What purpose does election and predestination serve?

[MB]

Hi Reformedbeliever;
Of course you're forgiven;
You're right it is harder to talk about such things with out the visual expressions of eveyday conversations.
MB

 

[MB]

Hi JD;

I assume you mean you want a proof text. Here's one:

"And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sin".

He raises them from spiritual death to walk in newness of life.

Your right that is one but, is only part of the whole picture.
MB

 

[skypair]

So God didn't foresee everything until AFTER creation, at which time He ordained it to be as it was foreseen?

npetreley,

Welcome to the debate. No, you're wrong "right out of the gate." :laugh: God coule see all things from before creation. He could then plan how He would respond in order to bring His plan to fruitition. Kinda like building an assembly line and then, at then taking the raw materials and putting them through. When scripture says that God "repented" that He had made man, you can know that in His foreknowledge, He realized He would have to intervene on bahalf of the last "pure" family. And so, when creation came down to that "workstation," the "process" He has ordained before creation was to send the flood.

No. God wasn't "surprised" by Adam eating the forbidden fruit -- He foresaw it and preplanned how How He would restore him.

In other words, God's own creation didn't conform to His will until after it did what it wanted to do...

Isn't that what Calvinism AND free will assert? Where is the believer that says that God's creation sinned on account of God commanded it to??

including those things APART from His will, at which point God said, "Ok, so it did that stuff I didn't want it to do. Hey, nobody's perfect. I'm willing to accept it that way. I'm easy."

Good. I was going to "let it slide" but realized that you really might not understand the order of events and logic of the rationale.

skypair

 

[skypair]

This is no "smear campaign" as you say. I'm stating fact. Read about open theism and you will see that what you and MB are stating is open theism. Nothing "smart-aleck" about it. I do not resort to smear campaigns or name calling, as this is not required when you teach/preach solid doctrine.

Open theism is multi-faceted and to take only one unembellished aspect of it (as you admit you did) in order to accuse someone of the whole theology --- well, let's not go there. I hear (you might well imagine) the same false accusation regarding me being Arminian -- another one that I am not in agreement with.

If you go back and read, you will see that much of what I said is not my words, but from Elwell's Theological Dictionary. They are not my words, but I agree with much of it. My stance is a bit stronger than Elwell's. I'm more determinist.

Again, you and MB are not alone in your open theism.

Let's focus on your "determinism," then, OK?

skypair

 

[skypair]

Hi J.D.,

It seems what you're implying is that me and reformedbeliever are contradicting one another because I am emphasizing God's action in predestination and he is emphasizing His passivity.

Actually, you are both "determinists" as refrombelievers puts it, right? I'm not trying to divide you -- just explaining my own view so far.

If we say that God plans the future, then that planning is an act, but within that plan are things which He has planned but not acted upon, and other things which he acts directly upon.

So God chooses the "elect" and He chooses where and when to act? Do you see these events and "election" being in response to men? to their prayers, for instance? Does God say He will answer prayers?

Such is the case with predestination to salvation of men. God does not act upon men to cause their sin and subsequent condemnation, but he does act upon the elect to ensure their salvation.

I agree God doesn't make them sin. And He does know the "elect" from before creation and does "preserve" the saints according to His positive plan. But don't you see that it is hard for me to believe that a God that answers prayer didn't just wait (in His foreknowledge) to hear men's prayers in order to save and to act much of the time?

This touches on the issue of active or passive reprobation which is debated among Calvinists, the overwhelming majority of which believe in passive reprobation, active reprobation being associated more with hypercalvinists.

Sure, I see that. God is "passive" in our lives up to the instant that we pray to receive salvation. That moment is the moment that we quit being reprobates and become sons.

The important thing about passive will (permissive) is that although God does not have to act to ensure it's coming about, it's coming about is nevertheless ensured by God's design of it.

Or "permission" of it, right?

So we understand predestination to be "double" only because the reprobate (predestinated to perdition) are assured of condemnation, not because God has acted on them to assure it, but rather because He has not acted upon them to awaken them from their spiritual deadness.

You make the defintion of "double preD" a function of time then. See, there was a point at which God waited to see whether a person would believe or not -- that's "forknowledge." Then there was a point at which God saw it wasn't gonna happen and permitted it in His plan -- predestined/foreordained it. Right?

