How to become a Calvinist in 5 easy steps

[GodsGrace101]

I have to disagree. We can have an inclination towards obeying and yet live our whole life in sin. Why? Because of libertarian free will.

Also our inclinations change if we choose living in sin. Our heart hardens and our inclination becomes more and more towards sin.

If we live our whole life in sin, we are not obeying God.
If we are not obeying God (to the best of our ability) we cannot call ourselves disciples of Jesus.
John 3:36
36And anyone who believes in God’s Son has eternal life. Anyone who doesn’t obey the Son will never experience eternal life but remains under God’s angry judgment.”

 

[Clare73]

We're all over the place and this takes a lot of time.

Let me ask you this:
Are you reformed in your theology?

Some call it that. . .but I got it solely from Paul in the NT.

I'd like to get away from repeating that I agree that having free will does not imply obedience.
Just that, once we are born again, we are free to obey or not to obey.

Agreed. . .but before we are born again, we cannot obey (Romans 8:7-8; 1 Corinthians 2:14).
And after we are born again, we can obey.

So obedience is about regeneration, not about free will.
The will is always free to choose what it prefers.
The unregenerate prefer sin, while the regenerate prefer God.

It is regeneration, not free will, which gives us the power to obey what we could not obey before.
And then it is the power of God (Philippians 2:13) which keeps us from falling into fatal sin, and
the Holy Spirit is given to us as a deposit (down payment) to guarantee the completion of our co-inheritance with Christ (2 Corinthians 1:22, 2 Corinthians 5:5; Ephesians 1:14), just as the down payment (deposit) on a house guarantees the completion of its purchase.

Scripture never presents the issue as "free will". . .that is an invention of man.
Scripture always presents the issue as regeneration (Romans 8:7-8; 1 Corinthians 2:14; John 3:3-5).

Free will is simply choosing what one prefers, and the unregenerate prefer sin.
It requires regeneration, not free will, to change what one prefers and, therefore, what one then freely chooses.

 

[GodsGrace101]

Some call it that. . .but I got it solely from Paul in the NT.

Agreed. . .but before we are born again, we cannot obey (Romans 8:7-8; 1 Corinthians 2:14).
And after we are born again, we can obey.

It is regeneration, not free will, which gives us the power to obey what we could not obey before.
And then it is the power of God (Philippians 2:13) which keeps us from falling into fatal sin, and
the Holy Spirit is given to us as a deposit (down payment) to guarantee the completion of our co-inheritance with Christ (2 Corinthians 1:22, 2 Corinthians 5:5; Ephesians 1:14), just as the down payment (deposit) on a house guarantees the completion of its purchase.

Scripture never presents the issue as "free will". . .that is an invention of man.
Scripture always presents the issue as regeneration (Romans 8:7-8; 1 Corinthians 2:14; John 3:3-5).

Free will is simply choosing what one prefers, and the unregenerate prefer sin.
It requires regeneration, not free will, to change what one prefers and, therefore, what one then freely chooses.

Obedience is about regeneration, not about free will.

Hi Clare,
Too late, will have to go till tomorrow.
A deposit is good, but we do have to keep making those mortgage payments!
Tomorrow...

 

[zoidar]

Being born again is objective.

You either are or you are not.

Hm, of course you are right. My misunderstanding of the words subjective and objective. Thanks!

 

[zoidar]

.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Of course you are right that the new birth is an objective reality. I had the wrong understanding of words subjective and objective.

But isn't it both?
If a blind man gets his sight back, it's an objective truth, but what he sees with his new eyes isn't that subjective?

*Edited

True that!. We have our subjective experiences of all we feel, and all we notice.

 

[zoidar]

.

 

[zoidar]

Yes, I believe many are fooling themselves. Possibly even I.

I think that is sad! There never was a question or shadow of a doubt to me about my new birth, but sometimes I wonder if I'm still saved. If I believed in perserverance of the saints, I guess I wouldn't question it, but you can't believe something for the sake of believing, can you?

