PREDESTINATION; LIVE BY GRACE; NOT BY WORKS (WEEK 8)

Well, this is really shaping up...

Angel food cake, devil's food cake, 5-alarm chili (blazing saddles?). I'll bring the Buffalo wings w/blue cheese salad dressing for dipping, and pizza, of course.

Yep, our little L & E one year anniversary party plans are really taking shape. Let's see, what else do we need? Hmmmm. Oh, I know. Based on recent threads, I nominate Gamecock to be in charge of bringing the hooch. :)

Based on recent threads, I nominate Gamecock to be in charge of bringing the hooch. :)

Excellent idea, but he needs to remember to bring ROOT beer for me. I have no theological disagreements with drinking alcoholic beverages. It's just not for me. That being said I'd be happy to be the designated driver.

Therefore, (4) One can know with certainty that one is elect only at or after death.

Do you call yourself a Christian? How do you know that you will not fall away 10 years from now and become a Muslim?

Based upon your argument you should not even wear the title until after you die.

Here we are, discussing a theological question, ["How can we now know with certainty that we are elect?"] and you are attempting to resolve the matter by asking me personal questions about my family. Aren't you committed to 'sola scriptura'? If so, they why are you turning away from Scripture in your attempt to answer this question? Shouldn't the question not turn on whether the questioner has children? Or have Calvinists now determined that only persons with children can now know with certainty that they are elect?

-A8

Do you call yourself a Christian?

Yes, but I prefer the term 'Catholic'; any heretic can call himself a "Christian".

How do you know that you will not fall away 10 years from now and become a Muslim?

I don't. Only God knows the future. Peter emphatically insisted that he [Peter] would never deny Christ. What happened? He immediately denied Jesus three times. We cannot depend upon our confidence in our own will-power to show us that we are elect. And if Calvinists are turning to their own will-power for assurance of election, then how is that not Pelagianism?

Based upon your argument you should not even wear the title until after you die.

How would that follow?

-A8

Just because the apostate-to-be was not given *true faith* does not mean that his 'conversion' could not have been like yours. It could have been like yours in many ways.

You are speculating. On what basis do you make this claim? For you to be correct, you must suppose that a person to whom God has given true faith experiences God in his life in a very similar way that a person with no true faith at all does. I see this as impossible. The false believer cannot please God and does not benefit spiritually from his false belief. The true believer can please God, and scripture says that the true believer will necessary benefit and grow spiritually from the relationship. Both of these basic truths fall if a believer and non-believer have the same experience/relationship with God.

FK: "I cannot compare my faith with that of another individual, but I can reason that the faith of a lost person is not the same as that of a saved person."

Indeed, but that doesn't help you determine that you are elect, because you cannot determine with certainty now whether your faith is of the sort that the apostate-to-be have or the sort that the elect have.

Sure I can. The sort of faith that the elect have can be called "saving faith", right? I assume you would acknowledge that this sort of faith is vividly described over and over again in the Bible through prayers, speech, and deeds. In addition, the faith of an apostate-to-be is also clearly described in the Bible. This allows me to test and prove myself against what the scriptures say. While I still stumble, I can report that the "effects" are vastly one-sided. That is "an" evidence to me that I am of the elect.

I'm simply showing that there is no way for us to know now with certainty that we are elect.

In reading through all the posts on this thread, I have been trying to look at this discussion from many different angles. One thing I can't figure is why the Church is so invested in there NOT being assurance. Surely if God sent you an angel today to give you assurance you would accept it with thanksgiving. The Church is well aware of the multiple verses in the Bible (illustrated on this thread) which accomplish the same thing, yet it rejects them (via interpretation). Why is that?

In addition, a number of us have asked you, in varying ways, to explain what the assurance verses are good for if no one can know if they apply to him. I do not recall a direct answer by you on this subject. 2 Tim. 3:16-17 tells us that ALL scripture is "profitable" or "useful" for "teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness". How do the assurance verses square with this passage?

How does your "faith" tell you things?

God gives me and actively manages my faith. The easiest evidence is whenever I am moved to do something "good" that is squarely against the nature of the person I used to be before belief (which I vividly remember). One way God communicates to all believers is by leading them. Sometimes this is done through conscience. Other times, one just "feels" led to go do something or other. Surely you have experienced this. I believe that the more mature a person's faith is, the more likely it is that he will perceive and act upon God's leadership. This is the sense I am talking about. In the instant case, I believe that God led me to interpret scripture (my guess would be to an 80-90% degree) in the Reformed tradition BEFORE I had even ever heard there was such a thing. I surmise that this was no accident and is an example of God's leadership (or my faith "speaking" to me).

