How to become a Calvinist in 5 easy steps

[Clare73]

Matthew 23:37 means the same, no matter what version you use. The persons were NOT WILLING. This denotes free will.

New International Version
“Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing.

"Free will" is not the same as "ability" any more than my not willing to take the wheel of an 18-wheeler means I have the ability to safely drive it.

 

[GodsGrace101]

By default they go to hell because they are at enmity with God. Why is not this eminently plain? Is this life about God, or about us? Do you define God according to what happens to us and by what we do? Just like with the universalist, I will tell you: You cannot build doctrine on your notion of what is love or justice, subjecting God to your judgement. The Bible teaches what it teaches. God is not tame; his mercy is severe. His kindness does not oppose his burning purity.

But I'm NOT building my notion of God on what I THINK.
I've listed tens of verses showing that God is LOVING, MERCIFUL AND JUST.
Why don't YOU believe what the bible states?
Why do you instead believe some theory some men came up with in the 1,500's that had not even existed in the church before
for the entire 2,000 years except for a gnostic convert in the 5th century - which even the church of his, the CC, does not accept?

God is burning purity. I agree.
His holiness is so bright it's impossible to see Him.
But we have seen Jesus so that we can understand God for as far as Jesus revealed Him to us.
I would refuse to worship a God that does not let His creation, mankind, know what His plan of salvation is.
That sent His only Son to die ONLY for those God chooses ... so why send Jesus at all?

Doctrine must be built on scripture.
Scripture does not portray the God calvinism worships.

But you will skip right over this to claim I still have not answered your real question. I don't mean to be disparaging when I say that it is not a real question, but a construction in your mind. God knows my concepts are silly compared to the reality of God's love and justice. But to have to form a construction (libertarian "freewill") not mentioned in Scripture in order to justify what you can't quite put together that IS mentioned in Scripture is dangerous at best, when there is so much evidence in Scripture to oppose that construction.

Scripture is chock full of free will.
You just refuse to see it because of some kind of veil that is put over you somehow.
Please show me scripture that shows we have no free will.

I hope you know that Calvin's whole theory came about because he couldn't reconcile man's free will with God's sovereignty.
Is that crazy or what?
A sovereign God is AFRAID of giving man free will?
That doesn't sound like a sovereign God to me...it sounds like a god that fears man somehow.
A sovereign God would not fear giving man free will, and He DID.
Was Adam free?
When was that freedom taken away?

Libertarian freewill introduces pure spontaneity on the part of Creatures; to be kind, that is self-contradictory. I will try to avoid calling it heresy, since you do the same with your notion that we teach that God is not loving.

It's spontaneity to us.
God KNEW what we would do.
God knows everything...He's Omniscient, as you know.

And I never said that Calvin taught that God is not loving.
Please read carefully.
What I'm saying is that GOD CANNOT BE LOVING if He arbitrarily sends some to hell,
for no apparent reason,
for His own reasons which are not disclosed to us,
for His own glory.
What kind of glory does sending someone to hell bring?

 

[GodsGrace101]

Indeed. . .and it appears it will take at least three times to fulfill my request that you exegete Ro 5:12-15, being true to its words and consistent with Paul's argument there.

Don't hold your breath...
I don't have enough time to waste on your repeated requests,
to which I have already replied 2X.

Why don't YOU exegete Romans 5:12-19 since you're so sure you understand it.
Otherwise, no need to reply.

 

[John Mullally]

We've been through all that before. I disagree with your use of those references, so there's nothing to be gained by presenting them to me as arguments, unless you mean them for someone reading this.

You disagree with the use of my references - and yet they are simple and natural arguments.

What are the most straightforward arguments for Calvinistic Determinism? This is what I have gleaned.

