One of the objections Arminians like to throw against the Reformed teaching regarding election is the fact that one cannot speak of a sovereign God electing without at least implying, if not directly approving, "double predestination"--that is, that God both elects to salvation and to damnation. The Arminian objection is largely emotional: the thought of a good and loving God condemning countless masses of people to eternal torment should grieve your soul and make you wonder how a God of love could ever do anything so heinous. That God would gather millions of people and select only some to be saved is supposed to be seen as equivalent to terrorists rounding up villagers and condemning them all to die, except for some random, fortunate souls that are picked out. Just imagine the poor, depraved non-Christians being dragged into hell against their will, kicking and screaming all the way to the fiery pit shouting "Why me? Why me?" and you get the idea.
Of course, this is quite an unbiblical representation of the Reformed doctrine of election and reprobation. The Reformed view starts with the fact that we are all sinners, every last one of us (Romans 3:23). And not just that we are guilty of getting angry at our kids, or jumping in line at McDonald's, or saying something mean about a co-worker. No, we are guilty of outright rebellion against our Creator. We are all God haters, actively suppressing the knowledge of God and ignoring Him and His claims upon us (Romans 1:18 ff.) When Romans 3:11 says that there are none who seek after God, we must understand that this is saying that no-one is actively pursuing the things of God. There is no-one who desires from the bottom of his or her heart to be pleasing to God (Hebrews 11:6). No-one wants to do God's will; it takes a work of God's regenerating Spirit to change the heart so that we are able to believe and desire to please God (John 3:3). This is what happens when God elects to save. Those God does not choose are left in their rebellion; they have no desire to do God's will, no love for God, and feel absolutely no remorse at not being of the elect.
I am a vegetarian, and I have been for nearly 20 years. Prior to being a vegetarian, I loved chicken and would drool over a juicy steak like the next carnivorous person. Now, such things do nothing for me. I have sat at the dinner table with people sharing stories of the fabulous cuts of meat they have enjoyed, salivating and causing other to salivate as they describe tender pork roasts, or succulent prime ribs, all of which has no effect on me whatsoever. I have no desire for meat, and the thought of a juicy steak does as much for me as the thought of moldy bread. People have tried to entice my taste buds with their favorite dishes of animal flesh, but I simply have no desire to eat meat, so they are left frustrated. When the turkey is being passed around at Thanksgiving, I do not feel in the slightest bit offended when the platter is passed over me. My feelings are not hurt when someone else is offered the turkey leg. Indeed, I am grateful that people are considerate enough not to pour gravy on my plate. I don't think I'm missing out on anything.
The Reformed position teaches that the reprobate attitude to God is akin to my attitude to meat. They don't want God. They have no desire for God. The last thing they want is to hear the gospel message and be told of Christ's sacrificial death and glorious resurrection. It is not glorious to them; it is foolishness and a waste of their time (1 Corinthians 1:18). In fact, you would not be dragging them kicking and screaming into hell; you would be dragging them kicking and screaming into heaven! Unless God changes his heart, taking out the heart of stone and replacing it with a heart of flesh (Ezekiel 36:26), the reprobate would be pleased to know that he has been passed over for election, and grateful that he will not have to tolerate God's presence for all eternity.
So, in answer to the Arminian who says, "if you believe in election, that means you believe in double predestination." I say, "yes and amen!" If by "double predestination" you mean that God has elected some (a multitude, if we accept what Revelation 7:9 says) for salvation, and purposefully left the rest to their just and deserved condemnation, I say, "indeed, that's exactly what I believe." That's not to say I don't grieve over the lost; they truly don't know what they are missing, and how severe their punishment will be. However, we need to be sure we recognize that God is ultimately just in all His ways, and He does not condemn to eternal death anyone a) who doesn't want to go there, and b) whom He has not determine will go there, for the greater purpose of His will, to the ultimate glory of His name. I close this article with the words of Loraine Boettner:
The condemnation of the non-elect is designed primarily to furnish an eternal exhibition, before men and angels, of God's hatred for sin, or, in other words, it is to be an eternal manifestation of the justice of God.. This decree displays one of the divine attributes which apart from it could never have been adequately appreciated. The salvation of some through a redeemer is designed to display the attributes of love, mercy, and holiness. The attributes of wisdom, power, and sovereignty are displayed in the treatment of both groups. Hence the truth of the Scripture statement that, "Jehovah hath made everything for its own end; Yea, even the wicked for the day of evil," Prov. 16:4... This decree of reprobation also serves subordinate purposes in regard to the elect; for in beholding the rejection and final state of the wicked, (1) they learn what they too would have suffered had not grace stepped in to their relief, and they appreciate more deeply the riches of divine love... (2) It furnishes a most powerful motive for thankfulness that they have received such high blessings. (Loraine Boettner, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination, pp. 121-122)
This will serve as a great example for the readers of this post to see first hand how Calvinism interprets Scripture to got their doctrine
Topic Post:
"The condemnation of the non-elect is designed primarily to furnish an eternal exhibition, before men and angels, of God's hatred for sin, or, in other words, it is to be an eternal manifestation of the justice of God.....Hence the truth of the Scripture statement that, "Jehovah hath made everything for its own end; Yea, even the wicked for the day of evil," Prov. 16:4..."
------------------------------------------
This author takes a verse out of Proverbs to say God creates people on purpose just to send them to hell for a bad example and ignores verses like 2 Peter 3:9 ~ "he is patient with you not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance" and Ezek 33:11 ~ " As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from ways and live."
Good grief is there no end to this madness?
So what does Proverbs 16:4 mean?
Simply it means that God created everyone, even those who reject Him and choose wickedness, and for those a day of disaster has been prepared.
