PREDESTINATION

Predestination (Refutation of Five Point Calvinism) Predestination LET us begin the study of this subject by turning to Romans 8, and we will read three verses:

28. "And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose."

29. "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren."

30. "Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called; and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified."

As we study together, let us pray that God will give us light on these matters of sovereignty. Yea, let us ask God to give us more light than we have ever had before. Let us remember we are dealing with subjects that have to do with Divine Sovereignty. These subjects have nothing to do with the deliberate planning of man. These matters can only be known to mankind as God by His Spirit has set them forth in His Word. As we look at the subject of Predestination, we are certain that it is a much discussed subject, and perhaps as much misunderstood. Let me mention again the meaning of Adoption as set forth in the Bible. "Adoption is a divine act of God, whereby God sets a goal for the believer." Man had nothing to do with setting that goal. It was solely the work of the Sovereign God. We see that Adoption is future. Paul with the believers in Rome was waiting for the Adoption to take place.

We now look at the subject of Predestination. Perhaps this subject is misunderstood because it has been dealt with in class rooms in a cold theological way, separated from the Word of God. Keep ever in mind that the Word of God gives clearness, and brilliancy to all doctrinal truths. Any doctrine, it does not matter what it is, when separated from the Word in discussion or presentation, becomes cold; and people do not understand it. The doctrine of Predestination is not only set forth in the Word of God, but it is so set forth that our hearts can be warmed, our minds filled, and our souls blessed as we study it.

I have a friend who is a preacher. He was a very earnest young Christian with a great desire to see souls won to Christ. He spent himself in every way to lead people to the Saviour. This same man was invited to preach in a country church in the Western states. He went for a week of meetings and on the closing evening, when he had just started preaching his sermon, he noticed a tall, young man come into his service. He wore a large cowboy hat, and had a red handkerchief fastened about his neck. This man took a back seat. While my friend was preaching the Gospel, this young man was in his mind, and upon his heart. He kept thinking about him and saw him sitting there silently. He continued preaching but felt that God was speaking to that man, and that evening would be the night when he would receive the Saviour. At the close of his sermon he gave a few words of invitation for people to accept Christ, and to signify their desire by coming forward. The man in the back seat who came in late did not respond. While the song leader led the congregation in the invitation song, the young preacher went down to the back seat, laid his hand upon the shoulder of the cowboy and said, "I suppose you are a Christian." The young man answered by saying, "That is just where you are mistaken. I am not." The preacher began to impress upon him God's desire to save him. The cowboy turned to the preacher and said, "There is no use of speaking to me, for God has predestinated me to Hell. He has not predestinated me to go to Heaven." The young preacher could not answer him so returned to the platform and closed the meeting.

Two years later, the same church had built a new building. They asked the same preacher to return and hold another week of Gospel meetings. At the first meeting, while the preacher was preaching his sermon, who should come walking in and take his seat at the rear of the church but the same young man, who had been there two years previous. When the preacher finished his sermon, he went down and to the young man as he had done previously. He asked the young man to accept Christ as his Saviour.- The young man said that God had predestinated him to go to Hell. There was no use in him trying to believe the Gospel. The preacher said, "Two years ago you told me the same thing. You had me in a corner. I could not answer you. I thought at that time that perhaps God had predestinated you to Hell, and I left you. Since then I have been reading my Bible. I just want to tell you now that God never predestinated a man to Hell and desires and wants to save you now."

In the writing of this article I want to prove to you that the young preacher told the truth. Moreover we want to know how to deal with those who make such statements as this cowboy made to the preacher.

Many things have been said about Predestination in books. Some of these statements have been made by good men. Yes, some Godly men have made statements saying that God has predestinated some people to Heaven and some people to Hell. While such men have been right on other truths, of the Word of God, they have most surely been wrong in this. First, they have been ignorant of the teaching of the Word of God on the subject. Second, they have been in error concerning the truth of Adoption, Election, and Foreknowledge. This is a terrible statement for any man to make or dare to make, "that God predestinates some people to Hell." It is not true. It is not according to the clear teaching of the Bible, and is diabolical. Listen to what the Apostle Peter says in II Peter 3: 9

"The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is long-suffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

Hear what Paul says in 1Timothy 2: <{P> 3. "For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;"

4. "Who will have all men to be saved, and - to come unto the knowledge of the truth."

Now, in the light of these verses, how can one say that God has predestinated some people to Hell, and some people to Heaven?

In dealing with these four subjects of sovereignty: Adoption, Predestination, Election, Foreknowledge, it is well to remember a certain phrase used in the wedding ceremony. We are all familiar with the phrase. "What God, therefore, has joined together, let no man put asunder." I would like to reverse that, "What God has put asunder, let no man join together." These four truths or subjects of sovereignty are truths that differ. They are not jumbled together in the Word of God so that man cannot understand them. God has set them in their position and in proper relationship in the Word of God. The Spirit of God is always trying to bring to our hearts and minds the simplicity, and beauty of these truths as they are clearly set forth in His Word. The Spirit of God is not bothered with the doctrines of man, and is not bothered with man's interpretation of the doctrines of the Word. The Spirit never gives a Methodist interpretation of Predestination. Neither is He bothered about the Presbyterian way of handling the subject. He does not ask anyone to accept the Baptist view of this doctrine. The Spirit of God does not have any denominational ax to grind. Neither does He seek, present or promote denominational interpretations of certain doctrines. When writing on these subjects, I remove myself from all denominational platforms to present the truth. I take the Bible to mean what it says and to say what it means. In our hearts inquire after the clear, satisfying understanding of the doctrine of Predestination, we will turn to the Bible and will find what the loving Father has to teach His children in this matter, and our hearts will be satisfied.

