|
Post by happy on Jun 27, 2006 9:42:27 GMT -5
In another thread (Jesus=God) Jessi stated her beliefs in election. I'm just wondering, Jessi or anyone, if God has chosen all who he wishes to be his, before the earth was made, what is the point of missions and sharing the gospel with those who don't believe?
Does this mean that there is just no hope for many people?
|
|
|
Post by IT on Jun 27, 2006 16:33:45 GMT -5
In another thread (Jesus=God) Jessi stated her beliefs in election. I'm just wondering, Jessi or anyone, if God has chosen all who he wishes to be his, before the earth was made, what is the point of missions and sharing the gospel with those who don't believe? Does this mean that there is just no hope for many people? It means that there are still lost sheep out there, that He wants to bring into the fold.
|
|
_
Junior Member
Posts: 71
|
Post by _ on Jun 27, 2006 16:53:11 GMT -5
If God has elected unconditionally and predestined those whom he elected and is effectually calling those whom he predestined, what is the point of praying and evangelizing?3.1 Prayer3.11 Compare Ezekiel 36:9-10 with 36:37. On the one hand the repopulation of Israel is promised. And on the other hand God says that he plans to (litterally:) "be asked of" by the house of Israel. In other words, God wills that prayer be the ocasion for the fulfilment of his promises. 3.12 It is not logically inconsistent to say that God will answer prayer and that he has decided before the world what shall take place. For the prayer itself is one of the things he has foreordained as a means of bringing about what. he wills to do things through prayer so that we will be more conscious of our reliance on him and of his intimate involvement in the world (John 14:13—"That the Father may be glorified in the Son.") 3.13 If God did not have the right and power to call effectually what would you ask him to do for your unbelieving friends and family? How can you pray if you DON'T believe in the sovereignty of grace? 3.14 The persistent burden to pray for something, like revival or the conversion of a friend is a good sign that God is moving to do something special. A movement of prayer usually precedes the great works of God, not because enough people have the power to twist the arm of the Almighty, but because God is pleased to prepare us to behold his work as a gift of grace and to cherish it dearly by having us plead for it so fervently. 3.2 EvangelismWhy engage in missions if people are already predestined to be saved, and the predestined cannot be lost? 3.21 God commanded us to (Matthew 28:18-20), and no amount of philosophical speculation should deter us. 3.22 God has ordained that his effectual call of the elect will happen through the preaching of the gospel and not without it (1 Thessalonians 1:4-5; 1 Corinthians 1:23-24; Romans 1:16; 10:14-17; Acts 26:16-18; 13:48; John 17:20 etc.) 3.23 It is impossible that the elect should be lost (Matthew 24:24). Nevertheless people are lost because we don`t evangelize and because we don't pray who otherwise would be saved. For if we evangelized and prayed we would give evidence that God had planned to save people. The upsurge of world evangelism and prayer is the sign that God is about do a great ingathering. 3.24 We should want to enjoy the thrill of being empowered by God as a channel of his saving grace. Not to evangelize because God has predestined, is to be like the man who chooses to stay in bed because he says if God had predestined him to get out he would get out. 3.25 The effectual call of God based on God's eternal election is an encouragement for missions (Acts 18:10; John 10:16; 11:52; 17:20) www.desiringgod.org/library/sermons/85/102085p.html
|
|
|
Post by happy on Jun 27, 2006 18:37:25 GMT -5
Okay...so you are ministering to a very troubled co worker and you are telling him about how Jesus loves him and all he has to do is trust in him and invite him into his heart. You might be lying, right? So should you add....well, IF you are one of his chosen ones, otherwise, sorry bud, you are doomed to hell.
Help me out here.....
|
|
_
Junior Member
Posts: 71
|
Post by _ on Jun 27, 2006 19:07:58 GMT -5
Okay...so you are ministering to a very troubled co worker and you are telling him about how Jesus loves him and all he has to do is trust in him and invite him into his heart. You might be lying, right? So should you add....well, IF you are one of his chosen ones, otherwise, sorry bud, you are doomed to hell. Help me out here..... Why would you be lying? You must trust him and invite him into your heart... And if the person is one of the elect then God will move them to do just that. I would have you read the election part of www.desiringgod.org/library/topics/doctrines_grace/tulip.html again....
|
|
|
Post by happy unplugged on Jun 27, 2006 20:10:00 GMT -5
Sheesh Mr. B...you are worse than a college professor...all the reading you want me to do!
