Unconditional Election

[steaver]

Under Calvin's model of Election, the believer had no choice in his or her matter of receiving the Holy Spirit regeneration. God caused the person to believe without any action at all taken by the individual.

For those here who do not agree with Calvin's Unconditional Election, what do you see in the scripture which causes you to reject Calvin's teaching on this subject? Or, what is your best argument against the Calvinist who declares Unconditional Election is a matter of scriptural fact?

What scripture must Calvin be disregarding or misinterpreting that is causing him to embrace his model of UE?

I am asking this because I am currently in a debate about this with a fellow brother in Christ from our local church and I would like to brush up on some of the arguments against this doctrine.

 

[The Biblicist]

Under Calvin's model of Election, the believer had no choice in his or her matter of receiving the Holy Spirit regeneration. God caused the person to believe without any action at all taken by the individual.

For those here who do not agree with Calvin's Unconditional Election, what do you see in the scripture which causes you to reject Calvin's teaching on this subject? Or, what is your best argument against the Calvinist who declares Unconditional Election is a matter of scriptural fact?

What scripture must Calvin be disregarding or misinterpreting that is causing him to embrace his model of UE?

I am asking this because I am currently in a debate about this with a fellow brother in Christ from our local church and I would like to brush up on some of the arguments against this doctrine.

You have misrepresented the doctrine of unconditional election. If you want to discuss it reasonably it must be presented reasonably.

1. Unconditional election is UNTO salvation not to damnation - 2 Thes. 2:13

2. All human beings already come into this world in unbelief - Jn. 3:17

3. Unconditional election does not force anyone to believe anything but is simply God's choice to save some in spite of their unbelief.

The change of choice within the unregenerated is due to regeneration not election. Regeneration provides a "new heart" and a "new spirit" within the elect (Deut. 29:4; Ezek. 36:26). The human will is nothing more than the vehicle of expression for the human "heart" for as a man thinketh IN HIS HEART so is he in his actions and life. Jesus said that all sinful choices or acts of the will come from the unregenerated heart (Mt. 15:19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies.

Thus in regeneration the elect is given a NEW HEART and that "new" heart is fundementally different than the old unregenerated heart in that it is by nature a BELIEVING heart whereas the old heart is by nature an UNBELIEVING heart.

Here is the bottom line. The elect previous to regeneration FREELY CHOSE to sin and after regeneration FREELY CHOOSES righteousness. Hence, there is no FORCED choice upon the elect but rather whatever the elect chooses is FREE according to his own SELF-DETERMINATION. Self-determination originated from the old heart prior to new birth but originates from the new heart after regeneration.

 

[kyredneck]

Under Calvin's model of Election, the believer had no choice in his or her matter of receiving the Holy Spirit regeneration...

No, it was the apostle John who first articulated the threefold denial of any participation on the part of man in the heavenly birth:

who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. Jn 1:13

 

[TCassidy]

Under Calvin's model of Election, the believer had no choice in his or her matter of receiving the Holy Spirit regeneration.

The above is not entirely correct. The unregenerate do have a choice, and they always choose sin and rejection of spiritual things.

It is only through the regenerating grace of God that the unregenerate enemy of God is show the mercy and love of God and is drawn unto the Savior.

 

[The Biblicist]

You have misrepresented the doctrine of unconditional election. If you want to discuss it reasonably it must be presented reasonably.

1. Unconditional election is UNTO salvation not to damnation - 2 Thes. 2:13

2. All human beings already come into this world in unbelief - Jn. 3:17

3. Unconditional election does not force anyone to believe anything but is simply God's choice to save some in spite of their unbelief.

The change of choice within the unregenerated is due to regeneration not election. Regeneration provides a "new heart" and a "new spirit" within the elect (Deut. 29:4; Ezek. 36:26). The human will is nothing more than the vehicle of expression for the human "heart" for as a man thinketh IN HIS HEART so is he in his actions and life. Jesus said that all sinful choices or acts of the will come from the unregenerated heart (Mt. 15:19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies.

Thus in regeneration the elect is given a NEW HEART and that "new" heart is fundementally different than the old unregenerated heart in that it is by nature a BELIEVING heart whereas the old heart is by nature an UNBELIEVING heart.

