Who makes the choice?

[theophilus]

There are many doctrinal divisions among Christians. For example, some believe that human beings repent and believe because God causes them to do so by choosing them to be saved while some believe that people believe and are saved because they choose to do so. What does the Bible say about this?

I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live.
Deuteronomy 30:19 ESV

This says that whether we are saved or lost depends on our choice.

He chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him.
Ephesians 1:4 ESV

This says that whether we are saved or lost depends on whether we are among those he chose before the foundation of the world.

How can we reconcile these apparently contradictory statements?

Here is one way.

Those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers.
Romans 8:29,30 ESV

God knows who will choose to receive the salvation he offers and on this basis he predestines them to salvation.

Here is another way.

No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him. And I will raise him up on the last day.
John 6:44 ESV

God draws those whom he has chosen to himself and gives them the power to choose him.

Both sides can find support for their views in the Bible. Does this mean that the Bible contradicts itself and can’t be trusted as a guide to the truth?

We can find a possible answer to this by looking at a subject that at first may seem completely unrelated: the nature of light. Here is what Wikipedia says about this subject.

Wave-particle duality is perhaps one of the most confusing concepts in physics, because it is so unlike anything we see in the ordinary world.

Physicists who studied light in the 1700s and 1800s were having a big argument about whether light was made of particles shooting around like tiny bullets, or waves washing around like water waves. At times, light seems to do both. At times, light seems to go only in a straight line, as if it were made of particles. But other experiments show that light has a frequency and wavelength, just like a sound wave or water wave. Until the 20th century, most physicists thought that light was either one or the other, and that the scientists on the other side of the argument were simply wrong.

In 1909, a scientist named Geoffrey Taylor decided that he was going to settle this argument once and for all. He borrowed an experiment invented earlier by Thomas Young, where light was shone through two small holes right next to each other. When bright light was shone through these two small holes, it created an interference pattern that seemed to show that light was actually a wave.

Taylor’s idea was to photograph the movie coming out of the holes with a special movie that was unusually sensitive to light. When bright light was shined through the holes, the movie showed an interference pattern, just like Young showed earlier. Taylor then turned down the light to a very dim level. When the light was dim enough, Taylor’s photographs showed tiny pinpoints of light scattering out of the holes. This seemed to show that light was actually a particle. If Taylor allowed the dim light to shine through the holes for long enough, the dots eventually filled up the movie to make an interference pattern again. This demonstrated that light was somehow both a wave and a particle.

To make matters even more confusing, Louis de Broglie suggested that matter might act the same way. Scientists then performed these same experiments with electrons, and found that electrons too are somehow both particles and waves.

Today, these experiments have been done in so many different ways by so many different people that scientists simply accept that both matter and light are somehow both waves and particles. Scientists generally admit that even they do not fully understand how this can be, but they are quite certain that it must be true. Although it seems impossible to understand how anything can be both a wave and a particle, scientists do have a number of equations for describing these things that have variables for both wavelength (a wave property) and momentum (a particle property). This seeming impossibility is referred to as the wave-particle duality.

This shows that in the physical realm two ideas that seem to contradict each other can both be true. Isn’t it possible that this is true in the spiritual realm as well?

The Wikipedia article shows that if we accept the results of scientific research we must believe that light is both a particle and a wave even if we don’t see how both of these things can be true. If we believe the Bible we must believe that God is completely sovereign in the matter of salvation and chooses whom he will save and we must also believe that each person is responsible to choose whether or not he will be saved even if we don’t understand how they can both be true.

We live in a universe which had a beginning and will have an end. One component of this universe is time, which flows in one direction so that some things are in our past and some things are in our future. The decisions we make may be influenced by our past but they can only affect our future. Temporally a cause must precede its effect so that one event can be the cause or effect of another but not both.

This limitation doesn’t apply to God and his actions because he isn’t part of the creation and so not subject to its laws. Because we are part of the creation there are many things about God that we can’t understand and it is because we lack understanding that many of the truths he reveals seem to contradict each other.

It is possible that the two natures of light that we see are manifestations of some natural law that scientists haven’t yet discovered and that if we understood that law we would see that there is no contradiction in the way light behaves. In the same way, the doctrines of God’s sovereignty and our responsibility to choose are probably manifestations of some higher truth that hasn’t been revealed and if we could understand that truth we wouldn’t see any contradiction between the two.

