What purpose does election and predestination serve?

Do you think He blinded them for a particular purpose, or do you think He blinded the wise for all time?

 

Well, if He blinded them then He would have to make them able to see. There must of been a reason for Him to set this group apart from all others, I mean it is saying all others can already "see".

 

It's not a theory J.D. - Who were those thousands of believers (and I don't just mean in Acts 2) who came unto salvation first (as in before the gentiles). They were Jews.

We find in your verses this "blinding" by God is a direct result of their unbelief as a Nation. Now is this or is this not a fact?

This judgment was so they (the Nation as whole) would miss the true messiah BECAUSE of their unbelief BUT that they would be restored at a later time as a NATION.

We see this true in John 12 were they believed Jesus to be the Christ, BUT...He then starts talking about having to die. Their messiah (they say) abides forever and therefore they didn't understand what he meant about having to die because they wanted the messiah to come the way THEY thought He should be coming. They missed Him because they were looking for what they wanted Him to be and do though He was NOT going to do what they wanted so in their minds He was not who they thought Him to be. So they were still in the unbelief as a nation.

Now heres the kicker. Did God blind them? - You can bet you salvation on it.
BUT... were they ALREADY a Nation of faith or unbelief? Did God blind His people that were faithful or unfaithful?? And then you must reconcile the REST of the prophesy about Israel being blinded... There will still be some unto Himself...AND in the latter times (end times) God will bring His PEOPLE (the Nation of Israel) back to Himself.

 

Yes but they are wise in their own eyes (their own conciets due to worldly wisdom). Now that point can be argued from either point (though both are true statements) but I just want to establish that this scripture is not stating or meaning ALL the wise are blinded.

 

This does not say they were without opportunity but that in light of the truth they had, those who DID NOT believe were without excuse. This is speaking of those who would be going to judgment for their rejection of the truth they had and their sentence is a Just punishment BECAUSE they were without excuse for they COULD have believed. This is why it does not show they were without opportunity but that by opportunity they were without excuse.

Yes they are accountable and by proxy able. Responsibility ALWAYS bears with it ability. This has always been understood in any language and culture. Just look it up. You CANNOT have responsiblity APART from Ability. However I do agree that abilitly can be limited to and by the amount of knowledge one has. This is the very reason Paul states that those without the Law are a law unto themselves ... and that they are still without excuse because creation itself bears enough truth to lead them to see there is a specific singular and unique God (The Creator) and if they will believe even that much God will already be sending someone to them that they may hear ALL of His truth concerning 'the' everlasting Truth who is Christ Jesus.

This is true for it is Christ that saves and it is the gospel that reveals Him.

That is an incorrect assumption. Man is responsible with accepting or rejecting the truths with God has revealed. Works have never saved a man even under the Law. But it was the truth of the Law that revealed God or better the Word that was a light unto them. But light is not enough to save them only reveal. The Word gives light but it is the Spirit that gives life - Amen? And Jesus is both the Word (light) and the God who gives life. This is why through Him (revealed truth) we may see but is by Him we are saved (given life eternal). As you can see this is why AFTER Christ left light is throught the gospel message OF Jesus and salvation is given via the Holy Spirit.

That is right. Man can not of himself nor by himself save himself. It is God that saves man, but man must believe or man IS NOT saved, no??

No one says that. (ok almost no one - but I'm talking mainline Baptist non-cals)
No one even disputes that salvation is a work completly done By God alone. But you are not saved that you may believe, for the scriptures state... believe that you might be saved. Your belief doesn't save you but your placing your faith in Gods completed work on your behalf that you WILL be saved does! Because you have believed on the only begotten of the Father, full of Grace and Truth.

Everyone who has believed as is according to scripture; and another one is those who received Him...

Only if you believe those are your only two alternitives (it is called a false dicotamy but you know that!)

that is one VIEW of it yes, though not one most believe is the most scripturally accurate view.

Though I will give this much - Faith is of God in the sense that if God did not intervene with regard to man via revealing truth then we would have no option toward faith for if left to ourselves we run to destruction.

 

You are just scratching the surface of what "blind" means. I believe it is a physiological as well as psychological response that God has instilled in man. If your house becomes messy, you notice it at first, but if you continue to live in it in that state, you will become "blind" to the situation you have created. I saw something recently on Animal Planet. A woman kept adopting cats until she had over 50. There was 3 feet of garbage and cat droppings in her house. They asked her how she could live like that, and she replied she didn't even notice it. The same thing happens with Gospel truth. If ignored enough, one becomes "hardened" and "blind" to the truths therein...all as a result of how God programmed us.