Here is the bottom line. The elect previous to regeneration FREELY CHOSE to sin and after regeneration FREELY CHOOSES righteousness. Hence, there is no FORCED choice upon the elect but rather whatever the elect chooses is FREE according to his own SELF-DETERMINATION. Self-determination originated from the old heart prior to new birth but originates from the new heart after regeneration.

Freedom of choice does not mean the will is independent from self or acts independent from human spiritual nature but rather is free to express human spiritual nature. The will is nothing more than the expression of heart or mind determination/inclination. Jesus explicity identifies the heart of man as the source of all determinate thoughts and actions - Mt. 15:19. An unregenerated heart has a mindset of opposition/enmity and refusal to God and His will (the law) and "neither indeed can be " (Rom. 8:7) not because the will is bound by anything external to human nature but because it's freedom lies in expressing only the determinations arising in the human heart and mind. It has no freedom outside of self-determination.

 

[billwald]

What action did any of you take to obtain your regeneration and why did you take it?

 

[pinoybaptist]

What action did any of you take to obtain your regeneration and why did you take it?

mind if I throw the question back at you so we can have a starting point for the discussion ?

 

[TCassidy]

What action did any of you take to obtain your regeneration and why did you take it?

None. God drew me to Christ and gave me faith to believe. Now I know Whom I have believed and am persuaded that He is able to keep that which I have committed unto Him against that day.

That which I have committed unto Him is nothing less than my eternal destiny.

 

[steaver]

I find with those who embrace Calvin's pov there is a lack of understanding of the transition from the Old Covenant to the New Covenant.

The OC did not contain regeneration. Ezekiel prophesies of the Millennial Kingdom, when Christ shall be their Sheperd and they shall experience the miracle of regeneration, receiving a new heart and a new spiritual walk with God, as has had already been going on in the Gentiles since the glorification of Jesus Christ after His ressurrection.

The NT writer of Hebrews goes into great lengths to explian the NC of regeneration which begun in Christ after His glorification.

James as well, goes into detail concerning salvation, declaring that Abraham was imputed righteousness because of His FAITH. Abraham was saved because he believed, yet Abraham had no benefit of a rebirth for the NC had not yet begun.

David cried out, longing for the New birth to come as he cried out "create in my a clean heart oh God".

Jesus scolded Nicodemus for being a teacher of the law and not knowing of the rebirth or NC that was to be established through Messiah.

 

[Winman]

Rom 11:18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.

The best argument against Uncondtional Election is this passage in Romans 11. It is clear in vs. 20 that elect Jews were broken off because of unbelief. How can the elect be broken off if they were chosen unconditionally before the foundation of the world?

Christians are also warned in verse 20-22 to fear lest they fall into unbelief and be not spared. Again, how can the elect be lost if Unconditional Election is true?

Why does faith matter if Unconditional Election is true?

And we are told in verse 23 if these Jews abide not still in unbelief, God shall graff them in, for God is able to graff them in AGAIN. The word AGAIN shows they were elect at one time. They were broken off because of unbelief which clearly shows election is CONDITIONAL, and if they abide not in unbelief but believe they shall be graffed in AGAIN.

Election is conditioned upon FAITH.

 

[steaver]

Rom 11:18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.

The best argument against Uncondtional Election is this passage in Romans 11. It is clear in vs. 20 that elect Jews were broken off because of unbelief. How can the elect be broken off if they were chosen unconditionally before the foundation of the world?

Christians are also warned in verse 20-22 to fear lest they fall into unbelief and be not spared. Again, how can the elect be lost if Unconditional Election is true?

Why does faith matter if Unconditional Election is true?

And we are told in verse 23 if these Jews abide not still in unbelief, God shall graff them in, for God is able to graff them in AGAIN. The word AGAIN shows they were elect at one time. They were broken off because of unbelief which clearly shows election is CONDITIONAL, and if they abide not in unbelief but believe they shall be graffed in AGAIN.

Election is conditioned upon FAITH.

This is probably the number one if not the only passage of scripture which cast doubt on OSAS. But with the overwhelming amount of scriptures on eternal security I am reluctant to let this one passage cause me to reject all the others.

I just don't see Clavin's pov on UE, however, I do see OSAS in the full counsel of the NT with the implementation of regeneration (New Covenant)

 

[Winman]

This is probably the number one if not the only passage of scripture which cast doubt on OSAS. But with the overwhelming amount of scriptures on eternal security I am reluctant to let this one passage cause me to reject all the others.

