ELECTION/PREDESTINATION AND THE NEED FOR A THEOLOGICAL BALANCE

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

Johann

Active member
Apr 12, 2022
928
212
43
#1
ELECTION/PREDESTINATION AND THE NEED FOR A THEOLOGICAL BALANCE

Election is a wonderful doctrine. However, it is not a call to favoritism, but a call to be a channel, a tool, or means of others' redemption! In the Old Testament the term was used primarily for service; in the New Testament it is used primarily for salvation which issues in service. The Bible never reconciles the seeming contradiction between God's sovereignty and mankind's free will, but affirms them both! A good example of the biblical tension would be Romans 9 on God's sovereign choice and Romans 10 on mankind's necessary response (cf. Rom. 10:11,13; also note Phil. 2:12-13).

The key to this theological tension may be found in Ephesians 1:4. Jesus is God's elect man and all are potentially elect in Him (Karl Barth). Jesus is God's "yes" to fallen mankind's need (Karl Barth). Ephesians 1:4 also helps clarify the issue by asserting that the goal of predestination is not heaven, but holiness (Christlikeness). We are often attracted to the benefits of the gospel and ignore the responsibilities! God's call (election) is for time as well as eternity!

Doctrines come in relation to other truths, not as single, unrelated truths A good analogy would be a constellation versus a single star. God presents truth in eastern, not western, genres. We must not remove the tension caused by dialectical (paradoxical) pairs of doctrinal truths:

predestination vs. human free will
security of the believers vs. the need for perseverance
original sin vs. volitional sin
sinlessness (perfectionism) vs. sinning less
initial instantaneous justification and sanctification vs. progressive sanctification
Christian freedom vs. Christian responsibility
God's transcendence vs. God's immanence
God as ultimately unknowable vs. God as knowable in Scripture
the Kingdom of God as present vs. future consummation
repentance as a gift of God vs. repentance as a necessary human covenantal response
Jesus as divine vs. Jesus as human
Jesus as equal to the Father vs. Jesus as subservient to the Father
The theological concept of "covenant" unites the sovereignty of God (who always takes the initiative and sets the agenda) with a mandatory initial and continuing repentant faith response from mankind (cf. Mark 1:15; Acts 3:16,19; 20:21; ). Be careful of proof-texting one side of the paradox and depreciating the other! Be careful of asserting only your favorite doctrine or system of theology!

Titus 2:11 is a balance to other NT passages on election. I thought it might be theologically helpful to provide my commentary notes from Romans 8:29 and chapter 9, as well as Ephesians 1.

Romans 8:29 ‒ Paul uses "foreknew" (proginōskō, "to know before") twice, here and 11:2. In 11:2 it refers to God's covenant love for Israel before time began. Remember that the term "know" in Hebrew related to intimate, personal relationship, not to facts about someone (cf. Gen. 4:1; Jer. 1:5). Here it was included in a chain of eternal events (cf. Rom. 8:29-30). This term was linked with predestination. However, it must be stated that God's foreknowledge is not the basis of election because if that were so, then election would be based on fallen humanity's future response, which would be human performance. This term is also found in Acts 26:5; 1 Pet. 1:2,20 and 2 Pet. 3:17.
"foreknew" (proginōskō, "to know before")

The terms "foreknow" and "predestine" are both compounds with the preposition "before" and, therefore, should be translated "to know before," "to set bounds before," or "mark off before." The definitive passages on predestination in the NT are Rom. 8:28-30; Eph. 1:13-14; and Romans 9. These texts obviously stress that God is sovereign. He is in total control of all things. There is a preset divine plan being worked out in time. However, this plan is not arbitrary or selective. It is based, not only on God's sovereignty and foreknowledge, but on His unchanging character of love, mercy, and undeserved grace.

We must be careful of our western (American) individualism or our evangelical zeal coloring this wonderful truth. We must also guard against being polarized into the historical, theological conflicts between Augustine versus Pelegius or Calvinism versus Arminianism.