A class of young men in a Bible School wanted to get a teacher. They asked a certain doctor if he would teach their class. So he began. The class had several who had recently been born into the family of God. Their hearts were hungry. They were college students. In the course of study, one of them asked their teacher about the subject of Predestination. The teacher being an honest Christian said that he could not explain the subject himself, but would bring them a book on the subject, written by his denomination.

One of these young men called to see me concerning the teaching of this book. The young man said that they had been asking their teacher some questions. One of the questions was on the subject of Predestination. The teacher had been honest, and said that he could not explain it, but he had a book which could, and assured him that he would find great help from it.

The book which he handed me was on the subject of Election. I said to the young man, "I notice the book is on the subject of Election, and not Predestination. However, we will read a few paragraphs together." The writer of that book had not gone far on the first page, when he used the words Predestination and Election interchangeably. This is why the young man said to me, "The more I read this book the less I know and understand about the subject of Predestination." The writer tried to join together what God had made clear in His Word should never be joined together. These subjects of sovereignty that we are dealing with in this book are separate subjects, and they do differ.

Now, is the subject of Predestination a Bible subject, or is it not? Can a humble believer know anything about this great truth? If it is a Bible truth, and most certainly it is, then the Bible is the best book to turn to for help and blessing. As we enter upon the subject of Predestination, let me give you a definition. May I remind you again of the definition of Adoption. Adoption is a divine act of God whereby, God sets a goal (Son placed) for the believer.

Definition of Predestination Predestination is a divine act of God whereby God makes that goal-(Adoption, or Son-placing) certain for the believer.

5. "Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will."

Notice the first sentence in this verse. It says that God has predestinated us unto the Adoption of children. I trust this simple definition is a clear one. We will now go through the Scriptures following a certain outline to see how the Spirit of God sets forth in beautiful simplicity this gracious truth for the hearts of all of God's people.

I. The Precise Meaning of the Word What does the word "Predestination" mean when you look at the etymology of the word itself ? Predestination is made up of two words. The first part is "pre", which means before, or beforehand. The last part of the word is "destination" which means the climax, end or farthest extent. The little word pre has to do with something beforehand. The word "destination" has to do with the farthest extent. We understand by this then, what Predestination, according to the precise meaning of the word has to do with: something beforehand and something at the farthest end or termination. Predestination has nothing to do with anything in between. The time is designated by the word "pre" and the farthest extent is designated by the word "destination."

It was not predestinated that I write this book. It was not predestinated by God that I should be the pastor of this church. It was not predestinated that this lady should play the piano in this church. These things have nothing whatsoever to do with the subject of Predestination.

Predestination is God doing something beforehand, and doing something about or concerning, or relative to the farthest extent. Predestination does not deal with anything in between these two points.

Last night I was in Washington. Yesterday afternoon I went down to the ticket office in the railroad station. I put down my clergy ticket and for $5.90, the clerk handed me a strip of paper with some writing on it. Before she handed it to me, she placed a stamp on two halves of the paper divided by perforated lines, one being on each ticket. On one line of one ticket she stamped "From North Philadelphia to Washington." On the ticket it did not say anything about conditions or happenings between North Philadelphia and Washington. It did not remark about the scenery, about the conditions of the coach, it just said "From North Philadelphia to Washington."

Now turn to the word "Predestination" in reference to the railroad ticket. Pre, which means beforehand, and implies that the railroad corporation decided that for $5.90 they would carry a man from Philadelphia-to the destination- Washington. The railroad company, beforehand, guarantees the delivery of the man to a certain destination. A man may be cold on a train, a man may be sick physically, a man may injure his hand, the railroad company states nothing about what might happen between North Philadelphia and Washington. They have taken the responsibility of delivering the individual to the destination. This had been thought of, planned, and worked out, beforehand. That is the illustration of the meaning of the important word "Predestination." It means precisely what the word itself declares.

28. "And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are called according to His purpose."

29. "For whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren."

30. "Moreover whom He did predestinate, them He also called: and whom he called, them He also justified: and whom He justified, them He also glorified."

We notice here in verse 29 the purpose of Predestination. It is, that we might be conformed to the image of His Son. Now when will that take place? We read in Romans 8:23 that it will take place when the body is redeemed, and that is the time of my adoption. In Ephesians 1:5 the Spirit of God spoke through the Apostle Paul:

5. "Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,"

We are dealing with the matter of the purpose of Predestination, and the purpose of Predestination is to bring us to the image of the Lord Jesus Christ. "To be conformed to the image of His Son," Romans 8 :29.