 

[zoidar]

If we live our whole life in sin, we are not obeying God.
If we are not obeying God (to the best of our ability) we cannot call ourselves disciples of Jesus.
John 3:36
36And anyone who believes in God’s Son has eternal life. Anyone who doesn’t obey the Son will never experience eternal life but remains under God’s angry judgment.”

"Best of our ability?" This can put an enormous pressure on a person since you can always do more. Of course I agree we are to obey. But to the best of our ability is very subjectice. Some are never doing any evangelizing or giving to the poor and still thinking they do their best to obey God. Another person is evangelizing on the street every day and giving half his income to the poor, yet feels he isn't doing enough to obey God. So how do we know that we obey God with the best of our ability?

David Bercot put it in a way I like. He said we are to live in a love, faith, obedience relationship with Christ. It's like all these parts fit together. It's a relationship with Christ, with all the things that comes in a relationship. But we are to be good servants, not like the ones not getting anything ready for the bridegroom.

Btw, of course if we are living in sin we are not obeying God. What I wrote to Mark was that you can have an inclination towards obedience and still live your whole life in sin. I didn't say that person won't come under judgement, if you think I meant that.

 

[Mark Quayle]

In theology we use the term FREE WILL which is related to moral decisions.
We use the term FREE because there are some areas of theology which state that our will is not truly free, but is dependent on an outside source, or, actually, on coercion from this outside force.

Which theology states that our will is dependent on coercion? Can you cite it?

Where is the inaccuracy?

You said:
"Those of the reformed faith believe God picks who will and will not be saved.
They believe those saved cannot ever have their salvation in danger due to the perseverance of the saints.
This would tend to make one believe that free will has been removed from us.
Free will is presented EVERYWHERE in scripture - beginning in the Garden.
It is never taken away from us.
If you think it has, you'd have to show where."

Here you pick out (accurately enough) something Calvinism teaches, to wit: that God chooses who will and will not be saved, and combine it with something else it also teaches, and leave out the rest of it: That one MUST obey or they are not saved. Hello!

Exactly.
In the reformed faith, it is GOD that chooses who will have eternal life and who will be damned.
For whatever reason - we are not informed as to what the decision is based on.
The person, either chosen or not chosen, has no say in the decision.

Does the reformed faith say a person has no say in the decision, or that the person's decision is subsequent to their regeneration?

Correct. In Calvinism God planned what each person will choose at each moment of his life.
As Piper has stated, even the specks of dust in the air are controlled by God.
This type of choosing on our part is certainly mocking TO US.
It's called compatibilist free will.
It is not true free will, but man is made to choose according to what God wills.

Why is it mocking to you? Do you dislike it because it grates on your sense of self-determination?

See, the fact is nobody has any excuse in the end. They did willfully oppose God. Even in Calvinism. I don't call it Compatibilist because it need not be named. I don't know if it ever occurred to you, but not only are the two wills not mutually exclusive —but the will (and therefore choice) of man is not even possible apart from causation.

Choosing according to our inclinations is a sweet way of saying it.
But it's not so sweet to man since his true free will has been eradicated by a God that chooses everything for him.

Bad representation of the facts. God does not choose for man. God chooses what will happen, and man chooses what he does, and it happens.

It would be nice to clear up whether or not you adhere to all the beliefs of calvinism,
or if you just pick and choose which ones you like and then expect others to know your choices.

I don't believe what I do because of Calvinism. Calvinism just closely resembles what I believe. But show me the incongruities.

 

[Clare73]

Jacob Arminius was born in the 1,500's.
I don't know anything about him.
I believe in normal Christianity which began soon after Jesus resurrected.
And yes, if we can choose between option A or option B that means we have free will.

See Deuteronomy 30:19
19“Today I have given you the choice between life and death, between blessings and curses. Now I call on heaven and earth to witness the choice you make. Oh, that you would choose life, so that you and your descendants might live!

