Calvinist limited love for mankind

Bible Highlighter said:

In Romans 7:14-24, Paul is referring to his past experience of trying to be justified by the 613 laws of Moses as a part of being in the false Pharisee religion. They over emphasized salvation by the Law and did not make God's grace through the Messiah the basis of their salvation. When a person seeks to be justified by Law Alone Salvationism and no grace, then of course they are going to be a slave to their own sin because they are not playing ball on God's terms.

As for the dual nature teaching that we sin the flesh and yet we are seen justified in the eyes of God spiritually because we have a belief alone on Jesus: Well, if this is indeed the belief you are referring to, then it is clearly false according to the Bible.

2 Corinthians 7:1 says,
“Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.”

Click to expand...

You are co-mingling thoughts from different doctrines and making erroneous conclusions.

First off we will not seek salvation by grace!

As Paul wrote in Corinth.

1 Corinthians 2:14
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

The unsaved man has no capacity to understand issues of soteriology, unless theyare being convicted by the Holy spirit prior to salvation.

Paul made it clear the law has nothing to do with our salvation. Just the opposite as He said in corinth

2 Corinthians 3:7
King James Version

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

and also:

1. Galatians 3:24
   Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
   
   
2. Galatians 3:25
   But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

The law was given to show that man could not work for his salvation at all!

A person who is saved by grace- can finally please god because they are a new creature, have a new mind, a new nature, and God living within them. the unsaved have none of these!

As for sinning in the flesh and still being justified?

YOu have confused justification with sanctification!

Judtification is us being declared innocent of all sin!

Sanctification is th eprocess of growing into what what God has declared us to be!

Sons of god, seated in heavenly places, justified, glorified, having all things work for our good. and as the writer of Hebrews declared:

Hebrews 10:14
For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

The new man cannot sin but the old man can do nothing but sin! We have to choose who we will allow to control daily! this is what is known as positional truth and experiential truth.

Our position is secure and our experience should be growing to what God has already declared who we are!

God has already perfected us- and now He is making us holy so that what we are in our daily life will match more and more what god has declared we are in His sight!

Bible Highlighter said:

No. We are told to believe the gospel (Mark 1:15).
In addition, John says, “This is His commandment: We should believe on the name of the Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as He gave us commandment.” (1 John 3:23).

Why are we told to believe the gospel and or believe in Jesus (as a part of His commandment) if it is something that God just gifts us? It makes no sense.

Paul and Silas told the jail keeper, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you shall be saved, and your house” (Acts of the Apostles 16:31).

This was said in reply to his question:
“Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” (Acts of the Apostles 16:30).

If Calvinism was true, they would say, “Do nothing” “If you are one of the Elect, then God will make it clear to you on what to do next.”

But instead, they told him to BELIEVE on the Lord Jesus Christ. Why would they tell him to do something that only God can gift to him? It makes no sense in Calvinism.

Click to expand...

Your assumption is the negative of another --that the command to obey necessarily includes the ability to obey, or to say it somewhat how you do, that God is unjust in demanding from anyone what they are unable to do. (Who is to remonstrate God for making some vessels for destruction (Romans 9)). God is GOD. We are his creation, not his peers. He has the right (not to mention the ability) to do with us as he chooses.

First I would remind you that Calvinism does believe in real choice. Also I ask you to consider whether anyone chooses to sin without willing it. The sinner is always an active participant in his sin, even when he doesn't realize he is set against God.

In the strictest sense, good hermeneutics shows that the jailer's request was not objectively about salvation from sin, but about salvation from the sure penalty for allowing the escape of his prisoners. But I won't even rely on that. The construction of "believe, and..." does not necessarily denote cause and effect. And no, Calvinism would not say "do nothing". We encourage belief --with all our hearts we do. We love the truth and the pursuit of it. We CAN choose to believe, but understand that only God can give salvific faith, and further, that the gift of faith is the work of the Holy Spirit who regenerates us. When we choose to believe in Christ for salvation, then, it is the result, and not the cause of regeneration.

