Election

TibiasDad

Well-known member
It isn't, it's established in your errant "gospel."
No it is not! You are saying I am wrong because it violates double-jeopardy! It doesn't! Atonement is not the same thing as forgiveness. Forgiveness is possible only because of the atonement, but they are not synonymous! Forgiveness is dependent on confession of sin and repentance from sin! (Acts 2:38, 1John 1:9) Sin is atoned for, but individuals are not forgiven sans human confession and repentance! At least according to the Bible.


Doug
 

TibiasDad

Well-known member
I don't know Doug, that doesn't sound right. God Forgives Sons of Perdition from the Heart because Christ Reconciled God to them?
Like I've said in an earlier post, Atonement is a legal answer to the relational fracture of man and God. Sin is the dividing factor, and wrath is God's necessary and legal response to that. Atonement is meant to turn aside the need of wrath because Christ died for us, absorbing the wrath of the cross as a substitute to demonstrate the wrathful justice that we are worthy of receiving! Atonement satisfies God's requirement, and thus now allows for forgiveness of sins. God can look at us solely in love because of the atonement, and this allows God's love to be expressed unconditionally to all in forgiveness for all who confess and repent of our sins, recognizing and receiving the gracious forgiveness afforded by the atonement. God is willing to forgive, and in his heart already forgiven, but man's position and perspective needs to follow suit by believing the gospel that God does not hold our sin against us! Thus, we preach, "Be reconciled" to God -there is no reason to fear, and no fear of rejection!


Doug
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
Yes, double-jeopardy. He paid our sin debt in full, "but not really."
Generally on these threads, Calvinist do not seem to grasp what it means to be in Christ. They deny tne idea that what the bible teaches as the way to receive all that God has done for us is for us to be in Christ. They deny that you must come to Christ for redemption, that somehow if you are the Calvinist elect, you are redeemed without receiving Christ
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
I don't know Doug, that doesn't sound right. God Forgives Sons of Perdition from the Heart because Christ Reconciled God to them?
If God reconciled them to himself, what is meant by "Be reconciled" What is the Bible calling them to do?
If you notice in this discussion, Calvinists do not what to discuss what "be reconciled" is all about
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
Like I've said in an earlier post, Atonement is a legal answer to the relational fracture of man and God. Sin is the dividing factor, and wrath is God's necessary and legal response to that. Atonement is meant to turn aside the need of wrath because Christ died for us, absorbing the wrath of the cross as a substitute to demonstrate the wrathful justice that we are worthy of receiving! Atonement satisfies God's requirement, and thus now allows for forgiveness of sins. God can look at us solely in love because of the atonement, and this allows God's love to be expressed unconditionally to all in forgiveness for all who confess and repent of our sins, recognizing and receiving the gracious forgiveness afforded by the atonement. God is willing to forgive, and in his heart already forgiven, but man's position and perspective needs to follow suit by believing the gospel that God does not hold our sin against us! Thus, we preach, "Be reconciled" to God -there is no reason to fear, and no fear of rejection!


Doug
That all sounds correct. Add in that the word "atone" means to "soothe anger"
 

SovereignGrace

Well-known member
It isn't, it's established in your errant "gospel."

I was doing a little reading this evening before having to get ready for work, when I read this...


For this reason we also constantly thank God that when you received the word of God which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men, but for what it really is, the word of God, which also performs its work in you who believe. For you, brethren, became imitators of the churches of God in Christ Jesus that are in Judea, for you also endured the same sufferings at the hands of your own countrymen, even as they did from the Jews, who both killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and drove us out. They are not pleasing to God, but hostile to all men, hindering us from speaking to the Gentiles so that they may be saved; with the result that they always fill up the measure of their sins. But wrath has come upon them to the utmost.[1 Thess. 2:13-16]

These very ppl Paul was writing about were in no way, shape, form, or fashion reconciled to God. The Greek word for "utmost", means, among other things, "to the full, continually," which shows these people were truly children of God's wrath, which means, again, they were not reconciled to God, neither was God reconciled to them.
 

Carbon

Well-known member
Thus, the very being of God, his existence, his Self-sufficiency within that says that God needs nothing outside of himself, which would include the need to glorify himself to something outside of himself.
Thanks for your reply.
Sorry it has taken so long for me to get back to you on this, been very busy.

