with that. And people can be labeled Arminian.

I understand what they mean by that, but I, personally, try to resist those labels because those labels are loaded with different content for different people. And people love to slap a label on you and then everybody defines that label in a different way. So, I really run from those labels.

At the same time, to put it simply, the debate of Calvinism and Arminianism falls along five simple lines that we all know about called T.U.L.I.P.: Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, and the Perseverance of the saints--T.U.L.I.P.

John Calvin rightly interpreted the Bible to teach that man is totally depraved. What that means, is that, not every human being is as sinful as he could be or she could be, but that every human being is sinful to the point that they’re incapable of altering their condition. That is to say, total depravity means you can’t do anything to save yourself. You can’t even make a right choice. You can’t awaken your spiritual deadness. You can’t give life where there is death. You can’t come to a right conclusion on your own. Total depravity means that everyone, is by virtue of their own will and their own power and their own choices, incapable of redemption. That’s total depravity.

Arminius would say--Arminian theology, Palagian theology, as it’s also called--would say “man is capable.” That while man is, in the general sense, a sinner, he has capacities within himself to choose to be saved. That is the debate. I don’t think that’s biblical. I think we are dead in trespasses and sin, and dead people don’t make choices. Dead people can’t make themselves alive. So, I think there is a clear distinction there.

In the case of unconditional election, you have the view in the Scripture that the people who are saved are saved because they were chosen by God apart from any merit of their own, apart from any condition. Whereas, typically, the person who holds Arminian theology would say that we are saved by acts of our own will. We have still the power to believe on our own, and therefore, when we choose to believe, we become elect. It isn’t something that God determined in eternity past; it’s something that occurs sort of ‘de facto’ or ‘ipso facto,’--“after the fact.”

And then you have limited atonement; in the typical reformed view, means that the atonement, in its actual work, the actual efficacy of the atonement, was only for the elect. That is, it’s limited to those who believe and were chosen by God, whereas the Arminian side of it would say that everybody’s sins have been paid for, all across the world, whether people believe or not. So that, in the end, Jesus paid the penalty for the sins of people who don’t believe. That’s a problem because if your sins are paid for already by Jesus and you go to hell, then that’s double jeopardy.

And then you have irresistible grace, which is the idea that when the spirit of God works on the heart of a sinner, the sinner can’t resist. Arminian theology would say the sinner can resist.

And perseverance of the saints, the last in the five points, is the idea that if you’re saved, you’re going to persevere to glory. Arminian theology says you might not--you could lose your salvation along the way.

So, they are diametrically opposed. The question comes, “Can somebody who holds an Arminian view be a Christian?” And I would hate to say they couldn’t be. I really believe that it is possible to be Arminian and to be a Christian…to misunderstand your human capability, to misunderstand the election, to misunderstand the extent of the atonement, even to misunderstand the irresistible nature of God’s saving grace, and even to think you could lose your salvation. But, at the same time--while being confused or ignorant of those things--to know that you’re a sinner and know that the only way of salvation is through Jesus Christ. I guess you could say that someone could be an Arminian and push those points far enough, where they could jeopardize my confidence that they really are a Christian. You could push the point of not being totally depraved far enough where you’re actually being saved by your own works, by your own belief, by your own ingenuity, by your own self-induced faith. And you could get to the point where you could really wonder whether someone understands that it’s all a work of God.

But, I think it would be going too far to say someone who holds an Arminian view, or anyone who holds an Arminian view, is, by virtue of that view, not a Christian. I think there are people who just don’t understand rightly those things, but who know they’re sinners and who cry out in their sin for the Lord to save them. They don’t understand how what they’re doing works together with the great purposes and power of God, and consequently can’t give God fully the glory He deserves for all of that, but they could be genuinely saved, by hoping in Christ and Christ alone.”

I guess this puts MacArthur in the same boat as all those "fruitcake" Baptist Saints like Spurgeon, Boyce, Dagg, Broadus, Manly, and countless others.

 

[Craigbythesea]

That is the debate. I don’t think that’s biblical. I think we are dead in trespasses and sin, and dead people don’t make choices.

You can believe John MacArthur if you want to . As for me and my house, we believe the Bible

.

Deut. 30:19. "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants,
20. by loving the LORD your God, by obeying His voice, and by holding fast to Him; for this is your life and the length of your days, that you may live in the land which the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give them." (NASB, 1995)

 

[Daniel David]

That verse is not about personal salvation, but the promise of a blessed life if one is faithful to the Mosaic covenant.

Pathetic try though.

 

[OldRegular]

Originally posted by Craigbythesea:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> That is the debate. I don’t think that’s biblical. I think we are dead in trespasses and sin, and dead people don’t make choices.

You can believe John MacArthur if you want to . As for me and my house, we believe the Bible

.

Deut. 30:19. "I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants,
20. by loving the LORD your God, by obeying His voice, and by holding fast to Him; for this is your life and the length of your days, that you may live in the land which the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give them." (NASB, 1995)

</font>[/QUOTE]As I said before we cannot pick and choose what we want to believe in Scripture. I can find a passage that intimates universal salvation, but to believe that I have to ignore Scripture that teach otherwise. Each verse of Scripture must be interpreted in the context of the particular passage, in the context of the particular book or letter, and finally in the context of all of Scripture. Context, Context, Context!

