Understanding God’s election

[studier]

Interpreting John5 re: Election:

In John5 Jesus speaks of belief (“they” below = the Judeans in Jerusalem seeking to kill Jesus for allegedly violating Sabbath):

• John5:38 They don’t believe Jesus
  • They don’t have God’s word abiding in them
  • John5:37 They’ve not heard God’s voice/testimony nor seen God
• John5:44 They cannot (not able to) believe
  • They receive honor from one another
    • John 5:43 They do not receive Jesus
    • They receive men of reputation
  • They do not seek honor from God

I’ve outlined 5:43-44 as I did because it seems chiastic – the first and fourth points are parallel as are the second and third points. The parallelism elaborates what is meant.

IMO, there is a language issue in John5:38 having to do with the conjunction “hoti” that English translations translate as “for” or “because”.

NET John 5:38 nor do you have his word residing in you, because you do not believe the one whom he sent.​

​

ESV John 5:38 and you do not have his word abiding in you, for you do not believe the one whom he has sent.​

@PaulThomson how do you read this word and would you explain it in the flow of what’s said in 5:37-38? IOW, does it makes sense in your opinion that it’s causal as the NET and others translate it?

This leads into 5:39-40 where Jesus speaks of Eternal Life and coming to Jesus which was the big discussion re: John6 and the Father’s drawing. At the moment it looks to me like Jesus is fairly clear at least in very close context as to why they do not will/desire/choose to come to Jesus.

 

[Rufus]

PaulThomson said:


What, in the context of John 12:32, makes it natural to infer that pantas (accusative masculine plural) refers to all nations (ethnE accusative neuter plural) rather than all men (anthropous: accusative masculine plural)?

In Greek pantas ethnE (all nations) is a gender mismatch grammatically. pantas (masculine plural) (ethnE) (neuter plural).

pantas anthrOpous (all men) is a match in terms of gender. pantas (masculine plural) anthrOpous (masculine plural)

If it's so natural, then why isn't the Gr. term for "men" in the manuscripts? Also, "pantas" is used in Act 3:25 with the Gr. term "patria" (Strong's 3965) which most translators render "families" or "kindreds" or "peoples". See also Mat 24:30; Rev 1:7; 5:9; 13:7 in which "pantas" is used with Gr. term "fulai" (Strong's 5443) and the term is also rendered "kindred(s)" or "tribe(s)".

Another reason to seriously question the "men" translation is that that term doesn't square with the Abrhamic Covenant. God never promised Abraham that He would make him the father of all men -- but rather the father of many nations or peoples. So, why would God give and draw all men in the distributive sense to his Son when God's promise to Abraham is limited since he is giving nations or peoples to the patriach in the collective sense.

A third reason, I personally reject the "men" translation is because John frequently used "universal" terms in a narrow sense.

A fourth reason, I reject "men" is because "all" is often used in the NT in a collective (limited) sense.

 

[GWH]

Yeah but Jesus wasn't born of Adam, He was born of the Spirit, so you're point doesn't exist. Are you really comparing Jesus to us?

Yes. Who else should be our spiritual role model? (GL 4:19, PHP 1:27 & 2:5, COL 3:1&5)

 

[BillyBob]

Brief explanation of fallen man and how they are saved:

• We are all dead in trespass and sin! A dead person cannot help themselves!
• Therefore, God sends His son to save them.
• God sends ministers to teach about His son.
• God sends His Spirit to bring the elect to faith.

Given that the above is true and you are a Christian, then ask yourselves why do some believe and others do not?

There are only two answers unless you fudge it in some way.

• Either we are better, more moral, and wiser than those who do not believe. Or
• We believe because God gave us this gift! We are not better, more moral or wiser – but it is by grace that we are saved.
  
  

 

[studier]

Brief explanation of fallen man and how they are saved:

• We are all dead in trespass and sin! A dead person cannot help themselves!
• Therefore, God sends His son to save them.
• God sends ministers to teach about His son.
• God sends His Spirit to bring the elect to faith.

Given that the above is true and you are a Christian, then ask yourselves why do some believe and others do not?

There are only two answers unless you fudge it in some way.

• Either we are better, more moral, and wiser than those who do not believe. Or
• We believe because God gave us this gift! We are not better, more moral or wiser – but it is by grace that we are saved.
  

