TULIP: Unconditional Election

[eightball]

Here comes another post from a Christian simpleton:

Jesus sends out His apostles to the ends of the earth to tell all of the great Gospel.

Why is it necessary TULIP followers?

The "elect" are already in the Lamb's book.

Why evangelize? Why? The "elect" will crawl out of the slime of hardened souls as the true children of God, regardless of the "Message/Gospel"

We walk among the predestined, and the "already damned to hell".

Where is the zeal or emphasis to send out missionarys to the ends of the world, or share the good news with friends, relatives, co-workers, etc.......?

Sincerely, Simpleton In Christ, and proud of it.......:BangHead:

 

[eightball]

So, now I am "witless"?

But, none of my question marks recieved a reply.

You are not "witless".

Child-like faith entails reason, and your posts have been just that.

If only the Body of Christ could remove their collective heads out of using scripture as cannon balls and just exercise common sense.

I refer to my self as a "Christian simpleton" in jest, but basically there is an "element" here that seems to see those that don't embrace TULIP as bordering on "apostasy".

This is so sad.

God entered time through His Son Jesus Christ, yet God resides in eternity past/present/future............which boggles the finite mind of humanity, and in my assessment nulifies the lock-stock-and barrel argument that God's elect are set in our present time/existence, and on into our earthly time-bound future.

It is an old argument, but I will say it again as that simpleton: God knows who will and who will not believe on His Son Jesus for salvation, as God oversees "everything" in creation from the beginning in eternity past through eternity/future.

God has an "elect" but it is only because He/God Almight, "knows" who will and will not choose wisely.

Choosing is not performing the miracle of a soul's salvation, but in metaphorical terms, throws the human will-switch that says "I Do need you Lord Jesus".

To be accused of being involved in God's miraculous work of making a brand knew peron in Christ by saying "I do" is in a way playing God from another angle. It is presuming that man is but a mindless "tool" that has no capacity to recognize his/her bankrupt state as a result of God's chastening work to "push" a human soul to the state of "helplessness", and possibly salvation. Of course the other state that follows helplessness is continued mockery, and obstinance.

 

[webdog]

The rare occasion where "getting behind the eightball" is considered a good thing :thumbs:

 

[SpiritualMadMan]

Thanks Eightball!

Sometimes it is hard when the rounds are falling so close to forget that we are told to let our moderation be known to all men...

(Php 4:5 Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand.)

When the fleshly nature wants to respond with nukes...

But, then there'd be no one left to fellowship with...

Sorry, I'm rambling... Don't think I got enough rest while sleeping...

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

I herewith wish to retract and apologise for my referring to Calvin's use of the words or concept 'the good-pleasure of God'. I may have referred to it out of place. I do not now have the time to check up in what sense or context I made the reference myself. Therefore please ignore my making use of it in the current discussions. If I wrongly used Calvin, I again apologise.

It is my personal conviction that it was because of God's pure good-pleasure of his own that He Elected out of a sea of drowned in sin carcases, some to bring them to life through the merit of Jesus Christ and the operation of his omnipotent Holy Spirit. The dead bones of the slain on the plains of sin He brought together and instilled with new life. That was and is God's goodwill and NONE of man's. There is no elect that before was not a dry-dead burning wood stump plucked by God from the raging fires of hell.

The issue remains - not for me; but for some in this discussion -, why and how come the carcases are carcases and the sea a sea of carcases, and the bones and wood stumps plains fulls of scourged and stinking smoking rotten bones and timbers. Some say no these dead so chose and that's why they sent themselves into the fires of hell. Others say it just happened but that those rotten dead were not to blame in the first place; they only sealed their lot through having made wrong choice in their second chance. I say, no it is God so decided and the only moving influence on God choosing that end for the wicked, was HIS OWN, WILL. And God cannot will against his own good pleasure. God will never regret that He made death the reward for sin and the fires of brimstone the end of hell. And I, for one, cannot understand that what God does according to his own and good will, is not his pleasure.

Our sense of holiness and justice and God's are so remotely removed from one another as heaven from earth.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

then we are closer in view. And you to are at odds with ge doctrinally.

GE:

As long as nobody ever accuse me of synergism (call it what you like), I'm more than happy to walk away the loser in a debate on the Sovereignty of God (or whichever facet of it).

Thank you guys for the discussion. It certainly brought some fresh perspectives to myself.

This has been the first and only discussion of sorts on this topic I engaged in. Hope the last too.