But according to the Calvinist, the Bible's assurance verses only apply to you if you are elect, and so unless you already know you are elect, you cannot appeal to the assurance verses to show that you are elect.

I think you would have to admit that I have genuinely attempted to use parol evidence vis-a-vis the assurance verses in this discussion. Calvinists do not say that assurance verses are the only source of assurance. However, that doesn't mean they should be thrown out either! :) Many of those verses say simply "He who believes is saved". We interpret "believes" to be true belief and we interpret "saved" as saved for all time, since that's what the assurance verses say in plain language. My understanding of Catholicism would be that you would interpret "believes" as either true or false belief, and that "saved" really meant only for so long as until one is no longer saved, which could happen at any time (and multiple times) thereafter.

So, under our interpretations, the assurance verses are actually very strong evidence if you accept personal testimony at face value. The problem here is that you keep wanting to compare that testimony against the unknowable heart of an apostate-to-be. I reject that premise because it artificially nullifies the discussion before it begins. In effect, it seems you are saying that we cannot have assurance because we cannot specifically differentiate ourselves from the "faith" of apostates-to-be. You appear to say that this is true because we cannot know the hearts of the apostates-to-be. HOWEVER, you seem to have no problem ASSUMING what the hearts of these people are. You appear to assume that the genuineness of their sinner's prayers was the same as ours (all permanently saved Christians, including you :), and that the lost and saved have the same relationships with God. I respectfully disagree with these assumptions/premises.

----------

Thank you for your response to my question about excommunication.

So what is the difference between what they claim to know, and what you claim to know?

While the answer to that question may be interesting, it has absolutely no bearing on what is revealed in Scriptures:

1 John 5:13
These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.

The Scriptures declare that we may know. That fact that some only think they know, people who are in fact not believers or sons, but Reprobates. They have been GIVEN OVER to believe lies, even the lie of being a true believer, just as many of the Lord's own disciples were.

Anything to the contrary calls the Bible a LIE, the Word who gave it, a LIAR, and the HS, a windbag & deceiver.

Believers may know that they HAVE eternal life. I happen to believe it and make no "logic" contrary to the Logos of Theos which calls him a Liar. Let God be true.

post tenebras lux,

You are speculating.

I'm pointing out a non sequitur. You stated (in #190) that since the apostate-to-be was never given true faith, therefore his "conversion" could not have been "like" yours. But that is a non sequitur. You are assuming that true faith cannot be "like" faux-faith. If they were not alike in any way, we could just go through every congregation, and remove all apostates-to-be, and no [God-fearing] seminaries would ever admit apostates-to-be.

The sort of faith that the elect have can be called "saving faith", right? I assume you would acknowledge that this sort of faith is vividly described over and over again in the Bible through prayers, speech, and deeds. In addition, the faith of an apostate-to-be is also clearly described in the Bible.

Where? Judas sure fooled the rest of the Twelve. Philip was fooled by Simon Magus into baptizing him. All those disciples who stopped following Him (John 6:66) sure seemed faithful before that. Hymenaeus and Alexander seemed to be good Christians before they abandoned the faith (1 Tim 1:19-20). So did Phygelus and Hermogenes (2 Tim 1:15). Paul thought that Demas was a genuine believer, until Demas abandoned him for love of this world. (2 Tim 4:10) What Jesus says in Matthew 24:9-10 suggests that in some cases not until there is persecution does it become clear who has true faith and who doesn't. (He also says this in Matt 13:20, Mark 4, and Luke 8:13.) Peter says in 2 Peter 2 that there are false teachers who have forsaken the right way; if it were obvious from the start that their faith was false, then how were they allowed to become teachers? They could not have forsaken the right away unless they were once following the right way (and therefore once quite *like* the elect).

If false faith is so unlike true faith, then how can the author of the epistle to the Hebrews write, "Take care, brothers, lest there be in any of you an evil, unbelieving heart, leading you to fall away from the living God." (Heb 3:12) He does not say *some* of you; he says *any* of you. All Christians (which would include the elect) must take care not to "fall away from the living God". That makes absolutely no sense if the the faith of the elect is presently in no way like the 'faith' of the apostates-to-be.

