Pastoral Thoughts on the Doctrine of Election

Theology
223

@BlueDragon

Alright, “Satan convinced her.” Close enough.

Here is the bridge between Calvin and Arminius. Determination and freedom. Our freedom is epistemic. We believe what we choose to believe. God’s determination is that we act on what we believe, and we always act in what we believe is our own best interest.

Knowledge of good and evil is essential for any created person to live freely forever in Heaven. Of course there are “what abouts”. There always are. Those can be discussed.

The reason that you, or any of us, do anything is because you believe it’s the best thing that you should do at that moment. You’re convinced of it, as you say.

So when James says “faith without works is dead”, he is saying that works are the unavoidable consequence of what you believe. God made us that way.

Then, He helps us with our beliefs. The Spirit of God brings conviction to our hearts in the instant of our apprehension of the truth. Our part is to choose to welcome the guidance of the Spirit, and choose to believe Him.

Our part is not to then make a list that we have to do to earn His love. The old covenant had 10 commandments, the new covenant has 10,000 “commandments”, but none of those acts are essential for salvation . Each one is a means of grace extending the love we receive to those we love.

Our challenge is to bring every thought captive, apply God’s law of love to it, and decide what we are going to believe about it. Critically important, because our decision about what we believe determines what we do about it.

Eve looked at the fruit, saw it was attractive, believed it would be good for food, and comes with a bonus - makes one wise. She believed all those things. She also knew what God had said. If you eat it, you will die.

Satan offered a competing belief. “You won’t surely die.” And since she was created with epistemic freedom (a very good thing) she was free to choose to believe what she thought would be in her best interest, and act accordingly. She chose to believe the lie, and she sinned.

So, we continue to have all the same challenges to this day. Competing beliefs. Once we’ve made our choices about what we are going to believe (because we believe it’s in our best interest), we get downright indignant if anyone disagrees with us. And that’s fine, as long as we aren’t forgetting our higher calling, our deeper faith, and that is that Christ died for that brother that you are criticizing.

They are going to believe what they choose to believe, just like you do.

So my challenging question is this - what Spirit are you listening to when you decide it’s in your best interest to believe that it’s good to bring railing condemnation against fellow believers? I also have to ask myself the same question. Because as I said in another thread, I’m at times more likely to grab the rod than take up a staff.

I don’t think that Jesus is in the midst of your vitriol. Let your yea be yea. Any more is not good, and certainly not convincing.

EDIT: Our brother @KPuff reminded me of this on another thread:

“Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. He who does not love does not know God, for God is love. In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. (1 John 4:7-11)

1 Like
224

Whatever I did not respond to, I did so because I agree with you on that point.

we always act in what we believe is our own best interest.

I may have misunderstood what you mean here, so correct me if I am wrong – but real world experience does not demonstrate this. Sometimes people “do” not out of best self interest, but out of sheer stupidity (I understand “stupid” to be a choice, no one is “stupid” but they make stupid choices). I worked in a county jail, I can tell you that most of them there were there because of either stupid choices that had nothing to do with their best interest, or because they liked breaking the law.

The reason that you, or any of us, do anything is because you believe it’s the best thing that you should do at that moment. You’re convinced of it, as you say.

I did not say that I was not convinced of that. But that still does not fly; I just had a piece of chocolate cake…it was NOT in my best interest to eat it. So while I understand what you are saying, if we stop and think about it, what you claim here really does not fly in the real world.

So when James says “faith without works is dead”, he is saying that works are the unavoidable consequence of what you believe. God made us that way.

Actually, if that was what James meant, then his book would not be in the Bible, because that would directly contradict numerous other passages. No where in Scripture is obedience ever addressed as “unavoidable consequences” of what you believe. If that was the case, then we should not read “bear fruit in keeping with repentance” and like passages – because there would be absolutely no reason to say what should automatically take place.

Our part is not to then make a list that we have to do to earn His love.

So then…first, God is the one who made the list, not me; second, then you reject every passage that tells you what you have to do – not to “earn His love,” but in order to remain abiding in Christ. Good to know.

The old covenant had 10 commandments, the new covenant has 10,000 “commandments”,

Wrong. The covenant law of the old covenant was the 10 commandments, not counting all the 600+ other commandments and laws that had nothing to do with the covenant law; and the New Covenant only has 2 commandments, the rest (like the 600+ in the old covenant) are social laws. The “covenant law” of a covenant is the list of obligations the maker of the covenant makes for himself and his covenant partner (like a contract), and as long as you continue to walk in obedience to those obligations, then you remain in covenant relationship with each other.

but none of those acts are essential for salvation .

