Calvinism has its own philosophy langguage that makes things complicated and unnecessary

Jesusthekingofking said:

are you saying Servetus?

Click to expand...

No I am saying an inquisition lead by a professing christian group.

Jesusthekingofking said:

there are many quite, trust God pastor who started their denominations out of love.. according to your methodology

Click to expand...

But my methodology has not started a denomination. Plus, I can not speak for pastors whom I do not know personally. So, I can not tell you that pastors are quiet and God trusting if I don't even know them.

But I have been with people of various groups. It seems to me, that there can be Biblical people in different groups, but they are not pouting and spouting how they are more right than ones of other groups.

"For we dare not class ourselves or compare ourselves with those who commend themselves. But they, measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise." (2 Corinthians 10:12)

God is comparing us with His Son. We in Jesus are being changed into the likeness of Jesus who is so pleasing to our Father; so this is an important part of our ministering and message > "speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head---Christ---" (in Ephesians 4:15) > this is a basic which I do not see a number of self-congratulating church people talking about and ministering.

And I pay attention to if and how ones talk about how God's word tells all of us to submit to how our Father rules us . . . "in one body" . . . in His own peace >

"And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to which also you were called in one body; and be thankful." (Colossians 3:15)

The atonement of Jesus is not limited, but trusting in Christ on the cross brings us to submit to Him whom we trust, so we are personally ruled by Christ in His own peace > John 14:27, Matthew 11:28-30. And with this is >

"Do all things without complaining and disputing, that you may become blameless and harmless, children of God without fault in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation," (in Philippians 2:13)

Are the pastors you talk about being quiet and God-trusting, by relating at home "without complaining and disputing", so they "become blameless and harmless, children of God without fault", right "in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation"?

Ones can argue about atonement theories, but not give attention to all which God's word says about how we become in Jesus and relate. So, I do not make a major project of comparing what groups claim to believe. If you consider yourself to be predestined, Colossians 3:15 and Philippians 2:13-16 are included; if you believe you make your choices, then choose to constantly submit to our Father in His peace and live and relate "without complaining and disputing".

All Glory To God said:

Well the people who appeal to ''church fathers'' or early Christians do exactly that. Specifically I am thinking of Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox that claim they are following a tradition that will justify their model of salvation and indeed their church as authoritative over Christendom.

Do you accept that? Do accept the Roman catholic church AND the Eastern orthodox church as correct in their assertions, because both are making the claim to that tradition following these church fathers? If not you are just contradicting yourself.

And how much do you agree with Origin? He did not believe in hell and held to a type of universal salvation and seems to accept various Apocrypha work as canonical, quoting them in his De Principiis.

Click to expand...

To my mind, the "church fathers" begins with the Apostles. What did they believe and teach? The Gospel is the power of God, and the work of God.

What came after the Apostles is in many ways, subtraction, and a good bit of addition.

Calvinism is a reaction to false teaching. The basics are nothing new. God does not need our self-determination to accomplish what he set out to do.

Jesusthekingofking said:

Some Christian (in fact most of them) will said the otherwise. They affirm monergistic salvation but not being a calvinist

Click to expand...

Yet they must qualify monergism. They want their cake and eat it too. (I know --I lived with them since the day I was born.) To them, God will not save unless we first ask, though they give him the credit for motivating us to ask. The same holds true for the Christian walk, growth, sanctification. To hear them tell it, it is all up to us.

Jesusthekingofking said:

there's nothing too wrong to call ppl heretic, indeed calvin is indeed consider heretic to many, even protestant. meanwhile lutheran and Calvinism has been declared heretic in the early days of the reformation.

Click to expand...

Calling someone a heretic is saying they are clearly outside of the Christian faith (aka not Christian) and it's not allowed on these here forums...

If you want to discuss matters of faith, clean up your language and manners.

[QUOTE="Mark Quayle, post: 75622512, member: 410020"]To hear them tell it, it is all up to us.[/QUOTE]
From my reading of the New Testament, Jesus's work on earth is finished at the resurrection and He is waiting on the body of Christ. Note the Great Commission:


In contrast, John Calvin made this fatalistic statement:


So, regardless of the age they expire, when does John Calvin say the above individuals are doomed? At least “from the womb” you say, that’s fabulous. Beautiful picture of God dooming babies inside their mothers womb, super duper.

