What do you see?

[Dave G]

All,
In another thread I asked a member who disagrees with what are commonly called "the doctrines of grace" ( or what is very often referred to as "Calvinism", TULIP, etc. ), but what I see as the truth in summary form, what they see when they read the Scriptures like I do...

As a newspaper or book, line by line and chapter by chapter;
Paying careful attention to context and the words written on the page.

What I'm not doing is asking anyone for a summary that's been provided to them by a church, denomination, Bible college, seminary or system of theology.
What I am asking for is for someone to please pick a passage of the Bible that deals with election, predestination, calling, etc and simply let me know, in a detailed fashion, what they see when they read it for themselves...with no help from men or institutions of men.
Think, "commentary", like Matthew Henry, John Gill, Adam Clarke, etc., but without their help.

I'll start with Ephesians 1 and go through to verse 12:

"Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:
2 grace [be] to you, and peace, from God our Father, and [from] the Lord Jesus Christ.
3 Blessed [be] the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly [places] in Christ:
4 according as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
5 having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,
6 to the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.
7 in whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;
8 wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence;
9 having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:
10 that in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; [even] in him:
11 in whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:
12 that we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ."

Keeping in mind that this is in the AV ( my preferred and only translation of God's word in the English ) and may pose a problem for some who are not used to reading it, I'd like to compare notes with anyone who is willing to perhaps go through a few passages just to see where we differ in our understandings.

 

[Dave G]

Here's what I see when I read the words in context:


1) Paul is declaring himself an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, and addressing the saints at Ephesus, and the faithful in Jesus Christ.
2) He extends grace and peace, which is from God the Father and from the Lord Jesus.
3) He then declares that God is blessed, and He is the Father of our Lord Jesus. He ( God the Father ) has blessed the faithful in Jesus Christ with all spiritual blessings that are in heavenly places.
4) According as God the Father has chosen us ( the faithful from verse 1) "in Christ" before the foundation of the world, so that we ( the faithful ) should be holy and without blame before Him in love.
5) God having predestinated us ( chose the destiny for those faithful in Christ ) to the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself. This was done according to the good pleasure of His will.
6) Also, it was done according to the praise of the glory of His grace, wherein ( in His grace ) He has made the faithful accepted in the beloved ( all who are loved by God ).
7) In whom ( in the beloved, mentioned in verse 6 ) we have redemption through Christ's blood, which includes the forgiveness of sins and is according to the riches of His grace.
8) Wherein ( in His grace ) He ( God the Father ) has abounded ( overflowing ) toward us ( the faithful ) in all wisdom and grace.
9) Having made known to us ( the faithful in Christ ) the mystery of His will, which is according to the good pleasure which He has purposed within Himself.
10) That in the dispensation ( order ) of the fullness of times ( when He brings it to pass ), He might ( signifies purposes ) gather together in one all things in Christ...both which are in Heaven and which are on earth. Those things being gathered are those that are "in Him", or in Christ.
11) In whom ( in Christ ) we also have obtained ( received ) an inheritance...and inheritance that we ( the faithful ) were predestinated to according to the purpose of Him who works all things after the counsel of His own will ( the Lord God the Father from verse 4 ).
12) Why? So that we ( the faithful ) should be to the praise of His glory, who first trusted in Christ.


So, just like a newspaper and reading it line by line, what I've summarized is what I see when I read it for myself.
What do you see when you do this, if I may ask?

 

[Dave G]

Also:
This is not a debate.

I'm not looking for an argument, to establish who's right or wrong, or who's the most educated when it comes to theological background.
I'm only looking for people who have studied the Scriptures for themselves and can express what they believe, based on what they see when they read the words on the page and independently of men.

We as believers in Jesus Christ should not only know what we believe, but why we believe it.
This belief and trust should be firmly fixed on His words, and not somebody else's.

 

[JesusFan]

Also:
This is not a debate.

I'm not looking for an argument, to establish who's right or wrong, or who's the most educated when it comes to theological background.
I'm only looking for people who have studied the Scriptures for themselves and can express what they believe, based on what they see when they read the words on the page and independently of men.

We as believers in Jesus Christ should not only know what we believe, but why we believe it.
This belief and trust should be firmly fixed on His words, and not somebody else's.

The first major difference between Cals and Non cals would be on what basis did the Father chose us to now be found in Christ? By His election of us based upon Hs will and choosing, or upon His foreknowledge of what we when do when presented the gospel?

