- RSS FeedSubscribe
- « Previous PostA La Carte (12/15)
- Next Post »A La Carte (12/16)
One in a Sea of Faces
- 12/15/08
- 36
The fifth chapter of John presents us with a pitiful scene. It is the Sabbath day and in Jerusalem, gathered around a pool by the Sheep Gate, is a great multitude of men and women. Some of them are lying on the ground, stricken with sores. Others are paralyzed or have shriveled limbs. Still others are blind or lame. All of these people are waiting by the edge of this little pool, for they believe that every now and again an angel stirs the water and immediately afterward the first person to step into the pool receives instant healing. History does not tell us if there is some foundation to this practice or if it is mere rumor. Either way, many wretched souls wait day after day by the edge of this pool, desperate for healing.
Jesus enters the city on this day and surveys the scene before Him. Moved with compassion, he approaches a certain man--just one man in a sea of faces--a man who has been an invalid for thirty-eight long years. We do not know why he chooses this one person out of the crowd. What we do know is that Jesus asks him a simple question; an obvious question and one which is answered by the man's mere presence. Jesus asks "Do you want to be made well?" The man, who is sick and nearly immobile, answers that of course he wanted to be made well! He would not be spending his days waiting by the edge of this pool if he were not holding out hope that he could be made well. The problem, of course, is that he is helpless, and whenever the waters stir and he has the opportunity to be healed, another person with greater mobility beats him in. He is unable to help himself; he must be bitter, depressed. While others are claiming their healing, this man lays helplessly, missing chance after chance.
The Lord has pity on Him. To this one man he says "Rise, take up your bed and walk." And in that very instant the man is healed. His legs, useless for thirty-eight years, are suddenly and completely strengthened and healed. He rises up, takes his bed with him and walks away. In this brief instant, Jesus performs one of the thousands of miracles designed to prove that he is the very Son of God.
Is Jesus unjust to heal this man? Is it wrong for Him to do so? Of course not! It is an act of great mercy. Jesus has pity on a poor, helpless man and takes away his infirmity. He turns to a man who has no hope and gives him exactly what he needed. He gives him a new chance at life!
Is Jesus unjust to heal only this man? Is it wrong for him to heal that one person and leave the others still waiting for their miracle? No! Jesus is able to choose the person to whom he will extend an act of such grace. No one can say it is unjust for Jesus to heal just one man. He has mercy on whom he chooses to have mercy.
There is a beautiful parallel between this story and the Father's work in choosing some for eternal life. In the same way that Jesus was able to choose those whom he would heal, God is able to choose the ones whom he will forgive. He is not unjust to choose one and not another. All are equally helpless before him. God tells us "I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion." And for some reason his mercy extends to me--He has picked my face out of this crowd of sick, desperate people who are looking everywhere but at him and has given me new life. I thank God that his compassion extends even to a sinner like me.
I am a follower of Jesus Christ, a husband to Aileen and a father to three young children. I write books and blogs for fun while doing web design and consulting for a living. I worship and serve at 
Published in 2008, this book
This is a guide that calls men,
This review of the bestselling
New to the site? You can get
Comments (36)
I have no intention of accusing God of injustice here, but I think it is not so easy to gloss over this issue as one where God does not have to save anyone so if He saves anyone it is grace and we ought to leave it at that. Certainly God does not have to do anything, we do not have sovereignty over Him but vice versa.
However...
Why do you think that in normal human terms people would see grace and not injustice if in a shipwreck I pulled one person from the water, but not everyone? I think that would be seen as grace because everyone would assume that I saved as many as I could. No one assumes I am capable of pulling everyone out, so the fact that I risked myself to save any is an act of mercy and love.
What though would people think if in a shipwreck I had the capacity to save every single person in the water, but only picked a few to save? Now I did not pick them because of any specific merit, but I still decided to pick a few and not save others even though I could have. Would people still see this as a heroic gracious act? Or would they be angry that I did not save everyone even though I was fully able to?
