The Philippian Jailer versus Calvinism

TheSeabass

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2015
1,855
358
✟47,754.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Let’s look at this one.

Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brethren, what shall we do?”
— Acts 2:37

“Now when they heard it, they were pricked in their heartes, and said vnto Peter and the other Apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we doe?”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭2:37‬ ‭GNV‬‬

“Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭2:37‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brothers, what shall we do?"”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭2:37‬ ‭ESV‬‬


Just as I thought. Not one of them says explicitly that they were pricked by Peter’s words. Is there somewhere in Acts we can look at to see what happens when the gospel is preached?

Hmmm

A woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple fabrics, a worshiper of God, was listening; and the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul.
— Acts 16:14
You clearly avoid the fact that in neither context it does NOT say people were totally depraved and unable unwilling to hear/understand. And avoid the fact that in neither context is says the Holy Spirit had to act upon people so they can then be willing to hear and understand. You insert much into the texts that is not there.

The SPirit did nothing miraculous to the eunuch but sent a man to him to teach him and he heard/understood Phillip.
 
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,170
25,219
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,726,704.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
You clearly avoid the fact that in neither context it does NOT say people were totally depraved and unable unwilling to hear/understand. And avoid the fact that in neither context is says the Holy Spirit had to act upon people so they can then be willing to hear and understand. You insert much into the texts that is not there.

The SPirit did nothing miraculous to the eunuch but sent a man to him to teach him and he heard/understood Phillip.
Did I ever try to use that verse as an argument? No. All I did was show that you misrepresent what it says.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Danthemailman
Upvote 0

TheSeabass

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2015
1,855
358
✟47,754.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Nothing in the text says the opposite. Except for this

A woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple fabrics, a worshiper of God, was listening; and the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul.
— Acts 16:14
You made the affirmation the Holy Spirit must first act upon one to enable one to be able and willing to hear/understand. The onus is upon you to prove your own affirmation yet you have not proven that affirmation from the context, just assumed it.
 
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,170
25,219
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,726,704.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
The SPirit did nothing miraculous to the eunuch but sent a man to him to teach him and he heard/understood Phillip.
You still need to show that from the text.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danthemailman
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,170
25,219
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,726,704.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
You made the affirmation the Holy Spirit must first act upon one to enable one to be able and willing to hear/understand. The onus is upon you to prove your own affirmation yet you have not proven that affirmation from the context, just assumed it.
What I did was show that you misrepresented what the text says. I have not made a positive argument. So stop trying to shift the burden.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danthemailman
Upvote 0

TheSeabass

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2015
1,855
358
✟47,754.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Where does it say that explicitly?

I’ll wait.
Again, you are not able to show from the context that the Spirit had to first miraculously act upon the eunuch to 'enable' him, to 'illuminate' his understanding apart from the word being preached to him. Again, you keep assuming that idea into the various texts.
 
Upvote 0

TheSeabass

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2015
1,855
358
✟47,754.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Why did people die before the law was given?
Physical death is a consequence of Adam sinning. A person dies as a consequence of the sin of a drunk driver, he does not inherit the sin of the drunk driver.

Sin, spiritual death, does not occur until there is a law and that law is transgressed. In the garden of Eden there was
1) a law not to eat of a specific tree.
2) that law was transgressed

THEN Adam and Eve sinned. Same is true for us today, one is not, cannot be a sinner unless/until one transgresses a law of God.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

TheSeabass

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2015
1,855
358
✟47,754.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
You said there was no working of God. Are you changing your mind?
I never said the Lord did nothing.
The context shows Lydia was not totally depraved unable, unwilling to hear/understand the word of God spoken to her....she was a worshipper of God. If one cannot read the Bible and have no understanding at all what one reads, then how can one read a newspaper, magazine or book and understand anything he is reading? How can one watch a tv program and understand anything that is being said? Obviously men have understanding, reasoning skills to read and understand the Bible as they would a book or newspaper.

Paul spoke to Lydia and she was willing and able to understand what was spoken. THEN AFTER Paul had ALREADY spoke the word to her, it was THEN the Lord opened her heart TO RESPOND to what Paul said. She already heard and understood what Paul said BEFORE the verse says the Lord opened her heart.

