Conditional Election

[Old-Pilgrim]

Hello all, your time is appreciated even if I do get a bit ratty at times.

This post is more the essence of what I am trying to say in 'Scriptural Election?'. Sorry if it isn't very well written since I am no literary genius.

Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you...
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:
According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

If we can assume just for now that God does elect some, and not others, is it in Scripture and how could a just God choose some and not others, ultimately to Glory?

Suppose it is something like this;
God is willing that all should be saved,
but the terms are ‘only those who learn to be humble before God shall be drawn and given to the son,
So the chosen of the Father are whosoever humbles themselves. And those who humble themselves in response to the working of The Spirit and the principles of the Law, written on stone or in the heart shall find out when he realizes that he believes the Gospel.

So this is actually up to the individuals involved, Whoso offereth praise glorifieth me: and to him that ordereth his conversation aright will I shew the salvation of God.’ of course God will know from the beginning who those individuals are. So perhaps he has not chosen specific individuals but whoever has a specific frame of mind. Christ draws all men unto himself, The Father draws only those who have learnt.

So to crudely sum up, the ‘proud’ would remain blind , and the Humble would be given sight.

If a scripture is taking into account Gods foresight, it could talk of a specific lot of individuals, if not it might be talking about a type of person, ie the meek, the base, the zeros which are not, or what ever the specific criteria is to fit through the narrow gate as it were.

No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. (since unaversalism if out, this must be showing Christ's willingness to save all)

The Law leading to Faith
But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.
Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

The Spirit leading to Faith
No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
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.

The Proud

But though he had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on him:
That the saying of Esaias the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?
Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again,
He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.

If this were so, would it be salvation by works or fruit bearing? No, is talking about the gift Salvation of the reconciliation type. is talking about Election in HIM we are elect IN CHRIST The Father Gives the elect to the Son, This is why we are told to strive to enter by the narrow Gate, If the Chosen are simply given sight/faith this cannot pay the great price, nor can the fruit borne, no, the fruit is an acceptable offering, but Salvation and eternal life and reconciliation to God, all this in included in the Free gift which we could never earn.

An illustration could be, 'A Father has a brand new expensive Car as surprise gift for his son, Just before He tells him about it and offers him the gift which he fully expects will be received with much joy and thanks, due to the sons fault they have a great fall out, the son touts in his room, the father waits on him coming and humbly apologising before he proceeds to give him the gift, But he isn't going to let his son stomp past him and grab the keys and drive off in the Car. Even thought the car is fully intended for the son, the son never did anything to merit the car.

So in a sense all are, or would/will be elected but if they can/could be humble enough to see it.

'...to him that ordereth his conversation aright will I shew the salvation of God'

Edited June 21, 2015 by Old-Pilgrim

[John81]

You seem to be trying to way over-think this.

[Old-Pilgrim]

You might be right, and I have actually left out the two key verses which led me to this view point, which are

1Pe 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

Joh 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.

these and other verses helped set my mind free of the Calvinistic thought which I had held to for some 20 ish years. But now I have this view of 'elect by fruit bearing' which is alien to what I've heard before, 'i.e.  it's all of God, it's not of Works, everything in man would dam him,' so quite way out there different from where I was before. but you are right there is other things I would like to discuss and think about.

[beameup]

A lot of IFB would hold that there is more than one group of "elect"... and they would hold that there are different "dispensations".

[TheSword]

If we can assume just for now that God does elect some, and not others, is it in Scripture and how could a just God choose some and not others, ultimately to Glory?

This cannot be assumed. If you start to define a doctrine based an any interpretive assumption, it cannot be considered a biblical one, but rather one of preferred meaning. That is to say, it forces you to read in that assumption to every subsequent passage and use it as a lens through which to interpret. This is a term commonly called eisegesis (as opposed to exegesis). 

Before any of your following explanation can be thoughtfully considered, this assumption must be proven from Scripture in context. For this assumption to hold true, you must prove the following:

1. Election is the mechanism by which God selects who will be saved. (essentially we're talking about the definition of election)

2. Not everyone is considered or has the opportunity for election. (i.e. general/universal vs. special calling)

Only after this has been established can we examine how God's other attributes (i.e. love, justice, etc.) fit into that paradigm. If, then, any attributes cannot be reconciled with the paradigm, it must be scrapped and the process started over.

[heartstrings]

Old Pilgrim,

 I still believe that the simplest way to know the meaning of all of this is to define the meaning of the word "elect". Did God "choose" Jesus to be saved?  I believe we all would say "no " to that. Then how could or why would God "choose" Jesus from among any other beings seeing that Jesus was already God and always existed as such? The Bible says that "in the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word WAS God (He still is God too)).  Yet the Bible calls Jesus "elect".

 

Isaiah 42 King James Version (KJV)

42 Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.

² He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street.

³ A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment unto truth.

⁴ He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgment in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his law.

⁵ Thus saith God the Lord, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:

⁶ I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;

⁷ To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 22, 2015 by heartstrings

[heartstrings]

Here's another thing to ponder. Would you agree that saved people can be seduced, tempted or deceived? I would certainly say so. Yet notice this...

