Unconditional Election And the Invincible Purpose of God

"As their deeds deserved" seems to me to describe things written after the foundation of the world. Of course this could mean that only the elect whose names were written before the foundation are judged according to their deeds, but that is stretching.

What if every person who ever lived or will live has their name written in the book of life. That would mean of course that God knew before creation the names of every person who would ever live even those tiny pre born infants that are slaughtered for convenience sake. That would also mean that God is the one who names the children we have.

Never the less, I believe that every person who comes to belief in Jesus gets his name written in the Lambs book of life! Those not found in the Lambs book of life are cast into the lake of fire.

 

Yelsew;so you're telling me that God does'nt know beforehand whose name will be written down in the Lamb's book of life? Come on now,either He knows or He does'nt,which is it? You can't have it both ways.

 

Brutus,
I suspect that it is we who do not know whose names are or will be written in the Lambs book of Life.

We have do not know who "the elect" may be.

It is not for us to know!

 

Yelsew;I do agree that we don't know who the elect is.But,you stated in a previous post that there are those who are added daily to the book of life along with those who were there before the foundation of the world.By that statement I take it to mean that you're saying that God does'nt know beforehand who's going to get their name recorded in the book of life!Is that exactly what you meant,yes or no?

 

Brutus,

In answer to your question . . .

You have stated basically what I believe. God only regenerates those who see their need of Christ and repent/turn from their sins, and believe and trust in Him. God's conviction and convincing ministry of the Spirit precedes a personal response to the call of the Gospel.

 

Brutus,
A yes or no answer is inadequate, so...

I don't know, but strongly believe that the book of life is what I would term a "living document" that is, it is not a bound and sealed book, but one that is added to, whether by simply a check mark next to an existing name, or by the addition of a name.

We are told that names can be blotted from the Book of life, examples below, so the book must be open and living.

If the book is open and living, and names can be blotted out, that must mean that everyone's names are in the book to start with and when we sin against God (perhaps a direct act against God and his chosen race), the names of the actors get blotted from the book. If that is the case, then why can't names be added upon their belief in the Lamb?

More examples of how the Book could be considered an open book and some that indicate otherwise.
David believed that the Book of Life is an open book,

Indication that perhaps not all are written in the Book of Life from the foundation.

This one indicates that not all are written in the Book of life. And that there are many who are not permitted entry into the New Jerusalem because of that.

A great deception will befall those who are not written in the Lamb's Book of Life. So that indicates that not all are written from the foundation. Yet, believers in Jesus are saved by the blood of the lamb. So their names must get written at some time into the Book of Life.

More, or amplification, of the great deception. This one confuses the issue, because it specifies "from the foundation of the world".

Well if the book is open, and the Gospel message which is to all mankind has been heard and believed, what would prevent a drop of Jesus' blood from being added to the name of the new believer? If other than I stated above, why can't God add names if he desires? After all, it is the Father's desire than none should perish, but that all should have everlasting life.

 

On this regard, calvinism does say that the Gospel is for anyone who will hear and accept. That again shows that you are disagreeing with something that you do not understand.

Surely you are not serious ... Read John 10 about the sheep who never perish. Read Rom 8 about the progression from foreknowledge to glorification.

 

Well then, if Calvinism includes "anyone who will hear and accept", why all the emphasis on "the elect"? What does it matter if one is "elected" or not if virtually anyone can hear and believe and thus receive salvation?

 

Well then, if Calvinism includes "anyone who will hear and accept", why all the emphasis on "the elect"? What does it matter if one is "elected" or not if virtually anyone can hear and believe and thus receive salvation?</font>[/QUOTE]The elect are the ones who have ears to hear and believe. Your error is in adding "virtually" to "anyone". That's not what the text says.

Let's look at the reverse statement, "If anyone does not hear and accept..." You can find an example in 1 John.

Now what does John say next?

There's your answer. If anyone hears and accepts, you can know they are the elect. But John spells it out even better with respect to sin:

Ooh, there's that word "if" again. So it sounds as it's all up to us as to whether or not we sin, right? Then John says...

(Take careful note that "continue to sin" communicates living in sin, or sinning continually). Cannot? What's with the "cannot" if it is a matter of free will? I seem to recall that, while they may not have been in a continual state of sin, the Corinthians were sinning a LOT, and the text implies that they were saved.

So what's the point here?

Let's play "find the free will" in that verse! Looks more to me like there are children of God and children of the devil, and one way you can tell them apart is because the children of God hear and accept (and obey, and love, and only because the seed of God is in them and they were born of God, not because of anything in themselves). There's no "virtually anyone" in that statement.

 

Do you believe that we are created in the image of God?

How many images of God can there be?

Do you think that God created two classes of humans, those who can hear and those who cannot?

Did God create humans who have no ears and thus cannot hear? Reference please?

