Free Will

[civic]

Then you don't know your NT.

The death of Christ is not applied to us until faith.

To be God's enemy and to be under his wrath are the same thing.

Amen !

 

[David1701]

Then you don't know your NT.

The death of Christ is not applied to us until faith.

To be God's enemy and to be under his wrath are the same thing.

Being an enemy of God was our state, before salvation; however, it was while in that condition that we were reconciled, by the death of Christ, on the cross. This was love towards his elect, not wrath. The wrath due to God's elect was poured out on His Son.

 

[Eleanor]

I've been thinking about the issue we're discussing and, although I've not come to a firm conclusion yet, I have some preliminary thoughts.

Does God treat the unsaved elect and non-elect the same? No, he doesn't.

Jer. 31:3 (KJV) The LORD hath appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee.

This isn't wrath and condemnation (although they deserved those), nor does it apply to the non-elect.

2 Pet. 3:7-9
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
9 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.

The Lord makes a distinction between the unsaved elect and the non-elect, treating us as "beloved" and being long-suffering towards us, in a way that means that we don't perish but all come to repentance. That the long-suffering shown the elect is different from that shown to the non-elect, is clear from verse 15.

That passage is about the second coming of Christ, and why he "delays."
He is long-suffering ("delays") until all the elect have "at last" come in.
God's whole plan for time is about the elect, so of course, he "delays" until they all come in, through the means he has already ordained.

 

[David1701]

That passage is about the second coming of Christ, and why he "delays."
He is long-suffering ("delays") until all the elect have "at last" come in.
God's whole plan for time is about the elect, so of course, he "delays" until they all come in, through the means he has already ordained.

I agree. That is fully consistent with what I posted.

 

[Eleanor]

The story of Abraham is truly amazing. He called a pagan from a pagan place and made remarkable promises to him and from the loins of that pagan unbeliever came the Messiah. How did that pagan come to ‘believe’ God and become the father of the faithful? Amazing! The father of a chosen Nation dear to the heart of Almighty God.
Special and unique indeed. It ain’t over yet.

He came to believe the same way all believers do, by the gift of faith (Php 1:29, Ac 13:48, Ac 18:27, 2 Pe 1:1, Ro 12;3).

 

[Eleanor]

I'm not confounding eternity with time. I know that blessings are applied to us, in time, based on the eternal purpose of God. In the eternal purpose of God, the elect were chosen, in Christ, before the foundation of the world; so, in that sense, we have always been in Christ; however, in time, when we are born again and believe in Jesus, we experience the blessings of that.

The guilt of Adam is imputed to all mankind (Ro 5:12-14), causing their condemnation (Ro 5:18) and spiritual death (loss of God's divine eternal liffe within the immortal human spirit)..

We are born again out of that guilt, condemnation to damnation and spiritual death by the sovereign act of the Holy Spirit, until which time we are guilty, spiritually dead and condemned.

 

[Eleanor]

Being an enemy of God was our state, before salvation; however, it was while in that condition that we were reconciled, by the death of Christ, on the cross. This was love towards his elect, not wrath. The wrath due to God's elect was poured out on His Son.

We were not personally reconciled to God until we believed, prior to which we were guilty, condemned and in spiritual death.

 

[David1701]

We were not personally reconciled to God until we believed, prior to which we were guilty, condemned and in spiritual death.

Well, we (the elect) only get the full benefits of our reconciliation, when we believe, partly because we are still enemies towards God, until we're born again; however, God was reconciled towards us, when Jesus died on the cross, bearing our sins and punishments.

 

[David1701]

The guilt of Adam is imputed to all mankind (Ro 5:12-14), causing their condemnation (Ro 5:18) and spiritual death (loss of God's divine eternal liffe within the immortal human spirit)..

That's true, in Adam; but, the elect are not only in Adam, we are also in Christ (from before the foundation of the world). We were condemned in Adam, but declared righteous in Christ, and the benefits of that are applied, in time, when we are born again and believe in Jesus.

We are born again out of that guilt, condemnation to damnation and spiritual death by the sovereign act of the Holy Spirit, until which time we are guilty, spiritually dead and condemned.

We are spiritually dead until we're born again, and we still have subjective guilt, but the cross removed our condemnation and objective guilt.

 

[Arial]

Thanks

@David1701 I do not live in Scotland but have roots there going at least as far back as Robert the Bruce, and this seems to be the strongest fueling in my DNA. Am reading a book now, "The Story of the Scottish Reformation" by A.M. Renwick. Fascinating! That freedom fighting spirit that battled the English, the French and the Roman church simultaneously. And many of those Highlanders emigrating to to the US (the earliest record I have of my ancestors is in the 1700's settling in Virginia and Kentucky) and bringing that same freedom fighting spirit to my country in the Revolution.

 

[David1701]

@David1701 I do not live in Scotland but have roots there going at least as far back as Robert the Bruce, and this seems to be the strongest fueling in my DNA. Am reading a book now, "The Story of the Scottish Reformation" by A.M. Renwick. Fascinating! That freedom fighting spirit that battled the English, the French and the Roman church simultaneously. And many of those Highlanders emigrating to to the US (the earliest record I have of my ancestors is in the 1700's settling in Virginia and Kentucky) and bringing that same freedom fighting spirit to my country in the Revolution.

We Scots can be a wee bit belligerent...

I'm not so sure that the "freedom fighting spirit" is such a good thing, when it is physical. He who lives by the sword will die by the sword.

