Easy.
A plain reading of this text would be that God loves all of us, even though we are rebels, and that he offers us salvation if we believe. And if we believe, we will receive life. Nothing in that verse or hundreds of others suggests God makes those decisions for us, or that he secretly gives us life without our knowing or believing.
OK, thank you for answering. I believe you are the first Arminian who has admitted to me that not only does God leave some things to chance, but that He leaves the most important thing of all to chance, the salvation and eternal destiny of those He loves. If true, I think this view would tell us volumes about the true character and nature of our God. In His beautiful, loving, and omnipotent hands He holds and sustains our very lives, His creations, and yet with His love for us that is far beyond our wildest imaginations He leaves whether we will spend forever with Him or forever apart from Him to chance? I just don't see this God described anywhere in the Bible. If God's love is to have any real truth and power, then it takes no chances. There is no need.
[From the passage quoted:] “According to this verse, the basis of our being predestined is not something that we do or will do, but is based solely on the will of God for His own pleasure.”
True. Now define ‘predestined’. Election would be a better word anyways, but is it corporate (effective in Christ) or individual?
Many people use predestine and election interchangeably, but I consider predestining to be bigger. That is, I believe God's entire plan is predestined, and a part of that plan includes electing those He so chooses. I believe that corporate election necessarily entails random results, as discussed above, and would also show that God's preference is to have only a corporate relationship with us rather than a personal one. Given His unused omnipotence, in a corporate relationship God would not care whether I chose Him AS OPPOSED to any other choosing Him. The "whosoever" could wind up being any number, however it works out (granting that God would already know).
Again, I do not see this God described in the scriptures. Rather, I see a God who wants a PERSONAL relationship with each of His individual children. I see a God who wants to have intimate communication with ME, His beloved child, whom He chose to save, by name, from the foundations, for reasons having nothing to do with my merit, and known only to Him. In the way God has changed my life and continues to bless me and keep me I KNOW that I am not simply one in the batch who chose Him. I am one whom HE went out of His way to choose and love. And yes, He chose me and not the next guy. I don't know why, as I know I have ZERO claim to be chosen. All I can do is be awestruck, and thankful, and loving, and obedient, and sanctified, again all by Him.
And even though this is easy for me to say, I am not worried at all that this is not fair. If I got "fair" then I will be rotting in hell. That would be fair for everyone. All we believers can do is be thankful that our merciful God did not give us fair.
As written, those verses could support either. However, corporate election makes all the verses about our believing and receiving life make sense in the plain text.
And my contention is that reading grates against the nature and love of God that we are told of in scriptures. Just try to imagine the person you would be if all you could say is that you chose to love your own children corporately. Sure, you might equally not want misfortune to befall any of them, but your relationships with them would all be different and all also in love, i.e. not corporate. So it is with God and His children. Yes He loves all of us, but in a personal way, not in a corporate way. He leads us differently, He communicates with us differently, He sanctifies us differently, He blesses us differently, He challenges us differently, etc. The list goes on and on. All of these differences are revealed in scripture. They show the love of a Personal God.
Jesus also said, “...you refuse to come to me that you may have life.” Jesus, as God, knew full well who would or would not believe (foreknowledge). However, he also made it clear that ANYONE who comes will receive life, and those who refuse will remain in death.
This is all true. He was explaining to them and us what the playing out of the rules looked like and what a Christian looked like.
I’m still waiting to hear the verse that says, “I gave you life that you might believe” instead of “these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.”
Well, in the way I "think" you are using it, "life" is not the same as regeneration. Even though election is a "package deal" and so this is all academic, the technical order would be regeneration first, then belief, then awarding of eternal life.
Calvinism says we are given life first, and then given belief as a gift. John wrote, “by believing you may have life”.
This could be a matter of semantics, which would not be surprising given that it's all within the guaranteed package deal. If you have a specific quote I would be happy to respond to it.
Calvinism says the only ones who will believe are the ones God irresistibly calls, while Jesus said, “Whosoever believeth”.
Yes, both are true and do not conflict. Given that we all agree that God already knows the names of all the whosoever(s), Calvinism explains WHY the whosoever ARE the whosoever. Jesus simply does not address that issue in verses like John 3:16. Rather, God discusses that issue in the verses we have been giving you.
Those who believe are incorporate in Christ:
Yes, we are set apart from those who are not in Christ, but this does not mean that God deals with us identically on the basis of being in the one group. All of our walks with Christ are different because He saves us and deals with us as individuals, on a personal (and wonderful) basis. At a given time are not my needs different from those of my brothers and sisters in Christ? Of course, and God deals with all of our needs, again, on an individual basis.
No, I’m not holding my breath waiting for Forest Keeper or blue-duncan to join the Society of Evangelical Arminians! I’d be glad if you did, but somethings must be left with God. And when we see him face to face, I doubt predestination vs free will is going to be on our minds or lips!
Oh, when there's a break, I'll want to know. LOL!
My Calvinist former Sunday School teacher and I went hiking & looking for rattlesnakes last week. And we are both praying for each other...not about PD/FW, but about the trials of life.
I am very happy to hear there don't appear to be any hard feelings on either side about what happened. Sadly, I have seen hard feelings from some who have left our church for this or that reason not related to moving. I continue to wish you all the best in your search. Sounds like that old guy had a John the Baptist style to him. Jesus approved so it sounds good to me. :)
I don’t have much time right now, and will reply better later, but this stuck out:
“I believe you are the first Arminian who has admitted to me that not only does God leave some things to chance, but that He leaves the most important thing of all to chance, the salvation and eternal destiny of those He loves.”
I said choice, not chance. God deliberately gives us that choice, rather than making it for us.
Yes, this means we are not chosen for salvation before creation, although the end result is known before creation. And this makes all those verses about needing to believe, and about our receiving life by believing, and about entering into the grace on which we stand by faith meaningful verses.
If we have no choice in it, then the only critical link in our salvation is election. If elect, according to Calvin, we are predestined to salvation no matter what, and the verses about belief are a lie - for we don’t receive life by believing, but by being elect. We enter into grace, not by faith, but by election. We are saved by grace thru election, not thru faith.
More later.