Aseity is something that exists in and of itself, it is uncaused, un created, it differs from everything in the universe that has a cause, or that is dependent. Aseity means God has the power to be, in and of Himself. He does not gain His existence or His being from anything but Himself. There was never a time God did not exist. So, God is completely self sufficient, having within Himself the sufficient reason for His own existence.

Like I said, election is a divine deed, and it has pleased God, who is all sufficient in Himself, to communicate His goodness, having chosen some men to be the recipients of that communication.
You state the purpose of election was to bring glory to God.
Yes, it is the glorification of God.
But it's not to add glory to Him, He is already perfect, but to reveal all His glorious perfections which manifest themselves in the work of redemption.

Do you think God does not have the right to choose an elect for Himself?

That God purposefully created and elected some to life and everyone else to perdition so that they would "...afford Him all honor and glory" through seeing "...His glorious perfections which manifest themselves in the work of redemption...".
Is not God worthy of glory, honor and praise?

So the question my mind is, if God "needed" to do what you assert, then he is not self-sufficient and his aesity is violated by needing something outside of himself.
Your trying to prove God does not elect because of His aseity? Again, Aseity is something that exists in and of itself, it is uncaused, un created, it differs from everything in the universe that has a cause, or that is dependent.

Because of God's aseity, He cannot choose and redeem an elect because that would make Him dependent on something? That's ridicules Doug!



If he didn't "need" to do what you assert, but just wanted to do it "to glorify himself" then he sought to do this by deliberately condemning the vast majority of humanity to eternal destruction, and this before the creation event itself, simply to "to reveal His glorious perfections"!
Whatever the Lord pleases, he does,
in heaven and on earth,
in the seas and all deeps.
Psalm 135:6.

This violates his being,
On the contrary, It magnifies His being.

and thus his aesity, by violation of his being Love. How/why? Because one of the characteristics of being Love, is not being "self-seeking" in motivation for what he does! In other words, God cannot do anything simply to glorify himself for himself!
22 What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— Romans 9.
Thus, I think your premise, the first paragraph of your OP, is invalid and thus, whatever follows the first paragraph, being dependent on it, is also negated!


Doug
I know what you think Doug.

I think you don't really understand the Aseity of God, and are using it to try and prove you theory.
 

Carbon

Well-known member
Thus, the very being of God, his existence, his Self-sufficiency within that says that God needs nothing outside of himself, which would include the need to glorify himself to something outside of himself.

Doug
Do you think God existed in eternity, then one day humans appeared, He found interest in them, and He decided to see if they would of their own free will love Him and come to Him for salvation, but if they don't, no big deal because He really don't need them.

Or, He created them, and the poor humans fell in the garden, and even though He don't need them, He decides to have His followers communicate him to all the lost humans and "even He will woo them on" even though He don't need them. He even had 66 books that were written, combined and presented His holy word to man.

And all those who make that big decision to come to Him for salvation, don't owe God anything, because He is self-sufficient and not dependent on them, no glory, no honor, no praise. After all, He's perfect already, why glorify His name?

The objective God had in view with election and predestination is the magnification of Himself in His grace, mercy, and justice.

You are correct in saying God needs nothing outside Himself, but what if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, 23 in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory Rom 9.

Does God not have the right, because it would go against His character, to show His wrath and to make His power known? Are people born already knowing his power? Does it go against His character, enduring with much patience, vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?
Does it go against God's character wanting to make known the riches of His glory? For those vessels prepared beforehand for glory?

Why would God want to make His power known? God would know, the redeemed would glorify Him, honor Him and praise Him.

He alone is worthy!
 
Last edited:

Carbon

Well-known member
You state the purpose of election was to bring glory to God. That God purposefully created and elected some to life and everyone else to perdition so that they would "...afford Him all honor and glory" through seeing "...His glorious perfections which manifest themselves in the work of redemption...".

Doug
Doug, God prevents no one from obtaining salvation, it's man himself, who sins willfully. The election of some is not the determent of others.

Also, reprobation is not the cause that someone sins, nor is it why someone is damned, but it is of the sinner himself and his sin.
 

Carbon

Well-known member
No it is not! You are saying I am wrong because it violates double-jeopardy! It doesn't! Atonement is not the same thing as forgiveness. Forgiveness is possible only because of the atonement, but they are not synonymous! Forgiveness is dependent on confession of sin and repentance from sin! (Acts 2:38, 1John 1:9) Sin is atoned for, but individuals are not forgiven sans human confession and repentance! At least according to the Bible.