"predestined" (proorizō, "to set the bounds before")
 Predestination is not a doctrine meant to limit God's love, grace, and mercy nor to exclude some from the gospel. It is meant to strengthen believers by molding their worldview. God is for all mankind (cf. John 1:12; 3:16; 1 Tim. 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9; 1 John 2:2; 4:14). God is in control of all things. Who or what can separate us from Him (cf. Rom. 8:31-39)? God views all history as present; humans are time bound. Our perspective and mental abilities are limited. There is no contradiction between God's sovereignty and mankind's free will. It is a covenantal structure. This is another example of truth given in dialectical tension. Biblical doctrines are presented from different perspectives. They often appear paradoxical. The truth is a balance between the seemingly opposite pairs. We must not remove the tension by picking one of the truths. We must not isolate any biblical truth into a compartment by itself.
 It is also important to add that the goal of election is not only heaven when we die, but Christlikeness now (cf. Rom. 8:29-30; 2 Cor. 3:18; Gal. 4:19; Eph. 1:4; 2:10; 4:13; 1 Thess. 3:13; 4:3; 5:23; 2 Thess. 2:13; Titus 2:14; 1 Pet. 1:15). We were chosen to be "holy and blameless." God chooses to change us so that others may see the change and respond by faith to God in Christ. Predestination is not a personal privilege, but a covenantal responsibility. This is the major truth of the passage. This is the goal of Christianity. Holiness is God's will for every believer. God's election is to Christlikeness (cf. Eph. 1:4), not a special standing. The image of God, which was given to man in creation (cf. Gen. 1:26; 5:1,3; 9:6), is to be restored.
"conformed to the image of His Son" ‒ God's ultimate goal is the restoration of the image lost in the Fall. Believers are foreordained to Christlikeness (cf. Eph. 1:4).

Romans 9
Romans 9 is one of the strongest NT passages on God's sovereignty (the other being Eph. 1:3-14), while chapter 10 states humans' free will clearly and repeatedly (cf. "everyone" Rom. 9:4; "whosoever" 9:11,13; "all" 9:12 [twice]). Paul never tries to reconcile this theological tension. They are both true! Most Bible doctrines are presented in paradoxical or dialectical pairs. Most systems of theology are logical half-truths. Augustinianism and Calvinism versus semi-Pelegianism and Arminianism have elements of truth and error. Biblical tension between doctrines is preferable to a proof-texted, dogmatic, rational, theological system that forces the Bible onto a preconceived interpretive grid.
This same truth (found in Rom. 9:23) is stated in Rom. 8:29-30 and Eph. 1:4,11. This chapter is the strongest expression of God's sovereignty in the NT. There can be no dispute that God is in total charge of creation and redemption. This great truth should never be softened or diminished. However, it must be balanced with God's choice of covenant as a means of relating to human creation, made in His image. It is surely true that some OT covenants, like Genesis 15, are unconditional and do not relate at all to human response, but other covenants are conditioned on human response (e.g., Eden, Noah, Moses, David). God has a plan of redemption for His creation; no human can affect this plan. God has chosen to allow individuals to participate in His plans. This opportunity for participation is a theological tension between sovereignty (Romans 9) and human free will (Romans 10).
 It is not appropriate to select one biblical emphasis and ignore another. There is tension between doctrines because eastern people present truth in dialectical or tension-filled pairs. Doctrines must be held in relationship to other doctrines. Truth is a mosaic of truths.