Bible Highlighter said:

A person can be chosen to be president, but that does not mean they cannot be impeached. Just because God chooses to elect people to salvation based on what His Son did, does not mean that they are guaranteed salvation. God is not willing that any should perish, but that ALL should come to repentance. Many are called but few are chosen. How does that statement even work in Calvinism? Who are the many that are called? The elect or the non-elect? Again, you are faced with an endless series of contradictions in Calvinism. Why does God get mad at sinners if He can just elect all to salvation and be happy? How do you not see God as unloving if He creates most of mankind for the specific purpose and or destiny to suffer for all eternity as their only choice? Why is there a judgment if it was God who has determined their destiny of either Heaven or hell? Is not a judgment in our real world based on what a person does wrong when they could have chosen otherwise?

Click to expand...

You have neglected God's whole reason for creating for his own glory. Only through this structure of sin, salvation of the unworthy, resurrection, glorification, can this be accomplished. We would not be vessels of that very truth, knowing by BEING the very subjects to the Gospel. Also, you neglect the teachings we have all heard, that God has the Church as his very dwelling place, the Body of Christ, the Bride of Christ, bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. We, the elect, are the only ones he has made for each specific member of that Body. There are no substitutes. There has never been a plan B. What God has set out to do, he will accomplish. What he has begun he will complete.

Mark Quayle said:

Funny, I've noticed the most hateful are the hyper-fundamentalist, semi-Arminian (synergists). But I don't pretend to know what chapter of the Bible causes them to be so.

Click to expand...

The Westboro Baptist church that’s been in the news many times for being so hateful, are hard core five point Calvinists. Case closed.

chad kincham said:

The Westboro Baptist church that’s been in the news many times for being so hateful, are hard core five point Calvinists. Case closed.

Click to expand...

"In the news" for being hateful is no proof --but I will accept them as hateful; yes they are. Likewise those who use equally hateful language and worse against Calvinists for an outrage against Christ and the Gospel.

Mark Quayle said:

Your assumption is the negative of another --that the command to obey necessarily includes the ability to obey, or to say it somewhat how you do, that God is unjust in demanding from anyone what they are unable to do. (Who is to remonstrate God for making some vessels for destruction (Romans 9)). God is GOD. We are his creation, not his peers. He has the right (not to mention the ability) to do with us as he chooses.

First I would remind you that Calvinism does believe in real choice. Also I ask you to consider whether anyone chooses to sin without willing it. The sinner is always an active participant in his sin, even when he doesn't realize he is set against God.

In the strictest sense, good hermeneutics shows that the jailer's request was not objectively about salvation from sin, but about salvation from the sure penalty for allowing the escape of his prisoners. But I won't even rely on that. The construction of "believe, and..." does not necessarily denote cause and effect. And no, Calvinism would not say "do nothing". We encourage belief --with all our hearts we do. We love the truth and the pursuit of it. We CAN choose to believe, but understand that only God can give salvific faith, and further, that the gift of faith is the work of the Holy Spirit who regenerates us. When we choose to believe in Christ for salvation, then, it is the result, and not the cause of regeneration.

Click to expand...

And Calvinism has it wrong.
You just said it - you claim faith comes from being regenerated, which is totally backwards.


I realized many years ago that reformed dogma is not just wrong, but is diametrically opposed to the truth about how anyone is saved.


To whit: in Calvinism, man is unable to believe in his unregenerate state, and God First regenerates the elect, and then they believe.


So the Calvinist sequence of salvation is:

1) regeneration (salvation) and then 2) belief.


This is backwards. The Bible gives the sequence as 1) believe and 2) be saved (regenerated).

Compare:

Calvinism says 1) be saved 2) believe.


Scripture says 1) believe 2) be saved.


Act it’s bottom line, reformed dogma is absolutely backwards.