Now, I said that predestination is an action of God and I stand by that inasmuch as the elect are predestined to salvation.

Yes, at a point in time that is true. But you are ignoring what came BEFORE He predestined -- FOREKNOWLEDGE. At that point, God had NOT predestined yet.

I have not contended that foreknowledge and predestination are the same thing and I don't know why you keep pressing that point.

Most Calvinists I debate with have this difficulty with timing. They say the 2 are different but as a practical matter, foreknowledge always comes out as "choosing" as does predestination. The cause is the same as the effect whereas with free will, the cause is foreknowledge and the effect is predestination.

Your contention is that foreknowledge is mere foresight which exludes God's own knowledge of His own plan and purposes; election is mere ratification which binds God's will and therefore He does not have free will while man does; and predestination is a mere addendum to man's sovereign choice.

Calvinists commonly "blow off" free willers as "simplistic" regarding the word "foreknowledge." Friend, if there was a plan behind the plan -- predestination behind predestination as Calvinists appear to explain it -- it would be that God planned to bring BELIEVERS to salvation and then, through foreknowledge, chose those whom He foresaw would BELIEVED on Christ!

Maybe we could summarize what Calvinists really believe this way -- they believe that the purpose of all creation is to choose certain people to salvation -- mostly Calvinists which is why many of them maintain that Calvinism IS the gospel. The salient flaw in Calvinism is they don't know how God chooses who He chooses (the coincidence that only believers are "chosen" going "right over their heads") but they certainly don't believe that mere man can choose God.

Free will sees God's purpose as saving BELIEVERS through the Bible gospel. They believe that God's overarching plan permits mere man to choose salvation by acknowledging God and trusting Him.

And after all that, my original question has not been answered.

If God looks down the corridors of time and foresees that we will be saved, then what purpose does election and predestination serve? What do they effect?

"Election" and "predestination" are the plans God has for those He foreknows as BELIEVERS. The very instant God foresaw that you would believe, God began influencing your life through His word to bring you to the "perfection of the stature of His Son." God does "act" on behalf of and through His saints as Noah, Abraham, Moses, etc. all attest. God planned to use Noah to save all mankind from destruction, for instance. He didn't let Cain's descendants to destroy creation as would surely have happened. God intervened through Noah and saved creation per His active plan.

 

[skypair]

It seems I have hurt some feelings with my remarks about open theism. That was not my intention. I appologize to MB and Skypair.

When "speaking" in this medium, it is impossible to read facial expressions, hear voice inflection etc. Sometimes a person may come across as sounding mean or as was mentioned earlier.... "having a tone of voice".

After reading my posts I can see where I may have "sounded" or had a "tone" that I do not want to appear to have. My appology is sincere. I pray that both of you will fogive me.

What I was saying about open theism is that they seem to have the same kind of views you seem to be giving. I'm not calling you an open theist, and may even be misunderstanding what you are saying. Again, my appologies.

Thank you, reformbeliever -- I will go see if I need to edit my reply to you before reading this post.

skypair

 

[reformedbeliever]

I don't think I'm an Arminian so this isn't intended to defend there position.

What I don't understand here is that some Reformers here have claimed that God's Sovereignty means that no one thinks of or, even does a thing that wasn't first planned by God. This is not Sovereignty according to modern definitions. I believe it's original meaning is "superus" or simply "superior" The word Sovereign or Sovereignty do not appear in my Bible but the Bible does use the term "The most high God" (Gen 14:18), I do not Argue that God is with out a doubt superior to everything.
Ultimately God can be Sovereign and not necessarily in control every single thing to remain so. Sovereignty in other words has nothing to do with control, but "Authority". The Control of everything as I have searched is not found in scripture at all. Please would you show scriptural proof of the total control of everything by God with scripture? Because Sovereignty has nothing to do with authority.

I believe there will come a time when God will rule the planet but at present, It seems that Satan is in charge while God is away, (if indeed He can be).
Omnipotence is authority like Sovereignty and not necessarily control.
MB

Hello MB. Not a lot of time tonight, but here is some answers I have just quickly and we can expound upon it later.

