|
Forums118
Topics9,228
Posts196,147
Members1,325
| |
Most Online5,850
Feb 29th, 2020
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
Here is a link to show exactly where the Space Station is over earth right now: Click Here
|
|
|
Re: God's election to save vs. the human choice.
#16333
10/02/05 12:48 PM
10/02/05 12:48 PM
|
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,196
Ontario
|
|
The error with the doctrine of TOTAL DEPRAVITY OF MAN and IRRESSISTIBLE GRACE is that it ignores the reality of God or man.
The first takes the assumption that there are those who exist whom God has not enlightened. It talks about the condition of sinners apart from God, (which would be true, except that God has not left any man without light). So because God is a reality in everyone’s life, It remains that the choice is made by our response.
The second establishes that the only reason anyone is saved is because they could not do otherwise, because who could resist God. The reality is that man can resist God’s grace and does; and that is what sin is about. Otherwise there would be no sin possible. It would be just labels of unreality, and God would be the author of sin.
|
|
|
Re: God's election to save vs. the human choice.
#16334
10/02/05 12:55 PM
10/02/05 12:55 PM
|
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,196
Ontario
|
|
quote:
If we give ourselves credit for accepting the gospel invitation, repentance is no longer a gift.
Who is doing the repenting?
The gift is given by God, but it has to be received by man.
Who is willing to accept it?
If any man will do his will …
|
|
|
Re: God's election to save vs. the human choice.
#16335
10/02/05 04:14 PM
10/02/05 04:14 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
quote:
Have another look Tom and see if I did not address your main point in my latest post(s).
Thank you for your response, Mark, but I don't see that your above post addressed any points I made. I'll itemize below.
quote:
Regarding your point that God is no respecter of persons, this is true. But when scripture says that God hated Esau but loved Jacob, we have to give that its place too. Scripture does not placed all the credit for the salvation or damnation of the individual with their personal choice.
Scripture places ALL of the credit for the salvation of individuals to God and ALL of the "credit" for damnation on the choice of the invidual.
God is not willing that any should perish, so if any perish at all, it is in spite of God's will. Because of man's depravity, unless God had acted, the entire human race would have been lost. Because God did act (He chose us -- we did not choose Him) we have the oppotunity to respond to His grace, which He gives to all:
quote:
In the matchless gift of His Son, God has encircled the whole world with an atmosphere of grace as real as the air which circulates around the globe. All who choose to breathe this life-giving atmosphere will live and grow up to the stature of men and women in Christ Jesus.(SC 68)
The Spirit of Prophesy quotes provided earlier make it clear that God is drawing all men and no one will be lost unless they resist God's drawing. This same argument can be made from Scripture, but I chose to make it from the Spirit of Prophesy because the quotes were so clear, and I wanted to see your response. You haven't responded, as far as I can tell.
Regarding Romans 9, many arguments were presented to show that the context of the argument is not dealing with the predesitination of individuals. If one thinks that's what Paul is talking about in Romans 9, one has missed the whole argument. The argument is summarized at the end of the chapter:
quote:
30 What shall we say then? That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained to righteousness, even the righteousness which is of faith.
31 But Israel, which followed after the law of righteousness, hath not attained to the law of righteousness.
32 Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were by the works of the law. For they stumbled at that stumblingstone;
Paul is not arguing that people are lost or saved because of God's election, but on the basis of faith.
Regarding Jacob and Esau, it is clear that the prophesy is not dealing with the two as individuals, but as nations. Esau the individual never served Jacob the individual.
|
|
|
Re: God's election to save vs. the human choice.
#16336
10/02/05 04:45 PM
10/02/05 04:45 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
quote:
The second establishes that the only reason anyone is saved is because they could not do otherwise, because who could resist God. The reality is that man can resist God’s grace and does; and that is what sin is about. Otherwise there would be no sin possible. It would be just labels of unreality, and God would be the author of sin.
It (the second, total depravity) also ignores the reality of God in terms of God's character. That is, it supposes that there are those whom God chooses not to save, even though He could if He wanted to. This contradicts the attribute of God's justice, because if God acted in the way suggested, He would acting in an arbitrary fashion, which is not just.
It also contradicts the Scriptural teaching that God is love because it would have God choosing not to save someone, although He could if He wanted to . The Scriptures teach that God does everything in His power to save. For example, in the Romans 9-11 passage which supposedly teaches God arbitrarily elects individuals ("arbitrarily" here meaning based on His own discretion) has the following:
quote:
But to Israel he saith, All day long I have stretched forth my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people. (Rom. 10:21)
|
|
|
Re: God's election to save vs. the human choice.
#16337
10/04/05 12:15 AM
10/04/05 12:15 AM
|
OP
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2020
4500+ Member
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 4,583
USA
|
|
Those terms - total depravity and irresistable grace - ring a bell, but they are not in my thinking or theology.
I'm about out of time. Just one comment for now. We are given a repentant spirit as a gift but we can resist it. If we do not resist it but instead, allow it to enlighten us and shape our actions and thoughts, we are in harmony with Heaven. Scripture teaches that all are drawn and enlightened. But not all are chosen. Christ taught that it is the Father who ultimately takes credit for the saved whom He gives to Christ. He does not assign any credit to those who respond favourably.
|
|
|
Re: God's election to save vs. the human choice.
#16338
10/04/05 12:41 AM
10/04/05 12:41 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
quote:
Scripture teaches that all are drawn and enlightened. But not all are chosen. Christ taught that it is the Father who ultimately takes credit for the saved whom He gives to Christ. He does not assign any credit to those who respond favourably.
