1. Illinois
    Joined
    20 Mar '07
    Moves
    6266
    19 May '07 15:36
    Vistesd, although I still don't believe that God can or will save men from eternal damnation who reject His Son, Jesus Christ, I must admit that my Calvinist views of the elect have been biblically unsound. I have unknowingly defended the Calvinist position up until now, and need desperately to amend my exegesis to more closely reflect the whole of scripture. Why change now? Well, I came across an article online by F. Furman Kearley, Ph.D. called, "THE BIBLICAL DOCTRINE OF PREDESTINATION, FOREORDINATION, AND ELECTION", which opened my eyes. I had been troubled lately by the Calvinist conclusions I have derived from certain scripture passages; by their blatant contradiction of Christ's message and call to faith; and had up until now been unable to reconcile them. Here are the most poignant and relevant excerpts from Kearley's paper:

    "Ephesians 4:1 says, "Even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world for us to be holy and unblemished before him in love." While reference is made here in the context to the act of choice being made before the foundation of the world, the context also indicates that the act of choice was as much centered on the kind of life style as on individuals. The passage is saying simply that God chose--before the foundation of the world--that those whom he would bless with every spiritual blessing would be the ones who would be holy and without blemish before him in love. The election has to do with selecting or predetermining holy characteristics, not individuals."

    "The clear teaching of the Bible is that God “would have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth” (1 Timothy 2:4). God does not wish “any should perish, but that all should come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9). Peter, who at one time thought only a particular race of people was chosen of God, had to be taught a thorough lesson on this very point. Through the vision he experienced, he learned
    “of a truth I perceive God is no respecter of persons; but in every nation he who fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him” (Acts 10:34-35).

    "From these and numerous other passages it is clear that: (a) the Bible teaches that God loves every human being and has acted to make possible the salvation of each one; and (b) the death of Christ was for every man, and makes it possible for every man to receive atonement for his sins. “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believes on him should not perish, but have eternal life” (John 3:16). Christ, demonstrating God’s love, tasted “of death for every
    man” (Hebrews 2:9). He “gave himself a ransom for all” (2 Timothy 2:6).
    The great commission is aimed toward all men (Matthew 28:18-20; Mark 16:15-16). The invitation is extended to all, according to Revelation 22:17: “And the spirit and the bride say, come. And he who hears, let him say, come. And he who is athirst, let him come: he who will, let him take the water of life freely.” Clearly, the atonement is not limited (as Calvin taught). The plain teaching of Scripture is that election is conditioned by man’s response, or failure to respond, to God in faith and obedience. It is not conditioned by God’s arbitrary choice, before a man is born, as to whether he will be saved or lost. Such a concept is totally out of harmony with the plain expressions of Scripture regarding the care and concern of God and Christ, and of their actions in order to save mankind from sin."
  2. Joined
    15 Oct '06
    Moves
    10115
    19 May '07 20:341 edit
    Originally posted by epiphinehas
    Vistesd, although I still don't believe that God can or will save men from eternal damnation who reject His Son, Jesus Christ, I must admit that my Calvinist views of the elect have been biblically unsound. I have unknowingly defended the Calvinist position up until now, and need desperately to amend my exegesis to more closely reflect the whole of scri concern of God and Christ, and of their actions in order to save mankind from sin."
    What do you see as "rejecting" Christ? If one comes to repentance and lives a life based in love, compassion, justice, etc., yet doesn't proclaim Jesus as his savior, has he "rejected" Christ? What is Christ if not the embodiment of love, compassion, justice, etc.?
  3. Joined
    21 Apr '07
    Moves
    1560
    19 May '07 21:00
    Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
    What do you see as "rejecting" Christ? If one comes to repentance and lives a life based in love, compassion, justice, etc., yet doesn't proclaim Jesus as his savior, has he "rejected" Christ?
    Show me a person who comes to repentance and lives a life based in love, compassion, justice, etc., yet doesn't proclaim Jesus as his savior, and then we can talk.

    I personally don't think it is possible for such a scenario to occur.
  4. Joined
    15 Oct '06
    Moves
    10115
    19 May '07 21:101 edit
    Originally posted by Phuzudaka
    Show me a person who comes to repentance and lives a life based in love, compassion, justice, etc., yet doesn't proclaim Jesus as his savior, and then we can talk.

    I personally don't think it is possible for such a scenario to occur.
    Why don't you think it's possible?

    I suppose we could get into a battle of who adequately fits that description and poke holes in each others candidates, but what would that prove?

    Not that I'm well grounded in any of them, but I see this concept as foundational to Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam and the Bahai Faith. I'm sure there are others as well.
  5. Joined
    29 Oct '06
    Moves
    225
    19 May '07 21:14
    Originally posted by Phuzudaka
    Show me a person who comes to repentance and lives a life based in love, compassion, justice, etc., yet doesn't proclaim Jesus as his savior, and then we can talk.

