Definite Atonement

[Arial]

It is the prayer before his atonement, and follows the order of the High Priestly prayer on the Day of Atonement, who offered sacrifice only for the people of God (who did not offer sacrifice for the world and did not include the world) in his High Priestly prayer (Lev 16:16, 15, 17),
first, for himself (Jn 17:4-5),
secondly, for his household (Jn 17:6-19),
thirdly, for all who believe (Jn 17:20-24).

That is very interesting and edifying. I had never noticed that before. Thanks.

 

[Arial]

I just proved that wrong above! It has power to save all men if they believe, and it actually saves all who do! All the power that is needed is to keep the promises made, and it has that plus!

Reformed theology says the same thing. The difference is only in how that believing comes about.

 

[fastfredy0]

Reformed theology says the same thing. The difference is only in how that believing comes about.

Agreed. Cause and effect. Law of causality (every effect has a cause).

 

[Johan]

That is very interesting and edifying. I had never noticed that before. Thanks.

Just my 2 cents-not being facetious.
John 17:9

Joh_17:9. I pray for them! Both in ἐγώ and in περὶ αὐτῶν there lies a motive element in reference to God. That which lies in περὶ αὐτῶν is then further made specially prominent, first negatively (οὐ π. τ. κόσμ. ἐρ.), and then positively (ἀλλὰ περὶ, κ.τ.λ.).
οὐ περὶ τοῦ κόσμου] has no dogmatic weight, and is therefore not to be explained in the sense of the condemnation of the world (Melanchthon), or of absolute predestination (Calvin, Jansen, Lampe), or of the negation of such intercession in general (Hengstenberg), but refers simply and solely to this present intercession, which has in truth no relation to those who are strangers to God, but to His own, whom He has given to Jesus,—and this should all the more move Him to fulfil the prayers.

Prayer for the unbelieving has been enjoined by Jesus Himself (Mat_5:44), and was, moreover, offered by Himself upon the cross (Luk_23:34), and for them did He die, comp. also Joh_17:20; but here He has only the disciples in view, and lays them, by the antithesis οὐ περὶ τ. κόσμου, the more earnestly on the Father’s heart.

Luther well says: “At other times one should pray for the world, that it may be converted.” Comp. Joh_17:21.
ὅτι σοί εἰσι] Ground of the intercession: because they—although given to me—are Thine, belonging to Thee as my believing ones, since they were Thine (Joh_17:6) already, before Thou gavest them to me.
H. Meyer.

Because the Eleven had believed on Him Jesus made request for them, not for the world, at this point. The basis for that request was that these disciples belonged to God, so their welfare was His special interest. Those who belong to the Father belong equally to the Son. Thus Jesus claimed equal concern for the Eleven with the Father. This is another claim of equality with the Father. Glory had come to Jesus through the faith of the Eleven, as it had not come from the world.

However-when I read Gill-

"I pray not for the world; the inhabitants of it, the carnal unbelieving part of the world, which lie in sin, and will be condemned; as he died not for them, so he prayed not for them; for whom he is the propitiation, he is an advocate; and for whom he died, he makes intercession; and for no other in a spiritual saving way:-"

--something is "not right"

Do you see where I'm coming from?
J.

 

[Arial]

--something is "not right"

Do you see where I'm coming from?

Nope. What do you think is not right? The way I see it, John 17 is all one prayer so every part of it must be put together and agree with the rest of scriptures on the subject at hand. Sometimes Jesus in this chapter is praying specifically for the disciples, sometimes for all believers. And in verse 20 He extends what He has prayed for the disciples to all those who will believe in Him. He calls them those whom the Father has given Him as He also indicates in the gospels in a number of places, that He is laying down His life for those the Father gives Him.

 

[Johan]

Nope. What do you think is not right? The way I see it, John 17 is all one prayer so every part of it must be put together and agree with the rest of scriptures on the subject at hand. Sometimes Jesus in this chapter is praying specifically for the disciples, sometimes for all believers. And in verse 20 He extends what He has prayed for the disciples to all those who will believe in Him. He calls them those whom the Father has given Him as He also indicates in the gospels in a number of places, that He is laying down His life for those the Father gives Him.

Did Jesus Die for All Men, or only the Elect Only?

You may have never even believed in a group of people known as the elect, but the term is not without biblical support.

www.bible-knowledge.com

Excellent article-still reading through the links you have provided.

 

[Arial]

Did Jesus Die for All Men, or only the Elect Only?

You may have never even believed in a group of people known as the elect, but the term is not without biblical support.

www.bible-knowledge.com

Excellent article-still reading through the links you have provided.