This is the definite purpose of God in Predestination. He has predestinated us unto the Adoption. Keep in mind the definition of the word. Predestination is a divine act of God, whereby, God makes that goal which is Adoption, certain for the believer. The purpose of God in Predestination then is Adoption, and when we are Adopted we shall be Son-placed. When we are Son-placed we shall be like Him, we shall then be in the image of His Son.

III. The People Who Are Predestinated Now we will look at the portion of the subject that has to do with the people who are included in the Predestination purposes of God. I was speaking one Saturday evening at a Bible conference on the subject of Predestination. During the evenings of a week of meetings, which would close on the following day, there had been sitting near the front each evening a fine young man with his lady friend. After having spoken on the subject of Predestination, I stepped off the platform.

This young man came to me and said, "I have enjoyed your ministry this week. I am sorry that I cannot be here tomorrow which is your closing day. My seminary work begins on Monday, and I must leave early tomorrow in order to arrive there in time for school. I have enjoyed the meetings and have been blessed by hearing you week. I should like to tell you something about the meeting here tonight. I did not believe a thing you said about 'Predestination'."

I said to him, "Friend, what is there in particular in my message that you do not believe ?"

"Well," he said, "I still believe that God Predestinates some folks to Heaven and Predestinates some to Hell.'!

He came to the meeting with preconceived ideas about the subject of Predestination, and would not be convinced even by the Scriptures.

Perhaps he was prejudiced against my teaching of the subject because of what his denomination believed concerning the matter of Predestination. Of course, if he wanted to remain in the denomination and be a part of it, he would have to hold to the "denominational view" of Predestination.

Let me say here and now, concerning Bible study, when studying the Word of God every person should lay to one side their denominational glasses, and turn, with the use of every faculty they have, under the control of the Spirit of God, to find the mind of the Spirit regarding the teaching of the Bible. Do not say it does not matter what I believe about this truth and that, it is nonessential and unimportant. There are no non-essential truths-neither are there unimportant truths. Every part of the truth in the Word of God is of vast and valuable importance to victorious living.

The young man previously referred to, said, "If you have a brother who is not a Christian, and you are one, if you both died tonight, one saved, and the other lost, I believe that God predestinated one for Heaven, and the one that was lost, for Hell."

I said to him, "Now you have made a definite statement, and in your statement another issue is involved. You have laid a charge against God. You have charged God with damning a soul. Now would you open the Bible and confirm your statements with Scripture, for if God does this, you should find some support for it in the Word of God without difficulty."

He said, "Ephesians 1:4 teaches that God predestinates the saved to Heaven, and the lost to Hell."

Now keep in mind that we are dealing with the matter of the people who are Predestinated, and to show you the error of this young man's statement. I want you to notice the teaching of Paul in the book of the Ephesians in general, which leads us to the clear teaching of Ephesians 1:4 in particular. To understand clearly the teaching of the book, you must understand clearly the mind and purpose of God in the book where the text is found. In the book of Ephesians, Paul is presenting to us the truth concerning the Church, which is His Body. The Church which is His Body is made-up of all believers. God only recognizes and is only identified with one Church on earth. Every person born of the Spirit of God belongs to the Church, which is His Body, spoken of in Ephesians 1: 22, 23:

22. "And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the Church,"

So many people know about the Church, but do not understand what the Church really means. In Ephesians we have the divine blue print of the Church. The word church is found in Ephesians nine times, and the word body is also found nine times. If a man is not saved or born of the Spirit, he does not belong to the Church which is His Body. Those who are in the Church, the Body of Christ, are sinners who have been saved by the grace of God. If you are saved you are in the Body of Christ, which had its beginning on the Day of Pentecost; when the Holy Spirit baptized those who believed and were scattered units into that body, thus making them members of the Body of Christ, and relating them to the Head in Heaven, who is the Lord Jesus Christ.

The work of the Spirit of God is to bring members in to the Body of Christ. Now Paul in this book is dealing with the Body of Christ; the Church as a whole is a corporate group or body. He is not speaking of us as individual believers. If I have entered into the blessings that are presented by Paul in Ephesians, it is only because I am a member of the Body of Christ. In Ephesians the believer is not dealt with as an individual. He is dealing with the Church as a corporate body. In the first three chapters of the book of Ephesians, we have the Church as God sees her accepted, and resting in all the merits of the Lord Jesus. In the last three chapters of this book we see the Church as God desires the world to see her. There is only one way in which the unbeliever can see the Church, and that is in her walk and work. The last three chapters of Ephesians then, have to do with the believers' walk and work. There again we have presented the walk and work of a corporate group, the Church as a whole. In Ephesians 1: 4 we read,

4. "According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:"

Notice clearly what the Spirit of God is saying through the Apostle Paul. He is telling in this verse that before the foundation of the world, God decided He would have a church. He decided that that church would have its foundation, "in Him." This was a Sovereign act of God. He is Sovereign. He can do as He likes, and here is one of His decisions before the foundation of the world. He not only decided to have a church that He would be united with Christ, but He decided what kind of a church that Church would be, and He decided it before the foundation of the world. He wanted a church that would be without blame before Him. He wanted a church that when He looked at it, there would be nothing imperfect about it. It would not have marks of imperfections. It would be a church designed and completed by His infinite wisdom and His almighty power. The ways of God are perfect and the works of God are perfect. When He looks at that Church He does not see a flaw. It is without blame before Him. Anything that man makes, after it is made, he sees certain imperfections in it, and also room for improvement

It is not so in the Church of Christ. God created that Church as perfect, having imputed to her the perfect righteousness of the perfect Son of God. That is what God designed and desired, and also what He has brought into being concerning the Church which is His Body. God not only decided before the foundation of the world to have a church, but He also decided what kind of a church that church would be. According to Ephesians 1: 4, this was all decided before the foundation of the world. He decided that that church would be a holy church. I-wonder if we are building according to the divine blue print?