Ephesians 1
Election is a wonderful doctrine. However, it is not a call to favoritism, but a call to be a channel, a tool, or means of others' redemption! In the OT the term was used primarily for service; in the NT it is used primarily for salvation which issues in service. The Bible never reconciles the seeming contradiction between God's sovereignty and mankind's free will, but affirms them both! A good example of the biblical tension would be Romans 9 on God's sovereign choice and Romans 10 on mankind's necessary response (cf. 10:11,13).
 The key to this theological tension may be found in 1:4. Jesus is God's elect man and all are potentially elect in Him (Karl Barth). Jesus is God's "yes" to fallen mankind's need (Karl Barth). Ephesians 1:4 also helps clarify the issue by asserting that the goal of predestination is not heaven only, but holiness (Christlikeness). We are often attracted to the benefits of the gospel and ignore the responsibilities! God's call (election) is for time as well as eternity!
 Doctrines come in relation to other truths, not as single, unrelated truths. A good analogy would be a constellation versus a single star. God presents truth in eastern, not western, genres. We must not remove the tension caused by dialectical (paradoxical) pairs of doctrinal truths (God as transcendent versus God as immanent; security vs. perseverance; Jesus as equal with the Father vs. Jesus as subservient to the Father; Christian freedom vs. Christian responsibility to a covenant partner, etc).
 

Eli1

Well-known member
Apr 5, 2022
5,017
2,175
113
46
#2
ELECTION/PREDESTINATION AND THE NEED FOR A THEOLOGICAL BALANCE

Election is a wonderful doctrine. However, it is not a call to favoritism, but a call to be a channel, a tool, or means of others' redemption! In the Old Testament the term was used primarily for service; in the New Testament it is used primarily for salvation which issues in service. The Bible never reconciles the seeming contradiction between God's sovereignty and mankind's free will, but affirms them both! A good example of the biblical tension would be Romans 9 on God's sovereign choice and Romans 10 on mankind's necessary response (cf. Rom. 10:11,13; also note Phil. 2:12-13).

The key to this theological tension may be found in Ephesians 1:4. Jesus is God's elect man and all are potentially elect in Him (Karl Barth). Jesus is God's "yes" to fallen mankind's need (Karl Barth). Ephesians 1:4 also helps clarify the issue by asserting that the goal of predestination is not heaven, but holiness (Christlikeness). We are often attracted to the benefits of the gospel and ignore the responsibilities! God's call (election) is for time as well as eternity!

This was an interesting and different post which got my attention from the usual broadcasting about Calvinism.
It was interesting because of this part here; Ephesians 1:4 also helps clarify the issue by asserting that the goal of predestination is not heaven, but holiness (Christlikeness).
This is something that I learned in the Eastern Orthodox Church but it’s not something that’s usually linked to Calvinism.
So the question now is : How realistic are the teachings that we learn from the Bible and the doctrines that we come up with?
Because communism is a nice idea on paper, but in practice is a disaster.
So if Calvinism is meant to be a tool or a channel for others, how realistic is this in practice taking into consideration our fallen nature?
 

Johann

Active member
Apr 12, 2022
928
212
43
#3
This was an interesting and different post which got my attention from the usual broadcasting about Calvinism.
It was interesting because of this part here; Ephesians 1:4 also helps clarify the issue by asserting that the goal of predestination is not heaven, but holiness (Christlikeness).
This is something that I learned in the Eastern Orthodox Church but it’s not something that’s usually linked to Calvinism.
So the question now is : How realistic are the teachings that we learn from the Bible and the doctrines that we come up with?
Because communism is a nice idea on paper, but in practice is a disaster.
So if Calvinism is meant to be a tool or a channel for others, how realistic is this in practice taking into consideration our fallen nature?
2Ti 2:16 But avoid irreverent babble, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness,
2Ti 2:17 and their talk will spread like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus,
2Ti 2:18 who have swerved from the truth, saying that the resurrection has already happened. They are upsetting the faith of some.
2Ti 2:19 But God's firm foundation stands, bearing this seal: “The Lord knows those who are his,” and, “Let everyone who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity.”
2Ti 2:20 Now in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and clay, some for honorable use, some for dishonorable.
2Ti 2:21 Therefore, if anyone cleanses himself from what is dishonorable, he will be a vessel for honorable use, set apart as holy, useful to the master of the house, ready for every good work.

Only those who are sealed with the Ruach HaKodesh-living a lifestyle conformed to Scriptures and INTO/EIS Christ Jesus.