Mar 13:22

For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect.

That little word "if" tells me that it is impossible to deceive "the elect", So how can we understand that? Well, we do know that the saved have two (2) natures; the new nature and the sin nature. The new nature cannot sin, has no fear, and has the mind of Christ so I would be thinking that maybe "the elect" is somehow closely related to the indwelling Spirit. Our old natures can in fact be "seduced" but the new nature cannot; it is impossible. That part is sinlessly perfect. (1 John 3:9)  Only God can get the credit for that. The only part we have is in obediently choosing life and blessing instead of death and cursing. God says "choose life".  (Deuteronomy 30:19) And you cannot even get the credit for "choosing" because it is God who invites and "draws" "all men"(John 12:32)

Edited June 22, 2015 by heartstrings

[Old-Pilgrim]

 

Before any of your following explanation can be thoughtfully considered, this assumption must be proven from Scripture in context. For this assumption to hold true, you must prove the following:

1. Election is the mechanism by which God selects who will be saved. (essentially we're talking about the definition of election)

 

Only after this has been established can we examine how God's other attributes (i.e. love, justice, etc.) fit into that paradigm. If, then, any attributes cannot be reconciled with the paradigm, it must be scrapped and the process started over.

 

Hello Matt

>You Said>>This cannot be assumed. If you start to define a doctrine based an any interpretive assumption, it cannot be considered a biblical one, but rather one of preferred meaning. That is to say, it forces you to read in that assumption to every subsequent passage and use it as a lens through which to interpret. This is a term commonly called eisegesis (as opposed to exegesis).<<< I know that, I have already proven to myself that God indeed has chosen 'us' based on a plain reading of Scripture. It's just that I thought it might be a stumbling block to some of you, and I guess it will take a bit of explaining to make 'he chose us' mean 'we chose him' as Clarence Larkin seems to have done. But in a way that is what I am doing, researching why he chose us. The Calvinists solve this moral dilemma by ignoring half the scriptures. But how can 'He chose us' mean anything other than 'He chose us'? I am taking the plain and undeniable text; that isn't a Calvinist text by the way; and believing it, then going on from there to try explaining it, and I think my way of looking at it fits more comfortably with Scripture. So:

>>>>1. Election is the mechanism by which God selects who will be saved. (essentially we're talking about the definition of election)<<<

Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you...
Eph 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:
Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

Done!   Now you need to prove me wrong and the plain text to be misunderstood. But I think to do that would be wresting the scripture, even if it isn't in order to make them understandable. I think you might be following some of that eisegesis stuff yourself without realising it, that is why 'he chose us' doesn't read 'he chose us', just like a Calvininst reads 'God so loved the world', and it doesn't say 'God so loved the world'.

>>>>2. Not everyone is considered or has the opportunity for election. (i.e. general/universal vs. special calling)<<<< You are falling into an old dialectic (ill throw that word in and look it up later) I believe that *everyone* has the same opportunity to press to enter, seek and find, but as one guy said to me, 'I did seek', well I can only say based on scripture that he should keep seeking. This is null and void off the table, since none of us believe it. I am proposing more like a SPECIAL PREPAREDNESS.

[Old-Pilgrim]

Old Pilgrim,

 I still believe that the simplest way to know the meaning of all of this is to define the meaning of the word "elect". Did God "choose" Jesus to be saved?  I believe we all would say "no " to that. Then how could or why would God "choose" Jesus from among any other beings seeing that Jesus was already God and always existed as such? The Bible says that "in the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word WAS God (He still is God too)).  Yet the Bible calls Jesus "elect".

 

Isaiah 42 King James Version (KJV)

42 Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.

² He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street.

³ A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment unto truth.

⁴ He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgment in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his law.

⁵ Thus saith God the Lord, he that created the heavens, and stretched them out; he that spread forth the earth, and that which cometh out of it; he that giveth breath unto the people upon it, and spirit to them that walk therein:

⁶ I the Lord have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;

⁷ To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.?

 

 

 

 

 

 

I wrote and posted twice and it's gone twice, so ... briefly God Chose Christ to save, and he Chose a people to be saved. Christ was chosen, we are chosen, that does not make us Christ.elect just means -Select-choose and needs to be taken in context.

[Old-Pilgrim]

Here's another thing to ponder. Would you agree that saved people can be seduced, tempted or deceived? I would certainly say so. Yet notice this...

Mar 13:22

For false Christs and false prophets shall rise, and shall shew signs and wonders, to seduce, if it were possible, even the elect.

That little word "if" tells me that it is impossible to deceive "the elect", So how can we understand that? Well, we do know that the saved have two (2) natures; the new nature and the sin nature. The new nature cannot sin, has no fear, and has the mind of Christ so I would be thinking that maybe "the elect" is somehow closely related to the indwelling Spirit. Our old natures can in fact be "seduced" but the new nature cannot; it is impossible. That part is sinlessly perfect. (1 John 3:9)  Only God can get the credit for that. The only part we have is in obediently choosing life and blessing instead of death and cursing. God says "choose life".  (Deuteronomy 30:19) And you cannot even get the credit for "choosing" because it is God who invites and "draws" "all men"(John 12:32)

Do you believe a Christian can lose their salvation?

