Calvinism Refuted

[Hammster]

That is what I get for relying on my memory! I should have checked to confirm. John does mentioned seeing the Holy Spirit descend upon Jesus, but does not include his baptizing Jesus. My mistake.







Good connection. Definitely a reference to water.







'Saved' is not a word that appears in either Rom. 6 or John 3. However, both passages do speak of regeneration. Jesus says that a person must be regenerated to enter the kingdom of God. Paul describes dying to the old life and being raised up to a new life, that is, regenerated. One question which would arise then, are they speaking of the same event, or of different regenerations?







I don't know if the actual baptizing was what saved, but I do see the significance Paul attaches to it in the passage.







I don't see the word 'salvation' mentioned there, but we do see the phrase, 'see,' 'enter' the kingdom of God.







Not mentioned in Jn. 3:3, 5







Agreed. Regeneration. So, is the regeneration described in Jn. 3 the same as the regeneration described by Paul, dying to the old life and being raised up to new life (regenerated) in Christ? Or do you think they are two different events? And regarding the Ezekiel passage, do you see that as referring to what Jesus spoke of to Nicodemus in Jn. 3? Do you see it referring to or being reflected in baptism?



Dave

Sorry that I can't break quotes apart on my cell, but I will try to address everything. Last part first.

Yes, I and others see the Ezekiel passage in connect with what Jesus is speaking about to Nicodemus. As I mentioned in an earlier post, I cannot be concrete about it. However, it fits with what is is talking about in reference to water and the Spirit. If not for the rebuke of Nicodemus, I am not sure if it would fit. But it would seem to have to be something that Nicodemus could think back on as a reference. So one way or another it seems that it would have to be an OT reference. And I don't think it is exclusively a Calvinist doctrine because a new heart is what we are talking about in salvation. The only difference is we have differing views on what a heart of stone is capable of.

Although salvation isn't mentioned (my bad), I t can't imagine what else Jesus would be talking about, especially if you finish the whole conversation.

One thing about the John 3 passage is that if it is talking about regeneration, either as a starting point of salvation (a we propose) or the end result (as a lot of others propose), there is no mention of anyone doing anything for their salvation. Everything is done by God. Now before I became a Calvinist I read into the passage that I must believe to be saved. But there is no command; just a statement that says whosoever believes will have eternal life. So from my standpoint, believing is a result of regeneration, not the cause, or catalyst of salvation.

 

[JDS]

The Gospel is that God, through Grace in Christ, Saves People, not that man saves himself. Calvinism teaches that, and is the only theological system that teaches it consistently.

This is the real problem, I think. Those who teach Calvinism say those who disagree with it are preaching that men save themselves.

So, I do not agree with Calvinism because God does not choose whom he will justify by pre election.. He justifies men by faith. A persons personal faith in the testimony of God is the basis by which he imputes their faith for righteousness. He takes a whole chapter in Romans 4 to explain this and yet I am the only person on this forum who references that chapter.

It is dishonest to assign the meaning of faith as work when God consistently contrasts the two as being opposites.

I E

For by grace are ye saved through faith - Not of works

 

[drstevej]

Good comments Hammster. I would go even further and say that no one has seen the kingdom of God even yet.

So was Jesus wrong?

Matthew 9:1
1And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.

 

[archierieus]

And I don't think it is exclusively a Calvinist doctrine because a new heart is what we are talking about in salvation.

Agreed. A new heart, a new life, regeneration, all without reasonable doubt are connected.

The only difference is we have differing views on what a heart of stone is capable of.

Not so sure there is a difference there. Belief, repentance, all the steps are initiated by and done through the power of God. Where I see a difference is how many hearts of stone God reaches out to.

Although salvation isn't mentioned (my bad),

No problem lol. As careful as I tried to be, I missed a couple of big ones, at least. A reminder of the value of peer review.

I t can't imagine what else Jesus would be talking about, especially if you finish the whole conversation.

Getting saved and entering heaven without a doubt are related. Just trying to stick with each verse as it reads, so as to develop an accurate picture of the whole.

One thing about the John 3 passage is that if it is talking about regeneration, either as a starting point of salvation (a we propose) or the end result (as a lot of others propose),

Not sure if I would call it either the starting point or the end result. I would see the starting point described in John 1, and therein lies the question as to how many does God enlighten and reach out to.

I also see a semantical issue here. Regeneration is described in Jn. 3, and Paul speaks of it. The spiritual awakening, the spiritual awareness of a person is not technically regeneration as described by Paul, nor does it match with what Jesus described in Jn. 3. It definitely is an awakening, and it definitely is instigated by God, but it is not regeneration. Another term might be more accurate.

there is no mention of anyone doing anything for their salvation. Everything is done by God. Now before I became a Calvinist I read into the passage that I must believe to be saved. But there is no command; just a statement that says whosoever believes will have eternal life. So from my standpoint, believing is a result of regeneration, not the cause, or catalyst of salvation.