I'm not saying I don't believe that God chooses who He chooses...it is just a big concept.
|
|
_
Junior Member
Posts: 71
|
Post by _ on Jun 27, 2006 20:11:59 GMT -5
Sheesh Mr. B...you are worse than a college professor...all the reading you want me to do! I'm not saying I don't believe that God chooses who He chooses...it is just a big concept. I agree...
|
|
Salvation between God Man
Guest
|
Post by Salvation between God Man on Jun 27, 2006 20:21:46 GMT -5
Salvation is not dependent upon the intercession of other humans (evangelism). Salvation is strictly between God & the individual. It is arrogance to think that fellow humans have anything to do with another person's salvation.
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jun 27, 2006 21:23:50 GMT -5
Okay...so you are ministering to a very troubled co worker and you are telling him about how Jesus loves him and all he has to do is trust in him and invite him into his heart. You might be lying, right? So should you add....well, IF you are one of his chosen ones, otherwise, sorry bud, you are doomed to hell. Help me out here..... Yes, Happy. This is a problem. Under this paradigm you can't meaningfully say to someone, "God loves you and Jesus died for you. Put your faith in Him." You can say it, but you or the person can't know if it is true in their case. Consider this statement that Bryan quoted (probably from Piper): " It is impossible that the elect should be lost (Matthew 24:24). Nevertheless people are lost because we don`t evangelize and because we don't pray who otherwise would be saved."This is double-speak. The writer affirms: 1) It is impossible that the elect should be lost 2) Nevertheless people are lost because we don`t evangelize and because we don't pray who otherwise would be saved. The elect, in this paradigm, are the only ones who can and will be saved. If these people are to be saved, they must belong to the elect. But if they belong to the elect, then they will be saved. But if they don't belong to the elect then they can't be saved. So statement 2 has no meaning. Now it may be the case that the person to whom you say, "God loves you and Jesus died for you so put your faith in Him," is one of the elect. In saying this to the person they do put their faith in Christ and are saved. So you are the means to the end of salvation for this person. God ordained that they would be saved, and God ordained that you speaking to them would be instrumental. But this is somewhat arbitrary, for if the person is one of the elect they will be saved no matter what. The fact that God ordained you to speak to them means you will speak to them. But if you don't speak to them, it is not as though they will be lost. God will just have ordained some other means rather than you. But if this person is not one of the elect, then you speaking to them will have no effect. Further, saying to them, "God loves you and Jesus died for you so put your faith in Him" is untrue in their case. For in this paradigm Jesus did not die for this person. He died only for the elect. And so even if the person did put their faith in Christ it would have no purpose for if this person is not one of the elect then he cannot be saved. But the picture gets more bleak. Because this person is not one of the elect then he cannot exercise faith in Christ because he is not enabled to do so. But to avoid this problem we're told that this is irrelevant because the person doesn't want to be saved and doesn't want to have faith. So it all boils down to this: 1) The elect i) Jesus died for them ii) They will all be saved, no exceptions iii) They will all have faith, no exceptions iv) God sovereignly decides who belongs to this group in the act of predestination 2) The non-elect i) Jesus did not die for any of them ii) None of them can be saved, no exceptions iii) None will exercise faith, no exceptions iv) God passes over this group and chooses not to predestine any of them to election So if you are in group 1, thank God. If you are in group 2, tough bickies, because there is nothing you can do to get into group 1. This is part of the reason I don't subscribe to this paradigm.
|
|
|
Post by One or the other on Jun 27, 2006 22:29:55 GMT -5
So if you are in group 1, thank God. If you are in group 2, tough bickies, because there is nothing you can do to get into group 1. This is part of the reason I don't subscribe to this paradigm. Look at it from the point of view of an omniscient God. From the very beginning He knows if you are in group one or group two. There is nothing you can do to change the outcome that was in place before you were born. It is the illusion of free will. What will be will be.
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jun 28, 2006 0:28:59 GMT -5
Hi "one or the other",
That depends greatly. Is His foreknowledge causative of the outcome? Or is His foreknowledge contingent on the outcome? If His foreknowledge is causative then the outcome is determined by Him and there is nothing we can do. If His foreknowledge is contingent then He foreknows what we would do in any given situation, and the world that exists just happens to be one of many possible worlds that He could have created. He chooses to create the world in which the non-determined choices of free creatures align with His plan.
As has been argued elsewhere,
1) Necessarily, if God foreknows that Pruebert will do X, then Pruebert will do X 2) God foreknows that Pruebert will do X 3) Therefore, necessarily Pruebert shall do X
But this contains a fallacy because a necessary conclusion can't follow from a contingent premise. Premise 2 is contingent (for it could be that Pruebert will do Y rather than X)
What should follow is:
3') Therefore, Pruebert will do X
......which hardly constrains Prubert's freedom, for God's foreknowledge is not causative, in that it differs from possible world to possible world. In this world that is, Pruebert chooses to come on this message board and call us VOT's and apostates. In another world, Pruebert could have exercised free choice to come on this board and call us brothers and sisters. Pruebert's choice is not strongly determined. I hope that in this world, Pruebert comes to her senses, but we shall see.
|
|
|
Post by johnny on Jun 28, 2006 1:37:28 GMT -5
I've come to the conclusion that I am not one of the elect, and therfore there's no hope for me.
|
|
|
Post by to nathan on Jun 28, 2006 9:14:01 GMT -5
Every time you post something as fact you surpass my wildest expectations...