You are correct here as long as you do not erroneously read eternal life into salvation.

So, we continue to have all the same challenges to this day. Competing beliefs.

I said this before, but not here I think…99% of Scripture has only ONE intended meaning, other “competing beliefs” about interpreting a passage that is not the intended meaning, are false – false beliefs that lead to false teachings that lead to false doctrines, all of which lead to eternal fire. This is why it behooves us to ensure that we learn how to properly and accurately read and interpret Scripture, because if we are wrong, then we ourselves and all those who listen to us will have eternal fire to pay.

Continued…

225

Continued…

Once we’ve made our choices about what we are going to believe (because we believe it’s in our best interest), we get downright indignant if anyone disagrees with us.

Yes, especially if we have not learned to set our biases aside and take a look at what someone is trying to show us. No one here knows it all. No one here has it all together. Everyone here should be of the attitude that they just might have it wrong, completely examine what the other is telling them, leaving their bias aside, taking what Scripture says over and above what men say…because otherwise that person will never be able to come to the truth.

They are going to believe what they choose to believe, just like you do.

True, but…I have changed what I chose to believe over the years, one doctrine after another, because when I stopped pushing my bias that I was taught as a young man, that I chose at the time to believe, and did what I suggest above, I began to see what I could not see before. As I said, bias blinds people to truth. We should not be like my catholic friend who says, “I was born a catholic and I will die a catholic, even if it is wrong,” because frankly, that is a stupid choice.

So my challenging question is this - what Spirit are you listening to when you decide it’s in your best interest to believe that it’s good to bring railing condemnation against fellow believers?

The Spirit that says we are to contend for the truth of the Faith…because eternity is at stake.

There is a misunderstanding there on your part; I do not condemn anyone – I condemn the false doctrines they espouse. Now, if you are so entwined with your doctrine that it feels personal, then I would suggest they step back and understand something – this is not your doctrine. If it is Biblical, then it is God’s doctrine, you have no right to get upset if someone steps upon it because it is not yours…it is God’s, He will render recompense to those who step on His doctrine.

I may get frustrated when someone stiffens his neck and refuses to even listen to what I am trying to show them for their own good, for their eternal benefit, but ultimately it is their choice to listen and learn, or end up as hell fodder; it is not my doctrine. I am only the messenger. Now…if what he espouses is false doctrine, then I can see that he might get upset, because he feels that he has to defend his bias. I do not have to defend, truth does not need to be defended, it speaks for itself both here and on judgment day.

If you teach people false doctrine, and they end up going to hell for believing what you taught them, how many people have you consigned to eternal fire so far? Do you think you will still go to heaven after being the reason that hundreds of people listening to your voice end up in hell?

I don’t think that Jesus is in the midst of your vitriol.

Well, you have once again misidentified and read into my words what I have not said nor intended, you have done this since day one. It is a bad habit on your part. In case you think that is a personal attack or “vitriol,” it is not…I am simply stating a fact that the readers can go back and see for themselves.

Jesus is behind all that I show doctrinally speaking, because it is His Word. Who has Jesus in his words: the one whose teaching lines up with His Word, or the one whose teaching directly contradicts His Word? And I can demonstrate that any day of the week.

226

Yeah you have misunderstood a bit, and the misunderstanding runs as thread through your responses. I do appreciate your taking the time to respond though - a lot of work!

What I’m saying always flies in the real world. Here’s how.

Take your cake. You have a whole cluster of beliefs about chocolate cake. Some positive, some negative. For example, one of those beliefs might be that chocolate cake is bad for you, and you should never eat any. But then, when you are faced with an available piece of chocolate cake, you look at it. And you see that it looks good, and you think that it would be good to eat, and you know that you would enjoy it, because you have had chocolate cake before. You weigh all those beliefs against your previous belief that eating chocolate cake would be bad.

And you say to yourself, “it’s just once - won’t hurt anything”. Or, “I deserve a treat”, or whatever. You eat it because, at that moment, your deepest belief about that piece of chocolate cake, is that, all things considered, eating that cake at that moment is the best thing you can do for yourself.

It doesn’t mean you’re necessarily having the articulated conversation in your head. It’s more a combination of fundamental drives, emotional states, and willful agreement with the beliefs that you find most compelling, AT THE MOMENT.

