Is This True? - Limited Atonement

[stenerson]

But His arbitrary choice is fair?

How does that work?

Oh, I'm beginning to see it. He's fair because RT says so. Got it.

You confuse terms. You believe God is only just if He gives grace and mercy to all ? Justice and Mercy are not the same thing. God would be just in condemning all. He chooses to show mercy, grace, unmerited favor to many that hate Him. That are born in enmity towards Him.
It's not arbitrary, but God gives some reasons in scripture as I showed earlier. We are told the reason He quickens many and translates them from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of His beloved Son.
Again, he anticipates your accusations against this doctrine of original sin and predestination. "Who are you oh man.........................?
Some passages are just too brutally clear for people to accept.

 

[stenerson]

B
So it's still quite a closed system. No one wants God, per RT, so God arbitrarily changes some of them, which by definition is against their desire and will, so that they will WANT to seek Him.

Yet RT denies that God forces anyone.

Uh, changing someone against their will IS forcing them. By definition.

I don't believe that's totally accurate. God changes the heart, the new affections will indirectly affect what people value and want, in other words their will.
I'm grateful that God didn't leave me in my rebellion, with a heart of stone that didn't value His Son or His mercy.
He promised in OT prophecies that He would extend this work to a remnant in Israel and to people from the entire world. In other words, a great miraculous work of salvation, heart transplanting that would cause those affected to walk in his statutes, judgements etc.
Can you imagine if folks thought like you when these prophets were predicting this future grace? They would say: "that's not fair, why don't you do that now, with all the nations, with every individual in the world, right now not in the future !" :o

 

[Hammster]

Uh, which part of "why" wasn't clear?

They don't fit because they make no sense in the verse. Maybe you could hurry things along and give a quick exegesis of the verse employing one of the definitions.

 

[Hammster]

Originally Posted by catholichomeschooler View Post
So now you are saying it is men's desires that determines their salvation?

That is not consistent with Calvinism.

Your answer pretty much did.

Not even close.

 

[FreeGrace2]

You confuse terms.

I'm not the confused one.

You believe God is only just if He gives grace and mercy to all ?

By golly, just what Paul wrote!! Rom 11:32

Justice and Mercy are not the same thing. God would be just in condemning all.

Not the issue.

He chooses to show mercy, grace, unmerited favor to many that hate Him.

Actually, only "some". And arbitrarily at that. His arbitrary choice is what is unfair. Only when people have choices is their consequence fair.

That are born in enmity towards Him.

All are, so God simply has to force those "some" to seek Him by changing them against their wills. Or is that not actually what RT teaches?

It's not arbitrary

It is because Calvinists cannot specify any reason at all. I agree that God's choices are not arbitrary, but I can point to the specific reason God chooses, but RT rejects that specific reason. And defaults to "no apparent reason".

but God gives some reasons in scripture as I showed earlier.

There is only one reason for which He chooses. Based on those who believe His promise of eternal life.

We are told the reason He quickens many and translates them from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of His beloved Son.

He quickens those who believe.

Again, he anticipates your accusations against this doctrine of original sin and predestination. "Who are you oh man.........................?
Some passages are just too brutally clear for people to accept.

Totally out of context.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I said this:
So it's still quite a closed system. No one wants God, per RT, so God arbitrarily changes some of them, which by definition is against their desire and will, so that they will WANT to seek Him.

Yet RT denies that God forces anyone.

Uh, changing someone against their will IS forcing them. By definition.

I don't believe that's totally accurate.

Well, it is, nonetheless.

God changes the heart, the new affections will indirectly affect what people value and want, in other words their will.

Right. Per RT, by this unwanted change by God, He has effectively changed them against their wills.

I'm grateful that God didn't leave me in my rebellion, with a heart of stone that didn't value His Son or His mercy.

Actually, the Bible is clear that rebellion and obedience are choices facing mankind. And consequences of either.

He promised in OT prophecies that He would extend this work to a remnant in Israel and to people from the entire world. In other words, a great miraculous work of salvation, heart transplanting that would cause those affected to walk in his statutes, judgements etc.
Can you imagine if folks thought like you when these prophets were predicting this future grace? They would say: "that's not fair, why don't you do that now, with all the nations, with every individual in the world, right now not in the future !" :o

There is no difference between then and now. It's ALWAYS been about whether man chooses to be obedient to God or in rebellion against God. And God has clearly spelled out the consequences of either choice.

What continues to be not fair is the system taught by RT. When man rejects God, his condemnation is fair. When man accepts God's promise, his salvation is fair.

But, otoh, if God saves some and condemns many arbitrarily, that's NOT fair.

It is apparent that RT just does not recognize fairness.

 

[FreeGrace2]

They don't fit because they make no sense in the verse. Maybe you could hurry things along and give a quick exegesis of the verse employing one of the definitions.

