The Elect and Predestination - the unfortunate implications

[Rockerduck]

Problem is, hyper-Clavinists generally don't make a discernible distinction.



I guess the idea is that many (all?) are called but few are chosen, so to speak. That always seemed kinda backwards to me, but I'm getting used to and even comfortable with that as time passes. The LORD and I have this understanding/inside joke, if you will, that "I don't know jack." It helps me to be still and know that... You get the picture, of course.

An old preacher I really admired by the name of E.E. Cleveland used to say "We-e-ell, you know how the LORD is" whenever He would manifest His awesome power/wisdom in a special way.



My newly embraced, old-age curmudgeony is making it increasingly difficult for me to even entertain the usual arguments for odds-based atonement. I see the broad/many/narrow/few illustration more as representing the nature of wrothful children and the difficulty of parting with our cherished views. I don't know what could have ever possessed someone to see this as an "us-and-them" model except as they have never struggled with human nature and therefore simply "don't get it."

The whole idea that Christ was one of the "us" before Bethlehem and then cast His lot with the "them" (us-us) seems to up-end the whole notion of elitism, doesn't it?

I confess I'm quite literally losing my patience for people who state their soteriological cases in a dismissive, unyielding way. I'm not happy about it, but there it is. I especially have a problem with millennials and Gen-Xers who feel no need to show even the slightest bit of regard for their elders.

When I listen to someone older than myself offer some wisdom, I'm grateful enough for their going to the trouble of the gesture to be gracious in return unless, of course, they go out of their way to engage in some undignified rhetoric that contributes more to a problem than a solution.

But I've said too much.

:)

It was a nice discussion until you went on the attack.

 

[St. SteVen]

It was a nice discussion until you went on the attack.

Why do you consider that an attack?

[

 

[Rockerduck]

Why do you consider that an attack?

[

Your topic was good for a discussion. barney brought up hyper c., and not a good description. I appreciated the non-C discussion. The bible canon was available way before Calvin. Those that agree with predestination are Christians too. We must respect another Christian's views.

 

[St. SteVen]

Your topic was good for a discussion. barney brought up hyper c., and not a good description. I appreciated the non-C discussion. The bible canon was available way before Calvin. Those that agree with predestination are Christians too. We must respect another Christian's views.

Fair enough, thanks.
Were you able to adequately present your position?
How would you summarize?

[

 

[Rockerduck]

Fair enough, thanks.
Were you able to adequately present your position?
How would you summarize?

[

I do find that when we read the bible, we have our individual experiences, that we view God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit. As we read the Word of God, it seems to support our views to a degree. These degrees overlap and Christians can all agree on most doctrines. :) So, discussions can be lively, but no, my way or the highway. I have belief views that are unchangeable, but I recognize others views as well.

 

[Stumpmaster]

Very interesting reply.
Does this apply in the spiritual realm? Opposites attract: negatives repel.

What attracts sinners to Christ? He is positively charged, they negatively at that time.

 

[St. SteVen]

From the OP.

We can't claim that the terms "the Elect" and "predestined" aren't biblical.
But the man-made doctrinal conclusions carry with them some disturbing implications.

Specifically:
1) God chose who he would save and who he would damn.
2) If the Elect were predestined to life, then everyone else was predestined to destruction. (per the standard doctrine)

Let's discuss.

[

 

[St. SteVen]

We can't claim that the terms
"the Elect" and "predestined" aren't biblical.
But the man-made doctrinal conclusions carry
with them some disturbing implications.

Specifically:
1) God chose who he would save and who he would damn.
2) If the Elect were predestined to life, then everyone else was
predestined to destruction. (per the standard doctrine)

Let's discuss.

[

 

[St. SteVen]

New topic:

Did the Serpent deceive A&E by lying, or by telling the truth?

The knee-jerk reaction is to claim the serpent lied. Let's give this a closer look. Genesis 2:15-17 NIV The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. 16 And the Lord God commanded the man, “You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; 17...

www.christianityboard.com

[

 

[St. SteVen]

We can't claim that the terms "the Elect" and "predestined" aren't biblical.
But the man-made doctrinal conclusions carry with them some disturbing implications.