While there are many things about salvation we don’t understand the Bible makes it perfectly clear what we must do to be saved. God is holy and and his holiness demands that he punish all sin. We have all sinned. Jesus Christ died to pay the penalty that we deserve and rose again from the dead. Anyone who repents of his sins and puts his faith in Christ will find salvation and be forgiven. It isn’t necessary to know whether you are believing of your own free will or because God has given you the ability to believe. It is possible to eat food and receive nourishment from it without understanding how your body digests it; in the same way it is possible to receive salvation without understanding all that is involved in it.

On this subject, as on many others, we need to keep in mind what Paul said in 1 Corinthians 13:12:

For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.

[PaulSacramento]

One can argue that if Jesus died only for those that were already predestined to be saved, that he died for "nothing".
Or at least that his death was "ceremonial" since, in effect, those that are saved were already predestined to be so.

[jlay]

How can we reconcile these apparently contradictory statements?

Run as far away from reformed theology as you can.

Plucking verses out of context and trying to imply that they are speaking of the same thing regarding 'chosing" and thus creating an apparent contradiciton, then plucking out another verse is not sound exegesis.

[1over137]

[quote]If we believe the Bible we must believe that God is completely sovereign in the matter of salvation and chooses whom he will save and we must also believe that each person is responsible to choose whether or not he will be saved even if we don’t understand how they can both be true.[\quote]

I would not compare this with wave-particle duality.

Saying that God chooses and at the same time we choose is like saying A and not A does not contradict each other. But A and not A cannot be both true.

Here is something on the duality: http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/05/ ... xperiment/

And to the Deuteronomy 30:19. I just got the thought that maybe those words were spoken to people among them were ones who were chosen ... My 2 cents.

[jlay]

Saying that God chooses and at the same time we choose is like saying A and not A does not contradict each other. But A and not A cannot be both true.

No, the confusion is over what is being chosen.

All those who are saved are chosen of God. And people do choose whether to believe the Gospel.

The problem with the first part is what notions we apply to the scripture. God is not playing eenie meenie minie mo. I choose you, but not you. Those who are in Christ, are chosen. Chosen for what? To be Holy and blameless. Eph. 1:4

Let me give you an analogy. There are two rooms. One with a green door and one with a blue. You enter an anti-room, and now the only way to leave is by choosing one of the two doors. Those who choose the green door will hear the super-sonic celestial sound machine. And those who choose the blue door will not. Not choosing a door has the same outcome as choosing the blue door. You choose the green door, and when you walk in, the door closes behind you. You turn around to see a sign on the back of the door that says, "Chosen to hear the super-sonic celestial sound machine."

You see, I soverignly chose and predestined who will hear the SSCSM. That being those who chose the green door.
One of the greatest disasters of reformed theology is to confuse what is being chosen.

[1stjohn0666]

I would move the subject to Conditional vs. Natural immortality.... and then the decision is made by who......
I wouldn't rely on wikipedia as a true source of information as it can be easily edited.

[1over137]

Saying that God chooses and at the same time we choose is like saying A and not A does not contradict each other. But A and not A cannot be both true.

No, the confusion is over what is being chosen.

All those who are saved are chosen of God. And people do choose whether to believe the Gospel.

The problem with the first part is what notions we apply to the scripture. God is not playing eenie meenie minie mo. I choose you, but not you. Those who are in Christ, are chosen. Chosen for what? To be Holy and blameless. Eph. 1:4

Let me give you an analogy. There are two rooms. One with a green door and one with a blue. You enter an anti-room, and now the only way to leave is by choosing one of the two doors. Those who choose the green door will hear the super-sonic celestial sound machine. And those who choose the blue door will not. Not choosing a door has the same outcome as choosing the blue door. You choose the green door, and when you walk in, the door closes behind you. You turn around to see a sign on the back of the door that says, "Chosen to hear the super-sonic celestial sound machine."

You see, I soverignly chose and predestined who will hear the SSCSM. That being those who chose the green door.
One of the greatest disasters of reformed theology is to confuse what is being chosen.

Interesting. And what about John 6:44?