1. Romans 8:28-30 NKJV is one of their proof texts as it has their buzz words "foreknew", "predestined", "justified", and "called" in it and they creatively weave that into an argument for Determinism. But I see its purpose is to show that good things are in store to the "those who love God", as you can see that is who the passage is addressed to. Those "called according to his purpose" could just be those who respond to the call by loving God, as Matthew 22:14 says many are called, but few are chosen. When Paul says "those he foreknow", was he alluding to OT saints? Or was he saying that God looks down the corredore of time - I don't know - its not exactly clear.
2. Ephesians 1:1-14 NKJV is another of their proof texts as it has their buzz words "good pleasure of his will", "mystery of his will", "predestined us", and "works all things according to the coucil of his will". But I see its purpose is to show good things are in store to the "faithful in Christ Jesus", as you see that is who the passage is addressed to.
3. Calvinists point to a number of statements where Jesus constrasts "sheep" vs "goats" and "wheat" vs "tares". The assumption is that God assigns people to those categories - but I would assert that people assign themselves to those categories per Matthew 25:31-46.

 

[zoidar]

The Father is glorified in the glory of the Son who redeemed the church.

The Father doesn't "earn" glory, he shows forth his glory.

And when Jesus is glorifying His Father, His Father gets no glory?

 

[Clare73]

Don't hold your breath...
I don't have enough time to waste on your repeated requests,
to which I have already replied 2X.

Reply does not mean exegesis.

You assert that you have done so, then demonstrate your assertion by giving the post #'s of those two posts which are your exegesis.

Why don't YOU exegete Romans 5:12-19 since you're so sure you understand it.
Otherwise, no need to reply.

I will when I have examined yours.

Or you can just acknowledge that you cannot exegete it, and I will do so.

 

[Clare73]

And when Jesus is glorifying His Father, His Father gets no glory?

Is the Father "earning" it in that case. . .or showing it forth?

 

[zoidar]

Is that not stated in the post you are quoting?

I just find your view strange. When we glorify God we give Him glory and God receives glory.

 

[Clare73]

I just find your view strange. When we glorify God we give Him glory and God receives glory.

Actually, we acknowledge his glory. . .

 

[Mark Quayle]

But I'm NOT building my notion of God on what I THINK.
I've listed tens of verses showing that God is LOVING, MERCIFUL AND JUST.
Why don't YOU believe what the bible states?
Why do you instead believe some theory some men came up with in the 1,500's that had not even existed in the church before
for the entire 2,000 years except for a gnostic convert in the 5th century - which even the church of his, the CC, does not accept?

God is burning purity. I agree.
His holiness is so bright it's impossible to see Him.
But we have seen Jesus so that we can understand God for as far as Jesus revealed Him to us.
I would refuse to worship a God that does not let His creation, mankind, know what His plan of salvation is.
That sent His only Son to die ONLY for those God chooses ... so why send Jesus at all?

Doctrine must be built on scripture.
Scripture does not portray the God calvinism worships.



Scripture is chock full of free will.
You just refuse to see it because of some kind of veil that is put over you somehow.
Please show me scripture that shows we have no free will.

I hope you know that Calvin's whole theory came about because he couldn't reconcile man's free will with God's sovereignty.
Is that crazy or what?
A sovereign God is AFRAID of giving man free will?
That doesn't sound like a sovereign God to me...it sounds like a god that fears man somehow.
A sovereign God would not fear giving man free will, and He DID.
Was Adam free?
When was that freedom taken away?


It's spontaneity to us.
God KNEW what we would do.
God knows everything...He's Omniscient, as you know.

And I never said that Calvin taught that God is not loving.
Please read carefully.
What I'm saying is that GOD CANNOT BE LOVING if He arbitrarily sends some to hell,
for no apparent reason,
for His own reasons which are not disclosed to us,
for His own glory.
What kind of glory does sending someone to hell bring?

And you continue to misrepresent...

You say your verses show that God is LOVING, MERCIFUL AND JUST. And I agree they do. Then you imply that I don't believe them!? Why, because I don't subscribe to your use of the verses —your theology? Because I don't subscribe to your interpretation of the verses? Either way, you are assuming that YOU have it right. Thanks, but I'm not changing my opinion just because you think you have it right. And no, you can't guilt me into adopting your mindset. The fact that I don't agree with you does not boil down to "Why don't YOU believe what the bible states?"