Don’t take this the wrong way, I am not mocking Calvinism or anything like that. In fact I lean heavily toward Calvinism myself. At the same time there are problems the system causes, which I have been personally wrestling through on my blog, and I think this is one. For in Calvinism anyone God elects to save gets saved, there is a zero percent failure rate, and if that is so how can we be ok with the obvious conclusion that God is choosing not to save people He easily could? At least Arminianism, for all its weaknesses, can avoid this problem.
I love this post. It really makes you think about your place as a Christian and gives greater insight to the compassion of Jesus Christ. I am encouraged by this post to show more compassion today.
"He has picked my face out of this crowd of sick, desperate people who are looking everywhere but at him and has given me new life. I thank God that his compassion extends even to a sinner like me."
Amen to that! Thank you Tim!
http://www.reigningimmortal.com
Mason:
"What though would people think if in a shipwreck I had the capacity to save every single person in the water, but only picked a few to save? Now I did not pick them because of any specific merit, but I still decided to pick a few and not save others even though I could have. Would people still see this as a heroic gracious act? Or would they be angry that I did not save everyone even though I was fully able to?"
I am not sure that you are taking into account that we all deserve hell. All have sinned and fallen short. God "has mercy on whom he has mercy and compassion of whom he has compassion". There is no doubt that the bible portrays God electing in many different ways throughout the whole bible. What about the rest of the world in the old testament. God did not even reveal Himself to anyone but t Israel. Were they told to evangelize?
What do you do with Romans chapter 9?
Good illustration of an important truth. It's a difficult one to grasp, and I still struggle with the concept of mercy denied when the alternative is the eternal hopelessness of Hell. But it's so clear in the Bible that I can't argue with it. I can only trust that, once we get to Heaven, we will see the rightness of it all.
Mason,I appreciate your question, and the tone in which it was asked. And while I think there was truth in the above response, I don't think you can rightly be accused of challenging Romans 9 or anything else. Like me, you believe, but with honest difficulties. I trust that the Lord will reveal more and more light to us both as we seek Him. God bless you.
Betsy,Thank you for the kind words. You are right, I'm not challenging Romans 9, and I know God can save whoever he chooses to and is not obligated to save everyone. What I am saying is, in holding to Calvinism (albeit with a somewhat open hand) I struggle with the difficulties it presents, such as the very real fact that God could save us all, but chooses not to.
Luke,I know we are all fallen sinful people who deserve Hell. That is true for the people God saves as well as those He does not. Are you really telling me it is easy for you to be ok with what we are talking about here? I'm not saying it is wrong, I'm saying it is very hard to accept because God could save all in a Calvinist understanding of soteriology, an issue Arminian theology does not face.
This is so true Tim! I have been thinking about this a lot lately, especially the fact that I definitely do not in any way deserve God's grace but yet I am one of His chosen...for reasons I do not understand but am ever grateful and thankful for!
Mason, If you really want to use the shipwreck analogy from an Arminian perspective, I think it would be more accurate to picture Christ saving people by sitting on a float and waiting for them to jump on if they choose to. There would be no active rescuing. He would be waiting for people to ask for His help. Obviously, all people don't, because there is hell. Arminians still do deal with this issue because of hell. If he could save all people, then there wouldn't be, and we would have universalism, which I am sure you realize is totally unscriptural.
Analogies only help us to a point because when we use them we are talking about human beings in human situations. However, I am grateful that God has given you enough light to believe despite your struggling.
I should have put "If he wanted to save all people, not if he could" God is obviously Sovereign and can do whatever He wants. I hope I came across clear enough.
You go Betsy! Although, I also see the point of Mason's question and respect it. As Betsy says we must trust God, one day we will all understand why but right now it is not important why God chose to choose some and not others. That is His business and not mine. I was not created for myself but created for Him. He is just!
