Five Misconceptions About Calvinism

[MDC]

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.

It actually demonstrates that they do not understand and believe the gospel according to scriptures. "Calvinism" or reformed theology, as it relates to soteriology, is the gospel. Reformed theology is the express image of the gospel of grace that saves. And it separates itself from the false gospel of Arminian Pelagianism. And is why the unsaved respond with such hatred towards it

 

[jimmyjimmy]

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

God has arranged it that way.

When the children of Israel were in the desert, and God gave them manna, why did they have to go and gather it? Why did the have to chew it? Why didn't He just put it directly into their stomachs?

When God created the universe, why did He speak? It's because His words cause life to come forth. His words create and they also recreate.

The way you phrase, "cannot refuse" reveals more misunderstanding of these biblical teachings. If I offered you dinner, and gave you two choices, one a plate of salmon, and the other a plate of cow dung, would I describe your choice as forced?

 

[EmSw]

God arranged it that way.

When the children of Israel were in the desert, and God gave them manna, why did they have to go an gather it? Why did the have to chew it? Why didn't He just put it directly into their stomachs?

When God created the universe, why did He speak? His words cause life to come forth. His words create and they recreate.

The way you phrase, "cannot refuse" reveals more misunderstanding of these biblical teachings. If I offered you dinner, and gave you two choices, one a plate of salmon, and the other a plate of cow dung, would I describe your choice as forced?

If you predestined the choice, yes.

 

[EmSw]

It actually demonstrates that they do not understand and believe the gospel according to scriptures. "Calvinism" or reformed theology, as it relates to soteriology, is the gospel. Reformed theology is the express image of the gospel of grace that saves. And it separates itself from the false gospel of Arminian Pelagianism. And is why the unsaved respond with such hatred towards it

Well folks, there you have the truth.

It is the gospel of the Reformed which relates to salvation. If you don't believe their doctrines, you will not be saved. To those who do not respond to their 'gospel', you are not saved.

 

[Foxfyre]

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

Again the words have to be included in their full context to have any possibility of understanding. I interpret John 6 that as no matter how good the seed, if the ground has not been properly prepared, the seed cannot grow. But that doesn't suggest that the seed itself is incapable of bearing fruit. Jesus himself is the fertile ground prepared for the seed. Once the ground is prepared, the seed only has to be sown.

Jesus was sent by God to suffer and die not for an elect--there would be no point--but for the whole world. All will not seek him, but I cannot believe it is impossible for some to do so.

The great commission cited in Matthew 28:16-20

- 16 Then the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain where Jesus had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted. 18 Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”​

I can't translate that to make it just an elect who is to be identified, baptized, and taught to obey Jesus' commands.

Nor can I translate John 6:48-51 to mean just an elect:

48 I am the bread of life.49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died. 50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die. 51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”
​

So again, the scriptures the Calvinists choose by selecting passages and applying those to many other unrelated passages can easily be countered with selected scriptures as I have provided here.

And since no Calvinist can answer what is the point if the elect have no choice but to be chosen and those who are not the elect have no ability to choose? Why go through the whole sometimes brutal, painful, cruel process of life on Earth if the outcome has already been determined?

It simply is not logical that no ability to choose or not choose and free will can co-exist.

 

[-V-]

The way you phrase, "cannot refuse" reveals more misunderstanding of these biblical teachings. If I offered you dinner, and gave you two choices, one a plate of salmon, and the other a plate of cow dung, would I describe your choice as forced?

According to what the Calvinists say, yes, the choice is forced. If anyone takes the cow dung, it's because they're totally depraved and can't make any other choice. If anyone takes the salmon, it's because they were elected to take it and, again, can't make any other choice.

 

[Foxfyre]

God has arranged it that way.

When the children of Israel were in the desert, and God gave them manna, why did they have to go and gather it? Why did the have to chew it? Why didn't He just put it directly into their stomachs?

When God created the universe, why did He speak? It's because His words cause life to come forth. His words create and they also recreate.

