An issue I've had with the idea of Calivinism: could someone explain please? Thanks!

[Don Maurer]

Salvation is an action that is totally of God. And God acts totally without anyone's help after man believes. While you might call that "assistance" or "help", you would just be wrong. One's act of believing has no power in it, nor can it help God do anything. Why Calvinists seem unable to grasp that is troubling.

He says... "And God acts totally without anyone's help after man believes"

FreeGrace2, are you implying that God has no part in man believing?

 

[nobdysfool]

Why Calvinists seem unable to grasp that is troubling.

Why someone cannot grasp that he doesn't rightly understand Calvinism is even more troubling....

 

[FreeGrace2]

Why FG2 cannot grasp that he doesn't rightly understand Calvinism is even more troubling....

Go ask hammster about what I understand. He acknowledged that I understand it.

Why can't you grasp that I do understand it?

Or, more to the point, what about it do you think I don't understand? Can you elucidate a bit?

Here's what I understand that Calvinism teaches. Correct any errors. Thanks.

#1 Christ died only for the elect.
#2 God chose to save the elect before the foundation of the world.
#3 Only the elect go to heaven.
#4 The non-elect go to hell to pay for their own sins, because Christ didn't die for them.
#5 The elect believe because God regenerates them so that they can and will believe.

How am I doing so far? Any corrections?

 

[Don Maurer]

Well, FG2 knows how to troll.

 

[Ask Seek Knock]

Why FG2 cannot grasp that he doesn't rightly understand Calvinism is even more troubling....

Since Calvinism says the reprobate cannot understand the things of God, you are calling Free Grace a reprobate.

 

[Hammster]

.

#1 Christ died only for the elect. Yep. Just as the Day of Atonement was only for Israel.

#2 God chose to save the elect before the foundation of the world. Yep. Just as God chose Israel. He's always had a chosen people.

#3 Only the elect go to heaven. Yep. Jesus loves His bride.

#4 The non-elect go to hell to pay for their own sins, because Christ didn't die for them. Yep. That's justice.

#5 The elect believe because God regenerates them so that they can and will believe.

Almost. It's so they will believe. That's how much God loves His chosen people.

 

[Hammster]

Since Calvinism says the reprobate cannot understand the things of God, you are calling Free Grace a reprobate.

Not true. We both believe that we are saved by faith through grace. What we agree on is prolly more than we disagree on. But viva la difference.

Oh, and FG quotes Paul. But he probably gets a pass.

 

[BrianJK]

Thanks for everyone on this board sharing their take on both Calvinism and Arminianism, as well as your objections to the side with which you disagree.
After taking a week or so to look at both Calvinism and Arminianism, I must say that I couldn't subscribe to either one fully. At the end of the day, it's not something that should completely separate anyone except on sides of a friendly debate. However, they seem like two extreme sides of a line, if you catch my meaning.

I am kind of a simple dude, so if I have a problem understanding something, I make a little illustration about it. I'll share my illustrations about both sides, and let me know where they are wrong, if you will. I don't mean to insult anyone's belief... I simply wish to share what makes me conclude this way.

I imagine a hundred orphaned kids and the master of the orphanage. He tells them that there is a wildfire just outside of town, so they are not to go into the playground down the street today. The kids don't know what a wildfire is, and being naturally rebellious kids, they go to the playground anyway and begin to do the things they think are fun.

The master of the orphanage, now, does one of two things. He chooses a fifteen passenger van, drives down to the playground, and hand-selects his favorite fifteen kids. He walks up to each of them, distracts them from their play, points to the horizon where the fire is getting closer so they understand, and they eagerly follow him back to the van. He leaves the remaining 85 kids playing at the playground so they can burn to death. After all, he told them not to and they disobeyed, right, so why shouldn't he let them burn?

On the other hand, the master of the orphanage may choose a large bus with a hundred seats and drive that over to the playground. This master, however, just throws a bunch of maps into the playground with a note about the impending fire, instructions to find the way back to the bus, and instructions to share the map with the other kids. Some of the kids find the maps and some of them don't. Some of the kids who find the maps tell the other kids about it, and a few of them follow. At the end, fifteen kids board the bus and the other 85 are either still doing their own thing or they're arguing about who would make a map to stop them from playing in the first place. They burn to death because they chose not to follow the map home or believe the other kids.

I'm sure that both sides will be able to show me what my illustrations are lacking. Again, I'm not trying to be sarcastic... this is how I'm seeing it.

