Could Someone Explain Calvinism?

[ClementofA]

In the case of God and His offer of salvation to us, both He and the offer are so good, so "irresistible" , that none who receive this particular offer from Him, IOW, none who who are drawn by the Father and are given to the Son will refuse to go to Him and be saved.

​

In Calvinism those not "given to the Son" have no chance of avoiding eternal hell, since that is what God predestined them to & God is fully responsible for. It is His fault & His alone that they spend eternity being punished. These people that the Calvinistic God forces to "go to hell" are just as undeserving of their fate in fatalistic Calvinism as the babies Calvin thought would end up there.

"Why Calvinism Makes Me Cry":

Why Calvinism Makes Me Cry

 

[St_Worm2]

Hi Clement, nothing you just said above (save perhaps a proper understanding of your first phrase concerning those outside of Christ going to Hell) has anything to do with Calvinism/what it teaches.

Yours and His,
David

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Hi Clement, nothing you just said above (save perhaps a proper understanding of your first phrase concerning those outside of Christ going to Hell) has anything to do with Calvinism/what it teaches.

Yours and His,
David

Have you ever been in a debate about Calvinism in which your opponent has accurately represented Calvinism? I haven't.

 

[ClementofA]

Hi Clement, nothing you just said above (save perhaps a proper understanding of your first phrase concerning those outside of Christ going to Hell) has anything to do with Calvinism/what it teaches.

You provide no evidence to support your claim.

Your thrice repeated idea that God "offers" salvation seems to try to make you sound like a free will advocating Arminian instead of a Calvinist. Where do the Scriptures ever say salvation is an "offer"?

As to what Calvinism teaches, here is what an ex Calvinist says:

"The Calvinist tells us that man has no ability at all to cry out to God for His mercy. All humanity, therefore, will certainly perish apart from a forceful intervention from heaven. There is no hope whatsoever that man's will, ever at enmity with his Maker, can avail him to the gospel. God must reach out and change the man into a new creature who can will to do right. And there is no necessity laid upon God that He must thus intervene in the lives of all of humanity, the Calvinist reasons."

"God has decided, before the beginning of time, whom He will save with this "effectual call" and whom He will leave to suffer ruin. This is the doctrine commonly called Unconditional Election. The teaching has a "flip-side," Reprobation, which holds that God also foreordains the damnation of the non-elect."

Calvinism Critiqued by a Former Calvinist

Here is what Calvinist Matt Slick says:

What is Calvinism? | carm

 

[5thKingdom]

While I appreciate your information, it doesn't answer the question. How can God, who is love, create people just to dump them into hell because He hasn't elected them?

Rom 9:11 (For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God
according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth Rom 9:12 It was said unto her, The
elder shall serve the younger. Rom 9:13 As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.
Rom 9:14 What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. 9:15 For he saith to Moses,
I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
Rom 9:16 So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy.
Rom 9:17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew
my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Rom 9:18 Therefore hath he mercy on
whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. Rom 9:19 Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault?
For who hath resisted his will? Rom 9:20 Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed
say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Rom 9:21 Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump
to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour? Rom 9:22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and
to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: Rom 9:23 And that
he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory,
Rom 9:24 Even us, whom he hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?


...

 

[Copperhead]

At the heart of the controversies between Calvinism and Arminianism is the emphasis on the sovereignty of God by the Calvinists and on the sovereignty (free will) of man - or human responsibility - by the Arminians. Calvinism emphasizes that God is in total control of everything and that nothing can happen that He does not plan and direct, including man's salvation. Arminianism teaches that man has free will and that God will never interrupt or take that free will away, and that God has obligated Himself to respect the free moral agency and capacity of free choice with which He created us.

Both doctrinal positions are reasonable and both have extensive Scriptures to back them up. Both are partially right and partially overextended. As Philip Schaff has put it, "Calvinism emphasized divine sovereignty and free grace; Arminianism emphasized human responsibility. The one restricts the saving grace to the elect; the other extends it to all men on the condition of faith. Both are right in what they assert; both are wrong in what they deny. If one important truth is pressed to the exclusion of another truth of equal importance, it becomes an error, and loses its hold upon the conscience. The Bible gives us a theology which is more human than Calvinism and more divine that Arminianism, and more Christian than either of them."