 

[Craigbythesea]

Throughout the Old Testament we find people who are not saved, and thus depraved, making choices. My point here is that John MacArthur's teaching about the doctrine of Total Depravity is contrary to Scripture, in or out of context.

 

[Dr. Bob]

Craig, you are so far wrong that you begin to sound pelagian. Man IS so completely and irrevocably depraved that he can do NOTHING.

Any teaching less than such depravity borders on a "spark of goodness" somewhere within man. Thank God MacArthur (and most Baptists - even those who would eschew the calvinist label) hold such a strong, biblical view of depravity.

 

[Craigbythesea]

I guess this puts MacArthur in the same boat as all those "fruitcake" Baptist Saints like Spurgeon, Boyce, Dagg, Broadus, Manly, and countless others.

"Fruitcake" would not be my choice of words for these men.

 

[Watchman]

Craigbythesea, hang in there, I am in total agreement with your posts here.
I think my brother I am not sure I would go so far as to call those mentioned, as well as others, such as James White and R.C. Sproul, as well as members of this board who adhere to this doctrine, as fruitcakes. What you have here, quite to the contrary, is extremely intelligent people, as I perceive that you are as well. Having so much intelligence, there is a danger that human reasoning will be mixed in with what God's Word says. Nowhere in the Genesis narrative is there a prohibition about touching the fruit on the tree of knowledge of good and evil, but Eve "reasoned" that God meant to not even touch it (3:3).
What we have here is a doctrine that even Calvin himself, late in life, refuted.
One can go to spurgeon.org on the internet here and read his sermon simply titled "Election", and that would seem to leave no doubt where he stood on this issue. He would, however often preach sermons that would make one think that he was free-will. I read that he came to the conclusion that whosoever will come ARE the elect. This explaination I feel is close to what the Scriptures teach.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Craig, you are so far wrong that you begin to sound pelagian. Man IS so completely and irrevocably depraved that he can do NOTHING.

Hogwash!

Any teaching less than such depravity borders on a "spark of goodness" somewhere within man.

I don’t know what kind of an evil little monster you were as an unregenerate child, but I was not like that, neither were my friends (I guess I kept much better company than you did!).

Thank God MacArthur (and most Baptists - even those who would eschew the calvinist label) hold such a strong, biblical view of depravity.

I believe what the Bible says, not some other Baptist who doesn’t understand the Bible.

 

[Craigbythesea]

Watchman,

Thank you for your observations. Even the most intelligent men are susceptible to an infestation of the Harry Ticks. Personally, I frequently use a very strong insecticide called Holy Ghost Prayer, and it does an excellent job of protecting me from those nasty things. I wish that I could spray this entire message board with some of that stuff.

 

[whatever]

Hi Watchman!

I read that he came to the conclusion that whosoever will come ARE the elect. This explaination I feel is close to what the Scriptures teach.

I'm a Calvinist and I believe that too. All who will believe are elect, and all who are elect will believe. The question is, which came first? We believe that God chose certain ones, before the foundation of the earth, and those are the ones who will come to faith. Our doctrine is not that He chose us because He saw that we would believe. Rather our doctrine says that we will believe because He chose us, and that the reason(s) for Him choosing us are entirely within Himself and not for anything in ourselves.

"Come, let us reason together ..." - we all have plenty of problems, including false reasoning, but reasoning itself is not a problem. We are commanded to study and to think things through, and it is a sin to not even try, but to simply believe what we are told. That one of the valuable things about a forum like this, where we can test ideas against one another.

[ December 13, 2004, 07:12 AM: Message edited by: whatever ]

 

[whatever]

Craig,

I don’t know what kind of an evil little monster you were as an unregenerate child, but I was not like that, neither were my friends (I guess I kept much better company than you did!).

Of course, depravity is not about being an "evil little monster". It is about having nothing to commend ourselves to God. There was nothing within you or me whereby God looked at either of us and said "there's some potential there, I think I can do something with that". We had no ability to change our state, either. Depravity is not about being as bad as one could possibility be, obviously. Everyone can think of something he has done such that he could have done something worse. But every single thing that an unregenerate person can do is touched by his sin, so that none of it is acceptable to God. Either God has to lower His standard to accept the unregenerate, or God has to meet His own standard on behalf of the unregenerate. We believe that He did the latter.

Personally, I frequently use a very strong insecticide called Holy Ghost Prayer, and it does an excellent job of protecting me from those nasty things.

So, do you believe that Calvinists don't pray, or that God only hears Pelagian prayers, or what?

 

[Craigbythesea]

So, do you believe that Calvinists don't pray, or that God only hears Pelagian prayers, or what?

Pelagius was a heretic who denied the doctrine of original sin . Calvin was a Harry Tick who most unfortunately did not have the resources to study the Bible that I and other true believers do have and invented five fictional doctrines to fill the void in his understanding . I suppose that if spent as much time writing Harry Ticked books as Calvin did, I wouldn’t have time to pray either

.