The full sequence of biblical salvation is: 1) hearing the word and getting the gift of faith Romans 10:17 2) choosing to reject or receive Jesus John 1:11 3) being saved.

Ephesians 2:8-9 by grace are you saved THROUGH faith.

Yes, faith is the gift that we get from God that we get to grace, THROUGH.

Rom 4:16 Therefore it isof FAITH that it might beby GRACE; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

Rom 5:2 By whom also we have access BY faith INTO this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

Faith is how you access grace. Faith precedes grace.

Yet Calvinists insist grace precedes faith

Calvinism’s version of Ephesians2:8-9 is: by grace (regeneration) you are saved, and then have faith.

But faith is how we get TO grace. And faith is the gift we get when we hear the word of God, as I showed in scripture.

Faith comes from hearing Gods word, not from being the elect.

To whit:

Rom 10:17 So then faith comethby hearing, and hearing by the word of God

Mark Quayle said:

I hope you recognize that what you write following, "In the world of Calvinism", is not what Calvinism teaches, but, rather, your use of what we teach. If God placing the Holy Spirit within, regenerating, cannot be resisted, how is that any more a forced matter than anything else God has done? Did God ask your permission before causing you to exist? Were you forced to make every decision you make? (Logic shows, after all, through the law of causality, that ALL things were caused except First Cause.) Is the nature you are bound to, forced upon you? How is the unspeakable gift of a changed nature (regeneration) considered with such an attitude? Why not accept your salvation as a gift, instead of trying to force it to be your choice?

Click to expand...

There is a huge difference between being born without our say so, vs. God creating others to specifically be punished for all eternity as their only sole destiny in life. God creates things to be good, and not bad. All sin is the result of man being the problem. But in Calvinism: God's way of preventing sin is by election (Because the elected saved will be in Heaven with no sin), and so if that is the case, then why doesn't He prevent all from sinning by electing all?

You said:

When the Bible says, "the love of Christ compels us", it is a sure fact. "Forced"? By the way,

Click to expand...

Being compelled does not always mean one is being forced.
One of the definitions of compel is “influenced.” To be influenced does not mean one is being forced against their own will to do something. I would encourage that a Calvinist needs to take a step back away from Calvinism for a while and just read the Bible alone and asking God for the understanding without any Calvinstic bias or teachings.

You said:

If you don't have God's point of view concerning his love, you don't concerning his hate either. Sin is a horror, an abomination against the nature of existence itself. How can God not hate it? I can hardly understand how it can be possible for God to create something that is not himself, but that the very thing he created is capable of rebelling against him is more than my mind can even do more with than to accept as being so. It is only by God's Grace that the "fabric of the universe" is not torn at the contradiction.

So yeah, God is angry at sinners, and rightfully so. You really think you can operate judgement at God's level? If God predestined mankind to fall, so that some he chose for the purpose can KNOW God's love in a way Adam never could, is he to be blamed, or rather to be THANKED?

Click to expand...

Why would God get upset at sin if He could just snap his fingers and stop men from sinning? What other purpose is there other than the fact that man has a free will to decide in choosing God?

You said:

More to follow when I get time, and if I remember, concerning your logic that if one is born unchosen into a sin nature, he is not to blame for his sin.

Click to expand...

I believe all are condemned in Adam, but there is a way of escape through Jesus Christ by their own choice. But if Calvinism is true, and all were condemned in Adam and God just left the majority to perish when He could have saved them by electing them to salvation, then one must conclude that God is being unjust. Why? Because that would be like a coast guard who saves complete strangers in a boat that you were in that sank, and yet he decides not to save you and your family (When he could have easily done so).

In other words, if the responsibility of accepting the Lord rests in the hands of the individual, then they are to blame for their choice in either choosing God or rejecting Him. God making the choice for them takes the choice out of their hands makes their fate or destiny to be one that is cruel and mean. God would be creating a bunch of people for the sole purpose but only to torture them for all eternity. Their sole existence is to suffer. They have no hope or escape. Yet, God does not care. He created life to meet this cruel fate.