 

[BobRyan]

I said -- I claim that the calvinist idea of Unconditional Election is just a euphemism for "arbitrary selection"

Of course BobRyan is correct in this assertion. There can be no other alternative than Election is a selection based arbitrarily or Randomness because any other view is based on the merit of the individual. Ultimately, when holding this view the elected person is such based on the "luck" of the draw rather than God's supremacy Making God less than "luck".

This is how it works. Man is incapable of choosing God or even looking for God or even wanting to. God makes it clear in his scriptures that the path is narrow thus indicating that fewer people attain glory than damnation.


Thus the first thing we learn from God about this view is that God has selected fewer people for Glory. God has chosen a (finite) number of those he wants to save. He purposely chose fewer people to be save. Why fewer?

True in the "arbitrary selection" model "God chooses fewer".

But in the "God so loved the World" Model which is the "Whosoever will model" and is the "I will draw all men unto me" model where "God is not willing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance" we have God sending his son "to be the savior of the World" 1 John 4, and we have God providing Christ as the "Atoning sacrifice for OUR sins and not for our sins only but for the sins of the WHOLE WORLD" 1John 2:2.

Thus in that model the fact that it is only the "FEW" that are saved (Matt 7) is a reflection on man who "rejects God's purpose for them" Luke 7, for "HE CAME TO HIS OWN and his own received him not" John 1.

Rather than "He arbitrarily selected a FEW to come to and draw and the others he cared nothing about".

Thinkingstuff said of the arbitrary selection model -

It then is clear God purposely did not choose the rest of humanity thus logically speaking by the act of not choosing for election chose for damnation.

Now God makes it clear election is not based on Merit of the person who is elected but because God chose him. What then are the mechanics of selection? Certianly nothing reliant upon the person he chose. It cannot be because that person pleases him because that would be merit base. It cannot be because that person is optimum in God's plan because its merit base, nor can it be because of its contribution to the Glory of God because once again its merit based.

Therefore, the selection must be arbitrary or random in order for it to have nothing to do with the elect themselves. If Random then the person elect is reliant on luck rather than a discriminating God. And if so that lessens God's soveriegnty which contradicts the principles of TULIP. Therefore there is a significant theological problem with this view.

Indeed - Romans 2 states clearly that God is NOT partial.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

Yet, the TULIP society can't seem to understand that God is the "Saver", the "Remaker", the "Restorer", of the divine relationship that involves man's cooperation, but God's total miraculous work of salvation.

For man to respond is interpretted by the TULIP group as man in some say saving himself or being involved in the salvation process that is solely God's realm.

How skewed, how untrue! Man was created from the beginning not as an automaton that is either flawed of incapable to receive salvation or is wired correctly to receive the grace of God. Man was given a "will"........that could be exercised to the quality of "willingness".

Indeed.

God is the "Sovereign creator of a free will universe".

Lucifer chose rebellion while others chose to remain faithful.

1/3 of the angelic host chose to follow Lucifer while others chose to remain faithful.

Adam and Eve chose to follow Satan - while other worlds chose to remain faithful.

Christ chose to come to earth and die for our sins.

The Jews chose to reject the one sent to them as we see in John 1.

Christ weeps over their choice in MAtt 23 "O Jerusalem ... how I WANTED to save your children ... but you would not!".

in Christ,

Bob

 

[BobRyan]

SMM said

It think it all comes back to where on the scale of Sovreignty you "sit".

From one xtreme, "Absolute Predestination" to the other "Open Theism".

IMHO both extreme are "inaccurate".

Indeed the problem with 5 Pointer POV is that it tries to sit in the seat of God -- the problem is -- it is just too hard to BE God!



Better to stick with the "Whosoever will" of the Bible.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[SpiritualMadMan]

Indeed the problem with 5 Pointer POV is that it tries to sit in the seat of God -- the problem is -- it is just too hard to BE God!



Better to stick with the "Whosoever will" of the Bible.

in Christ,

Bob

SWEET! :thumbsup:

 

[annsni]

Indeed the problem with 5 Pointer POV is that it tries to sit in the seat of God -- the problem is -- it is just too hard to BE God!



Better to stick with the "Whosoever will" of the Bible.

in Christ,

Bob

Who sits in the seat of God for a "5 pointer"? Oh - God TOTALLY does.

 

[Dr. Walter]

It is an old argument, but I will say it again as that simpleton: God knows who will and who will not believe on His Son Jesus for salvation, as God oversees "everything" in creation from the beginning in eternity past through eternity/future.

