Featured Rationalism & Antinomy

[I think the unresponsiveness of the keyboard, making it difficult for me to reply, is caused by the numerous pop-up ads at this site. Anyone else experience this? This is not mere annoyance--it's stealing keystrokes from the buffer.]
It depends on which Southern Baptist church you visit. The SBC has a broad spectrum of beliefs on this issue. Some are staunch Calvinists, and some ("Traditionalists") differ from full Arminians only in their affirmation of eternal security. The two extremes incessantly argue and occasionally fight for power, while either ignoring the middle or trying to coopt the middle (by a convenient use of labels such as "Non-Calvinists" or "Modified Calvinists"). The worst case of ignoring the middle is when the "Traditionalists" (who are the Arminian side of the SBC) claim their own view to be the middle (!), with Calvinists on one side and full Arminians on the other. Fortunately, and by God's grace, the majority of the SBC is not in that battle.

By revealing anything to the world, God changes the world. If foreknowledge is descriptive rather than prescriptive, then we might expect to find instances in Scripture where the revelation itself changed the outcome that was prophesied. And we do...

God has knowledge of more than the set of events that will actually happen. He also has knowledge of all possible alternative sets of events that will not actually happen. In other words, God knows what would have happened, in the case of every decision, if the option not chosen had instead been chosen. In many cases, a minor decision by one person can result in major changes for many people. God has full knowledge of all of this. A Scriptural example is found in the account of David inquiring of the Lord at Keilah:

1 Sam. 23 ESV
9 David knew that Saul was plotting harm against him. And he said to Abiathar the priest, “Bring the ephod here.” 10 Then David said, “O Lord, the God of Israel, your servant has surely heard that Saul seeks to come to Keilah, to destroy the city on my account. 11 Will the men of Keilah surrender me into his hand? Will Saul come down, as your servant has heard? O Lord, the God of Israel, please tell your servant.” And the Lord said, “He will come down.” 12 Then David said, “Will the men of Keilah surrender me and my men into the hand of Saul?” And the Lord said, “They will surrender you.” 13 Then David and his men, who were about six hundred, arose and departed from Keilah, and they went wherever they could go. When Saul was told that David had escaped from Keilah, he gave up the expedition.​

If David had remained at Keilah, then Saul would come down there. But since David departed, then Saul did not come down. Such is an example of how a change in one detail can change the trajectory of events. This account establishes that God knows contingent outcomes as well as actual outcomes. It also establishes that the contingent outcome is as valid an outcome as the actual until the pivotal event occurs or the pivotal decision is made, since God does not lie. God told David that Saul “will come down.” He did not say, “Saul will not come down because you will not be here.” Therefore, it was true that Saul would come down, but it was only true until the pivotal event of David leaving Keilah. This is not to say that God did not know that David would leave and Saul would not come down. Rather, David’s inquiry presupposed that David would remain in Keilah, and God told him what the true outcome of that course of action would be.

There is another account in Scripture that illuminates this principle:

Matthew 26 ESV
51 And behold, one of those who were with Jesus stretched out his hand and drew his sword and struck the servant of the high priest and cut off his ear. 52 Then Jesus said to him, “Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword. 53 Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels? 54 But how then should the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must be so?”​

If there was any event in human history that was necessary, it was the central event of the crucifixion of the Savior. But here we have the surprising revelation of Jesus that alternative courses of action were indeed possible. His question to Peter serves well as a rebuttal to all who think that the foreknowledge or the sovereign plan of God invalidate or preclude the possibility of alternative choices or actions: “Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels?” Those who think that there are no genuinely possible alternatives would have to answer Him, “No, I do not think You can.” And although Christ implicitly affirmed the possibility of the alternative, he also affirmed that the Scriptures will indeed be fulfilled (God’s foreknown plan will indeed be carried out): “But how then should the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must be so?” The balance is found in God’s use of certainty, rather than necessity, to carry out His perfect plan. If He had used necessity, then no other alternative choices or courses of action would be possible. But by using certainty, God left intact all alternative possibilities within our temporal world. God’s plan is unfailingly carried out not because men cannot do otherwise, but because they will not do otherwise.