Trust is an element of faith. There is a certain level of humility that we must embrace in order to trust. As I have said before, I am not blind...I just have trust issues... I trust in my God. I know my place and it is not a place to question nor understand why. With all due respect to Mason, I understand his struggle and actually I learned something from it. It made me think and challenged me to consider God's soveriegnty today. Thank you, Mason.
Proverbs 3:5-65 Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding;
6 in all your ways acknowledge him, and he will make your paths straight.
Jessica,Thank you, and yes you were quite clear.
I actually was not trying to use that analogy from an Arminian perspective, though I admit your adaptation of the analogy to Arminianism fit well enough for our purposes here.What I was attempting to do is to show that a common Reformed analogy (we are all perishing in disaster ‘X’ but He chose to save me from X and that He did not save others is not a issue since He did not have to save anyone at all) might work quite well if the person doing the saving is a human with limited capacity, but becomes much more difficult when the person doing the saving is an omnipotent God who saves in the Calvinist sense.Just to clarify I’m not a universalist, though in the words of Barth I might not believe it but I do wish for it.
Might take a little issue with the idea that struggling with a belief is necessarily inferior to certainty, but that’s probably best left for another time.
Mason:Your comment "I have no intention of accusing God of injustice here, but I think it is not so easy to gloss over this issue as one where God does not have to save anyone so if He saves anyone it is grace and we ought to leave it at that.
You are right in saying "it is not easy to gloss over" if what you really meant was "doesn't sit well at first because our usual perception of who God is contradicts the character of God revealed in scripture", but these truths cannot be denied from scripture. Paul answers your question simply " Who are you, o man, who answers back to God?"...and we ought to leave it at that." Paul left it at that.
There is a strong propensity for Christians to err by applying human judgment and standards to our perfect Creator. By doing this we anthropomorphos Deity.
I too am guilty of momentarily thinking "But that's not fair...!" when considering God's judgments. Then I remind myself that the potter owes no explanation to the clay in his decisions of approval or selection.
I'm lead to share Isaiah 29:13-16 (NIV):
13 The Lord says: "These people come near to me with their mouth and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. Their worship of me is made up only of rules taught by men.
14 Therefore once more I will astound these people with wonder upon wonder; the wisdom of the wise will perish, the intelligence of the intelligent will vanish."
15 Woe to those who go to great depths to hide their plans from the LORD, who do their work in darkness and think, "Who sees us? Who will know?"
16 You turn things upside down, as if the potter were thought to be like the clay! Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, "He did not make me"? Can the pot say of the potter, "He knows nothing"?
In Christ,
Dan...
"You are right in saying “it is not easy to gloss over” if what you really meant was “doesn’t sit well at first because our usual perception of who God is contradicts the character of God revealed in scripture”,"
Luke,No, I appreciate your sentiments here and the spirit of your reply, but I knew what I meant, and it was not that. What I meant is actually that, yes, it does not sit well, but because it seems to, not contradict, but at least create a great deal of tension with how God is portrayed in Scripture. That has nothing to do with how I might feel about God or wish to see Him. It has to do with the way Scripture speaks of God, and the way we see God's nature most clearly, in Jesus and in His death and resurrection. As the Scriptures show us, the Triune God was, in Jesus, willing to give His life because of how much He loves the people He created and the world He has made. It seems that such a God would want to save everyone, and the tension comes in when we see that in Calvinism He could without the hang up of free will the Arminians deal with. That by no means makes Calvinism wrong, but is it something we need to grapple with deeply.
Yes Luke and Dan, Paul and Isaiah may have left it at that. On the other hand Job and many other Biblical characters spent entire books wrestling with God. I did not really expect to be Scripturally admonished over these questions, I’m just trying to work through what should be a difficult issue for any of us who see truth in Calvinism.