He also decided before the foundation of the world the Destination of that Church. Notice what He says in Ephesians 1:4-5

4. "According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:'

5. "Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,"

The divine blue print which is set forth in the book of Ephesians has in it the destiny of the Church which is His Body. He was not dealing with the individual believer in this book, but with a corporate group, known as the Church. In Ephesians 1:5 He has predestinated the Church unto the Adoption of children by Jesus Christ. God is not here deciding the Destination of individuals as individuals, but is telling us that before the foundation of the world He had decided the Destination of the Church the corporate group.

The young man who spoke to me at the close of the meeting at the Bible Conference on the matter of Predestination did not understand clearly the mind and teaching of the Spirit of God in the book of Ephesians. Nothing is more important than the studying of the Bible by Books. God never predestinated an individual to Heaven, and God never predestinated an individual to Hell; for God neither predestinates individuals to Heaven nor to Hell.

There is one exception to that statement. In the Bible, God has predestinated One outstanding individual to two places, and you will find the fact of it recorded in 1 Peter 1:11

11. "Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it satisfied beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow."

The Lord Jesus was predestinated in two places. He was predestinated to suffering, and He was predestinated to the glory which should follow. Inasmuch as individuals do not come under the predestination purposes of God, we do find that God has predestinated two corporate groups in the Bible. God has predestinated one corporate group, known as Israel, to the outstanding place among the nations of the world. Then, God has predestinated another corporate group known as "the Church which is His Body." This corporate group is predestinated unto the Adoption, which means that the Church is predestinated to be Son-placed. Ephesians 1: 5.

Now if you are in the Body of Christ you are in the predestinated company. People who are predestinated are those who belong to the Body of Christ. You are predestinated the moment you are saved, because that moment you became a member of the Body of Christ. Predestination has nothing to do with going to Hell. or going to Heaven as individuals. Predestination has nothing whatsoever to do with unconverted people. It only affects believers. The words "us" and "we" in Ephesians refer to the Church which is His Body.

It is blasphemous to dare to say that God predestinates individuals to Hell. Predestination is a divine act of God whereby, God makes the goal, which is Adoption, certain for the believer. Will I be "Son-placed?" Yes, if I am a member of the Body of Jesus Christ. If I, as a believer, and a member of the Body of Christ do not arrive there, at the place of Adoption, God would be a liar. Do you see that Predestination makes Adoption certain ? Thank God for His great truth concerning the Church which is His Body.

IV. The Partners in Predestination I want you to notice another truth relative to the subject of Predestination presented in the 8th chapter of Romans, verses 28 to 30. Read these verses carefully, and as you do you will notice in verse 29 it says,

29. "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren."

30. "Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified."

Notice the phrase, "whom he . . . them he also;" "whom he . . . them he also;" "whom he . . . them he also." Here are the five things that God has joined together. It is a most delightful truth for the soul of any man. What God has joined together, let not man dare to try to put asunder. Five tremendous blessings are here joined together. These are the five:

God Himself has joined together these great blessings. He so united them together that they are inseparable. No man can put them asunder. They are joined together by His sovereign wisdom and power. This verse declares it to be so: "Whom he did Predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified; and whom he justified, them he also glorified."

Now if you have experienced one of these blessings you have all five of them, for they can not be separated. These are acts of the Sovereign God, and thank God for His Word that these acts to us. Do you ever stop to thank God for these five blessings? Our faith rests in the knowledge of this abounding truth for the soul, and it is refreshing to our hearts. "He Who has begun a good work in us will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ." As a child of God you do not need to worry as to whether you are predestinated or not. God has settled that in His Word as He deals with the subject of Sovereignty.

V. The Pathway that Leads to Predestination In Romans 3:28 a man is justified by faith alone. In Romans 4, we are told that man was justified by faith always. Two leaders are mentioned here in the opening of Romans 4, Abraham and David. So, you see that men of the Old Testament were justified by faith as in the New Testament. In chapter 5 we are told that justification is by faith. Romans 5: 1 says, "Therefore being justified by faith." How a man is justified is clearly stated by Paul, and the question of justification is settled.

