• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Assessing Calvinism Using Biblical Data

Patmos

Well-Known Member
Mar 11, 2016
471
53
New York
✟893.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
In the many of the Calvinism/Arminianism debates on CF, it is often completely missed that the labels aren’t even adequate in explaining the positions of the men they supposedly represent.

Calvinism evolved from Calvin's Institute's via several Confessions e,g Belgic, the Canons of Dort and the Westminster Confessions.

It is still evolving e.g Calvinism is typically identified by the classic TULIP system of Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, and Perseverance of saints - But; Td has several definitions, L is largely out of fashion in some circles and P is often understood to be 'Preservation', not 'Perseverance'.

Similarly Aminianism has evolved from Jacobus Arminius's original objection that Supralapsarian is tantamount to saying God is the Author of evil.

All of this has resulted in much futile debate on CF. What follows is a comparison of the major Calvinistic tenants with Biblical data.
 

Patmos

Well-Known Member
Mar 11, 2016
471
53
New York
✟893.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Total Depravity (from WCF)

“Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation; so as a natural man being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is not able, by his own strength, to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto” (Westminster Confession, 9:III).


This statement is consistent with Romans 3:9-20, 5:1-12, and Ephesians 2:1-3 in describing our former estate. The insufficiency here is in the explanation of how man is presently in such a helpless state.

Calvin advocated the idea of federal headship – that Adam was representative of all humanity in his sin. But the Biblical conception of human depravity is not simply that we are all in sin because Adam represented us. Adam’s son was born in his image and likeness (Gen 4:3). So the sin Adam bore is passed down to all of us as an inherited trait.

We have the sin nature just as Adam. Insofar as all are sinners by nature (Rom 5:12; Eph 2:3), we all bear the consequences of spiritual death (Gen 2:17) and physical death (Gen 3:19). This is likely why David referred to himself as having been brought forth in iniquity and conceived in sin (Ps 51:5).

In short, the Biblical concept of human depravity seems to include representation in Adam, but extends beyond that to a depravity due to our own individual natures: we are born from a sinner – in the image and likeness of that sinner – therefore, we are by nature, sinners.

But are we Totally dead in sin, cut of, a corpse, spitually UNABLE ? NO

Genesis 3 21 The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them.22 And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us,knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.

And then, later, God talks to Cain.

Genesis 4:6 Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast?7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.”

Does this sound like God talking to a corpse ? NO

Furthermore God offers Cain something - acceptance as shown above!

To be continued.
 
Upvote 0

StanJ

Student & Correct Handler of God's Word.
May 3, 2016
1,767
287
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
✟3,516.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Liberals
I agree, but instead of making it about the people that instigated these doctrines it should be about what the Bible actually says despite what these men taught.
For instance do Calvinists know that Calvin himself advocated infant baptism as a way to preserve salvation? I'm sure there are also issues like this with Arminianism, but that won't allow us to focus on biblical truths. I'm hoping that we can focus on some basic issues that define both sides of the spectrum and not get waylaid by multiple rabbit trails.
 
Upvote 0

Patmos

Well-Known Member
Mar 11, 2016
471
53
New York
✟893.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Otherwise known as "Why The Bible Doesn't Really Mean What you Think It Does" ....

NO, I am not a pre tent calvinist or anything else. Did you not notice ACTUAL Scripture quoted ?

But are we Totally dead in sin, cut of, a corpse, spitually UNABLE ? NO

ACTUAL SCRIPTURE
Genesis 3 21 The Lord God made garments of skin for Adam and his wife and clothed them.22 And the Lord God said, “The man has now become like one of us,knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.

And then, later, God talks to Cain.


ACTUAL SCRIPTURE
Genesis 4:6 Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast?7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.”

Does this sound like God talking to a corpse ? NO

Furthermore God offers Cain something - acceptance as shown above!
 
Upvote 0

Patmos

Well-Known Member
Mar 11, 2016
471
53
New York
✟893.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I agree, but instead of making it about the people that instigated these doctrines it should be about what the Bible actually says despite what these men taught.
For instance do Calvinists know that Calvin himself advocated infant baptism as a way to preserve salvation? I'm sure there are also issues like this with Arminianism, but that won't allow us to focus on biblical truths. I'm hoping that we can focus on some basic issues that define both sides of the spectrum and not get waylaid by multiple rabbit trails.


Hi Stan

Rabbit trails seem part of the course in the is forum. I am comparing what the Bible actually says.

This is not intended to be a sales pitch for conversion. Yes, there are similar issues with Arminianism and as I said in post one, both Calvinism and Arminianism has evolved a long way from what Calvin or Arminius ever said or wrote. This is why I have not quoted any doctrine of Armianism but instead used only the Bible.
 