Tim your being provocative! The doctrine of election is one of my great struggles especially when you're praying for a teenage child who is struggling with his life and faith, and these questions of election begin to haunt you. I personally find the doctrine fatalistic, I know who cares what you PERSONALLY think, well I think God does care and he cares about my son and all who would be lost. Jn. 3:16 says "Whosoever believes." Election being true in its extremest form would have to concede that your child, wife, mother, father or whoever are destined for damnation; personalize it!. Is there really any other way of seeing it? Or could your prayers change that? Not according to election.
This miracle doesn't have a parallel in the other three gospels. It stands alone.
Your points are very good and this definitely serves as an illustration of God's Sovereign choices.
However, there is no mention that Jesus surveyed the scene or was moved with compassion. Perhaps He did or perhaps He didn't. It may be a small point and I may be nit-picking but I believe this is also a part of God's Sovereign choice. He is not obligated to show compassion to sinners and He is not moved by feelings as we are.
I still must say, "Amen" to the overall message of the article.
Mason:
"It seems that such a God would want to save everyone, and the tension comes in when we see that in Calvinism He could without the hang up of free will the Arminians deal with."
God does desire that all be saved 1 tim 2:4. But if He saved all men then what about his attributes? Justice and Wrath. God has purpose in all he does. Believers see his true grace and mercy which we had nothing to do with. We then see his justice and wrath that we ultimately deserve. Now we can understand true grace and give him all the glory. If we somehow take part in our salvation we become the relying factor of whether or not we are saved. In short we become our own savior with room to boast.
Calvinism is tension. That's what makes it different from Arminianism. Instead of accepting the tension that God's sovereignty and man's responsibility are both in the Bible, The arminian will throw one out.
Dear Mason,
No admonition was implied or intended. I simply wanted us all to remember who is the producer of all outcomes.
Dear Mike,
To some degree I share your grief, for I too have a loved one who may be one of the non-elect. My beloved brother belongs to a church that labels itself as Christian and Evangelical. However, they have many extra-scriptural doctrines and do not believe in the finished work of Christ on the cross. I will not presume to limit God's power by assuming that my brother's error is fatal to his salvation. But I am, never the less, prayerfully very concerned. Yes, the concept of "the elect" is troublesome to us and smacks of a pre-destination that puts us completely out of the picture as to whether or not we or anyone else is saved. But this is exactly the point. As stated in John 6:44: "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, ..." Additionally, we know what God desires all to be saved: 2 Peter 3:9 "The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance."
You ask if prayers can change the status of the non-elect? To this I must say yes, but in a rather un-conventional sense. Because God knows of all past, present, and future prayers. Hence, the elect are exclusively the elect. From the beginning, they always have been the elect and always will be. God's word tells us that the names of the elect were written into the book of life before anything was made. But God's foreknowledge is infinite. And this also applies to His foreknowing our heart-felt prayers as much as anything else. We have no way of knowing the efficacy of our prayers; but we are told to put all requests, whether by prayer or petition before the Lord. It is interesting to ponder that God has considered our requests before we even make them. However, when we make these requests, we must realize that ultimately, our prayers must end with an unsaid but understood; or an explicit statement of surrender to the Father's will. Just as Christ ended His prayer in Gesthemane just before His betrayal: Luke 22:42 (NIV) "... yet not my will, but yours be done."
Yours, in Christ,
Dan...
Mason,Perhaps you just have the wrong analogy. If you were to use a court room setting then you would have a more accurate comparison, though still limited. Imagine a line of 100 people all guilty of horrible crimes, each has a fine of 1 million dollars or life in prison. They can't pay their fine so the judge must throw them in jail, then Someone they don't know, and weren't looking to help them walks in a chooses 20 people and pays their fine for no other reason than His own good pleasure. Though He has the capacity to pay all the peoples fines, no one would accuse Him of being unfair or unjust. If they want fair and just, they would all get their due punishment, what they need is mercy and grace, and that is exactally what He gave, and who gets the glory? Well, the fine-payer does.
