Chosen Ones

Status
Not open for further replies.

ValleyofVision

Puritan Board Freshman
So I have a question in regards to 1 Timothy 2 and hoping someone could help me understand more clearly.


I have struggled with the thought of God saving only the elect. It makes me feel like that plants a sense of "pride" within the chosen one because they have been saved by Christ and not the others (correct me if I'm wrong about this). If someone is truly desiring to know God, but is not apart of the elect, then how does that person accept God's decision in not calling them to be saved? Also, how does the chosen one respond to that person?

Now onto my question:

2 I urge, then, first of all, that petitions, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for all people— 2 for kings and all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness. 3 This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4 who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time. 7 And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a true and faithful teacher of the Gentiles.

Why didn't Paul say that God wants only the elect to be saved and know the knowledge of truth? Why did Paul say the Man Christ Jesus, gave himself as a ransom for only those chosen? Is it true that God truly wants all people to be saved? Or is it only the elect? Has God already predestined the ones that are going to know him and not know Him, or did He, before creation, desire that ALL humans come to know Him?
 
This is similiar to should we understand that Jesus died for the whole world, or would the contex have it to be understand as really being for just the elect?
 
Just about any teaching of truth can be perverted to a bad end. Your first statement seems to suggest, however, that the doctrine of election necessarily births pride. The questions should never begin, "What ills may come if such things are believed?" But, "What is the truth?" Followed by, "What is the proper and true response to it?"

It is also possible to teach the doctrine of election in a manner that obscures the tenor and the end of it. So, errors related to this doctrine can come about from misunderstanding and misapplying by the hearer, but also by the communication. Since one great intent of the doctrine of election is the absolute death of human pride, we should not be surprised if the devil aims at discrediting the truth of it by a counterfeit, that works the opposite result.

It is NOT POSSIBLE for someone to "truly desire" to know God, except that the urge be stirred up in him by the Holy Spirit. Scripture is clear, the NT Apostle declares it by an appeal to the OT prophet, Rom. 3:11, "...there is NONE that seeketh after God." 1Cor.2:14, "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

Jesus said that if one truly desires to know God, he will surely have his reward: "If any man will do his [God's] will, he shall know of the doctrine," Jn.7:17. The only way to know if one is elect is by believing the Word, by faith in Christ. When one knows that his faith is God's gift, that he could not believe in any wise by his own power, then it is possible to work back to the eternal purposes of God for his salvation. Election is the insurance that he would desire to know God, and would believe.

Conversely, the only way to know oneself to be reprobate is by rejecting the hope of God in Christ. It would be a strange fellow--though I doubt not that there has been a few of these in the world--who admitted intellectually the accuracy of Scripture's representation of the whole doctrine of salvation, redemption accomplished and applied, and embraced his identity as one forever at enmity with God. He would have to admit that any faint stirrings of human desire, seeming to yearn for God rather than repudiate him, were nothing really of the kind; but only a wisp of lust to force God to take him on his own terms. Most men will never pursue Christian theology in such a way that they conclude in true doctrine, yet place themselves outside the mercies of God.

So, I find the hypothetical in your first paragraph quite mistakes an actual state of affairs. Moreover, no one can detect the ultimate nature of someone else' heart. 1Cor.2:11, "For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him?" So, we relate to people not on the basis of whether they might or might not be one of those known unto salvation from all eternity, but on the basis of what we hear (confession) and what we see (manner of life). That's all we have to go on.


As for the text of 1Tim.2, again I must ask: Why begin an investigation by demanding to know why some words are not present? As if, were a doctrine well-founded from passages that speak directly to it, no one would ever challenge it by pulling a text from another place? 1Tim.2 is not designed to teach the doctrine of election, so why OUGHT it have other language than it does? Let the passage speak for itself; and properly interpreted and contextualized, it cannot subvert any of the rest of divine truth.

What does ὃς πάντας ἀνθρώπους θέλει σωθῆναι (v4) mean? What, exactly, does "all men" mean? Does it mean "all mankind, everywhere, in all time, without exception?" Or, "everybody alive at any given moment in history." Or, "everybody alive when Peter wrote the words." Why would any of those be the best or most obvious meaning?

One antecedent to "all men" in v4 is the "all men" in v1, which plainly interpreted means "all kinds of men," as v2 elaborates by example: kings and all those in authority. So, one qualifier of "all" is already explicit in the text. With that in mind, it should be clear that the express "will of God" in v4 is a general, and not his specific electing-will-unto-salvation, which would be the case if this text were concerned to teach on election.

But, it is a text about men at prayer; men who do not know the secret things of God, but who do know that God has a general love for his creation and for man as his image bearer, which is expressed elsewhere in similar fashion. For instance, Jn.3:16. And men should go to prayer, in general terms (and for specific souls); knowing that God has not revealed any exclusions regarding his offer of mercy.

What does ὁ δοὺς ἑαυτὸν ἀντίλυτρον ὑπὲρ πάντων (v6) mean? The "all" that are ransomed: is it "people" in general (the standalone adjective takes the force of an unstated noun)? It is certainly ALL something. Could there be a more precise referent for "all?" Actually, it is the word "ransom" that should supply the referent for "all" in this case. It is a full and complete ransom, and those for whom it is paid out will surely see the benefit of it.

How, indeed, could it be a ransom for those who are never ransomed by it? Some interpreters do, in fact, teach that God has paid a great ransom; cancelling the debt of every last sinner in the whole world (does that include the betrayal by Judas, the "son of perdition"?). Ultimately, this view leads to the Arminian-like conclusion that the destiny of the ungodly is finally their "choice," rather than the judicial fiat of God, Jn.3:18. Did he release them from their condemnation, and yet they've chosen to remain estranged from his yearning heart? Since he is God, his must be an eternally unfulfilled yearning! Blasphemous conclusion, but necessitated by the view that God has ransomed the damned. And, it makes some great portion of Christ's shed blood unavailing, not securing the release of some ransomed souls.

For consistency's sake, therefore, we must understand that "all" (v6) is defined by those who are ransomed; and not "those who are ransomed" defined by the "all" which word gets extended (in the error) to every human being besides the Savior himself.

Hope this is helpful.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top