 

[Dave G]

The first major difference between Cals and Non cals would be on what basis did the Father chose us to now be found in Christ? By His election of us based upon Hs will and choosing, or upon His foreknowledge of what we when do when presented the gospel?

My friend, I ask that all who post in this thread please respect the spirit and letter of it.

While I appreciate your comments, my primary intent is for those who disagree with "unconditional election" and everything else that is labeled as "Calvinism", to please post what they see when they read the passages ( not just the "verses", as context is important ) that are used in support of it.
For now, I'm focusing on the ones that involve election and predestination.

Thank you, and may God bless you.

 

[Dave G]

Here's another passage for consideration:

"And when they had found him on the other side of the sea, they said unto him, Rabbi, when camest thou hither?
26 Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.
27 Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.
28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?
29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.
30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?
31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.
32 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Moses gave you not that bread from heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread from heaven.
33 For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.
34 Then said they unto him, Lord, evermore give us this bread.
35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
36 But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.
37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
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.
40 And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day.

41 The Jews then murmured at him, because he said, I am the bread which came down from heaven.
42 And they said, Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? how is it then that he saith, I came down from heaven? 43 Jesus therefore answered and said unto them, Murmur not among yourselves.
44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.
46 Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.
47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
48 I am that bread of life.
49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.
50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.
51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.
52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us [his] flesh to eat?
53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. 54 Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.
56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.
57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.
58 This is that bread which came down from heaven: not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead: he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever.

59 These things said he in the synagogue, as he taught in Capernaum.
60 Many therefore of his disciples, when they had heard [this], said, This is an hard saying; who can hear it?
61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?
62 [What] and if ye shall see the Son of man ascend up where he was before?
63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, [they] are spirit, and [they] are life.
64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. 65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
66 From that [time] many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.
67 Then said Jesus unto the twelve, Will ye also go away?
68 Then Simon Peter answered him, Lord, to whom shall we go? thou hast the words of eternal life.
69 And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.
70 Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?
71 He spake of Judas Iscariot [the son] of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve." ( John 6:25-71 )

Given that this passage is a bit lengthy,
I'll break down what I see into several sections following this post.

 

[Dave G]

On second thought:

Given that this thread has now been open for nearly two weeks without a reply from any of those who are opposed to what is often called "Calvinism", I think it best that I ask the mods to close it. To me, there's little point in asking what people who disagree with me actually see, as some of this has actually been answered in various threads over the years.

What few items that have not been addressed ( and my curiosity about the finer details ), will simply have to wait until such time as the occasions present themselves.


May God bless you all.

 

[atpollard]

I would respond, but I am a Particular Baptist, and you are looking for the POV of the General Baptists.
So I remain silent.

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I would respond, but I am a Particular Baptist, and you are looking for the POV of the General Baptists.
So I remain silent.

And I’m very similar to you in that I am a Child of God via my affiliations with the Primitive Baptists and like you state, more for the General Baptist crowd. God bless.

 

[Christforums]

44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.

No man can come to me (Total Depravity or Inability)
Except the Father (Unconditional Election)
Which hath sent me draw him (Irresistible Grace)
And I will raise him up (Limited Atonement)
at the last day (Perseverance of the Saints).

I am a theological Calvinist:

 

[Christforums]

While I appreciate your comments, my primary intent is for those who disagree with "unconditional election" and everything else that is labeled as "Calvinism", to please post what they see when they read the passages ( not just the "verses", as context is important ) that are used in support of it.
For now, I'm focusing on the ones that involve election and predestination.

It is quite a familiar theme throughout the Scriptures that every man would become subject to the man of Lawlessness and be blotted out of the book of life if it were not for G-d. And that's Monergism, which is Protestant.

 

[Piper 2]

The problem with your original post is that no one, absolutely no one, can come here and say all they've done is read the Bible. All of us have heard other people preach, teach, have read books, listened to sermons, lectures, etc. And those things have influenced them. If you're asking them to come here and defend Arminian truth by just quoting bible verses and explaining the context, very few people can do that.

The Bible is a huge collection of writings and no one can just breing everything to memory without referrng to what others have said. It's that old idea that Independent Fundamental Baptists used to promulgate, that "all I need is my KJV and the Holy Spirit. I don't need theology books, reference books, advanced degrees."

It's like bringing together 10 first aid corpsmen in the Army and asking them to give their diagnoses and treatment plan on a long list of illnesses without asking any Doctors or referring to any medical manuals.

