Author Archive for Randy Seiver

19
Aug
18

Randy’s Author’s Page

Please visit Randy’s author’s page at Amazon.com.
http://www.amazon.com/author/randyseiver

18
Aug
18

The Israel of God

Now available on Amazon Kindle, The Israel of God by Randy Seiver

09
Aug
18

Not Willing That Any Should Perish–2 Peter 3:9

It seems that every time a person mentions the concept of divine election, a non-Calvinist will feel compelled to “quote” a portion of 2 Peter 3:9 in support of the idea that it is God’s intention for everyone to be saved. There are several questions I would like to propose to such people:

1. Do you believe that God knew before he ever created Adam and placed him in the garden that great multitudes of people would perish if he proceeded with his purpose to create? If he was not willing that anyone perish, why did he create them knowing perfectly that they would perish? Your only recourse here would seem to be to embrace open Theism.

2. Given the indisputable fact that Peter was explaining why God’s promise of Christ’s coming and the impending, accompanying judgment had not yet been realized, how does your understanding of 3:9 make any sense at all in that context?

It seems to be without dispute that in any given generation there are fewer people saved than lost. If that is so, is it not true that with every passing generation, the aggregate number of those who perish will grow? At the end of this generation, the sum of those lost will be greater than the sum of those lost at the end of the last generation. If Jesus had returned at the end of the first century fewer people would have perished than will have perished when he returns. Since God knows this perfectly, a delay in judgment would make no sense at all. If God truly intended for more people to be saved than lost, would not hastening the judgment make more sense than delaying it?–

29
Jul
18

Love’s Condescension

When Jesus knew the hour had come
That he should make his way back home,
He took a towel and left his seat
To wash his people’s filthy feet.

‘twas greater condescension still,
Though being in the form of God,
He stooped to do his Father’s will
And bore his people’s sinful load.

He laid aside his glory above,
And poured himself into our frame,
Humbled himself and came in love,
And in his bosom bore our blame.

He girt himself with love’s strong bands,
And in our guilty place he stood;
Took squalid souls in holy hands
And washed them spotless in his blood.

And when his work on earth was done
He donned his glorious robes again,
Sat down upon his heavenly throne
In splendid majesty to reign.

His name, above all names sublime,
Our lips shall praise, our souls esteem,
And every knee shall bow to him
Whose love shall be our constant theme.

Randy Seiver

Based on John 13:1-12; Phil. 2:5-11.

12
Jul
18

BATTLEGROUND PASSAGES

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07FFN97GY/ref=sr_1_1… Art Galleries

“Battleground Passages,” An Exposition of Pivotal Passages in the Monergist-Synergist Debate, by Randy Seiver is now available at Amazon Kindle.
This book offers a contextual and exegetical consideration of major passages over which Calvinists and non-Calvinists have disagreed. The author offers a fresh perspective on passages that have often been misused by those on both sides of the issue. If you truly wish to understand the issues in this controversy over the nature of God’s saving work, you cannot afford to neglect this book.

28
May
18

For We are His Handiwork–Ephesians 2:10

If there is any question in anyone’s mind about Paul’s meaning in verses eight and nine, what he has written in verse ten makes it abundantly clear. First, notice that the purpose clause “in order that no one should boast” and the words “we are his handiwork/created work” are connected by “for, or because [γὰρ].” Paul is citing the reason that no one should boast and he places “of Him [αὐτοῦ]” in the emphatic position—“of him, we are the created work” to underscore the fact that our union with Christ in the new creation is his doing and not ours. This clearly accords with Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians 1:29-31 where he wrote, “In order that no human being should boast in his presence, but it is of him [God] you are in Christ Jesus. . .in order that just as it is written, ‘he that boasts, let him boast in the Lord.’”

If the synergistic view were correct, none of what is written in these passages would be true. According to synergism, God’s choice of sinners has been determined, not by his sovereign good pleasure but by his foresight of their free will decision. The Son has not secured the eternal redemption of any sinner in particular but has merely given sinners the potential for salvation if they will let Jesus save them. Jesus “draws” every sinner and the Father enables them to believe by giving all of them prevenient grace. He does absolutely nothing to distinguish between one sinner and another. If any sinner is saved, it is solely because he [or she] has cooperated with God’s best efforts and has thus distinguished himself from other sinners who have had equal opportunities but did not improve on them.

