Wormwood said:
In Christ,
Thanks for the response.
1. Yes he was a sinner crying out. But both Calvinists and Arminians would agree that he recognized his need for God through God's grace, not his own innate goodness. The text where we find "many are called but few are chosen" is based out of a parable of a feast the King is having for his Son. I think this text is a very strong support for free will actually. The King was calling everyone to come celebrate with the son, but only the marginalized responded. And even among those who responded, not all came dressed appropriately. So we see that everyone is called, but the "chosen" are the ones who respond appropriately. This text teaches the opposite of what you are suggesting in my opinion.
2. Yes I agree with you. But if God wants all to be saved, and none can be saved apart from his irresistible grace, why wouldn't he bestow that grace on everyone? Isnt God choosing to not save some when he could easily impart irresistible grace on them and cause them to be saved? So if this is true, how can Scripture say that he wants ALL saved? Clearly he doesn't want all saved if he is purposely choosing to condemn some by not imparting grace to them. So which is right? Scripture or this picture of limited atonement?
3. Well then I think we can chalk that up to unclarity and move on. I would have thought you would have said that the story of Lazarus is the "best" text for teaching Calvinism or the best text refuting Arminianism if your point was that it is an argument for Calvinism (and even here I don't think I have heard it used as an argument for such). When you say it is the best text concerning teaching on Arminianism, it sounds like you are talking about a support text for Arminianism. Anyway, no big deal. I do think we can discuss the significance of the miracles in the Gospels. John has seven of them. Each miracle depicts something significant about the person and work of Jesus and are often followed with an "I am" statement (healing the blind - "I am the light of the world, raising Lazarus - I am the resurrection and the life, feeding multitudes - I am the bread of life, and so forth). I just don't happen to think that the spiritual meaning of Jesus bringing Lazarus out of the grave was to prove a point about God's sovereignty and man's lack of free will. I think it had much more to do with putting faith in Jesus as the one who has power over life and death and is the ultimate judge of mankind. Anyways...
4. Well I would have to disagree with you regarding the role of the Holy Spirit in interpreting text. The Holy Spirit works though the church via gifts such as teachers and so forth. I do not believe he gives special illumination to each individual so they can have proper doctrinal understandings of texts. If this is the case, then we don't need teachers. Moreover, if this is the case, then either 95% of the church does not have the Holy Spirit, or the Holy Spirit is sending mixed messages since most Christians do not agree on these issues. Everyone claims they are enlightened by the Spirit in their interpretation of the Bible. So why is it YOU are the one really receiving the truth and everyone else is deceived? Personally, I just don't think this is how the Spirit operates. But that's another blog.
5. Well, that's the rub you see. If God really desires it, and God alone can save man through his irresistible grace, then why doesn't he elect everyone? If He sees nothing in us good that would warrant our salvation and simply elects some to be saved out of a whole human race headed to hell....why not just elect everyone? Then God displays incredible grace and his desire for all to be saved is accomplished. Maybe....maybe that is not how God works. That would be my argument.
Again, I believe in predestination. However, is election based on foreknowledge or God's sovereign selection process? That is the debate here. If you believe he elects people based on foreknowledge, then you and I are in agreement. If you do not, and God arbitrarily chooses people from before time to be saved, then he is also electing people to be destroyed by necessity. If the selected group is A and the non selected is B...then by choosing A you are also designating B. This is double predestination. If God chooses some to be saved before they ever acted by his sovereign will, he is also choosing some to be condemned by NOT choosing them as the heavenly elect. They have been predestined not to be chosen and thus be condemned. I do not think the Bible teaches this.
Wormwood,
You are very welcome.
1. Scripture says in Romans 3 there is none righteous no not one, and there is none that seeks after God. If this is true, which I believe it to be, then the Publican
will never have recognized his need for God. And, if he did recognize his need for God, it is only because he was an
elect, he was
named and he was
chosen by God, before the foundation of the world!
How do you figure the wedding feast is a strong support for free will? Remember, this story is a parable, an earthly story with a spiritual meaning. Although I must say and I say it kindly, I believe you do not have any idea what the “call” is about. The call is “to believe in the name of His Son.” But God knows man can't respond because he is spiritually dead yet, the command was given anyway. I believe this is a test to man once again just as God tested Adam long ago back there in the Garden of Eden and failed. Today, however, the test is, are we going to trust in the finished work of Jesus that He alone did all the work to save us or, are we going to insist that somehow we can contribute to our salvation by believing or having faith in Christ? As I've mentioned to you in a previous post, faith is works ( I Thessalonians 1:3 ), therefore contrary to Ephesians 2:9. The word believe is a verb and the word faith is a noun and both words are derived from the word faithful. You don't have to believe what I say, but believe the Bible.
We have opinions and that's just it, opinions. No relevancy. The churches have their own presuppositions and these reasons are why there are so many different denominations in the world. If we are reading the same Bible then it is only logical that we arrive with the same conclusions. But we don't because all have feet of clay.
The spiritual meaning of the wedding feast is this. God told His servants ( angels ) to go and invite ( call ) the whole town ( here, National Israel is in view ) to celebrate His Son's wedding. The town's people rejected the invitation so he told his servants to go to the highways ( the world ) to gather all the good and the bad to the feast. The guests arrives and one of them shows up without a wedding garment and was cast out. The wedding garment represented Christ's robe of righteousness, that is, his sins were not covered by the blood of Christ. The wedding feast was for the elect only..
2. 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. 2 Peter 3:9
The text above are God's word. If you want to contend with Him about it then do so. The term, “many
are called but few are chosen,” doesn't it sound like limited atonement?
3. We've gone through the raising of Lazarus so many times that if you haven't grasped the illustration by now then you'll never get it. Sorry, I am not even going to listen to your explanations about Calvinism or Arminianism, I have a one track mind....the Bible!
4. You can disagree with me on anything and everything about the Bible, as you like.. But, to say the Holy Spirit only works through the church via the gifts of teachers and so forth, and without as much as giving scripture references, I think is saying too much, and really, shows me you have no knowledge at all of Scripture, and rely only on what you've read in other books written by man! But let me share what the Bible have to say about what the Holy Spirit do:
But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall
teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance,
whatsoever I have said unto you. John 14:26
And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for
flesh and blood hath not
revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. Matthew 16:17
Why God reveals truths to some and not to others, I don't know.
5. Your argument is invalid and not biblical. God is the same today, yesterday, and forever, that means, what He has decreed He will do. The wages of sin is death! Man by nature is a sinner and is accountable for his sins, and must pay for them, unless he can find a substitute to take his place.. God is not under any obligation to save everybody, only those He predestined to save, arbitrarily. What a loving and merciful God we serve! Yet, people find fault with Him for sending them to hell, which they put themselves under, and they do not realize how He paid a tremendous price to have a special people for Himself, by sacrificing His only Son to die on man's behalf!.
I too believe the Bible does not teach that God chooses people to be condemned. The unsaved are condemned because they are sinners and ready to be slaughtered, on their own doing.
Yea, for thy sake are we killed all the day long; we are counted as sheep for the slaughter.
Psalm 44:22
The debate is not about foreknowledge, rather the OP is about predestination ( God elects ) or free will ( man has a choice )?