 

He said He blinded them for this reason and for His purpose.
38: That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?

I really think it had something to do with the "trying" of Elias's faith.

 

I believe after. That is, if you don't believe what you hear, you're not convicted, are you? Yes, the Spirit convicts. Yes. The Spirit, of course.

Here's where "belief in vain" comes in -- when you believe but are not convicted to do anything about it, you believe in vain. Does that mean the Spirit wasn't "calling?" No, it's just that you weren't filled with the Spirit. Your mind started to look at the life you will lose, right? It is "double-minded" as scripture says ("let such an one not think that he will receive anything of the Lord" Jas 1:7). You "acknowledge" the truth but it doesn't "move" your will. I heard the gospel several times before I received. I'm sure that is true of a lot of readers here.

No, because you can believe intellectually and it not change your will, right? That's why I see the need for the Spirit to "fill" you before you can repent and receive.

I hope the previous was responsive to this issue.

Now you appear to obviate the power of the Spirit, JD. Think about it -- even a man with hatred in his heart (like my FiL, a lost man, who hated God because God didn't answer his prayer once. Happens all the time. :tears: ). He hears the gospel -- he believes by the filling of the Spirit (that is, into conviction) -- do you think whatever else was in his mind, emotions, and will is going to be a consideration? Not if he sees that his mind, emotions and will are what got in the way (he is convicted of sin, righteousness and judgment), right?

Your account of it makes it sound as if it were something in you. Do you consider yourself to have been "elect" all along and them not? That would be a difference, right?

Best I can think is that they were not "filled" and you were. By their responses, I'd say that is a good possibility, wouldn't you? They compared what they heard to their flesh and were "double-minded." You compared what you heard with what God told your conscience and said, "Woe is me!"

Does that sound about right? It was my case. I believe that is how salvation works. Everyone has the capacity to focus what they hear -- true or false -- on their flesh or on their spirit and soul. Like Pharoah, you can harden your spirit by turning to the flesh. Do you see free choice there now?

skypair

 

This is the "drawing" that Calvinists are looking for. It's the "first stage." Do you see that? If they would overcome their conviction and come closer, God would reveal more! Light accepted brings more light -- light rejected brings darkness. You've heard that, right? It's scriptural -- I'll dig it out if you like. EVeryone, like Moses, has the option of turning aside when they see the "burning bush."

Rom 1-3 is lacking in that it doesn't tell us what would happen if, rather than turn away, they were drawn to Him -- God's Spirit witnessing in their spirit right from the get-go.

Now you know that is not true. Are you not a man? Did you turn to your own sinfulness or to God??

A lot do as you say - not all else there would be no "elect." All of our "first inclinations" are to do what you say, but in the end, some of us believe.

Like I said, Rom 1-3 only gives the negative response.

Grace, by defintion, is a gift, of course. And in salvation, it does appear that God does all the giving. He gives faith, spiritual gifts, the Holy Spirit, eternal life, a glorified body, blessings, on and on! :godisgood: But the one thing God can't give us is BELIEF. We either believe and receive or we don't.

Absolutely!! God GIVES us faith in exchange for our belief. Belief is not a work on our part, BTW (Rom 4:5).

Now that's uncalled for, JD.

skypair

 

Believe me, in my eyes, your responses too are unorthodox yet I take the time to answer. It's called "longsuffering" and "patience" with one another. Most of my responses were short and to the point and asked your for POV, which I am trying to understand as well. J.D. -- I'm laying a "burden" on you which must be borne by us all -- to find the truth. Calvinism appeared shortly after the Bible was accessible and it is no wonder at all that interpretation was in its infancy -- especially from one who drew from Augustine as Calvin did. Reform went beyond Catholicism in understanding. Do you not detect in scripture that there is something "beyond" Calvinism??

Please go back and try to give me the courtesy that I gave to your long-winded posts. Unorthodox doesn't mean untrue.

Also, Have you considered what Christ said about Sardis lately. "You have a name that liveth but art dead." Sardis IS the architypical Reform/Calvinist church. They DO have the name of Jesus, but since they refuse to "receive" Him (on account they can have do part in their own salvation), they are still "dead."

skypair

 

I agree with J.D. Skypair, you do not have an idea what Calvinist believe. You have just said that we do not receive Christ. Have we said you are lost? I think an appology is due. You have judged our salvation. Go learn what Calvinist really believe and then come back to debate..... but before that, appologize.