 

[Old-Pilgrim]

it is our faith which overcomes the world.

 

[Old-Pilgrim]

A lot of IFB would hold that there is more than one group of "elect"... and they would hold that there are different "dispensations".

would that be different dispensations at the same time? or each in a different time?

[heartstrings]

Do you believe a Christian can lose their salvation?

 

absolutely not

[TheSword]

>>>>1. Election is the mechanism by which God selects who will be saved. (essentially we're talking about the definition of election)<<<

Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you...
Eph 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:
Eph 1:4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:
Eph 1:5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

Done!   Now you need to prove me wrong and the plain text to be misunderstood. But I think to do that would be wresting the scripture, even if it isn't in order to make them understandable. I think you might be following some of that eisegesis stuff yourself without realising it, that is why 'he chose us' doesn't read 'he chose us', just like a Calvininst reads 'God so loved the world', and it doesn't say 'God so loved the world'.

Not exactly done. I suppose it depends on how closely you want to follow the grammar. In the English, there is some ambiguity and what you're saying seems to make sense on the surface. However, in the Greek there is more clarity, and I believe it eliminates your interpretation as a possibility. The following is a visual rendering of the verse called phrasing that shows how the different parts of the sentence fit together (note** normally I would include more detail with specifics of Greek grammar, but have simplified it to make the reading easier):

According as

       he hath chosen  (subject - "he"; verb "hath chosen")

                     us        (specifies who is affected by the verb)

                           in him    (modifies "us" to describe location or association)

                                    before the foundation  (modifies "in him"; adds time dimension to when "us" was "in him")

                                                         of the world (modified "foundation" to specify what was founded)

        that we should be (predicate of the sentence and receives the action of the verb "chosen"; additionally, it is the combination of the infinitive verb "to be" and pronoun designator "us" and a literal rendering would be "to be us"; if we remove the adverbial phrase, the sentence grammatical reads "he hath chosen that we should be")

                         holy and without blame (adjectival phrase functioning as the direct object; specifies the condition of the infinitive)

                                     before him (prepositional phrase to the direct object that specifies location or association)

                         in love. (prepositional phrase that specifies the how/condition of the infinitive "to be")

 

What we have here, then, is not a definitive declaration of God choosing anyone to be saved, but rather a description of what He has chosen those who are saved to be. That is to say, God has chosen for those who are saved to be holy and blameless. The passage does not say that the choosing happened before the foundation of the world, but that the saved were in Him before the foundation of the world. There is an enormous difference between the two.

I could lay out a similar explanation for verse, but won't for the sake of space (if you want it I'll be happy to). What it'd show is that "having predestinated" begins a phrase that also modifies "hath chosen" and describes the "how" and we are made holy and without blame (i.e. via spiritual adoption).

As a counterpoint I would like to re-submit 1 Peter 1:1-2.

"Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied."

In addition to the previously given explanation that election is accomplished through/after sanctification I offer that "unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ" is grammatically linked to "elect" and states the purpose of the election. This harmonizes perfectly with the above exegesis of Eph 1:4-5 in which both state that the end purpose/result of election is being in holy/blameless/obedient/anointed.  

As a further proof, I put forth Rom 8:28-29 which plainly states that those who love God have been predestined to be conformed to the image of Jesus, i.e. made holy/blameless/obedient/anointed (verse 30 describes the "how"). I can offer a full exegesis of this passage too if you like, but this is the conclusion that it will present.

Each of these passages are often used in isolation as proof-texts for various Calvinist doctrines, but taken all together and in their own contexts, they present a solid case for an understanding that sees the purpose of election to be conforming the saved to the image of Christ rather than choosing who is or is not saved.

 

[TheSword]

>>>>2. Not everyone is considered or has the opportunity for election. (i.e. general/universal vs. special calling)<<<< You are falling into an old dialectic (ill throw that word in and look it up later) I believe that *everyone* has the same opportunity to press to enter, seek and find, but as one guy said to me, 'I did seek', well I can only say based on scripture that he should keep seeking. This is null and void off the table, since none of us believe it. I am proposing more like a SPECIAL PREPAREDNESS.

I tried to post this already but had some network issues, so I apologize if it's a duplicate response.

I don't 100% understand exactly what you're saying, so if I've misunderstood, please correct me. I seems we agree that everyone has the opportunity to seek God. I would further argue that everyone is called to make a faith-based response to the Gospel for salvation.

John 12:32-33 - And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. This he said, signifying what death he should die.

Since Jesus was, in fact, lifted up, then He is drawing everyone to him. What evidence do you offer to assert that only a select few are then enabled to respond to being drawn (which I'll refer to as calling for ease of discussion)? Further, how do you reconcile limited enablement (or special preparedness) to respond to the calling since it would mean that the calling was feigned or dishonest to most people?