So you eat it, even though one of your present beliefs that later comes true is that you will regret it. You already knew that. It was already one of your beliefs. But you decided that you would believe, that at least at that moment, it wasn’t in your best interest to prioritize your future regret. The belief in your future regret is in conflict with your present best-interest belief, that you would love a piece of chocolate cake.

So the point is, we don’t do what actually is in our best interest. Like, for the future, or for our marriage, or for our health. At least not always, or even very often. We do what we BELIEVE is in our best interest, at least at the moment.

Just like Eve did. And Adam. And every single sin since.

227

So it was God’s fault?

Just asking.

Be blessed,

Peter

228

I like this and chuckled. Well said. :blush:

1 Like
229

I guess this is an opinion that I have to disagree with.

Not every action one takes is based on the thought or idea that it is in my best interest, or to my benefit. When you had sex outside of marriage, it was not to your best interest or benefit, you got horny and wanted to have sex, not understanding at the time that you were actually hurting yourself and her, by that act. It felt good, and that was the only thing in your head.

Just one example out of hundreds. Some of our choices are not based in our best interest or benefit at all, they are based upon selfishness, greed, pleasure, laziness, and we could go on. When we take the full spectrum of reasons why people do the things they do, simply doing them because it is what they believe is in their best interest does not fly.

Blessings!

230

To clarify…“So it was God’s fault that Adam and Eve fell?” Is that what you are asking?

If so, I would clarify that it was not His “fault,” but rather by His purposed design. If they did not fall, then you could not learn and choose to have a personal relationship with Him - and that is the whole purpose for Him creating us in the first place.

Blessings

231

Perhaps it’s the “best interest” terminology that’s tripping you up. People make decisions that are selfish, greedy, hedonist, or lazy because they want to. They believe obtaining the objects of their decisions will make them happy. We might describe that as being something that they believe is in their best interest.

So if someone needs money really bad, he might believe that it’s in his best interest at the moment to rob a drug dealer. Drug dealers have money, and they are reluctant to report robberies to the police. So robbing one might seem like a good idea to someone in desperate need.

So let’s see if we can satisfy two arguments with one answer.

The question is, did God cause the introduction of evil into His very good universe? If so, that would be problematic, since the Bible teaches that God cannot sin, is not tempted by evil, and never tempts anyone with evil. So it wouldn’t matter how much is gained - God cannot cause evil.

Theodicies attempt to show that God had very good reasons to ALLOW evil, but most Christians of every sect in history who attempt to offer adequate theodicy, do so without indicting God for evil. It’s very rare that anyone makes the claim that God planned and caused evil to exist, no matter the benefit.

Free-will theodicies claim that Adam and Eve had libertarian, or substantially libertarian free will, and decided for themselves to disobey God. Atheists who want to prove that the idea is incoherent, point out that if God created Adam and Eve, that He created whatever it is about them that caused them to sin. Be it their flesh that lusted after something, or their will that rebelled against God’s will, or whatever. In any case, God is ultimately responsible.

Unless the thing that caused them to sin is their beliefs. They are free to choose their own beliefs. God does not cause them to believe one way or the other. But He did cause them to act accordingly to their beliefs. That’s what we all do.

You might notice a certain symmetry to this. Sin came into the world through false beliefs, rejecting God’s truth. Salvation comes into the world through true beliefs, faith in God’s truth. False beliefs caused our downfall, and true beliefs cause our salvation.

I know it seems like a short step, but it’s an important step. When we want to make a certain decision with regard to a set of choices, we make that decision because of what we believe about those choices. This or that or the other would be best for what I want to gain. So, that’s the choice we make.

I mentioned earlier that no one tries to say that God caused them to sin. It’s also true that I know of no other Christian in history who make the claim that “salvation” does not result in the person going to heaven. It could be true that a person gets saved, but still goes to hell. You are the only person who I’ve ever heard of who makes that claim.

So,I suppose you might also say that God caused evil. Typically only atheists say that.

1 Like
232

The question is, did God cause the introduction of evil into His very good universe? If so, that would be problematic, since the Bible teaches that God cannot sin, is not tempted by evil, and never tempts anyone with evil. So it wouldn’t matter how much is gained - God cannot cause evil.

