Responding To James White & Calvinism | Did God Choose A Nameless Faceless Group? @AominOrg

A common objection from Calvinism against a more corporate understanding of Ephesians 1:4 is to say that this view isn't personal enough and doesn't properly account for the individualist nature of God's choosing of "us" as the direct object of the verb. This results in a caricaturization of the view as having God choosing a "plan" or a "nameless faceless group." This objection is fundamentally flawed in several ways which I hope to explain in this video.

SOURCES:

Does Ephesians 1 teach Calvinism?:

WATCH MY FILMS HERE:

#reformedtheology #soteriology #JohnPiper #noncalvinist #TULIP #Predestination #Calvinism #Provisionism #Calvinist #Salvation #calvinismdebate #christianity

[LovesHugItOut]

The “free will” argument for me is also huge because it directly correlates with the gospel. If determinism is true the very gospel I share with people and my students at school would be completely changed. So if in fact everything is determined and free choices are a delusion, that would completely change my life and evangelism. It is probably my major complaint and I think for very good and valid reason.

[eiontactics]

I never joined an "ism" or some brand name building, thankfully. I literally read a gifted Bible and came to faith through the words of the Apostles and was born again.
Union with Christ is a fundamental concept in Biblical Christianity... and it really boggles my mind that most "Christians" do not understand the importance. IF they did, Ephesians 1 wouldn't be so confusing for them to discern false doctrine (Calvinism) from Biblical Christianity.

@GreenLightStudios You are doing a good job educating Christians and Calvinists alike.

[RR-ueim]

That’s why we rightly divide the word of truth.

[kevinperry]

I appreciate your views on this. As I have begun to engage people on this, I wonder if a quicker, more simply stated question is: “When are the elect not in Christ?” This is of course to a Calvinist, assuming a Calvinist definition of election.

[markshaneh]

Your right, it seems obvious that this is a topic that needs far more thought and want in my own life and relationship with God, in Him. Gonna give this another couple of runs, because I think this is going to grow quickly.
Blessings
Mark
✌🏼

[eldrow]

As a guy who has leaned calvinistic for the last 12+ years, your arguments and demeanor are greatly appreciated. I appreciate your content, brother. 👍🏿

[Jebron_G]

Powerfull!! Thank you Jordan.
Chosen by the father before the foundation of the earth to be in Christ means we are reconciled to Christ by the father before we entered this world.

[MarcoGonzaG]

Abasciano gives a great example in his response article to Schreiner. He uses the example of a baseball team. He says something like this: suppose a team wins a toss between other teams, any member of the team could say with certainty that he really was a winner. now, his victory is completely tied to his membership of that team. If he affirmed that he individually won the prize, the awarding entity would not recognize him as such, nor would it give him the prize individually. He was chosen in the team, and that has absolutely nothing to do with being chosen to be on the team...

[theremnant]

You do great work brother. You don't need to be apologetic for the revelations the Lord has given you. Your spirit is open to understanding what the Spirit of God desires to give all His children, but many are closed to. Thank yo for sharing the truth of God's Word, so that many can grow in the knowledge of Christ and intimacy with Him. Continue to contend for the faith brother. 🙏✝

[langbergloghomes]

Man I feel you hit the nail on the head very directly here!! I’m interested in how I can support your channel?

[makedisciples]

Starting to watch Jordan a couple of times per week. This guy is so gracious and challenging while at the same time using Biblical logic. Keep going Jordan.
- BTW “Elect in the Son by ROBERT Shank
- I highly recommend “33 Things that happen at the moment of Salvation” by Lewis Sherry Chafer- DTS founder (maybe a Calvinist, but most Calvinists don’t think so) which speaks to your points in this video
- Watchman Née - great author (not every great Christian author of the past came from the UK!)

[Telorchid]

I have to look at Piper's diagram at about 15:00 and just marvel at how he seems to be running roughshod over the emphasis of the passage, which is about God's 'foolish' wisdom. It is not primarily about the soteriology of individuals, the apostle is attacking human pretensions of wisdom. Moreover, the context is a divided church, a boastful church, who does not understand the lowly, cruciform work of God. It is NOT to a group of people who need assurance that God loves them and/or that they are eternally secure.

[LovesHugItOut]

Hey Jordan, very excited to continue watching the video. I see how your main complaint in calvinism is the “in Him” aspect of the scriptures and that Calvinists are essentially saying God is giving benefits to people who are not actually “in Him”. Yes, that’s a great point and a huge hole in the doctrine.

