'As everyone can see?' Are you addressing me or are you addressing everyone?
I had gotten a D in college philosophy, so I'm just asking for scriptural backing, not from logic or man's reasoning.
"
Are you addressing me or are you addressing everyone?" Perhaps you have forgotten that this is a public forum, so my answer is yes.
Your terms of assessment, "
not from logic or man's reasoning."
-If we take your terms as the grid by which to evaluate, then we must reject your question: "
What would be the reason (if not arbitrary) for God's choice?" Your question itself uses the very categories you reject.
-If we take your terms as the grid by which to evaluate, then we must reject every person who posts a disagreement on the forum, for every post where people utilize logic and reasoning must be disregarded.
-If we take your terms as the grid by which to evaluate, then we must reject the expression "unconditional election," since people have used logic and reasoning to express the issue in that way. The same goes for any attempt to read scripture and every single attempt to use our own words to express scripture's meaning.
-As, when you read the scripture in English, you are reading people's use of reason and logic as they seek to translate from the Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek into the English you are reading. A very significant amount of reason and logic is utilized in the translation process.
-In short, we must disregard this entire forum, since even the posting of scripture comes from logic and reasoning.
-We must also disregard every pastor and teacher out there, for they all utilize logic and man's reason as they preach and teach.
Now, if we are talking about "ultimate sourcing" and not just the use of logic and reason, then your assessment is also fallacious, since I posted scripture and referenced scripture.
{1} In my multiple responses destroying the arbitrary objection to unconditional election, I repeatedly argued from Scripture utilizing reason and logic. The arbitrary objection is itself a bad use of reason and logic, as I have repeatedly demonstrated. So why have you raised an issue that goes against your own principles? So, rather than utilizing self-contradictory standards and unfounded accusations, take the time to think and read with comprehension.
=================
{1} Ephesians 1:4 & 6. I also referenced the relevant passages in Romans 9, since they eliminate the man-centered reasons I spoke of previously. And the ultimate sourcing of the arbitrary objection comes from a fallacious use of man's reason and bad logic. Paul also reasoned in the synagogues every sabbath from scripture (assumed as the general norm, since various afflictions, difficulties, and travel probably keeps us from seeing this as covering absolutely every single Sabbath).
=================
The simplistic response to the arbitrary objection leveled against unconditional election is this. The removal of some reasons for God's choice of some to save, does not therefore mean that all reasons for God's choice have been removed. Thusly, the charge of arbitrary cannot stand, for God can still have a reason, even after removing man's choices, merit, and faith as a ground for His choice. Therefore, if God still has reasons, outside of man, that still have a bearing upon His decision, then by definition His choice is not arbitrary; for to be arbitrary is to have no reason at all.
Arbitrary = choice void of reason
Unconditional election = a reasonable (magnification of His grace) choice to save some void of certain man-centered reasons.
Hence, the charge of "arbitrary" is simply misguided and false. Opening posts 1-4 deal with this issue in greater detail.
