Here is a question for Calvinists. I was thinking primarily of PL, but if anyone else wishes to respond, that's obviously great, too. So, for those who believe in Unconditional Election:
What is the basic understanding of Mattt. 22:14, esp., how do "called" and "chosen" relate, and how does this understanding comport with Rom. 8:30?
I read through some commentaries on this later on, but it's just as easy to ask here
Thanks much,
God bless
Proinsias wrote:I don't think you are hearing me. Preference for ice cream is a moral issue
And that, brothers and sisters, is the kind of foolishness you get people who insist on denying biblical theism. A good illustration of any as the length people will go to avoid acknowledging basic truths.
Calvinists understand a difference between the effectual calling of the elect and the outward calling of "many", such as that of Judas Iscariot. This is summarized well in the 10th Chapter of the Westminster Confession, with the outward calling being explained in Section 4.
Chapter 10 - Of Effectual Calling
10:1 All those whom God hath predestinated unto life, and those only, He is pleased in His appointed and accepted time effectually to call (Rom. 8:30; Rom. 11:7; Eph. 1:10, Eph. 1:11), by His Word and Spirit (2 Cor. 3:3, 2 Cor. 3:6; 2 Thess. 2:13, 2 Thess. 2:14), out of that state of sin and death, in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ (Rom. 8:2; Eph. 2:1-5; 2 Tim. 1:9, 2 Tim. 1:10); enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God (Acts 26:18; 1 Cor. 2:10, 1 Cor. 2:12; Eph. 1:17, Eph. 1:18); taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh (Eze. 36:26); renewing their wills, and by His almighty power determining them to that which is good (Deut. 30:6; Eze. 11:19; Eze. 36:27; Phil. 2:13), and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ (John 6:44, John 6:45; Eph. 1:19): yet so, as they come most freely, being made willing by His grace (Psalms 110:3; Song 1:4; John 6:37; Rom. 6:16-18).
10:2 This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man (Rom. 9:11; Eph. 2:4, Eph. 2:5, Eph. 2:8, Eph. 2:9; 2 Tim. 1:9; Titus 3:4, Titus 3:5), who is altogether passive therein, until being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit (Rom 8:7; 1 Cor. 2:14; Eph. 2:5), he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it (Eze. 36:27; John 5:25; John 6:37).
10:3 Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated, and saved by Christ through the Spirit (Luke 18:15, Luke 18:16, and Acts 2:38, Acts 2:39, and John 3:3, John 3:5, and 1 John 5:12, and Rom. 8:9 compared), who worketh when, and where, and how He pleaseth (John 3:8): so also, are all other elect persons who are uncapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word (Acts 4:12; 1 John 5:12).
10:4 Others, not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word (Matt. 22:14), and may have some common operations of the Spirit (Matt. 7:22; Matt. 13:20, Matt. 13:21; Heb. 6:4, Heb. 6:5), yet they never truly come unto Christ, and therefore cannot be saved (John 6:64-66; John 8:24): much less can men, not professing the Christian religion, be saved in any other way whatsoever, be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature, and the law of that religion they do profess (John 4:22; John 14:6; John 17:3; Acts 4:12; Eph. 2:12); and to assert and maintain that they may, is very pernicious, and to be detested(1 Cor. 16:22; Gal. 1:6-8; 2 John 1:9-11).
"To suppose that whatever God requireth of us that we have power of ourselves to do, is to make the cross and grace of Jesus Christ of none effect." - JOHN OWEN
So are you saying that Calvinists with reference to one's calling, all people fall into one of three catagories: those who have no calling, those who have an outward calling, and those who have an effectual calling?
Proinsias wrote:I don't think you are hearing me. Preference for ice cream is a moral issue
And that, brothers and sisters, is the kind of foolishness you get people who insist on denying biblical theism. A good illustration of any as the length people will go to avoid acknowledging basic truths.
Jac3510 wrote:So are you saying that Calvinists with reference to one's calling, all people fall into one of three catagories: those who have no calling, those who have an outward calling, and those who have an effectual calling?
Pretty much. There can be a little discussion about what it means to have "no calling", but unless you adopt Covenant Theology, it really doesn't matter.
"To suppose that whatever God requireth of us that we have power of ourselves to do, is to make the cross and grace of Jesus Christ of none effect." - JOHN OWEN
It would be absolutely pointless to try to critique someone on having "no calling" from a dispensational perspective if it is defined differently by covenant theologians. Actually, though, the "outward calling" struck my interest more . . .
So, within the Covenant framework, what does it mean to have no calling? And, again, within your framework, what exactly does it mean to have an outward calling, and how does that relate to God's sovereignty?
Thanks
Proinsias wrote:I don't think you are hearing me. Preference for ice cream is a moral issue
And that, brothers and sisters, is the kind of foolishness you get people who insist on denying biblical theism. A good illustration of any as the length people will go to avoid acknowledging basic truths.