But you are building your notion of God on your notion of what Love, Mercy and Justice are. You interpret the many verses you post about Love, Mercy and Justice, according to your notion of what Love, Mercy and Justice are. Maybe I should ask you why you don't believe them instead of bending them to fit your notions.

Why do you keep going back to Calvin? I don't care about Calvin. I keep trying to tell people, maybe I haven't told you, that I didn't get what I believe from Calvin, nor any denomination or religious system or organization or theological structure. I don't know Calvin. I've never studied Calvin. He did not invent what I believe. What I believe starts in Genesis 1:1 and is shown throughout Scripture. Even Paul did not invent it, but he sure did demonstrate it!

I've never studied Calvin, but I defy you to show me where he says God fears freewill! That's ludicrous. Pleaaasse show me where I'm wrong. You also seem to think Calvinism presents a God who doesn't let mankind know his plan for salvation??? How so? I don't call myself a Calvinist, but man!, you make me want to join them just because you treat them so! Does not Romans 1 show that nobody has any excuse?

You say, "It's spontaneity to us. God KNEW what we would do. God knows everything...He's Omniscient, as you know." And since it's spontaneity to you, it is therefore true spontaneity? Once again, is God first cause, or not? Is there another?

What kind of glory does God "sending someone to hell bring?" Why don't you ask why God waited so long??? Have we not mentioned this verse you set up so nicely here for us? Romans 9:23
"What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory?"

 

[Mark Quayle]

It's not good news if the news is ONLY for those upon whom God wishes to show mercy.
John said he wrote his words so that we might hear and be saved.
1 John 1:3-4
John 20:31 NASB
31but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.

John wrote so that we may believe...and by believing have eternal life.

I've listed many verses that state that God has mercy on everyone. (that chooses to believe).
We are saved by faith -- belief brings faith.

We are all helpless when born Mark,
why would a just God have mercy on just a few?
And (heaven help me) USE the others He created to somehow show His glory by sentencing them to hell?

And please remember that YOU also continue to show the same mindset...
that God is not LOVE, MERCY AND JUSTICE.

I'd say that this IS about US.
It was God that created humans.
It was God that put responsibility on Adam.
God did everything.
He allowed Adam to name animals.
He allowed Adam to walk with Him in the Garden.

GOD DID EVERYTHING FOR US. Even the plan of salvation because He knew we'd fail.
(emphasis - not screaming).

And....around we go. I've had enough for now. This is going nowhere.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I would say God's glory is connected with God's love, but I think we will disagree how it's connected. God wouldn't earn any glory if He sent His Son for His own glory. The reason God earns glory from sending His Son is because He did it for us (out of love).

And this (your reason) contradicts what I said?

 

[GodsGrace101]

And....around we go. I've had enough for now. This is going nowhere.

Agreed.
Besides you don't really understand my posts.
God bless you.

 

[GodsGrace101]

Reply does not mean exegesis.

You assert that you have done so, then demonstrate your assertion by giving the post #'s of those two posts which are your exegesis.

I will when I have examined yours.

Or you can just acknowledge that you cannot exegete it, and I will do so.

You're here for fun and games.
I'm here to discuss theology.
Bye.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Agreed.
Besides you don't really understand my posts.
God bless you.

Thank you brother. And the same to you.

 

[zoidar]

Actually, we acknowledge his glory. . .

Hm, at least Piper seems to disagree with you.

"God created us for his glory, says the prophet. We bring him glory through our good deeds, says the Lord Jesus. So we are not surprised when we hear the apostle say, God created us for good deeds. Ephesians 2:10: "We are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good deeds, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them." Created for his glory, and created for good deeds, because it is by our good deeds that God gets glory."

How to Do Good So That God Gets the Glory

God gets glory not from our heroic exertion but from our reliance upon his strength—when we serve as one who serves with the strength which God supplies.

www.desiringgod.org

 

[Mark Quayle]

What are the most straightforward arguments for Calvinistic Determinism? This is what I have gleaned.

