Reasons to remain a Calvinist

ConsumedByHisCall · #**141** 5th May 2012, 10:41 PM

Originally Posted by Eddie L

The dilemma over sin and the one about receiving the gospel is exactly the same. We both have an all-powerful God Who desires to save and yet there are those who remain unsaved. You (and countless others) think that placing the mystery within man's will is radically different than the approach of the Calvinist who places the mystery in God's will,

We place the responsibility on man's will by appealing to mystery regarding a created beings freedom. You seem to think the mystery is the culpability (i.e we place the MYSTERY in God's will), but the mystery (from our perspective is the freedom. We KNOW where the culpability rests, it rests on the free agent making the free choice. Your appeal to mystery is much different than ours because we are simply saying we don't know exactly how to define how a free choice is determined, whereas Calvinists speculate to know that mystery by suggesting God determined it, and then the Calvinist appeals to mystery as to why men are held culpable since their choices are determined by God. Scripture never teaches that God determines men's choices so there is no reason to appeal to that mystery. The scripture clearly indicates men are responsible for their choices and appears to present the possibility of contra-causaul choices. There is no reason to believe otherwise unless clearly revealed in scripture. The only thing Calvinists have as support for their conclusion is finite logical reasoning.

which to me is almost funny, because God is the Creator of everything, even man's will.

That's right, so the question is how big of a God do you believe in? Is He big enough to create a free will while remaining sovereign? Or is that just beyond his ability? Must he instead play both sides of the chess board, so to speak, to ensure his will is accomplished? Was it just too risky for God to actually create free moral agent with the ability of first cause choice? Is that just too hard for our omnipotent God? I think not. I say that is exactly what He did and we have no hope of fully defining how a free moral agent comes to determine his own choices, for to do so would to presume a deterministic response is necessary.

How that becomes such a big thing to the present-day Arminian, I think, is not scholarly at all.

As I wipe the drool off my Arminian face and pick up my remedial theology primer, I'll be sure to thank God for making the Calvinists so much more scholarly than us.

in either view if there wasn't a purpose higher to God than the salvation of man, nobody would be ending up in Hell at all.

God's glory is the highest purpose, but to suggest that a doctrine which teaches in essence that God's pretending to want all to come to repentance while on the other hand preventing it from occurring actually serves to further His Glory is preposterous.

So, to me, the Arminian's angst against the Calvinist is a lot of to do about nothing, when the Arminian hasn't spared himself of any of the so-called dilemmas that he thinks present themselves to the Calvinist.

Again, you have yet to show me a single dilemma.

Lee52 · #**142** 6th May 2012, 01:52 AM

Originally Posted by Eddie L

If you were to honestly stare this "divine culpability issue" in the face, you would have to be intellectually honest enough to see that it isn't the chasm you think it is. Sin exists in both views to fulfill a purpose of God. That exact purpose, in both views, is a mystery. God's purposes allows for specific sins in both views, and in practice requires them in both views. The Calvinist looks at this dilemma and gets his answer to it from Scripture. The Arminian usually attempts to deny the dilemma, but when pressed will create some well-meaning speculation about God's desire for free-willed love or something like that. In the end, both are still left with the mysterious dilemma, and only one has comfort from the fact that his answer comes from the Word of God.

This is so much Balderdash! I call foul right here and now with this group of statements.

ALL Arminian/Wesleyan doctrine Christians on this forum have provided Scripture upon Scripture to support the position that GOD is offering salvation in Jesus' shed blood to ALL who will believe. Over and over again we have done so.

You want honesty in discussion? Start with yourself.

Lee52

Lee52 · #**143** 6th May 2012, 02:08 AM

EddieL,
Please, answer me this:

Does GOD create some men, even today, that He predetermined before He began time, to go to Hell for eternity?

Did He create them, knowing ahead of time that He would control their decisions so that they were full of sin and could NEVER come to the saving grace of Jesus' blood, shed on the cross for everyone but them?

Oh, and, does GOD love those whom He created to be lost in sin for eternity without hope of salvation in Christ because they are not His elect?

If you answer is yes, then by default, GOD created sin and sinfulness in His creation man. For there is no way around that conclusion.

If you answer no, you are not a true Calvinist.

Eddie L · #**144** 6th May 2012, 07:58 AM

Originally Posted by Lee52

This is so much Balderdash! I call foul right here and now with this group of statements.

ALL Arminian/Wesleyan doctrine Christians on this forum have provided Scripture upon Scripture to support the position that GOD is offering salvation in Jesus' shed blood to ALL who will believe. Over and over again we have done so.