Specifically:
1) "God chose who he would save and who he would damn."
2) "If the Elect were predestined to life, then everyone else was predestined to destruction." (per the standard doctrine)

Let's discuss.

[

 

[Lambano]

Let's discuss.

 

[soberxp]

We can't claim that the terms "the Elect" and "predestined" aren't biblical.
But the man-made doctrinal conclusions carry with them some disturbing implications.

Specifically:
1) God chose who he would save and who he would damn.
2) If the Elect were predestined to life, then everyone else was predestined to destruction. (per the standard doctrine)

Let's discuss.

[

How God defeated himself. Through man? One side is blessed, the other is cursed.

Or Through Jesus Christ.

 

[St. SteVen]

How God defeated himself. Through man?

Exactly.
That makes no sense that God would defeat Himself by the will of humankind.

[

 

[St. SteVen]

The Elect and Predestination - the unfortunate implications​

We can't claim that the terms "the Elect" and "predestined" aren't biblical.
But the man-made doctrinal conclusions carry with them some disturbing implications.

Specifically:
1) God chose who he would save and who he would damn.
2) If the Elect were predestined to life, then everyone else was predestined to destruction. (per the standard doctrine)

Let's discuss.

cc: @Hillsage

 

[Windmill Charge]

The Elect and Predestination - the unfortunate implications​

We can't claim that the terms "the Elect" and "predestined" aren't biblical.
But the man-made doctrinal conclusions carry with them some disturbing implications.

Specifically:
1) God chose who he would save and who he would damn.
2) If the Elect were predestined to life, then everyone else was predestined to destruction. (per the standard doctrine)

Let's discuss.

cc: @Hillsage

Yet God himself said in exodus 33:19 And the Lord said, “I will cause all my goodness to pass in front of you, and I will proclaim my name, the Lord, in your presence. I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. 20 But,” he said, “you cannot see my face, for no one may see me and live.”

It is God whose estate, so it is reasonable that if God saves, then he chooses who will be saved.

 

[St. SteVen]

... it is reasonable that if God saves, then he chooses who will be saved.

Is it also reasonable that God chooses who will not be saved?
Or will everyone be saved in the end?

 

[Beebster]

Is it also reasonable that God chooses who will not be saved?

Which begs the question.
What does being saved really mean?
Simply put, I believe it means being saved from death.

For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, SPECIALLY of those that believe. (1Ti 4:10 )

Yes, there is something special for those that believe i.e. God's Elect, his chosen.

Or will everyone be saved in the end?

You know my answer to that one.

In the end, yes everyone, will be saved.

 

[St. SteVen]

Which begs the question.
What does being saved really mean?
Simply put, I believe it means being saved from death.

Agree.

And Jesus paid the death penalty for all of humankind.
There still needs to be a judgement where every nation, leader and person is held accountable,
but everyone will be restored and redeemed.

 

[soberxp]

"the Elect"
I understand it as
Apostles, prophets, teachers,watchman of Israel.

But not the believers and unbelievers.

And One of my questions is whether Judas the traitor was among the "the Elect"?

 

[St. SteVen]

"the Elect"
I understand it as
Apostles, prophets, teachers,watchman of Israel.

But not the believers and unbelievers.

And One of my questions is whether Judas the traitor was among the "the Elect"?

That's a good question.
The term "Elect", of course, has the meaning of being selected. Like we vote for politicians.
God has his elect, chosen ones, that have been set aside now in this lifetime as His own.
Called for His purpose.

But God will save everyone, "each in turn". The Elect (firstfruits) first and others to follow.

2 Timothy 2:10 NIV
Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect,
that they too may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus, with eternal glory.

1 Corinthians 15:22-24 NIV
For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made alive.
23 But each in turn: Christ, the firstfruits; then, when he comes, those who belong to him.
24 Then the end will come, when he hands over the kingdom to God the Father
after he has destroyed all dominion, authority and power.