KenH
Well-Known Member
Those that are lost are lost because of sin, not because of what Calvinists and Spurgeonites teach.
Ken
A Spurgeonite
www.spurgeon.org
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The Sovereignty of God
- Thread starter pinoybaptist
- Start date
Ken
A Spurgeonite
www.spurgeon.org
ScottEmerson
Active Member
I am sorry, Ray, but I am afraid you don't understand what I believe.
Ken</font>[/QUOTE]Do people have the ability to be saved if they are not elect?
Primitive Baptist
New Member
No man has the ability, whether elect or not, to be saved unless the Father draws them (John 6:44), but all of those whom the Father chose will come to Christ as a result of that drawing (John 6:37-39). That is extremely clear in the Holy Scriptures, and one could not misunderstand that unless someone helped. As a matter of fact, the elect are like the "children of wrath, even as others" until the saving grace of God dawns in their lives (Ephesians 2:3). Those who go to hell do not go sincerely believing Jesus Christ to be the Son of God nor wanting to be saved. They have no interest in it (1 Corinthians 1:18).
Question - When Adam sinned, would God have been just in sending everyone to hell?
[ July 31, 2002, 12:25 AM: Message edited by: Primitive Baptist ]
Question - When Adam sinned, would God have been just in sending everyone to hell?
[ July 31, 2002, 12:25 AM: Message edited by: Primitive Baptist ]
before God would accept a soul, such a soul must have a righteouness which is the same as God's, for God's standard of rigtheousness is one which is the same as His - perfect.
at the time of the cross, Christ paid the penalty of sins. however, this does not yet fulfill the requirement of having a righteousness the same as God's. imputation of righteousness will only come at the moment of faith in Christ. thus, those who do not apply faith in Christ, though their sins are already paid for, remains condemned, for justification is not applied in them. in effect, even with the condition that not everyone will be saved, there is no failure at the cross for Christ still was able to take away the sins of the world there.
payment for sins was for everyone. justification is for those who apply faith in Christ. this is why it is said that those who get condemned are so punished because of lack of faith in Christ - not for any sin which they committed.
Sigh.....
For the sake of those who really don't know, I will explain how the real Calvinistic viewpoint differs from the misrepresentation of Calvinism in this quote.
Everyone has the option of everlasting life. They just need to believe, and eternal life is theirs.
Everyone who rejects God chooses to reject Him all by themselves out of the evilness of their hearts. Nothing keeps them from choosing to worship God except the hostility toward God in their hearts.
It is only their intransigent hostility and intractable wickedness that cause them to be unable to come to Christ.
[ July 31, 2002, 01:49 AM: Message edited by: russell55 ]
ScottEmerson
Active Member
And yet God gives some the option by drawing them to Him. (This option is always taken, in the Calvinist view.)
If God holds up pancakes and waffles and says, "have which one you want," but the people are unable to choose the pancakes, then they do not really have the option of choosing pancakes.
The Calvinists protest on a semantic level, but there is still no option for a non-elect to be saved. The non-elect are not given any chance to be drawn to God, which God knows keeps them hellbound. To the Arminians, this means that those going to hell have no option to choose God, nor does God give them the chance to be born again. That, in my view, is why single predestination can ONLY lead to double predestination on a strictly logical level. If God is completely sovereign, as the Calvinists use the word, and if God predestines only some, knowing the fate of those who are non-elect, then by simple logic, God predestines the non-elect to Hell. That is how the Arminians see it, and in our opinion it takes a huge step of logical fallacy to say otherwise.
Scott,
Those people don't want to be saved. Why do you keep missing that? If I offer you pancakes and mud, what are you going to choose? To them, salvation in Christ is mud. They don't want it.
Those people don't want to be saved. Why do you keep missing that? If I offer you pancakes and mud, what are you going to choose? To them, salvation in Christ is mud. They don't want it.
ScottEmerson
Active Member
Why don't they want to be saved? Because it's not offered to them! Had it been offered to them, would they not take it (according to your principle of irresistible grace)? If God does not enlighten all men, which the Calvinist says, then he is withholding from others - they do not have a chance.
You gave an unbiblical answer though. They do not want to be saved because they would rather have their sin. They have chosen the creature rather than the Creator. They refused to submit to God, even though the know God.
The gospel is preached to whosever will accept it. Furthermore, God commands all men everywhere to repent. They will not accept it and they will not repent. They do not want to do anything differently.
They do not want a chance. They will not be in hell because they would have done otherwise. They will be in hell because they did exactly what they wanted to do.
It isn't the drawing that gives anyone the option. The option is always there for everyone, but everyone, to a man, obstinately refuses to take the option.
The drawing, rather than giving an option, overcomes the obstinate refusal of that option.
If their inability to choose pancakes comes only from their absolute revulsion to pancakes, and not from anyone keeping pancakes from them, then how can you say they don't really have the option of choosing pancakes? Please explain.
Word meaning is everything in theology. Its all in the details, or things that may seem like nitpicking, but make all the difference in the world.
People use the term "single predestination" to mean that God is only ACTIVE in those He predestines to salvation. He actively overcomes their natural hostility to God. The others are left to chose whomever they want to serve.
[ July 31, 2002, 01:15 PM: Message edited by: russell55 ]
Ray Berrian
New Member
russell55,
Everything that you said in your July 31st. 1:47 a.m. post I also can agree with, being more toward an Arminian persuasion. In my opinion, I don't think you have represented a very strong Calvinistic view as to how God deals with human beings. Your statements in this post is a very moderate view of Calvinism or you did not say enough to offer the full picture of your view.