[RickD]

1/137 wrote:
Interesting. And what about John 6:44?

Hana, by the cross of Christ, God draws all men to himself. The "drawing" power is in the work of Christ. Not in a god that plays Eenie, meenie, miney, mo with people's souls, like jlay already said.
John 12:32 32 And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself.”

[PaulSacramento]

There is also the issue that God has chosen some for special works and that, perhaps, the issue of "predestined" refers to those that were predestined for special works by God, like the apostles for example.
I don't think anyone will argue that some people feel a very strong "push" towards God, that they are different than the others.
People like Augustine for example or Justin Martyr or Thomas Aquinas of Francis of Assisi or so many others.
I think that God does "pre chose" some "chosen ones" for His special works.

[1over137]

1/137 wrote:
Interesting. And what about John 6:44?

Hana, by the cross of Christ, God draws all men to himself. The "drawing" power is in the work of Christ. Not in a god that plays Eenie, meenie, miney, mo with people's souls, like jlay already said.
John 12:32 32 And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself.”

If the drawing power is in the work of Christ why John 6:44 mentions drawing by Father?

[RickD]

1/137 wrote:
Interesting. And what about John 6:44?

Hana, by the cross of Christ, God draws all men to himself. The "drawing" power is in the work of Christ. Not in a god that plays Eenie, meenie, miney, mo with people's souls, like jlay already said.
John 12:32 32 And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself.”

If the drawing power is in the work of Christ why John 6:44 mentions drawing by Father?

Hana, who does John 6:44 say sent Christ?

[1over137]

"44 “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day."

Hmmmm.

So, Rick, you ask "who does John 6:44 say sent Christ". Hmmmm. So, to rephrase the verse 44:
No one can come to Christ unless the Father who sent Christ draws him by sending the Christ and Christ will raise him up on the last day. Well, this sounds so strange to me. To you not?

[PaulSacramento]

"44 “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day."

Hmmmm.

So, Rick, you ask "who does John 6:44 say sent Christ". Hmmmm. So, to rephrase the verse 44:
No one can come to Christ unless the Father who sent Christ draws him by sending the Christ and Christ will raise him up on the last day. Well, this sounds so strange to me. To you not?

Not really.
The decisive "drawing" of people by God to Christ is the sending of Christ.
What was done in the past via the law ( to show where people were lacking) and the prophets ( to lead people to Christ, the Word of God), is now done DIRECTLY By Christ (via the HS) because God has sent Him so that we may be drawn to Him.

[jlay]

This whole drawing thing is easily answered.

Well, this sounds so strange to me. To you not?

Hanna.
Read the context. It sounded strange to those Jews who heard it first hand. Stop plucking verses out of context to try and fit them in with your presuppositions.
43 “Stop grumbling among yourselves,” Jesus answered. 44 “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day. 45 It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’[d] Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me. 46 No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father. 47 Very truly I tell you, the one who believes has eternal life. 48 I am the bread of life. 49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. 50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”

52 Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, “How can this man give us his flesh to eat?”

Obviously Jesus is using figurative language relating to his audeniece. Jews who knew about God's provision to Israel in the wilderness.

Do you believe the Gospel has power? Jesus would also commission Paul with his Gospel which has the power to draw any sinner, because of what is inherent in its message. The Gospel draws a sinner like an oasis draws the thirsty.

[1over137]

Jlay, I'm thinking about your reply. I am looking at the John 6 and this is there:

"26 Jesus answered them and said, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you seek Me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves and were filled. 27 Do not work for the food which perishes, but for the food which endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you, for on Him the Father, God, has set His seal.” 28 Therefore they said to Him, “What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God?” 29 Jesus answered and said to them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.” 30 So they said to Him, “What then do You do for a sign, so that we may see, and believe You? What work do You perform? 31 Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness; as it is written, ‘He gave them bread out of heaven to eat.’” 32 Jesus then said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, it is not Moses who has given you the bread out of heaven, but it is My Father who gives you the true bread out of heaven. 33 For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world.” 34 Then they said to Him, “Lord, always give us this bread.”

35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; he who comes to Me will not hunger, and he who believes in Me will never thirst. 36 But I said to you that you have seen Me, and yet do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me. 39 This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. 40 For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.”"

What do you think, esp. about the parts in bold?