Why Calvinism Is Wrong About Ephesians 1:4

Calvinism ultimately teaches not that the elect are chosen IN HIM but that they are chosen TO BE in him. This may seem to be a trivial distinction, however I think it demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of union with Christ.

@ApologiaStudios @desiringGod

WATCH MY FILMS HERE:

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

[elteacher]

Good intentions, good effort. For a lay christian such as myself, not enough clarity. Which one is the Calvinistic belief, and which one the belief of this video's producer?

[SerendipitousProvidence]

Please please keep up the good work. They have the loudest speakers.

[e.t.h.]

First, the phrase "in Christ" is a common Pauline expression denoting our spiritual unity and identification with Christ by God's grace through faith. It does not negate or contradict the fact that we are effectually called in time and united to Christ by virtue of God's electing grace preceding our faith. This is made abundantly clear in verses like Ephesians 2:8-10.

Secondly, even if we granted for argument's sake that "in Christ" implied an existing state rather than a decreed reality, it in no way rules out a prior unconditional election unto that state. God's sovereign choice precedes and facilitates our engrafting into Christ through the effectual call of regeneration.

To be "in Christ" signifies our privileged status as united to Him by grace through faith - a faith that is itself a gift of God's sovereign electing grace, lest any man should boast. …

[mikelyons]

Great work Jordan. I will say it again. It is one of 👿 greatest works. It made it's way into mainstream Christendom & is perpetuated by many prominent Pastors & their followers.

[primeobjective]

So, individually, they're NOT special. They weren't even "known of God" until after they believed. Thats not going to sit well with those who have a chosen-complex.

[jeffreybomba]

No, man does not control his own destiny, because it is not my confession of faith that saves. God judges my confession because He defines that He seeks humble and contrite hearts, not certain words, and it is ultimately Him who saves. My faith cannot remove me from the drowning in the ocean, but He will not come save me unless I open the door upon which He knocks. Not man centered or created, it is described throughout ALL of scripture.

[yeeandy]

Lol. Given the timeline is before the foundation of the world. In him we were chosen and eventually be in him. That show not contradiction but his chosen will was fulfilled.
If according to this logic, then outside Christ will receive no spiritual blessing at all according to 1:3. Furthermore, before the world, other than Christ and God who were in there? Then why it says chose us in him and not chose us who were in him? It literally didn't make sense as well.

[robertzamzow]

It seems that what you are implying is that God took in information. If God didn't choose, where did that information come from?

[jeffreybomba]

If you force in a few words here to make it Calvinist then what do you do with, If my people, (Israelites) which are called by my name (Paul made it clear they were not called salvation, but to a purpose) shall humble themselves (impossible according to Calvinism), and pray, and seek my face (impossible according to Calvinism) and turn from their wicked ways (impossible according to Calvinism); then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, (God does not respond to man according to Calvinism) and will heal their land.”

You have to read core Calvinist passages with a Calvinist lens, and then you have to read Calvinism into everything else.

[jaggedlines]

Wrong. Individuals DONT choose to be In-Christ. Ephesians does NOT say that individuals choose. It is God that chooses.
You are promoting semi-pelagianism.
I also understand that Pelagius was a Pantheist. That would explain his heretical theology.

[aslan]

A halfway, ineffective argument from Ephesians…and next you’ll try to reinterpret some other peripheral passage with an equally uncompelling argument…but of course you won’t try Romans 9.

[bravebarnabas]

ἐν αὐτῷ - In Him - can be translated - "by means of" Him

[ethanlash]

How do you explain romans 8:7 then. Wouldn't God have to be the soul purpose to change our sinful nature?

[josephalvinalmedatv]

Its what the text says but in Arminianism, provisionism which is man centered, man controls his destiny by his own liberatrian freewil choice. Unconditional election is in scripture because of total depravity/ inability. You are just expressing human opinion and disagreeing. You cannot absolutely say calvinism is wrong. The fundamental debate should be is man partially dead or totally dead? Does he have inate ability to respond to the gospel on his own? If total inability is right, then in that scenario God must choose effectually or everyone goes to hell. In this scenario, God is still a loving God because He chose to save those who are totally incapable of choosing Him by granting them the gift of faith. I can understand why human logic hates unconditional election because it offends human libertarian freewill philosophy.

[robertredmon]

Selfrightiousness will fight Gods will but the facts are here in his word eph 1 4 n many more scripture theres no freewill to choose heaven or hell it was made for us this should humble the true elect n to those chose not his its the minstey of damnation to be from his presents😊