An awful lot of assumptions in the above paragraph. God holds lotteries for heaven, does he? And how is the Potter unjust in creating two lumps out of one? How is he unjust by leaving men in their sins to do as they please? The only way God could be unjust in condemning the non-elect to hell is if any of the non-elect truly desired to be saved in the first place, and God acted contrary to their desires! But for God to leave many in the very Darkness they love cannot possibly be unjust!
Understanding God’s election
- Thread starter dougcho
- Start date
-
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.
An awful lot of assumptions in the above paragraph. God holds lotteries for heaven, does he? And how is the Potter unjust in creating two lumps out of one? How is he unjust by leaving men in their sins to do as they please? The only way God could be unjust in condemning the non-elect to hell is if any of the non-elect truly desired to be saved in the first place, and God acted contrary to their desires! But for God to leave many in the very Darkness they love cannot possibly be unjust!
Isaiah 6:9-10, Luke 8:10, (Matthew 13:14-15, Mark 4:12, Romans 11:8, John 12:39-40, Acts 28:26-27, Ezekiel 12:2,Jeremiah 5:21, Deuteronomy 29:4, Psalm 115:4-8, Psalm 135:15-18) ~ The voice of the Lord said: “Go and tell this people, ‘Be ever hearing, but never understanding; be ever seeing, but never perceiving.’ Make the hearts of this people calloused; deafen their ears and close their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and turn and be healed.” The knowledge of the mysteries of the kingdom of God has been given to you, but to others I speak in parables, so that, ‘though seeing, they may not see; though hearing, they may not understand.’
Romans 9:19-21 One of you will say to me, “Then why does God still find fault? For who can resist His will?” But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to Him who formed it, “Why did You make me like this?” Does not the potter have the right to make from the same lump of clay one vessel for special occasions and another for common use?
I started a thread on unconditional election and put work into it,
https://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/doctrine-of-unconditional-election.200944/
Righteousness Of Christ ~ “The work of God is this: to believe in the One He has sent.” You were dead in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, in which you used to walk when you conformed to the ruler of the power of the air, the spirit who is now at work in the sons of disobedience. The Son gives life to whom He is pleased to give it. If Christ is in you, your spirit is alive because of righteousness. We put on the righteousness of Christ.
The Canons speak of faith in this way:
The Way God Gives Faith
In this way, therefore, faith is a gift of God, not in the sense that it is offered by God for people to choose, but that it is in actual fact bestowed on them, breathed and infused into them. Nor is it a gift in the sense that God bestows only the potential to believe, but then awaits assent—the act of believing—by human choice; rather, it is a gift in the sense that God who works both willing and acting and, indeed, works all things in all people and produces in them both the will to believe and the belief itself.
Thanks. Just making certain what you see and wanting you to say it clearly, so I don't assume.
We're dealing very simply with a 'come = faith' vs. a 'come + faith' interpretation. I used to see the = interpretation but have been rethinking it and at the moment see the + interpretation for a few reasons. There are many considerations in the language and flow of John6 and actually back into John5 in regard to this 'come to Jesus' language.
In John 5:40 Jesus literally tells the Judeans He's speaking to that 'they do not will (are not willing) to come toward Him so they may have life"
- Jesus addresses human will in the matter
- Same wording as the other 'come toward Jesus' phrases in John6.
- The crowd is unbelieving
- Are they hearing and learning nothing from the Father [in being drawn to], following, coming to Jesus? They see Him as the Prophet and want to make Him King.
- Jesus simply tries to refocus them to work for the spiritual food they need to believe for eternal life.
- Come = believe or come + belief?
When we get down to 6:41 Jesus is dealing with a specific group and 6:44-45... is His discussion with them. All in all, in J5-J6 I see Jesus dealing with at least 4 different groups of people and this needs to be taken into account when interpreting what He's saying and to whom.
I'm a little pressed for time but before I forget, Mr. PT said earlier today or possibly yesterday that Jn 6:45 is a good example of the negative inference fallacy! And that is pure, unadulterated balderdash! The text reads:
John 6:45
45 It is written in the Prophets: 'They will all be taught by God.' Everyone who listens to the Father and learns from him comes to me.