Supportive reference-

1Co 6:9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,
1Co 6:10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
1Co 6:11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

"He chose us"
This is an aorist middle indicative which emphasized the subject's decisive choice.

This focused on the Father's choice before time. God's choice must not be understood in the Islamic sense of determinism nor in the ultra Calvinistic sense of "God chooses some versus God did not choose others," but in a covenantal sense.

God promised to redeem fallen mankind (cf. Gen. 3:15). God called and chose Abraham to choose all humans (cf. Gen. 12:3; Exod. 19:5-6).
. God calls all in Christ (cf. John 3:16; 1 Tim. 2:4; 2 Pet. 3:9; 1 John 2:2; 4;14. God Himself elected all persons who would exercise faith in Christ. The believers' choice of trusting in Christ confirms, not determines, God's choice of them.

God always takes the initiative in salvation (cf. John 6:44, 65). This text and Rom. 8:28-30; 9:1-33 are the main NT texts for the doctrine of predestination emphasized by Augustine and Calvin.
God chose believers not only to salvation (justification) but also to sanctification (cf. Col. 1:12)! This could relate to
1. our position in Christ (cf. 2 Cor. 5:21)
2. God's desire to reproduce His character in His children (cf. Eph. 2:10; Rom. 8:28-29; Gal. 4:19; 1 Thess. 4:3)

God's will for His children is both heaven one day and Christlikeness now!

The pronouns in this passage are ambiguous. Most refer to God the Father. This whole passage speaks of His love, purpose and plan to redeem fallen mankind. However, in context it is obvious that the pronouns in Eph. 1:7, 9, 13 & 14 refer to Jesus.

"in Him" This is a key concept. @Eli1 The Father's blessings, grace and salvation flow only through Christ (cf. John 10:7-18; 14:6). Notice the repetition of this grammatical form (locative of sphere) in Eph. 1:3, "in Christ"; Eph. 1:4, "in Him"; Eph. 1:7, "in Him"; Eph. 1:9, "in Him"; Eph. 1:10, "in Christ," "in Him"; Eph. 1:12, "in Christ" and Eph. 1:13, "in Him" (twice). These are parallel to "in the Beloved" of Eph. 1:6. Jesus is God's "yes" to fallen mankind (Karl Barth). Jesus is the elect man and all are potentially elect in Him (cf. John 3:16). All of God the Father's blessings flow through Christ.

"before the foundation of the world"
This phrase is also used in Matt. 25:34; John 17:24; 1 Pet. 1:19-20 and Rev. 13:8. It shows the Triune God's redemptive activity even before Gen. 1:1. . Humans are limited by their sense of time; everything to us is past, present, or future, but not to God. History for Him is eternally present.

"that we should be holy and blameless before Him"

The goal of predestination is holiness, not privilege. God's call is not to a selected few of Adam's children, but to all! It is a call to be what God intended mankind to be, like Himself, i.e., Christlikeness, (cf. Rom. 8:28-30; 2 Cor. 3:18; Gal. 4:19; Eph. 4:13; 1 Thess. 3:13; 4:3; 5:23; 2 Thess. 2:13; Titus 2:14; 1 Pet. 1:15); in His image (cf. Gen. 1:26-27).

To turn predestination into a theological tenet instead of a holy life is a tragedy. Often our a priori systematic theologies speak louder than biblical texts!
Here is your answer @Eli1 ^^^^^

The term "blameless" (amômos) or "free from blemish" is used of
1. Jesus, (cf. Heb. 9:14; 1 Pet. 1:19)
2. Zacharias and Elizabeth, (cf. Luke 1:6)
3. Paul (cf. Phil 3:6)
4. all true Christians (cf. Phil. 2:15; 1 Thess. 3:13; 5:23)
HENCE------
God's unalterable will for every believer is not only heaven later, but Christlikeness now (cf. Rom. 8:29-30; 2 Cor. 3:18; Gal. 4:19; 1 Thess. 3:13; 4:3; 1 Pet. 1:15). Believers are to reflect God's characteristics to a lost world for the purpose of evangelism.