This would be a very interesting topic to explore. So then, identifying the issues:

1) Is there more than one regeneration, or are the descriptions of Paul, Jesus and Ezekiel of the same event?
2) Is a spiritual awakening on the part of an individual a regeneration, or would a different term be more accurate?
3) Is belief something a person must do, or is it a result of the regeneration described by Jesus and Paul?

Dave

 

[JDS]

So was Jesus wrong?

Matthew 9:1
1And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.

No! He was not wrong but these statements must be reconciled, so was he wrong when he said it cometh not with observation? What do you think?

 

[JDS]

JDS,

You've been given a perfectly good answer but you didn't like it.

I'll try again, but I'll add some things and I will space it out a bit:

Spurgeon was not a systematician. He was a preacher. He was not making a categorical pronouncement about the absolute equivalency between the message of salvation and Calvinism.

What he was saying, in the context of a sermon, is that Calvinism is the fullness of biblical doctrine about sin, redemption, salvation and eternal life and even more than these.

As an evangelist, his emphasis will have been on the Gospel as an earnest call to repent and believe, but I think we make a mistake if we import 21st century ideas about the limitations of what the Gospel is into a discussion on what a 19th century preacher would have meant when he used the word.

Just as "salvation" means far more than just "getting saved" so too, when we deal fully with the idea, the Gospel is far more than just information about how we get a gracious God. It touches upon ideas having to do not merely with soteriology proper but with hamartiology, anthropology, eschatology and teleology as well.

Similarly, Calvinism is far more than just the doctrines of grace. Earlier in the conversation you indicated that you were confused about this as well.

So, what Spurgeon is saying is that Calvinism is the true Biblical doctrine about all of God's relations with His fallen creation, not limited to but certainly inclusive of His plan of redemption for the same.

He is certainly boasting in Christ that this is what the Bible teaches. But again, he is not making a categorical identification of Calvinism with the call to repentance and belief or even to the particular details of what makes that call effective and how it works.

I will now presume to speak for all Calvinists and this will probably annoy you but it is important for me to say it because it is of a piece with what Spurgeon said, are you ready?

In heaven we will all be Calvinists. And even more, we who are now Calvinists will be even moreso.

It is an accident of history that this system of doctrine bears John Calvin's name. It is the same doctrine held by Augustine, Paul, Jesus, David, Moses, Jacob, Abraham, Noah, Seth and Adam.

But all of these men, and we all too, stand on a line, none of us at the terminus of perfection in doctrine. Paul knew more than Moses because he lived and wrote after what Moses hoped for had been accomplished. But this does not mean that there is always a necessary progression. We all stand in relation to truth as we have the capacity, talent and maturity to receive it. Some closer, some further away.

But none of us may claim absolute privilege of intimacy with Truth. We all stand around it.

There are things we know to be true and that we share in common whatever our confession. There are other things about which we have freedom to disagree without consigning one another to hell on the one hand or on the other insisting that only we are the elect of God in Christ.

We do truly believe that Calvinism stands closer to Glory than any other system named by men.

I would hope that you feel the same way about whatever shape your particular set of beliefs and propositions may take. Anything less would betray the meaninglessness of ones confession.

When you say that those who disagree with your eschatology are less spiritual, for example, you show that you do.

Is the gospel good news and if so what is it's extent?

 

[JDS]

archierieus


I made a point in an earlier post concerning the kingdom message of the gospels and water baptism. I noted that recieving the gift of the Holy Ghost by the Jews was conditioned on water baptism but water baptism was administered after the receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost by the gentiles and was not a condition for receiving him. I compared Acts 2:38; Acts 8:12-18; Acts 19:1-7 with Acts 10: 44-48; Acts 11:15-18.

I am interested in your comments on this.

 

[archierieus]

archierieus


I made a point in an earlier post concerning the kingdom message of the gospels and water baptism. I noted that recieving the gift of the Holy Ghost by the Jews was conditioned on water baptism but water baptism was administered after the receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost by the gentiles and was not a condition for receiving him. I compared Acts 2:38; Acts 8:12-18; Acts 19:1-7 with Acts 10: 44-48; Acts 11:15-18.

I am interested in your comments on this.

Yes, very interesting indeed. Gotta head out the door right now, but will look forward to getting back to this later today.

Dave

 

[Bulstrode Whitelock]

Is the gospel good news and if so what is it's extent?

Ok, so you didn't read it...maybe we can all move on now. But no more whining about not having been answered, ok?

 

[drstevej]

No! He was not wrong but these statements must be reconciled, so was he wrong when he said it cometh not with observation? What do you think?

Actually He was right on because right after that He went with three of them to the Mount of Transfiguration which was a foretaste of the Kingdom. So some of them did not taste death before they saw the Kingdom.

 

[archierieus]

Actually He was right on because right after that He went with three of them to the Mount of Transfiguration which was a foretaste of the Kingdom. So some of them did not taste death before they saw the Kingdom.

Agreed. That is my understanding as well. And chronologically the transfiguration is described in the gospel right after Jesus talked about that.