I just don't see Clavin's pov on UE, however, I do see OSAS in the full counsel of the NT with the implementation of regeneration (New Covenant)

Of course Unconditional Election is involved here, what does faith matter if election is unconditional?

This passage clearly shows the Jews belonging to the "natural" branch. The Jews are God's elect, his chosen people. But even though they were elect, they were broken off because of unbelief, and Gentiles were graffed in because of belief.

Our eternal fate was not decided before the foundation of the world, Paul warns us that we must continue in faith or we will ALSO be cut off, and Paul tells us if the Jews abide not STILL in unbelief that God can graff them back in again.

Election is absolutely conditional, based on faith.

 

[The Biblicist]

Rom 11:18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.
19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.
20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:
21 For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he also spare not thee.
22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.

The best argument against Uncondtional Election is this passage in Romans 11. It is clear in vs. 20 that elect Jews were broken off because of unbelief. How can the elect be broken off if they were chosen unconditionally before the foundation of the world?

Christians are also warned in verse 20-22 to fear lest they fall into unbelief and be not spared. Again, how can the elect be lost if Unconditional Election is true?

Why does faith matter if Unconditional Election is true?

And we are told in verse 23 if these Jews abide not still in unbelief, God shall graff them in, for God is able to graff them in AGAIN. The word AGAIN shows they were elect at one time. They were broken off because of unbelief which clearly shows election is CONDITIONAL, and if they abide not in unbelief but believe they shall be graffed in AGAIN.

Election is conditioned upon FAITH.

The context deals with Israel as an ETHNIC PEOPLE in God's plan of redemption. As a NATION they have been "cut off" and yet can be "grafted in....again" just as the Gentiles as a people were previously cut off but now have been grafted in but can be cut off again.

This has nothing to do with INDIVIDUAL salvation as individual salvation cannot be saved and lost and resaved (heb. 6:6). The context has to do with a chosen ETHNIC sphere of God's redemptive work for calling out a people. Previously God primarily called out a people from Israel as an ethnic people and rarely called out any people from the Gentiles. Now it has been reversed. God is primarily calling out a people from the Gentiles and few from Israel. However, God can reverse this and "graft back in again" Israel as the primary sphere from which he calls out a people.

 

[Winman]

The context deals with Israel as an ETHNIC PEOPLE in God's plan of redemption. As a NATION they have been "cut off" and yet can be "grafted in....again" just as the Gentiles as a people were previously cut off but now have been grafted in but can be cut off again.

This has nothing to do with INDIVIDUAL salvation as individual salvation cannot be saved and lost and resaved (heb. 6:6). The context has to do with a chosen ETHNIC sphere of God's redemptive work for calling out a people. Previously God primarily called out a people from Israel as an ethnic people and rarely called out any people from the Gentiles. Now it has been reversed. God is primarily calling out a people from the Gentiles and few from Israel. However, God can reverse this and "graft back in again" Israel as the primary sphere from which he calls out a people.

Who are you trying to convince?

Paul is speaking to believers, he said "thou standest by faith", and warns these same persons they must continue in God's goodness or they ALSO will be cut off.

Go spread your garbage elsewhere.

 

[OldRegular]

Election is absolutely conditional, based on faith.

And Winman has the deciding vote!

 

[steaver]

Who are you trying to convince?

Paul is speaking to believers, he said "thou standest by faith", and warns these same persons they must continue in God's goodness or they ALSO will be cut off.

Go spread your garbage elsewhere.

I think that in light of all the scriptures which strongly support OSAS, this passage most likely must be reffering to Gentiles as a whole and Israel as a whole. Most of Israel rejected the Messiah and thus were cut off as God's voice to the people. I believe Paul is warning these new Gentile converts as a group to not get highminded because God could just as easily reverse the situation again. God will remove Israel's blindness when the fullness of the Gentiles comes in and all of Israel at the beginning of the Millennium will be saved.

I don't know if you two have had bad words in the past, but let's all put on Christ in our conversations. We are brothers in Christ, each will receive reward or suffer loss for our construction work at the JSoC where a fair and righteous Judge will end all of these debates. Let us sharpen iron with iron until that day. Does any of us believe that Christ will not include HOW we preached in our judgment?? There will be points for correctness, but also points taken away for any unkindness I'm sure.

