God's Desire to Save Everyone and Predestination

[apostoli]

God is infinitely good, and evil is in fact part of God's good creation. Good is void of evil, yet there can be no evil unless there is good which can be take away in some way. In that God created good which can be negated, that is the creation of evil, the potential of evil.

Isaiah 45:. . .6,7,

. . . I [am] the LORD, and [there is] none else. I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these [things].

Again, evil is part of God's good creation. Free will, as it is called is not the cause of evil, but not chosing what is right or true, or destroying a good that can be negated in some way is an evil choice.

From the context of Isaiah, many modern translations render "ra`" (misery, distress, injury) as "calamity". In the natural world this would be obvious - floods, drought, famine, disease, hillslides, earth quake, volcanic eruptions etc are predictable natural phenomena and part of the regenerative processes of natural cycles (or in some cases the result of man's intereference with the natural environment). So in that respect "evil' is a relative term ie: "evil" only in the experience (an avoidable experience) of those who suffer detriment in a natural event. So in these respects we can't blame God for avoidable detrimental experiences, so that leaves mankind's avarice. Given God gave mankind dominance over the whole earth and everything upon it, I guess there is a case, but in retrospect can we lay the blame upon the feet of the parents of a mass murder etc...

The knowledge of good and evil is God's knowledge.

I would suggest "The knowledge of what is good and what is evil is God's knowledge".

In the fall, man obtained this knowledge contrary to God's instruction. (Genesis 2:17; Genesis 3:22.) That is why [finite] man has a sinful and fallen nature, because [finite] man acquired a knowledge which only an infinite good God can have and remain good.

From Genesis 3, Eve was deceived but Adam made a choice. Hence, the reason A.Paul says sin came through the first Adam. Imu, Adam chose the voice of Eve over the voice of God (cp. Gen 2:16-17 ; 3:4-7,17), and that is the original sin and all cause of mankind's avarice = all deviance in the world...

[37818]

Notice the bit I underlined. Imu, the prize of the high calling of God, is the fellowship in Christ's sufferings...that is what A.Paul, imu, assumed would confirm his right to a resurrection...

That conlusion does not work in imu, for a prize [a reward] is merited and the right to be resurrected to immortality is not merited.

One can loose the prize and yet be saved, as though by fire, the works being what is tried and burned up, not the person.

1 Corinthians 3:11-

For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

[apostoli]

Philippians 3:8-14, "...not having a righteousness of mine own, even that which is of the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith: that I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, becoming conformed unto his death; if by any means I may attain unto the resurrection from the dead. Not that I have already obtained, or am already made perfect: but I press on, if so be that I may lay hold on that for which also I was laid hold on by Christ Jesus."

Notice the bit I underlined. Imu, the prize of the high calling of God, is the fellowship in Christ's sufferings...that is what A.Paul, imu, assumed would confirm his right to a resurrection...

That conclusion does not work imu, for a prize [a reward] is merited and the right to be resurrected to immortality is not merited.

I'm sure we agree that grace is a free gift of God, and nothing we do can merit it! (cp Eph 2:8) However, this isn't A.Paul's topic at Phil 3, imu, he is concerned about assurance. A.Paul admits he hasn't a righteousness of his own, but if righteousness is to be attributed to him it is his "faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith". Hence his reference to the prize (an analogy he also presents at at 1 Cor 9:24). I'm also sure we agree that with God's foreknowledge (prescience) he knows who and who will not succeed in striving for His free gift. What I am unsure about is whether you hold that God created some to fail and others to succeed (predestination). Imu, the free gift has to be accepted for it to have personal worth to us.

Now thinking upon the idea of a prize being a merited reward, I don't think this is a concern of A.Paul's. What I perceive in A.Paul's witness is that as an athelete trains and disciplines him/herself to attain the wreath, so should we in the context of faithful works, but we do so not as am object of merit, but as a witness to all that we are worthy of God's free gift, and that through our example we can draw others to accepting the free gift (cp 1 Cor 9:25 "Every athlete exercises self control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable".)

Possibly, A.Paul had Jeremiah in mind, for in his prophecy he makes regular reference about people "shall have his life as a prize of war".

One can loose the prize and yet be saved, as though by fire, the works being what is tried and burned up, not the person.

1 Corinthians 3:11-

For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.