Doug
So then, what sin did Christ take upon Himself, scripture say's He became sin, who knew no sin. The Father even turned from Him.

Was that just a sin the Father made up and placed on Him? So, now we can all be forgiven for sins that are not truly and personally ours?

Was the Father just getting Christ used to real actual sin's that would soon follow?
 

Dizerner

Well-known member
So then, what sin did Christ take upon Himself, scripture say's He became sin, who knew no sin. The Father even turned from Him.

Was that just a sin the Father made up and placed on Him? So, now we can all be forgiven for sins that are not truly and personally ours?

Was the Father just getting Christ used to real actual sin's that would soon follow?

Here's the way the Bible reads to me.

The forgiveness does not actually happen on the Cross under any system except Hyper Calvinism which bright and newheart espouse. If the forgiveness was "actual" it would be a sin to confess our sins, it would be unbelief to ask for forgiveness for any sin which would all already be forgiven, and before we commit any sin it would already have been forgiven. This is clearly not Biblical. The Blood is sprinkled the atonement is applied. The very imagery of application precludes a single-part forgiveness system.

If the forgiveness was not a potentiality found by becoming "in Christ" where the forgiveness was wrought, it would necessarily have to follow that we are not born under condemnation and not born children of wrath, again unbiblical. Christ died for our sins before we even committed them, so the atonement has to be outside of time. The forgiveness and atonement is wrought out "in Christ" with our actual sins being placed on Christ in relation to Christ alone, which means being outside of Christ forfeits the benefit.

Christ paid the mortgage for the world and for sin, and now owns the deed. "The Wrath of the Lamb." Why the Lamb? The Lamb is the symbol of atonement, of forgiveness, yet here it has wrath. The reason Christ can actually JUDGE the world is because he owns the world now by paying for it, all authority in heaven and earth was only granted him after his Work on the Cross. Christ will judge the world that did not access the potential bank of his own atonement because they are not found in Christ, they are outside of him.
 

SovereignGrace

Well-known member
Here's the way the Bible reads to me.

The forgiveness does not actually happen on the Cross under any system except Hyper Calvinism which bright and newheart espouse. If the forgiveness was "actual" it would be a sin to confess our sins, it would be unbelief to ask for forgiveness for any sin which would all already be forgiven, and before we commit any sin it would already have been forgiven. This is clearly not Biblical. The Blood is sprinkled the atonement is applied. The very imagery of application precludes a single-part forgiveness system.

If the forgiveness was not a potentiality found by becoming "in Christ" where the forgiveness was wrought, it would necessarily have to follow that we are not born under condemnation and not born children of wrath, again unbiblical. Christ died for our sins before we even committed them, so the atonement has to be outside of time. The forgiveness and atonement is wrought out "in Christ" with our actual sins being placed on Christ in relation to Christ alone, which means being outside of Christ forfeits the benefit.

Christ paid the mortgage for the world and for sin, and now owns the deed. "The Wrath of the Lamb." Why the Lamb? The Lamb is the symbol of atonement, of forgiveness, yet here it has wrath. The reason Christ can actually JUDGE the world is because he owns the world now by paying for it, all authority in heaven and earth was only granted him after his Work on the Cross. Christ will judge the world that did not access the potential bank of his own atonement because they are not found in Christ, they are outside of him.

The cross was where the payment due for sins was paid in full. Unless there was the cross, we would all still be in our sins. Forgiveness comes from Jesus dying for His sheep. It is because He paid their sin debt in full, God can now forgive them.

It's like if you were found guilty in a court of law and the penalty was either $50,000 or 1 year in prison. You do not have the money, so you are staring at 1 year in prison. In comes someone who pays that fine for you. Now the judge can let you walk free, seeing someone paid the debt you owed the court. If the judge was to let you walk free w/o paying the penalty of the crime you were convicted of, he/she would be considered an unjust judge, seeing the law demands justice for crimes committed.

Now that the payment due the Father was paid in full by Jesus, God can now be just and the justifier of all those who have faith in Jesus.
 

Dizerner

Well-known member
The cross was where the payment due for sins was paid in full. Unless there was the cross, we would all still be in our sins. Forgiveness comes from Jesus dying for His sheep. It is because He paid their sin debt in full, God can now forgive them.