"The condemnation of the non-elect is designed primarily to furnish an eternal exhibition, before men and angels, of God's hatred for sin, or, in other words, it is to be an eternal manifestation of the justice of God.....Hence the truth of the Scripture statement that, "Jehovah hath made everything for its own end; Yea, even the wicked for the day of evil," Prov. 16:4..."
------------------------------------------
Twosparrows said:
This author takes a verse out of Proverbs to say God creates people on purpose just to send them to hell for a bad example
and ignores verses like 2 Peter 3:9 ~ "he is patient with you not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance"
James replies:
2 Peter was written to CHRISTIANS, and God does not want any of HIS chosen people to perish, but that ALL OF THEM would come to repentance.
Twosparrows continues:
and Ezek 33:11 ~ " As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from ways and live."
James replies:
And where did anyone say that God takes pleasure in the death of the wicked????
Twosparrows continues:
Good grief is there no end to this madness?
So what does Proverbs 16:4 mean?
Simply it means that God created everyone, even those who reject Him and choose wickedness, and for those a day of disaster has been prepared.
James replies:
Now Twosparrows says that Proverbs 16:4 merely means that God created everyone. But read it again in the ESV:
" The LORD has made everything for its purpose,
even the wicked for the day of trouble."
ALL things serve God's purposes, and if they did not, they would not exist. The Bible says this again in Romans 9: 17-23
If God knew that we would sin, why did he create the world?
If God knew that we would sin, why did he create the world?Our tendency in answering this question is to look at it from a man-centred perspective: what�s in it for us? Wouldn�t it have been better for us never to have sinned?
But the answer that the bible gives challenges us by taking a God-centred perspective. And it makes us step back and ask an even bigger question:
Why did God create the world at all?
God didn�t create the world primarily for our benefit, he did it for his glory. He created a world that would display his glory most fully and most perfectly. That is to say, every aspect of God�s character could be shown in its most extreme form.
If God had created a world in which no one sinned, what aspects of his character could he have shown? His creative power, his loving-kindness, his provision for his people.
But what about his mercy? Or his justice? Or his wrath?
And would we have seen even his creative power to its fullest extent if there had been no death and therefore no resurrection?
Could we have known the greatness of his loving-kindness if he had not shown it to faithless Israel?
Paul explains something of this in Romans 9:22-23
�What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory��
God�s wrath expended against unrepentant sinners demonstrates the riches of his glory, just as his mercy shown to the elect demonstrates his glory.
The orginal intent of my post was to show how Calvinism interprets Scripture to fit their doctrine. Your topic post on double predestination served as a fine example, and now you go the extra mile and provide a double exhibition of interpreting Scripture to fit your doctrine! Such as in 2 Peter where you 'change' the word "anyone" to "HIS choosen people"
FYI~
ESV = any / all
HCSB = any / all
NIV = anyone / everyone
NASB = any / all
NKJV = any / all
KJV = any / all
NLT = anyone / everyone
AMP = any / all
NRSV = any / all
Interlinear = all / any
Sorry James, I looked it up in 10 different Bibles and cannot find your wording. I can only conclude you are mistaken or are adding to or changing the oringal text to fit your own doctrine.
Unless of course it is you postion that the Holy Spirit writing through Peter mistakenly used the words "any" and "all" not realizing they would be interpreted as "any" or "all" and rather should of used "HIS choosen people".
Allow me to preface this post to you since you have figuratively strolled into a mine field : 'I love you as a brother in Christ and bear no malice for you"
I can talk unknowingly with a Jehovah Witness or a Mormon and in a few minutes know what they are. Their vernacular and what they deem most important gives them away. Then are like clones in that regard. After reading your post I am assuming you are of Reformed Doctrine (I haven't checked your profile, I could be wrong). Why is Calvinists are such clones each parroting vernacular from the mothership? Have any of you studied independently letting the Holy Spirit teach you or have you all been taught the excat same Systematic Theology word for word according to the followers of Calvin.
You told us why God created the earth, even with no supporting Scripture. Don't you think that is a bit presumptuous? That "you" would know exactly why God created the earth?.... Yes I know it is "Reformed Vernacular"
In the same way you have been taught memorize the "meanings" or "interpretations" of Bible verses. The Romans verse you posted is a great example of how verses are taken out of context to fit a particular doctrine. In a nut shell, in context, this verse is showing how God knew the Jews would reject their Savior and planned use this rejection to bring the Gospel to the world. But you all want to use this to support double predestination.
The word "any" and "All" hardly ever means "everyone who ever lived".
If I say in a thread on this group, "you all know what I mean",
I mean "all the people on CDFF who read on the discussion forum."
The fact is, when you read the word "all" written in a letter TO a group of Christians, say in Corinth, it was written TO CHRISTIANS.
It does NOT mean everyone in the whole world who ever lived, unless the context supports that idea.
If you demand that the word "all" means "everybody who ever lived" every time you read it in the Bible, YOU are demanding a definition that is not there.
The word "all" can mean "all of one kind", or "all of a group".
Well James, shall we do some "BASIC READING COMPREHENSION" in context? :
You say Peter is "writing to Christians", this is true. However dig deeper James, (BASIC READING COMPREHENSION) Who is Peter writing about? (In context) Look at the end of the verse : "that all should reach repentance" (ESV). So how can Peter be writing to Christians if they haven't reached repentance?
Opps!
James, I am fully aware you can go around to any verse and say "Oh, that applies only to the elect" That works great if you believe your doctrine takes precedence over Scripture. However if you believe Scripture takes precedence over your doctrine, then you realize your doctrine is not 100% Scriptural.
You know James, you just gotta be asking yourself why the Holy Spirit used the words "all, any, everyone, anyone, whosoever, all men, the whole world" instead of just using the word "elect"?