Curiously, today I had reason to investigate 1 Cor 3:11-15 in the context of the 1st and second resurrections, and suggested to a correspondent that 1 Cor 3:11-15 implies that everyone's foundational works (cp. James 2:14-26) will be tested as if by fire (vs13), "If anyone's work which he has built on [it] endures, he will receive a reward" (vs14) (cp. Mt 20:1-16 where each of the workman receive equal wages irrespective of effort). Note in vs14 "reward" renders the Greek λήψεται" (dues paid for work), imu, such indicates participation in the first resurrection. Verse 15 continues "If anyone's work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire". Imu, this is a reference to the second resurrection wherein "works" is the criteria for judgement (Rev 20:12&13 "they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done").

Though I seem to talk of "works", I mean "works" as a thanksgiving rather than "works" as an obligation or "works" in the terms of acquisition of a reward. Imu, it is not sufficient to say "I am saved", that is self exhaltation (Luke 18:10-14 comes to mind - "for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted"). Imu, what is required to assure the promise to ourselves is to emulate Christ!

[37818]

I'm sure we agree that grace is a free gift of God, and nothing we do can merit it! (cp Eph 2:8) However, this isn't A.Paul's topic at Phil 3, imu, he is concerned about assurance.

It is my understanding Paul was arguing the validity of his conversion over claims of false teachers (v.2).

Philippians 3:. . . 6 . . . 9 . . . 18

. . . as touching zeal, persecuting the church; . . . and be found in him, not having a righteousness of mine own, even that which is of the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith: . . . For many walk, of whom I told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: . . .

As for assurace of salvation, Paul wrote on saying,

Philippians 3:20, 21,

For our citizenship is in heaven; whence also we wait for a Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: who shall fashion anew the body of our humiliation, that it may be conformed to the body of his glory, according to the working whereby he is able even to subject all things unto himself.

Curiously, today I had reason to investigate 1 Cor 3:11-15 in the context of the 1st and second resurrections, and suggested to a correspondent that 1 Cor 3:11-15 implies that everyone's foundational works (cp. James 2:14-26) will be tested as if by fire (vs13), "If anyone's work which he has built on [it] endures, he will receive a reward" (vs14) (cp. Mt 20:1-16 where each of the workman receive equal wages irrespective of effort). Note in vs14 "reward" renders the Greek λήψεται" (dues paid for work), imu, such indicates participation in the first resurrection. Verse 15 continues "If anyone's work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire". Imu, this is a reference to the second resurrection wherein "works" is the criteria for judgement (Rev 20:12&13 "they were judged, each one of them, according to what they had done").

Only those who have part in the first resurrection are the sons of God (Revelation 3:15, 1 John 5:4, 5, Revelation 21:7) those are to be judge according to their works for salvation are the lost (Revelation 20:11-15, Revelation 21:8, Galatians 5:19-21; Ephesians 5:3-5. Romans 3:10,11, 23. John 5:24.)

Eph 2:8

Now salvation is not of works, we seem to agree here. But the purpose of salvation is so we can have good works (Eph 2:10.).

A. Paul likens living the Christian life unto a race.

1 Corinthians 9:24,

Know ye not that they that run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? Even so run; that ye may attain.

[The Remonstrant]

(Note: Apologies to the thread owner in advance, but I feel liberated now to deviate from your opening post as you've completely ignored my excellent comments in response above.)

Regarding Assurance of Salvation

You explain this well. But it does not change the fact that from that point of view, [from]that interpretation, one cannot really know they have eternal life.

Thank you. I would disagree, however. I believe it is possible for full-fledged Arminians to have genuine assurance of salvation (as posted above). But again, it is a present assurance of present salvation, not a present assurance that one will attain final salvation (i.e., glorification). But if you mean by "assurance of salvation" that this necessarily entails a believer's present knowledge (or belief) of salvation and that he or she will attain final salvation with no possibility of finally defecting from the faith whether through spiritual negligence or engaging in gross sin -- whether this view is based on a belief in individual unconditional election to salvation and irresistible grace or not -- I deny such a definition of assurance.

Because: 1) None of us, for the most part, knows when death will come [to or upon] each of us.