NIV
In fact, this passage is an excellent example of how so many here blatantly abuse qualified or unqualified statements. Qualified statements are essentially no different than conditional statements in that both limit the extent or scope of an action. Conversely, Unqualified statements are universal in scope, having no conditions or limits placed upon them.
What I highlighted above, represents precisely how Jesus qualified precisely what kind of people will come to him! This phrase would have to be removed from the above text in order to make it unqualified in nature. The text would essentially have to read: "They will all...come to me."
Paradoxically, everyone who does listen to the Father and learns from him WILL come to Jesus! Jesus placed no limits on the actual coming [in faith] to Him. The limit was only placed on the kind of people who will come! Those whom God qualified to come will indeed come!
John 6:45
45 It is written in the Prophets: 'They will all be taught by God.' Everyone who listens to the Father and learns from him comes to me.
NIV
In fact, this passage is an excellent example of how so many here blatantly abuse qualified or unqualified statements. Qualified statements are essentially no different than conditional statements in that both limit the extent or scope of an action. Conversely, Unqualified statements are universal in scope, having no conditions or limits placed upon them.
What I highlighted above, represents precisely how Jesus qualified precisely what kind of people will come to him! This phrase would have to be removed from the above text in order to make it unqualified in nature. The text would essentially have to read: "They will all...come to me."
Paradoxically, everyone who does listen to the Father and learns from him WILL come to Jesus! Jesus placed no limits on the actual coming [in faith] to Him. The limit was only placed on the kind of people who will come! Those whom God qualified to come will indeed come!
1 Corinthians 4:7b, John 3:27, Romans 9:15-16 ~ What do you have that you did not
receive? And if also you did receive it, why do you boast as not having received it? John replied, “A man
can receive only what is given him from heaven.” “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” So then, it does not depend on man’s desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.
Why is "Jesus will never drive out any who are coming (present tense) to Him" a problem for those who reject exhaustive divine determinism? Why should we accept your assertion that " coming to Jesus is an invitational metaphor to believe on him". There is nothing in the text of John 6 that makes that identity obvious or necessary. Your theological presuppositions eisegeted into the chapter are forcing you to explain "coming to Him" metaphorically., when the literal sense works perfectly fine without your extra-biblical presups..
Actually, Jesus is talking only two to only three groups. Two of them followed him to Capernaum (the "many" who turned away from him, and presumably others who did not). At the very end of his Bread of Life discourse, he addresses his apostles.
Also, I believe I pointed out to PT that if you do a word usage study on the Gr. term "pas" (all) you'll find that it's often used in the NT with people. "Every thing" simply doesn't fit the context. Jesus fed 5,000 people. Many of those of those people chased after him to the other side of Galilee. And, again, presumably some of that group did come to faith. And lastly, he addresses the 12. Since the whole issue is Faith or lack thereof, then I cannot see how "things" can be the proper interpretation in this context. How can non-humans look in faith to Jesus? Anyhow...a word usage study might help toward a better understanding.
I gave you biblical examples of how "coming to Jesus in an invitational metaphor. Also, you should remember what Billy Bob wrote earlier today re v. 29. From practically the very beginning of the discourse, Faith was always in the mind of the Lord. The entire discourse is about coming to Him in faith and just how God in his infinite wisdom works His Work of Faith into all his elect.
And your problem with "divine determinsm" sounds like a personal problem you have with the high view of your own self-sufficiency in spite of your evil human nature, and your low view of God. Speaking for myself, I'm exceedingly joyful, ever thankful and forever filled with praise for my Redeemer that He determined in eternity to rescue this helpless soul from the this dark, forlorn world, from myself and from the devil. I won't be feeling your pain over the above mentioned doctrine any time soon...in fact...ever by God's precious grace!
As an exhaustive divine determinist, you believe that your trickster God has determined people to believe all kinds of foolishness, but to be absolutely convinced that they are thinking correctly. And you cannot know whether you are one such person yourself, absolutely and confidently convinced you are right, but ultimately destined for hell on your God's whim.