Furthermore those whos fines were not paid may actually curse and scorn the one who pays the others fine and thus incur a more severe punishment. Whereas those whos fines were paid will always, for all time depend on grace for having saved them, though guilty, they can never boast in any merit within themselves.
This is what so upsets me about Arminianism, as it not only limits the work and sovereignty of God, but gives the sinner something to boast about in himself, thus sharing the glory with God. Though we know this is not so, God will not share His glory with another, which is why I think Aiminianism is so dangerous. If man contributes something, if there is any vestige of good in man where we can do anything to draw near God, then we have every right to boast, but we do not, lest we call God a liar. Besides that, this is what has so twisted and perverted the gospel, this watered down, soft, easy believeism, prosperity message, at least I believe thats where it starts. Just my 2¢
MasonI respect your thoughts on the issue and from a human stand point, what you said makes a lot of sense. However, on the subject of election God only reveals so much to us on why he elects some to salvation and not others. Just because God doesn't reveal something, doesn't mean that He doesn't have a reason. I know my God is a just and righteous God and regardless of whether I understand something or not, I must trust in what He reveals about Himself.One thing I am certain about, God has a purpose for only revealing so much to us.I can speculate on why He elects some to salvation and not others, but perhaps I/we wouldn’t understand it even if He had revealed it.In the mean time let us have confidence in what he has revealed about election. Eph. 1:5 says “Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,” KJV Why did He do it? Simply because it was His good pleasure.God is God and we are not.
Thanks for that post. I have preached on that passage but never actually thought of it in terms of Christ exercising His divine will. As a convinced calvinist ( which of course is just another of saying Biblical Christian) I appreciate the insight.
Good article until the part about God is able to choose the ones whom he will forgive. Would that mean that God does not forgive everyone? Jesus did not die for the sins of the whole world? Only the elect? That would then seem to indicate that the work at the cross was not a complete work, would it not? I shall look into this further through prayer and study. Thank you for your time and God bless.
Mason"What I am saying is, in holding to Calvinism (albeit with a somewhat open hand) I struggle with the difficulties it presents, such as the very real fact that God could save us all, but chooses not to."I think you should be careful about claiming that it is Calvinism that brings these difficulties. While these difficulties are present in Calvinism, I would say that is due to the fact they are clearly supported in the Bible (Mt 13:10-17; Rom 11:7-9;Rom 9:22). God clearly shows mercy to some and justice to others.
What we must come to grasp is a God centered theology not a man centered theology. God actions are based on what is most glorifying to God. God has done that by clearly revealing the depth of His characteristics. It is glorifying to God not only to reveal His love, mercy, and grace but also to reveal His justice, wrath, and righteousness. By seeing the God's character more fully, we can worship Him more as we ought. I believe it is John Piper who said that the Cross of Christ is the blazing center of God's Glory. This is because, this is where we see clearly many characteristics of God. Everything from His wrath to His mercy.
" I’m saying it is very hard to accept because God could save all in a Calvinist understanding of soteriology, an issue Arminian theology does not face."I do not think something that limits the power and sovereignty of God should be looked upon as a positive.
Luke and DanYou have brought up two of the three sets of verses of the Arminian Pillar. While I could try to put into words the explanation, this link does it very well. http://www.aomin.org/aoblog/index.php?itemid=3018
Mike" I think God does care and he cares about my son and all who would be lost. Jn. 3:16 says “Whosoever believes.” Election being true in its extremest form would have to concede that your child, wife, mother, father or whoever are destined for damnation; personalize it!. Is there really any other way of seeing it?"Mike I can understand your feelings. However, we cannot allow our emotions to get in the away of what the Bible teaches. The Bible clearly teaches election. I am glad you brought up this verse though. This verse often gets brought up in these types of discussions. However, it does not support either side in this discussion. Both sides would agree with this verse. All would agree that whoever believes would be saved. The point though is that no one is capable of believing. The only way we come to faith is through the grace of God.
Also, God does care for the lost. However, this love is different than the love for the elect. Remember Romans 9:13. He loves all of His creation in a providential sense, but His elect in a salvific sense.