Which is all the more reason for believers to always be prepared and on the watch. Preparation is constantly stressed in the teachings of Jesus -- to watch, stay awake, keep alert, etc., etc. 1 Peter 5:8-9 is especially relevant here: "Be serious! Be alert! Your adversary the Devil is prowling around like a roaring lion, looking for anyone he can devour. Resist him and be firm in the faith, knowing that the same sufferings are being experienced by your fellow believers [literally: brothers] throughout the world" (HCSB). Believers are exhorted to be cautious. There is no room for any carnal security.

2) If those who profess faith in Christ and can be lost, then they do not know for sure they have eternal life.

First, I would stress that whether or not the NT teaches that a believer may decline from the faith (and so cease to be a genuine believer) or not, we ought to tackle the doctrine of perseverance apart from assuming any particular concept of assurance (of salvation) beforehand. To be sure, one's perspective of perseverance will have ramifications in one's view of assurance, but it is simply backward to argue from assurance to perseverance.

Second, as stated above, I would argue that it is possible for a believer to have present assurance of present salvation.

Present, Present, Present Assurance & 1 John 5

They cannot because one might yet deny the faith. 1 John 5:13 is false. Why would it be true?

This is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent. (John 17:3, NASB; emphasis added)

And the testimony is this, that God has given us eternal life, and this life is in His Son. He who has the Son has the life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have the life. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life. (1 John 5:11-13, NASB; emphasis added)

The assurance John is writing of in his epistle is present assurance (yes, I have to keep beating this horse), based on the believer's present relationship with God through Jesus Christ. We have or are "in possession" (if I might say so crudely) of eternal life so long as we are in the Son. The unspoken implication is if one ceases to believe or abide in Jesus Christ and abandons the apostolic doctrine concerning him, then he or she (i.e., the former believer) no longer has eternal life, the life that is in the Son alone. 2 John 9: "Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son" (NASB; emphasis added).

In short, it is possible to have a healthy present assurance of salvation if you are abiding in Christ. Biblically, however, no comfort or assurance is offered to those with deviant doctrines of Christ's full humanity or divinity (i.e., adhering to, accepting, or tolerating false/heretical doctrine), nor is any assurance offered for those living in open rebellion to Jesus's or the apostles' moral commands through sexual immorality, idolatry, hatred of others, etc. (i.e., living in gross immorality). Morally and doctrinally, the follower of Christ is constrained to the narrow path. Only there can any genuine -- as opposed to carnal -- security be found, and this security is found in Christ the Person.

[The Remonstrant]

Those who persevere in the faith are the genuine Christians. Those who do not were never saved to begin with. (2 John 9.)

2 John 9 does not teach that those who failed to persevere "were never saved to begin with".

[indent]Anyone who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God; the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son. (2 John 9, NASB)[/quote]

The emphasis is on persevering in Christ and his teaching, as no one will attain to final salvation apart from persevering to the end. No assertion is made to the effect that "if you fail to persevere in Christ, you never were a true believer".

1 John 2:19: Apostates & Fake Believers

Also, regarding 1 John 2:19, which says, "They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us" (NASB) -- this passage cannot legitimately be generalized or universalized and taken to describe all individual apostates for all times and places. Were some apostates fake or phoney believers? Are some in the church now unregenerate phoneys? Yes, of course! I think this principle can generally be assumed be any branch of Christian theology. Not everyone who professes faith in Christ is necessarily a genuine believer. This poses no problem for Arminian theology, which readily acknowledges the possibility and presence of snakes and self-deluded individuals who profess Christ but are by no stretch of the imagination in a saved or ever were in a justified state before God.

The particular group apostates written of in 1 John 2:19 clearly never had a portion in Christ or his salvation, and John makes this abundantly clear under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. But it simply will not do to take this passage and universalize it to the point where each and every single case of a professed believer of Christ apostatizes from the faith. As an Arminian, I am certainly within my logical rights to believe that some individuals who have departed from the faith were (or may well have been) genuine followers of Christ. But as I am not all knowing and have no special revelation or divine insight into the state of men's hearts, I would not wish to devote serious time in speculating or separating the sheep from the goats pertaining to (1) the phoneys who have abandoned an outward profession of the faith and (2) those who truly were, at one time, devoted believers in Jesus, but have since departed from the faith.