Jesusthekingofking said:

Calvinist emphasis on God's predestination that sometime make me feel that these Christian defined love in their own way.

Click to expand...

Yeah, otherwise we'd have ignored the Bible and just come up with a hand made doctrine that made everybody feeeeeeel better. Now for my part, I have trouble understanding people who apparently believe that if we leave the choosing of the Elect to God that He'll chuck almost everybody, from from the most harmless infant to the mass-murdering tyrant, into hell, while randomly picking out a scattered few as "keepers" and allowing them into Heaven. Real respect for God's grace and mercy there, huh? "No, can't leave that stuff up to God, no telling what He's liable to do." Right? Instead Free-Willies prefer that everyone, from the lowest to the highest, choose where they're going, based on whether other Christians have had the necessary marketing skills to persuade them to believe in Christ. The default destination for those who choose wrong or who don't choose at all is to be roasted in hell forever. That's looooove, you see. And of course, in the latter scenario, God is powerless to override human stupidity and boneheadedness by saying "No, you're coming with me.", because of "Free Will".

Sorry, mate, I find the Free Willie position nonsensical. It elevates the will of fallen and corrupt human beings to a position of authority higher of that of God Himself, rendering Him helpless. That's hogwash.

God will save whom He will, and none may gainsay it or prevent Him. Human "free will", (never all that free in the first place) saves no one. Face it, everybody likes the idea of being saved by their own choices and not because God pulled them out of the fire. You can't thump your chest and bloviate about how spiritual you are if all you are is a poor shipwreck hauled out of the water by the grace and mercy of God.

Free will is why we sin, and it never saved anyone, and never will. Salvation is the GIFT of GOD, not a result of anything we've done. No one gets bragging rights.

Can they go around and say to people "Jesus love you"?

Click to expand...

If Jesus doesn't love them, they're dead. Left to our own devices we're all lousy sinners who merit only destruction.

Jesus died for all and desire all to be saved, those who rejected the gospel go to hell.

Click to expand...

So Jesus' sacrifice on the Cross didn't do Group B a bit of good, did it? He died for them, and they're going to hell anyway, because "there's just nothing He can do", an ignorant and depraved sinner's Free Will" has stumped him.

Ridiculous.

Jesusthekingofking said:

Well I can't be calvinist, it seems like everything has been determined since the foundation of the world.

Click to expand...

That's atheism. But thanks for playing.

Cormack said:

Under some forms of Calvinism, Jesus didn’t die for everyone.

Click to expand...

Under all forms of Free-Willyism either Jesus didn't die for everyone, or if He did die for them it didn't do them any good. Right?

Does God love the people he didn’t die for?

Click to expand...

Give me the Free Willie answer for that question. Does God love the people He won't save?

alllivesmatter said:

I kind of understand why Calvinist are hesitant to spar. They know that there will be resistance to their beliefs and probably arguments.

Click to expand...

It's not the resistance. It's the emotional reaction, such as this:

chad kincham said:

The most hateful “believers” I’ve ever met are Calvinists.

Click to expand...

I've observed a few of the Calvinist/anti-Calvinist debates around here, and this is the way it usually goes. The visceral, emotional reaction seems to come from the anti-Calvinist side, entirely. It's not much fun, and there doesn't seem to be a reasonable way to reach the other side.

alllivesmatter said:

They believe what they believe and why should they care if you don't and why should they have to defend their beliefs to the likes of the unchosen, lol.

Click to expand...

What do you expect? How can I claim to believe in destiny and then argue like the whole world rests on my shoulders, absent God? If I trust that God works all things to good for those who love him, then my participation is optional, but it won't stop God from fulfilling his plans if I don't.

I trust God. I'm not worried that your faith depends on me.

nolidad said:

You are co-mingling thoughts from different doctrines and making erroneous conclusions.

First off we will not seek salvation by grace!