The sinner is perfectly and fully accepted by God and justified by faith. Religion and rights are all excluded. Now, if you can come into the experience of justification by faith, you can come into the assurance that you are predestinated. Justification by faith in Christ is the pathway that leads to Predestination. Whom He justifies, them He also predestinates. If you have the blessing of justification in your soul, you also have the blessing of Predestination. The same moment that God justifies a sinner, the Spirit of God places him in the Body of Jesus Christ, and as soon as he is in the Body of Christ, he is in the divine predestinated, corporate group. It is impossible for a man to be justified and not predestinated. You can change these five blessings around and mix them up with the little phrase, "Whom he . . . them he also," and you will find that no human power and no human language can separate what God has joined together. The believing heart should continually bless God for this. God has saved the believing soul from sin, and made him a member in the Body of Christ; therefore God has pledged Himself by His sovereignty; yea, He guarantees that the Church on earth shall be the Church in Heaven. A man who has been justified by faith is in the predestined company.

How can a man be justified ? Hear the Apostle Paul telling a man how to get ready for Heaven on the shortest notice: "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved." Again, hear the Apostle John in John 3:16

16. "For God so loved the world, that he gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

12. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name."

If you believe on Him you possess another life. Are you a member of the Body of Jesus Christ? You are, if you have taken Christ to be your Saviour, and you can sing from the depths of your heart, "When the roll is called up yonder, I'll be there."

Other Articles On This Site Under the Topic of Calvinism Refuted: [ Up ] [ Adoption ] [ Calvin's Error of Limited Atonement ] [ Did Christ Die For All? ] [ Election ] [ Five Point Calvinism - The Position of Fundamental Baptist World -Wide Mission ] [ Foreknowledge ] [ Predestination ] [ Problems With a Limited View of the Atonement ] [ The Death Christ Died -A Case for Unlimited Atonement-Introduction ]

Are you sure you are saved and on your way to heaven? Please read "Have You Considered This?" and be sure!

Do not lie. There has never, let me repeat that, NEVER been a Calvinist that will ever put the teachings of Calvin, or any other Reformer, above Scripture. For you to repeatedly make this claim is to lie. For you to lie is for you to sin. You are sinning against God every time you say this. (Note that I didn't say you are sinning against Calvinists) Please repent of this sin.

I shouldn't waste time on you close-minded guys. Of course, you elevate your silly littel construct above Scripture all the time.

You start with the construct's silly doctrines and then you shoehorn Scripture to try to make it fit. Recently, "the doc" spent several frutiless days trying to clip and chisel and twist 1 Cor 2:14 from its contextual moorings on the premise that it would support his loony idea that 'regeneration causes (sic) conversion'. Of course, it didn't work, but it showed he had never ever even considered 1 Cor 2:14 before. He just got it from some Calvinist list of 'proof-texts' which (it promised) would support the zany ideas of the construct.

He stuck with it because he had started a priori with the silly construct and therefore couldn't go back and study Scripture with an open mind. He had to 'make it fit'. How sad.

After listening to your prideful arrogant pronunciamentoes upon others for "lying", "heresy" and the rest, I am now convinced tthat no Calvinist will ever sit down and study Scripture with an open mind, because deep in their twisted, embittered little hearts they know if they did they would never come out at the construct. And they would rather have the false sense of pride of having their tattered little construct (I suppose because it is 'theirs' alone) than have the full power of the Word of God.

And, by the way, telling the awful truth about Calvinists' a priori pre-occupation with Johnny's little construct and their giving it priority over Scripture is not a "lie" and most assuredly, a fortiori, not a sin. It is the cause of sadness beyond words.

Since your mind is so closed and locked in error, no one can expect to reach it, I am inclined to stop here. But, because there are others out there who may be (as I have been) so appalled by the Calvinists' performance in elevating their faulty systematic theology above the Bible that they are tempted to abandon systematic theology, let me share the conclusions I have come to on the subject.

The Calvinists here on FR clearly demonstrate the grave risks of majoring on one's systematic theology. Like weeds in a lawn, it tends to take over, driving out the Scripture, driving out humility, driving out concerns with spriritual matters and leading to single-minded insistence that others agree with your construct or face the vilest names that can be launched.

On the other hand, when one studies Scripture properly (a posteriori) there is still the quite natural tendency to compare one passage or book with another and draw comparative conclusions. To some degree this is the impulse of systematic theology.

However, having witnessed the abuses of the Calavinists here at FR, I think that a good line is never to focus on the study of systematic theology per se. It is the giving it of a central place (thus displacing the Scriptures) that led the Calvinists to their distasteful end.

So, my tentative conclusion on the proper use of systematic theology is as one would properly use a Bible dictionary, or Bible commentary to check a conclusion independently arrived at from the Scripture after the a posteriori study.

Now I say tentative, because as we have seen from the abuses of the Calvinists here, systematic theology, when combined with oour own tendency to want to devise our own philosophies, is a powerful elixir to twist and abuse Scripture.

Frankly, I do not own a systematic theology text (other than Johnny's creaky Institutes) and I will not now buy another. The Calvinists here have convinced me that 'playing around' with systematic theology is like 'experimenting' with heroin -- it can destroy lives.

6-9 months ago (before encountering the mean-spirited, close-minded Calvinists here) I would not have seen these dangers. Calvinists, in my experience, were simply legalistic people with an unreasoning affinity for a world view which didn't make any Biblical sense. But I certainly had never seen the bitter, destructive side so visible day after day here.