It appears to me you are using the term "chosen" in a way which was not intended. Please consider the following:
quote:
The Lord saw our fallen condition; He saw our need of grace, and because He loved our souls, He has given us grace and peace. Grace means favor to one who is undeserving, to one who is lost. The fact that we are sinners, instead of shutting us away from the mercy and love of God, makes the exercise of His love to us a positive necessity in order that we may be saved. Christ says, "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain" (John 15:16) (1SM 347).
God chose us because if He hadn't, we would have been lost. The emphasis of these texts in Scripture is that our being saved is due to God's grace, not to our own initiative. It's not saying that God arbitrarily chooses some and not others.
Please note the sentence marked in bold. This explains the intent of "chosen" very clearly, I believe.
Indeed, the fact that God draws all (as you have brought out) shows that all are chosen (in the sense of the word "chosen" that you are using).
|
|
|
Re: God's election to save vs. the human choice.
#16339
10/04/05 02:07 AM
10/04/05 02:07 AM
|
Dedicated Member
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 1,196
Ontario
|
|
quote:
Christ taught that it is the Father who ultimately takes credit for the saved whom He gives to Christ. He does not assign any credit to those who respond favorably.
There is no question that it is the Father who saves and none can save himself, however it is equally important to realize that there is “someone here” to save. We cannot consider our existence, response, or thoughts of him or ourselves as non-issue. In fact these are that, which is of consequence.
Salvation is a fellowship to oneness. God calls us to fellowship with him, and not as pawns but as sons. As such it is a completely interactive process of us acquiring his mind. The common Calvinistic election theology does not understand any such thing, leaving God a manipulator of man’s feelings, thoughts, and emotions as salvation.
In terms of taking credit regarding salvation; I think it is unreasonable thinking either way. Its is one of those ‘trap theologies’ which are designed to bring one to stupor and make response of no virtue, while seeing those who do respond as being proud and conceited. When God calls us to “choose” we are not to say it does not matter and there is no virtue to my choice. When God calls us to hear and obey, we are not to say, God has no regard to it, He will do what He will.
God is very much interested in our response and choice. If God is interested in it, so should we be. God cares; do we? Does it matter? If it matters to him, it should matter to us.
Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
Isa 1:18 Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.
|
|
|
Re: God's election to save vs. the human choice.
#16340
10/04/05 02:39 AM
10/04/05 02:39 AM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
Regarding the question of choice, I agree this is a non-issue. The question comes up by unclear thinking of the problem. If we see sin as a legal problem, then the question of merit becomes important.
However, if we consider the story of the prodigal son, we see that it is God's gracious character which is alone worthy of merit. What merit is there in the prodigal's choice to return to his father? Could we say that he earned anything by virture of his return?
Similarly Lucifer/Satan was offered repentance time and time again, and had he returned, he would have been given his position back, just as the father in the story gave the prodigal son his position back. Had Lucifer/Satan returned, would there have been any merit assignable to him?
It is according to God's gracious character to treat us, not as we deserve, but according to His own mercy. As we understand this principle, the question of assigning merit falls by the wayside, as well it should.
|
|
|
Re: God's election to save vs. the human choice.
#16341
10/04/05 10:52 PM
10/04/05 10:52 PM
|
OP
SDA
Charter Member
Active Member 2020
4500+ Member
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 4,583
USA
|
|
Well said Tom. Your last post was a blessing to me.
I don’t mean to suggest that our choice is not important. As Ellen White says, ‘Everything depends on the right action of the will’ MH 176.
But in saying ‘everything’ what does she contemplate? In this context her intent is not to teach that salvation comes from our own will-power, but to underscore the role of the will in overcoming temptation. In other contexts she stresses the pitfalls of will worship. Similarly we have to let the context interpret what is meant by the terms ‘choose and chosen’ in scripture.
I agree with the SOP quote Tom. Isn’t it saying that God in love reaches out first and touches those who are save by His love even while we are estranged prodigals? But notice that the chosen are those that are saved.
Calvanists are not right on some things but they are defamed by those who have not made enough effort to candidly examine the scriptural evidence for their position.
|
|
|
Re: God's election to save vs. the human choice.
#16342
10/04/05 11:12 PM
10/04/05 11:12 PM
|
Active Member 2012
14500+ Member
|
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,795
Lawrence, Kansas
|
|
If we separate the corporate from the individual, we can resolve the problem of how Calvinists and Arminianists seem to each have a bit of the truth. There are certain passages, in Paul especially (also in Acts) where the sovereign role of God is emphasized.
In terms of the human race, God acted unilaterally and saved it. Man has no part to play in this, and free will or choice does not come into the picture. Viewing things corporately, the Calvinistic perspective makes sense.
However, when it comes to the individual, the Arminian perspective makes sense. God has made provision for ALL to be saved, but some (many, unfortunately) choose to refuse what God has so generously, and at such great cost, given to them.
God gives salvation to every person. There is no exception. In this sense, all are chosen to salvation.
Jesus is not making the point that all those whom He chooses to be saved will be saved, but rather that all who are saved are saved because He has chosen them to be saved. IOW, Jesus' choice is not the cause of salvatation, but an indication of salvation.
It's like faith and works. Works does not cause one to be saved, but it is an indication of those who are saved (who are those who have faith).
If Jesus had not made the choice to save us, not a one of us would be saved. That's the point.
Mark, I'm so glad you were blessed by my post. I hope by the grace of God to be more of a blessing.
|
|
|
|
|
Here is the link to this week's Sabbath School Lesson Study and Discussion Material: Click Here
|
|
|