 

[Hammster]

Unfortunately, that's a typical emotion-laden argument that is usually presented. Instead of another illustration, here's a reminder if how scripture describes us.

9 What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin,
10 as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands; no one seeks for God.
12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one."
13 "Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive." "The venom of asps is under their lips."
14 "Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness."
15 "Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 in their paths are ruin and misery,
17 and the way of peace they have not known."
18 "There is no fear of God before their eyes."

1 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.

This is who we are. We aren't just a bunch of wayward misfits who don't know any better. We are rebellious folks who want nothing to do with God.

 

[andreha]

Unfortunately, that's a typical emotion-laden argument that is usually presented. Instead of another illustration, here's a reminder if how scripture describes us.

9 What then? Are we Jews any better off? No, not at all. For we have already charged that all, both Jews and Greeks, are under sin,
10 as it is written: "None is righteous, no, not one;
11 no one understands; no one seeks for God.
12 All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one."
13 "Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive." "The venom of asps is under their lips."
14 "Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness."
15 "Their feet are swift to shed blood;
16 in their paths are ruin and misery,
17 and the way of peace they have not known."
18 "There is no fear of God before their eyes."

1 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.

This is who we are. We aren't just a bunch of wayward misfits who don't know any better. We are rebellious folks who want nothing to do with God.

This makes sense to me. Without the Holy Spirit, we can't even confess Jesus as Lord. This part of Calvinism makes good biblical sense to me. It's just the election part that I tend to struggle with.

 

[Hammster]

This makes sense to me. Without the Holy Spirit, we can't even confess Jesus as Lord. This part of Calvinism makes good biblical sense to me. It's just the election part that I tend to struggle with.

That's the part a lot of people struggle with.

 

[RisingSpirit]

Well, FG2 knows how to troll.

Trolls are unregenerates. Its easy to accept by free will but it isn't real.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Well, FG2 knows how to troll.

If you're not a mod, your opinion is just that. How is asking questions "trolling"?

 

[FreeGrace2]

.

#1 Christ died only for the elect. Yep. Just as the Day of Atonement was only for Israel.

#2 God chose to save the elect before the foundation of the world. Yep. Just as God chose Israel. He's always had a chosen people.

Whether you see it as double or single predestination, you have the same end point. By ONLY choosing some for heaven, He most definitely did choose the rest for hell. Which is my point, and you are supporting.

#3 Only the elect go to heaven. Yep. Jesus loves His bride.

And, conversely, He hates the non-elect by not choosing them for heaven.

#4 The non-elect go to hell to pay for their own sins, because Christ didn't die for them. Yep. That's justice.

Why not justice for the elect sinners? They stink just as bad. Again, God ONLY chose the elect for heaven. Which is my point.

#5 The elect believe because God regenerates them so that they can and will believe.

Almost. It's so they will believe. That's how much God loves His chosen people.

I said that, and I added the "ability clause" that you guys are so famous for.

That said, these questions prove that the non-elect have an excuse for being hell dwellers. Christ didn't die for them. Period.

Why is it so hard for Calvinists to just admit that FACT?

 

[FreeGrace2]

Oh, and FG quotes Paul. But he probably gets a pass.

Who, Paul or me?

 

[Hammster]

Whether you see it as double or single predestination, you have the same end point. By ONLY choosing some for heaven, He most definitely did choose the rest for hell. Which is my point, and you are supporting.

And?

And, conversely, He hates the non-elect by not choosing them for heaven.

And?

Why not justice for the elect sinners? They stink just as bad. Again, God ONLY chose the elect for heaven. Which is my point.

There was justice for the elect sinners.

I said that, and I added the "ability clause" that you guys are so famous for.

That said, these questions prove that the non-elect have an excuse for being hell dwellers. Christ didn't die for them. Period.

Why is it so hard for Calvinists to just admit that FACT?

So Christ not dying for them somehow absolves them of their sin? That doesn't track.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Thanks for everyone on this board sharing their take on both Calvinism and Arminianism, as well as your objections to the side with which you disagree.
After taking a week or so to look at both Calvinism and Arminianism, I must say that I couldn't subscribe to either one fully.

Good for you, Brian! I don't either. There are many things that both sides do agree on, but the debate focuses on the infamous "5 points".

At the end of the day, it's not something that should completely separate anyone except on sides of a friendly debate. However, they seem like two extreme sides of a line, if you catch my meaning.

Amen!