God has an "elect" but it is only because He/God Almight, "knows" who will and will not choose wisely.

It is an old argument but a false one. Election is not based upon prescience and election is never presented that way in the scriptures. Indeed Romans 9:11 states the postion of prescience and denies it bluntly. Romans 8:28-30 clearly teaches that God works all things "according to His purpose" (v. 28) and that foreknowledge is a consequence rather than the cause of that purpose (v. 29).

According to forescience the scriptures declare twice that God looked down from heaven and all that he saw was complete and total rejection by all mankind (Psa. 14:2-3; 54:2-3) and it is this statement that Paul chooses in Romans 3:9-11 demonstrate there is "NONE" no, "NOT ONE" that seeks after God.

Hence, election is "of grace" (Rom. 11:5) and is unto salvation (2 Thes. 2:13) where faith is produced by the Holy Spirit (1 Thes. 1:4-5; 2 Thes. 2:13b) in the gospel (v. 14) rather than the consequence of foreseen human response.

The truth is there are only two oppossing options (1) Unconditional election of grace and (2) conditional election that is God's response to human reaction in some and not in others. The Bible clearly and flatly denies the latter.

It is not whosoever won't (Rom. 8:7; Acts 7:51) which is the condition of all mankind (Psa. 14:2-3; Rom. 3:10-11; Jn. 3:18-19) but whosoever will and that willingness is due to a "new" heart and a "new" spirit granted by God's elective grace (Deut. 4:29; 29:4; Ezek. 36:26-27; 2 Cor. 3:3-6; 1 Cor. 1:26-31; 2 Cor. 4:6)

 

[BobRyan]

It is an old argument, but I will say it again as that simpleton: God knows who will and who will not believe on His Son Jesus for salvation, as God oversees "everything" in creation from the beginning in eternity past through eternity/future.

God has an "elect" but it is only because He/God Almight, "knows" who will and will not choose wisely.

Indeed "Whom He foreknew He predestined" in that He foreknew their choice to accept the Gospel provision that he made in "Drawing all" of mankind unto Himself.


However arbitrary selection does not work that way. Under the speculative scenarios of arbtrary selection God "is arbitrarily partial" to favoring some and not others (no matter what Romans 2:13 says to the contrary) - having nothing at all to do with what the "FEW" of Matt 7 choose or accept or think or do.

Giving rise to the classic 5 point Calvinist "future scenario".

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

It is an old argument but a false one. Election is not based upon prescience and election is never presented that way in the scriptures. Indeed Romans 9:11 states the postion of prescience and denies it bluntly. Romans 8:28-30 clearly teaches that God works all things "according to His purpose" (v. 28) and that foreknowledge is a consequence rather than the cause of that purpose (v. 29).

According to forescience the scriptures declare twice that God looked down from heaven and all that he saw was complete and total rejection by all mankind (Psa. 14:2-3; 54:2-3) and it is this statement that Paul chooses in Romans 3:9-11 demonstrate there is "NONE" no, "NOT ONE" that seeks after God.

Hence, election is "of grace" (Rom. 11:5) and is unto salvation (2 Thes. 2:13) where faith is produced by the Holy Spirit (1 Thes. 1:4-5; 2 Thes. 2:13b) in the gospel (v. 14) rather than the consequence of foreseen human response.

The truth is there are only two oppossing options (1) Unconditional election of grace and (2) conditional election that is God's response to human reaction in some and not in others. The Bible clearly and flatly denies the latter.

It is not whosoever won't (Rom. 8:7; Acts 7:51) which is the condition of all mankind (Psa. 14:2-3; Rom. 3:10-11; Jn. 3:18-19) but whosoever will and that willingness is due to a "new" heart and a "new" spirit granted by God's elective grace (Deut. 4:29; 29:4; Ezek. 36:26-27; 2 Cor. 3:3-6; 1 Cor. 1:26-31; 2 Cor. 4:6)

GE:
Thanks, Dr Walter for doing the work God gives a believer in Him to do. I plead guilty that I got tired to do my duty; it seems - to my sinful guilt - it's a waste of time. When people are worshipers of themselves they are worshipers of themselves and NOTHING EVER will change that; not even the children of God doing their duty.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Indeed "Whom He foreknew He predestined" in that He foreknew their choice to accept the Gospel provision that he made in "Drawing all" of mankind unto Himself.