--no indication she was totally depraved and could not understand what Paul spoke to her.
--nothing in the context says the Lord had to first act on her BEFORE Paul spoke to her so she could be willing/able to hear and understand what Paul had to say to her.
 
Upvote 0

Hollow Man

Active Member
Jun 26, 2019
57
24
54
Palm Beach
✟1,332.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
The text in Psalms 58:3 is poetic and highly figurative. Even Calvinist Albert Barnes admits original sin cannot be gleaned from the passage "The words, “the wicked,” here do not necessarily refer to the whole human family (though what is thus affirmed is true of all the human race), but to people who in their lives develop a wicked character; and the affirmation in regard to them is that they go astray early in life - from their very infancy.

Strictly speaking, therefore, it cannot be shown that the psalmist in this declaration had reference to the whole human race, or that he meant to make a universal declaration in regard to man as being early estranged or alienated from God; and the passage, therefore, cannot directly, and with exact propriety, be adduced to prove the doctrine that “original sin” pertains to all the race--"

Barnes is basically saying David is talking about his enemies, but in general, David is speaking about all people who BECOME wicked, who GO ASTRAY early in life in their youth, not at birth. Genesis 8:21 says man's heart is evil from his youth...not at birth. The Bible does not contradict itself.

In the immediate context of Psalms 58:3 David says:
The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.
Their poison is like the poison of a serpent: they are like the deaf adder that stoppeth her ear;
Break their teeth, O God, in their mouth: break out the great teeth of the young lions, O LORD
.

--they "go astray" showing personal culpability and not how they were passively born against their will. The passages does not say one is responsible for the sins of another.
--they speak lies. Obviously new borns cannot speak.
-must have their "teeth broken". Again, not a reference to new borns. The wicked are spoken of as poisonous snakes. The idea is they should be killed to stop their poison from spreading.
--to take the passage literally, then David is not talking about human infants, but young lions.

Albert Barnes point being, looking at ones life in whole, early in life at youth one moves from God, he speaks lies, ie, rebels against God speaking things contrary to God and will not listen to God.

Further more if tries to literalize Psalms 58:3 with Psalms 51:5, then one has a problem. Psalms 58:3 speaks of birth while Psalms 51:5 speaks of conception. Conception and birth are two distinct points separated by about 9 months. If one is literally conceived a sinner then he cannot become a sinner at birth for he already is a sinner. If one is not a sinner until he is born, then he cannot be a sinner at conception.
OK. I tried. Good look with your heresy when you stand before God.
 
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,170
25,219
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,726,704.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Again, you are not able to show from the context that the Spirit had to first miraculously act upon the eunuch to 'enable' him, to 'illuminate' his understanding apart from the word being preached to him. Again, you keep assuming that idea into the various texts.
You’re the one making an argument from scripture. If your argument is “it doesn’t say what you say, so I must be right”, that’s a weak argument. But if you are sure that the Spirit didn’t work on the eunuch, then you should have no problem showing that from the text.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danthemailman
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,170
25,219
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,726,704.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Physical death is a consequence of Adam sinning. A person dies as a consequence of the sin of a drunk driver, he does not inherit the sin of the drunk driver.

Sin, spiritual death, does not occur until there is a law and that law is transgressed. In the garden of Eden there was
1) a law not to eat of a specific tree.
2) that law was transgressed

THEN Adam and Eve sinned. Same is true for us today, one is not, cannot be a sinner unless/until one transgresses a law of God.
That didn’t answer the question. So let’s get specific. Why the flood?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Danthemailman
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,170
25,219
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,726,704.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
  • Agree
Reactions: Danthemailman
Upvote 0

philadelphos

Sydney
Jun 20, 2019
431
154
Sydney
✟45,144.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Reformed Theology teaches that faith comes by hearing... You should work on addressing what Reformed Theology teaches, instead of creating straw men.

Not exactly. - And it depends on your definition of 'Reformed Theology'.

Scripture teaches that "faith cometh by hearing" (Rom 10:17), not 'Reformed Theology' (credit where credit is due).

