The Witness of the Apostles Refutes Calvinism, Predestinationism

[gmm4j]

Regeneration is by the Spirit of God. Faith comes by hearing, and hearing comes by the Word of God. Two different things.

Right, so the Word cannot be the means (tool) used to bring about regeneration, can it?

 

[gracewriterrandy]

GMM4J,

Though your question was not addressed to me, with your permission, I would like to give you an answer. It is not the gospel of itself that brings about the change. It is the Holy Spirit who effectively applies the gospel to the sinner that effects regeneration. As has often been stated here, we believe God uses a variety of means to accomplish his purpose of grace. The preaching of the gospel is just one of those means. Paul wrote that the gospel is foolishness to the Greeks and a scandal to the Jews, but TO THOSE WHO ARE CALLED, it is the wisdom of God and the power of God. It is the call of God that enables sinners to believe a message that otherwise would be foolishness to them. Apart from the gospel, there would be nothing for them to believe even if they were regenerated. "How shall they call on him of whom they have not heard?"

 

[gracewriterrandy]

The Word doesn't bring about regeneration of itself. It is the message one must believe to be justified before God. Regeneration is God's act in which he cleanses, renews [removes the stoney heart and replaces it with a heart of flesh], puts a new spirit [disposition] in a person and indwells him by his Spirit to cause him to walk in obedience to his Word.

 

[nobdysfool]

Right, so the Word cannot be the means (tool) used to bring about regeneration, can it?

Not sure what you're getting at.

 

[gracewriterrandy]

In regeneration, the external Word of God, becomes an internal governing principle. The Spirit acts as the internal seed and Word of God within the believer that corresponds to the Word written in Scripture.

 

[gmm4j]

GMM4J,

Though your question was not addressed to me, with your permission, I would like to give you an answer. It is not the gospel of itself that brings about the change. It is the Holy Spirit who effectively applies the gospel to the sinner that effects regeneration. As has often been stated here, we believe God uses a variety of means to accomplish his purpose of grace. The preaching of the gospel is just one of those means. Paul wrote that the gospel is foolishness to the Greeks and a scandal to the Jews, but TO THOSE WHO ARE CALLED, it is the wisdom of God and the power of God. It is the call of God that enables sinners to believe a message that otherwise would be foolishness to them. Apart from the gospel, there would be nothing for them to believe even if they were regenerated. "How shall they call on him of whom they have not heard?"

What does, "the Holy Spirit effectively applies the gospel to the sinner" mean? That sounds a lot like faith?

Oh, and thank you for the response.

 

[gracewriterrandy]

You are welcome.

Faith is the response to this work. There are two divine operations involved in this application of the gospel that effects faith and repentance. One is the calling or drawing of the Father, the other is the washing and renewing of the Holy Spirit referred to theologically as regeneration. [the biblical term "regeneration" is usually used in a different sense]. Regeneration and calling are God's work; conversion is the sinner's willing, heartfelt, intellectually informed, and obedient response to the gospel.

 

[sculleywr]

not true

Yes it is. It is our capacity to think and to make decisions which separates us from animals. Therefore, as it is that which makes up free will, free will is the separating line between man and animals.

And if we don't have free will, then we are not in the image of God, for He has free will.

 

[sculleywr]

Arcoe,

One thing I noticed that was conspicuously absent from your diatribe was any reference to the Word of God. You will always arrive at faulty conclusions as long as you depend on your marred human wisdom to form your conclusions.

In defining "free will" as you did, you revealed your abject ignorance of the issues in the theological discussion in which we are engaged here. I don't think anyone here would deny that human beings, in every decision we make, choose what we will, what we think, what we delight in and how we will act. Short of calling you an imbecile, I am not sure how to describe one who would enter into a discussion like this without even some vague concept of the real issues.