For what biblical reason would God create those who cannot hear because they have nor "ear to hear"?

OH Blind Guide, You are distorting scripture to support your own corrupt theology! In the Name of Jesus I beg you to cease and desist!

[ January 12, 2003, 10:17 PM: Message edited by: Yelsew ]

 

'Calvinism does say that the Gospel is for anyone who will hear and accept.'

The above statement is filled with hyperbole. According to the above teachers the non-elect have already either been foreordained to Hell or as the more clever ones say, 'have been passed by.' If this is a true statement and fact then the first paragraph is an unintentional fabrication, or at least a novel, ill designed deception. If the non-elect are not drawn by the Effecutal Call, according to Calvinism, then they indeed cannot come to Christ, which again makes paragraph number one a false statement.

If a sinner has no ability to accept the Gospel, because he is dead as a 'door nail' because of Total Depravity, then by the same token he cannot hear the saving and eternal value of His grace. This is the theory that is postulated by St. Augustine and "Calvin's Institutes." Again, this makes the statement in the earliest paragraph in error.

Thank God there is nothing that can keep a person away from eternal salvation, except his or her rebellion against the Lord God.

 

Stated eloquently Dr. Berrian.

It seems Calvin's God created men who are not in his image and others who are, but I can't find that written in scripture.

Some do not have ears to hear and others do.

My God created not even one man who is not in His image!

Not one of Calvin's God's people were given the capability to Choose, and everyone of them are totally depraved.

My God's people were made perfect but chose to sin, and now all of them sin but only a few are totally Depraved. Many of them are convicted by their sins, and they choose to believe and accept the redeemer's promise, and every day they all face temptations and must choose to yield to temptation or to believe the Promise and not yield.

Calvin's God is a respector of man. Mine is not!

 

Ray,

YOu once again show that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking. We clearyl and without question believe that whoever wants to be saved can be saved. The gospel goes out to whosoever will. You need to start learning. It is obvious that your mind is closed. YOu want to call us false teachers but we teach what Scripture does. Your problem is with Scripture not with us.

As for the image of God, you and Yelsew repeat another often answered misconception. We believe that every man has the image of God. The Bible clearly teaches that. Depravity and election has nothing to do with the image of God. Again, some basic study (instead of speaking from your lack of knowledge) would bear this point out. This is common stuff;

Now let's move forward and talk about the differences we have. We both believe that whosoever will may come. We both believe that all men have the image of God. Stop repeating inaccurate information. Let's talk about differences.

 

For people who are so Biblical we do not hear to much expostulating on having faith, believing or trusting in Christ. [Hebrews chapter 11; Romans chapter four and five; John 3:16; and Hebrews 11:6 for example. Calvin and his over emphasized sovereignty disallows this lest, God forbid, that a person might have a 'free will' to step out on these Biblical realities.

In the 1,300 pages of Calvin's Institutes he never expounds on God's love for human beings. And then some wonder why other Christians suggest that sovereignty was over-played.

 

How could you possibly believe that "whosoever will" may come when you believe in the Effectual call?? aren't you contradicting yourself?

But then again the Calvinist say they believe in a General call..but then again that's a front...it leads people into thinking that they could come when it's really the effectual one that counts and if they don't get that effectual call they can't come...

So when you get down to it it really isn't "whosoever" because God didn't give the effectual call to the Non-elect.. so in all honesty looks to me like your trying to look like you agree with the Bible and Yelsew when really you don't.

 

"How could you possibly believe that "whosoever will" may come when you believe in the Effectual call?? aren't you contradicting yourself?"

Of course it isn't a contradicition. Calvanisst believe that anyone who responds to teh general call of the gospel in faith will be received by God. But Calvanists also understand that the depravity of humanity is such that no one will so respond to such a general call.

"But then again the Calvinist say they believe in a General call..but then again that's a front...it leads people into thinking that they could come when it's really the effectual one that counts and if they don't get that effectual call they can't come..."

It isn't a front. The General call is a legitimate call from God, one that people are responsible to respond to, and are held accountable for as to their response. So the General Call certainly counts.

And don't forget that it isn't God's fault that people are depraved such that they cannot respond in faith to the general call.

Frankly if you have a problem with fallen nature take it up with Adam, not God. We deal with the consequences of that first sin still.

"So when you get down to it it really isn't "whosoever" because God didn't give the effectual call to the Non-elect.. so in all honesty looks to me like your trying to look like you agree with the Bible and Yelsew when really you don't."

Wrong. It IS whosoever since it is a real call. If anyone responded in faith, God would receive them. Sour grapes over the Fall is hardly an appropriate response to this.

No one is seeking to be disengenuous or deceptive. The reason that what we say looks biblical is because it IS biblical.

 

Hang on you just said that NOONE can respond to the general call So how can the be held responsible for something they can't do?? They can't be held responsible.

