|
Post by MsMarie on Jun 20, 2008 11:13:49 GMT -5
This question will probably be more directed at exes, as 'the Elect' is not a term which was ever discussed or understood when I was professing. I know there is disagreement about this in the Christian world generally.
In a nutshell, it means that God has already preordained who shall be saved and that these are the elect. He said 'I will have mercy upon whom I will have mercy'. At first this seems so unfair that it is unacceptable to our way of thinking and produces an anxiety that our name may not be among those in the Book of Life. But once you start looking, the scriptures refer to this again and again and point to that conclusion.
There is a thread already on the board about 'once saved, always saved' and I would connect to this. Jesus said He would not lose those whom the Father gave to Him (and no man comes to Jesus unless the Father draw him) and I am coming to the belief that yes, once saved (or chosen), always saved because the truly elect cannot be lost, but will always be drawn back by the Father if wandering, will be corrected, chastised and set back on the pathway to heaven - over and over if necessary. If a person falls away completely, then it leads to the conclusion that that person was not elect in the first place. The great mystery is how and why God chose those He would save.
Justice is getting what we deserve and there can be no doubt what mankind deserves, quite apart from the sickness and death which has entered by sin, so I suppose you cannot say God is being unfair to us if what we deserve is justice only. Our thoughts are not His thoughts and our idea of democratic fairness is unlikely to affect God's way of dealing with us.
I would be interested to hear others' thoughts on the doctrine of the elect.
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jun 20, 2008 21:09:43 GMT -5
The word "elect" refers to different things in scripture. Israel was elected to be a priestly nation. Paul was elected to apostleship. Then there are the redeemed who are called the elect.
There are probably two main views of the elect in relation to salvation; under each are different sub-interpretations.
But broadly, there is the view that the elect are fore-ordained by God and people have no determining role in whether they belong to the elect. Or, the elect are those whom God foreknew (not fore-ordained) would come to Christ.
I believe the latter view.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 25, 2008 14:10:04 GMT -5
Rob wrote: As do I, others?
|
|
|
Post by kencoolidge on Jun 25, 2008 15:15:22 GMT -5
As do I
|
|
|
Post by Douglas on Jun 28, 2008 22:23:50 GMT -5
when thinking of the elect, I enjoy that verse in IIPeter 3;9.....the Lord is longsuffering to usward, not willing that any should perish. but that all would come to repentance. this verse has always been a help to me in understanding his love and patience for all.
|
|
|
Post by recentarriver on Jun 29, 2008 10:42:44 GMT -5
Just another concept I am beginning to ponder. Thought I would try to write down my 2 cents... Because God is Omniscient He already has foreknowledge of what our relationship with him is/will be. For example He knew that Judas would betray Him. In addition - He didn't "make" Judas sell out (because there is no evil in God He couldn't have done that). Romans 9:11 says that God knew about us before we were even born. So this helps me understand how 1 Peter 1:2 "Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father" could be. This is how I am also believing the latter view. MsMarie said: "There is a thread already on the board about 'once saved, always saved' and I would connect to this. Jesus said He would not lose those whom the Father gave to Him (and no man comes to Jesus unless the Father draw him) and I am coming to the belief that yes, once saved (or chosen), always saved because the truly elect cannot be lost, but will always be drawn back by the Father if wandering, will be corrected, chastised and set back on the pathway to heaven - over and over if necessary. If a person falls away completely, then it leads to the conclusion that that person was not elect in the first place. The great mystery is how and why God chose those He would save. Justice is getting what we deserve and there can be no doubt what mankind deserves, quite apart from the sickness and death which has entered by sin, so I suppose you cannot say God is being unfair to us if what we deserve is justice only. Our thoughts are not His thoughts and our idea of democratic fairness is unlikely to affect God's way of dealing with us. I would be interested to hear others' thoughts on the doctrine of the elect." I would also be interested in a discussion about this "predestination" idea. I feel clueless about this but it seems to somehow tie in to the "elect" doctrine. ( ) RA
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jun 29, 2008 23:12:18 GMT -5
I cannot point to anything on the internet that is evenhanded and does not reduce to caricature when discussing the different views. Perhaps the best place to start would be the companion books Why I am not a Calvinist and Why I am not an Arminian. These two positions, Calvinism and Arminianism do not exhaust the possible ways of viewing election/predestination but they are a good place to start as they are both widely popular.