The way you phrase, "cannot refuse" reveals more misunderstanding of these biblical teachings. If I offered you dinner, and gave you two choices, one a plate of salmon, and the other a plate of cow dung, would I describe your choice as forced?

The God I love and who loves me is not the God you describe though. And he hasn't picked and chosen who He has saved and also create countless people who have no choice to accept the salvation He offers. He loves all and does not will that any shall perish. Any who perish will have made that choice of their own free will and not because they were chosen for that fate sometime before the Earth was made.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

I interpret John 6 that as no matter how good the seed, if the ground has not been properly prepared, the seed cannot grow.

John 6? Are you referring to the parable of sower?

 

[Foxfyre]

It actually demonstrates that they do not understand and believe the gospel according to scriptures. "Calvinism" or reformed theology, as it relates to soteriology, is the gospel. Reformed theology is the express image of the gospel of grace that saves. And it separates itself from the false gospel of Arminian Pelagianism. And is why the unsaved respond with such hatred towards it

But my goodness. Why wouldn't people who do not believe at this time hate a theology that condemns them before they were born? The God I love is a God of love and who is unwilling that anyone should perish. If I preached a gospel of Calvinistic theology, reformed or otherwise, I am presenting a God of unimaginable cruelty. The God I love is not cruel.

 

[Foxfyre]

John 6? Are you referring to the parable of sower?

No. I am using a metaphor of the sower to describe what I believe John 6 teaches.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

No. I am using a metaphor of the sower to describe what I believe John 6 teaches.

Where?

 

[jimmyjimmy]

But my goodness. Why wouldn't people who do not believe at this time hate a theology that condemns them before they were born? The God I love is a God of love and who is unwilling that anyone should perish. If I preached a gospel of Calvinistic theology, reformed or otherwise, I am presenting a God of unimaginable cruelty. The God I love is not cruel.

What specifically is cruel about God's judgement of sin?

 

[MDC]

But my goodness. Why wouldn't people who do not believe at this time hate a theology that condemns them before they were born? The God I love is a God of love and who is unwilling that anyone should perish. If I preached a gospel of Calvinistic theology, reformed or otherwise, I am presenting a God of unimaginable cruelty. The God I love is not cruel.

Your emotional opinion of what's cruel and what's fair is irrelevant. The God you love is not the God of the Bible

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Your emotional opinion of what's cruel and what's fair is irrelevant. The God you love is not the God of the Bible

Many imagine a god of their liking, one that is palatable to them. It's often said, "I believe in a god of love", when one desires a god who doesn't care about justice, for instance.

 

[-V-]

What specifically is cruel about God's judgement of sin?

Probably the part in Calvinism about neither the damned nor the saved having any choice in the matter. The damned are damned because God simply chose to not save them. The saved are saved solely because God made them become saved.

 

[Foxfyre]

Your emotional opinion of what's cruel and what's fair is irrelevant. The God you love is not the God of the Bible

The God I love is the God of the Bible I read.

 

[Foxfyre]

Many imagine a god of their liking, one that is palatable to them. It's often said, "I believe in a god of love", when one desires a god who doesn't care about justice, for instance.

What is just about creating souls who are given absolutely no chance to be saved?

 

[MDC]

Many imagine a god of their liking, one that is palatable to them. It's often said, "I believe in a god of love", when one desires a god who doesn't care about justice, for instance.

I agree

 

[Foxfyre]

Well folks, there you have the truth.

It is the gospel of the Reformed which relates to salvation. If you don't believe their doctrines, you will not be saved. To those who do not respond to their 'gospel', you are not saved.

Well I don't think that is exactly what they are saying, but that is the logical implication of what they have been arguing. I don't accept any part of the predestination doctrine so I suppose I am considered one of the non-elect. Yet how can I love God so, feel so loved by God, and be so certain of eternal life if I am one of the hopelessly depraved and was judged so before the Earth was made?

It is a puzzlement.

 

[-V-]

Many imagine a god of their liking, one that is palatable to them. It's often said, "I believe in a god of love", when one desires a god who doesn't care about justice, for instance.

Where's the justice if no one has any choice?