"No true Christian would ______________."

Originally posted by epiphinehas
I can't claim to be a student of either Augustinian predestination or Calvinism. That's not to say I don't agree with some aspect of either of those teachings, but that I'm not familiar with their every aspect (enough to say definitively what I am in relation to them). The bible seems clear about what constitutes a member of God's elect (persevering fa ...[text shortened]... o in some way explain away its significance, as if the idea were elitist in some way.

Okay--you've given me a lot of references and exegetical comments to look at, and I need to take the time to do that... I'm going to print some of it out, so I can get away from the computer to do it. I appreciate the work.

Be well.

Originally posted by vistesd
Okay--you've given me a lot of references and exegetical comments to look at, and I need to take the time to do that... I'm going to print some of it out, so I can get away from the computer to do it. I appreciate the work.

Be well.

Actually, the 'work' I put into this forum I perform while I'm at work, if you can believe that. I have an unsupervised desk position which affords me at least five hours a day, which I can devote to digging into God's word. I don't see this as work because I enjoy the challenge. So take your time.

May God's grace be with you.

Epiphinehas

Originally posted by epiphinehas
Actually, the 'work' I put into this forum I perform while I'm at work, if you can believe that. I have an unsupervised desk position which affords me at least five hours a day, which I can devote to digging into God's word. I don't see this as work because I enjoy the challenge. So take your time.

May God's grace be with you.

Epiphinehas

Yes, I enjoy it too—it has only been fairly recently that I discovered the Eastern Orthodox church, and some of it’s different takes. I printed out all your references and comments for study, because I do want to take the time to work through this, and dig deeper.

I just have one question, to understand your position on “election” more clearly, especially vis-à-vis your comment that “‘Bringing salvation to all people’ is not the same as saying that all people will receive God’s salvation. Though the Lord brings salvation to them, many will reject him (Christ).”

Either (1) God brings salvation to all people, and the elect are those who accept it; or (2) God only brings salvation to the pre-determined (from the beginning) elect; or (3) there are some who are elect from the beginning, but salvation is also offered to (some? all?) others, who may or may not reject it.

I believe that some version of the 3rd was Augustine’s view. Double predestination (again, as I understand it) is that the elect are predestined to salvation and everyone else is predestined to condemnation.

Which is your understanding?

______________________________

There seem to me to be three related issues in this, that cannot be separated:

(a) the juridical versus the healing model of salvation (although some, such as Clement of Alexandria held a juridical view along with the expectation of an ultimate reconciliation—i.e., hell is punitive but not eternal);

(b) whether or not physical death is a bar to further salvific action by God, one the one hand, and/or decision by the individual, on the other; and

(c) whether or not hell is eternal (which partly depends on how one translates aion and it cognates; for example in Colossians 1:26, aionion is translated as “ages”—also in Romans 16:25, 1st Corinthians 10:11, Ephesians 2:7 and 3:9, and elsewhere—it can mean anything from a definite period of time, to an age or ages, to a long time, to forever, depending on both context and one’s theological view).

Originally posted by vistesd
Either (1) God brings salvation to all people, and the elect are those who accept it; or (2) God only brings salvation to the pre-determined (from the beginning) elect; or (3) there are some who are elect from the beginning, but salvation is also offered to (some? all?) others, who may or may not reject it.

I believe the first choice is accurate.

Originally posted by vistesd
Either (1) God brings salvation to all people, and the elect are those who accept it; or (2) God only brings salvation to the pre-determined (from the beginning) elect; or (3) there are some who are elect from the beginning, but salvation is also offered to (some? all?) others, who may or may not reject it.

I believe the first choice is accurate. However, those who accept God's salvation are also predetermined, i.e. chosen from the foundation of the world. Their faith in Jesus Christ is not of themselves, but God's work in them.

Originally posted by epiphinehas
I believe the first choice is accurate. However, those who accept God's salvation are also predetermined, i.e. chosen from the foundation of the world. Their faith in Jesus Christ is not of themselves, but God's work in them.

Okay. Part of my problem is that I don’t want to argue this particular issue just vis-à-vis that position, but other alternatives as well; and I’m getting a bit strung out jumping from thread to thread. So—

I’ve only had time to briefly skim the last scriptural references you gave—I suspect that part of this is going to come down to which texts we each are using to interpret other texts. (I hope I’m making you work as hard at this as you’re making me work! 😉 Or at least that I’m providing a useful diversion while you sit at your desk... 🙂 )

However—I’ve reached a point where I need to broaden my scriptural study, to keep my arguments from being too piecemeal; and since we are both citing heavily from Paul, I’m going to start by going through the entire Pauline corpus (which, with some exception, represents the earliest layers of the NT anyway, and I’ve never read through the NT in historical order before). Then I’ll look at other texts. Only after I have an overall view will I go back and start to look at the Greek, and stuff like that. This gives me a framework within which to gather it all together again in some cohesive way.

Along with my other projects of reading in the history of church doctrine and trying to up-level my Greek, this ought to keep me out of trouble for awhile.

Lucifershammer has just bumped the “God Fails at Salvation?” thread, where my thought on this was developing (in argument as usual) before you came in here. (LH comes from a Roman Catholic perspective.) I may need to put him off there awhile as well. But when I’m ready, maybe we can move it all over to that thread—and re-cap from this one as we need to?

In the meantime, be well.

Originally posted by vistesd
Okay. Part of my problem is that I don’t want to argue this particular issue just vis-à-vis that position, but other alternatives as well; and I’m getting a bit strung out jumping from thread to thread. So—

I’ve only had time to briefly skim the last scriptural references you gave—I suspect that part of this is going to come down to which texts we each ...[text shortened]... it all over to that thread—and re-cap from this one as we need to?

In the meantime, be well.

Take all the time you need. When you're ready message me and let me know. I'll be delving into the texts as well.

Peace.