Everything that you said in your July 31st. 1:47 a.m. post I also can agree with, being more toward an Arminian persuasion. In my opinion, I don't think you have represented a very strong Calvinistic view as to how God deals with human beings. Your statements in this post is a very moderate view of Calvinism or you did not say enough to offer the full picture of your view.
Ray,
Russell's statement is exactly the position of Calvinism. There is nothing "moderate" about it really. I think the difference is that you underestimate the hostility of the human heart towards God. You seem to think that hostility can be removed by human reasoning, human decisions, etc. We do not. The hostility of man against God is an innate product of his heart and that man is deceived because his heart is deceitful.
Russell's statement is exactly the position of Calvinism. There is nothing "moderate" about it really. I think the difference is that you underestimate the hostility of the human heart towards God. You seem to think that hostility can be removed by human reasoning, human decisions, etc. We do not. The hostility of man against God is an innate product of his heart and that man is deceived because his heart is deceitful.
The issue is whether they don't have a chance because they don't want a chance. But then they reason they don't want a chance, is because they don't have a chance (i.e to want the chance. They are not elect and only the elect have a chance, which is not a "chance" then, but irresistable "grace".
The original conception of what is being called "Calvinism" affirmed double predestinarian "election to hell", and people have simply modified this to eliminate the "double" aspect, to try and remove some of the offense (while still criticizing non-Calvinists for removing more or all of the "offense"), but there is no escaping that corollary, and original pure Calvinism did not try to do that. Especially when Romans 9 is the prooftext for the doctrine,and a few others like in 1 Peter 2:8 ("appointed to disobedience/stumbling")
The original conception of what is being called "Calvinism" affirmed double predestinarian "election to hell", and people have simply modified this to eliminate the "double" aspect, to try and remove some of the offense (while still criticizing non-Calvinists for removing more or all of the "offense"), but there is no escaping that corollary, and original pure Calvinism did not try to do that. Especially when Romans 9 is the prooftext for the doctrine,and a few others like in 1 Peter 2:8 ("appointed to disobedience/stumbling")
That corollary has been shown not to be a necessary corollary if free will is properly understood. It is only the result of forcing your own view on the text of Scripture in an effort to discredit our answers to your questions.
Speaking of corollaries, you still haven't answered how a loving God can create creatures that he knows will go to hell, have you?
I don't think that can really be answered, and there is too much speculation of God decreeing it, or He might as well have decreed it in your view, so that proves our view, etc.
I still don't see where it was "shown" how that corollary is not necesary. This is frequently affirmed, but not proven.
the question at the bottom is this, is do individual "non-elect" people have the worth and purpose God created man for-- to love and worship Him? Not whether they want to (because no one wanted to at first), but do they exist for that purpose? Or did He create them just to be punished as some sort of example? (Or are they some sort of anomaly-- They cropt up (one could use (Matthew 13:25, 28 as support) and were not apart of God's plan, so He disposes of them.)
I still don't see where it was "shown" how that corollary is not necesary. This is frequently affirmed, but not proven.
the question at the bottom is this, is do individual "non-elect" people have the worth and purpose God created man for-- to love and worship Him? Not whether they want to (because no one wanted to at first), but do they exist for that purpose? Or did He create them just to be punished as some sort of example? (Or are they some sort of anomaly-- They cropt up (one could use (Matthew 13:25, 28 as support) and were not apart of God's plan, so He disposes of them.)
Ray Berrian
New Member
I especially liked your expression something to the effect that 'did the non-elect have worth, especially being created in the 'image of God.' [James 3:9] Did the non-elect have a value as viable human beings or were they mere fodder for the Almighty to torture forever in Hell or to satisfy the vengeful aspect of the Divine Being.
People who believe in more of an Arminian way believe that the non-elect do have infinite value and worth, now and in eternity. Those who receive Christ, as Calvinists and Arminians have, know we have infinite value and worth. We are pilgrims walking toward our heavenly home.
People who believe in more of an Arminian way believe that the non-elect do have infinite value and worth, now and in eternity. Those who receive Christ, as Calvinists and Arminians have, know we have infinite value and worth. We are pilgrims walking toward our heavenly home.
So why is this acceptable for your position but not for ours? Why can you appeal to mystery but we cannot?
These are questions that you must answer, assuming you are not an open theist. They have all been answered by us. Man does have worth because he is in the image of God. That is why capital punishment is the appropriate response for those who stamp out the image bearer. He did not create them to be punished. But in your position, you are not free from this "dilemma." For you, God created people that he knew would go to hell. You cannot simply accuse us of this. You must realize it is inherent in your position as well (unless you are an open theist).
Ray Berrian
New Member
Aki,
I Tim. 2:5 The Greek word for 'will have' is wishes . . . ALL men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
Romans 5:18 The gift of salvation is offered to all, because everyone is not too depraved to understand the ABC's of the Gospel.
I Peter 3:18 ' . . . the Just for the unjust.' {not just the few unjust ones--all}
I Tim. 2:5 The Greek word for 'will have' is wishes . . . ALL men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
Romans 5:18 The gift of salvation is offered to all, because everyone is not too depraved to understand the ABC's of the Gospel.
I Peter 3:18 ' . . . the Just for the unjust.' {not just the few unjust ones--all}