As Paul wrote in Corinth.

1 Corinthians 2:14
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

The unsaved man has no capacity to understand issues of soteriology, unless theyare being convicted by the Holy spirit prior to salvation.

Click to expand...

In regards to 1 Corinthians 2:14:

Paul’s overarching concern... is to make a case for true wisdom as held in contrast with the “wisdom of the wise” (1:19), the “wisdom of this world,” (1:20; 3:19), or the carnal “wisdom of men” (2:5). The Greeks boasted in their wisdom and Paul is providing them a spiritually inspired warning by teaching them what true divine wisdom looks like. That wisdom is contained in the gospel revelation (1:24, 30; 2:7). And there is nothing about that revelation that is insufficient in enabling a willing response (Rm. 1:16). Those who ignore the apostle’s warning are not to be thought of as victims of God’s unchangeable decree, as we must conclude if the claims of Calvinism are true. No, anyone who chooses to trade the clearly revealed truth in for lies stands as a fool “without excuse” (Rom. 1:20; Ps. 14:1).

Now, lets focus on the key passage of this debate: First Corinthians 2:14 reads as follows:

The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Simply put, this can be taken in one of two ways:

Calvinistic Meaning: “The reprobate, who has not be irresistibly regenerated by the Spirit, cannot accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for God has unchangeably decreed that revealed truth (apostles teaching, scripture) will only be seen as foolish to him.” (God is ultimately responsible for man’s unbelief)

Non-Calvinistic Meaning: “The man who freely chooses not to accept the things that come from the Spirit of God (apostles teaching, scripture, etc), but freely deem them as foolish, cannot understand spiritual truth, because those are the means of spiritual revelation.” (Man is responsible for his own unbelief)

The understanding of 1 Cor. 2:14 becomes very simple when we answer the first question posed by this verse, “Why won’t the natural man accept the things that come from the Spirit of God?”

• Because God so determined it

or

• Because the man freely chose the wisdom of the world over the wisdom being revealed by spiritually wrought means (apostles, scriptures, etc)?

We believe Paul is saying that the “natural man” is one who will not accept the wisdom from the Spirit of God, because he himself considers these things to be foolish by HIS OWN FREE CHOICE, NOT GOD’S DETERMINATION. Therefore, he is incapable of ever understanding spiritual things unless and until he turns from human wisdom and accepts the wisdom being revealed by the spirit through His chosen means (apostles, scriptures, etc).

Source used:
Does 1 Corinthians 2 Support Calvinism?
(Note: I do not agree with the author on their view on Eternal Security, but they make a great argument against the Calvinistic viewpoint on this verse here).

Mark Quayle said:

Culpability for sin is judged as to degree by God himself, who looks on the heart.

Click to expand...

Of course, but he doesn't leave us without guidance on this matter, just as he defines sin for us to begin with by the law.

Mark Quayle said:

Your appeal to deliberateness of ("or"?) consent, while it may seem noble, rules out nobody with original sin. The fallen cannot please God, because they are at enmity with God --willfully so, whether they recognize the fact or not.

Click to expand...

"Deliberate consent" is a term sometimes used in moral theology.

Again, if they have no recourse but to sin, if they really have no option but to will wrongly, then how could they be blameworthy? It's like sending a savage beast to eternal torment for doing what he naturally does, what he's designed to do.

Mark Quayle said:

You are missing the point. We, the saved, are by no means divine, and only divinity (and finally the glorified) can have the knowledge, the understanding of the nature of God's gift, and the depth of horror that sin is, to make a decision concerning the matter "REAL" or worthy. Nor do we have the integrity to keep it. But who God has chosen he will indeed save --not by our will, but by HIM.

Click to expand...