Just as soon as you provide a sensible reason WHY they "make no sense". Maybe just not to you. But I won't assume that.

 

[Hammster]

Just as soon as you provide a sensible reason WHY they "make no sense". Maybe just not to you. But I won't assume that.

Is that a promise? I really don't want to go through the work to show your error just to have you dismiss it out of hand, as you've been doing so far.

It would be a lot easier if you'd just exegete the text using one of the definitions, however.

 

[stenerson]

Actually, only "some". And arbitrarily at that. His arbitrary choice is what is unfair. Only when people have choices is their consequence fair.

But scripture is clear, not only concerning all being ungodly, but in the fact that none seek Him, no not one. We always choose, we always make choices, we choose according to our affections and nature. Paul sets the stage ,showing us the condition of the human soul (and will) before he gives us the truth of God's sovereign work in salvation.

All are, so God simply has to force those "some" to seek Him by changing them against their wills. Or is that not actually what RT teaches?".

You're using the word force, as in a gun to the head and the person not wanting to believe.
I prefer to use scriptural terminology. Scripture does say He causes, and it gives us the means of how He affects this change. The Gospel and His Holy Spirit.

There is only one reason for which He chooses. Based on those who believe His promise of eternal life.

He chooses "according to the good pleasure of His own will." Again, He will have mercy on whom He will have mercy.

 

[stenerson]

Actually, the Bible is clear that rebellion and obedience are choices facing mankind. And consequences of either.


There is no difference between then and now. It's ALWAYS been about whether man chooses to be obedient to God or in rebellion against God. And God has clearly spelled out the consequences of either choice.

Excellent. We are getting to the heart of your theology. Salvation by works/law/obedience . God predestined the godly people to eternal life.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Is that a promise? I really don't want to go through the work to show your error just to have you dismiss it out of hand, as you've been doing so far.

I dismiss error. There have been other posters asking for explanations, for which they just seem not to be coming. So, rather than not wanting to "go through the work", most likely there just isn't a reasonable explanation for WHY my points "make no sense". That really isn't such a difficult request.

It would be a lot easier if you'd just exegete the text using one of the definitions, however.

Sure, you've already noted that you'd rather not "go through the work". Taking the easy way, huh.

 

[FreeGrace2]

But scripture is clear, not only concerning all being ungodly, but in the fact that none seek Him, no not one.

Yes, Scripture is clear that all are ungodly, and all are under sin (Rom 3:9).

But Scripture does NOT say that "none seek Him" as in the entire human race, which is what RT believes. After Paul made the point that "all are under sin" in v.9, he begins v.10 with "just as it is written", meaning that he is about to quote from the OT. In fact, he quotes from 6 different passages, all given to demonstrate the various ways that "all are under sin". Not that all of humanity is guilty of all 6 quotes. So, what does v.11 refer to? In Paul's first quote, from Psa 14:1-3, the subject is fools, or those who claim there is no God. Atheists certainly do not seek God.

If v.11 did refer to all of humanity, it would be clearly wrong, for the world is full of people searching for God, which explains all the religions.

If v.11 referred to everyone, there would be no religion but Christianity.

We always choose, we always make choices, we choose according to our affections and nature. Paul sets the stage ,showing us the condition of the human soul (and will) before he gives us the truth of God's sovereign work in salvation.

I've argued against "God's sovereign work in salvation". In fact, I champion the fact that God alone is the One who saves. But I know what's just under the surface: that God regenerates in order for those He regenerates to be able to believe, which isn't taught in Scripture.

You're using the word force, as in a gun to the head and the person not wanting to believe.

Does anyone want to believe before the RT claim that God must regenerate a person so that they will believe? OF course not. So, I do use the word "force", because, according to RT, NO ONE wants to believe or even seek God. Until God, against their will and desire, regenerates them against their will. So they will believe and seek Him.

Those who don't see that as forcing, just don't want to see it.

I prefer to use scriptural terminology. Scripture does say He causes, and it gives us the means of how He affects this change. The Gospel and His Holy Spirit.

Please share what Scripture says that He "causes". Is it belief? If so, where?

No one argues that God doesn't cause things. Of course He does. But where is the verse that He causes belief?

He chooses "according to the good pleasure of His own will." Again, He will have mercy on whom He will have mercy.

And we know upon WHOM He will have mercy; the one who repents: Isa 55:7.

Let the wicked forsake his way
And the unrighteous man his thoughts;
And let him return to the LORD,
And He will have compassion on him,
And to our God,
For He will abundantly pardon.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Excellent. We are getting to the heart of your theology. Salvation by works/law/obedience .

That is absurd. Salvation is by grace through faith, just as Paul said. Your post just demonstrated how poorly my view is understood by you.

God predestined the godly people to eternal life.