I am trying to get some fix on your theological orientation. It appears to me you are basically Pelagian in your views. You seem to believe everyone is born innocent just as Adam was created in God's image. But, it also seems you believe some are in some way better than others since not all do not resist the Holy Spirit. Perhaps you could share with me what makes some better than others. Stephen preached that not only did those whom he addressed ALWAYS resist the Holy Spirit, but their fathers had acted in exactly the same way. Acts 7:51

What I am having difficulty with is why a "supposed" believer thinks everyone can understand what is clearly written in the Bible when the Apostle Paul states "the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God for they are foolishness to him, neither CAN he know them because they are discerned by means of the Spirit. "1 Cor. 2:14.

A am also guessing you think King David was describing himself as an exception to the rest of the human race when he wrote that he was brought forth in iniquity and conceived in sin (Psa. 51:5.

If I believed I were less a sinner than the rest of the race, I wouldn't need the grace of God would I. Unlike you, I believe what Paul wrote in Eph 2, "And you were dead in the trespasses and sins
2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience-
3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind."

Since you believe some sinners are able and willing to turn to God on their own, you must believe there is some aspect of their being that is better than the rest and less in need of God's grace. Paul's statement in Eph 2 seems to indicate that all sinners are alike "were by nature children of wrath, LIKE THE REST OF MANKIND."

Hope you have a lovely day.

Randy, you remind me of Marilla's neighbor in Anne of Green Gables. This is a discussion board. Bite your tongue because calling people imbeciles and stupid has become quite a habit for you. It's also a CHRISTIAN board. Christians are called to be above reproach. I understand that you don't agree with everyone on this board, but that is no reason whatsoever to refer to people as stupid or imbecilic. If you do teach that those who are of the elect will act as Christ did, why don't you start acting like one of the elect and show the love of Christ, rather than using your yard-long tongue to lash out at everyone. Besides, while I don't make a habit of reporting everyone, I know there are many people on this board who have probably reported you multiple times.


The point you need to prove here is that Calvinism is not only something that you can prove from the Bible, but that it is the original interpretation as given by the apostles. In other words, prove that it was the true meaning of which Paul and the apostles were meaning to convey. And no matter the method you choose, that is a point which you cannot convey.

I posit that unless you can show that Calvinists existed in all generations, and are historically AND scripturally connected to the apostles, that Calvinists should teach that the scripture was wrong about Christ teaching that the church would be built on the faith which was once delivered for all the saints.

 

[sculleywr]

In regeneration, the external Word of God, becomes an internal governing principle. The Spirit acts as the internal seed and Word of God within the believer that corresponds to the Word written in Scripture.

If the opportunity for regeneration is not offered freely to all, then salvation, which is dependent on regeneration, is not offered freely to all.

 

[nobdysfool]

Is God obligated to provide Salvation for every person? Does God owe them salvation simply because they exist? On what basis? Is God not free to do with His creation as He sees fit? Is the fact that some are not found written in the Book of Life an accident? An oversight? Or is that Justice?

 

[janxharris]

LUKE: When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.

Acts 13:46-48
Then Paul and Barnabas answered them boldly: “We had to speak the word of God to you first. Since you reject it and do not consider yourselves worthy of eternal life, we now turn to the Gentiles. For this is what the Lord has commanded us: “‘I have made you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.’” When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and honoured the word of the Lord; and all who were appointed for eternal life believed.

If one compares the highlight parts it is clear what the intended meaning is:the Jews were not worthy of eternal life but the Gentiles were. Also, many scholars say that the Greek word in question (τεταγμένο&#953 does not convey any sense of pre-ordination or pre-destination.

 

[sculleywr]

Is God obligated to provide Salvation for every person? Does God owe them salvation simply because they exist? On what basis? Is God not free to do with His creation as He sees fit? Is the fact that some are not found written in the Book of Life an accident? An oversight? Or is that Justice?

Romans 2:6-11
He will render to each one according to his works: to those who by patience in well- doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, he will give eternal life; but for those who are self- seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and fury. There will be tribulation and distress for every human being who does evil, the Jew first and also the Greek, but glory and honor and peace for everyone who does good, the Jew first and also the Greek. For God shows no partiality.