|
|
|
Post by recentarriver on Jul 3, 2008 9:52:59 GMT -5
From Romans 9:11-21 As I understand these verses: Paul is saying that an example of God's election process can be seen in Jacob and Esau. They hadn't been born yet. Their good/evil (which I am assuming can be considered their works/faith,etc or lack of works/faith, etc) hadn't been done yet. The election was about God's purpose and of Him that called. Sort of like (vs 21 about the potter and clay) the clay has no say in the type of vessel it is to become, it is totally in the hands of the potter. It sounds (vs 17) as if Pharaoh was one who was NOT elected. Anyone else see this? It appears to me that the elect weren't made the elect because God could see into their future and by His foreknowledge know if they would accept or reject Him. Yes, He could see their response but no, He didn't base His election on that. God's elect are chosen by His grace and not by the merit of the elect. Romans 11:5-8 referrs to the election of grace which discounts works because if works was in the equation, it wouldn't be grace. This entire topic is really very complicated for me and I am not sure how sure I am of any of this. Hopefully not to jumbled up to project my thoughts, tho. Probably I should say here that my previous post- stating that I agreed with the latter view as did some others- I now feel differently about. That view would have involved some sort of preceived-by-God "work" of of the elect in the course of their life. Concerning the statement made by Rob: " there is the view that the elect are fore-ordained by God and people have no determining role in whether they belong to the elect. " I agree with this, it is totally God's soverign choice, and further will add my observation that as the elect, God has given us the free will (we are not robots programmed to reach God's ultimate goal for us) to either finish up as the elect or not. I could look up commentaries on this topic but have tried to search out the answer(s) for myself in the bible. Are there any others who would like to share their thoughts? Would enjoy reading and considering them. My thoughts are not set in concrete. I have been known to change my mind. RA
|
|
|
Post by pianoman on Jul 4, 2008 20:46:53 GMT -5
I will confess I don't have the great understanding that some may have, but I have to believe that Dennis hit it on the head. It was well known by Jesus that Judas was not going to be right in his heart, because he told His father, 'I have lost none except the son of perdition' I have come to this conclusion and it is just my thinking, but based on what I have read. Since we are not to 'judge lest we be judged' Judas is the only one that we know for a fact was not saved. I know this is a bold statement, but it is up to God to judge us and with that in mind I am going to make this brief. I feel strongly about it, or I would not mention it here. I think that God's Elect are those that have chosen to do his will completely, and are doing that. I must add though that we do not know each other's hearts (for which I am thankful) but only when we draw our last breath here on earth is our salvation (or not) sealed. Wasn't the man on the cross one of God's Elect? When we start wringing our hands because we see someone that is "lost" we are judging them. Like I said I am no scholar but then again I remember Jesus lifting his eyes and saying to the Father, I am glad these things are hid from the wise and prudent...... I have always felt that no matter what anyone said, that I have only my own soul to care for and prepare for eternity. I think that a lot of people that have tons of knowledge and are convinced that they are "saved" are in for a suprise some day if they are not tending the little garden that God gave them. I try to share experiences so that others can look and determine if it will help them, but I can save no one and only by the grace of God can I be saved. I must seek his face and let him use my heart as He will if I have the opportunity, but He will make the decision in the end. I guess in summary I am saying that God's Elect are those that cherish Him and He cherishes. All I can do is to do my best in serving Him and I hope to be one of the Elect.
|
|
|
Post by pianoman on Jul 4, 2008 20:51:43 GMT -5
Sorry, but I agree with Rob, whom I mistook for Dennis' comments. My mistake or should I say "As do I"
|
|
|
Post by MsMarie on Jul 19, 2008 11:15:01 GMT -5
So interested to read the posts here. I suppose then I fall into the category of Calvinistic thinking on this. I believe our sovereign God has preordained those who He will save (that is the scriptural word more than once), those upon whom He says He will have mercy and that salvation is sure and secure for the elect. The Holy Spirit in those lives prevents falling away completely. I will not lose them, I will keep them, Jesus promised.
This is a hard belief in many ways to our thinking but you know, who really cares about it? - just the elect themselves with their sense of compassion and fairness to all which is a fruit of the Spirit. The unsaved and unbelieving won't find it unfair or offensive, just because they are either unsaved or unbelieving, ie it is not an offensive doctrine but just a difficult one.
The mystery is that this is a matter of grace only and we find it so difficult to accept there is no merit involved on our part anywhere in salvation. Grace is undeserved favour and there can be no reasoning to our minds, only God knows his reasons.
