Does Matthew 22:14 prove Calvinism and Predestination?

Bible Highlighter said:

There is no other side. Calvinism is unbiblical. Words like Predestination are redefined to mean what they want it to say. The whole Bible is chocked full of stories that have a moral lesson in not sinning or you will be punished. That makes no sense in Calvinism. God trying to teach people to not sin? Yeah, okay. That doesn't work in Calvinism. They are all about how one is either saved or unsaved by God's choice or design. Why on Earth would God feel grieved or upset about their sinfulness? Why would God destroy an entire world with a global flood for their wickedness (Especially when God could have just zapped these people to be saved and righteous)? Why destroy the whole world? 2 Peter 2:5-6 says that the global flood was an example to all who would live ungodly thereafter. This suggests that the lesson in that story is not to live in sin like those in the global flood or we too can perish. But if Calvinism was true, such things in Scripture would not exist. We would read in Genesis 6 how God was pleased in electing the many who were sinful to be reprobate and He just felt like destroying a bunch of people to satisfy His own good pleasure (instead of force saving them all). But that is not what is stated in Genesis 6.

Click to expand...

You do not understand Calvinism.

Dave L said:

Do you think I have a contradiction? When all I did was quote scripture without comment?

Click to expand...

Yes, I do. 1 John 3:9 is hyperbole. Using it literally creates a contradiction.

HTacianas said:

Yes, I do. 1 John 3:9 is hyperbole. Using it literally creates a contradiction.

Click to expand...

Not if you understand the meaning.

Dave L said:

Not if you understand the meaning.

Click to expand...

Well share with us the meaning.

HTacianas said:

Well share with us the meaning.

Click to expand...

If you experience it, it will solve the mystery.

Dave L said:

You do not understand Calvinism.

Click to expand...

This is a common statement made by Calvinists.
It is one of the things mentioned by those who debate a lot against Calvinists.
They mention that these words are frequently brought up by Calvinists; And it's true. I heave heard them say this before. But if one's position in the Bible is true, then they should have no trouble refuting the points I made with using the Bible.

Bible Highlighter said:

This is a common statement made by Calvinists.
It is one of the things mentioned by those who debate a lot against Calvinists.
They mention that these words are frequently brought up by Calvinists; And it's true. I heave heard them say this before. But if one's position in the Bible is true, then they should have no trouble refuting the points I made with using the Bible.

Click to expand...

Quote what you think they say in a few words for sake of clarity.

Albion said:

It's a theological term just like dozens that we all use frequently in order to refer to something more complicated in the Bible.

Click to expand...

The terms they use are derived from the Bible, but they redefine them to fit their own meaning that is not in the Bible. This is evident in the fact that reading the whole Bible does not teach a person is forced saved and yet others are forced to be unsaved.

You said:

Yes. We know that evildoing merits punishment. That's not the issue at all.

Click to expand...

Your not getting it. 2 Peter 2:5-6 tells us that the global flood is an example to all who live ungodly thereafter. Meaning, we are to change our ways as an example of hearing the global flood story. This does not work in Calvinism because they believe one is saved by some kind of forced election process by God. No story needed to give an example for the ungodly to change. 2 Peter 3:9 says that God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. Not some. All should come to repentance. 1 John 2:2 mentions how Christ is the atoning sacrifice not only for believers sins, but for the sins of the entire world. This means salvation is for all and not for a select few that God just randomly picks. It is not even moral or good for God to Unconditionally elect some for salvation and others to reprobation. God cannot punish people for their sin if they have no control over their sinful state and it is God who is the One who can zap and change them. It would be like kicking a dog across the room because it has an uncontrollable pooping problem. The dog cannot help but to poop hot steamy piles of furniture on his master's carpet, and yet the master does not care. He just wants to blame the poor animal and kick him like a football when he could take the animal to the vet and cure him of his sickness.

Albion said:

If true, that would be irrelevant. The topic concerns the use of the word chosen and whether it refers to election/predestination.

My view, for what it's worth, is that there is too much on BOTH sides to be found in Scripture for us to know for certain that Election is either true or false.

Click to expand...

Calvin's error was to claim that election was arbitrary and not based on God's foreknowledge.

Calvinism includes the unbiblical ideas that: there is such a thing as original sin, God can't see the future, God is partial and arbitrary, and man has no free will. Election is only one small part of Calvin's errors.

HTacianas said:

Yes, I do. 1 John 3:9 is hyperbole. Using it literally creates a contradiction.