There are so many scriptures that tell me that God is intimately involved in His creation. There are no sparrows that fall without Him knowing. He knows the count of the hair on your head. When you think about that and multiply it by the number of birds in the world and the number of people in the world..... He is pretty intimately involved. The amount of "memory" required to accomplish such task would not involve any of God's resources however.... to put it in computer terms........lol

When we read Job, where God is asking Job where he was while God performed all that He performs, and when David is speaking of God's omnipresence and omniscience in Psalms 139.... I just can't imagine God not being intimately involved in His creation.

The main thing is this... and its hard for us to put our brains around it I know... when He said I am the Alpha and Omega... He was not merely saying that He is the beginning and the end, He was saying I am that at the same time. In other words.... He is the I am. He is as He is. He has never changed. He remains constant.

When biblical language speaks of God repenting of having made man, I believe that is anthropomorphic language. God does not change. Change involves a measurement of time. God is outside time. He is not bound by it. He created time for man. Remember, God is the I am.... He is the Alpha and Omega at the same time.

Hope this helps you to understand what I believe. I look forward to debating with you. Maybe we both can learn from each other. Grace and peace.

 

[Rippon]

SK , ( that's a telecommunications company here in S.K.) I'd like to address a few things . You keep saying that God foresees what will transpire , then acts in response to His acquired knowledge . But no one will believe on their own accord . The Lord does not look into the future and determine to save someone who will turn to Him . Nobody can ( has the ability ) to do that . God has to intervene .

You said that " The salient flaw in Calvinism is they don't know how God chooses ." Well , I thought we have been saying all along that it is due to His good pleasure -- to the praise of His glorious grace . Non-Cals usually accuse Calvinists of pretending to know the mind of God in such matters . We do not of course . But what He has revealed we will not deny . Yet we will not venture beyond what the Scripture opens up to us .

Noah and the other seven were the elect remnant at that time . It was not God's plan to save all mankind through Noah . The Lord wanted Noah to preach to them and harden them in their sins , which is an effect of authentic preaching . Biblical messages will harden the hearts of some and soften the hearts of others .

 

[npetreley]

Isn't that what Calvinism AND free will assert? Where is the believer that says that God's creation sinned on account of God commanded it to??

This is the fallacy of no third option. Either God foresaw things that didn't go according to His will and permitted it, or God commanded/force man to sin. But there's at least a third option you missed: God planned the fact that man would sin. Man still did it of his own volition, but it was according to God's will, not against God's will. This is the same concept as described in "You meant it for evil but God meant it for good." Not "God permitted it for good" but "God MEANT it for good".

 

[MB]

Hello MB. Not a lot of time tonight, but here is some answers I have just quickly and we can expound upon it later.

There are so many scriptures that tell me that God is intimately involved in His creation. There are no sparrows that fall without Him knowing. He knows the count of the hair on your head. When you think about that and multiply it by the number of birds in the world and the number of people in the world..... He is pretty intimately involved. The amount of "memory" required to accomplish such task would not involve any of God's resources however.... to put it in computer terms........lol

I also believe that God is intimate with His creation.

When we read Job, where God is asking Job where he was while God performed all that He performs, and when David is speaking of God's omnipresence and omniscience in Psalms 139.... I just can't imagine God not being intimately involved in His creation.

The main thing is this... and its hard for us to put our brains around it I know... when He said I am the Alpha and Omega... He was not merely saying that He is the beginning and the end, He was saying I am that at the same time. In other words.... He is the I am. He is as He is. He has never changed. He remains constant.

When biblical language speaks of God repenting of having made man, I believe that is anthropomorphic language. God does not change. Change involves a measurement of time. God is outside time. He is not bound by it. He created time for man. Remember, God is the I am.... He is the Alpha and Omega at the same time.

Hope this helps you to understand what I believe. I look forward to debating with you. Maybe we both can learn from each other. Grace and peace.