It's like if you were found guilty in a court of law and the penalty was either $50,000 or 1 year in prison. You do not have the money, so you are staring at 1 year in prison. In comes someone who pays that fine for you. Now the judge can let you walk free, seeing someone paid the debt you owed the court. If the judge was to let you walk free w/o paying the penalty of the crime you were convicted of, he/she would be considered an unjust judge, seeing the law demands justice for crimes committed.

Now that the payment due the Father was paid in full by Jesus, God can now be just and the justifier of all those who have faith in Jesus.

If someone offers to pay for your fine, they have the power to put whatever conditions they want on it. You can actually in fact buy people's debts, and this happens all the time. It does not "pay off" the debt, until the person you owe the money to declares their particular conditions are met. The atonement works more like the concept of amnesty, forgiveness being granted with conditions. A pirate could obtain amnesty as long as he fulfilled certain conditions, such as stayed in one city. If he left his "city of refuge," then his amnesty no longer held. This actually happened with Blackbeard if I recall correctly. A simplistic one-time universal unconditional transaction of forgiveness is nowhere supported in Scripture, even the strongest grace books in the Bible such as Galatians and Hebrews are replete with strong warnings and conditions.
 

SovereignGrace

Well-known member
If someone offers to pay for your fine, they have the power to put whatever conditions they want on it. You can actually in fact buy people's debts, and this happens all the time. It does not "pay off" the debt, until the person you owe the money to declares their particular conditions are met. The atonement works more like the concept of amnesty, forgiveness being granted with conditions. A pirate could obtain amnesty as long as he fulfilled certain conditions, such as stayed in one city. If he left his "city of refuge," then his amnesty no longer held. This actually happened with Blackbeard if I recall correctly. A simplistic one-time universal unconditional transaction of forgiveness is nowhere supported in Scripture, even the strongest grace books in the Bible such as Galatians and Hebrews are replete with strong warnings and conditions.
So, the cross didn't actually pay anyone's debt? It just put them in a more favorable spot with God?
 

SovereignGrace

Well-known member
If someone offers to pay for your fine, they have the power to put whatever conditions they want on it. You can actually in fact buy people's debts, and this happens all the time. It does not "pay off" the debt, until the person you owe the money to declares their particular conditions are met. The atonement works more like the concept of amnesty, forgiveness being granted with conditions. A pirate could obtain amnesty as long as he fulfilled certain conditions, such as stayed in one city. If he left his "city of refuge," then his amnesty no longer held. This actually happened with Blackbeard if I recall correctly. A simplistic one-time universal unconditional transaction of forgiveness is nowhere supported in Scripture, even the strongest grace books in the Bible such as Galatians and Hebrews are replete with strong warnings and conditions.
The Father was owed a debt. The Son paid said debt. The Father was fully satisfied with the debt payment that was made. If the Son paid the sin debt that everybody owed, everybody would be saved.
 

SovereignGrace

Well-known member
If someone offers to pay for your fine, they have the power to put whatever conditions they want on it. You can actually in fact buy people's debts, and this happens all the time. It does not "pay off" the debt, until the person you owe the money to declares their particular conditions are met. The atonement works more like the concept of amnesty, forgiveness being granted with conditions. A pirate could obtain amnesty as long as he fulfilled certain conditions, such as stayed in one city. If he left his "city of refuge," then his amnesty no longer held. This actually happened with Blackbeard if I recall correctly. A simplistic one-time universal unconditional transaction of forgiveness is nowhere supported in Scripture, even the strongest grace books in the Bible such as Galatians and Hebrews are replete with strong warnings and conditions.
Jesus did not offer to pay off His elect sheep's sin debt, He paid it. There are no conditions the sheep have to meet, either, seeing Jesus met every condition God required in regards to the Law. That is why Calvinists teach unconditional election. Praise God that His sheep do not have to meet conditions in order to be saved, as their Shepherd met them on their behalf. That is why we say Soli Deo Gloria!!!
 

Sethproton

Well-known member
So, the cross didn't actually pay anyone's debt? It just put them in a more favorable spot with God?
You must be in Christ to receive forgiveness and redemption. Everything pertaining to Salvation is accessed only in Christ.
If you are not in Christ this may not make sense to you
 

SovereignGrace

Well-known member
Ok, let's go with human logic like yours. Only a cruel god would create people destined for hell.
And I will throw this back at you. Only a cruel God would create someone that He knew would never use their free will so as to be saved, yet He created them anyways.

FYI, we are not created but PROcreated. God created Adam from the dust and Eve from Adam. We came into existence via procreation.
 
Top