Accept Jesus into your heart and be saved they say, as if this mantra saves. Get fired up by emotion at conventions and missions - does that save? Does God give us an offer which we can accept or reject? Does He allow sinners to reject something so precious as Jesus' sacrifice as if it were an unwanted gift? Jesus accomplished his purpose on earth which was to save souls - He cried out that it was his finished work.
Why do some respond to the Word of God and others do not? Election does explain this.
|
|
|
Post by MsMarie on Jul 21, 2008 15:27:03 GMT -5
OzElaine: Thank you for your message which I did reply to but unfortunately you are coming up as not registered under the name you posted under. Try contacting the administrators of the board as you did mention you had had previous problems since the board was changed.
|
|
|
Post by recentarriver on Jul 21, 2008 20:30:54 GMT -5
MsMarie Thanks for your thoughts. As you said in your post - it is a hard thing to understand. We could be inclined to see the unfairness of it but we know this is all in God's divine plan.
I have tried to condense my thoughts just for my personal use and this is how they go".
"God's elect are chosen by His grace and divine decision alone. By His foreknowledge he knows of their acceptance or rejection of Him but this is not a part of His election process. Because there are some elect this means there are some who are not the elect. God has simply chosen to not include them and it is not for me to question". RA
|
|
|
Post by MsMarie on Jul 22, 2008 10:57:37 GMT -5
Yes, I don't think I could put it better, and it took me some time to be able to accept this. I remember expressing outrage the first time I heard it but then I hunted through the bible and found it confirmed time after time. I came to really understand then that God's thoughts are not our thoughts. We all have those unsaved who are near and dear to us and it can make us feel desperately unhappy about them, but we don't know who the elect are and there is hope to the last breath. I suspect the thief on the cross had no idea he would end the day with Jesus in paradise, nor would those around his life up until then.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jul 22, 2008 13:50:37 GMT -5
Yes, I don't think I could put it better, and it took me some time to be able to accept this. I remember expressing outrage the first time I heard it but then I hunted through the bible and found it confirmed time after time. I came to really understand then that God's thoughts are not our thoughts. We all have those unsaved who are near and dear to us and it can make us feel desperately unhappy about them, but we don't know who the elect are and there is hope to the last breath. I suspect the thief on the cross had no idea he would end the day with Jesus in paradise, nor would those around his life up until then. I do not question your view on what the bible teaches about election. But have you considered that perhaps you are allowing your deference to the bible to cloud your god-given good judgement? At one time, you felt that election seems unfair. It seemed that a just god would not put such a plan in place. Your heart at one time convicted you of what is right and good, and the doctrine of election simply didn't fit. My argument is that perhaps it would be good for you to listen to your heart, and set the bible aside -- at least in regards to the doctrine of election.
|
|
|
Post by juliette on Jul 22, 2008 21:21:31 GMT -5
Yes, I don't think I could put it better, and it took me some time to be able to accept this. I remember expressing outrage the first time I heard it but then I hunted through the bible and found it confirmed time after time. I came to really understand then that God's thoughts are not our thoughts. We all have those unsaved who are near and dear to us and it can make us feel desperately unhappy about them, but we don't know who the elect are and there is hope to the last breath. I suspect the thief on the cross had no idea he would end the day with Jesus in paradise, nor would those around his life up until then. I do not question your view on what the bible teaches about election. But have you considered that perhaps you are allowing your deference to the bible to cloud your god-given good judgement? At one time, you felt that election seems unfair. It seemed that a just god would not put such a plan in place. Your heart at one time convicted you of what is right and good, and the doctrine of election simply didn't fit. My argument is that perhaps it would be good for you to listen to your heart, and set the bible aside -- at least in regards to the doctrine of election. Now, that's just CRAZY talk! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Rob O on Jul 22, 2008 21:54:58 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2008 2:38:35 GMT -5
For myself, a thought line answered these questions a couple of decades ago. Although I've heard many arguments since in attempts to create another point of view, so far this thought line takes precedence for me over them all.
- The God of the Bible exists in Eternity
See, among others: "The high and lofty one who inhabits eternity, the Holy One, says this: "I live in that high and holy place with those whose spirits are contrite and humble. I refresh the humble and give new courage to those with repentant hearts. "
- In His habitat, the Lord God lives outside of our time continuum.
See, among others; : “I am the Alpha and the Omega,” says the Lord God, “who is, and who was, and who is to come, the Almighty.” and,
"For a thousand years in your sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night."