For (Reformed) Presbyterians, the Westminster Confession teaches about an 'inward faith', for one partaking in the Lord's Supper "inwardly by faith" (WCF 29.7). That one can expect to be administered with Scripture reading and preaching and "conscionable hearing of the word" in a religious setting. In other words 'hearing comes by religiosity'. Thus 'Hearing' is not taught for 'faith', but for "religious worship".

Of 'Religious Worship' (WCF, chapter 21),

"The reading of the scriptures with godly fear;r the sound preaching,s and conscionable hearing of the word, in obedience unto God, with understanding, faith, and reverence:t singing of psalms with grace in the heart;v as also the due administration and worthy receiving of the sacraments instituted by Christ; are all parts of the ordinary religious worship of God:w besides religious oathsx and vows,y solemn fastings,z and thanksgivings upon special occasions,a which are, in their several times and seasons, to be used in a holy and religious manner.b" (WCF. 21.5)

In fact, the statement 'faith comes by hearing' can be nullified by the Lord's words commending those with "great faith". That faith can have nothing to do with hearing (internally receiving info), but rather behaviour (externalising info, practical living).

"And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. ... Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. ... And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table. Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great is thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour." (Mt. 15:22, 25-28)

Also, the woman at the Pharisee's house:

"And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster box of ointment, And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment. ... And he turned to the woman, and said unto Simon, Seest thou this woman? I entered into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet: but she hath washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head. Thou gavest me no kiss: but this woman since the time I came in hath not ceased to kiss my feet. My head with oil thou didst not anoint: but this woman hath anointed my feet with ointment. Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth little. And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven. And they that sat at meat with him began to say within themselves, Who is this that forgiveth sins also? And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace." (Luke 37-38, 44-50)

Therefore, the statement 'faith comes by hearing' can be nullified by the Lord's words in that 'faith cometh by acts of love', not religiosity.

  • "He that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. ...Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law." (Rom 13: 8-10)
  • "For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." (Gal. 5:14)
  • "If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well:" (Js. 2:8)

 
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,170
25,219
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,726,704.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Not exactly. - And it depends on your definition of 'Reformed Theology'.

Scripture teaches that "faith cometh by hearing" (Rom 10:17), not 'Reformed Theology' (credit where credit is due).
That’s your rebuttal?

Okie dokie.
 
Upvote 0

Hammster

Psalm 144:1
Christian Forums Staff
Site Advisor
Site Supporter
Apr 5, 2007
140,170
25,219
55
New Jerusalem
Visit site
✟1,726,704.00
Country
United States
Faith
Reformed
Marital Status
Married
Therefore, the statement 'faith comes by hearing' can be nullified by the Lord's words in that 'faith cometh by acts of love', not religiosity.

From the SoP.

  • NT writers' teachings do not contradict each other or the teachings of Christ. (2 Peter 3:15,16)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

philadelphos

Sydney
Jun 20, 2019
431
154
Sydney
✟45,144.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
My faith is that all are loved and can receive the grace of God and eternal life.

The WCF is probably the most comprehensive creed of 'Calvinism', hence I thought it useful to present it, for discussion purposes. It's not my personal POV (and I actually disagree with it in certain areas). That's the 'system'.

About your quote, are you aware that there variations of 'grace' ? i.e. God brings sunlight and rain on both the good and the wicked, but yet some are called, chosen, elect, and saved, while others are not. e.g. The world was flooded while Noah and his family were saved. Have you thought about this ? - Most Calvinist threads focus on 'irresistible grace', for salvation, etc, but you may have this confused with 'common grace'.

https://www.theopedia.com/common-grace
https://www.theopedia.com/irresistible-grace
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

philadelphos

Sydney
Jun 20, 2019
431
154
Sydney
✟45,144.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Those in Acts 7 were lost, spiritually dead and they were able to understand God's word preached to them by Stephen. They did not like what they "heard" (Acts of the Apostles 7:54 heard akouo means having understanding) "they gnashed on him with their teeth.....And cast him out of the city, and stoned him:"
They did not kill Stephen because they could not understand what he was saying, but they killed because they understood exactly what he was preaching and hated what he preached.

--Lydia was a lost person, spiritually dead. But she was not totally depraved for she was a worshipper of God.
--verse 13 says Paul "spake unto the women" and verse 14 says Lydia "heard us". The word heard akouo according to Thayer means to understand, comprehend. Again, no totally depravity on Lydias' part.
--it was the word of God spoken to her that opened her heart. Nothing miraculous, mysterious apart from the word of God. Those in Acts 2 "heard" the word and were 'pricked in their hearts".