I did not provide any links. I will not read through the one you provided. I would prefer that you simply respond to what I posted and answer the question I asked.

 

[Johan]

I did not provide any links. I will not read through the one you provided. I would prefer that you simply respond to what I posted and answer the question I asked.

Are you STILL harping on a question I seemingly avoided?!

Refresh my memory and ask again-and yes, you DID provide links.

Jacobus Arminius: Works of James Arminius, Vol. 1 - Christian Classics Ethereal Library

ccel.org

-or did this "slip your mind?" I think it would be in my best interest to avoid any dialogue with you in future.

 

[Arial]

Are you STILL harping on a question I seemingly avoided?!

Refresh my memory and ask again-and yes, you DID provide links.

--something is "not right"

Do you see where I'm coming from?

Nope. What do you think is not right? The way I see it, John 17 is all one prayer so every part of it must be put together and agree with the rest of scriptures on the subject at hand. Sometimes Jesus in this chapter is praying specifically for the disciples, sometimes for all believers. And in verse 20 He extends what He has prayed for the disciples to all those who will believe in Him. He calls them those whom the Father has given Him as He also indicates in the gospels in a number of places, that He is laying down His life for those the Father gives Him.

Your response to this post in #206

Did Jesus Die for All Men, or only the Elect Only?

You may have never even believed in a group of people known as the elect, but the term is not without biblical support.

www.bible-knowledge.com

Excellent article-still reading through the links you have provided.

Where is the link in the post you are responding to? And the question that you did not answer and I could not possibly have been harping on is asked in my post above this one and was answering your question that you asked me in the one above that.

Jacobus Arminius: Works of James Arminius, Vol. 1 - Christian Classics Ethereal Library

ccel.org

-or did this "slip your mind?" I think it would be in my best interest to avoid any dialogue with you in future.

No I do not remember posting that link. Show me where I did? In any case it has nothing to do with the post you were responding to.

I think it would be in my best interest to avoid any dialogue with you in future.

That is probably a good idea since you have taken a dislike to me for whatever reason and are unable to communicate without offering up a few insults that express your personal opinion of who I am and my character. Which of course is against the rules.

You remind me of a wailing Jew wailing at the wrong wall.

This will be edited out and you will be given a warning with points against you as you ignored the last two times you were asked to stop making personal remarks disparaging a person's character on a public forum. Next time you will likely get a permanent ban. The way to not have that happen is to not do it anymore, instead of blaming admin for it. It is nothing personal. We are not going to allow this type of thing on the forum.

If you have a beef with me you can express it in the Talk with admin forum.

 

[TibiasDad]

That does not mean chosen to destruction or predestined to destruction. Look at the different words. "Predestined" and "foreordained." Those God predestined means He appoints them to eternal life and it is certain they will arrive at eternal life (faith in the person and work of Jesus.)because He will do it. Foreordained is the condition of us all as willful sinners, so they were not predestined to everlasting death but came to it by their own actions. God ordained what the destination of sinners would be---everlasting death. Only God's action of grace and mercy, and the necessary work of Jesus, spares any from this.

Tomato tamahto. The end result is fixed by God’s decree of will.

Doug

 

[Arial]

Tomato tamahto. The end result is fixed by God’s decree of will.

Doug

That is all fine and good to say but the Westminster confession still means what it means, not what someone else says it means. They used two different words to express to different aspects for a reason.

 

[TibiasDad]

That is all fine and good to say but the Westminster confession still means what it means, not what someone else says it means. They used two different words to express to different aspects for a reason.

Are the end results fixed by God’s decree of will?


Doug

 

[Arial]

Are the end results fixed by God’s decree of will?


Doug

Always. But the one thing He decreed was towards those He chose----that they would be placed in Christ and inherit the kingdom. The other thing He decreed was the end result of evil. He did not predestine them to wrath, or unbelief, they already didn't believe. He left them in their natural condition. Those He chose were predestined to be placed in Christ. Those He did not choose were foreordained to receive the penalty He placed on evil, the exact same position all are in without His intervention for some. One is justice. The other is mercy.

That is why the Confession also says regarding the eternal decrees of God: God from all eternity did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass: yet so as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures, nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established.

And this: The rest of mankind God was pleased,according to the unsearchable counsel of his own will, whereby he extendeth or withholdeth mercy as he pleaseth, for the glory of his sovereign power over his creatures, to pass by; and to ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious justice.

 

[TibiasDad]

That does not mean chosen to destruction or predestined to destruction. Look at the different words. "Predestined" and "foreordained."