Please share the verse that tells us that God predestines anyone for eternal life. We KNOW that eternal life is based on faith in Christ.

 

[Hammster]

I dismiss error. There have been other posters asking for explanations, for which they just seem not to be coming. So, rather than not wanting to "go through the work", most likely there just isn't a reasonable explanation for WHY my points "make no sense". That really isn't such a difficult request.


Sure, you've already noted that you'd rather not "go through the work". Taking the easy way, huh.

I didn't say that I didn't want to go through the work. Please read my post more carefully, and then respond accordingly.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I didn't say that I didn't want to go through the work. Please read my post more carefully, and then respond accordingly.

Sure. I'll refresh your memory.

" I really don't want to go through the work to show your error just to have you dismiss it out of hand, as you've been doing so far."

Seems you actually did.

 

[Hammster]

I guess I'll do the work and let the chips fall where they may.

It is plainly obvious that the context of Rom 8:30 refers to believers, the called.

So according to FG, "those He predestined He also called" refers to believers. I cannot seem to get him to give any sort of exegesis. This is as close as he's come. It's a bit odd, so I hoped he would clear it up. Instead, we have pages of him dodging doing so.

So "the called" equals believers in v. 30. But does this make sense? It seems to me that "called" is used as a verb here, yet FG uses it as a noun. This is a bit confusing since as a noun, the sentence is nonsense.

The other definition he's used has been to equate the call to the gospel offer. Yes, more of a verb here. But it does leave done questions that I'm sure will be discarded. One, who are the predestined, and why are they the only ones who get this offer? Two, why do they need this offer at all if they are predestined? Three, why doesn't everyone get this offer?

Will there be any concise answers? Will we get any sort of exegesis for this passage? Time will tell.

 

[Hammster]

Sure. I'll refresh your memory.

" I really don't want to go through the work to show your error just to have you dismiss it out of hand, as you've been doing so far."

Seems you actually did.

Seems you didn't understand the sentence as a whole.

 

[stenerson]

But Scripture does NOT say that "none seek Him" as in the entire human race, which is what RT believes. After Paul made the point that "all are under sin" in v.9, he begins v.10 with "just as it is written", meaning that he is about to quote from the OT. In fact, he quotes from 6 different passages, all given to demonstrate the various ways that "all are under sin". Not that all of humanity is guilty of all 6 quotes. So, what does v.11 refer to? In Paul's first quote, from Psa 14:1-3, the subject is fools, or those who claim there is no God. Atheists certainly do not seek God.

It's a common misinterpretation that said passage is speaking about Atheists. The context is concerning those that behave as if God does not see or is watching. Atheism was not the issue in those days. Just the opposite, they had too many gods. Also both the passage in Psalm and Paul's quoting and understanding of it leaves no doubt that this is concerning all humanity. That's his whole point and what he's building up to. That is that all sin and fall short of the glory of God, both the "righteous law keeping Jew" and the reprobate pagans.
The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”
They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds,
there is none who does good.
2 The Lord looks down from heaven on the children of man,
to see if there are any who understand,
who seek after God.
3 They have all turned aside; together they have become corrupt;
there is none who does good,
not even one.

You do pretzel work of the scriptures in order to establish your tradition. Just take what it says at face value.

 

[stenerson]

That is absurd. Salvation is by grace through faith, just as Paul said. Your post just demonstrated how poorly my view is understood by you.

You said "There is no difference between then and now. It's ALWAYS been about whether man chooses to be obedient to God or in rebellion against God. And God has clearly spelled out the consequences of either choice."

That's Law. Do this, and live. Disobey, rebel and die. You're saying that God saw those that would be obedient and chose accordingly.

Please share the verse that tells us that God predestines anyone for eternal life. We KNOW that eternal life is based on faith in Christ.

Oh I'm sorry, He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, and predestined us for adoption as sons. Not eternal life. Just maybe like a few days then the fun's over.

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, 4 even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love 5 he predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will,

 

[nobdysfool]

Lack of citations or words that contradict assertions do not, by themselves, confirm that the one asserting is right. To flippantly dismiss anything disagreed with, usually because it comes from a Calvinist, shows a deep bias that goes beyond one's scriptural understanding. Why? Because such people dismiss Calvinism. in toto. And they have provided ample proof that they do not correctly understand that which they so vehemently oppose. Nearly every claim made about what Calvinists believe is nothing but error, falsehoods, and straw men. Some are so aggressive in their opposition, that they insult, and bully Calvinists, thinking to drive them away, not realizing that they appear as bullies and aggressive, belligerent people to the silent readers of this forum which are many, and actually undermine their own position in doing so, because many people can recognize that such tactics and attitudes are not the work of the Holy Spirit, but fleshly, base, and wordly tactics. The harder they try to put down Calvinism, the stronger its message becomes, and the more begin to look into it.