1. Romans 8:28-30 NKJV is one of their proof texts as it has their buzz words "foreknew", "predestined", "justified", and "called" in it and they creatively weave that into an argument for Determinism. But I see its purpose is to show that good things are in store to the "those who love God", as you can see that is who the passage is addressed to. Those "called according to his purpose" could just be those who respond to the call by loving God, as Matthew 22:14 says many are called, but few are chosen. When Paul says "those he foreknow", was he alluding to OT saints? Or was he saying that God looks down the corredore of time - I don't know - its not exactly clear.
2. Ephesians 1:1-14 NKJV is another of their proof texts as it has their buzz words "good pleasure of his will", "mystery of his will", "predestined us", and "works all things according to the coucil of his will". But I see its purpose is to show good things are in store to the "faithful in Christ Jesus", as you see that is who the passage is addressed to.
3. Calvinists point to a number of statements where Jesus constrasts "sheep" vs "goats" and "wheat" vs "tares". The assumption is that God assigns people to those categories - but I would assert that people assign themselves to those categories per Matthew 25:31-46.

1. Mine is a lot more straighforward than that. John 1 says everything was made by him. God is therefore 1st cause. He created, therefore he determined everything subsequent to that creation.
2. Ephesians 2 follows it, with "not of the will of man".
3. Calvinism does not deny that people assign themselves to either category. But it does say that the one category, the fallen, is default. Their assignment is proof of it. The other category, the regenerated, assign themselves too, in obedience, but that too is proof of their assignment. But this whole point takes a strange turn away from the basis for the whole question. They are not assigned to a category by God, as such. The names given to the categories are by the assignation by God before the foundation of the world. They are not assigned by God to the category as such, I say, because they are CREATED by God for that purpose, (among whatever other purposes he sees fit to use them for).

 

[Clare73]

Hm, at least Piper seems to disagree with you.

"God created us for his glory, says the prophet. We bring him glory through our good deeds, says the Lord Jesus. So we are not surprised when we hear the apostle say, God created us for good deeds. Ephesians 2:10: "We are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good deeds, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them." Created for his glory, and created for good deeds, because it is by our good deeds that God gets glory."

Keeping in mind that it is all God's work in us (Php 2:13), showing forth his glory, not our own works "giving him glory."

 

[zoidar]

And this (your reason) contradicts what I said?

I don't know. You tell me.

I said: "I think we will disagree"

 

[GodsGrace101]

1. Mine is a lot more straighforward than that. John 1 says everything was made by him. God is therefore 1st cause. He created, therefore he determined everything subsequent to that creation.
2. Ephesians 2 follows it, with "not of the will of man".
3. Calvinism does not deny that people assign themselves to either category. But it does say that the one category, the fallen, is default. Their assignment is proof of it. The other category, the regenerated, assign themselves too, in obedience, but that too is proof of their assignment. But this whole point takes a strange turn away from the basis for the whole question. They are not assigned to a category by God, as such. The names given to the categories are by the assignation by God before the foundation of the world. They are not assigned by God to the category as such, I say, because they are CREATED by God for that purpose, (among whatever other purposes he sees fit to use them for).

You don't have to reply to this Mark.
I'm understanding why you couldn't get what I was writing to you.
From the above, I see that you're not a real calvinist.
I don't know how you came up with your beliefs, but they DO tend toward calvinism....
You're not orthodox either - so it makes posting a little difficult.

I'm going to make some comments on your post, but I'm not expecting a reply.
This is re your list above:

1. Everything was made by God. God is most definitely the first cause.
He created the entire universe. Then He planned a nice planet for us.
Then He prepared it and placed us on it.
This does NOT mean that He, thus, determined everything that would happen to those on the earth -mankind.
God set in place a system which science acknowledges...all those physics laws we all know a tiny bit about. We must
work within those laws.

2. Ephesians 2: NOT OF THE WILL OF MAN. This simply means that man is not saved by his own works, or his own plan, but by the plan of God.
God is indeed sovereign and we must be saved through HIS plan of salvation, which He has kindly shown to us.

3. All of Christianity believes that the fallen nature is by default.
We are created for good works Eph 2:9 and this from the creation of the world.