When Peter says in 2 Peter 3 that the beloved should be on their guard so that they are not carried away by the error of unprincipled men and fall from their own steadfastness, this implies that those with steadfastness can lose their steadfastness. Does it not? If so, then apostates-to-be can show "steadfastness", just *like* the elect show "steadfastness".

Jesus Himself says in Matthew 24 that in the latter days "the love of many will grow cold". If their love was at one time *not* cold, then that is another way in which they were like those with *true faith*. And Paul says in 1 Tim 4: "Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons." How can they depart from the faith if they did not for some time at least appear very much to be like those following the faith?

And the author of the epistle to the Hebrews shows that people can be enlightened and made partakers of the Holy Spirit, and then fall away (Heb 6). While they are enlightened and partaking of the Holy Spirit, it sure seems that they would at least be *like* [though of coure not identical to] those with *true faith*.

This allows me to test and prove myself against what the scriptures say. While I still stumble, I can report that the "effects" are vastly one-sided. That is "an" evidence to me that I am of the elect.

But your "testing" here depends on a present ability to distinguish between the present *effects* in the lives of apostates-to-be and the present *effects* in the lives of the elect. But there is no evidence that we can presently distinguish between these effects, at least not until the apostates-to-be actually apostasize.

One thing I can't figure is why the Church is so invested in there NOT being assurance. Surely if God sent you an angel today to give you assurance you would accept it with thanksgiving. The Church is well aware of the multiple verses in the Bible (illustrated on this thread) which accomplish the same thing, yet it rejects them (via interpretation). Why is that?

It is not true that the Church is so invested in there not being assurance. As I have said before, assurance in Catholic theology is not the same as assurance in Calvinist theology. Only if one were to define 'assurance' as "present and certain knowledge that one is elect" would it be true that Catholic theology denies that we can (in this life) have assurance. But assurance in Catholic theology is not "present and certain knowledge that one is elect". Rather, it is a knowledge of God's promise that if we abide in Him He will not cut us off, that He will provide for all our needs, that He will not let us be tempted beyond what we can bear. But when we are tempted, He will also provide a way out so that we can stand up under it.

In addition, a number of us have asked you, in varying ways, to explain what the assurance verses are good for if no one can know if they apply to him. I do not recall a direct answer by you on this subject.

To do justice to your question, we should consider the assurance verses one by one. But to speak generally, these verses give us assurance in the sense I just mentioned above, not in the sense of "present and certain knowledge that one is elect". The verses about God's guarantee that He will lose none of His elect give us assurance about God's character and power; we don't have to worry about the Devil successfully snatching away the elect from Christ. But these verses don't give one "present and certain knowledge that one is elect".

Other times, one just "feels" led to go do something or other. Surely you have experienced this. I believe that the more mature a person's faith is, the more likely it is that he will perceive and act upon God's leadership. This is the sense I am talking about. In the instant case, I believe that God led me to interpret scripture (my guess would be to an 80-90% degree) in the Reformed tradition BEFORE I had even ever heard there was such a thing. I surmise that this was no accident and is an example of God's leadership (or my faith "speaking" to me).

I understand what you are saying. But I am wary of this sort of thing, in part because I was raised Pentecostal, and I saw all sorts of crazy things justified by claiming "God told me to say or do this", or "the Spirit led me to ...". I spent a summer talking with Mormons, and in doing so I came to understand the danger of depending on the "burning in the bosom". It is completely subjective. And so many people get so many contrary results from following this method. Moreover, it is quite gnostic. I'm not saying that the Holy Spirit cannot and does not speak to us internally. I'm saying that there has to be some *objective* way of testing such subjective leading; otherwise its a crap shoot.

In effect, it seems you are saying that we cannot have assurance because we cannot specifically differentiate ourselves from the "faith" of apostates-to-be. You appear to say that this is true because we cannot know the hearts of the apostates-to-be.

Correct, as long as by 'assurance' you mean "present and certain knowledge that one is elect".

HOWEVER, you seem to have no problem ASSUMING what the hearts of these people are.

No! I am not assuming *anything* about the hearts of apostates-to-be. I don't have to assume anything about the hearts of apostates-to-be to point out that you cannot differentate your "faith" from that of the apostates-to-be.

Let me say that you seem to be the only Calvinist here taking my comments seriously. I appreciate that.

-A8

I really don't like to bother you, but there a situation w/freep mail that I think you and other posters should know about.