The General Call does NOT count unless your using that as an excuse to damn people to hell who can't do anything about the condition they are in.

WHAT??!? you have got to be kidding..it is God's fault people can't respond to the Call because only he gives the Elect the Effectual call.. SO if God doesn't give everyone the Effectual call then they are without responsibility if they are so unable to come by their own want.

IF only the ELECT get the EFFECTUAL call that results in a persons salvation ...then it Is not WHOSOEVER WILL because whosoever includes EVERY person on this planet..but the effectual call only goes out to the Elect..so it's NOT whosoever will..and whosoever will gives an option..so If the effectual call can't be resisted..then it still isn't whosever will.. but whosoever is made.

it is NOT Biblical at all..it's a sick twist of God and his nature.

[ January 14, 2003, 09:04 AM: Message edited by: shilo ]

 

"Hang on you just said that NOONE can respond to the general call So how can the be held responsible for something they can't do?? They can't be held responsible."

But we are. Just like the Jews were held responsible for upholding the whole law even though that is impossible.

"The General Call does NOT count unless your using that as an excuse to damn people to hell who can't do anything about the condition they are in."

Not at all. It certainly does count, for the reason specified. It is an authentic call. If anyone responded to it in faith, God would receive them.

You are trying to say that it can't count just because of the result. That isn't logic, its sour grapes.

And God does not need the general call as an excuse to codemn. Apart form Christ everyone is condemned anyway.

"WHAT??!? you have got to be kidding..it is God's fault people can't respond to the Call because only he gives the Elect the Effectual call.. SO if God doesn't give everyone the Effectual call then they are without responsibility if they are so unable to come by their own want.

People go to Hell because of sin. Sin is not God's fault. Sin is our fault. We are the ones who Paul says are without excuse. God is totally just and righteous in judging sin. Our inability is not God's fault, but ours. It is the result of the Fall, a consequence of Original Sin. SAdam and Eve comitted that sin. Not God.

"IF only the ELECT get the EFFECTUAL call that results in a persons salvation ...then it Is not WHOSOEVER WILL because whosoever includes EVERY person on this planet..but the effectual call only goes out to the Elect..so it's NOT whosoever will..and whosoever will gives an option..so If the effectual call can't be resisted..then it still isn't whosever will.. but whosoever is made."

You are not dealing with the issue. What makes the General Call real is the sincerity of it. If God made the offer with no intent of receiving anyone who responded in faith, then you'd be right. But that isn't the case. God would receive anyone who responded to the General Call. That is also why the responsibilty for responding to it is real. God is sincere both ways. God's call is certainly a whosoever. you are simply saying that God is insincere, and that not based on his words but on ours. We don't respnd to that call so you deny tha God is sincere.

You sound like Adam, blaming God, anyone but himself. "Lord the woman you gave to me..."

 

True! But the jews also had laws given to them so when they broke the commandments they could atone for their sins..But they had to do it or else they would go to hell..they had a choice. God didn't MAKE them bring the offerings to the priest

Okay lets say it's authentic. However you stated that man CANNOT respond to the call.. So why would God Knowing that man couldn't respond to the call give a call man couldn't respond to?? To say.. "See I gave you a call..but you couldn't come..sorry. you're damned.."

It is logic not sour grapes..If you CANT do something you can't do it no matter what..so the general call IS a mock call..because God would KNOW people couldn't respond..so it would be as if God were mocking them..

I agree apart from Christ people are already Condemned..

I agree with everything you said except that man has an INABILITY..He doesn't have Inability..he has a choice in the matter..

Example..The Men of Nineveh..God decreed they would be overthrown (Jon 3:4) THEY repented on their own (3:8-10) God spared them. You can't tell me that man has inability..that right there proves he has ability.

I am dealing with it..it stems from TD.this effectual callin buisness.

God would accept anyone who came to him true..however..THEY CAN'T COME God would know this..no matter how sincere you say the call is..it is certainly not..it isn't one that would result in a sinner coming to God anyway. You have to have the EFFECTUAL CALL..that is the Key..only those who get that call can be saved.

According to the Doctrines of Calvin..the General call is not a sincere one, since it is not effective...even your fellow Calvinist agree to that.

"the general Call will not work a work of salvation in a sinner's soul" (seaton pg.85)

"The General call, like sheet lightning is grand and beautiful but never strikes anything" (Gunn pg 22)

"God issues an invitation which is universal yet ultimately ineffective" (storms chosen for life pg.104)

I'm not blaming God for anything..I'm blaming Calvinist for making God out to be a God who only wants certain people saved. The docrtines are NOT biblical..as a matter of Fact the effectual call makes God out to be a liar.

[ January 14, 2003, 10:24 AM: Message edited by: shilo ]

 

Because that was not teh question at hand. We have already affirmed the necessity of belief for salvation.

Have you read all 1300 pages??