Truth corresponds to temporal reality. But the future is not yet temporal reality. Every change in present action changes the trajectory of the future. We see in the two accounts, above, that every such trajectory has an equal validity. Alternative choices in the present are choices between equally valid possibilities. God knows the actual outcome of all things, but that outcome will result from men choosing between genuinely possible courses of action and freely choosing according to what God has sovereignly planned.

 

Maybe this will start a trend and as others from here visit other sites that the link to the BB will draw them here... Who knows?... Kind of like a recruiting tool... No physical required... Brother Glen

 

That is due to a misunderstanding of "free will" and the extent of the effects of the Fall!

 

Some friends and I were having a discussion on the crucifixion... Who was involved in the event, what occurred in the event... when the event happened and where it happened... But they were in so much disagreement on the WHY!... If we look at the crucifixion with human eyes we will NEVER understand it but if we look with the understanding of God's grace and spiritual eyes we will... In the Sovereign Plan of the WILL of God was their an alternative?... What a "HELLISH" thought... It was planned with the three and one Godhead before the foundation of the world in the chambers of eternity... Brother Glen

Matthew 26:53 Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?

26:54 But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?

 

How would you answer Jesus' question, "Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels?"

 

The crux of the issue between Calvinists & Arminians is caused by a faulty presupposition that they both share, to wit, that if God is fully in control of who will eventually believe, then God cannot earnestly desire the salvation of all men and not do all that is needed to successfully bring all men to faith. In other words, both agree that if God earnestly desired all men to be saved, then God could do nothing other than save all men if He were in control of whether or not each man believes. They agree on this faulty premise, with one side resolving it by assuming that God must not earnestly desire the salvation of all, and the other side resolving it by assuming that God must not be in full control of who will eventually believe.

Every other bone of contention springs from this. Every other doctrine in their systems was built to buttress this. The one who demands free will would not have such an objection if every man were saved "monergistically."

 

We should avoid conflating salvation and sanctification. Salvation is immediate and everlasting. There is no progressing from wrath to grace. Regeneration is rebirth--the sending of the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying, "Abba! Father!" To be born again is to be spiritually united with Christ, and so to be identified with Him that Justice can no longer look upon us without looking upon the union of Christ and us. This regeneration IS salvation itself.

 

An appeal to my understanding is a will... Jesus had a will but he did not come to do his own will, if he did he would have appealed to Father and the Father would have honored his Sons request. If you look at the discussion he had with those on the road to Emmaus, there is the answer... Brother Glen

Luke 24:25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:

24:26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?

24:27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.

 

Brother Ken... I feel you should start a thread on this very subject it might turn into a lively discussion... Just a suggestion... Brother Glen

 

No its not "due" to free will.

 

I would hold to reformed Sotierology, but not all into their Covenant theology, nor church govt/water baptism!

 

If words mean anything, then salvation is a saving from wrath. Once saved, there remains no process or progress by which we are justified, expiated, atoned for, reconciled, or by which God is further propitiated. Merely because the process of sanctification accompanies salvation does not mean that salvation is a process.

 

TC, it seems that we vary in nuance.

You state: "Salvation is a life long process."

But you nuance this with the thought that Regeneration is punctiliar.

I watched a video of a bus getting stuck in a flooded river. For each child being plucked out of that bus, the moment of being saved from the flood waters was specifically a one time thing. There was a specific moment of salvation.
They will spend the rest of their lives being grateful for that salvation. They will learn from the experience and likely stay away from flood waters. The process of living goes on.

I use the term adoption. When God adopts us, there is a time when the transfer into God's family takes place. It's one time and permanent adoption. However, now that we are adopted we are disciplined, chastened and encouraged by our adoptive father. The process of raising us from orphan to prince is a lifetime in the making. All the work our Father has done, though sometimes grueling, is joyous and fulfilling to look back on.

For me, then, salvation/adoption is a specific moment, but sanctification/discipline goes on throughout our lifetime.