Conditional or Unconditional Election?

[apostoli]

Yes, well, even granting the doctrine of the trinity, the fact remains: the New Testament authors almost exclusively refer to the Father by the simple designation "God" (theos).

As any literate fool can easily discern!!!

[The Remonstrant]

Just as a matter of clarification: When you guys use the idea "God", who do you mean - the Father, Son, Holy Spirit or all three? If you attend to scripture your only answer can be the Father, who sent his Son to be the saviour of the world (nb: note A.John quoting Jesus testifies that the Son did not come as a result of his own volition)...

God, The Father; God, The Son & God, The Holy Spirit. One God. God Is Spirit. The three persons of the trinity; God

Yes, well, even granting the doctrine of the trinity, the fact remains: the New Testament authors almost exclusively refer to the Father by the simple designation "God" (theos).

As any literate fool can easily discern!!!

Unfortunately, evangelicals are prone to being rather sloppy in their God-talk. While we may affirm the deity of Jesus, we must keep in mind that the Father and the Son are distinct persons (as I believe you have already noted). It is true that the Son was sent by the Father, but not vice versa. So it is not proper to simply say, "God did such and such; therefore, Jesus did such and such." It is too easy for some to veer into modalistic lines of thought. We must keep in mind that the Father never became incarnate; the Father was never crucified; the Father never prayed to or petitioned the Son; the Holy Spirit never sent the Son; the Holy Spirit is not the high priest of the saints; &c. (The other error to stay away from is tri-theism. We do not believe in three distinct gods.)

[apostoli]

[SIZE=3]The other error to stay away from is tri-theism. We do not believe in three distinct gods.

Very true!!! Modalism is so easy to trip into when discussing the Tri-unity (Trinity) as is tri-theism. That is why all valid Christians (the majority orthodox church) recite the Nicene Creed at each service, and include the homoousious (consubstantial) clause...The Creed begins "I (we) believe in one God the Father..." Anyone who challengers such a declaration has been considered heretical since the early four century...

[The Remonstrant]

Very true!!! Modalism is so easy to trip into when discussing the Tri-unity (Trinity) as is tri-theism. That is why all valid Christians (the majority orthodox church) recite the Nicene Creed at each service, and include the homoousious (consubstantial) clause...The Creed begins "I (we) believe in one God the Father..." Anyone who challengers such a declaration has been considered heretical since the early four century...

I appreciate your observations, my friend. It's really nice to have someone to agree with on T-Web for a change.

Postscript: For whatever the reason, I seem to get along better with non-American Christians (unfortunately I am a native to "the States").

[apostoli]

Postscript: For whatever the reason, I seem to get along better with non-American Christians (unfortunately I am a native to "the States").

It is simply a matter of history. My country is younger than yours, unfortunately yours attracted in its early days people representative of every European heresy, which caused something of a melting pot. Hence we encounter the rise of the Millerites, Seventh Day Adventists, Christadelphians, Jehovah's Witnesses, Mormons, the KKK, Oneness Pentecostals, the non-denominational churches and the various independent churches, who do whatever they do... In my country, until WWII, we have basically been divided between between the RCC and the CoE (ie: how to be Catholic without acknowledging the Pope ;-).

[apostoli]

It occurred to me that I and others are heading away from the thread's topic = "Conditional or Unconditional Election?" Personally, on the basis of the scriptural witness, I hold all things conditional, particularly immortality...In short I reject the protestant idea of predetermination...

[Dante]

It occurred to me that I and others are heading away from the thread's topic = "Conditional or Unconditional Election?" Personally, on the basis of the scriptural witness, I hold all things conditional, particularly immortality...In short I reject the protestant idea of predetermination...

The idea of predetermination is not uniquely Protestant, since Augustine also held to it. Not all Protestants hold to the idea of predetermination either. But, to be sure, predestination is in the Bible, yet the dispute is in its extent. To dispute predestination is to deny Scripture.

I hold that election is in Christ, meaning conditional upon our choosing to have faith in Christ when we are called.

[phat8594]

The idea of predetermination is not uniquely Protestant, since Augustine also held to it. Not all Protestants hold to the idea of predetermination either. But, to be sure, predestination is in the Bible, yet the dispute is in its extent. To dispute predestination is to deny Scripture.

I hold that election is in Christ, meaning conditional upon our choosing to have faith in Christ when we are called.

The issue really is what does 'predestine' mean, Biblically speaking. In other words, "Who is predestined to what?"

IMO, most peopel are told what predestination means (individual unconditional election to salvation) and then when they read the word 'predestine' in scripture, they go 'Aha! The Bible teaches individual unconditional election to salvation)'. Of course, most people don't realize that they have been theologically preprogrammed in a sense as to what the Bible teaches and what words mean Biblically before even encountering the text and context in which the words are used.

[RBerman]

The issue really is what does 'predestine' mean, Biblically speaking. In other words, "Who is predestined to what?"

IMO, most peopel are told what predestination means (individual unconditional election to salvation) and then when they read the word 'predestine' in scripture, they go 'Aha! The Bible teaches individual unconditional election to salvation)'. Of course, most people don't realize that they have been theologically preprogrammed in a sense as to what the Bible teaches and what words mean Biblically before even encountering the text and context in which the words are used.

In my experience, most people have heard that predestine = Calvinism = bad, and they get confused when you show them that "predestine" is a word in the Bible. They haven't really been taught the doctrinal issues involved even for their own side, let alone the other side.

[phat8594]

In my experience, most people have heard that predestine = Calvinism = bad, and they get confused when you show them that "predestine" is a word in the Bible. They haven't really been taught the doctrinal issues involved even for their own side, let alone the other side.

To be fair, many Christians who aren't Calvinist don't put an emphasis on 'predestination'.

But in either case, your experience backs up what I was saying in that people are taught about a word, before even reading the text. Whether its good or bad and what the meaning of the word is. So in this case, it seems that the theological implication prior to reading the text (whether pro or con) seems to be that 'predestine' = Calvinism (i.e. individual unconditional election to salvation).

But I am sure that you know me well enough by now to know that I don't believe that definition is what is meant with regards to its usage in the text.

[Dante]

predetermined.jpg

Or if the above doesn't work: