Does Matthew 22:14 prove Calvinism and Predestination?

[nolidad]

Paul addressed all of them as saved because his epistle was written to
“the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling, with all who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours:”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭1:2‬ ‭NASB‬‬

And Paul says to these saints

“And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to infants in Christ. I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able, for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men?”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭3:1-3‬ ‭NASB‬‬

These “who have been sanctified in Christ are still fleshly and yet they have repented. They are still new Christians and still have much to learn which takes time which is what Paul is saying in chapter 2. Nobody is baptized coming out of the water suddenly understanding all that the Spirit has to teach. So your statement that the carnal man cannot repent is false because 1 Corinthians is a prime example of carnal people who have repented.

You h ave totally misunderstood what I wrote! Christians who live in the flesh (carnal nature) cannot please God! But because they are in Christ- they are in the Spirit as well (though not living in the Spirit) and thus when convicted have the ability to repent because they are Believers!

But the unsaved man- is spiritually dead! They have no capacity to do good because they are not in Christ (unsaved). thus they have no foundation to do good in and of themseves. The Christians can because as Paul also said to the Corinthians, that if any man is in Christ they are a new creature, the old one has died and all things are new!

YOu need to understand the difference between positional truth and experiential truth.

 

[BNR32FAN]

= the same thing. Plus many no longer followed him because of that.

No not really. To say no one can come to Christ unless The Father has granted them in no way implies that they are predestined for salvation. Jesus also said all that The Father give time Him will come to Him and the one who COMES to Him, He will certainly not cast out. The Greek word translated to COMES is only used in the present and imperfect tense. So it does not mean that anyone who has ever came to Him He will not cast out but instead everyone who presently and continuously comes to Him He will not cast out. Why would He use a word that specifically only means to presently or continuously come instead of just using the same word “come” that He just used in the same sentence?

 

[bbbbbbb]

I’m curious about these “syncretist”, do they themselves openly state that they are trusting in their works to save them or is that an accusation made by others?

I apologize for my strange mistake. I meant to write about synergism, not syncretism, which is an entirely different animal.

Here is the Wikipedia entry concerning synergism - Synergism - Wikipedia

 

[BNR32FAN]

I apologize for my strange mistake. I meant to write about synergism, not syncretism, which is an entirely different animal.

Here is the Wikipedia entry concerning synergism - Synergism - Wikipedia

Im definitely a synergist very much like every church the apostles ever established. I see evidence of synergism throughout the scriptures both Old and New Testament. I see it in the earliest of church writings outside of the scriptures. Iranaeus would be a really good example, not to mention that he even refuted Calvin’s theology back in 170AD, 1300 years before Calvin even existed. I find it terribly hard to believe that every single church established by the apostles would fall to teaching a false gospel. I believe wholeheartedly in Jesus’ words in Matthew 16:18, that the gates of hell will not prevail over His church. I don’t believe it is possible that all the devoted servants of God agreed to teaching a different gospel than the apostles with no evidence whatsoever of any resistance. I think either by force or by collaboration such a disaster would be utterly impossible unless one were to believe that there was a complete absence of the Holy Spirit in Jesus’ Church. I don’t believe that God would allow a 1300 year absence of His true teachings, which is what reformed theology really implies. I was not taught this, I learned it. I’ve never once attended a Catholic Church, Roman, Orthodox, or any other Catholic denomination. I don’t do commentaries although I do have a high regard for the earliest church writings, mostly in the first 3-5 centuries of the church. I began as a reformed Christian but the more I studied the more I began to realize that it’s an incorrect theology. I got tired of reading certain scriptures saying to myself that can’t possibly mean what it appears to be clearly saying. So I prayed, and I studied, and I learned. It was hard to accept at first and it took some time to really convince me that I had it all wrong for the first 2-3 years of my Christian walk. But it’s not about where you start but where you finish that matters.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Im definitely a synergist very much like every church the apostles ever established. I see evidence of synergism throughout the scriptures both Old and New Testament. I see it in the earliest of church writings outside of the scriptures. Iranaeus would be a really good example, not to mention that he even refuted Calvin’s theology back in 170AD, 1300 years before Calvin even existed. I find it terribly hard to believe that every single church established by the apostles would fall to teaching a false gospel. I believe wholeheartedly in Jesus’ words in Matthew 16:18, that the gates of hell will not prevail over His church. I don’t believe it is possible that all the devoted servants of God agreed to teaching a different gospel than the apostles with no evidence whatsoever of any resistance. I think either by force or by collaboration such a disaster would be utterly impossible unless one were to believe that there was a complete absence of the Holy Spirit in Jesus’ Church. I don’t believe that God would allow a 1300 year absence of His true teachings, which is what reformed theology really implies. I was not taught this, I learned it. I’ve never once attended a Catholic Church, Roman, Orthodox, or any other Catholic denomination. I don’t do commentaries although I do have a high regard for the earliest church writings, mostly in the first 3-5 centuries of the church. I began as a reformed Christian but the more I studied the more I began to realize that it’s an incorrect theology. I got tired of reading certain scriptures saying to myself that can’t possibly mean what it appears to be clearly saying. So I prayed, and I studied, and I learned. It was hard to accept at first and it took some time to really convince me that I had it all wrong for the first 2-3 years of my Christian walk. But it’s not about where you start but where you finish that matters.

Thank you for clearing that up. Out of curiosity, do you consider Augustine to be among the early church fathers?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Thank you for clearing that up. Out of curiosity, do you consider Augustine to be among the early church fathers?