Is it impartial to not provide the opportunity for salvation to all men? No. If God provides the ability to follow Him to only some, then He is partial, and that is a direct contradiction of scripture.

If regeneration is a prerequisite of salvation, and it is not provided freely, then God is utterly despicable, for He would lie in the words He gave.

But He did not lie. There is no partiality with God. All who follow Him will be saved, for it is written further in Romans:

Romans 2:12-16
God's Judgment and the Law
For all who have sinned without the law will also perish without the law, and all who have sinned under the law will be judged by the law. For it is not the hearers of the law who are righteous before God, but the doers of the law who will be justified. For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.

Who will be in the book of life? Those who follow Christ's commands. Who can? Everyone or no one. If God is truly a being of love, then everyone CAN follow Christ. If He is only a being of impartial justice, then nobody can follow Christ.

Both versions of God would be more scriptural than the version of God that chooses people to follow Him according to a roll of the dice.

 

[janxharris]

It might be helpful to note here that every leader of the modern missionary movement was a Calvinist. Some of the greatest evangelists and pastors E.g., George Whitefield, David Brainard, C.H. Spurgeon, were Calvinists. Many of the great hymn-writers were Calvinist.

C.H. Spurgeon was rather ambiguous in some of his views.

 

[janxharris]

That is exactly what the Bible teaches.

"Therefore as by the offence of one (Adam) judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one (Christ) THE FREE GIFT came upon ALL MEN unto justification of life," Romans 5:18.

No one needs to be predestinated. No one needs to be holy.

Jesus Christ provides salvation for ALL MEN. It is God's great FREE GIFT. All one has to do is receive it by faith.

Correct.

 

[drstevej]

C.H. Spurgeon was rather ambiguous in some of his views.

Are you suggesting he was not a Calvinist?

 

[janxharris]

Are you suggesting he was not a Calvinist?

I think he called himself a Calvinist but he did make some statements that seemed more akin to Arminianism.

 

[janxharris]

So, then, it is faith that saves him and not Christ since the work of Christ itself did not save all the others for whom he died. Many of them are already perishing in hell because they lacked faith even though Jesus completely satisfied the wrath of God on their behalf, objectively accomplished their justification, reconciled them to God, which includes the non imputation of their sins, and set them free from their sins by his death [redeemed them], and yet they are still perishing. Strange theology. Jesus paid their debt in full and now they too must pay for eternity? Jesus did his best to save them but they wouldn't let him? Poor Jesus! And you think that is the picture of a victorious Savior? If that is your savior, you may keep him. I like the one who gets what he pays for.

It is just as in the Passover - Exodus 12. The blood has to be applied.

 

[reformed ttL]

Yes it is. It is our capacity to think and to make decisions which separates us from animals. Therefore, as it is that which makes up free will, free will is the separating line between man and animals.

And if we don't have free will, then we are not in the image of God, for He has free will.

not the way you think it does no one is argueing that a man cant choose but i believe an unsaved person will always choose his poison . sure he can choose drugs or heavy booze or maybee never drugs or booze or he can be a theif but unless the Spirit of God regenerates that man the choices will always be tainted with sin heck even an animal has some free will you could put 2 bowels of food down he can either choose to eat out of one, or he can choose to eat out of the other one, or he could even walk away and choose none, but to say that dog could go into the house and bake a pie, well thats not in his nature to do so. its insulting to me and im sure others to say what we beleive makes us no different than a dog, if we could prove these things to you these debates would have stopped centurys ago

 

[drstevej]

I think he called himself a Calvinist but he did make some statements that seemed more akin to Arminianism.

How about this quote from Spurgeon, Autobiography, 2 Volumes, (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1962) 1:172:

That Christ should offer an atonement and satisfaction for the sins of all men, and that afterwards some of those very men should be punished for the sins for which Christ had already atoned, appears to me to be the most monstrous iniquity that could ever be imputed to Saturn, to Janus, to the goddess of the Thugs, or to the most diabolical heathen deities. God forbid that we should ever think thus of Jehovah, the just and wise and good!

Sounds quite Calvinistic to me.