    I personally don't think it is possible for such a scenario to occur.
    What about someone like a devout Buddhist monk? Are they going o burn in hell for not accepting Jesus as their saviour? (not that they would care, of course, as they don't believe in heaven and hell)
  6. Joined
    21 Apr '07
    Moves
    1560
    19 May '07 21:281 edit
    Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
    Why don't you think it's possible?

    I suppose we could get into a battle of who adequately fits that description and poke holes in each others candidates, but what would that prove?

    Not that I'm well grounded in any of them, but I see this concept as foundational to Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam and the Bahai Faith. I'm sure there are others as well.
    I believe that repentance is a supernatural work that only Christ can do in the life of an individual.

    Repentance apart from Christ "doing the work of regeneration", is meaningless and I.M.O a fruitless excercise.
  7. Joined
    21 Apr '07
    Moves
    1560
    19 May '07 21:32
    Originally posted by whiterose
    What about someone like a devout Buddhist monk? Are they going o burn in hell for not accepting Jesus as their saviour? (not that they would care, of course, as they don't believe in heaven and hell)
    Most religions are exclusive. Christ certainly made exclusive claims, and he is the only one whose claims can be taken seriously since he is not rotting in the grave like all the other religious leaders...
  8. Joined
    29 Oct '06
    Moves
    225
    19 May '07 21:48
    Originally posted by Phuzudaka
    Most religions are exclusive. Christ certainly made exclusive claims, and he is the only one whose claims can be taken seriously since he is not rotting in the grave like all the other religious leaders...
    Did jesus make exclusive claims, or is it the bible that makes them? What if jesus simply preached "love thy neighbor", and all that other stuff about having to be a christian was made up to keep people under the influence of the church?

    Who says all other religious leaders are rotting in their graves? Budhhists believe in reincarnation, which means that no one ever rots in a grave.
  9. Joined
    15 Oct '06
    Moves
    10115
    19 May '07 21:482 edits
    Originally posted by Phuzudaka
    I believe that repentance is a supernatural work that only Christ can do in the life of an individual.

    Repentance apart from Christ "doing the work", is meaningless and I.M.O a fruitless excercise.
    What is Christ if not the embodiment of love, compassion, justice, etc.?
  10. Joined
    21 Apr '07
    Moves
    1560
    19 May '07 22:031 edit
    Originally posted by whiterose
    Did jesus make exclusive claims, or is it the bible that makes them? What if jesus simply preached "love thy neighbor", and all that other stuff about having to be a christian was made up to keep people under the influence of the church?

    Who says all other religious leaders are rotting in their graves? Budhhists believe in reincarnation, which means that no one ever rots in a grave.
    If you have any historical documentation to support your view, please provide it. Historical documentation seems to support what the Bible says.

    Reincarnation is not falsibiable and thus not provable, on the other hand, the ressurection of Christ was perfectly falsifiable, and thus has a huge weight of circumstantial evidence.
  11. Joined
    21 Apr '07
    Moves
    1560
    19 May '07 22:041 edit
    Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
    What is Christ if not the embodiment of love, compassion, justice, etc.?
    I thought we were speaking about repentance and regeneration?
  12. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    83887
    19 May '07 22:13
    Originally posted by Phuzudaka
    Reincarnation is not falsibiable and thus not provable, on the other hand, the ressurection of Christ was perfectly falsifiable, and thus has a huge weight of circumstantial evidence.
    Do go on...
  13. Joined
    15 Oct '06
    Moves
    10115
    19 May '07 22:14
    Originally posted by Phuzudaka
    I thought we were speaking about repentance and regeneration?
    We were. I don't know that repentance is necessarily "a supernatural work that only Christ can do". But even if it is, what is Christ?
  14. Joined
    29 Oct '06
    Moves
    225
    19 May '07 22:17
    Originally posted by Phuzudaka
    If you have any historical documentation to support your view, please provide it. Historical documentation seems to support what the Bible says.

    Reincarnation is not falsibiable and thus not provable, on the other hand, the ressurection of Christ was perfectly falsifiable, and thus has a huge weight of circumstantial evidence.
    What historical documentation is there that supports all of the supernatural events in the bible? If someone came along 200 years from now and wrote in a book that I lived 200 years ago was God incarnate, would it be true? Just because someone wrote it down doesn't make it so.

    Christ's ressurection is perfectly falsifiable?! Please tell me you are joking.
  15. Standard memberBosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    Spiel des Lebens
    Joined
    27 Jan '05
    Moves
    83887
    19 May '07 22:18
    Originally posted by whiterose
    Christ's ressurection is perfectly falsifiable?! Please tell me you are joking.
    Lighten up...This should be good.
Back to Top