God, come out, come out wherever you are!

[Ryft]

I actually started thread a few weeks ago discussing problems in interpreting scripture in such a way. The discussion mostly centered on whether you are interpreting scripture really the way it was intended to be interpreted or just committing the Spiritual Fallacy. . . . That discussion is not relevant for what we we are debating now but, if you wish, you can find it and continue the discussion here: http://atheistforums.org/thread-12501.html

It was not a few weeks ago, it was only last week. Heheh. Anyway, I will have a go at your questions in that thread over the next couple of days. And it does not matter that it has no relevance to our discussion here; like most anyone else, I enjoy a broad range of subjects.

You seem to understand that Christ only died for those God intended save, and that God only calls those Christ died for. Basically only those he intended to save, died for, and calls, will be saved. I must ask, then: What is the difference between people he did not decide to die for and call and those who he did (aside from the fact he chose them of course)? Why did he select the ones that he did select? What’s so special about them? Also, why did he not select all human beings? Why did he not die for all and then call them all to him?

The election by God of particular people for redemption is explicitly and clearly stated in the Bible. What is not stated in the Bible, nor is it even implied, is the reason why God chose these people but not those—although it does state what the reason was not, namely, anything to do with the people in themselves (Rom. 9:11; cf. v, 16; 2 Tim. 1:9). In other words, election is unconditional.

So what I mean to say is that there is no "difference" between who he did and did not choose, that there was no "special" quality about those he chose; we were all in the same boat, condemned under his wrath for our manifold sins (Titus 3:3-5). There is no morally neutral state in which anyone exists; all mankind exists in a state of condemnation on account of sin. We all come from the same pool of sin, of moral ruin and death—and through unbelief, which is itself a sin, we would remain there. We exist under death; only in Christ do we move to life. We exist under God's wrath; only in Christ is that wrath removed. We exist under condemnation; only in Christ are we justified.

So then why did he choose these people but not those? Why did he not choose everyone? We are not told what his reason was, beyond the fact that he has one (Eph. 1:11; Deut. 29:29); and it was arguably a smart move to not tell us, quite frankly, for we are thus unable to presume who is and is not part of the elect. For all I know, you might be. And thus, not knowing who constitutes the elect, we do not discriminate when sharing the gospel.

(Yes, it is possible for an atheist to be part of the elect. That term simply means chosen by God for salvation; but 'when' they are called to that salvation through union with Christ, and everything which attends that, is another matter entirely. It could happen at any point in their life, a time known only to God and his purpose; but it will happen, for when God intends to save someone he will not fail.)

When you say that the non-elect willingly choose to sin, does that mean the elect do not sin (or at least do not willingly sin)? If you say no, that both groups willingly sin, then what is the difference between the elect and non-elect?

Indeed my answer would be that they both willingly sin. What, then, is the difference between them? Just this: That once the elect are called and regenerated, now turning to Christ in faith and repentance, they are no longer comfortable in and with their sin; that is, they hate their sin and yearn to stop sinning, and all the more as God continues to sanctify them in the pure image of God, Jesus Christ. They also now love God and the things of God, and all the more as they are being sanctified. Moreover, they are no longer under condemnation, the penalty their sin was due having been borne by Christ and nailed to the cross, with the righteous requirement of the law being fulfilled in them through the faithfulness of Christ for all who believe.

It is a stark difference from the non-elect, who are left unregenerated and remain under condemnation, left to continue enjoying their sin and increasing it, despising God and the things of God, an obdurate rebellion and ingratitude to which God responds by removing what little grace they had been extended, and in the end having to bear the penalty their sin is due themselves (which some here have even insisted on).

If both groups are willful sinners, then the only reason the non-elect went to hell is because they were non-elect.

Again, being of the non-elect is why they do not go to heaven. It is not why they go to hell. They are condemned because of their multitude of sins, the penalty for which they must bear themselves (which some even insist on). Again, that is the condition in which absolutely everyone finds themselves; and it is out of that already condemned lot that God chose to save some. So being of the non-elect is why they do not go to heaven; they were already condemned to hell.

One last question: Do all people for whom Christ died respond to God's call? Are there some he died for that do not respond to his call?

Yes, every single person for whom Christ died ends up responding to God's call, brought into union with Christ and saved in him. God will not fail to save any one of those who belong to him.

That seems to make witnessing pointless. (Back to that point, I'm afraid.) God's call will always end up getting to the elect person somehow . . . If you do not witness to someone, it is inevitable that someone else will later down the road. Or, if all else fails, perhaps something miraculous will happen like a Bible coincidentally falling off the shelf, smacking the elect person on the head and landing on the floor open to John 3:16. God will always find a way to get his elect called.

You seem to be contradicting yourself here. If it is inevitable that the gospel of Jesus Christ will somehow reach every elect person, then it is not pointless at all.