I DO, however, cling to the aspect of “free will” as a huge part of why I reject calvinism. Not because I just love my precious “free will” and have a love for self (as Calvinists accuse me of), but because in rejecting free will, God becomes an unholy unloving impure monster and His eternal glorious character gets trampled over. That’s a HUGE problem for me and for my love of God. It’s personal in a major way to the heart and relationship we have with God and who He even is

Just speaking for myself, intellectually the “in Him” issue is a strong case against calvinism. But the “free will” issue cuts to the heart for me.

[ReformedlyGuy]

Because we are not speaking of a temporal reality in Ephesians 1:4, namely that God has done something before anything was created, even time itself, we are necessarily on grounds that will not comport to our experience. Most Calvinist should be quick to point out that God choosing us “in Christ” makes zero sense if you place his choice as contingent on our own… the Calvinist begins here because this point is concrete from the text. Further evidence that his choice shapes our destiny is that what we are chosen to (before we ever believed) was to be holy and blameless, presented to the Father… this is the point or purpose for the election… God sees us at once in eternity as a snapshot of our entire existence… there is not temporality there.. he chooses and thus sees us in Christ, our eternal destiny. Some reformed writers take these facts beyond what scripture could tell us but these are pretty easily deduced.

Your assertion that everyone should just accept a “union with Christ by faith” model for Ephesians one is unfounded as you seem to admit you’re getting this from other texts. What you should have read up on are the various meanings of “in Christ” in the New Testament so as not to assume your case had been won.

[sviolin]

Paul explicitly states that in their state of unbelief the Ephesians were without Christ (Eph. 2:12). He further writes that at that time they were far off but now, in Christ, they have been brought near. We can argue what to be in Christ means but, apparently, one cannot be in Christ and without Christ simultameously. Now, either we as believers were in Christ before the foundation of the world, then somehow fell out, and then were brought back again, which is nonsense, or we hadn't been in Chirst before we believed and that's what the Bible teaches. Eph. 1:13 says when and how we are being chosen by God to be holy and blameless before Him - it's when we start believing in Christ and are sealed by the Holy Spirit to become part of His possession. When God chose Him, He separated us from the rest of the world to be His people, His possession. Then, I noticed that verses that say 'before the foundation of the world, ' before the ages began, and others like that (2 Tim. 1:9-10; Eph. 1:9-10; 3:8-12; 1 Pet. 1:17-21) are always related to Christ. These phrases sort fo serve as a marker that the author writes about Christ. However, when the Bible says about election of people, the timing either is not mentioned or it states that election happened within the time boundaries of creation (Jer. 1:5; John 15:19; Gal. 1:15). So, in Eph. 1:4 Paul is writing first and foremost about Christ. He is the Chosen One, He was Chosen to be a representative, a mediator for those who believe on Him.

[TKK]

Col 1:21-23 is also important. It says you were alienated, now reconciled, in order to be holy and blameless (same language as Eph 1), IF indeed you continue.

Paul didn’t see choosing to holiness and blamelessness as some locked in choice of individuals from eternity past, it was contingent of continuing in the faith (being in Him).

[danimal]

I find it disturbing that you don't know a group has a face and a name.

[Hezekiah]

The last group of God's chosen ones in the last days are those who receive the seal of the living God from the One who appeared from the East (Rev 7:2).

Making effort to be part of the group is what we should do.

When come to explaining God's chosen ones, You feel that it would be nameless and faceless if we just explain as it is. It's because you don't understand the group whom God chose.

The reason why we can be God's chosen ones is because there's already prophecy that foretold about the group. Out of many, in Jer 31:31, it's said that God will establish the New covenant. So, by participating in the new covenant, we can be the children of promise.

So, there's no such thing as nameless or faceless. Everything is clear in God's plans.
As long as we in God's prophecy, we are in the promise, as the children of promise.

[joshuabetinis]

Im not too savy on the differences between sects, but i do so the issue you are bringing up with this one. Much appreciated! 💎

[lindajohnson]

God sees and loves the individual. He draws the individual to Jesus to be saved (John 6:44 AND 12:32). Whoever receives Jesus through faith are the individuals who are saved.


If we never were really outside Christ, I guess we never really needed to be saved. So Jesus just wasted His time and His life in this world, since everyone who has any opportunity to be "saved", really never needed to be saved in the first place. And we aren't saved by believing the gospel, they are quick to tell us. It is salvation by sovereign election, period. The Gospel is not really necessary, except that because of the way the Bible is written, we humor Him, and _pretend_ the gospel is important. If we've always been reconciled, we never needed to be reconciled; you just said it in so many words.