[RBerman]

Also, regarding 1 John 2:19, which says, "They went out from us, but they were not really of us; for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but they went out, so that it would be shown that they all are not of us" (NASB) -- this passage cannot legitimately be generalized or universalized and taken to describe all individual apostates for all times and places. Were some apostates fake or phoney believers? Are some in the church now unregenerate phoneys? Yes, of course! I think this principle can generally be assumed be any branch of Christian theology. Not everyone who professes faith in Christ is necessarily a genuine believer. This poses no problem for Arminian theology, which readily acknowledges the possibility and presence of snakes and self-deluded individuals who profess Christ but are by no stretch of the imagination in a saved or ever were in a justified state before God.

The particular group apostates written of in 1 John 2:19 clearly never had a portion in Christ or his salvation, and John makes this abundantly clear under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. But it simply will not do to take this passage and universalize it to the point where each and every single case of a professed believer of Christ apostatizes from the faith. As an Arminian, I am certainly within my logical rights to believe that some individuals who have departed from the faith were (or may well have been) genuine followers of Christ. But as I am not all knowing and have no special revelation or divine insight into the state of men's hearts, I would not wish to devote serious time in speculating or separating the sheep from the goats pertaining to (1) the phoneys who have abandoned an outward profession of the faith and (2) those who truly were, at one time, devoted believers in Jesus, but have since departed from the faith.

You seem awfully sure that the passage "cannot be universally generalized." You may choose not to generalize it, but on what basis do you say it cannot be generalized? The local text gives no clues to think that John's observation wouldn't be generally true. Your Arminian precommitments may make you "not wish to devote serious time" to that idea, but that's just a statement of how you've chosen to use other texts to control your reading of this text, rather than incorporating the information in this text to help induce your systematic conclusions.

[37818]

2 John 9 does not teach that those who failed to persevere "were never saved to begin with".

So let me understand this, are you saying one can not have the Spirit of God in him and still be saved? (Romans 8:9.)

2 John 9,

Whosoever goeth onward and abideth not in the teaching of Christ, hath not God: he that abideth in the teaching, the same hath both the Father and the Son.

[The Remonstrant]

So let me understand this, are you saying one can not have the Spirit of God in him and still be saved? (Romans 8:9.)

I have absolutely no idea how you could arrive at such an interpretation of my views from the posts above.

No, absolutely not, that is not what I am saying. Of course one must be indwelt by the Holy Spirit in order to be a genuine Christian. Arminians and Calvinists agree on at least this much. As long as one is regenerate, he or she is and will be indwelt by the Holy Spirit. If one fails to persevere in faith, however, he or she will be lost (or, in Calvinism, based on lack perseverance, is said to have never been regenerate or saved in the first place; this is where the disagreement lies). "For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live" (Romans 8:13, ESV).

[The Remonstrant]

You seem awfully sure that the passage "cannot be universally generalized." You may choose not to generalize it, but on what basis do you say it cannot be generalized?

I'll frame it this way: I don't see any compelling reason to universalize this particular passage John applies only to a specific group of apostates (1 John 2:19). John himself doesn't give us any hints that we should seek to broaden this application indefinitely to every and all cases of individual and corporate apostasy from the faith.

[RBerman]

I'll frame it this way: I don't see any compelling reason to universalize this particular passage John applies only to a specific group of apostates (1 John 2:19). John himself doesn't give us any hints that we should seek to broaden this application indefinitely to every and all cases of individual and corporate apostasy from the faith.

He seeems to be stating a general principle which he applies to this particular apostasy. Why would "If they were of us, they would have stayed with us" be unusually applicable just to that situation?

[37818]

I have absolutely no idea how you could arrive at such an interpretation of my views from the posts above.

No, absolutely not, that is not what I am saying. Of course one must be indwelt by the Holy Spirit in order to be a genuine Christian. Arminians and Calvinists agree on at least this much. As long as one is regenerate, he or she is and will be indwelt by the Holy Spirit. If one fails to persevere in faith, however, he or she will be lost (or, in Calvinism, based on lack perseverance, is said to have never been regenerate or saved in the first place; this is where the disagreement lies). "For if you live according to the flesh you will die, but if by the Spirit you put to death the deeds of the body, you will live" (Romans 8:13, ESV).

Well from the stand point being, the reason one would depart from the faith being, not really having God in one's life to begin with. (1 John 9, Romans 8:9, 1 John 5:12, 2 Corinthians 13:5.).

