Announcement

Collapse

Theology 201 Guidelines

This is the forum to discuss the spectrum of views within Christianity on God's foreknowledge and election such as Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Open Theism, Process Theism, Restrictivism, and Inclusivism, Christian Universalism and what these all are about anyway. Who is saved and when is/was their salvation certain? How does God exercise His sovereignty and how powerful is He? Is God timeless and immutable? Does a triune God help better understand God's love for mankind?

While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.

Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.

Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

What biblical passage do you find most problematic for your view on election?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • What biblical passage do you find most problematic for your view on election?

    I'm always curious what people view as the strongest arguments for the other side. For example, as an Arminian, I find 1 John 2:19 to be the most difficult verse to contend with, and to be honest, I've never seen an Arminian explanation of it that I find truly satisfying. I.H. Marshall doesn't mention it in his classic defense of conditional security, Kept By The Power of God, and in his commentary on the Epistles of John, he doesn't attempt to "explain it away" at all.
    "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

  • #2
    Well i dunno. I'm more of a molinist/classical theist, and I haven't really given too much consideration to argue for or against viewpoints. But...there's an old joke about Baptists put 3 in a room to discuss one verse you'll end up with 5 churches.
    A happy family is but an earlier heaven.
    George Bernard Shaw

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Catholicity View Post
      Well i dunno. I'm more of a molinist/classical theist, and I haven't really given too much consideration to argue for or against viewpoints. But...there's an old joke about Baptists put 3 in a room to discuss one verse you'll end up with 5 churches.
      I'm not really all that dogmatic about it for the most part. At this point in time, I'm content to see the mechanisms as something we couldn't possibly understand and aren't meant to.
      "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

      Comment


      • #4
        As a Calvinist, I find the universalist flavor of Col 1:20 and 1 John 2:2 to require more explaining than many verses do. Not that it can't be done, but I can certainly see how a first reading could lead someone to conclusions I consider incorrect.

        Comment


        • #5
          As a Molinist, I'd have to say that John 6:44 is the most difficult for me to explain.
          That's what
          - She

          Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
          - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

          I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
          Stephen R. Donaldson

          Comment


          • #6
            To be honest, I tend to have problems with proof texts in general - as they tend to be a pretext to 'prove' whatever a person wants. I think if we are honest, most 'proof' texts seems to be a problem until context of the book is brought in. I have a hard time believing that the authors were giving dissertations on soteriology as we sometimes want to make it seem.


            and...

            Anyone ever wonder if the church spent as much time evangelizing as it did arguing about calvinism, there would be a lot more people in the church? Or is that just an arminian way of thinking?
            Last edited by phat8594; 02-04-2014, 07:54 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by phat8594 View Post
              To be honest, I tend to have problems with proof texts in general - as they tend to be a pretext to 'prove' whatever a person wants. I think if we are honest, most 'proof' texts seems to be a problem until context of the book is brought in. I have a hard time believing that the authors were giving dissertations on soteriology as we sometimes want to make it seem.


              and...

              Anyone ever wonder if the church spent as much time evangelizing as it did arguing about calvinism, there would be a lot more people in the church? Or is that just an arminian way of thinking?
              As for the first point: I'd agree, which is why we have these differing views in the first place. As for the second, well, not touching that one
              "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by phat8594 View Post
                To be honest, I tend to have problems with proof texts in general - as they tend to be a pretext to 'prove' whatever a person wants. I think if we are honest, most 'proof' texts seems to be a problem until context of the book is brought in. I have a hard time believing that the authors were giving dissertations on soteriology as we sometimes want to make it seem.

                and...Anyone ever wonder if the church spent as much time evangelizing as it did arguing about calvinism, there would be a lot more people in the church? Or is that just an arminian way of thinking?
                Welcome back! I agree that context solves a lot of these apparent proof-textual problems. As to the latter, I don't see the Church spending a lot of time arguing about Calvinism. Most Arminians in my community have never actually talked about Calvinism to a Calvinist, and their view is simply a thirdhand caricature. But yes, on fora such as this board, I do think it's a good idea not to continually debate the same questions with the same people once it's been established that neither person is convinced by the other.

                Comment


                • #9
                  .
                  Last edited by GoBahnsen; 02-06-2014, 12:56 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    .
                    Last edited by GoBahnsen; 02-06-2014, 12:57 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Yeah, I'm not a fan of philosophical arguments at all. I'm not an Arminian because of my view of God; it's what I legitimately see in Scripture (though not without tensions).

                      I've been dialoguing with some universalists in a Facebook group, and philosophy is pretty much all they have. And the Romans 9 passage you mention is really the best response.
                      "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Well, I am still working out my view between Molinism, Arminianism and Calvinism. I love the Molinist point of view, I just have not yet seen adequate scriptural evidence of it's truth. So I would at the moment probably describe myself as a non-calvinist, since I believe there are major problems with a couple of the major points, especially limited atonement and unconditional election. Thus, Romans 9-11 have been problem passages for me in the past. However, I am looking forward to discussing more in these forums to hone in on my own view, as well as seeing what other people believe.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I think Molinism is essentially impossible to prove or disprove because the Bible says nothing about it at all. I do think the popular "nobody who isn't evangelized would have ever accepted the gospel anyway" version is refuted by Luke 10:13.
                          "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                            I'm not really all that dogmatic about it for the most part. At this point in time, I'm content to see the mechanisms as something we couldn't possibly understand and aren't meant to.
                            Kind of the position I've taken up. Was a Molinist, but I can see very strong texts for all arguments, so I just tend to say that the precise mechanism is beyond human understanding.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                              I'm always curious what people view as the strongest arguments for the other side. For example, as an Arminian, I find 1 John 2:19 to be the most difficult verse to contend with, and to be honest, I've never seen an Arminian explanation of it that I find truly satisfying. I.H. Marshall doesn't mention it in his classic defense of conditional security, Kept By The Power of God, and in his commentary on the Epistles of John, he doesn't attempt to "explain it away" at all.
                              I could never pick a side between calvinist or arminian so my answer is whatever happens,happens.
                              "Kahahaha! Let's get lunatic!"-Add LP
                              "And the Devil did grin, for his darling sin is pride that apes humility"-Samuel Taylor Coleridge
                              Oh ye of little fiber. Do you not know what I've done for you? You will obey. ~Cerealman for Prez.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by Kenneth Roberson, 11-08-2020, 09:37 AM
                              5 responses
                              56 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Kenneth Roberson  
                              Started by footwasher, 11-03-2020, 01:24 AM
                              19 responses
                              93 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post footwasher  
                              Started by lee_merrill, 06-29-2020, 06:29 PM
                              241 responses
                              2,433 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post footwasher  
                              Working...
                              X