I suppose this is to me, so I'll answer according to your points:

• Your second sentence is an interpretive tradition not accepted by many of us as it is explained in greater detail. No man can save himself, but spiritual death is interpreted differently according to different interpretations.
• Rewritten per just above - No man can save himself therefore God sent His son to save them.
• Agreed. And some time ago that Minister was our Lord Himself. There are many questions that arise here that I'll pass on for now because I don't want to debate Calvinism in broad strokes.
• Some would counter that those who believe become the elect. I think there may be some information about this in John6 which is why I jumped into the fray. Some would say that in a sense both statements could be correct, but they'd want to separate all the TULIP tradition and discuss it point by point. Some would want to clarify the role of the Spirit.

The above (that you said and I quoted) is true to you and to some others but not to all as discussions like this thread and countless articles and debates over the centuries show. I and many others have asked your posed question over millennia. I don't know all the reasons but I'm seeing some of them in the info I'm posting re: John5.

There are more answers than you state and again I'm seeing some in John5 that are not readily identifiable in your 2 points. So maybe you're fudging to make your 2 answers the only answers to fit your favored interpretive tradition or maybe these are as far as you've gotten in your reasoning in the Scriptures or... Salvation is indeed a gift, and we are indeed saved by grace through faith because Scripture clearly says this. But the gift of faith which I believe you're referring to is debated and IMO debatable requiring much discussion. Threads like this will rarely if ever go through all the work necessary to wring out such issues. The only one I see posting this type of work is @GWH. Maybe others here have done such topical studies, but I don't see evidence of it.

So, it's not about being better at all. And this is what I posted to you and to @Jimbone. We who do not agree with a certain interpretive tradition should not be placed into a judgment of our intentions or supposed self-superiority by other Christians. I can assure you that some of us base our thinking on how we interpret Scripture and that some of us left interpretive traditions battling against each other in order to be more personally responsible for our own work in the Text in Christ in Spirit.

 

[BillyBob]

I suppose this is to me, so I'll answer according to your points:

My post was not to you as much as the entire group who follow this thread. However, you comments are welcome.

And this is what I posted to you and to @Jimbone. We who do not agree with a certain interpretive tradition should not be placed into a judgment of our intentions or supposed self-superiority by other Christians. I can assure you that some of us base our thinking on how we interpret Scripture and that some of us left interpretive traditions battling against each other in order to be more personally responsible for our own work in the Text in Christ in Spirit.

I don't want to speak for jimbone, but I think that we both agreed that man's attempt to rob God of His glory is a far deeper problem than posting on CC. As for myself, I know that I fall into this trap even though I am a Christian and I pray that this thorn will be removed and that I will cease to do this.

 

[Rufus]

I suppose this is to me, so I'll answer according to your points:

• Your second sentence is an interpretive tradition not accepted by many of us as it is explained in greater detail. No man can save himself, but spiritual death is interpreted differently according to different interpretations.
• Rewritten per just above - No man can save himself therefore God sent His son to save them.
• Agreed. And some time ago that Minister was our Lord Himself. There are many questions that arise here that I'll pass on for now because I don't want to debate Calvinism in broad strokes.
• Some would counter that those who believe become the elect. I think there may be some information about this in John6 which is why I jumped into the fray. Some would say that in a sense both statements could be correct, but they'd want to separate all the TULIP tradition and discuss it point by point. Some would want to clarify the role of the Spirit.

The above (that you said and I quoted) is true to you and to some others but not to all as discussions like this thread and countless articles and debates over the centuries show. I and many others have asked your posed question over millennia. I don't know all the reasons but I'm seeing some of them in the info I'm posting re: John5.

There are more answers than you state and again I'm seeing some in John5 that are not readily identifiable in your 2 points. So maybe you're fudging to make your 2 answers the only answers to fit your favored interpretive tradition or maybe these are as far as you've gotten in your reasoning in the Scriptures or... Salvation is indeed a gift, and we are indeed saved by grace through faith because Scripture clearly says this. But the gift of faith which I believe you're referring to is debated and IMO debatable requiring much discussion. Threads like this will rarely if ever go through all the work necessary to wring out such issues. The only one I see posting this type of work is @GWH. Maybe others here have done such topical studies, but I don't see evidence of it.

So, it's not about being better at all. And this is what I posted to you and to @Jimbone. We who do not agree with a certain interpretive tradition should not be placed into a judgment of our intentions or supposed self-superiority by other Christians. I can assure you that some of us base our thinking on how we interpret Scripture and that some of us left interpretive traditions battling against each other in order to be more personally responsible for our own work in the Text in Christ in Spirit.