Re. the American Revolution: it's been said that that was Britain's greatest military victory, after all, a large number of the colonists were British and many of the army sent to quell the revolution were foreign mercenaries.

 

[Eleanor]

Well, we (the elect) only get the full benefits of our reconciliation, when we believe, partly because we are still enemies towards God, until we're born again; however, God was reconciled towards us, when Jesus died on the cross, bearing our sins and punishments.

Reconcile = to bring back to harmony, to reconcile (adjust, settle) differences.

Can this be said of us before we are born again, and I am not in harmony with God, still in disagreement with him about who is the boss of me; i.e., not in submission?

 

[Arial]

We Scots can be a wee bit belligerent...

I'm not so sure that the "freedom fighting spirit" is such a good thing, when it is physical. He who lives by the sword will die by the sword.

Re. the American Revolution: it's been said that that was Britain's greatest military victory, after all, a large number of the colonists were British and many of the army sent to quell the revolution were foreign mercenaries.

But it is the British we gained our independence from. We were no longer their colony, no longer under their tyranny. And we wrote into our constitution prohibition of a major aspect of that tyranny. The prohibition of a state mandated religion and religious beliefs. Religious freedom.

 

[David1701]

Reconcile = to bring back to harmony, to reconcile differences (adjust, settle).

Can this be said of us before we are born again, and I am not in harmony with God, still in disagreement with him about who is the boss of me; i.e., not in submission?

There are two sides to reconciliation: from our side, before being born again, no, are not in harmony with God; in fact, we are rebels against him; from God's side, he was reconciled to his elect (i.e. his justice was satisfied and his wrath was turned away), when Jesus bore our sins and punishments, on the cross.

 

[David1701]

But it is the British we gained our independence from. We were no longer their colony, no longer under their tyranny. And we wrote into our constitution prohibition of a major aspect of that tyranny. The prohibition of a state mandated religion and religious beliefs. Religious freedom.

I know. It was a satirical comment that I read somewhere, and it appeals to my dry sense of humour.

 

[Eleanor]

That's true, in Adam; but, the elect are not only in Adam, we are also in Christ

We can't be in both at the same time.

(from before the foundation of the world). We were condemned in Adam, but declared righteous in Christ, and the benefits of that are applied, in time, when we are born again and believe in Jesus.

We are spiritually dead until we're born again, and we still have subjective guilt, but the cross removed our condemnation and objective guilt.

Not until it is applied (by faith).
The blood of the sacrifices did not cleanse until the blood was applied (with hyssop).

You could slaughter the whole herd, but if none of the blood was applied, there was no cleansing.

 

[fastfredy0]

In response to your comment that the elect were never under the wrath of God.

The NT presents condemnation for all men at the trespass of Adam (Ro 5:18).

Ro 5:18-19 are contrasting parallels between the two Adam's.
All those in the first Adam are condemned/sinners, while all those in the second Adam (Christ) are justified/righteous.

First off, I used the words HATE and WRATH and not condemnation. In regards to the elect, if you define condemnation as blame or censure or criticism then I am on board with you. IF you define condemnation as "pronounce judgment' and judicial sentencing, I don't see it.
But again, I used the terms HATE and WRATH. I define these terms as: "Strictly speaking, wrath is not an attribute of God’s nature, but is his “holy justice against sin”. Joel Beeke Reformed Systematic Theology
I know of no scripture saying God hates or has wrath for an individual who is among the elect; or verses saying He loves an individual who is not among the elect. Before Jacob and Esau were born God loved(favored) one and hated (disfavored) the other. God chose the elect before the foundation of the earth and chose to love (favor) them before the foundation of the earth. The elect were, figuratively speaking, always His sheep and never goats that turned into sheep upon regeneration.

 

[David1701]

We can't be in both at the same time.

I think that there's a sense in which the elect are in both, at the same time (before being saved). We're "in Adam" according to our fallen nature; but, "in Christ", in that we were chosen in him, before the foundation of the world. This is a lesser sense of "in Christ" from that which obtains after we're born again (this is the full package), but it is still a kind of "in Christ".

Not until it is applied (by faith).
The blood of the sacrifices did not cleanse until the blood was applied (with hyssop).

Jesus applied the blood of his sacrifice, when he went to the heavenly temple, as High Priest.

You can slaughter the whole herd, but if none of the blood is applied, there is no cleansing.

Agreed.

 

[Eleanor]

First off, I used the words HATE and WRATH and not condemnation. In regards to the elect, if you define condemnation as blame or censure or criticism then I am on board with you. IF you define condemnation as "pronounce judgment' and judicial sentencing, I don't see it.
But again, I used the terms HATE and WRATH. I define these terms as: "Strictly speaking, wrath is not an attribute of God’s nature, but is his “holy justice against sin”. Joel Beeke Reformed Systematic Theology
I know of no scripture saying God hates or has wrath for an individual who is among the elect; or verses saying He loves an individual who is not among the elect. Before Jacob and Esau were born God loved(favored) one and hated (disfavored) the other. God chose the elect before the foundation of the earth and chose to love (favor) them before the foundation of the earth. The elect were, figuratively speaking, always His sheep and never goats that turned into sheep upon regeneration.

Agreed. . .always sheep and never goats.
Always sheep never in danger of being lost (to salvation).
But not sheep of the saving fold until they actually come into that fold by faith.

 

[fastfredy0]

But not sheep of the saving fold until they actually come into that fold by faith.

I think you mentioned the eternal and chronological way of looking at this; I think some answers are determined by one's perspective.