The plan of God absolutely, of necessity, involves man’s will, or else it’s a pointless plan. Again he may has well have prevented Adam from sinning to begin with and stocked heaven with the elect and hell with the rest and precluded all the history of humanity on this earth with all of its pain and drama and suffering and ugliness if the will is not meant to be educated by, and educated within, that exile. Yes, it’s admirable to recognize (since not all do) that God’s plan is to produce something, something good, something truly grand out of the mess that His creation fell into. That's always been the plan, since before the Fall. Not only to restore justice to His wayward creation (He certainly didn't create man to sin) but to produce something even greater yet than he began with. He wants something more for us- something unimaginably good.

Man is potentially a great and noble creature as is, having been made in God's own image, in spite of the ugly sin and darkness we wallow in now as a result of our disfellowship with Him. But once fellowship is reestablished- now on more solid ground than was originally had in Eden since now, like prodigals returning from exile who've learned the hard way to appreciate our true home, we desire to get on board with the plan- the door is finally wide open to the work that only God can and will do in us to the extent that we stay on board, that we remain in Him.

That's our choice, a choice that He's been patiently drawing man towards throughout the centuries until the time was ripe. Otherwise those centuries of trials and tribulations, etc, of tasting of evil so that we may now contrast it with good and so choose between the two with the help of grace now available via the New Covenant, have no real purpose or reason. Man’s will being involved in cooperating with grace, in not refusing to be subjugated to God however weakly at first, is one part of the basis of his new-found worthiness, his justice-that which justifies him as he comes to believe. Adam willed otherwise, resulting in justice/righteousness lost, and the rest is history. Love, which would’ve caused Adam’s obedience to flow naturally, of its own accord, is always a matter of the will; that justice/righteousness is what God intends to cultivate in us.

nolidad said:

Paul made it clear the law has nothing to do with our salvation. Just the opposite as He said in corinth

2 Corinthians 3:7
King James Version

7 But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

and also:

Click to expand...

Well, look at the context. Paul is not referring to all forms of Law in existence. Paul is referring to the 613 laws of Moses and trying to be saved by the Law Alone without God's grace. For 2 Corinthians 3:7 talks about what was engraved in stones (i.e. the Ten Commandment tablets) and Moses and Paul is not referring to the commands given to us by Jesus Christ.

You said:

1. Galatians 3:24
   Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
   
   
2. Galatians 3:25
   But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

The law was given to show that man could not work for his salvation at all!

Click to expand...

Which Law? All forms of Law? No.

Galatians 3:17 says,

“And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.” (Galatians 3:17).

Which Law came 430 years after the covenant made with Abraham?

This would be the 613 laws of Moses.
This is the context. It's not referring to the Laws given to us by Jesus Christ.
Paul himself said that if any man does not agree with the words of Jesus Christ and the doctrine according to godliness, he is proud and he knows nothing (See: 1 Timothy 6:3-4).

James 4:6 says that God resists the proud and gives grace to the humble.
Obviously a person who thinks they can sin and still be saved is not being humble.

Mark Quayle said:

Concerning the cross, then, you are of the opinion that the symbolism ("the cross was an appeal", "a demonstration" ) was enough to save us --no, even I don't believe you mean that, yet that's where you went first. Do you believe that Christ died and truly redeemed all of mankind, yet some will somehow be lost anyway? Is some sin paid for twice?

Click to expand...

Not symbolism but rather a direct, visceral demonstration of a love so wide and vast and deep that we can barely begin to fathom it. We must hear and also see that love, in action; that's why Jesus came; to reveal God, so we may know Him and by coming to know Him we may believe in Him as Adam failed to do and so to hope/trust in Him and finally and most importantly, to love Him. And talk alone can be cheap so He showed us what, exactly, God would willingly endure in human flesh for His wayward creation in order to prove what He shouldn't have to prove. So it's not either/or, an act of sacrifice that we don't necessarily need to fully understand, but it's both, including a physical revelation of God's ineffable love. Likewise the resurrection physically demonstrated his power, love, and will for us, as it reveals in no uncertain terms His triumph over sin and death, so that we may see, and know. Otherwise, He could've just said, "Look, you lucky guys over there are forgiven and saved." Or just stuck the elect in heaven with nothing more needing to be said. Again, He's both prodding us with grace and drawing us.