I am not a Calvinist-but I am making a case for Calvinists and the Reformers/Puritans who laid a foundation on Christ-likeness now and holiness-and a casual read through Romans, Ephesians and Colossians will put God's stamp of approval upon it.

Do you agree-any of this make sense?
J.
 

Eli1

Well-known member
Apr 5, 2022
5,017
2,175
113
46
#4
Do you agree-any of this make sense?
J.
Despite your communication style [ which is not my favorite ] where you post lengthy posts instead of addressing the question, I do agree with what you‘re saying from a scriptural point of view.
However, this wasn’t what I was asking.

I was asking about the practicality of understanding a teaching from the Bible.
Because the practicality makes a huge difference.

One person becomes a monk and another person becomes a false teacher with private jets.
 
Dec 18, 2023
6,402
406
83
#5
I am not a Calvinist-but I am making a case for Calvinists and the Reformers/Puritans who laid a foundation on Christ-likeness now and holiness-and a casual read through Romans, Ephesians and Colossians will put God's stamp of approval upon it.
Your making a case for Calvinists 🤔. But you are not a Calvinist.

How on earth does that one work.

Sounds like your dangling your carrots,

What your hoping for is a debate with calvinists, by trying to win there confidence, is what I see. As you've already stated Calvinists are bastardisers.
 

Johann

Active member
Apr 12, 2022
928
212
43
#6
Despite your communication style [ which is not my favorite ] where you post lengthy posts instead of addressing the question, I do agree with what you‘re saying from a scriptural point of view.
However, this wasn’t what I was asking.

I was asking about the practicality of understanding a teaching from the Bible.
Because the practicality makes a huge difference.

One person becomes a monk and another person becomes a false teacher with private jets.
Of course you wouldn't like my communication style since it sounds "foreign" to most ears.

As for our calling and election-I can't speak for others-why some are "monks" and Pentecostalism-why some are flying around in jets.

As for practicality-how many Imperatives do you count in Scriptures? And do you-@Eli1 live out those Imperatives?
Take up your cross, deny self, and keep on following Me-3 Imperatives in one sentences-amazing, is it not?

Rom 14:8 For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's.
Rom 14:9 For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.
Rom 14:10 Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God;
Rom 14:11 for it is written, “As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.”
Rom 14:12 So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.

Shalom
J.
 

Eli1

Well-known member
Apr 5, 2022
5,017
2,175
113
46
#7
Of course you wouldn't like my communication style since it sounds "foreign" to most ears.

As for our calling and election-I can't speak for others-why some are "monks" and Pentecostalism-why some are flying around in jets.

As for practicality-how many Imperatives do you count in Scriptures? And do you-@Eli1 live out those Imperatives?
Take up your cross, deny self, and keep on following Me-3 Imperatives in one sentences-amazing, is it not?

Rom 14:8 For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's.
Rom 14:9 For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living.
Rom 14:10 Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God;
Rom 14:11 for it is written, “As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.”
Rom 14:12 So then each of us will give an account of himself to God.

Shalom
J.
Misunderstandings are something that's bound to happen, which is why we have denominations , but what I wanted to tell you is that I liked your interpretation in your OP about the idealism of a teaching.
So we do have moments of understanding and I liked your interpretation basically and thank you for sharing that.
 

Evmur

Well-known member
Feb 28, 2021
5,219
2,618
113
London
christianchat.com
#8
This was an interesting and different post which got my attention from the usual broadcasting about Calvinism.
It was interesting because of this part here; Ephesians 1:4 also helps clarify the issue by asserting that the goal of predestination is not heaven, but holiness (Christlikeness).
This is something that I learned in the Eastern Orthodox Church but it’s not something that’s usually linked to Calvinism.
So the question now is : How realistic are the teachings that we learn from the Bible and the doctrines that we come up with?
Because communism is a nice idea on paper, but in practice is a disaster.
So if Calvinism is meant to be a tool or a channel for others, how realistic is this in practice taking into consideration our fallen nature?
Calvin's mistake [and incidentally Augustine's before him] was to apply predestiny and election to salvation.
The mistake of Arminius was to not only throw out Calvin but to throw out predestiny and election too, which his doctrine does in effect.