I realize that there is a lot of 'adverse selection' going on here. We have the 'worst of the worst' because they look for a place to 'strut their stuff'. But, it still shows the impact of continued focus on systematic theology at its worst. As we have seen, it can literally destroy one's ability to even read Scripture. It is more dangerous than I had previously understood.

I would also like to point out Clarke's Commentary on this subject at his note on Jn. 6:44..

Drawing, or alluring, not dragging is here to be understood. "He," say the rabbins, "who desires to cleave to the holy and blessed God, God lays hold of him, and will not cast him off." Synops. Sohar. p. 87. The best Greek writers use the verb in the same sense of alluring, inciting, &c.

From Strongs

Strong's Number: 1670

Greek: helkuo

"to draw," differs from suro, as "drawing" does from violent "dragging." It is used of "drawing" a net, Jhn 21:6,11 (cp. No. 1, in ver. 8); Trench remarks, "At vv. 6 and 11 helko (or helkuo) is used; for there a drawing of the net to a certain point is intended; by the disciples to themselves in the ship, by Peter to himself upon the shore. But at ver. 8 helko gives place to suro: for nothing is there intended but the dragging of the net, which had been fastened to the ship, after it through the water" (Syn., xxi). This less violent significance, usually present in helko, but always absent from suro, is seen in the metaphorical use of helko, to signify "drawing" by inward power, by Divine impulse, Jhn 6:44; 12:32. So in the Sept., e.g., Sgs 1:4; Jer 31:3, "with lovingkindness have I drawn thee." It is used of a more vigorous action, in Jhn 18:10, of "drawing" a sword; in Act 16:19; 21:30, of forcibly "drawing" men to or from a place; so in Jam 2:6, AV, "draw," RV, "drag."

now Vines....I found all the other texts that have EXACTLY the same word..now you do not like that..that is your problem. Acording to Vines the word is antleo...a word that implies a less "violent" dragging...but still a dragging

Greek: antleo

signified, primarily, "to draw out a ship's bilgewater, to bale or pump out" (from antlos, "bilge-water"), hence, "to draw water" in any way (ana, "up," and a root, tel---, "to lift, bear"), Jhn 2:8,9; 4:7,15. Note: In Jhn 4:11, "to draw with" translates the corresponding noun antlema, "a bucket for drawing water by a rope."

So tell me something ...is the water drawn from the bottom of the well done without the one doing the drawing doing some work ? Or does the water respond to a call?

Some one must do the work..it is not the water..the water plays NO part in coming....ya may not like it..but Salvation is of God:>) He drags up the bucket..gently but he still drags it

And yes, I deliberately misunderstood you. To answer you seriously, yes. I did as much work in finding this stuff out for posting as you did (and then some). Question is, can you prove, without resorting to "pick-and-choose the meaning of the word" (that's the biggest problem with the Amplified Bible, it tells you all these different possible meanings, but only one fits the context--but you get to choose which one, since there are all those definitions to choose from), that helkuo means 'to drag' in John 6:44 and 12:32? I've already given a good amount of evidence that it doesn't.

And I have given you the evidence that it does..you are the one "picking and choosing" Clarke is hardly a greek scholar..or a disinterested party with no bias

I have posted the greek from a greek dictionary and concordance...

You say it is context

Me I say God meant EXACTLY what he said..of course you do believe that salvation is all about you right:>))

the_doc's reply to WM on the Genesis Chapter Three thread, now deleted: "God's choice took place before time. What saves the sinner in time is his choice of God in the gospel of repentant faith in Christ. The sinner is not saved until he freely wills to trust the God of the Bible. This is the Calvinistic position. "
WM:It is also the Arminian position. I guess by now your compromises with Arminianism are quite unconscious."

Yes, I thought that was an amazing response. One wonders if doc will now retreat from "freely wills to trust" to something reflecting compulsion ("well, it's 'freely trusts' but every single one will absolutely 'freely[?] trust;").

I suspect the problem remaining is that the construct requires that the atonement be 'limited' to 'the [individualized] elect" which would mean that only a subset of humanity would have the opportunity to exercise the 'free will' which the_doc now concedes.

Since, as doc now outlines it, we have (under the construct) three possible classes of humanity: (1) those [individualized] elect who 'freely will to trust God', (2) those [individualized] elect who 'freely will [NOT] to trust God' and (3) those [individualized] non-elect who never had the opportunity to 'freely will', one wonders if the construct differentiates in the punishment afforded to classes (2) and (3) above.

Somehow I doubt that the other construct defenders will concede as much.

The Syndics' charge describes a letter from Servetus as evidence of his making the attributed quote. [OP further provided the additional reference you demanded.] You also questioned the bias of the Syndics and the trial process. You were asked for evidence of bias... Your response has emotion and passion. It is, nevertheless, non responsive to the preceeding discussion.

No, my response was entirely responsive to the issues of Servetus trial. I have accepted arguendo your quote ("They have not one absolute God, but a three-parted, collective, composite God—that is, an unthinkable, impossible God, which is no God at all. They worship three idols of the demons,—a three-headed monster, like the Cerberus of the Greek mythology") as the evidence of his 'crime' against Servetus. (I have assumed that, if this is not the sum total of the known evidence against him, you have at least selected the strongest evidence against him. Thus, it is proper to judge the strength of the case from the assumed evidence.)