Spoken to the people of God in whom the Holy Spirit would work.

We know that those in whom the Holy Spirit does not work cannot choose to obey God (Romans 8:7-8).

As you can see a free will choice is not an assumption, but what the entire bible teaches.
Are we robots, or are we human?
God created us in His image.
God has will that is free.
He gifted this to us also.

Nowhere in the OT or the NT did we lose this gift of the freedom to choose between 2 options -
moral options, salvation options.

No. The ability to freely choose does NOT imply the ability to obey.
Two different topics.



Agreed.
We are the slaves to whom we present ourselves.
Romans 6:16
16Don’t you realize that you become the slave of whatever you choose to obey? You can be a slave to sin, which leads to death, or you can choose to obey God, which leads to righteous living.

Again, notice that we are given the free will choice to choose.
The ability to choose denotes a will that is truly free.

As to your quote of Matthew 7:23 I do appreciate that you posted WHY Jesus is telling some to depart from Him...they were workers of iniquity. Some forget to leave out this part.



The above is not understandable to me. Sorry.

First you say the choice is up to us.
Then you say we are unable to choose.
The inability to be unable to choose is calvinistic.

If someone states they have chosen Christ, then they have chosen Christ and hopefully they will live for Christ and be sincere.

 

[Clare73]

Hi Clare,
Too late, will have to go till tomorrow.
A deposit is good, but we do have to keep making those mortgage payments!
Tomorrow...

Indeed, and as in the analogy above:
in "free will," as the deposit (guarantee) and mortgage payments are made by the same party, so
in "regeneration," the Holy Spirit deposit is made by God, while the mortgage payments are likewise enabled by the same party, God.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Jacob Arminius was born in the 1,500's.
I don't know anything about him.

I believe in normal Christianity which began soon after Jesus resurrected.
And yes, if we can choose between option A or option B that means we have free will.
See
Deuteronomy 30:19
19“Today I have given you the choice between life and death, between blessings and curses. Now I call on heaven and earth to witness the choice you make. Oh, that you would choose life, so that you and your descendants might live!

As you can see a free will choice is not an assumption, but what the entire bible teaches.
Are we robots, or are we human?
God created us in His image.
God has will that is free.
He gifted this to us also.

Nowhere in the OT or the NT did we lose this gift of the freedom to choose between 2 options -
moral options, salvation options.

No. The ability to freely choose does NOT imply the ability to obey.
Two different topics.

Two different topics, but very much related to the debate. Let me bring it a little closer: "The command does not imply the ability to obey."

Arminianism is the name given it, whether you know anything about Arminius or not. Same with what I believe and Calvin. It doesn't mean either man was the first to come up with it, nor does it even mean, since they supposedly are the first to come up with it, that what you, or I, believe, isn't Biblical.

Do robots have will? Calvinism is a long long way from claiming we can't choose. In fact, it claims the will is the problem with those who are not born again, but still remain DEAD in their sin. They will always choose against God, as is their will to do.

Agreed.
We are the slaves to whom we present ourselves.
Romans 6:16
16Don’t you realize that you become the slave of whatever you choose to obey? You can be a slave to sin, which leads to death, or you can choose to obey God, which leads to righteous living.

Again, notice that we are given the free will choice to choose.
The ability to choose denotes a will that is truly free.

As to your quote of Matthew 7:23 I do appreciate that you posted WHY Jesus is telling some to depart from Him...they were workers of iniquity. Some forget to leave out this part.

I don't deny at all, the ability to choose. What I deny is that our choices are free in the sense that they are uncaused. Our choices ALWAYS have causes.

The assertion that the ability to choose denotes a will that is truly free, is not supported by your post. The ability to choose only, so far as you have shown, 'denotes a will'.

The above is not understandable to me. Sorry.

First you say the choice is up to us.
Then you say we are unable to choose.
The inability to be unable to choose is calvinistic.