Look back to John5 which I included in what I said, so 4 groups.
When we look at use of "pas" we need to look at gender and number. The word can be used in several ways. The basic way to translate the neuter singular for example is "every (or each) thing". There may be more to consider in context, but this is the start. "Every thing" does fit the context IMO and I'd prefer translators brought out the parsing.
Here's how I currently see John 6:37-40. Maybe it will clarify. Also, this has implications for the other things we've been discussing re: J6. (For simplicity I'm not including something @PaulThomson and a few of us are discussing re: a certain word in 6:38, 39 & 40):
6:37a Every thing the Father gives to Jesus will come toward Jesus
- 6:38 Jesus has come down from Heaven sent by God to do God’s will
- 6:39 This thing is God’s will:
- Every thing God has given to Jesus, Jesus does not lose from it
- Rather, Jesus will raise it in the last day
- Every thing God has given to Jesus, Jesus does not lose from it
- 6:39 This thing is God’s will:
- 6:38 Jesus has come down from Heaven sent by God to do God’s will
- 6:40 This thing is God’s will:
- Every man who beholds the/His Son and believes into Him may have eternal life
- And I will raise him in the last day
- Every man who beholds the/His Son and believes into Him may have eternal life
- 6:40 This thing is God’s will:
This is just a piece of the John5-6 puzzle. I don't think it fully resolves any parallelisms, but it gives us a base of what these verses are saying. As I alluded to above, there are a few more things to consider in these verses, but this addresses the parsing of "pas".
Also, there looks to be some very detailed logic to consider in comparing these verses to John6:44 and in the verses themselves. I'm going to stay out of that discussion for now, but I have been reading up on it a bit.
BTW, I also have a few things to say about Jesus not casting men out per John6.
You still have not shown us that you understand what the negative inference fallacy is. If you cannot explain iin your own words, you should not be accepted as an authority capable of discerning whether the negative inference fallacy is in play in someone's interpretation of Bible texts.
Will you show again but not in X & Y language, how John6:45 or other verses are interpreted fallaciously per your view of the NIF?
Just simple paraphrased English, i.e. __________ cannot mean _________. 6:44 is interesting with its 2 negatives.
Thanks.
Jhn 6:45
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.
It is a fallacy to infer that those who are not mentioned as being in a category are therefore not in that category. "All bananas are fruit." All things that are bananas, are fruit. Can we logically infer that all things that are not bananas are not fruit? No.
"Every man that has heard and has learned of the Father comes to Me". Here we are told that all people who have heard and learned from the Father are coming to Jesus. Can we logically infer that all persons who have not heard and learned from the Father are not coming to Jesus? No. That would be the negative inference fallacy.
And as we see in John Chapter 6, there are many people who have not heard and learned from the father, who nevertheless were coming to Jesus .... for physical food, for healing, an argument, to view wonderworking, etc.
I could be wrong, but I think that yes, we might actually be able to infer that. If we go back to the OT verses that are referenced in v45 by the "it is written in the prophets", we can actually go back and look at those verses. As I understand them, they pertain to ALL of those saved, not just a subset of them; that is, everyone saved falls into the "all" of the "taught by God" category; no one saved is outside of it; so, therefore, only and all of those saved are those taught of the God, hence, no negative inference fallacy applies nor is it logically possible because there is only one perspective to it. Consequently, it seems that those not taught of God are those not saved and not applicable to v44 &45. For the sake of brevity, I've included only several of the verses from Isa, but the intervening ones continue and/or expand upon the same line of reasoning. I guess it is possible that different OT verses were intended, and I missed them, but I couldn't find any others that seemed applicable to me.
[Isa 54:1, 8, 13-14 KJV]
1 Sing, O barren, thou [that] didst not bear; break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou [that] didst not travail with child: for more [are] the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the LORD. ...
8 In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the LORD thy Redeemer. ...
13 And all thy children [shall be] taught of the LORD; and great [shall be] the peace of thy children.
14 In righteousness shalt thou be established: thou shalt be far from oppression; for thou shalt not fear: and from terror; for it shall not come near thee.