It's a legitimate question since many "interpretative traditions" have an anti-God, anti-grace or anti-gospel bias associated with them. In the FW ("freewill") "interpretative tradition" it is generally believed that God would never interfere with or impose his will upon anyone's will; for that would be tantamount to God "forcing" people to come into his kingdom, or to come to Christ, or to come to faith and repentance, etc. Moreover, God would never presume to take it upon himself to determine or decree anyone's eternal destiny. Man's destiny is so sacrosanct that God could only be just and fair if he allowed each person to determine his own fate. So...the bottom line to all this is that man is the ultimate arbiter of his own eternal fate. The buck stops with Man, not God! Man is the "pilot" of his ship and God is merely the "co-pilot". Therefore, Jimbones's question is perfectly legitimate as it pertains to the implications of these various "interpreative traditions". Either God makes the difference between two sinners and why one truly believes and repents and why the other one doesn't OR the difference lies in the two individual sinners themselves. Clearly, the theological implications to FWT (freewill theology) is that since man is ultimately in control of his own spiritual destiny, then any man (whether he chooses to believe the gospel or not), that inviducal sinner logically must make the difference between opposing spiritual choices. This must be case since the salvation buck does not stop with God!

Here's another question you will not like. It's one I asked a few weeks ago and received no replies from any FWer, save for Genez's evasive and rebuking-type answer. Since the salvation buck ultimately stops with every sinner and God's grace is not efficacious then why would any Christian pray TO God for the salvation of any sinner, since God doesn't actually save anyone until a sinner himself chooses to be saved? Shouldn't Christians be praying TO the sinner since the choice is ultimately his and God cannot or will not cause his salvaton? Since a person's eternal destiny resides in his individual power of choice, shouldn't we be praying to those who hold that power?

 

[BillyBob]

Here's another question you will not like. It's one I asked a few weeks ago and received no replies from any FWer, save for Genez's evasive and rebuking-type answer. Since the salvation buck ultimately stops with every sinner and God's grace is not efficacious then why would any Christian pray TO God for the salvation of any sinner, since God doesn't actually save anyone until a sinner himself chooses to be saved? Shouldn't Christians be praying TO the sinner since the choice is ultimately his and God cannot or will not cause his salvaton? Since a person's eternal destiny resides in his individual power of choice, shouldn't we be praying to those who hold that power?

I must admit that I am not Genez! However, I just want to say that this is an excellent point and one that I have never considered. Thanks.................

 

[Cameron143]

I must admit that I am not Genez! However, I just want to say that this is an excellent point and one that I have never considered. Thanks.................

It's an excellent point. And why intercede for anyone for anything?

Wait...isn't Jesus interceding on our behalf...Hebrews 7:25? Isn't the Spirit making intercession on behalf of the saints...Romans 8:26-27?

Just what are Those guys up to?

 

[Kroogz]

At some level neither side takes the position that Salvation is not from God alone and to Him is the glory.

Wait a sec. Election is the calvies/reformed "Glory."

Not Gods love, justice,righteousness,omniscience, omnipotence .....It's Just sovereignty in the calvies eyes.......A attribute of God that IS NOT eternal. His sovereignty did begin UNTIL he created time and beings that needed rule.

 

[studier]

Wait a sec. Election is the calvies/reformed "Glory."

Not Gods love, justice,righteousness,omniscience, omnipotence .....It's Just sovereignty in the calvies eyes.......A attribute of God that IS NOT eternal. His sovereignty did begin UNTIL he created time and beings that needed rule.

Note "At some level..."

There's normally inconsistency in all groups. We can read in this thread the allegation(s) made against opposing thinkers in respect to God's Glory. Honestly I'm not getting into that tradition in general. It's not difficult to see that 9,310 posts resolve nothing and as one poster said have not done much of anything to bring about "understanding God's election" per the OP.

 

[Kroogz]

Here's another question you will not like. It's one I asked a few weeks ago and received no replies from any FWer, save for Genez's evasive and rebuking-type answer. Since the salvation buck ultimately stops with every sinner and God's grace is not efficacious then why would any Christian pray TO God for the salvation of any sinner, since God doesn't actually save anyone until a sinner himself chooses to be saved?

Any believer with any doctrine knows we cannot pray to God to save someone. We pray for God to guide us to be open and willing to say things that will open eyes and ears to His Gospel.

Not like you...YOU want to shut every sinner and seeker out. You should really look at yourself. Your posts and everyone else who is "following" you is pushing everyone AWAY from His Gospel.

Shame. I mean SHAME on you.

Any unbeliever reading this thread....Jesus Christ died and rose for YOU. He asks that YOU believe upon Him for salvation. If you believe in Him......You have eternal life. You will NEVER perish. There is no condemnation. Don't believe these antagonistic folks that you "can't" believe..............He died for you and you CAN believe it.