I also Believe God never changes simply because He knows what he is doing. (This doesn't mean He never changes His creations.) He also knows what we are doing and how we perceive. He knows everything so it would be impossible for us to surprise Him. He is God and knows all but still this doesn't mean we can say that He controls us in everything. This is why I say God doesn't wish to control everything man does. He has allowed us the freedom to choose whether or not we sin. As I see it if God did control everything man did. Man wouldn't sin, because God is sinless and won't even touch sin. God may allow man to be tempted to sin. God never tempts us to sin or cause us to sin against Himself. He doesn't have to, We are surrounded by it. Sin is everywhere even in our places of worship. As long as we live in these bodies we will be surrounded by it. Sin dwells in mans flesh saved or not. We have to fight the temptation to do it all the time. For us we seldom have relief from it because it seems man isn't able to be spiritually minded all the time.
MB

 

[skypair]

SK , ( that's a telecommunications company here in S.K.) I'd like to address a few things . You keep saying that God foresees what will transpire , then acts in response to His acquired knowledge . But no one will believe on their own accord .

Not true. That is your flawed dogma of the TULIP.

The Lord does not look into the future and determine to save someone who will turn to Him . Nobody can ( has the ability ) to do that . God has to intervene .

You need to realize from your own experience that men choose all the time. They even choose good sometimes. Where do you get -- except by misusing scripture -- that no one can hear. Rom 1 says every man "hears" and all are "without excuse." Let's go over those verses where you think you find "inability." (I find it doubly curious that Calvin describes man as "totally depraved" but then makes this to mean "totally unable." The 2 are NOT the same thing, rippon.

You said that " The salient flaw in Calvinism is they don't know how God chooses ." Well , I thought we have been saying all along that it is due to His good pleasure -- to the praise of His glorious grace .

I was quoting R.C. Srpoul in his book Chosen by God.[/b] In it, he makes that confession.

Non-Cals usually accuse Calvinists of pretending to know the mind of God in such matters .

Not me! In fact, I hear so many Calvinists talk about godly things as "these are things we have no right to inquire into" that I believe much of Calvinism is dogma -- things that must be believed without proof.

We do not of course .

Which is precisely why you should consider whether God has answered some of the "unknowns" in Calvinism. What is "sin nature?" Calvin says it is "sin guilt" despite Isa 18:20 which says we can't inherit sin from our fathers. Calvinism has no separate plan for Israel, yet God clearly does. Calvinism can't explain why the Bible says that Christ died for the sins of the whole world and yet they teach He died only for the elect. or how grace is irresistible. or how "perseverance of the saints" (unlike free will's "preservation of the saints") isn't the teaching of "works salvation."

I believe you SHOULD have more of the mind of Christ/God than you do.

But what He has revealed we will not deny . Yet we will not venture beyond what the Scripture opens up to us .

Very commendable!

Noah and the other seven were the elect remnant at that time . It was not God's plan to save all mankind through Noah . The Lord wanted Noah to preach to them and harden them in their sins , which is an effect of authentic preaching . Biblical messages will harden the hearts of some and soften the hearts of others .

Well, by "mankind," I meant post-flood -- the succession of mankind on the earth. Sorry I wasn't more explicit.

skypair

 

[skypair]

But there's at least a third option you missed: God planned the fact that man would sin.

Viola! Just what I meant! How else could God divide the believers from the unbelievers?? God's plan "PERMITTED" the behavior of sin to "weed out" those who wouldn't love/believe Him. Then He allowed for those who would believe Him to be saved. He did NOT "will" for man to sin/disobey. He even told Adam NOT to eat thereof. That doesn't jibe with a God who wants/wills Adam to sin.

Big picture: Did God make creation to a) "be glorified in His saints" or b) to choose a random crossection of mankind (or maybe just Presbryterians) to live with Him in eternity? I mean, again, you might find another option -- this is just to get you thinking. Who does God obviously appear to "choose" -- believers or random people?

Man still did it of his own volition, but it was according to God's will, not against God's will.

Uh-uh-uh! :tongue3: According to God's PLAN, not His will, remember? God didn't will that Adam sin -- but His plan was able to be accomplished in spite of it.

This is the same concept as described in "You meant it for evil but God meant it for good." Not "God permitted it for good" but "God MEANT it for good".

Hmm. But God did "permit" it for evil upon Joseph first, right? You're not saying that God wanted and caused Joseph to be sold into slavery, then imprisoned falsely, etc. are you? I believe those were the acts of sinful men, not God.

skypair

 

[reformedbeliever]

I also believe that God is intimate with His creation.

