Five Misconceptions About Calvinism

[Meowzltov]

That's accurate. Regeneration precedes grace. No wearing down.

If he's "overcoming our natural resistance" to grace, that's the same thing as wearing us down.

 

[Meowzltov]

How many people responded to God's grace when Noah warned them of God's judgement?

One cooperated with God's grace freely. He could have said no as well.

 

[Meowzltov]

Is there scripture to support this outstretched hand?

It's a METAPHOR

 

[jimmyjimmy]

One cooperated with God's grace freely. He could have said no as well.

Not one person responded to the call of Noah. Zero. If that is not in the least bit intriguing to you, and you can't admit that, I am left wondering whether or not you are being intellectually honest in this discussion.

 

[Meowzltov]

Not one person responded to the call of Noah. Zero. If that is not in the least bit intriguing to you, and you can't admit that, I am left wondering whether or not you are being intellectually honest in this discussion.

When I said one, I was referring to Noah responding to God.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

I get it if folks disagree with Reformed Theology. I really do. What I don't get is why we aren't challenged on what we actually teach and believe. That part makes no sense, especially coming from other believers. I thought that integrity in these discussions should be paramount. Otherwise, it's not iron sharpening iron. It's something else.

Well said. Very well said.

I also can fully understand that someone would disagree with God's sovereignty in election, in the manner in which is put forth by Reformed Theology, but I can't understand intentionally misrepresenting it, and the utter unwillingness to hear what our position even is. If another Christian were to tell me that I had gotten his position wrong, I would first apologize, and second ask him to make another attempt at explaining it. In the end, I might insist that his position is wrong, but I would not insist that I understand his position when he has just told me that I hadn't.

"And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified." (Romans 8:30)

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Watch from 3:00 - 6:00

 

[Meowzltov]

I also can fully understand that someone would disagree with God's sovereignty in election, in the manner in which is put forth by Reformed Theology, but I can't understand intentionally misrepresenting it, and the utter unwillingness to hear what our position even is. If another Christian were to tell me that I had gotten his position wrong, I would first apologize, and second ask him to make another attempt at explaining it. In the end, I might insist that his position is wrong, but I would not insist that I understand his position when he has just told me that I hadn't.

Then let's you put it into your own words. Please answer yes/no, and then elaborate.

1. Is man capable of responding to grace, cooperating with God on his own? In other words, do we still have some good in us?
My guess is that you will say no.

2. Does God choose who is elect based on something we do such as have faith?
My guess is that you will say no.

3. Did God send his son to die for the whole world, which he loved?
My guess is that you will say no.

4. Does a man have the free will to turn down the Holy Spirit and grace and go to hell?
My guess is that you will say no.

5. Can the elect ever become a not-elect-any-more?
My guess is that you will say no.

 

[sdowney717]

As if the two have not been presented as one and the same?

My quarrel isn't with Scripture because in its full context I believe it is quite clear that the scriptures acknowledge that many do not know the Lord, but it is also clear, to me, that the Lord loves all and does not wish for any to perish but wants all to be saved. I can't believe anybody is born who is beyond redemption. So we can amicably agree to disagree on that one.

Scripture tells us it is not the choice of man that they are given mercy and born of God.
Scripture tells us it is God's mercy that actually saves us. This is not of ourselves, God is absolute in His word, this is not a area having any grays.

 

[sdowney717]

Then let's you put it into your own words. Please answer yes/no, and then elaborate.

1. Is man capable of responding to grace, cooperating with God on his own? In other words, do we still have some good in us?
My guess is that you will say no.
Matthew 12:34
Brood of vipers! How can you, being evil, speak good things? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks.

2. Does God choose who is elect based on something we do such as have faith?
My guess is that you will say no.
Romans 9:11
(for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls),

3. Did God send his son to die for the whole world, which he loved?
My guess is that you will say no.
John 10:7
[ Jesus the Good Shepherd ] Then Jesus said to them again, “Most assuredly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep.
John 10:8
All who ever came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them.
John 10:11
I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep.

The sheep are all over the world and Caiaphas prophesied they are the children of God for whom Christ had to die to bring them together under one Good Shepherd.
John 11:48-52 New King James Version (NKJV)
48 If we let Him alone like this, everyone will believe in Him, and the Romans will come and take away both our place and nation.”

49 And one of them, Caiaphas, being high priest that year, said to them, “You know nothing at all, 50 nor do you consider that it is expedient for us that one man should die for the people, and not that the whole nation should perish.” 51 Now this he did not say on his own authority;but being high priest that year he prophesied that Jesus would die for the nation, 52 and not for that nation only, but also that He would gather together in one the children of God who were scattered abroad.