The Word of God indicates that God does not get glory from the destruction of the wicked, but rather calls for repentance. Seems strange to me that the Bible frequently calls for repentance if everything is determined by God beforehand.

John Mullally said:

[QUOTE="Mark Quayle, post: 75622512, member: 410020"]To hear them tell it, it is all up to us.

Click to expand...

From my reading of the New Testament, Jesus's work on earth is finished at the resurrection and He is waiting on the body of Christ. Note the Great Commission:


In contrast, John Calvin made this fatalistic statement:


So, regardless of the age they expire, when does John Calvin say the above individuals are doomed? At least “from the womb” you say, that’s fabulous. Beautiful picture of God dooming babies inside their mothers womb, super duper.

The Word of God indicates that God does not get glory from the destruction of the wicked, but rather calls for repentance. Seems strange to me that the Bible frequently calls for repentance if everything is determined by God beforehand.


[/QUOTE]
Your narrative ignores an awful lot of things. You don't like Calvin, why --because he is gloomy?

Calvin's claims are nowhere denied by the Great Commission, nor by any other verse you quoted. Only your use, your view, of Calvin's claims, perhaps, are.

Your preferred mode of God's goodness --your notion of it, that is-- governs your thinking, it seems. Your sarcasm ("So, regardless of the age they expire, when does John Calvin say the above individuals are doomed? At least “from the womb” you say, that’s fabulous. Beautiful picture of God dooming babies inside their mothers womb, super duper.") doesn't answer any questions but to show your distaste allowing that God should be omnipotent and determine all things. You seem to want self-determination. The picture you despise is of your own making.

Mark Quayle said:

... but to show your distaste allowing that God should be omnipotent and determine all things. You seem to want self-determination. The picture you despise is of your own making.

Click to expand...

In Matthew 25:41, Jesus said that hell was prepared for the devil and his angels - Jesus makes no mention of hell being prepared for man. Whereas, Calvin says that hell was also prepared for those individuals "doomed from the womb" - as it was arranged by God's sovereign counsel.


Concerning self-determination (or free-will) - read the evangelistic preaching scattered throughout the book of Acts. Peter and Paul implore the lost (both crowds and individuals) to repent and believe. That is a very odd evangelistic style for those believing that God arranges everything beforehand. Famous Calvinist R. C. Sproul stated some initial misgivings:

John Calvin has drawn with his words the picture I despise.

Jesusthekingofking said:

Non Calvinist Christian understand God's sovereignty differently though, otherwise why there are so many heated debate about calvininsms even within the reformed realm?

Click to expand...

I don't understand why you say this. Of course non-Calvinist Christians understand sovereignty differently. They limit it --and they do so illogically and by it, make themselves a small god who must wait for them to allow him to work. It's not just sovereignty, but a whole self-important worldview they have wrong.

John Mullally said:

In Matthew 25:41, Jesus said that hell was prepared for the devil and his angels - Jesus makes no mention of hell being prepared for man. Whereas, Calvin says that hell was also prepared for those individuals "doomed from the womb" - as it was arranged by God's sovereign counsel.

Now, since the arrangement of all things is in the hand of God, since to him belongs the disposal of life and death, he arranges all things by his sovereign counsel, in such a way that individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb to certain death, and are to glorify him by their destruction.​

Concerning self-determination (or free-will) - read the evangelistic preaching scattered throughout the book of Acts. Peter and Paul implore the lost (both crowds and individuals) to repent and believe. That is a very odd evangelistic style for those believing that God arranges everything beforehand. Famous Calvinist R. C. Sproul stated some initial misgivings:

I no longer feared the demons of fatalism or the ugly thought that I was being reduced to a puppet. Now I rejoiced in a gracious Savior who alone was immortal, invisible, the only wise God.​

Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that at that point Sproul ceased to be a Calvinist? You are using him to show the beginning of your posts is mistaken --assuming the imploring shown in Acts to be contrary to Calvinism. It is not.

Reformed theology / Calvinism only shows the manner in which the work of God upon humanity depends on God alone, and the scope of his work, that is denied by Arminian-like teachings. It does not deny that man makes decisions and his heart is dealt with by the word of God and the Gospel in particular, along with other influences. Many Calvinists even give an altar call within or at the end of their sermons. That by no means denies predestination/ determinism.

You equate self-determination with free will --thank you for that. To me, 'free will' at the most merely means 'choice'. You believe God can't be Lord until you allow him to be. But he IS the Lord --not you.