Here's what I received a few minutes ago:

To the following Calvinist heretics: albion girl
I am sick and tired of seeing your heresy on this forum. See my profile page for a formal warning.
From his/her profile page:
WARNING TO ALL CALVINISTS HERETICS AND APOSTATES- especially Puritans and Dutch Calvinists! I do not like you! You destroy the beauty of man. I believe in religious plurality and free will except in your case in which you do not believe in religious plurality and free will in which case I then do not believe in religious plurality and free will and will work to destroy your religion and free will. If I had my druthers I would slit your noses and cut off your ears.
E.Strafford

Thanks for bringing this up.

By their fruitcakes you will know them

Wow. That's absolutely horrible. It sounds like something one might hear about in Pakistan or Egypt or Yemen. I'm very sorry you received that.

If the person who wrote that to you is reading this, please consider that violence and threats to violence are contrary both to reason and faith. That was a significant part of Pope Benedict's speech at Regensburg recently, which you can read about here. I hope and pray you will repent and apologize. Jesus told Peter to put away his sword. Let us never take it up again in the name of religion.

-A8

Thank you for your service, usarmymedic. It must be gratifying to save lives amid the turmoil of war.

Since leaving the Arminian and Dispensational frenzy years ago, I have been fascinated with the question of how I got there in the first place.

LOL. God takes us on many circuitous routes before He brings us home. I remember being filled with a dark malaise when I turned 20. I thought I had the world figured out and there were no questions left to answer. The world was a chunk of stardust and I just another speck. LOL. What a doofus. I didn't have a clue.

And then later when my Presbyterian father was dying, much too young, I told him I had found my faith again because it was important to him. But it was a lie to make him feel better. I was still very far away from God.

Then I sort of grew up and married and had children and responsibilities and solely by the grace of God, I returned to my faith. Only this time, with my ex-RC, vehemently Calvinistic husband's prodding, I read it again through new eyes, Reformed eyes. And it was like reading it for the first time.

We've talked about the assurance verses on this thread. While some insist they are not binding or particular, I find enormous security in believing they were written to me personally...and to everyone personally who believes Christ lived and died and rose for them because God wanted it so.

"These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer (have courage); I have overcome the world." -- John 16:33

"For this God is our God for ever and ever: He will be our guide even unto death." -- Psalm 48:14

Believers may know that they HAVE eternal life. I happen to believe it and make no "logic" contrary to the Logos of Theos which calls him a Liar. Let God be true.

Amen.

I came across this verse the other day and am fascinated by it, where Paul chastises the church at Corinth...

"Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse.
For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it.
For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you." -- 1 Corinthians 11:17-19

Even the errors, lies and heresies are given by God in order that the truth stand out more clearly -- all for His glory and the welfare of His saints.

I find enormous security in believing they were written to me personally

This is why Marx thought that religion is the opiate of the masses, because people often believe x not because they have good reason to believe x is true, but simply because it makes them feel good to believe x. What has not been shown in this thread is precisely any reason to believe that passages concerning the elect are addressed personally to you, at least not so as to inform you that you are elect.

-A8

Um, I think I might have over-reacted. I was thinking maybe once, just once, I could see just what use I could really make of all these vowels in my name. :)

Anyway, here's the first part of his profile page, which had I read in total, and according to the FBI, would definitely have been a clue:

My screenname is in honor of my hero the first Earl of Strafford. This was a man that knew how to keep heretics in line. I believe the tactics used by the Earl to keep the subjects loyal to the honorable Archbishop Laud should be reinstated in the Churches today. I believe in diversity of religious opinions and the free will of all men. I like Catholics, Orthodox, Free will Baptists, Methodists, Wesleyians, non-denominational seeker sensitives, tounges-babbling Pentecostalists and Charismatics and other Spiritists, Open Theists including Process and Post-Modern types, self-professed new age psuedo-scientism prophetess', poor-humored sensitive attornies of all stripes, and emotive males who's wives wear the pants in their families.

Now, I think I'm in love. /kidding

Now, I think I'm in love. /kidding

ROTFL!!!

What has not been shown in this thread is precisely any reason to believe that passages concerning the elect are addressed personally to you, at least not so as to inform you that you are elect.

What has been shown on this thread is that some people believe Scripture and some don't.

It's just that simple.

Now, I think I'm in love. /kidding

Serial killers make good money, selling their artwork and stuff on the net. He may have possibilities

Nice tagline.