4. Does a man have the free will to turn down the Holy Spirit and grace and go to hell?
My guess is that you will say no.
It is not of our will that we come to Christ, it is of His will that we come to Christ, and so those who do come to Christ do so because it was His will that they come.

John 5:40
But you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life.
John 6
36 But I said to you that you have seen Me and yet do not believe. 37 All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out.
5. Can the elect ever become a not-elect-any-more?
My guess is that you will say no.
Jude 1
Greeting to the Called
1 Jude, a bondservant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James,

To those who are called, sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ:

2 Mercy, peace, and love be multiplied to you.

 

[EmSw]

Scripture tells us it is not the choice of man that they are given mercy and born of God.
Scripture tells us it is God's mercy that actually saves us. This is not of ourselves, God is absolute in His word, this is not a area having any grays.

Where does scripture show us it's NOT the choice of man? Here's what I read -

Exodus 20:6

but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.


Deuteronomy 5:10

but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.


Deuteronomy 7:9
Therefore know that the Lord your God, He is God, the faithful God who keeps covenant and mercy for a thousand generations with those who love Him and keep His commandments;

God show mercy to all who keep His commandments, a choice of man. It is actually your doctrine by which God shows no mercy.

 

[Hammster]

If he's "overcoming our natural resistance" to grace, that's the same thing as wearing us down.

If you read the whole thing as intended, you'll see his point. Regeneration precedes faith. You shouldn't take things out of context.

 

[Hammster]

It's a METAPHOR

So no?

 

[Foxfyre]

Scripture tells us it is not the choice of man that they are given mercy and born of God.
Scripture tells us it is God's mercy that actually saves us. This is not of ourselves, God is absolute in His word, this is not a area having any grays.

I fully understand the Calvinist doctrine, have studied it, have taught it within the context of comparative religions.

I think in a nutshell the following from my own teaching materials sums up the doctrine of Calvinism:

1. Total Depravity. As a result of the Fall, mankind is no longer capable of believing the gospel. He is unable to repent and believe.

2. Unconditional Election. Therefore, before he made the world, God selected those he would save.

3. Limited Atonement. Jesus bore the full punishment for the sins of humankind ensuring their final salvation. His sacrifice does not cover the non-elect.

4. Efficacious Grace. God's Grace revives the otherwise spiritually dead among the elect, imparts a new nature, and draws the sinner to Christ. Regeneration or the news birth occurs before belief in Christ. The elect have no part in this process.

5. Final Perseverance. The elect who are called by God's grace will be saved and will never fall away and perish.

I as a semi-quasi professional Bible scholar once also did a lot of proof texting when teaching Bible--pluck a passage out of the whole text and apply it to some issue of the day. I had no problem just shrugging off all the applications that bit of scripture did not address or when circumstances explained in other scripture would contradict my interpretation of the scripture which would not be applicable in other situations.

So I eventually had to acknowledge the logical fallacy of applying scripture intended to address a specific point as literally applicable to all situations. So often it is not.

So I learned to back off and see the whole in context and also the purpose for which the scripture was intended by the writer. A passage that addresses a specific issue will almost always contain a universal truth, but it cannot specifically be applied to more than that specific issue.

Even disregarding all the 70 some Biblical passage that can be interpreted as assuring us that God does not will that any should perish. . .

. . . I can see that within the context and purposes for which they were written, the passages in say Romans that seem to support the predestination doctrine actually do not as Paul explains in Chapter 11.

Of course the Calvinist will argue that he is still speaking of the elect. And I will continue to say that the Lord I know, the Lord I have a relationship with, did not create souls to suffer unspeakable suffering amidst the chaos we humans have created on Earth if there was no greater purpose for those souls, no possibility of salvation, no chance for eternal life. And there is no getting around that creating people specifically to suffer with no hope of redemption would be unspeakably cruel.

If the elect are automatically on their way to heaven and are unable to resist the Lord, there is no purpose in attending church or preaching the Gospel, no value in teaching the Bible, no point in evangelism or going into all the world to create disciples. There is no value in prayer because everything is going to be the way it is going to be no matter what we do. We are all simply puppets preordained in every thought and movement with no ability to choose anything.

The Lord I know is a loving God and I am absolutely certain that I have complete choice in whether to love and serve Him or not.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

If the elect are automatically on their way to heaven and are unable to resist the Lord, there is no purpose in attending church or preaching the Gospel, no value in teaching the Bible, no point in evangelism or going into all the world to create disciples.

This clearly demonstrates that you do not understand Reformed theology.

God uses *means* to call His elect. The proclamation of the gospel is necessary and prescribed by Christ. The Holy Spirit, through the Word, is the way regeneration takes place.