I also Believe God never changes simply because He knows what he is doing. (This doesn't mean He never changes His creations.) He also knows what we are doing and how we perceive. He knows everything so it would be impossible for us to surprise Him. He is God and knows all but still this doesn't mean we can say that He controls us in everything. This is why I say God doesn't wish to control everything man does. He has allowed us the freedom to choose whether or not we sin. As I see it if God did control everything man did. Man wouldn't sin, because God is sinless and won't even touch sin. God may allow man to be tempted to sin. God never tempts us to sin or cause us to sin against Himself. He doesn't have to, We are surrounded by it. Sin is everywhere even in our places of worship. As long as we live in these bodies we will be surrounded by it. Sin dwells in mans flesh saved or not. We have to fight the temptation to do it all the time. For us we seldom have relief from it because it seems man isn't able to be spiritually minded all the time.
MB

I can agree with most of what you have said. I believe that God is in absolute control however. If He directly controls some times and allows other influences at other times, or indirectly controls us.... it is the same thing... He is still in absolute control of His creation.

 

[npetreley]

Hmm. But God did "permit" it for evil upon Joseph first, right? You're not saying that God wanted and caused Joseph to be sold into slavery, then imprisoned falsely, etc. are you? I believe those were the acts of sinful men, not God.

Yes, I'm saying exactly that he wanted it and caused it, though not by force or by puppetry, so please don't go there. God meant it for good, and good is what came of it. The Bible says God MEANT it for good, not permitted it for good.

 

[skypair]

Yes, I'm saying exactly that he wanted it and caused it, though not by force or by puppetry, so please don't go there. God meant it for good, and good is what came of it. The Bible says God MEANT it for good, not permitted it for good.

God means EVERYTHING for good, npetreley. Outcome depends on whether one is a believer or unbeliever. Perhaps I misspoke or you didn't understand.

skypair

 

[reformedbeliever]

God means EVERYTHING for good, npetreley. Outcome depends on whether one is a believer or unbeliever. Perhaps I misspoke or you didn't understand.

skypair

God does not have to have you believe in order to accomplish all He desires. His truth is truth, whether you believe it or not. He will accomplish all His purposes, whether you believe it or not. There are many who do not believe. Do you think that will frustrate God's plans?

If they do not believe, does that mean God can not accomplish His purposes? If so, there are many who do not believe... so God is defeated huh?

I don't think so. I believe He is sovereign and has the right to dispose of His creation as He sees fit.... and will.

 

[skypair]

God does not have to have you believe in order to accomplish all He desires.

Absolutely true!! Cause the other thing that works while God doesn't is His law. As an unbeliever, the law works God's will in your life automatically -- naturally! His law is sovereign over you though He is not so far as you are concerned!

His truth is truth, whether you believe it or not.

Which is what I just said another way. Good!

If they do not believe, does that mean God can not accomplish His purposes? If so, there are many who do not believe... so God is defeated huh?

Oh, no. God moves creation toward HIS purposes through believers. He hasn't quite made "His enemies His footstools" yet. I take that to mean that He permits them freedom to act, though ineffectually, in opposition to His will and purposes for now.

I don't think so. I believe He is sovereign and has the right to dispose of His creation as He sees fit.... and will.

And "He sees fit" to redeem believers and has set a destiny upon unbelievers.

skypair

 

[npetreley]

God means EVERYTHING for good, npetreley. Outcome depends on whether one is a believer or unbeliever. Perhaps I misspoke or you didn't understand.

I guess I don't understand your meaning. The outcome of all things is determined by God. Not even a sparrow falls to the ground apart from His will. Note carefully that it says apart from His will, not apart from his knowledge or foreknowledge. The hairs on your head are numbered. It doesn't say God knows the number, it says He numbers them. Of course in my case, He doesn't have to go much beyond double digits.

 

[J.D.]

Outcome depends on whether one is a believer or unbeliever

So then, it's not a strawman. Arminians/Pelagians really do believe that God is dependent on man, not man dependent on God?

 

[psalms109:31]

Trust and belief

To trust in Jesus to save us, it is us depending on God to save us, not God depended on us.

WE are totally depended on God.

The wages of our sin is death, not belief. So it is what God has done that saved us.

To believe is to stop trusting in what you can do, but what God has done for us.