 

[The Biblicist]

Who are you trying to convince?

Paul is speaking to believers, he said "thou standest by faith", and warns these same persons they must continue in God's goodness or they ALSO will be cut off.

Why not quote the WHOLE verse???? Look at the comparison when the whole verse is quoted:

20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:

"they" do not refer to individual believing Jews or "the remnant" as the "remnant" was never cut off at all, but contextually "they" refer to Israel as a Nation. When Gentiles as a people turn against Christ as did Israel as a people, then they too will be cut off.

Go spread your garbage elsewhere.

I have no right to say this to you any more than you have the right to say this to me as neither you or me own or rule over this forum. Only arrogance would spout off some thing like that.

 

[Winman]

I am simply tired of Calvinists saying scripture does not mean what it says. The Jews were the elect of God, but they were cut off for unbelief. The Gentiles were graffed in. But Paul warns the Gentiles they must continue to believe or they will be ALSO cut off. This shows election is conditional, you must believe to be one of the elect.

No person's fate was decided before the foundation of the world. Those Jews who were elect were cut off for unbelief, but Paul says if they remain not still in unbelief they will be graffed in again.

The Gentiles were not God's people, they were not elect, but because of the Jews unbelief God went to the Gentiles and they believed. They are now elect. But they must continue to believe or they will be cut off also. Election is conditional.

There are many persons who were elect, but were cut off. King Saul was chosen of God, God sent Samuel to specially pick him and anoint him.

1 Sam 10:24 And Samuel said to all the people, See ye him whom the LORD hath chosen, that there is none like him among all the people? And all the people shouted, and said, God save the king.

Was King Saul elect or chosen? YES. Was it unconditional? NO. As long as he was faithful to God he was elect. But when Saul rebelled against God, God rejected Saul and chose David. Again, being elect was conditioned upon faith.

1 Sam 15:22 And Samuel said, Hath the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.
23 For rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from being king.

The Jews were the chosen elect, but because they did not believe, God rejected them and chose the Gentiles. Being God's elect is conditional.

 

[The Biblicist]

I am simply tired of Calvinists saying scripture [not mean what it says. The Jews were the elect of God, but they were cut off for unbelief. The Gentiles were graffed in. But Paul warns the Gentiles they must continue to believe or they will be ALSO cut off. This shows election is conditional, you must believe to be one of the elect.

What was cut off NEVER BELEIVED in the first place. It was not that they once believed and then went into unbelief - they NEVER had believed. However, their unbelief, and their being cut off from the sphere from which God currently calls out a people did not change their unconditional election but rather demonstrated unconditional election because their TIME for belief had not yet arrived (Rom. 11:25-28) as that was still YET FUTURE:

25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:
27 For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.
28 As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes.

Notice, it is those who CURRENTLY are "enemies for your sakes" who are the subjects of election still while in UNBELIEF as their TIME of election unto salvation has not yet occurred - that is "unconditinal election" in the strongest terms.


In contrast the Gentile nations were NEVER GOD'S ELECT nations but God had individual elect among them and God had simply turned from the Elect Nation of Israel during its period of unbelief but not turned from His election of them unto salvation which would occur after he had called all individual elect out of the gentile nations (Rom. 11:25).

25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

No person's fate was decided before the foundation of the world. Those Jews who were elect were cut off for unbelief, but Paul says if they remain not still in unbelief they will be graffed in again.

None of the elect "remnant" were cut off. The only sense that elect Israel as a nation was "cut off" is in regard to being the PRIMARY SOURCE from which God CURRENTLY calls out a people. If this cutting off had been permenant you would have a point but the whole passage denies such permenancy and concludes with God grafting them in "again" as a nation because of their election which is the greatest evidence for unconditional election rather than any argument against it.

Jn. 6:39 And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

 

[pinoybaptist]

winman: I am simply tired of Calvinists saying scripture does not mean what it says.

oh, poor, poor you.
So why'nt you take a break from the Board?
Maybe the Calvinists are just as tired of you talking like your view of Scripture is THE only view there is. hello ?
In my native language there is a phrase: ang yabang mo naman.
find a Filipino and ask him what it means, perfessor.