Why did he do that?

I'll tell you why, because he thought exactly the same as Calvin, he also supposed predestiny and election was unto salvation, he saw exactly as Calvin that if this is so then God must have predestined all others unto damnation. That is pure logic, there's no way around it. So he chucked the whole kaboodle out, baby and bath water together.

Foolish man.

It's ok to chuck out Calvin, but don't chuck out God's word as well.

And of course you leave a great gaping hole in bible theology, it has to be filled. He filled it with Human freewill theology which is a BILLIONfold worse than Calvin. Oh yes, oh yes. How many BILLIONS human souls has Arminius already assigned to the eternal flames because they were never reached with the gospel?
 

Johann

Active member
Apr 12, 2022
928
212
43
#9
Misunderstandings are something that's bound to happen, which is why we have denominations , but what I wanted to tell you is that I liked your interpretation in your OP about the idealism of a teaching.
So we do have moments of understanding and I liked your interpretation basically and thank you for sharing that.
Yup-in full agreement with you-some like to pontificate and others philosophize and this is a "narrow" dereck we walk in-but thank you for the approval.
J.
 

Johann

Active member
Apr 12, 2022
928
212
43
#10
Calvin's mistake [and incidentally Augustine's before him] was to apply predestiny and election to salvation.
The mistake of Arminius was to not only throw out Calvin but to throw out predestiny and election too, which his doctrine does in effect.

Why did he do that?

I'll tell you why, because he thought exactly the same as Calvin, he also supposed predestiny and election was unto salvation, he saw exactly as Calvin that if this is so then God must have predestined all others unto damnation. That is pure logic, there's no way around it. So he chucked the whole kaboodle out, baby and bath water together.

Foolish man.

It's ok to chuck out Calvin, but don't chuck out God's word as well.

And of course you leave a great gaping hole in bible theology, it has to be filled. He filled it with Human freewill theology which is a BILLIONfold worse than Calvin. Oh yes, oh yes. How many BILLIONS human souls has Arminius already assigned to the eternal flames because they were never reached with the gospel?
Well said @Evmur-well said.
Johann.
 

Eli1

Well-known member
Apr 5, 2022
5,017
2,175
113
46
#11
Calvin's mistake [and incidentally Augustine's before him] was to apply predestiny and election to salvation.
The mistake of Arminius was to not only throw out Calvin but to throw out predestiny and election too, which his doctrine does in effect.

Why did he do that?

I'll tell you why, because he thought exactly the same as Calvin, he also supposed predestiny and election was unto salvation, he saw exactly as Calvin that if this is so then God must have predestined all others unto damnation. That is pure logic, there's no way around it. So he chucked the whole kaboodle out, baby and bath water together.

Foolish man.

It's ok to chuck out Calvin, but don't chuck out God's word as well.

And of course you leave a great gaping hole in bible theology, it has to be filled. He filled it with Human freewill theology which is a BILLIONfold worse than Calvin. Oh yes, oh yes. How many BILLIONS human souls has Arminius already assigned to the eternal flames because they were never reached with the gospel?
Yeah, the topic of salvation is what drives these types of doctrines because some people want a future reward i guess, however for others like me, predestination is not something i'm interested in but in the eternal process of trying to be like Christ, which is the theology of Theosis but the OP makes a great point of that since salvation should not be your internal drive for believing in God but the peace and joy that you have now.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
#12
Ephesians 1:4 also helps clarify the issue by asserting that the goal of predestination is not heaven, but holiness (Christlikeness).
And that totally undercuts the Calvinistic notion of election and predestination for salvation. This is further reinforced by Romans 8:29: For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

So if unconditional election ("U") is false, so is the rest of TULIP.
 