I do but I have a problem with his teachings because in he admits to making many errors in his earlier writings but never clarifies exactly what errors he was referring to. Honestly I haven’t studied his work very much. What I would like to do is have the time to study his writings after that comment about his errors and see what he was teaching after that time.

 

[Dave L]

No not really. To say no one can come to Christ unless The Father has granted them in no way implies that they are predestined for salvation. Jesus also said all that The Father give time Him will come to Him and the one who COMES to Him, He will certainly not cast out. The Greek word translated to COMES is only used in the present and imperfect tense. So it does not mean that anyone who has ever came to Him He will not cast out but instead everyone who presently and continuously comes to Him He will not cast out. Why would He use a word that specifically only means to presently or continuously come instead of just using the same word “come” that He just used in the same sentence?

“All things have been given over into My power by My Father; and no one knows Who the Son is except the Father, or Who the Father is except the Son and anyone to whom the Son may choose to reveal and make Him known.” Luke 10:22 (AMP)

 

[BNR32FAN]

“All things have been given over into My power by My Father; and no one knows Who the Son is except the Father, or Who the Father is except the Son and anyone to whom the Son may choose to reveal and make Him known.” Luke 10:22 (AMP)

There is no guarantee of salvation in this verse.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I do but I have a problem with his teachings because in he admits to making many errors in his earlier writings but never clarifies exactly what errors he was referring to. Honestly I haven’t studied his work very much. What I would like to do is have the time to study his writings after that comment about his errors and see what he was teaching after that time.

I recommend that you look further into his writings. He helped promote monergism (the opposite of synergism) with some very forceful writings which were done early in his life. These are the writings which he later rejected. Some say that he was pressured into recanting them by church authorities.

That said, both Luther and Calvin were heavily influenced by Augustine and his monergism. It is a popular misconception that Luther and Calvin somehow created monergism 1300 years after the ECFs. The difficulty I have with the ECFs is that one can pick and choose among their writings to support a range of theological beliefs. Overall they were not consistent on many things.

 

[Dave L]

There is no guarantee of salvation in this verse.

It means nobody is saved apart from divine revelation. The Father had to reveal Jesus to Peter before he could believe. Unless that happens, people always trust in a false Christ to no avail.

 

[BNR32FAN]

I recommend that you look further into his writings. He helped promote monergism (the opposite of synergism) with some very forceful writings which were done early in his life. These are the writings which he later rejected. Some say that he was pressured into recanting them by church authorities.

That said, both Luther and Calvin were heavily influenced by Augustine and his monergism. It is a popular misconception that Luther and Calvin somehow created monergism 1300 years after the ECFs. The difficulty I have with the ECFs is that one can pick and choose among their writings to support a range of theological beliefs. Overall they were not consistent on many things.

That’s why I have a hard time with Augustine’s writings because yes he was pressured to recant and I’m not familiar with any other EFC writings that support his views on monergism. So I have a tendency to lean towards the majority rather than the one individual to give an incite as to what the early church actually taught. I can’t see the logic in choosing an individual’s writing over the majority’s writings.

 

[Dave L]

That’s why I have a hard time with Augustine’s writings because yes he was pressured to recant and I’m not familiar with any other EFC writings that support his views on monergism. So I have a tendency to lean towards the majority rather than the one individual to give an incite as to what the early church actually taught. I can’t see the logic in choosing an individual’s writing over the majority’s writings.

His debates with Pelagius proved total depravity and salvation by grace alone.

 

[BNR32FAN]

It means nobody is saved apart from divine revelation. The Father had to reveal Jesus to Peter before he could believe. Unless that happens, people always trust in a false Christ to no avail.

I have agreed with you on this several times but this still doesn’t support predestination because their salvation is not guaranteed.

 

[BNR32FAN]

His debates with Pelagius proved total depravity and salvation by grace alone.

Pelagianism was labeled as heresy by the entire church, not just Augustine.

 

[Dave L]

Pelagianism was labeled as heresy by the entire church, not just Augustine.

It still is in the Council of Ephesus creed of 431. Luther and the Reformers based the Reformation on it and remained tied to the historic Church. Most today practice Pelagianism but dress it up trying to stay under the radar.

 

[Dave L]

I have agreed with you on this several times but this still doesn’t support predestination because their salvation is not guaranteed.

Eternal life has a guarantee written into it.

 

[BNR32FAN]

It still is in the Council of Ephesus creed of 431. Luther and the Reformers based the Reformation on it and remained tied to the historic Church. Most today practice Pelagianism but dress it up trying to stay under the radar.

Pelagian taught that people could live a sinless life and could receive salvation without Christ’s atonement by their own merit. That is what the church rejected about pelagianism.

 

[Dave L]

Pelagian taught that people could live a sinless life and could receive salvation without Christ’s atonement by their own merit. That is what the church rejected about pelagianism.

This is what all except Calvinists believe today. You still have an atonement that doesn't save. People save themselves by obedience to an imaginary law twisted from the gospel.

 

[BNR32FAN]

This is what all except Calvinists believe today. You still have an atonement that doesn't save. People save themselves by obedience to an imaginary law twisted from the gospel.

no thise are just a false accusations.

 

[bbbbbbb]

His debates with Pelagius proved total depravity and salvation by grace alone.

Yes, Augustine hardly invented monergism. In actual fact, as you know, his basis was found in scripture itself, and he stood firmly with the Church in refuting any form of works-based salvation.