I am kind of a simple dude, so if I have a problem understanding something, I make a little illustration about it. I'll share my illustrations about both sides, and let me know where they are wrong, if you will. I don't mean to insult anyone's belief... I simply wish to share what makes me conclude this way.

I imagine a hundred orphaned kids and the master of the orphanage. He tells them that there is a wildfire just outside of town, so they are not to go into the playground down the street today. The kids don't know what a wildfire is, and being naturally rebellious kids, they go to the playground anyway and begin to do the things they think are fun.

The master of the orphanage, now, does one of two things. He chooses a fifteen passenger van, drives down to the playground, and hand-selects his favorite fifteen kids. He walks up to each of them, distracts them from their play, points to the horizon where the fire is getting closer so they understand, and they eagerly follow him back to the van. He leaves the remaining 85 kids playing at the playground so they can burn to death. After all, he told them not to and they disobeyed, right, so why shouldn't he let them burn?

On the other hand, the master of the orphanage may choose a large bus with a hundred seats and drive that over to the playground. This master, however, just throws a bunch of maps into the playground with a note about the impending fire, instructions to find the way back to the bus, and instructions to share the map with the other kids. Some of the kids find the maps and some of them don't. Some of the kids who find the maps tell the other kids about it, and a few of them follow. At the end, fifteen kids board the bus and the other 85 are either still doing their own thing or they're arguing about who would make a map to stop them from playing in the first place. They burn to death because they chose not to follow the map home or believe the other kids.

I'm sure that both sides will be able to show me what my illustrations are lacking. Again, I'm not trying to be sarcastic... this is how I'm seeing it.

I'll let the Calvinists and whatever Arminians out there following this do that. Illustrations always have limitations, so I'm sure either side will focus on those limitations.

My view is real simple.

1. God created mankind to seek Him (Acts 17:26-27), and has revealed Himself to mankind, so that no one has any excuse for not seeking Him (Rom 1:19-20).

2. Because of Adam's sin, which corrupted humanity, God provided the solution of sin by sending His only Son to pay for the sins of all of humanity, and purchase the free gift of eternal life for everyone.

3. Because of #1, the free gift is available for whoever wants it. Many refuse the gift because they either don't believe that God exists (Psa 14, 53) or think they can get to heaven on their own (works salvation).

4. Those who end up in hell do so because they refused or neglected the free gift of eternal life. They have no excuse.

However, Calvinism provides an excuse for the hell dwellers. The ONLY difference between the sinners who go to heaven and the sinners who go to hell is that Christ died ONLY for the the one going to heaven, not for those going to hell.

I wish you well on your journey seeking truth. It is in the Bible. The Holy Spirit will guide you to understand what the Bible says and means.

Blessings.

 

[Hammster]

Who, Paul or me?

You. You are against Calvinism. ASK will give you a pass for quoting Paul. It's the "enemy of my enemy" clause in debates like this one.

 

[FreeGrace2]

You. You are against Calvinism. ASK will give you a pass for quoting Paul. It's the "enemy of my enemy" clause in debates like this one.

I'll be real clear here: I am FOR truth and the Bible. I don't find truth in Calvinism.

I've demonstrated that in two threads; "Jesus Christ died for everyone" in which I challenged Calvinists to provide any verse that plainly states that Christ died ONLY for the elect (whatever wording is fine), or that He DIDN'T die for everyone (any wording is fine). No one, even after the thread splitting twice, have done that. Because the Bible doesn't teach that.

Second thread, "Calvinism provides an excuse for the hell dwellers" didn't have any Calvinist who could refute that charge. Although, it really riled up the troops, for sure. But in Calvinism, the ONLY difference between the sinners in heaven and the sinners in hell is that Christ died ONLY for the ones in heaven.

All that stuff about justice for the sinners in hell ignores the plain fact that the elect didn't get justice but mercy. It's all about who got chosen in Calvinism, and you cannot refute that.

The Bible teaches that mankind is fully accountable and responsible for their own decisions and actions. So those in hell have on excuse, because Christ died for their sins and purchased eternal life for them, but they just weren't interested, or they rejected the gift, or they didn't believe the gift existed, or they didn't think God existed, etc, etc.

Calvinism gives the hell dwellers an excuse. The Bible doesn't.

 

[Ask Seek Knock]

You. You are against Calvinism. ASK will give you a pass for quoting Paul. It's the "enemy of my enemy" clause in debates like this one.

Much like your doctrine of God giving certain ones passes to heaven while leaving the others to themselves. I don't believe you think that is unfair.