- The Romans verses which state:
"For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate..." are spoken from within HIS nonlinear realm.
- Thus, being outside the time continuum which forces humans into a linear existence, God is not like man. He exists eternally of our time continuum, in what we know as the past as well as in what we know as the future.
- With humans, nothing can be predestined unless it is predetermined what is going to happen. Humans require the foreknowledge of that which will happen in order to structure the events to make something happen.
- God of the Bible, existing non-linearly knows before things happen what the outcome will be. He made the rules regarding salvation, by taking the sins of the world upon Himself while in a human form containing as much of our Spirit God as that human form could hold.
- As a result, God looks on the inward desires of humanity. He knows the answer to "Would they accept the provision He has made for them?
- When the answer is yes, the predestination process begins, and the soul is numbered as "elect."
And thus is the thought line that, as they say, "works for me" convincing me of man's free choice in the matter of whether or not there will be a conformation to the image of His Son.[/font][/size]
|
|
|
Post by MsMarie on Jul 23, 2008 12:04:14 GMT -5
Put aside the Bible and follow my own thoughts and emotions? Please say you didn't mean that! We only have the Word of God through the Bible. If sometimes we discover what God says to be unpalatable to our way of thinking, then we would not be the first. We are told that many of Jesus' own followers turned aside and followed no more when he gave them hard sayings.
I think to be a Christian means that we accept the Bible as God's Word. What other authority is there to accept? Our interpretation of it can and does obviously differ here and there, but we are told to search it for our spiritual progress.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jul 23, 2008 14:42:46 GMT -5
Put aside the Bible and follow my own thoughts and emotions? Please say you didn't mean that! We only have the Word of God through the Bible. If sometimes we discover what God says to be unpalatable to our way of thinking, then we would not be the first. We are told that many of Jesus' own followers turned aside and followed no more when he gave them hard sayings. I think to be a Christian means that we accept the Bible as God's Word. What other authority is there to accept? Our interpretation of it can and does obviously differ here and there, but we are told to search it for our spiritual progress. Oh I absolutely meant that. And I would not agree that "we only have the word of god through the bible." In my opinion, the bible is not the only nor even the primary avenue through which one has access to the word, the thought, the leading of god. I think it strange that people who claim to be led by the holy spirit would put more stock in the words of a book of dubious origin than in the promptings of the holy spirit speaking directly to one's soul. "You have to remember that religions all start out right, but the people who don't know who they are, what they've become and where they're going, tie themselves to some literature and then no longer see past what they're reading. Be free from that, son." --Moses Finkelstein, speaking to his son Aaron in "The Unworthy Servant," Bob Williston, p.32. Xlibris, 2008.
|
|
|
Post by learnedaboutgrace on Jul 23, 2008 14:59:51 GMT -5
2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
This is why I don't believe in the strict sense of "no choice" in the predestination.
|
|
|
Post by MsMarie on Jul 25, 2008 13:03:35 GMT -5
Look where people's own reasonings take them. Sincerity and a belief you are right is just not enough. Many monstrous people were very sincere about their beliefs. If you think that the Bible is a book of dubious origin, then I am sorry but I consider that to be a non starter if you want to say that you are a Christian. Religious fundamentalism and liberalism as regards Bible interpretation unfortunately are miles apart these days and I suspect we are one of each group taking our stances on this subject. Yes I agree in the promptings of the Holy Spirit and look where He led me - out of 'the Truth' and into the beliefs I have now. I always hunt in the Bible for confirmation of these leadings of the Spirit to see that they are scriptural, or else maybe it is down to my own mind, will and desires.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jul 25, 2008 14:06:50 GMT -5
Look where people's own reasonings take them. Sincerity and a belief you are right is just not enough. Many monstrous people were very sincere about their beliefs. If you think that the Bible is a book of dubious origin, then I am sorry but I consider that to be a non starter if you want to say that you are a Christian. Religious fundamentalism and liberalism as regards Bible interpretation unfortunately are miles apart these days and I suspect we are one of each group taking our stances on this subject. Yes I agree in the promptings of the Holy Spirit and look where He led me - out of 'the Truth' and into the beliefs I have now. I always hunt in the Bible for confirmation of these leadings of the Spirit to see that they are scriptural, or else maybe it is down to my own mind, will and desires. Actually, that's one reason I do not say that I am a Christian.