If someone states they have chosen Christ, then they have chosen Christ and hopefully they will live for Christ and be sincere.

We always choose between what we think are available options. Romans 8 says the mind of the flesh is unable to submit to God's law, and unable to please God. Romans and other parts of Scripture refer to the unregenerate as DEAD. UNABLE. HELPLESS. Now I don't say we can't think we choose Christ, apart from regeneration, but when we do, we are not actually choosing Christ. Take a good look at the T of TULIP, Total Depravity, on a Reformed website. The point is not that we are as bad as we could be, but that we are bad to the core. All we do is in opposition to God, unless the Spirit of God is in us —even when we don't know it is in opposition to God.

But back to the point of divergence, I don't believe we are unable to choose. I don't know where you get that. I only believe we don't need to know whether all options are actually possible, in order to choose from among them.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I think that is sad! There never was a question or shadow of a doubt to me about my new birth, but sometimes I wonder if I'm still saved. If I believed in perserverance of the saints, I guess I wouldn't question it, but you can't believe something for the sake of believing, can you?

True that! In fact, believing for the sake of believing, buttressing up the theory, is what I did for years, before I realized I was, even after "giving my heart" many times, (since each time my heart condemned me later), fully at the mercy of God to do as he pleased with me (—a much safer place to be than under the results of any act of my will in "giving my heart" to God).

But if it's of any comfort or of any use to you, take a look at your words there: "still saved". From what were you saved —from the Lake of Fire? Who saved you? Did he make a mistake, and change his mind? Or did he plan to take you to be with him in Heaven? What makes you think you can change anything God has ordained?

 

[John Mullally]

I don't know how many steps are needed to accept a horrific doctine that defiles God's character by asserting that God decrees many from birth to a future of eternal horrific suffering in order to give himeself glory (read quote Calvin's quote below). Fortunately, Paul contradicts that docrine per 1 Timothy 2:4 which says that God desires all men be saved. Upon reading the surrounding verses the meaning of 1 Timothy 2:4 it is very plain to everyone but the most indoctrinated that God does indeed desire all to be saved. God's desire does not mean all men are saved because God has given men free will (refer to parable of the Wedding feast) as men can reject God (John 15:23). If you cannot accept 1 Timothy 2:4 at face value, there are those who have a TULIP they will sell you.

“…individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb to certain death, and are to glorify him by their destruction.” (John Calvin,Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 6)​

 

[zoidar]

I don't know how many steps are needed to accept a horrific doctine that defiles God's character by asserting that God decrees many from birth to a future of eternal horrific suffering in order to give himeself glory (read quote Calvin's quote below). Fortunately, Paul contradicts that docrine per 1 Timothy 2:4 which says that God desires all men be saved. Upon reading the surrounding verses the meaning of 1 Timothy 2:4 it is very plain to everyone but the most indoctrinated that God does indeed desire all to be saved. God's desire does not mean all men are saved because God has given men free will (refer to parable of the Wedding feast) as men can reject God (John 15:23). If you cannot accept 1 Timothy 2:4 at face value, there are those who have a TULIP they will sell you.

“…individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb to certain death, and are to glorify him by their destruction.” (John Calvin,Institutes of Christian Religion, Book 3, Chapter 23, Paragraph 6)​

Of course terrible words by Calvin. You and I, we don't believe that. But I don't think they gonna change their minds any time soon. Just saying.

 

[zoidar]

True that! In fact, believing for the sake of believing, buttressing up the theory, is what I did for years, before I realized I was, even after "giving my heart" many times, (since each time my heart condemned me later), fully at the mercy of God to do as he pleased with me (—a much safer place to be than under the results of any act of my will in "giving my heart" to God).

But if it's of any comfort or of any use to you, take a look at your words there: "still saved". From what were you saved —from the Lake of Fire? Who saved you? Did he make a mistake, and change his mind? Or did he plan to take you to be with him in Heaven? What makes you think you can change anything God has ordained?

Thanks for trying to be supportive!

