Calvamanianism.

Ok... let me be up front. I think this topic poses some danger on discussion boards. I have seen numerous times where people got all heated about it. Just wanted to put that up first to remind everyone to keep the unity. I am leading a study on the book of Ephesians for Home Group. I had the intention this week to do the first three chapters but the first chapter was just so full of meat that we are going to just do the first chapter. In the first chapter it brings up the topic of being chosen and predestination. Before I pose my question here is a very very very brief nutshell between Calvinism and Armenianism....and probably extreme definitions of both. Calvinism - Eternal Security, predestination. God chose you from the foundation of time, therefor you are eternally secure. You have no choice in the matter. Armenian - free will. Man has a choice. Christ came that all may have a chance to believe and go to heaven. Ok, now my question: In the first chapter of Ephesians it says that God chose us and predestined us. What if we have the meaning here all messed up? What if the scripture doesn't actually mean "chosen" in the sense that He chooses "one man over another" but that he chose the church to be the vessel in which His spirit resides...and (later in the first chapter in Ephesians) to be His body where the fullness of Christ resides? Just like He chose Israel to be His nation, He chose the church to have the fullness of Christ, but not necessarily that He chose the individual. Does "chosen" apply to the individual believer or the church as a whole? Scripture also clearly states that God is the one who draws men to himself. Scripture also states that "for God so loved the world that he gave his only Son for all men, that whosoever believes will have eternal life". How do you reconcile these two scriptures with each other? Does the answer lie in the fact that God does at one point in every persons life draw every single man to himself but then its up to that man to decide to believe and accept salvation? This answer would resolve both the drawing of men and free will to believe in Him. I believe that at least in Ephesians this answer best fits into the context of the chapter. The letter is written to the "church" in Ephesus. It goes on speaking our blessings in Christ and our identity in Christ and then in the end of the chapter it goes on about the church being the body of Christ, of which Christ is head of and Lord over. And then the next couple of proceeding chapters speak on unity in the church. Do we take the concepts of predestination and "being chosen" out of context by applying it to the individual rather than the church as a whole? I used to be a die hard Calvinist, then decide that Armenian was the way to go. One camp pretty much denies free will and the other camp pretty much denies the sovereignty of God. Really, I think the answer lies somewhere in the middle of the two. One that embraces God's sovereignty but at the same time leaves the choice to the individual. Right now I am a Calvamenian Thoughts? Am I way off base and taking things out of context. I have never heard this way taught before so I assume there is a reason.

Conqueror wrote:What if the scripture doesn't actually mean "chosen" in the sense that He chooses "one man over another" but that he chose the church to be the vessel in which His spirit resides...It is the work of Christ that is predestined not man. All those who Abide in Christ become part of His predestined work. It's not about us, Ephesians is all about Him.In ChristJeff

11In him we were also chosen,[e] having been predestined according to the plan of him who works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will, 12in order that we, who were the first to hope in Christ, might be for the praise of his glory.Pretty sure Paul is referring to believers here.

GrannieAnnie wrote:What the Lord does use is His "Foreknowledge" of who will get on that jet, so He does know who is predestined to make it to N.Y..I believe your understanding of foreknowledge could be deepened somewhat.Let me explain, and feel free to comment.1. God (the Trinity) exists apart from His creation (that is, 'before' there was a creation God existed, and if creation ceases to exist God will 'continue' to exist).2. The act of creation neither diminished, nor augmented God's nature. God is unchanging.3. When God created the universe, he created both time and space.4. God therefore exists apart from both time and space, and as such rules that govern temporal and spatial reality cannot be rightly applied to God.If we understand foreknowledge to be God --looking forward-- into time, we have put a restriction upon God's perspective that isn't there.God doesn't experience time like we do, since His awareness/consciousness exists apart from time.If we picture the universe as a gigantic "ball" of space and time - God would be like a person who can examine the whole ball at once - that is, God doesn't look at one part of the ball then the next - but takes it all in simultaneously. So it is with creation. Because God is outside of time and space His awareness is everywhere simultaneously - (omnipresent), but he is also "fully conscious" in every moment of the past, in the present, and in every moment in the future (omnichronological)Because God is omnipresent and omnichronological God doesn't "looks forward" into time as though his awareness were trapped in the present like the rest of creation - instead God -is- in the future right now, just as He is in the past and in the present.It is a subtlety, but when understood the implications are profound.Predestination therefore cannot be described as God looking forward from one end of time and responding to men who have freely believed on His name in the future, predestinates them from the past. That intellectually dishonest - a sort of cerebral prestigidigitation. In this scenario, man is sovereign in election because God responds to man's choice. The bible portrays however a sovereign God, and if we allow God to be sovereign, we see that predestination works like this:Apart from creation and therefore apart from time), God determined (predestined) exactly whom He would save. This predestination was not based on the choice of man in any way, but rather man's free choice to come to God depends on God having predestined him to do so.The scriptures say that no one comes to the Son unless the Father draws him. God draws only the elect whom He predestined - and that predestination was not dependant upon man's choice - rather man's choice is dependant upon being predestined.That is the difference between, "My sheep hear My voice" and "I don't have any sheep, but some sheep will hear my voice and choose to become My sheep"I could go on -but the important thing is that we understand that God is not bound to time as though he were a created being.Dan/\\/\\/\\