The problem here so far, is that you read “God cannot cause evil” as the same thing as God allowing evil, they are not the same thing. God cannot sin, because sin is against God – He cannot sin against Himself. God cannot sin against you, because that is not the Biblical definition of sin, not too mention that as your Creator, He can do anything He likes with you, or even to you, because saved or heathen, God created all things and they are His possessions. As far as His “very good universe,” now you have entered into an area that few people seem to understand…when God says it was “very good,” that is very good according to His purpose, not according to your sensitivities.

Theodicies attempt to show that God had very good reasons to ALLOW evil, but most Christians of every sect in history who attempt to offer adequate theodicy, do so without indicting God for evil. It’s very rare that anyone makes the claim that God planned and caused evil to exist, no matter the benefit.

First, I did not say that God “caused evil to exist,” you are having a hard time understanding what I said again. I said that God that God made an environment where Adam would fall. Second, do you know and understand the difference between wickedness and evil? Because what you said here says the answer is no. Wicked is not obeying God, evil is what Hitler did to millions of Jews. There is a difference. I do not attempt to show why God allows “evil,” I said why God allowed sin, there is a huge difference.

In any case, God is ultimately responsible.

Lets see if you can understand a simple math equation:

1. God made a garden.

2. God made Adam and Eve and placed them in the garden.

3. God made a specific tree, and out of all the other trees, He directly commanded Adam not to eat from it, and then placed it in the middle of the garden.

Now…does your math add up, or are you going to stick to the erroneous tradition of men that you have so far stated? God put the tree in the middle of the garden, and then commanded them not to eat from it – the only command He gave them. If God did not want them to fall, then He would NOT have put the tree there, or He would not have commanded them not to eat from it. You fail to understand that in order to love God you must have free will (and by your remarks, you deny free will). You were created to love God, but you cannot love God if you have no choice, nor if you do not have something to choose between.

Unless the thing that caused them to sin is their beliefs. They are free to choose their own beliefs. God does not cause them to believe one way or the other. But He did cause them to act accordingly to their beliefs. That’s what we all do.

Where do you get that from? More of men’s false traditional teachings? Because that is not in the Bible. God did not “cause them to act” in any way – He did not cause them to do anything. If that is your theology, then it is way out in left field and does not line up with Scripture.

You might notice a certain symmetry to this. Sin came into the world through false beliefs, rejecting God’s truth.

Except that your symmetry is off; most sin does not come through false beliefs, it comes through disobedient actions and attitudes. Salvation comes through coming to God on His terms, not the false beliefs and doctrines of men. Belief and faith are completely useless if they are not lived accordingly – John 3:36 again; you can believe all you want, but unless you practice walking in obedience to God, your faith means diddly squat.

I mentioned earlier that no one tries to say that God caused them to sin. It’s also true that I know of no other Christian in history who make the claim that “salvation” does not result in the person going to heaven. It could be true that a person gets saved, but still goes to hell. You are the only person who I’ve ever heard of who makes that claim.

True, God does not cause anyone to sin.

Actually, you do know another Christian that says that, John and Paul, even James says it. The problem is perhaps you have blinders on that prevent you from seeing what Scripture clearly says…that is called bias. And it seems then that you have not known very many people who understand Scripture and take it for what it clearly states. By what you just said above, you must have taken a black pen to every passage in the Bible that tells you such – like John 3:36, and a host of others. It sounds like you have been hanging around people who do not know Scripture very well.

So, I suppose you might also say that God caused evil. Typically only atheists say that.

No, God does not cause evil, Calvinists are the only ones that I have ever heard of that make that claim. And again…there is a clear difference between the words “sin” and “evil”…sin is simply disobedience to God, in whatever form; evil means the absolute worst that a person could do in his sin.

For example, if Tom kidnapped and murdered a 16 year old girl, that is a sin (I think you agree here); however, if Tom kidnapped her, strapped her to a chair, and sliced and diced her, torturing her for whatever reason, pulled her teeth out one by one, pulled her fingernails out one by one, just to hear her scream…and I could go on…then he not only sinned, but he committed evil.

The correct word to use is sin, not evil; when you use the word evil as you have in this post, you have chosen the wrong word.

233

There might be one in a million chance that you’re an evil genius and you’re just winding me up.

Since there are 999,999 chances that you’re not an evil genius, I’ll leave you to your own conclusions. This is one of those Proverbs 26 situations, esp verses 4 and 5.

1 Like
234

@BlueDragon

While I appreciate your colorful creative explanation of “evil”, one thing you did was to illustrate our lack of common ground on things as simple as term definitions. Since you don’t know what “evil” means, it’s no surprise that you don’t know what “beliefs” means, or “salvation” means.