They are two words with identical meanings


Webster’s dictionary:

Predestine: to destine, decree, determine, appoint, or settle beforehand

Synonyms: destine, doom, fate, foredoom, foreordain, ordain, predetermine, preordain
Foreordain: to dispose or appoint in advance : Predestine

Those God predestined means He appoints them to eternal life and it is certain they will arrive at eternal life (faith in the person and work of Jesus.)because He will do it. Foreordained is the condition of us all as willful sinners, so they were not predestined to everlasting death but came to it by their own actions.

This is indeed true, but it stops short of the reality of the whole. If they are foreordained to sin by God’s decree (which eliminates being “willful” sinners) and they are not elected to salvation, then they have been predetermined to not be saved from death; thus the decree to predetermine the elect to salvation, effects the certain doom of the non-elect. They are both predetermined in total. Your verbal two-step cannot dance around the ultimate reality.

God ordained what the destination of sinners would be---everlasting death. Only God's action of grace and mercy, and the necessary work of Jesus, spares any from this.

True enough, Arminian theology says the same thing.


Doug

 

[Arial]

They are two words with identical meanings

Only if they are used in identical ways. It was qualified by what was said previously.

This is indeed true, but it stops short of the reality of the whole. If they are foreordained to sin by God’s decree (which eliminates being “willful” sinners) and they are not elected to salvation, then they have been predetermined to not be saved from death; thus the decree to predetermine the elect to salvation, effects the certain doom of the non-elect. They are both predetermined in total. Your verbal two-step cannot dance around the ultimate reality.

Encerting "but it stops short of the reality of the whole" is a two step that I assume is simply trying to be right and therefore maintain that position. You simply aren't understanding what I am saying.

So tell me what you say that passage from the Confession means.

 

[TibiasDad]

Only if they are used in identical ways. It was qualified by what was said previously.

Their meaning are interchangeable, Arial! If you switched the two terms and said, the elect are foreordained to life, and the non-elect are predestined to death for their sun, you would still have the same result!

Encerting "but it stops short of the reality of the whole" is a two step that I assume is simply trying to be right and therefore maintain that position. You simply aren't understanding what I am saying.

Nope, Paul Harvey has to tell the rest of the story! What you said was not inaccurate; it also wasn’t complete. I understand what you’re saying, I have little confusion about what the Calvinists of this, and other forums, have amply expressed as to what Calvinism believes.

So tell me what you say that passage from the Confession means.

I have told you what I say it means! What do you think you’ve been refuting these last several posts?

Here is a bullet point summary of what I have come to understand to be Reformed principles of theology, especially in regards to soteriological beliefs:

1) God is Sovereign.
2) As Sovereign, God can do anything he wants that doesn’t deny his being or character.
3) God has Sovereignly chosen to predetermine “whatsoever comes to pass”, allegedly “without violence” to the free will of man or to contingencies of secondary causes.
[Of this I have yet to have an explanation of this that resolves the mysterious tension of apparent contradiction between the issues of sovereign determination and an unviolated freedom of will; especially in reference to Adam’s sinning.]

4) Amongst the things predetermined, are:
a) that man would necessarily sin. b) That this sin would necessarily cause the fall of all humanity, resulting in the spiritual death and corruption of soul which leads to eternal death upon all human beings born of Adam, without exception. c) And that from this whole of humanity, God chooses to save some, whose number is fixed and unalterable, leaving the rest to the already established penalty of eternal death. Both of these results are chosen according to God’s “unsearchable counsel of his own will” and are inalterable in any way.

5) This concludes that the Elect cannot fall away from being Elect, and thus will necessarily persevere to the end and be saved, while the non-elect can never become true believers, though they may be strongly influenced by and temporarily effected by the gospel to mitigate their behaviors but never actually “born again” through regeneration, and thus are condemned without recourse. In short, the Elect will be saved without fail, and the non-elect are without hope of any reprieve from their sinfulness.


Doug

 

[Eleanor]

Their meaning are interchangeable, Arial! If you switched the two terms and said, the elect are foreordained to life, and the non-elect are predestined to death for their sun, you would still have the same result!


Nope, Paul Harvey has to tell the rest of the story! What you said was not inaccurate; it also wasn’t complete. I understand what you’re saying, I have little confusion about what the Calvinists of this, and other forums, have amply expressed as to what Calvinism believes.



I have told you what I say it means! What do you think you’ve been refuting these last several posts?

Here is a bullet point summary of what I have come to understand to be Reformed principles of theology, especially in regards to soteriological beliefs:

1) God is Sovereign.
2) As Sovereign, God can do anything he wants that doesn’t deny his being or character.
3) God has Sovereignly chosen to predetermine “whatsoever comes to pass”, allegedly “without violence” to the free will of man or to contingencies of secondary causes.
[Of this I have yet to have an explanation of this that resolves the mysterious tension of apparent contradiction between the issues of sovereign determination and an unviolated freedom of will; especially in reference to Adam’s sinning.]