Mark Quayle said:

You believe God can't be Lord until you allow him to be. But he IS the Lord --not you.

Click to expand...

Ooow! Show me exactly where I make believe to be my own Lord. I take God at his word. Analogy: If someone throws a line to a drowning man who grabs it, who gets credit for the rescue? Who would you expect to be grateful?

Throughout Acts, the Gospel was offered in good faith to all - the Gospel would not be offered in good faith if some were secretly excluded. This agrees with the parable of the Wedding Banquet in Matthew.

Jesus says that the angels in heaven rejoice when a sinner repents. Whereas, John Calvin says God receives glory by predestinating some to eternal damnation.

I use the quote of Calvinist RC Sproul to show that even he had had concerns over what he calls "the demons of fatalism" and "the ugly thought I was reduced to a puppet".

John Mullally said:

Show me exactly where I have made myself Lord. I take God at his word. If someone throws a line to a drowning man who grabs it, who gets credit for the rescue? Who would you expect to be grateful?

Throughout Acts, the Gospel was offered in good faith to all - the Gospel would not be offered in good faith if some were secretly excluded. This agrees with the parable of the Wedding Banquet in Matthew.

Jesus says that the angels in heaven rejoice when a sinner repents. Whereas, John Calvin says God receives glory by predestinating some to eternal damnation.

I use the quote of Calvinist RC Sproul to show that even he had had concerns over what he calls "the demons of fatalism" and "the ugly thought I was reduced to a puppet".

Click to expand...

This is an easy foul ball to catch. High and hanging there for me to reach.

Your lifeline thrown to a drowning man is not descriptive of what the Bible says. We are dead, but for regeneration.

Anybody who demands free will, as independent of causes, is demanding self-determination, and ignoring the God who is in control of all things.

The Gospel is offered in good faith. Were anybody at all to receive the gift of God, the Gospel would indeed be operative in their case. But they don't.

Nobody is excluded from the gospel, as such. Or all are. Because all are on the road to perdition, but for the rescue of God. We are all dead in our trespasses and sin. The dead cannot (will not) reach out to God, until God quickens them. I say they are not excluded, because perdition, the default end of mankind, is the just result of sin --not of exclusion. The rescue was meant for those God made for his special purpose. It is the anomaly.

Calvin does no such thing as to deny that there is joy in heaven over one sinner that repents. Yet you want to contrast with that theme, something he says, in making his objections to Arminianism, as though that is his whole version of the Gospel --it is not.

I don't know the context from which you extracted what Sproul said. But I assume he was describing what cold logic told him made sense, as apart from the Gospel --a rhetoric semi-equivalent to what Ecclesiastes uses (which is taken by many to defeat many claims of Christianity). Sproul had no problem defending the notions that Calvinism proclaims concerning the Gospel, and the nature and purposes of God, because they fit reason. You quote him to the detriment of your thesis.

Mark Quayle said:

This is an easy foul ball to catch. High and hanging there for me to reach.

Your lifeline thrown to a drowning man is not descriptive of what the Bible says. We are dead, but for regeneration.

Anybody who demands free will, as independent of causes, is demanding self-determination, and ignoring the God who is in control of all things.

Calvin does no such thing as to deny that there is joy in heaven over one sinner that repents. Yet you want to contrast with that theme, something he says, in making his objections to Arminianism, as though that is his whole version of the Gospel --it is not.

Click to expand...

Concerning regeneration. The Grace Community Church's (John MacArthur) doctrinal statement (Doctrinal Statement | Grace Community Church) says that regeneration requires action on the individual as it occurs:

I believe that part of their doctrinal statement. The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation. However, people can resist the Holy Spirit per Acts 7:51 - note the Stephen was filled with the Holy Spirit when he spoke Acts 7:51.

Angels rejoicing over one repentant sinner is incompatible with God receiving glory over predestinating some to eternal damnation. Its not good cop - bad cop.

The RIP cartoon is not a good analogy- its word play. Sinners are technically alive and can be born again. Just because God is all powerful doesn't mean He controls all things on earth at this time - not all of Jesus enemies are as of yet under his feet. If God controls all things we would have Heaven on Earth because that is God's Will on Earth per Matthew 6:10 - I know it is God's Will because Jesus commanded his followers to pray "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven". Jesus would not command his followers to pray something that was not God's Will.