EDIT: I left off “math equation”. You don’t know what that means either.

The privation theory of evil:

  • The Light and Dark Analogy: Think of darkness. Darkness is not a real thing you can touch or measure; it is just the total or partial absence of light. In the same way, evil is the lack of goodness.
  • Parasitic Nature: Evil cannot exist on its own. It requires a good host to corrupt or feed upon, much like rust eats away at metal or rot destroys a tree.
  • Historical Roots: Famous thinkers like Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas used this theory to explain how an all-good God could exist in a world with suffering. If God created everything as good, He did not technically “create” evil as an object; evil is just a turning away from that goodness.

So, evil is not just sin on steroids. Broadly speaking, evil is anything that detracts from, stands in opposition to, or distracts from God, His word, His goodness, His commands. Evil is not a thing. It is a detraction of good, or, as I said above, commonly called a “privation of the good”.

The really weird thing is how you can occasionally swerve into some genuinely important insights, which is how this present discussion got started. I had sort written you off as a sort of pseudo demi-troll, that only looks like a Blue Dragon. But then….

Oh well.

235

Amen! Sin is evil; anything not of God is sin, and anything that is sin is evil because it is not of God.

"Let no one say when he is tempted, ‘I am being tempted by God,’ for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one. But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire when it has conceived gives birth to sin, and sin when it is fully grown brings forth death.

Do not be deceived, my beloved brothers. Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change." James 1:13-17

Also here,

“Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil.” 1 John 3:8

Be blessed, be a blessing.

Peter

236

If you are calling me a fool, this is again a case of the kettle calling the pot black.

Good luck with that.

237

Famous thinkers like Augustine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas

This is a key part of your problem, you continue to rely upon dead carnal men and their theories, rather than taking ONLY what Scripture says. No wonder you cannot tell the right hand from the left.

Good luck with that.

238

Wow…really? You believe his nonsense definitions?

By your definition, cars are sin and evil because they are not of God.

I was hoping that there would be more light here than what apparently is…

Sin is simple disobedience to God, anyone more intelligent than a rock can see that in Scripture. If sin is the exact same thing as what is evil, then there is no reason to have two terms that mean the exact same thing. But, apparently logic does not rule here, bias does.

Blessings.

239

I dont call anyone a fool, but if the scripture fits, you must bear it. Proverbs are full of verses about fools in particular. Here are some examples from Proverbs 18.

**2 **Fools find no pleasure in understanding

but delight in airing their own opinions.

**6 **The lips of fools bring them strife,
and their mouths invite a beating.

**7 **The mouths of fools are their undoing,
and their lips are a snare to their very lives.

1 Like
240

I so totally agree with you friend and brother. Selfishly, I hope your hiatus is a short one. All of God’s best to you and yours. Let the Spirit charge you up with strength and energy and joy!

241

I was going to say the part of her that sinned was freewill. This detailed explanation is one of the best conversationally theological clarifications of Romans 14:5 I think i’ve ever seen. This mindset is so needed in a day and age where our convictions tend to be the litmus test of who has ears to hear. We all do it somewhere. But its kind of a scary age to live in with its level of Jupiter like gravity. Thanks for the detailed post. blessings.

242

Hi BlueDragon. I just moved to Arizona so I have not been on as much and will likely not be on as much in the future but will also try to respond as well to your part 2.

Yes I see many churches have been influenced in America by reformed doctrines. Its more common than not.

What do we do with:

  • 1 Cor 3:14
  • 1 Cor 11:27-32

Because of the huge number of Old Testament references throughout Romans i lean in that direction. But I understand if not. And if not, i think the context is fresh in ways to permit foreknew to simply be (both Jew and gentile) early church believers among them. Those whom God knew a while back because they became in Christ. And those known before the golden chain activation, received its certainty.

Yes He made it with Israel. But because of Romans being even a prophetic book 9-11, i’d see vessels of wrath = to Israel that rejected her Messiah and ended up destroyed by Rome 15 years later. Pretty near stream context. So in that sense, those stayed in the Mosaic system not seeing Christ were annihilated by God’s judgment through Rome. When animal sacrifices stopped I reckon.

Do you have scrpture that ends it there? For example Matt 5:17 is stated after His baptism. Hebrews explicitly associates the inauguration of the New Covenant with Christ’s death (Heb. 9:15–17; cf. Luke 22:20). Blessings.