However arbitrary selection does not work that way. Under the speculative scenarios of arbtrary selection God "is arbitrarily partial" to favoring some and not others (no matter what Romans 2:13 says to the contrary) - having nothing at all to do with what the "FEW" of Matt 7 choose or accept or think or do.

Giving rise to the classic 5 point Calvinist "future scenario".

in Christ,

Bob

GE:

You arrogantly twist and corrupt the Scripture --- the Word of God!

The Scripture says "_WHOM_ He foreknew He predestined"; But pellagian arminian SDA tells God --- not us --- No you don't! Don't you dare! Pellagian arminian SDA tells God his word was, "whosoever’s CHOICE God foreknew, He predestined".

NOT God being chosen by man, although whom God had foreknown and had predestined, shall choose God their Redeemer and RECREATOR.

The Scripture --- God's Word --- says and means "_WHOM_ God foreknew He _PRE_-destined".
So that GOD in ONE ACT OF HIS WILL AND COUNCIL "purposed" and "predestined" HIM (AND his choice) whom GOD "willed", AND "elected" and "foreknew" unto SALVATION AND ETERNAL LIFE WITHOUT FAIL.

The wicked or reprobate God never willed or purposed, nor chose or elected, but foreknew, and consistently and consequently, predestined and willed, and in fact PURPOSED their just REWARD.

 

[webdog]

GE:
You arrogantly twist and corrupt the Scripture --- the Word of God!

The Scripture says "_WHOM_ He foreknew He predestined"; But pellagian arminian SDA tells God --- not us --- No you don't! Don't you dare! Pellagian arminian SDA tells God his word was, "whose CHOICE God foreknew, He predestined".

But the Scripture --- God's Word --- says and means "_WHOM_ God foreknew He _PRE_-destined" so that GOD, predestined the choice of whomsoever _HE_ chose—

NOT God being chosen by man, although whom God had foreknown and had predestined, shall choose God their Redeemer and RECREATOR.

Fatalistic deterministic calvinist emphasizes WHOM for no apparent reason. At any rate the predestining here has nothing to do with salvation but being conformed to Christ.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

LIKE ALWAYS! I have never seen it happen differently. 'Free-will' will defend itself to death --- of anything in its way. Nothing is as sensitive as the mind of the self-obsessed; nothing ever so quickly offended as his ego.

 

[webdog]

LIKE ALWAYS! I have never seen it happen differently. 'Free-will' will defend itself to death --- of anything in its way. Nothing is as sensitive as the mind of the self-obsessed; nothing ever so quickly offended as his ego.

...and another post with no substance. I see you can dish it out, but you cannot take it.

Please elaborate on why WHOM for you is such a slam dunk for your position...and leave the attacks out...

 

[eightball]

Why the "Personal" attacks by the TULIP advocates?

Is that why we who differ are "lost" and need salvation unless we accept their "God Given" premise?

If we are not lost but considered brothers and sisters in the Lord, are we considered "apostate"?

The wife and I have some close friends(married couple) that used to accept/believe a moderate view that entailed both sides and also didn't involve debating intensely about who the "elect" our and how they ended up that way.

They left the church we all attended and joined a "Reformed" church, and it wasn't but a few weeks and they started to "change" in their relationship towards the wife and myself.

It was almost akin to having friends who were once bible Christians becoming Mormons or J.W.'s.. They became obsessed with "convincing" the wife and myself of the Calvinistic/election doctrine of their Protestant/Reformed church.

This couple(close friends) have spent less time breaking bread with us, but we still see them ocassionally. When "election" is brought up by "them" not "us" when getting together, it again seems to be the central focus in their Christian walk. That I don't understand?

I am not calling this "cultist" behavior...i.e. they "must" convince everyone of the TULIP doctrine or a modified TULIP doctrine in order to feel at peace that their brothers and sisters in Christ are on the same page with them.
*****
Salvation is God's mystery. It happens. It is evidenced by many different/unique changes in the human being who has passed from death to life in Christ.

Also, I find the human will to "choose", is a mystery too. Why is it that I can dream, hope, speculate, etc.......and sense a thought of some kind of existence of being alive, whether saved on not saved?

Why is it that many people do admirable, humanitarian things, yet refuse God's call to repentance, yet others who live such "depraved" lives fall on their faces in a most contrite, humble fashion, and call on God?

Just as one can observe the lower animal life of earth in the form of pets........i.e. cats, dogs, birds..........we see the infinite variations of personalities.........Some pets adapt, and want to "please" others stubbornly refuse to be domesticated and end up biting the hand that feeds them and then are gotten rid-of or euthanized for general public and personal human safety.