And yes, Jesus died for all, because He loves all and desires none to perish, and yet some still perish.

Mark Quayle said:

OF COURSE man can still say no --who said otherwise? How does that imply that cooperation of will --i.e. with man doing his part and God only doing his own part-- is implied by the fact that man can still say no? But as to that, if man says no, does that imply that God's predestination of every detail can be defeated?

Click to expand...

No one asserted that God predestines every detail as per strict determinism, at least not the historical church. The Christian Church teaches that man's will was not totally lost and destroyed at the Fall. And if he's limited to willing only wrongly, he cannot be said to will freely.

nonaeroterraqueous said:

It's not the resistance. It's the emotional reaction, such as this:



I've observed a few of the Calvinist/anti-Calvinist debates around here, and this is the way it usually goes. The visceral, emotional reaction seems to come from the anti-Calvinist side, entirely. It's not much fun, and there doesn't seem to be a reasonable way to reach the other side.



What do you expect? How can I claim to believe in destiny and then argue like the whole world rests on my shoulders, absent God? If I trust that God works all things to good for those who love him, then my participation is optional, but it won't stop God from fulfilling his plans if I don't.

I trust God. I'm not worried that your faith depends on me.

Click to expand...

I have talked on various different Christian forums since 2010. While I am not saying all Calvinists are alike, my experience with many Calvinists online throughout the years has been less than nice or cordial. So I tend to disagree with you here, friend. Granted, it is the doctrine that should be the real battle ground here. For if the battle is to be won it is with Scripture and the Spirit of God convicting men of the truth (if they are open to the truth).

nolidad said:

The new man cannot sin but the old man can do nothing but sin! We have to choose who we will allow to control daily! this is what is known as positional truth and experiential truth.

Our position is secure and our experience should be growing to what God has already declared who we are!

Click to expand...

If I understood you correctly (and please take no offense): But this sounds similar to the gnostic heresy that John warned us about in his first epistle.



Again, I think you fail to understand what 2 Corinthians 7:1 said.

“Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.” (2 Corinthians 7:1).

Not sure if you caught what this verse said. But Paul says that we are to cleanse ourselves from ALL (not just some) filthiness of the flesh and SPIRIT. If I am understanding you correctly: You believe that a believer sins in the body but not they do not sin in the spirit because they have a belief alone on Jesus. But this verse is saying that we are to cleanse ourselves from all filthiness in the flesh AND spirit. Why? It gives us the reason. “perfecting holiness in the fear of God.” But today, many do not believe in perfecting holiness in the fear of God. They don't believe 2 Corinthians 7:1 in what it plainly says. Why? Because they don't like the verse. They want to justify sin with the thinking they are saved.

Picture source:
Dismembering Scarecrows. "If we say we han no sin."

Bible Highlighter said:

While I am not saying all Calvinists are alike, my experience with many Calvinists online throughout the years has been less than nice or cordial.

Click to expand...

I've been watching you post, here, for much of that time. You could generalize about us, but I could talk specifically about how I've seen you debate.

I've never seen you mistreated, here. I've also never seen you resort to some of the nastiness that others of your view have engaged in. In a word, you're civil.

But, your argument relies far more heavily upon emotion than does that of your opponent. The reason is because of your ideas about God's love. To you, we paint a picture of a meaner God. In truth, if the Calvinists are right, then you don't even like God; you even despise him. For you, it's not really a question of objective facts, so much as it is an emotional gut instinct. For the Calvinist, on the other hand, you're just wrong. You don't paint an uglier picture of God, just a more illogical and unscriptural one. The emotional reaction is yours, not ours. Hence, based on what I've seen of your interactions, here, I'm inclined to think that you're projecting your own feelings on us. I don't think the Calvinists are being mean to you. I think you dislike them, because they show you the face of God, and you're faced with the fact that you don't like what you see.

nonaeroterraqueous said:

I've been watching you post, here, for much of that time. You could generalize about us, but I could talk specifically about how I've seen you debate.