Johann

Active member
Apr 12, 2022
928
212
43
#13
And that totally undercuts the Calvinistic notion of election and predestination for salvation. This is further reinforced by Romans 8:29: For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

So if unconditional election ("U") is false, so is the rest of TULIP.
Context--


Rom 8:28 And we know that for those who love God all things work together for good, for those who are called according to his purpose.
Rom 8:29 For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.
Rom 8:30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

Whom he did foreknow he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son. All that God designed for glory and happiness as the end he decreed to grace and holiness as the way. Not, whom he did foreknow to be holy those he predestinated to be so.

The counsels and decrees of God do not truckle to the frail and fickle will of men; no, God's foreknowledge of the saints is the same with that everlasting love wherewith he is said to have loved them, Jer_31:3. God's knowing his people is the same with his owning them, Psa_1:6; Joh_10:14; 2Ti_2:19. See Rom_11:2.

Words of knowledge often in scripture denote affection; so here: Elect according to the foreknowledge of God, 1Pe_1:2. And the same word is rendered fore-ordained, 1Pe_1:20. Whom he did foreknow, that is, whom he designed for his friends and favourites.

I know thee by name, said God to Moses, Exo_33:12. Now those whom god thus foreknew he did predestinate to be conformed to Christ.

1. Holiness consists in our conformity to the image of Christ. This takes in the whole of sanctification, of which Christ is the great pattern and sampler. To be spirited as Christ was, to walk and live as Christ did, to bear our sufferings patiently as Christ did. Christ is the express image of his Father, and the saints are conformed to the image of Christ. Thus it is by the mediation and interposal of Christ that we have God's love restored to us and God's likeness renewed upon us, in which two things consists the happiness of man.

2. All that God hath from eternity foreknown with favour he hath predestinated to this conformity. It is not we that can conform ourselves to Christ. Our giving ourselves to Christ takes rise in God's giving us to him; and, in giving us to him, he predestinated us to be conformable to his image. It is a mere cavil therefore to call the doctrine of election a licentious doctrine, and to argue that it gives encouragement to sin, as if the end were separated from the way and happiness from holiness.

None can know their election but by their conformity to the image of Christ; for all that are chosen are chosen to sanctification (2Th_2:13), and surely it cannot be a temptation to any to be conformed to the world to believe that they were predestinated to be conformed to Christ.

3. That which is herein chiefly designed is the honour of Jesus Christ, that he might be the first-born among many brethren; that is, that Christ might have the honour of being the great pattern, as well as the great prince, and in this, as in other things, might have pre-eminence. It was in the first-born that all the children were dedicated to God under the law. The first-born was the head of the family, on whom all the rest did depend: now in the family of the saints Christ must have the honour of being the first-born. And blessed be God that there are many brethren; though they seem but a few in one place at one time, yet, when they come all together, they will be a great many.

There is, therefore, a certain number predestinated, that the end of Christ's undertaking might be infallibly secured. Had the event been left at uncertainties in the divine counsels, to depend upon the contingent turn of man's will, Christ might have been the first-born among but few or no brethren - a captain without soldiers and a prince without subjects - to prevent which, and to secure to him many brethren, the decree is absolute, the thing ascertained, that he might be sure to see his seed, there is a remnant predestinated to be conformed to his image, which decree will certainly have its accomplishment in the holiness and happiness of that chosen race; and so, in spite of all the opposition of the powers of darkness, Christ will be the first-born among many, very many brethren.
MH.

Pearls of wisdom
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
#14
No need to talk about context since the context makes it perfectly clear as to what predestination is all about. No need for lengthy responses either. Something is either false or true, and the "U" of TULIP is false.
 

Johann

Active member
Apr 12, 2022
928
212
43
#15

FollowerofShiloh

Well-known member
Jan 24, 2024
4,321
715
113
#16
Titus 2:11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people.