Please show me New Testament scripture that explicitly tells us that we choose God. EXPLICITLY
It doesn't matter that this is not a registered name, whrther I am an ex or am professing, whether I believe in election or not, or any of the other millions of side stepping questions you usually ask people to dodge an issue.
Please teach us, people need to know the truth. Do it for us...
|
|
|
Post by In other words on Jun 28, 2006 9:51:59 GMT -5
What should follow is: 3') Therefore, Pruebert will do X ......which hardly constrains Prubert's freedom, for God's foreknowledge is not causative, in that it differs from possible world to possible world. We have already been down this road and made the choices so this is just a re-run for our enjoyment? Since it is known what Prubert will do, it is doubtful any other choice will be made. This is a semantic away from predestination. And, of course, there is no clear pointer to the facts. When the universe was constructed, God knew if you would be saved or not. From that point on there is no way to change theoutcome unless God was in error.
|
|
|
Post by Sylvestra on Jun 28, 2006 10:54:42 GMT -5
The wall one hits with the "predestination" issue is the reason I believe that every person at some point in the far future will bow to the rulership of our Lord. I also do not believe "hell" is a place of eternal torment, but rather the "lake of fire" is an age of correction and purification.
Some are predestined to the first resurrection, others are predestined for other events.
Best regards, Edy
|
|
|
Post by happy on Jun 28, 2006 16:31:52 GMT -5
... I would not go into a deep analysis of the doctrine of election and tell him that he MAY be a vessel of wrath (Rom 9:22). While it may be true, it's not helpful in the moment . . . With respect, Jessi, I must say I can't see when that would EVER be a helpful statement! If you really would tell someone that, you've got more "guts" than I. That seems like a very, very holier than thou thing to say. And...how would you ever, ever know that a person is a vessel of wrath? It is my belief that God would be the only one who would know. Happy
|
|
_
Junior Member
Posts: 71
|
Post by _ on Jun 28, 2006 18:04:13 GMT -5
Nathan,
I read it and I do not see your point...
Ephesians 1:13-15 (King James Version) King James Version (KJV)
13In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
14Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.
15Wherefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus, and love unto all the saints,
Ephesians 1:13-15 (New International Version) New International Version (NIV)
13And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit,
14who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession—to the praise of his glory.
15For this reason, ever since I heard about your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love for all the saints,
|
|
_
Junior Member
Posts: 71
|
Post by _ on Jun 28, 2006 18:07:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jun 28, 2006 18:47:11 GMT -5
You seem to be implying that God's foreknowledge causes the outcome. I have no reason to think that, and have explained why. If you have a cogent reason as to why you think otherwise, by all means, defend it.
It is known what Pruebert will do, and it is certain that Pruebert will do it. However, Prubert could do otherwise. But whatever it is that Pruebert does we can call X, and God's foreknowledge of X is certain. But the fallacy is claiming that God's foreknowledge causes or determines X.
Consider these two possibilities.
1) God knows X will occur because He determined it would occur. 2) God knows X will occur because He knows Pruebert so perfectly such that given Pruebert is in set of circumstances Y, Prubert would freely choose to do X.
The Calvinist claims 1. I only claim 2. There is a marked difference, not merely a semantic one.
|
|
|
Post by happy on Jun 29, 2006 7:08:49 GMT -5
With respect, Jessi, I must say I can't see when that would EVER be a helpful statement! If you really would tell someone that, you've got more "guts" than I. That seems like a very, very holier than thou thing to say. And...how would you ever, ever know that a person is a vessel of wrath? It is my belief that God would be the only one who would know. Happy Romans 9, Ex 9:16, Ex 33:19, Ex 34:5-7 Christ is King. Jessi I read all of these verses again. What I read said GOD will have mercy on who He will. I see no where where it says "go forth oh self righteous ones and have mercy on who you will." Sorry...none of these verses that tell me it is okay to tell someone they may be a vessel of wrath. Happy
|
|
|
Post by happy on Jun 30, 2006 17:03:36 GMT -5
Whew, Jessi. You had me really worried. Sure, saying a person IS God's is one thing, but to say one is NOT is a whole nother issue. Our human speculation needs to be chased from our minds. Thanks for clarifying your stance. Happy
|
|