John Mullally said:

The Grace Community Church's (John MacArthur) doctrinal statement (Doctrinal Statement | Grace Community Church) says that regeneration occurs:

when the repentant sinner, as enabled by the Holy Spirit, responds in faith to the divine provision of salvation.
​

I almost believe that part of their doctrinal statement - I would change the word "enabled" with "called". The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation. People can resist the Holy Spirit per Acts 7:51.

Angels rejoicing over one repentant sinner is incompatible with God receiving glory over predestinating some to eternal damnation. Its not good cop - bad cop.

The RIP cartoon is not a good analogy- its word play. Sinners are technically alive and can be born again. Just because God is all powerful doesn't mean He controls all things. There are too many directives in the Bible for me to believe that. If God controls all things we would have Heaven on Earth because that is God's Will on Earth per Matthew 6:10 - I know it is God's Will because Jesus commanded his followers to pray "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven". Jesus would not command his followers to pray something that was not God's Will.

Click to expand...

Sinners. all of us, are technically dead until regenerated. Spiritually dead. The mind of the flesh cannot accept the things of God. By that I don't mean that the Spirit of God cannot and does not deal with them, afflicting their conscience and in many other ways interacting, even imposing on them. And yes, they can resist him. I don't know of any Calvinists that say otherwise --I'm guessing you are reading too much into Irresistible Grace, as though it referred to all of life and not only regeneration. Nor do I consider regeneration necessarily a sudden thing where you can say here I was not, but an instant later I was. I think of it in terms of cause-and-effect, God being the cause.

Can you explain your statement? You said, "Angels rejoicing over one repentant sinner is incompatible with God receiving glory over predestinating some to eternal damnation. Its not good cop - bad cop." Of course its not good cop - bad cop. Why even mention such a concept? God is glorified by his justice, his power and authority, not to mention his wisdom.

I expect you are of the belief that contrary to Romans 9, God does not predestine anyone for perdition. Do you not know that God is that much higher an order of being than we, that he has the right to do whatever he pleases with us --his creation-- and that it not figure on any scale we can impose on him as to degree of goodness or justice?

But for the sake of your comfort, know that God will not afflict anyone with punishment they don't deserve, nor will he allow them to become as bad as they could be in this life were he to remove all restraints. "Will not the judge of all the world do what is right?"

McArthur's doctrinal statement does not differ from mine. The whole work of Salvation necessarily enroils the act of the will of the person, though it is all the work of God. The will of the person is not what saves him, as repentance is not even valid without God being the essence behind it. We are, forgive me, jokes, when it comes to integrity and truth.

Many are called; few are chosen. And none are chosen by their integrity or any other worth but by God's choice and purposes.

Mark Quayle said:

Can you explain your statement? You said, "Angels rejoicing over one repentant sinner is incompatible with God receiving glory over predestinating some to eternal damnation. Its not good cop - bad cop." Of course its not good cop - bad cop. Why even mention such a concept? God is glorified by his justice, his power and authority, not to mention his wisdom.

I expect you are of the belief that contrary to Romans 9, God does not predestine anyone for perdition.

McArthur's doctrinal statement does not differ from mine. The whole work of Salvation necessarily enroils the act of the will of the person, though it is all the work of God. The will of the person is not what saves him, as repentance is not even valid without God being the essence behind it.

Click to expand...

Hope this helps to explain my opposition to John Cavin saying God receives Glory by predestining some to Eternal Punishment:

1. Angels follow God, so if the Angels rejoice over a sinner's repentance, then so does God.
2. If God rejoices over a sinners repentance, it does not make sense that he would rejoice in a sinner's damnation. Jesus came to give life. Love does not take pleasure in evil. Remember Jesus weeping over Jerusalem.
3. If God does not rejoice over a sinner's damnation, he does receive Glory from it.
4. I gave scriptural examples on this point earlier in this thread.

Romans 9 ties in with other parts of Romans to show how God used the failure of Israel as a rationale to expand the Gospel to the Gentiles without having to teach them the law first (i.e. starting from scratch and making them Jews first).

MacArthur's doctrinal statement I quoted earlier shows that people do participate in their regeneration. Repentance and Response to the Holy Spirit precede regeneration. Technically Synergism.

As I argued from scripture earlier, if God is controlling everything on Earth at this time, we would have Heaven on Earth. Seems like we will have to wait for the Millennium.