You want honesty in discussion? Start with yourself.

Lee52

Lee, though I understand how hard it is to read the details of a post when you don't appreciate the view of the poster, you missed everything I said, so I can't answer you. One day God may bring us both to a place where you and I can listen to each other, but it seems that isn't today. No hard feelings, honestly.

Ormly · #**145** 6th May 2012, 08:15 AM

Originally Posted by Eddie L

Lee, though I understand how hard it is to read the details of a post when you don't appreciate the view of the poster, you missed everything I said, so I can't answer you. One day God may bring us both to a place where you and I can listen to each other, but it seems that isn't today. No hard feelings, honestly.

I am with Lee and Ed. It has been my experience as well and the reason I no longer reply. Anyone who holds that Calvin is the gospel, who withhold righteousness because of unrighteousness, should never be engaged in this kind of discussion. It is folly and engenders only strive.

Behe's Boy · #**146** 6th May 2012, 08:23 AM

I love the doctrines of grace and study them diligently. In regards to John Calvin - he was a man who had his faults - I don't agree with everything he taught - but in matters regarding salvation he knew his stuff and I think his teachings are very beneficial. I've read through the entirey of his "Institutes" two times and was very blessed by it...

Philothei · #**147** 6th May 2012, 09:57 AM

Mod hat on

Can we be a bit more civil here? Thanks!!

Mod hat off

bottomofsandal · #**148** 6th May 2012, 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by Lee52

..."come to the saving grace of Jesus' blood"...

Sorry, what does this mean, and is there Biblical support ?

Eddie L · #**149** 6th May 2012, 02:05 PM

Originally Posted by Lee52

EddieL,
Please, answer me this:

Does GOD create some men, even today, that He predetermined before He began time, to go to Hell for eternity?

Of course He does. At the instant God left Adam and Eve alone in the garden with the serpent, God predetermined that some men would go to hell for eternity.

Did He create them, knowing ahead of time that He would control their decisions so that they were full of sin and could NEVER come to the saving grace of Jesus' blood, shed on the cross for everyone but them?

Now you're using some odd language. God the Father ordained everything, but God the Spirit never moved anyone to a decision that was not more righteous than what it would've been without His influence.

I can agree that God created certain people knowing ahead of time that His Spirit would NOT guide their decisions so that they would be included in receiving the benefit of the shed blood of Christ.

Oh, and, does GOD love those whom He created to be lost in sin for eternity without hope of salvation in Christ because they are not His elect?

He loves them to a degree, but there is a higher degree of love God expresses towards those in Christ.

If you answer is yes, then by default, GOD created sin and sinfulness in His creation man. For there is no way around that conclusion.

Sigh... will you be courageous enough to look reality in the face and understand that sin could not exist if God did not want it to? God knew with 100% certainty that Adam would sin before Adam sinned. God knew BEFORE creation who would be saved. That means that if sin was not supposed to have happened, all God would have had to do was something other than what He did. He was the initiator of everything. He set up the circumstances. He did all the designing. He set things in motion.

"All He did was look ahead, though!" is what I've heard. But the trick here is that He got to look ahead before He moved. The fact that He chose to move the way He did in spite of the choices that would be made afterward makes every choice He foresaw a predetermined act. He was never obligated to do anything. When He set any ball in motion, He did so with a complete knowledge of every consequence.

So I agree that God ordained that there would be sin, but I don't see anywhere that God's Spirit is the source of it. The Father uses other means to bring His purposes in creation where sin is concerned. He uses a "spirit of stupor", for example, or "a lying spirit", or even Satan... so if our model or semantics requires us to call God sin's author just because we see that the Father's purposes include sin, then our model or our semantics needs to change.

Lee52 · #**150** 6th May 2012, 03:16 PM

Bump

Originally Posted by Lee52

This should provide some interesting reading for those committed to Calvin and not admitting to what EXACTLY Calvin taught.

The Unaccommodated Calvin: Studies in the Foundation of a Theological Tradition
By Richard A. Muller.
New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2000

Calvin: an Introduction to His Thought
By T.H.L. Parker
Louisville, KY: Westminster/ John Knox Press, 1995

The Writings of John Calvin — An Introductory Guide
By W. de Greef
Grand Rapids: Baker, 1994

Calvin: Origins and Development of His Religious Thought
By Francois Wendel
Grand Rapids: Baker, 1997, c1963

John Calvin — a Biography
By T.H.L. Parker
Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1975. [out-of-print]