 

[zoidar]

True that! In fact, believing for the sake of believing, buttressing up the theory, is what I did for years, before I realized I was, even after "giving my heart" many times, (since each time my heart condemned me later), fully at the mercy of God to do as he pleased with me (—a much safer place to be than under the results of any act of my will in "giving my heart" to God).

But if it's of any comfort or of any use to you, take a look at your words there: "still saved". From what were you saved —from the Lake of Fire? Who saved you? Did he make a mistake, and change his mind? Or did he plan to take you to be with him in Heaven? What makes you think you can change anything God has ordained?

I hope I'm not out of my line here, but from all our conversations one thing struck me. It sounds like you put your hope in or accept God's decree rather than having your hope in Christ for your salvation. If that is the case it is no good. I hope I'm wrong though. Our hope must always be in Christ, not in God's decree.

I apologize if I offend you.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I hope I'm not out of my line here, but from all our conversations one thing struck me. It sounds like you put your hope in God's decree rather than in Christ for your salvation. If that is the case it is no good. I hope I'm wrong though. Our hope must always be in Christ, not in God's decree.

They are one and the same. I have no hope but in Christ.

But I hope that you can understand, that my pleasure, my enjoyment, and my anticipation in Christ, is in the sure knowledge that God is pleased with the work of his hands, i.e. in all he has decreed. Whether or not I "make it there" is a very far secondary question. More dear to me even than the fact of finally being pure, and for the righteousness* with which I will be filled, is the simple thought of finally seeing his face.

*The Matthew reference (Mat 5:3; 5:6) concerns what I know is 'part and parcel' with seeing his face, and I don't deny that; but it still is separate to a large degree in my thoughts. The yearning to see the face of God, the joy at seeing his happiness, overrides my concerns for self-safety/ eternal security. I no longer dwell on thanksgiving to God for rescuing me from certain eternal death; I dwell on who he is. (This difference is also another thing that results from his work in me, and not by any decision I made. Just saying.) Many posters on this site have alluded to this with such things as "When I do what is right, I find that it was not me, but God who did it in me." and, "When I do what is wrong, it is no longer the fear of hell that grips me, but the great sadness, even mourning, at what I have done to God" (and to me, even the horror of the stain I have made, the wound I have inflicted on God's Creation).

 

[GodsGrace101]

"Best of our ability?" This can put an enormous pressure on a person since you can always do more. Of course I agree we are to obey. But to the best of our ability is very subjectice. Some are never doing any evangelizing or giving to the poor and still thinking they do their best to obey God. Another person is evangelizing on the street every day and giving half his income to the poor, yet feels he isn't doing enough to obey God. So how do we know that we obey God with the best of our ability?

Good question Z,
God knows if we are doing our best.
Doing our best just means doing what we can.
Maybe for one person it's evangelizing all the time,
maybe to someone else it's doing their job well and being peaceful in the workplace,
maybe for some it's keeping a pleasant home for the family.

We cannot do what we cannot do.
The Holy Spirit enables us to do what He wishes us to do.
So, yes, it is sujbective depending on the person and what that person can do for God.
1 John 5:3
Loving God means keeping his commandments, and his commandments are not burdensome.

If they seem burdensome, maybe the person is going beyond their ability.

David Bercot put it in a way I like. He said we are to live in a love, faith, obedience relationship with Christ. It's like all these parts fit together. It's a relationship with Christ, with all the things that comes in a relationship. But we are to be good servants, not like the ones not getting anything ready for the bridegroom.

Well said.
Some persons feel like they don't have to do anything because Jesus has already done it all.
This is not right, of course. We are God's hands and feet on this earth.

Btw, of course if we are living in sin we are not obeying God. What I wrote to Mark was that you can have an inclination towards obedience and still live your whole life in sin. I didn't say that person won't come under judgement, if you think I meant that.

Agreed.
I do think, though, that if a person is inclined to obedience, then probably they will obey.