Tim"He is not obligated to show compassion to sinners and He is not moved by feelings as we are."Tim, I agree with what you said here. I would just like to clear up a few things. Jesus does feel compassion even though he doesn't act on it the same way we would necessarily. This is clearly seen in the story of Lazarus.
Also Luke"Calvinism is tension. That’s what makes it different from Arminianism. Instead of accepting the tension that God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility are both in the Bible, The arminian will throw one out."I would be careful in adding human responsibility to Calvinism. It appears as this from our human perspective, but if we remember God providences all things, it is truly not the case.
WilliamI would like to only respond to one part of your comment. Please look at the rest of the response to answer the remainder of your comment."That would then seem to indicate that the work at the cross was not a complete work, would it not?"I think the opposite view of Calvinism can be drawn. Compared to other views of salvation, Calvinism offers the most complete work done on the cross. It states that for the elect the work was totally finished on the cross with nothing left to add. That the blood of Jesus was sufficient in paying our debt.
Sorry. Some of these responses are probably shorter than they should be to fully explain what is presented. However, it is late and I need to get to bed fairly soon. I would love to elaborate or continue to discuss any of these topics.
Election is a horrifying doctrine. Though one of the simplest to prove from Scripture, it's one of the most painful to accept. But it's also horrifying when I think of the years I knew of Christ and refused to follow Him. It's horrifying to remember the atrocious sins I committed in my rebellion against Him. It's downright terrifying to remember that I had no intention of giving up my way of life. My ugly sinful life was more precious to me than the beauty of His holiness. His holiness was a horrifying thing I tried not to think about. It is frightening to think that left to my own devices I'd have continued to the end of my life that way - had He not intervened. It's terrifying to think of what would have become of me if He had not saved me.
So, that fact that He elected to save me is a great comfort; because I would not have elected to save myself, not if it involved following Christ. Neither of my dear children are believers. Yet it is a comfort to me to know that God can save them. In fact that is my only hope. I know them well enough to see that they aren't interested in being saved. I prefer knowing my hope for their salvation is in the hands of the all-wise God, rather than in their hands. They like themselves the way they are. Though it breaks my heart, I trust with all my heart, that if in the end they are not saved God will give me grace accept His decision and ultimately to understand as He does. Our Lord Himself seemed to indicate that we cannot expect salvation to extend to all our loved ones when He said, "Brother will deliver up brother to death, and the father his child, and children will rise against parents and have them put to death; and you will be hated by all for my name's sake. But he who endures to the end will be saved." Mt. 10:22-22 Part of the cost of following Christ is being prepared to lose those we love.
Dan Hagan I appreciate your response I never said I disagreed with election I do struggle and question the doctrine, if that makes sense, and I think foreknowledge is different than election in my opinion.
Observer, I have to disagree with you, the disconnect between heart " emotions" and doctrine is one of the problems with new or old "reformed movement" yes truth is objective as was the death of the Lord but if it never becomes subjective then it is dead doctrine. Also sometimes our life experiences can change or at least adjust our theology as is my experience more "towards" reformed thought than away from it.
If God is not all inclusive, and already has chosen who will, and who will not be saved, then where is our free will, and that being said, what point is there in me or even Billy Graham sharing Christ with anyone? It is already predestined. There`s not really any hope for a lot of people in God only shedding his blood for only some of us. For that matter, why even bother to have a church? I could go on but redundancy is never a good thing. I appreciate all the comments here and I shall carefully and prayerfully search these things out as this has been my greatest struggle doctrinally in my christian life. Thank you for the time.
WilliamI don''t have time to deal with all of you post.However, I will say this.God uses means (the proclomation of the Gospel) to save His elect.Something else that I think is evident in what you said, is that you haven't fully grasped what Calvinists actually believe. If it was left up to "free-will" then no one would choose Christ.