I've never seen you mistreated, here. I've also never seen you resort to some of the nastiness that others of your view have engaged in. In a word, you're civil.

Click to expand...

Thank you for the kind words. But all glory to the Lord for any good done in my life.
Well, I can actually think of three right now on the forum who mistreated me, but I am not holding it against them or anything. I just try to steer clear of them, and I strive to remember to pray for them when I think of them.

You said:

But, your argument relies far more heavily upon emotion than does that of your opponent.

Click to expand...

Right, I rely on emotion because God is love (1 John 4:8).
Love is an emotion, and God embodies that emotion.
God is also fair in the way He does justice, too. Why? Because God is good.
God is holy, and He is righteous. Right-eous. God does always what is right and good.
In fact, the fruits of the Spirit are love, joy, peace, etc. So yeah, I base my argument on emotion; For even Jesus cried or wept.

You said:

The reason is because of your ideas about God's love. To you, we paint a picture of a meaner God. In truth, if the Calvinists are right, then you don't even like God; you even despise him. For you, it's not really a question of objective facts, so much as it is an emotional gut instinct. For the Calvinist, on the other hand, you're just wrong. You don't paint an uglier picture of God, just a more illogical and unscriptural one. The emotional reaction is yours, not ours. Hence, based on what I've seen of your interactions, here, I'm inclined to think that you're projecting your own feelings on us. I don't think the Calvinists are being mean to you. I think you dislike them, because they show you the face of God, and you're faced with the fact that you don't like what you see.

Click to expand...

The Bible says God is love, and God is good. I should not need a Bible to tell you that the god of Calvinism is not the God portrayed in the Bible. But if you do, there are plenty of verses that refutes Calvinism. Try reading again the story of Jonah, and pay extra close attention to Jonah 3. Jonah warned that the Ninevites were going to be overthrown in 40 days. But it did not happen. Why? Was it because God elected them to salvation? No. It was because they cried out to God (seeking forgiveness over their sin), and they forsaken their evil ways. When God had forsaken their evil ways, that is when God had decided to turn away from the wrath that He was going to originally bring upon them (Please see Jonah 3:6-10).

chad kincham said:

This is backwards. The Bible gives the sequence as 1) believe and 2) be saved (regenerated).

Click to expand...

Regeneration is not the same as salvation from sin. They both happen to the elect, yes, but they are not the same thing. Regeneration is more closely related to belief, as a matter of fact, since faith and belief are the result of regeneration.

Further, the stated sequence, "believe" followed by "be saved" does not imply a logical sequence. It doesn't say, "Believe, because this act of your will produces salvation." Not even close.

I don't know how you gather from Scripture that says man is unable to believe, apart from the work of God, that man is after all able to believe apart from the work of God.

To quote John McArthur--https://www.ligonier.org/blog/mans-ability-choose-god/

"It is ironic that in the same chapter, indeed in the same context, in which our Lord teaches the utter necessity of rebirth to even see the kingdom, let alone choose it, non-Reformed views find one of their main proof texts to argue that fallen man retains a small island of ability to choose Christ. It is John 3:16: “For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life.

"What does this famous verse teach about fallen man’s ability to choose Christ? The answer, simply, is nothing. The argument used by non-Reformed people is that the text teaches that everybody in the world has it in their power to accept or reject Christ. A careful look at the text reveals, however, that it teaches nothing of the kind. What the text teaches is that everyone who believes in Christ will be saved. Whoever does A (believes) will receive B (everlasting life). The text says nothing, absolutely nothing, about who will ever believe. It says nothing about fallen man’s natural moral ability. Reformed people and non-Reformed people both heartily agree that all who believe will be saved. They heartily disagree about who has the ability to believe."