Click to expand...

I expect you mean a contradiction with 1 John 1:8-10. But it doesn't. 1 John 3:9 is a repentant Christian full of the Holy Spirit. 1 John 1:8 is an unrepentant Christian still full of sin, and has never confessed their need for forgiveness. They are self-righteous. That is why the next verse solves the problem. And verse 10 is someone who believes they have never sinned in their whole life, that they were born sinless. But, all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. We all need our sin nature to be cleansed by Jesus, so that we may be partakers of the divine nature. 2 Peter 1.

Dave L said:

Quote what you think they say in a few words for sake of clarity.

Click to expand...

I have read a lot of articles online against Calvinism. The words you stated "you don't understand Calvinism" is like cliche phrase of escaping in trying to discuss the issue. It was one that is frequently mentioned a lot in the many articles I read online that refutes Calvinism.

You can simply Google the phrase "You don't understand Calvinism" and research it for yourself.

Bible Highlighter said:

I have read a lot of articles online against Calvinism. The words you stated "you don't understand Calvinism" is like cliche phrase of escaping in trying to discuss the issue. It was one that is frequently mentioned a lot in the many articles I read online that refutes Calvinism.

You can simply Google the phrase "You don't understand Calvinism" and research it for yourself.

Click to expand...

Why would this be a cliche if not true?

Al Touthentop said:

Calvin's error was to claim that election was arbitrary and not based on God's foreknowledge.

Calvinism includes the unbiblical ideas that: there is such a thing as original sin, God can't see the future, God is partial and arbitrary, and man has no free will. Election is only one small part of Calvin's errors.

Click to expand...

God is not a respecter of persons. = arbitrary choice of sinners.

boxman144 said:

Matthew 22:14

cho·sen
/ˈCHōzən/

1. adjective

adjective: chosen

1. having been selected as the best or most appropriate.

Guys, I could be completely wrong. I'm still a baby Christian. Let me know your thoughts.

In Jesus name,



boxman144

Click to expand...

This is probably the best refutation of all 5 points of Calvinism.

Calvinism vs. the Biblical View of Man and God.

I hope it helps, and may God bless you.

Dave L said:

God is not a respecter of persons. = arbitrary choice of sinners.

Click to expand...

God is not partial. Romans 2:11.

Under Calvinism, sinners have no choice.

Bible Highlighter said:

This is probably the best refutation of all 5 points of Calvinism.

Calvinism vs. the Biblical View of Man and God.

I hope it helps, and may God bless you.

Click to expand...

So he agrees with Catholicism?

Al Touthentop said:

God is not partial. Romans 2:11.

Under Calvinism, sinners have no choice.

Click to expand...

I would rather have Christ dictate my choices than Satan. It's either-or.

CharismaticLady said:

I expect you mean a contradiction with 1 John 1:8-10. But it doesn't. 1 John 3:9 is a repentant Christian full of the Holy Spirit. 1 John 1:8 is an unrepentant Christian still full of sin, and has never confessed their need for forgiveness. They are self-righteous. That is why the next verse solves the problem. And verse 10 is someone who believes they have never sinned in their whole life, that they were born sinless. But, all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. We all need our sin nature to be cleansed by Jesus, so that we may be partakers of the divine nature. 2 Peter 1.

Click to expand...

We do not have our nature cleansed but our sins. We were not born with a sin nature. We were born with a will that often serves our own desires rather than God's.

boxman144 said:

Matthew 22:14

cho·sen
/ˈCHōzən/

1. adjective

adjective: chosen

1. having been selected as the best or most appropriate.

Guys, I could be completely wrong. I'm still a baby Christian. Let me know your thoughts.

In Jesus name,



boxman144

Click to expand...

Indirectly it proves predestination and election ( I do not like calling it Calvinism but biblical truth).

There are far many other veses that show the saved are chosen by God.

Romans 9:23-24
John 6:65
Eph. 1:4-5
Rom. 8:29-30

Among many others are much stronger verses that shows God calls us out of the condemnation that is the lot of all mankind!

Dave L said:

I would rather have Christ dictate my choices than Satan. It's either-or.

Click to expand...

Christ doesn't dictate anyone's choices. He lays the choice out there and its up to you to chose. If you chose to follow him, you are elected.

If you choose to preach that he forces some people to obey and others not to obey and that he then punishes those who were forced to disobey, you're preaching a Christ that doesn't exist.