 

[Benefactor]

Agreed. That is my understanding as well. And chronologically the transfiguration is described in the gospel right after Jesus talked about that.

Yep, me too

 

[Hammster]

Agreed. A new heart, a new life, regeneration, all without reasonable doubt are connected.







Not so sure there is a difference there. Belief, repentance, all the steps are initiated by and done through the power of God. Where I see a difference is how many hearts of stone God reaches out to.







No problem lol. As careful as I tried to be, I missed a couple of big ones, at least. A reminder of the value of peer review.







Getting saved and entering heaven without a doubt are related. Just trying to stick with each verse as it reads, so as to develop an accurate picture of the whole.







Not sure if I would call it either the starting point or the end result. I would see the starting point described in John 1, and therein lies the question as to how many does God enlighten and reach out to.



I also see a semantical issue here. Regeneration is described in Jn. 3, and Paul speaks of it. The spiritual awakening, the spiritual awareness of a person is not technically regeneration as described by Paul, nor does it match with what Jesus described in Jn. 3. It definitely is an awakening, and it definitely is instigated by God, but it is not regeneration. Another term might be more accurate.







This would be a very interesting topic to explore. So then, identifying the issues:



1) Is there more than one regeneration, or are the descriptions of Paul, Jesus and Ezekiel of the same event?

2) Is a spiritual awakening on the part of an individual a regeneration, or would a different term be more accurate?

3) Is belief something a person must do, or is it a result of the regeneration described by Jesus and Paul?



Dave

You said something intriguing in regards to a heart of stone. You said you thought where we differed was how many hearts God reaches out to. The intriguing thing is that you agreed with view of a heart of stone, or least appeared to.

As far as I am concerned, the Sovereignty of God and the depravity of man is at the heart of Calvinism. Everything falls into place behind them. I agree with James White that it should be STULIP, with sovereignty at the front.

I concur with scripture that man has a heart of stone and is spiritually dead. That death gives him no desire to seek after God (Ephesians 2 and Romans 3). This is why we need regeneration and this is what I believe Jesus is talking about in John 3.

So I would be interested in yours, or anyone's elses views.

 

[JDS]

Actually He was right on because right after that He went with three of them to the Mount of Transfiguration which was a foretaste of the Kingdom. So some of them did not taste death before they saw the Kingdom.

Right on! A foretaste!

 

[JDS]

Its over! Calvinism has been soundly refuted.

 

[Hammster]

Well, if you don't know what it is, how do you know it's been refuted?

 

[cygnusx1]

Its over! Calvinism has been soundly refuted.

that's a first !!!!




.....

you sounding happy !

 

[Hammster]

Don't run off too soon. you still haven't given me you view of Romans 8:28-30 yet.

 

[cygnusx1]

Well, if you don't know what it is, how do you know it's been refuted?

mmmmmmmmmm ........

[FONT=Verdana,Arial,Helvetica]WAY OF LIFE LITERATURE WEB SITE
(A TONGUE IN CHEEK ADAPTION)
[/FONT]

"Oh yes! Calvin said that not only must people like Servetus be killed, but they should be burnt CRUELLY...
And again, Calvinists don't believe that people can reject Christ!
And...oh yes that's right...Calvinists believe that faith is a work...
... Do you hear me? ...

...What do you mean you want "PROOF"? ...

... You mean "Proof" as in actually giving you references? ...
...Verifiable references?...
... You want to LOOK UP what I'm writing? ...
... Hold on!...NOW HOLD ON!...
... I am a VERY BUSY MAN...
... I get thousands of emails every week from people who don't agree with me ...
... I get nasty letters from Calvinists...
(...By the way...Infant baptism is an abomination...)
...OK...that isn't anything to do with the subject ...
...I don't have time to defend my writings with things like verifable proof...

...You STILL want to see why I'm saying these things about your faith? ...
...You mean that you are prepared to take the time to LOOK UP any references? ...

What's that? See if I have quoted them in CONTEXT? ...

... CONTEXT? ...

Er...hem... I got all these things from
an old time, true blue, tell-it-as-it-is, no nonsense, Pre Mill, KJV Only, Dispensationalist,
anti CCM, Independent, Fundamental, soulwinning,
Baptist preacher boy who has since died and gone to glory ...

AND YOU STILL WANT PROOF?
/

CONCLUSION: Friends in Christ, do not be discouraged by any of this. It is God's will that we know the
times (1 Ch. 12:32; Mat. 16:3) and that we be as wise as serpents and harmless as doves. These things
remind us that the hour is very late, and we need to be ready for the coming of the Lord. Are you sure that
you are born again? Are you living for Christ day by day? “And that, knowing the time, that now it is high
time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed. The night is far spent,
the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light. Let
us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in
strife and envying. But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh, to fulfil the

lusts thereof” (Rom. 13:11-14). This material is sent only to those who personally subscribe...
​

END OF THIS SPOOF PAGE​

 

[Hammster]

Its over! Calvinism has been soundly refuted.

A single statement with nothing to support it. Well, you are an Arminian...

(this is fun)