"If it was left up to “free-will” then no one would choose Christ."
Well, yes, if you agree with other Calvinist presupositions, like Total Depravity.
Well, four out of five "tulip" points arn`t too bad. Hurray for John Calvin.
So Calvin missed the mark on the Limited Atonement, cut some slack here cause he was right on everything else. Nobody`s perfect. Much better than the Arminians can say.
At the opening of the gospel narratives the angel of the Lord appears to Joseph in a dream, telling him "thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins (Matt 1:21)." At the end of the gospel narratives Jesus declares "It is finished (John 19:30)." It was God's purpose to claim a people for Himself out of sinful mankind by paying the penalty due their sin, and this was accomplished at the cross. This is a completed work as the words "It is finished" imply and this is the Calvinistic teaching. The inconsistent universalism of the of the doctrine that Christ paid the penalty for all without discrimination and yet all are not saved is a teaching that leaves the work of Christ incomplete and impotent.
The Calvinistic doctrine alone gives hope and encouragement for prayer and evangelism. Within the sea of all mankind are the elect, and not one of them shall be lost. God has ordained that though prayer and the "foolishness of preaching" that the elect will be brought to faith. You fear for you loved ones, and that is good. The Holy Spirit is at work within you, graciously using you as the means to extend His kingdom, though you are not the cause of faith. It may be God's will that through many tears and much time on your knees that your loved one may be brought to faith. Be encouraged. Do not be faint and give up hope. Scripture teaches us to be persistent and importune in prayer. Salvation is of the Lord and thankfully does not depend on the fickle 'free will' of fallen man.
Since in the Calvinistic teaching only the elect are believers, and only the believers are elect, it might be helpful to substitute 'believer' for 'elect' in your reading and your thinking.
Grace, mercy, and peace be multiplied to you through Jesus Christ.
I am humbly not up on all the "Calvin" teachings or any other for that matter but I thought I would throw in what I believe that the Bible has shown me or what I have always thought. You can label it whatever you like.
God is sovereign and omnipotent. I have always looked at that as meaning that He can be at any moment in time whether past, present, or future at any time. He is not constrained by time as we are. If we were predestined since before creation then it would seem that He saw me and my life beforehand.
The choices are up to me and I have free will but He already knows the choices I will make or have made. He knows that some, no matter how many times they have had witnesses profess the gospel to them, will not submit to His truth. They choose just like we do but we are elected because God chose us because He knew already that we would conform to accepting His grace.
Now, I don't profess to be an expert on any of this and I hope this comment reply does not end up opening a bigger can of worms but that is my open view. I don't argue with people about it but it does help me some in understanding. Nevertheless, I trust in Him and know that He is just. Does this belief fall into any particular catagory of thought?
http://www.reigningimmortal.com
I only say this, man goes to hell because of unbelief, not because of his sins. The only thing not covered at the cross is the sin of unbelief , also known as the unpardonable sin. Man suffers eternal damnation do to his not accepting Gods free gift of salvation. God is no respecter of persons and we all have the same opportunity,though God , through his sovereignty already knows who will, and who will not accept his gift. God uses the believer as an extention of his hand to accomplish this work. It is His will that none should perish, yet few are chosen. It is a deep thing of God and we cannot expect to know the mind of God. Only to believe and grow in grace. I hope this was helpful. God bless.
Don,
Thank you for those words. That was basically what I was trying to say. I may be wrong and that is ok too. I leave the deeper things to Him. This verse you mention about God's will not wishing anyone to perish but that all might come to the truth is a declaration (to me) of God's wanting us all to be saved but the only thing that stands in His way is our free will. Love can not be forced, it must be chosen.
http://www.reigningimmortal.com
I wanted to leave a comment here explaining my views on this post, but due to the length I posted it on my blog instead. www.twelvenine.blogspot.com
I forgot to link to the exact post. Sorry!http://twelvenine.blogspot.com/2008/12/one-in-sea-of-faces.html