What motivates human beings to be "nice" and others to be "mean"?

Just as it is said by scientists that not one snowflake has a design that matches another, human personality, and or souls seem to mimic that way. Even identical twins can differ widely in behavior, likes and dislikes.
*****
"If" God exists outside of time and "knows" future as well as the past as one episode or a wink/blink of an eye, why oh why TULIP advocates, is it such a hard reach to realize that He/God has even in eternal presence observed the "decisions" of every future human soul? And with that omnipotent/omniscient position that only He/God holds that He "knows" His elect or children before/now/and future?

Just as David says the He/God knew about the "knitting" of he/David in his mother's womb before the event, why TULIP advocates, does He/God who is omniscient/omnipotent/omnipresent not "know" the entire human race that will "choose wisely or not wisely" from Adam and Eve's loins to the Last Trumpet or the Day Of The Lord?

How is it that the very gift of individual-will that we observe in ours and others lives both child and adult is not really "free", but is orchestrated/pre-set to predestine some to hell and others to eternal life with God?

Elect=Chosen. That makes sense. It's the "how" part where repentance and belief of the human being is under scrutiny as to whether "we" humans exercise motive of our own, or whether we are "pushed/subdued" of our will by the Holy Spirit to the point that we are just a passenger going for a ride towards salvation with no input, but the pilot's?

Somehow repentance and belief have been ripped from the very human grasp or will of the soul, and has been placed in the realm of "helpless predestination".

How are we human beings playing God, if we, in our depraved conditions of walking-death, have or realize a "light" at the end of a very dark and dreary tunnel?

God's chastening of every human soul prior to salvation is inescapable. Why does God water the crop of the evil man, and let the righteous man's crop wither in drought?

God's love for "All" of humanity causes God within His righteous/holy will to not only chasten, but also bless with the intent of waking the human soul to His beneficient presence.

Just as in Isaiah's discourse of how God allowed the Assyrians to chasten Judah and Israel, He/God also said that this weapon of His making(Assyria) is failing to see their strength and victory on the battlefield as His/God's endowment upon them. As a result, He God chastens the Assyrians, and many other nations.

For God to predestine a portion of humanity to spiritual death for eternity flies in the face of God's first work of even creating all of humanity.

Why oh why would God even "bother" to create damned-to-hell human beings? Does this not fly in the face of God's very nature?

Just as Paul says that the earth is going through the birth pangs.........So does the human race as it looks for "meaning" of life in every place but Jesus Christ's life.

Those "birth pangs" reside in every human being whether the TULIP advocates or other folks who believe themselves to be Christians can see the "possibilities".

Remember that when Jesus was crucified that He descended to the realm of those souls who fell asleep(in the grave) to proclaim to them all that He is about so that even "they" have opportunity.

When in Jesus' time on earth during His ministry did He ever say that He had those that He hated and those that He loved in all of human creation?

Evangelizing: TULIP advocates...........Do you advocate missions work both here and faraway? Do you have the "strong desire" to spread the "good news"?

If you say "Yes!" to the above, please explain how or why you have this strong motivation, and "What does it accomplish?"?

The last time I asked this question of a TULIP doctrine advocates, they said that they do this(evangelize) because the Lord commanded them to do so, thus they do it.

Last time I read the book of Acts of the Apostles, what I gathered was not a form of "have to, because" evangelism, but a monstrous zeal with "God's Love" as the push/motivator to carry out the Great Comission.

Also, I attended the "reformed" TULIP church of our friends and observed through asking questions that missions work was not a "great" emphasis as our own church that differs from strict Calvinism.

Again, where is the zeal, the love for the lost going to be generated when all have been predestined already??????

Instead, what I observe is a cult-like obsession to "convince" other believers of their folly in the areas of human will and it's connection with God's great miracle of salvation.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Fatalistic deterministic calvinist emphasizes WHOM for no apparent reason. At any rate the predestining here has nothing to do with salvation but being conformed to Christ.

GE:

I emphasized "whom" for the APPARENT reason the Pellagians on this Forum OBVIOUSLY DISREGARD it.

Like they pretend "the predestining here" in this text as everywhere, "has nothing to do with salvation" as though "being conformed to Christ" could be divided and separated from being "predestined" and “salvation” BY GOD in the first place, and as though 'salvation' is upon condition one "is being conformed to Christ" by himself in the first place.