Erm, this is catastrophic exegesis, shooting from the hip. - If read the lexicon carefully, you'll notice that Thayer's refers to a specific usage of 'akouo' in Matthew 13:15, in a specific context, not all usages.

"For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them." (Mt. 13:15)

There's about 20 different usages of 'akouo', ranging from "to be endowed with the faculty of hearing (not deaf)" to "to perceive in the soul the inward communication of God" (See Thayer's, Genesis 1:1 (KJV)).

Now,

While it's true that the Lord said "Who hath ears to hear, let him hear." - 'Hearing' ≠ 'Understanding'.

In Matthew 13,

When the disciples asked, "Why speakest thou unto them in parables?"

"He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. ... Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand." (11-13)

Proof that 'Hearing' (akouo) ≠ 'Understanding'.

Think about this: Most people have 'heard' another language being spoken, but how many will have 'understood' it ? - In the same way, you're drawing false equivalencies and jumping to conclusions.

Hence, in 1 Cor. 14:2 (another usage of 'akouo'), Paul writes "For he that speaketh in an unknowntongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries."

See the Ancient Greek usage of 'akouo' here, for comparison, ἀκούω - Wiktionary
 
Upvote 0

trophy33

Well-Known Member
Nov 18, 2018
9,165
3,654
N/A
✟148,927.00
Country
Czech Republic
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
There are verses that speak to the fact that God "repented". If God has predetermined all that happens then there would never be a need for God to "repent". Below, (in blue), is a post I made in another thread on this topic in how God's foreknowledge does not do away with man's free will:

God having foreknowledge does not mean man cannot have free will. In the book of Jonah, Nineveh was a wicked city therefore God sent Jonah with the message " Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown." Jonah 3:4 Yet the city was not overthrown in 40 days as God said, does that mean God lied? No, Hebrews 6:18.

God foreknew that if Nineveh maintained their wicked course they would be destroyed in 40 days. Yet Nineveh, upon hearing Jonah, used their free will to repent. Since they used their free will to change their course of action in repenting, God repented, changed His course of action from destroying Nineveh to sparing them.

God foreknowing Nineveh's destruction in 40 days if they did not repent was not predetermined, set in stone to happen. Again, they used their free will and chose to repent and God changed His course of action. If everything that happens has already been predetermined by God, then God would never have any reason to "repent". The reason God does repent and change His course is because man used his free will to change his course
.

Again, if God predetermined all that happens, that makes Him culpable for all sin that has occurred, yet God has no such culpability. So the idea God has predetermined all that happens can easily and correctly be dismissed.
Gods repentance, anger, sadness etc is just anthropomorphism. Its not like ours.

If you agree that free will means only that we are not forced, then I agree. If you think that the free will means we are unpredictable, then I do not agree that it exists.
 
Upvote 0

Foxfyre

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 1, 2017
1,484
831
New Mexico
✟233,566.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Well the doctrine I speak of came with Acts and after. Jesus certainly taught a different doctrine than the Jewish religious leaders of His time no doubt. Forgiveness and compassion were definitely at the top of the list after the teachings of His sacrifice and what it meant where God and we were concerned of course.

It is not that doctrine doesn't matter. But I don't think it is important that we all agree on the nuts and bolts of how we are supposed to do this or say that or whatever. And when we disagree on the interpretation of this or that verse, we both might be right, we both might be wrong, but in the grand scheme of things, it really doesn't matter. But yes, forgiveness, compassion, tolerance, kindness, love were what Jesus taught.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

TheSeabass

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2015
1,855
358
✟47,754.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Gods repentance, anger, sadness etc is just anthropomorphism. Its not like ours.

If you agree that free will means only that we are not forced, then I agree. If you think that the free will means we are unpredictable, then I do not agree that it exists.
God foreknows what option a man will choose, but God lets man choose that option and not force it upon man through predetermination. And since God foreknows what option a man will choose, God can use men's choices He foreknows they will make to accomplish His will through control, not through predetermined causation.
 
Upvote 0