I did not specifically allege 'bias' on the part of the prosecutors (although in view of the severity of the penalty imposed on a guy just 'passing through' their territory, some personal animus is surely indicated). What I have said is that Biblical justice requires that both sides be presented ("The first to state his case seems right, until his opponent comes and cross-examines him." Prov 18:17). So, I asked the following questions:

Assuming arguendo that this is the right fellow and that this was the evidence which was introduced at his trial, I have two questions of the assembled construct defenders here:
1. Who was he describing here? How do we know that? and
2. Does any sane person contend (even assuming arguendo that he was talking about Johnny and his friends) that these words justify the 'green wood barbeque' technique which Johnny and his friends gave him?

Surely, you can answer two simple questions.

And I have given you the evidence that it does..you are the one "picking and choosing" Clarke is hardly a greek scholar..or a disinterested party with no bias.

Actually, Clarke was very much a Greek scholar. He mastered over 14 different languages in his lifetime, Greek, Hebrew, Latin, Syrian and German included. He is also considered the father of textual, or lower, criticism--the ascertaining of which manuscripts are most likely genuine. To do this, he had to have a very encyclopaedic understanding of not only Greek, but also the other major languages in which translations of the Bible had been produced.

I have posted the greek from a greek dictionary and concordance...

You have posted the nominal meaning from a Greek dictionary and have forced the meaning that you choose to place upon the word, the meaning you boldface as the true meaning, regardless of context. So you are still word-loading.

You say it is context

I do indeed.

Me I say God meant EXACTLY what he said..of course you do believe that salvation is all about you right:>))

Me, I say God said exactly what he meant to say. And the only way we'll know that is by looking at the text honestly enough that we don't engage in logical and word-study fallacies in support of our own preconceived positions.

I asked you a question..can the water draw itself???

Water does not indeed draw itself, nor indeed does the man who comes to God. However, drawing is not always dragging, and helkuo is used, as Clarke states, by the best Greek writers to mean "to allure or entice" a man. See again my #669 and the article attached.

Let me also amend a further part of Clarke's note on Jn. 6:44,

St. Augustine answers from the poet, Trahit sua quemque voluptas; a man is attracted by that which he delights in. Show green herbage to a sheep, he is drawn by it: show nuts to a child, and he is drawn by them. They run wherever the person runs who shows these things: they run after him, but they are not forced to follow; they run, through the desire they feel to get the things they delight in. So God draws man: he shows him his wants-he shows the Saviour whom he has provided for him: the man feels himself a lost sinner; and, through the desire which he finds to escape hell, and get to heaven, he comes unto Christ, that he may be justified by his blood. Unless God thus draw, no man will ever come to Christ; because none could, without this drawing, ever feel the need of a Saviour. See August. Tract. 26, in Joan. and Calmet.

Winston, if you will read my original posts, I set the context for the question of tolerance and cited a statement of Servetus that was instrumental in his execution. My point was that Calvin's participation (despite the level of complicity) was not the high water of intolerance in an era that was intolerant by nature. I do not condone the intolerance of the era whether the instigator was Calvin, Zwingli, the Inquisition, Henry VIII or Boody Mary.

An additional point was the citing of an example of Servetus' remarks which he knew would be seen as heretical and incindiary. Are you implying in deciding to "stop overnight" Servetus was not aware of the possibility of arrest and trial? Again this presents the 16c. mindset and culture as about the same as today. Wrong.

Hate Calvin if you wish [or if you are predestined to do so ***grin***]. The names you use for derision at least are in keeping with the 16c. those guys were accomplished at slinging mud. However, slinging mud at the Triune God, was as I say a deadly serious issue then.

Really ???...you are short sighted..you should have seen the now deleted thread where my marriage became food for the masses...thanks to X or the constant hounding and being stalked from thread to thread by 2 other of your numbers..Yep I get angry..I , unlike the Wesleyans, still sin..Really ???...you are short sighted..you should have seen the now deleted thread where my marriage became food for the masses...thanks to X or the constant hounding and being stalked from thread to thread by 2 other of your numbers..Yep I get angry..I , unlike the Wesleyans, still sin..I find it troubling that Calvinists get warnings and Arminaians proceed with immunity ...but then again we were told that was going to happen

I did not see that thread, but from 'pings' I received it seemed that it was you that first mentioned someones family. When Rev.911 stated that was off limits I gave it an 'amen'. As for the rest of what you said it is just childish. Why don't you follow Shadowaces admonition to agree to disagree and move on?

It is the Calvinists who are waging a Jihad not the Noncalvinists.

As for your still sinnng, have you have confessed them to someone other then God?

I find it troubling that Calvinists get warnings and Arminaians proceed with immunity ...but then again we were told that was going to happen

Is that in the Book of Revelation? A sign of the End Times!

Are you implying in deciding to "stop overnight" Servetus was not aware of the possibility of arrest and trial? Again this presents the 16c. mindset and culture as about the same as today.