 

[Hammster]

This clearly demonstrates that you do not understand Reformed theology.

God uses *means* to call His elect. The proclamation of the gospel is necessary and prescribed by Christ. The Holy Spirit, through the Word, is the way regeneration takes place.

As soon as puppets gets used, you know that they don't understand.

And then it makes you wonder what they think it means to be regenerated.

 

[sdowney717]

I fully understand the Calvinist doctrine, have studied it, have taught it within the context of comparative religions.

I think in a nutshell the following from my own teaching materials sums up the doctrine of Calvinism:

1. Total Depravity. As a result of the Fall, mankind is no longer capable of believing the gospel. He is unable to repent and believe.

2. Unconditional Election. Therefore, before he made the world, God selected those he would save.

3. Limited Atonement. Jesus bore the full punishment for the sins of humankind ensuring their final salvation. His sacrifice does not cover the non-elect.

4. Efficacious Grace. God's Grace revives the otherwise spiritually dead among the elect, imparts a new nature, and draws the sinner to Christ. Regeneration or the news birth occurs before belief in Christ. The elect have no part in this process.

5. Final Perseverance. The elect who are called by God's grace will be saved and will never fall away and perish.

I as a semi-quasi professional Bible scholar once also did a lot of proof texting when teaching Bible--pluck a passage out of the whole text and apply it to some issue of the day. I had no problem just shrugging off all the applications that bit of scripture did not address or when circumstances explained in other scripture would contradict my interpretation of the scripture which would not be applicable in other situations.

So I eventually had to acknowledge the logical fallacy of applying scripture intended to address a specific point as literally applicable to all situations. So often it is not.

So I learned to back off and see the whole in context and also the purpose for which the scripture was intended by the writer. A passage that addresses a specific issue will almost always contain a universal truth, but it cannot specifically be applied to more than that specific issue.

Even disregarding all the 70 some Biblical passage that can be interpreted as assuring us that God does not will that any should perish. . .

. . . I can see that within the context and purposes for which they were written, the passages in say Romans that seem to support the predestination doctrine actually do not as Paul explains in Chapter 11.

Of course the Calvinist will argue that he is still speaking of the elect. And I will continue to say that the Lord I know, the Lord I have a relationship with, did not create souls to suffer unspeakable suffering amidst the chaos we humans have created on Earth if there was no greater purpose for those souls, no possibility of salvation, no chance for eternal life. And there is no getting around that creating people specifically to suffer with no hope of redemption would be unspeakably cruel.

If the elect are automatically on their way to heaven and are unable to resist the Lord, there is no purpose in attending church or preaching the Gospel, no value in teaching the Bible, no point in evangelism or going into all the world to create disciples. There is no value in prayer because everything is going to be the way it is going to be no matter what we do. We are all simply puppets preordained in every thought and movement with no ability to choose anything.

The Lord I know is a loving God and I am absolutely certain that I have complete choice in whether to love and serve Him or not.

You don't believe God saying no one seeks Him?

 

[sdowney717]

Where does scripture show us it's NOT the choice of man? Here's what I read -

Exodus 20:6

but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.


Deuteronomy 5:10

but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.


Deuteronomy 7:9
Therefore know that the Lord your God, He is God, the faithful God who keeps covenant and mercy for a thousand generations with those who love Him and keep His commandments;

God show mercy to all who keep His commandments, a choice of man. It is actually your doctrine by which God shows no mercy.

God shows mercy to His people who are under covenant with Him. That is true.
All those quotes are for the OT saints who are OF God.
And the OC has passed away, we are now in a much better NC relationship.

 

[EmSw]

God shows mercy to His people who are under covenant with Him. That is true.
All those quotes are for the OT saints who are OF God.
And the OC has passed away, we are now in a much better NC relationship.

So you have God changing, even though He says He says He does not change? Do you just pick passages out of the OT which suit your beliefs? What's so funny is that your pet passage, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion” is taken from the OT. Isn't that quote for OT saints? And haven't you taken that passage out of context?

A better relationship you say. How is that? In the covenant that you contrived, God does not give mercy to those who obey, nor those who ask for it. You guys have taken passages which you like and made your own religion from it. God hasn't changed; your religion has changed God.

Malachi 3:6
For I am the Lord, I do not change; therefore you are not consumed, O sons of Jacob.

 

[Foxfyre]

This clearly demonstrates that you do not understand Reformed theology.

God uses *means* to call His elect. The proclamation of the gospel is necessary and prescribed by Christ. The Holy Spirit, through the Word, is the way regeneration takes place.

And again that doesn't compute logically. Why would any 'means' be necessary if the elect are already chosen and cannot refuse?