[The Remonstrant]

Become As I Am (or A Calvinist, If You Prefer)

Well from the stand point being, the reason one would depart from the faith being, not really having God in one's life to begin with. (1 John 9, Romans 8:9, 1 John 5:12, 2 Corinthians 13:5.).

37818, I did all that detailed argumentation above and this is all I get?

I'm not attempting to proselytize you to join Arminian ranks; I can die a relatively happy (or discontent) man apart from whether or not you or anyone else here "becomes as I am."

What is particularly perturbing is that I don't see any real attempt on your part to grapple with a basic Arminian understanding of salvific perseverance on its own terms. And this is precisely what you must do if you genuinely desire to understand it. It means reading some fine soteriological volumes written by Arminian authors, not exclusively reading Calvinian critiques (my apologies in advance if this does not directly apply to you). Also, I would put it this way: Don't be afraid of where the truth might lead you; if it leads you to be or remain a Calvinist or become a Buddhist (though I highly doubt the truth will lead you to the latter), then so be it.

Personally, if I discovered Calvinism to be true in my studies, I would repent and become the staunchest five-point Reformed-Calvinist, publicly humiliating myself on this forum for my prior shameless advocating of Arminian theology.

As a general exhortation to all here, Arminians and Calvinists particularly -- immerse yourself not only in the writings of your pet theologians and the like but even more so in the finest authors and works of the opposing view of what you already inclined to believe.

If anyone is genuinely interested, send me a private message and I can recommend you some fine Arminian works.

[The Remonstrant]

Conditional Security

He seeems to be stating a general principle which he applies to this particular apostasy. Why would "If they were of us, they would have stayed with us" be unusually applicable just to that situation?

It's not that 1 John 2:19 can't be extended or broadened to any other cases of corporate or individual apostasy. Taking it to be a universal or absolute principle of each and every case of apostasy from the Christian faith, however, seems a stretch to me. I would argue, conversely, against your perspective, that it takes a prior commitment to the notion that all believers (i.e., those who are initially saved) must attain to final salvation (infallible divine preservation and perseverance of the saints) to view 1 John 2:19 as a text that should be taken as a universal principle for apostates. (Which is to say, according to this perspective, no apostates at any time ever were regenerate, there being no exceptions to this rule.)

Let's take a look at the surrounding context: 1 John 2:18-24 is a passage regarding a (particularly) doctrinal apostasy consisting of "antichrists" (v. 18) who departed from the fellowship of John's addressees (v. 19). An "antichrist" is defined as one who denies Jesus as the Messiah (vv. 22-23). Especially pertinent here is v. 24: "As for you, let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father" (NASB). Prior theological commitments influence us particularly at this point in interpreting this verse. A Calvinist would take v. 24 to mean that if one fails to persevere in the apostolic teaching, he or she never was regenerate to begin with. Verse 24b says, "If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father" (NASB; emphasis added). I take that to be a conditional statement that naturally leads to the conclusion that abiding in Christ (and/or the apostolic teaching concerning him) is necessary to attain to final salvation. Which is simply to say that the language of continuing, remaining or abiding affirms the conditionality of salvation. This seems a more natural interpretation.

[RBerman]

It's not that 1 John 2:19 can't be extended or broadened to any other cases of corporate or individual apostasy. Taking it to be a universal or absolute principle of each and every case of apostasy from the Christian faith, however, seems a stretch to me. I would argue, conversely, against your perspective, that it takes a prior commitment to the notion that all believers (i.e., those who are initially saved) must attain to final salvation (infallible divine preservation and perseverance of the saints) to view 1 John 2:19 as a text that should be taken as a universal principle for apostates. (Which is to say, according to this perspective, no apostates at any time ever were regenerate, there being no exceptions to this rule.)

To one with a Calvinist understanding, this text requires absolutely no "stretching." It's a comment about specific individuals, spoken without any qualification, bespeaking the universality of the underlying principle, just like "They went out in the rain, so they got wet." The Arminian, on the other hand, does have to stretch the text to include an unspoken disclaimer, "They went out from among us, because they were not of us. [That's not necessarily true of all apostates, just these.]" Your exegesis of verse 24 accurately captures how Calvinists and Arminians would differ in its interpretation, but "abiding" language does not "affirm the conditionality of salvation." Rather, in the context of verse 19, it implies the same thing about the rest of the church: "If you go out from among us, you too were never of us."