Upvote 0

Patmos

Well-Known Member
Mar 11, 2016
471
53
New York
✟893.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Continued

Unconditional Election


The Calvinist Position ( Quoating from WCF but Dort and Calvin say the exact same thing)

“By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death. IV. These angels and men, thus predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed; and their number is so certain and definite that it can not be either increased or diminished. V. Those of mankind that are predestinated unto life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will, hath chosen in Christ, unto everlasting glory, out of his free grace and love alone, without any foresight of faith or good works, or perseverance in either of them, or any other thing in the creature, as conditions, or causes moving him thereunto; and all to the praise of his glorious grace. VI. As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so hath he, by the eternal and most free purpose of his will, foreordained all the means thereunto. Wherefore they who are elected being fallen in Adam are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ by his Spirit working in due season; are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto salvation. Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only. VII. The rest of mankind, God was pleased, according to the unsearchable counsel of his own will, whereby he extendeth or withholdeth mercy as he pleaseth, for the glory of his sovereign power over his creatures, to pass by, and to ordain them to dishonor and wrath for their sin, to the praise of his glorious justice” (Westminster Confession, 3:III-VII).

(Note - I have quoted a bit more than needed to try and show no bias - e.g the popular foresight/faith view held by many who do not even know what Arminianism is.)

Angels are predestined to eternal life - Where does the Bible assert that?
Their number can be neither increased or diminished -Upon what Biblical basis?

The problem with the standard Reformed texts is not just in the conclusion of double predestination (that God elected believers to salvation and unbelievers to damnation). But also is in arriving at these conclusions the Reformed texts go further than what the Bible actually says.

E.g Canon of Dort, Rejection of Errors, First Head, Paragraph 8 quotes:

Matthew 13:11 (“not revealed to them”).
The content of the what was hidden in Matthew 13:11 was the mysteries of the kingdom – the things Jesus was sharing with the disciples in private – the things of the kingdom, not of individual salvation.

Matthew 11:25-26 (“you have hidden these things from the wise”).
Are we to understand Matthew 11:25 as restricting saving knowledge from the wise and intelligent? If so then Paul is wrong, because he admits there are some wise who are saved (1 Cor 1:26).

Romans 9:18 (“he hardens whom he wants to harden”),
The hardening of Romans 9 has nothing to do with predestination. In fact, the first Biblical instance of hardening is done with Pharaoh after the fact (Ex 4:21). We cannot say whether Pharaoh was ever a believer or not, because the Bible doesn’t reveal it.

While double predestination seems logically necessary to some, it is not exegetically provable. It may even be probable ( to some), but it cannot be justified as Biblical fact.

Which may explain why those who call themselves Calvinist often do not believe it.
 
Upvote 0

Greg J.

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Mar 2, 2016
3,844
1,909
Southeast Michigan
✟281,539.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I agree, but instead of making it about the people that instigated these doctrines it should be about what the Bible actually says despite what these men taught. ...

Word.

I listen for and look for God's commands and wisdom from everything. God sometimes speaks through unbelievers, those in authority, those with knowledge, and those with life experience (particularly through your parents, whether you like it or not). We see in Scripture He speaks through thunder and donkeys, as well. Sometimes he even speaks through famous people that codified doctrine.

Most people that write here about what Calvin and Arminius wrote are expressing their need to feel right about something or feel included in (or be the leader of) a group of people that "get it." (I have this fallenness, also.) Both are ways of expressing their frustration at their lack of understanding of, and contentment on, the topic. But there will always be things like this when it comes to God. Everyone needs to learn to put questions on the shelf and keep moving forward. It is a part of having a living faith. Something constructive would be to ask God to show you why you are angry about other people being "wrong" about God and Scripture. (I think God just spoke to me.) Odds are in favor of it having to do with feeling rejected and your self-esteem, not what they actually are professing.

At the moment, I can't even imagine seriously asking God to help me understand Calvin or Arminius, when I could be asking him to help me know him better.

If someone (living or dead) or anything else is not helping your relationship with Jesus Christ, then move on.

Everything that doesn't require omniscience can be understood, but genuine understanding comes from God alone. This includes how one God can be three Persons, how predestination can be true at the same time freewill is true, and all the so-called difficult truths. But understanding comes from God alone. You might also say it comes through faith alone. Work on trusting Jesus more and all things will eventually come to you, not just what you are most deeply interested in.

And don’t let anyone call you ‘Teacher,’ for you have only one teacher, the Messiah. (Matthew 23:10, NLT)

If you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any fellowship with the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and purpose. Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit, but in humility consider others better than yourselves. (Philippians 2:1-3, 1984 NIV)

It never hurts to read Philippians 2:5-11, 14-15 upon occasion (every morning and late afternoon would probably be best ;)).
 
  • Like
Reactions: StanJ
Upvote 0