I'm content to know that He's omniscient.I am not inferring anything with regards to yourself GrannieAnnie, I am merely springing off of your reply to make a further comment regarding the nature of contentment. There are many Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses who are content with their errant understanding of the truth. Many of these will reject the truth because they are content with what little truth they do possess.Was it Robert W who have us that wonderful definition of "understanding" - the gist of it being that when all his questions have been answered to his own satisfaction he feels he has come to an understanding of the issue. If some new information should arise either by challenge or whatever, he, like a nobel Berean, examines the challenge, and answers any questions that the challenge to his current understanding would ask - then when he is once again satisfied that all his questions are answered - then and only then is he content in his understanding.This sort of contentment is noble - because it is teachable and doesn't assume perfection in knowledge. The former kind however (Mormons and JW's who refuse to listen to the truth) is ignorant and beggarly.I do hope that anyone who is content with their own understanding doesn't acheive that contentment through ignorance, but rather through thoughtful examination. :-) Dan/\\/\\/\\

What made the Bereans -noble- wasn't that they read the OT scriptures, it was that they carefully researched what Paul was saying -before- they dismissed it. We learn from this that to dismiss something before you examine to see whether it is true or not is the thing that is ignoble.I appreciate your zeal.Dan/\\/\\/\\

Sooooo.... If God desires that none should perish but that ALL should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:7) Then why did he harden Pharaoh's heart? (Romans 9:14-18)

I didn't read all the posts, but I am either a backslidden Arminian or a 4.5 point Calvanist. Not sure which.I also agree with the brother that stated God is not constrained by time. God knows all. Therefore before He even started to create anything, He knew how it would all end. So for someone to say He is ignorant of who will be with Him in that day, is plain wrong in my view. It is saying that God doesn't know all. God knows the number, man does not. These are the elect. God knows who we are before we enter the womb. If he knows the number of each hair on our head, surely he knows the number who will be with Him in the last day.However, to say that man has no responsibility, and if he is elected, he can just hide in his home until the Spirit of God moves upon him, is absolute foolishness. If we have no responsibility to God, as believers or infidels, why is there a judgment? Even Spurgeon, who was heavily Calvanist, preached against this 'frozen chosen' way of thinking. Spurgeon used to pray, 'God call out your elect, and then elect some more.'Here is my take. God gave us freewill, however He knew who would submit to the Holy Ghost before the foundation of the world was laid. So when He created us, he created His chosen, as well. How can we say that we chose Him, when He made us, made the way to Him, breathed life into us, paid for our sin, guides us, gives us the ability to turn to Him, etc, etc, etc. While we have submitted ourselves to His will, in the big picture, He created us knowing full well who would turn to Him and who would resist. The end result is His glory.So man does have a responsiblity toward God, but He already knows the outcome. So the second you say, "I'm elect. Let's just sit around and wait for the judgment," or "It's all up to me and you, God just made the way and sits back," it seems to me you have misunderstood Scripture.Freewill: John 7:37b "If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink."Election: John 15:16a "Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you..."Resistance against the Holy Ghost: Acts 7:51 "Ye stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye."I see no problem with election and freewill working in harmony Scripturally. The confusion comes about when someone assumes we know everything God knows, and assuming God works with the same means and limits that we do.

Letsgetbusy,So when you say God knew before he created us "who would submit to the Holy Ghost", are you not still saying in effect that because we chose Him, He elected to choose us through some sort of foreknowledge?So who chose who first, and this choosing was based on what? Are you not still in effect making God's sovereignty bow down to man's choice to serve Him or not?Please answer the question I posed earlier;If God desires that none should perish, but that ALL come to repentance, Why did HE harden Pharoahs heart?

Sooooo.... If God desires that none should perish but that ALL should come to repentance (2 Peter 3:7) Then why did he harden Pharaoh's heart? (Romans 9:14-18)I've looked into that question a while back..You should check why God hardened pharao's heart.. makes a good study. But I won't get into that in this topic. Perhaps you'll find it handy to check what happened before God hardened pharaos heart.

Yes, but your response still didn't answer the question! The topic is Calvin vs Arminius, so this is a valid question, asked so the readers of this forum will THINK! Did God go against his own desires that none should perish, and harden Pharoah's heart anyway? There is a very simple answer found right there in Scripture, so keep your answers brief.And Annie, I'm pressing the issue because my sincere desire is to get people BEYOND this silly debate! God's ways are so much higher than our ways!P.S. John Calvin oversaw the execution of 58 people in Geneva that didn't agree with his theology, so while his views produced some great truths, they did not produce much love or compassion in the man himself!

And Annie, I'm pressing the issue because my sincere desire is to get people BEYOND this silly debate! God's ways are so much higher than our ways!You are right about one thing....this debate is silly.