Titus 2:11 clearly shows us not many understand what predestine and election is all about.
 

Cameron143

Well-known member
Mar 1, 2022
20,075
6,883
113
62
#17
Which part of Ephesians 1:4 has man choosing to be in Him? We hold elections all the time. If someone chooses themselves, would we consider this an election? Of course not. Election is about who chooses. God says He does the choosing.
There are 2 main objections to this understanding:
1. It doesn't seem to fit with many people's idea of who God is, and
2. The disagreement of the condition of fallen man; that is, is man able to choose God?

Where one comes down on these issues almost inevitably influences their belief. Where one sides will also influence how they operate within the kingdom of God. It's a worthy subject of discussion, but one in which tolerance and dispassion rarely find their way into the discourse.
 

Johann

Active member
Apr 12, 2022
928
212
43
#18
Titus 2:11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people.

Titus 2:11 clearly shows us not many understand what predestine and election is all about.
Context-

Tit 2:11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people,
Tit 2:12 training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age,
Tit 2:13 waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,
Tit 2:14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.
Tit 2:15 Declare these things; exhort and rebuke with all authority. Let no one disregard you.


2) "Hath appeared to all men," (epephane pasin anthropois) "Has appeared or been made manifest to all." The saving grace that came by Jesus Christ was offered, and is made available to all responsible men. Joh_1:7; Joh_1:17; Joh_3:15-16; Joh_3:18; He gave himself a ransom (redemption payment) "for all." Though salvation is universally provided and universally offered to all men, it must be individually and personally accepted as a grace-gift to become effective to each responsible person, Joh_8:24; Rom_14:11-12.

 

FollowerofShiloh

Well-known member
Jan 24, 2024
4,321
715
113
#19
Context-

Tit 2:11 For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation for all people,
Tit 2:12 training us to renounce ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright, and godly lives in the present age,
Tit 2:13 waiting for our blessed hope, the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ,
Tit 2:14 who gave himself for us to redeem us from all lawlessness and to purify for himself a people for his own possession who are zealous for good works.
Tit 2:15 Declare these things; exhort and rebuke with all authority. Let no one disregard you.


2) "Hath appeared to all men," (epephane pasin anthropois) "Has appeared or been made manifest to all." The saving grace that came by Jesus Christ was offered, and is made available to all responsible men. Joh_1:7; Joh_1:17; Joh_3:15-16; Joh_3:18; He gave himself a ransom (redemption payment) "for all." Though salvation is universally provided and universally offered to all men, it must be individually and personally accepted as a grace-gift to become effective to each responsible person, Joh_8:24; Rom_14:11-12.

Jesus died for ALL PEOPLE so He could redeem a people.

He died for the WHOLE Group of people to get just a few.

Basically, He died for the entire world of people to get a single nation of people.

But the fact is that He died for ALL PEOPLE!
 

Johann

Active member
Apr 12, 2022
928
212
43
#20
Which part of Ephesians 1:4 has man choosing to be in Him? We hold elections all the time. If someone chooses themselves, would we consider this an election? Of course not. Election is about who chooses. God says He does the choosing.
There are 2 main objections to this understanding:
1. It doesn't seem to fit with many people's idea of who God is, and
2. The disagreement of the condition of fallen man; that is, is man able to choose God?

Where one comes down on these issues almost inevitably influences their belief. Where one sides will also influence how they operate within the kingdom of God. It's a worthy subject of discussion, but one in which tolerance and dispassion rarely find their way into the discourse.
Valid points you are making and correct you are-a worthy subject of discussion IF done in love.


Eph 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places,
Eph 1:4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love
Eph 1:5 he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will,
Eph 1:6 to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved.

These verses are worthy of a deep study and reflection, not upon others, but our own salvation.

Which bring this to my mind-

Mat 5:9 “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
Mat 5:10 “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
Mat 5:11 “Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account.
Mat 5:12 Rejoice and be glad, for your reward is great in heaven, for so they persecuted the prophets who were before you.

J.