It is inconceivable, on the supposition that this view of soteriology is correct, that Paul could have written, “But it is of him that you are in Christ Jesus” since it would be of the sinner’s doing that is in Christ and not of his doing. If in all his best efforts to bring sinners to himself, efforts exerted toward all sinners equally, many will perish for eternity, one cannot accurately state that his most noble exertions have been effective in uniting any sinner to Christ. If there is no distinction in God’s efforts to save sinners, the factor or factors that distinguish one sinner from another must be in the sinner.

If God has done all he has intended to do to effect the sinner’s salvation once he has granted universal but ineffectual “grace” and has left the outcome to the sinner’s free will decision, the best one could say is that God has responded to the sinner’s decision and has united him to Christ in response to his faith, but in that case the reason for our union with him would be of our doing and not of him.

Paul is clear. We should not boast since it is God who has made us what we are spiritually. In creating us spiritually, he has performed a supernatural work that we could never have performed. Again, we should notice that the focus is entirely on God’s activity and not on ours.

28
May
18

If God is For Us

 

In Romans 8:31, Paul asks his readers to begin to draw encouraging conclusions and he does so by asking a series of rhetorical questions intended to lead them to rejoice in the absolute certainty of their final glorification. It should not escape our attention that he does so, not by asking them to focus on a decision they have made but on the salvific work of the Triune God.

In that verse, Paul asks his readers to begin to draw encouraging conclusions and he does so by asking a series of rhetorical questions intended to lead them to rejoice in the absolute certainty of their final glorification.

It is to the first series of questions that I would like to draw your attention and then leave you with a question. Paul asks, “What then shall we say to these things? If God is for us, who can be against us?” Then, as evidence that God is for believers, he writes concerning this God, “He that did not spare his own Son but delivered him up for us all [In the context he is clearly referring to all those who have been foreknown, predestined, called according to his purpose and justified by his grace through faith in Christ.]” then asks, “How shall he not along with him [the greatest gift he could give] freely give us all things [all the lesser gifts that belong to salvation including glorification].” His point is that if God is for us and if Jesus gave his life for the purpose of securing our redemption, our glorification is certain. In whatever sense God “gave Him up for us all,” He also “gives (the same people) all things.” After all, the “will he not also along with him freely give us all things?” is clearly rhetorical and expects an emphatic “Yes,” not an “I will…If you decide.”

I am amazed at the number of professing Christian people who will quite unabashedly state that Jesus did not save anyone by his death. Additionally, they will be quick to add that it was their faith that saved them. If one should ask them about the origin of that faith, they never seem to even question the idea that God has given a measure of faith to everyone without exception, then it is up to us to decide for or against Jesus. Apparently, the idea of God giving a measure of faith to every person is taken from a gross misrepresentation of Romans 12:3 that speaks of God granting to each believer a measure of faith for the exercise of the gift God has given them. There is no indication anywhere in Scripture that has granted to sinners universally the ability to believe.

It is difficult to blame these people because they are merely parroting what they have been told from “Evangelical” pulpits. In fact, I think they are rather astute in drawing the conclusion from what they have heard that Jesus did not save anyone by his death. If he accomplished no more for those who would believe than for those who will perish for eternity, his death, in itself, did not save anyone. If his death did not save everyone it was intended to redeem, it could not have, in itself, saved anyone it was intended to redeem.

We often hear the analogy of a ship being dispatched for the rescue of shipwreck victims who are in danger of drowning. To effect this rescue, the captain of the ship instructs his crew to throw a life ring into the water. He must not do anything more because if he did, he might violate the free will of the perishing. Apparently, since he has not determined to save any of these victims but merely to give them the potential for salvation by tossing the life ring, it is conceivable they will all perish because he clearly cares more about the preservation of their free will than about their rescue. If any are rescued, it will be solely because they made the right decision and grabbed the life ring. The life ring is nothing but the means of rescue. The true savior is the victim who is willing to use the means provided to get himself to safety.

This is far different from the image the Bible paints for us. In the biblical picture, the victims are murderous and pillaging pirates who have attacked the very ship that is being sent for their rescue. They are hostile toward the captain and his crew and would rather perish than dine at his table. At his own peril, the captain’s son dives into the frigid water, overcomes their hostility and brings them to safety. Had they been left to the ability of their wills, their doom would have been certain.

The question I would like you to ponder is this. Assuming for the sake of argument that synergists are correct in their views, would one not have to assume that God is for every person without exception and that he gave his Son to make salvation possible for every sinner without exception? Would we not have to conclude that God gave up his Son in that sense for every sinner? And if that is the case, how can one escape the conclusion that God has pledged himself to grant “all things” that belong to salvation including glorification to every sinner without exception?