Every account I have ever seen is at a loss to explain why Servetus would 'stop overnight' in Geneva, except that while he expected the papists to try to kill him (apparently they had an outstanding 'warrant' out for him), he did not expect it from Calvin. I think it is a fair summary of the known facts that he did not expect Calvin to try and kill him for his articulation of his theology in other places.

I do agree that it was a foolishly intolerant age. I cannot say that Calvin 'set the high water mark for intolerance" -- it would be hard to beat the RCC there. I do think the thing that makes Servetus keep coming back up here is the unbelievable intolerance shown by the Calvinists here.

As previously described I have not studied systematic theology (and now have an absolute aversion to it), but I certainly have reached some tentative conclusions on what the Bible teaches about the free will of believers. But I have no difficulty saying that I do not have all the answers. I do not 'know' exactly how the interrelationship of an all-powerful God and a distinctly finite man works.

But whenever one says that around here, you are immediately hit with some arrogant Calvinist saying "well, my construct explains all that and it is 100% right."

Well, it isn't. It doesn't comport with the totality (or even the main thrust) of Scripture. So, I "know" that it doesn't explain all Scriptural things, but I don't "know" what does explain all Scriptural things. Probably won't until I get to Heaven --and then I won't care.

But this business of constantly saying that everyone who points up the foolishness of trying to 'summarize' Scripture in Johnny's little construct is a "liar" or a "heretic" has the strange wafting of the smoke of green wood and Michael Servetus coming with it.

I can accept the well-spoken and temperate (but wholly misplaced) confidence of the Mormons here (such as White Mountain) while I cannot stand the moronic arrogance of the Calvinists refusing to even consider that their pet construct might, just might be wrong. I haave asked myself why that is and I think the answer is that the Mormons claim [entirely wrongfully in my view] that Smith was inspired of God to write his books. The Calvinists claim to know that Calvin wasn't inspired to write his systematic theology, yet they would sooner change an interpretation of Scripture than modify their construct. And that is the inverse of what it should be. Worse, their insistence on their manmade construct, strengthens the resolve of the Mormons (whom I think have to harbor doubts about Smith's various frauds).

That is why I asked here night before last "... does anyone doubt that this noisy crowd of intolerant Calvinist bullies would readily burn Biblical Christians at the stake were it within their power so to do?"

It is, as Yogi would say, deja vu all over again.

There are a lot of systematic theology texts out there on the shelf. One of them is Calvin's. But while we can seem to discuss any of the others with equanimity with their supporters, we cannot do the same with the Calvinists without the unbelievable personal invective that we see here. [No follower of Karl Barth has ever called me a "liar" or a "heretic".] It is as though that they are somehow threatened when others share the Scriptures but don't buy into their particular systematic theology.

Why is that?

Interesting that you reject the RC defination and say amen to Mormons..pssssssssssss the RC share our creed (just in case you didn't know that:>))

Interesting your mind is becoming so warped with hate that you cannot differente an Amen for a correct statement from acceptance of their entire theological system.

What is more interesting is that to get a nonCalvinist you would be willing to accept a Roman reading rather then the Reformed reading.

It shows the power of hate.

psssssss, the Roman Catholic Church does not share my creed.

I am sure the Reformers would love to hear you say that you and they do!

We agree on some things, but like the Mormons they preach a different Gospel!

One of the principles of the Reformation was the Priesthood of the believer, that is every believer can go straight to God with his sins (1Jn.1:9), he did not need to confess them to anyone!

Maybe, you could clear up a few things for me from your post:

1. for the inner influencing of the will (Plato).

It appears to me here that the author is arguing the meaning of the word using Plato as a source. Wouldn't the other NT uses of this word be a better standard for deciding the meaning, than 400 year old Greek? (Some English words had a different meaning for Shakespeare than they do for me.)

2. The Semitic world has the concept of an irresistible drawing to God (cf. 1 Sam. 10:5; 19:19ff.; Jer. 29:26; Hos. 9:7). In the OT helkein denotes a powerful impulse, as in Cant. 1:4, which is obscure but expresses the force of love. This is the point in the two important passages in Jn. 6:44; 12:32. There is no thought here of force or magic.

Here the author contradicts himself by saying that the OT word "expresses the force of love", but then says that "there is no thought here of force." If I forcefully pull my daughter out of the street because she is going to get hit by a car, isn't that both a forceful act and "the force of love"? I'm kind of confused as to what the "force of love" is, if it's not a force?

3. The Analytical Lexicon to the Greek New Testament, states that helkuo is used metaphorically "to draw mentally and morally, John 6:44; 12:32" [William Mounce, p. 180].

Isn't the idea of a metaphor to describe an intangible thing using a tangible example? Just because the word is used figuratively, doesn't mean that the "forcefullness" of the word is reduced. It appears to me that Jesus is using this picture of being physically dragged to show how he draws us to himself. As I showed in the example with my daughter, being dragged isn't always a bad thing. Christ is dragging us, to save our lives!!

I don't think the author is being completely honest with himself when he says that he has found no support from the lexicons. The first four lexicons he quotes, do not reduce the "forcefullness" of the word, they just state that it is used figuratively.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.