|
|
|
Post by MsMarie on Jul 25, 2008 21:15:45 GMT -5
Then we will always be are at opposite ends of understanding this subject Gene which I suppose is very common when one gets into theological discussions. We see through a glass darkly and I am sure we can agree to differ.
|
|
|
Post by MsMarie on Jul 25, 2008 21:19:38 GMT -5
2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. This is why I don't believe in the strict sense of "no choice" in the predestination. This is another place in the scriptures where those who believe in pre-ordination or foreknowledge would differ. Those who believe the choice is not ours but God's would say that this passage refers to collecting the elect from the four corners of the earth. Those who are not elect would never repent anyway. As I said before, it matters little whether one believes in this doctrine or not, the outcome will be the same, some will be drawn to God and others won't. It has and always will be so.
|
|
|
Post by Gene on Jul 26, 2008 12:27:28 GMT -5
Then we will always be are at opposite ends of understanding this subject Gene which I suppose is very common when one gets into theological discussions. We see through a glass darkly and I am sure we can agree to differ. very true -- regards, Gene
|
|
theophilia
New Member
God loved me enough to meet me where I was, but too much to leave me there
Posts: 43
|
Post by theophilia on Aug 25, 2008 12:23:42 GMT -5
Dear All, I hold firmly to a reformed (calvinistic) view of the doctrine of election -- that is, unconditional election. I would also like to offer friendly challenge to my arminian brethren here on this topic Firstly, In my humble opinion, this argument errs because it is based upon the false presupposition that "foreknow" means "to have knowledge of, in advance", which wouldn't fit with the verse. The whole verse, alongside the next one, reads: "For those God foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the likeness of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified." -- Romans 8:29-30 Foreknow, in this context, cannot simply means 'to have a knowledge of' because God 'has a knowledge of'.. well, everyone! Let us compare this verse with an Old Testament Scripture, in Amos 3:2, where we read: "You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities." -- Amos 3:2 God 'knows' every single intimate detail of everyone, ever, whether they are Israelites or not; no, the word 'know' means 'love' here! You only, Israel, have I set my covenant love upon, and revealed myself specially to. Thus, when reading in Romans, "Those whom he foreknew", it cannot be a mere knowledge of, because God foreknew everyone in that sense, and the first goes to make it clear that those experiencing this foreknowing are to be saved; and no-one here thinks everyone will be saved -- I think. Secondly, it is people themselves, and not events or dispositions of heart, that are being said to be foreknown; thus, it is the individuals themselves, and not anything in them, such as their faith, their belief or their persuasions, that are being known; or, 'loved'. Far from being an assault of my calvinistic persuasions, this is a bastion of my defence of them! Thirdly, to say that God, in some sense, 'looks down the corridor of time', or 'looks upon those who will believe from outside of time' implicitly holds that God had to learn something -- which creates a whole host of other problems for the proporter of this position; larger ones than the nature of election. Finally, the emphasis of the passage clearly teaches that the active worker, and indeed, ONLY worker of the salvation process is God; HE foreloves, HE predestines, HE calls, HE justifies, HE glorifies; there is no mention at all of anything within the sinner that activates or initiates this process. For further research on this, I suggest Luther's "On the Bondage of the Will", and A.W. Pink's "the Sovereignty of God". If anyone would like it, I once engaged in an extended debate with an arminian friend, and my final paper to which he has yet to respond, dealing extensively with many 'problem' texts for calvinistic believers, and indeed, with the whole issue of "free will". If you would like to read it, please feel free to send me a private message, and I will gladly reply a copy to you. Soli Deo Gloria Theophilia ***Reason for Edits: Conceptually confusing spelling ;D ***
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on Aug 25, 2008 19:37:36 GMT -5
It seems to me, at base, we are grappling with the question of why some are saved and some are not.
If one thinks, as I do, that this is a matter of personal responsibility, then the 'election' of God is not relevant to the question of who will be saved and who will not. That is, the election is open to all, and grace is available to all.
Does God foreknow who will make his calling and election sure? Certainly, but He's not telling us so this is of no consequence to us in our current life. (I think this is a similar line of thinking to what Dennis is saying above).
For God's foreknowledge to be of consequence to this question of who is/is not saved, he would have to speak to some, and damn others; something I don't believe He does during our earthly lifetime. I believe he speaks to all.
Finally, by my line of reasoning, God's foreknowledge has zero impact on my life; I never think that I am predestined in any useful sense.
|
|