Human free will is not without boundaries, which you fail to correctly understand. One more time:

Human free will is the power to execute, without external force or constraint, whatever one chooses.
However, the human will does not operate in a vacuum, it is governed by the disposition; i.e., what one prefers.
Free will is never violated when one chooses what one prefers.

The unregenerate disposition, not preferring complete submission to God in all things, but preferring self rule, freely chooses what it prefers--self.
The regenerate, in whose disposition God works a preference for him, freely chooses what it prefers--God.
And that regeneration is by the sovereign will and choice of the Holy Spirit, as unaccountable as the wind (Jn 3:3-8).

God does not violate free will, in either the unregenerate or the regenerate, to accomplish his purposes.
God works within dispositions which govern free will, giving some to prefer God's will, which they willingly and freely choose.
No one else does.

There is no "mysterious tension of apparent contradiction between the issues of sovereign determination and an unviolated freedom of will." Everyone freely and willingly chooses what he prefers.

 

[Arial]

What you said was not inaccurate; it also wasn’t complete.

It is complete insofar as what God has made available to us to know. We don't know why He decreed what He did. Or why man fell and that according to His will. We don't know why He wills to do anything that He wills. Etc. etc. It seems you expect Calvinism to explain all that also, while not recognizing that free will explains none of that either, or gives it a pass on those things.

We now what God tells us in His word. And we know the things that happened that are in His word. We even know He is triune from His word, but cannot begin to explain how that can be. With that in mind, what does that statement in the Confession not complete?

1) God is Sovereign.
2) As Sovereign, God can do anything he wants that doesn’t deny his being or character.
3) God has Sovereignly chosen to predetermine “whatsoever comes to pass”, allegedly “without violence” to the free will of man or to contingencies of secondary causes.
[Of this I have yet to have an explanation of this that resolves the mysterious tension of apparent contradiction between the issues of sovereign determination and an unviolated freedom of will; especially in reference to Adam’s sinning.]

1. Yes.
2. Yes.
3.If you would not insert your opinion of what is in the doctrine when you use the word "allegedly" before the next portion of the sentence, you would not arrive at a tension, mysterious or otherwise, or consider it a contradiction between sovereign determination and unviolated free will. In doing so you create the tension instead of trying to find out what it means. You, yourself, insert the tension that was never there.

God's sovereignty does no violence to the freedom of the will----which is not to say it is free as it is not----because He never does the willing of anyone for them. They do their own willing. And they never, ever, do something against their own will, from their own will. God does not touch that or violate it in anyway. He remains God. We remain human creatures. As humans we are sinners and therefore we sin, and we sin because we want to. You are also confusing determined with determinism, even though the WCF states in that very verse that is not what is being taught.

5) This concludes that the Elect cannot fall away from being Elect, and thus will necessarily persevere to the end and be saved, while the non-elect can never become true believers, though they may be strongly influenced by and temporarily effected by the gospel to mitigate their behaviors but never actually “born again” through regeneration, and thus are condemned without recourse. In short, the Elect will be saved without fail, and the non-elect are without hope of any reprieve from their sinfulness.

You are inserting your feelings about what you think it says into the doctrine as though it were the doctrine. No recourse was taken away from them by God or anyone else. The same options were before them as are before those God regenerates. And they did what they wanted to do, not what God made them do. The regenerate have been placed by God in a position of changed heart and they also do what they want to do, not what God made them do. It is not unfair. It is unequal but it not unfair, and who is man to talk back to God and tell Him He must treat all people equally?

 

[TibiasDad]

Human free will is the power to execute, without external force or constraint, whatever one chooses.
However, the human will does not operate in a vacuum, it is governed by the disposition; i.e., what one prefers.
Free will is never violated when one chooses what one prefers.

If all things whatsoever comes to pass have been predestined by God, then man cannot be free.

Human freedom, in the context of A vs C, is freedom that is independent of God’s direct decree to be a certain choice.

I do not say that we are free from outside influences, or inward inclinations but none of these necessitates the will to follow their suggestions or leanings. There are times we do not do what these forces seek to make us do. We we often choose otherwise to the direction we are tempted to take.


Doug

 

[Eleanor]

If all things whatsoever comes to pass have been predestined by God, then man cannot be free.

"Free will" is not a Biblical notion, and enjoys no Biblical status, it is a human notion.

Your understanding of free will is not the Biblical presentation of free will.