In actuality, there are only two groups. These are the effectually called and the lost. (The sheep and the goats, the wheat and the tares, etc). The "outwardly called" are goats. These may have some sort of religious experience, be partakers in the things of the Spirit (yet not able to recieve them in any beneficial way), and even performed miracles during the Apostolic period, yet Jesus never knew them. There are goats and tares in the church (representing Christ's kingdom here on earth), sown by the evil one. In the end, they will be separated.
By "outward calling", we mean that it is possible to be in Covenant with God on earth while not being redeemed (which is why Reformed Presbyterians reject the Baptist view of Baptism). For example, Judas Iscariot, a Hebrew, was almost surely circumcised, baptized in water, and even presented the elements of the Lord's supper by Christ himself, yet he was a devil. He recieved all three signs of the Covenant, yet was the "son of perdition". Was Judas outwardly called? Yes. Was he effectually called? No. In the end, the outwardly called and the non-called are one and the same (though I believe the outwardly called will suffer more in Hell, as some scriptures seem to suggest).
Hope the helps explain the position.
"To suppose that whatever God requireth of us that we have power of ourselves to do, is to make the cross and grace of Jesus Christ of none effect." - JOHN OWEN
The "outwardly called" are goats. These may have some sort of religious experience, be partakers in the things of the Spirit (yet not able to recieve them in any beneficial way), and even performed miracles during the Apostolic period, yet Jesus never knew them. There are goats and tares in the church (representing Christ's kingdom here on earth), sown by the evil one. In the end, they will be separated.
By "outward calling", we mean that it is possible to be in Covenant with God on earth while not being redeemed
This is an untenable position. First, any religious experience, as any thinking Calvinist should admit, is only possible by some prior movement by God. Any movement which results in any level of actual 'religious experience' is by nature illuminatory and regenerative.
Second, to add to this the notion that human beings who are outside any real and meaningful relationship and unity with God could be able to perform miracles and yet be wholly separated from some genuine unity and some degree of harmony with God's Spirit [a necessary component of relationship with God] is completely illogical and unScriptural.
Ditto to the idea that one could be in actual (as opposed to seeming or imagined) covenant of any type with God and still be lost. This defies all reason.
Scripture states of Christ Jesus, "A bruised reed He will not break, And a dimly burning wick He will not extinguish; He will faithfully bring forth justice." A dimly burning wick is an obvious reference to possession of spiritual life, which is of course regenerative and illuminative. That The Lord inspired Isaiah to record the concept of a "dimly burning wick" speaks directly to the notion that spiritual life may be, despite popular ideas to the contrary, a fragmental and incomplete possession of spiritual life.
The Father confirms this concept in Gen 18 by identifying to Abram on the road to Damascus the principle that He will not destroy a whole (Sodom in this case) in which some good exists.
To suggest as you do here that human beings can be in some real possession of spiritual life--even to the point of participating in the working of miracles--and yet be forever lost is in direct opposition to the princples of Scripture.
Bernie wrote:This is an untenable position. First, any religious experience, as any thinking Calvinist should admit, is only possible by some prior movement by God. Any movement which results in any level of actual 'religious experience' is by nature illuminatory and regenerative.
Really? Says Who? Satan can masquarede as an angel ot Light.
Second, to add to this the notion that human beings who are outside any real and meaningful relationship and unity with God could be able to perform miracles and yet be wholly separated from some genuine unity and some degree of harmony with God's Spirit [a necessary component of relationship with God] is completely illogical and unScriptural.
Matthew 7:21-23 "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.'
Ditto to the idea that one could be in actual (as opposed to seeming or imagined) covenant of any type with God and still be lost. This defies all reason.
Tell that to Judas Iscariot. He was probably circumcised under the Old Covenant, Baptised under the New Covenant, and was given the elements of the Lord's supper by Christ Himself, yet immediately after this, Satan entered him. He is clearly in Hell as we speak, and I await your response to this in another thread.
Bernie wrote:Scripture states of Christ Jesus, "A bruised reed He will not break, And a dimly burning wick He will not extinguish; He will faithfully bring forth justice." A dimly burning wick is an obvious reference to possession of spiritual life, which is of course regenerative and illuminative. That The Lord inspired Isaiah to record the concept of a "dimly burning wick" speaks directly to the notion that spiritual life may be, despite popular ideas to the contrary, a fragmental and incomplete possession of spiritual life.
The Father confirms this concept in Gen 18 by identifying to Abram on the road to Damascus the principle that He will not destroy a whole (Sodom in this case) in which some good exists.
To suggest as you do here that human beings can be in some real possession of spiritual life--even to the point of participating in the working of miracles--and yet be forever lost is in direct opposition to the princples of Scripture.
Not all Spiritual life is Good. Charles Manson was very "spiritual".
"To suppose that whatever God requireth of us that we have power of ourselves to do, is to make the cross and grace of Jesus Christ of none effect." - JOHN OWEN