 

[Christforums]

The problem with your original post is that no one, absolutely no one, can come here and say all they've done is read the Bible. All of us have heard other people preach, teach, have read books, listened to sermons, lectures, etc. And those things have influenced them. If you're asking them to come here and defend Arminian truth by just quoting bible verses and explaining the context, very few people can do that.

The Bible is a huge collection of writings and no one can just breing everything to memory without referrng to what others have said. It's that old idea that Independent Fundamental Baptists used to promulgate, that "all I need is my KJV and the Holy Spirit. I don't need theology books, reference books, advanced degrees."

It's like bringing together 10 first aid corpsmen in the Army and asking them to give their diagnoses and treatment plan on a long list of illnesses without asking any Doctors or referring to any medical manuals.

If the principle of Sola Scriptura as well Christology are practiced, then the OT is interpreted through the lens of the NT. In other words, the interpreters and their interpretation are in the Scriptures and do not require the peer review of modern-day commentators or institutions. Granted, these things might help but a scholar can be found on any side of any position: Soteriological camps: Arianism, Pelagianism (semi), Arminianism, Calvinism, and Universalism. Pick a school of thought and find a scholar to defend each position.

The peer review process of today can be likened to proper hermeneutics where the interpreter is reviewed by Scripture rather than any of those schools of thought.

The OT consists of the Law, Writings, and the Prophets. And each book within those categories requires their own hermeneutics. For example, nobody applying the same methods of interpretation concerning the historical record narrative in Genesis will interpret apocalyptic literature such as Revelations correctly. While I do agree and believe I am understanding the gist of what you're conveying, when William Tyndale said he'd make even a plow boy no more than the pope, he was not suggesting every plow boy will know more than the pope. Not everybody takes the time to study the methods of interpretation or even entertain what was suggested here.

Lastly, the difference between Scripture and the analogy you provided regarding Army or Doctors etc is that even in the sciences there are paradigm shifts. This could be found in the historical context and pivotal moment in the life of Martin Luther where he believed salvation was by faith alone. The church went through the same kind of thing the nation of Israel went through w/ the academia of the Pharisees. The truth was so twisted Jesus was necessary, and likewise, the truth was so twisted the Reformation was necessary. Kind of interesting, Newtonian laws was sufficient but altogether wrong as our perspective and perception changed making Einstein necessary resulting in the abandonment of a paradigm. Rome was behind a dark veil and could not and refuse to this day to see the light. Principle established by scripture and practiced by early councils of ecumenical creeds were abandoned for the authority and power of Rome the Catholics favorite school of thought or institution.

 

[Piper 2]

Not sure what your point is, but when people give assiduous study to the original languages and what godly men before them have concluded, I think we do need to listen to them. People who are unhinged from the church start cults.

 

[Christforums]

Not sure what your point is, but when people give assiduous study to the original languages and what godly men before them have concluded, I think we do need to listen to them. People who are unhinged from the church start cults.

My point is surely not relativism or that the Roman Catholic church is the standard by which truth is measured.

And what is the church? Define church: denominations, sects, cults, and apostates. Why use Scripture if Scripture isn't the authority in such matters. Why not ask a cult?

 

[Piper 2]

The church is the universal body of Christ and its local expression. A local gathering of genune believers. Of course there are always some unbelievers mixed in. Paul and the writer to Hebrews assumed that. But the church is God's only place to work in the entire New Testament. If you think you can operate outside of the church you are not a bible believer.

 

[Christforums]

The church is the universal body of Christ and its local expression. A local gathering of genune believers. Of course there are always some unbelievers mixed in. Paul and the writer to Hebrews assumed that. But the church is God's only place to work in the entire New Testament. If you think you can operate outside of the church you are not a bible believer.

Why not suggest the church is universal or catholic which confesses the early ecumenical creeds containing and emphasizing the essentials of the faith.

Unbelievers are not my concern, since the garden of Eden Satan has always been among us and within the walls of our assembly. Paul in Corinthians said there must be sects [denominations] among us... so what is a sect or cult? For one they both abandon the early ecumenical creeds and the essentials of the faith. Needlessly said, because a body of believers rejects what is mostly believed or mainstream doesn't mean they are heretical, but they could be heterodoxic.

I must admit, if there was nothing but Pentecostals in my local area whether or not they post the Nicene Creed on their website I will not go. Interestingly, Baptists were considered a sect of Christianity and not denominational. Charles Spurgeon rejected the universal catholic church.