Certainly, the Bible does teach that God is sovereign, and that believers are predestined and elected by God to spend eternity with Him. Nowhere, however, does the Bible ever associate election with damnation. Conversely, the Scriptures teach that God elects for salvation, but that unbelievers are in hell by their own choice. Every passage of the Bible that deals with election deals with it in the context of salvation, not damnation. No one is elect for hell. The only support for such a view is human logic, not Biblical revelation (which John Calvin did teach).

The concept of total depravity is consistent with Scripture, but the doctrine of limited atonement, that Jesus did not die for the sins of the whole world, is clearly contrary to Biblical teaching. The Bible clearly teaches that Jesus died for everyone's sins and that everyone is able to be saved if they will repent and turn to Christ. Limited atonement is a non-Biblical doctrine.

Election and predestination are Biblical doctrines. God knows everything and therefore He cannot be surprised by anything. He is beyond the constraints of mass, acceleration and gravity, therefore He is outside time. He knows, and has known from "eternity past," who will exercise their free will to accept Him and who will reject Him. The former are "the elect" and the latter are the "non-elect." Everyone who is not saved will have only himself to blame: God will not send anyone to hell, but many people will choose to go there by exercising their free will to reject Christ.

On the other hand, no one who is saved will be able to take any of the credit. Our salvation is entirely God's work, and is based completely on the finished work of the Cross. We were dead in trespasses and sins, destined for hell, when God in His grace drew us to Himself, convinced us of our sin and our need for a Savior, and gave us the authority to call Jesus Lord. Is this grace, this wooing, this courtship, irresistible? No, we have free will and we can (and do) resist, even to the damnation of our souls, but God does everything short of making us automata (preprogrammed puppets) to draw us into His forever family.

Not sure if it was Barnhouse or Ironside that this quote originally came from....

"People are all standing in a room with several doors. Above one door is a sign which reads "All who will may enter." Those who choose to enter the door find on the back side of the door a sign which reads, "Chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world."

 

[5thKingdom]

Election and predestination are Biblical doctrines. God knows everything and therefore He cannot be surprised by anything. He is beyond the constraints of mass, acceleration and gravity, therefore He is outside time. He knows, and has known from "eternity past," who will exercise their free will to accept Him and who will reject Him. The former are "the elect" and the latter are the "non-elect." Everyone who is not saved will have only himself to blame: God will not send anyone to hell, but many people will choose to go there by exercising their free will to reject Christ.
ronside that this quote originally came from....

Your analysis is lacking in several areas... the primary one above.

The fallacy to your argument is that you neglect to start at the starting point.
The starting point is that (after Adam and Eve) the Bible teaches that all men
are BORN DEAD.... from a spiritual standpoint they are already destined to Hell.
It is not that God decides who is saved/elected by which "door" they choose...
in fact the Bible is clear that NO MAN can come to Christ unless he is "drawn"
by God - they are saved IN SPITE of the fact that they are dead.

Lazarus is a perfect example of election.
He was DEAD (his body stinketh).... he could not "choose" life
He could not "hear" Jesus call... he could not respond in any way.
Salvation (from start to finish) depended on GOD giving him the ears
to hear His call... and God giving him the will to respond... and God giving
him the strength to respond. A DEAD MAN does not have "free will".

BTW... men have the "free will" to choose to wear black sock or white socks,
but they do not have the "free will" to be "translated" from DEATH to LIFE.

----------

Your second mistake was not understanding the qualification of Particular Atonement.
If Christ PAID for the price of all sins... then all sins are already PAID.

Your error is not understanding the CONTEXT of verses that seem to teach such
a doctrine.

I will give you an example: When the Bible says God protects the true "church"...
that is 100% correct. However, we must understand the term "church" can apply
to BOTH the saved "wheat" and the unsaved "tares"....or it can ONLY the "wheat",
then we can see the "harmony of Scripture" in that God promises His protection
to the REAL CHURCH (the saved wheat) while He also promises eternal torment
to the FALSE CHURCH (the unsaved tares).

In other words.... the ONLY reason you think that Particular Atonement is not Biblical
is that you CONFLATE the definition of TERMS. Christ came to seek and save HIS SHEEP
he did not come to seek and save the TARES... and he certainly did not come to seek and
saved all those who REJECT the Gospel.

Here is the starting point:
The Bible is clear the "world" consists of three (3) Groups of people
(a) The saved Wheat in the "Kingdom of Heaven" (Christian Kingdom)
(b) The unsaved Tares in the "Kingdom of Heaven" and
(c) The unsaved Souls OUTSIDE the "Kingdom".... such as Jews, Moslems,
Buddhists, Atheists, Humanists, Pagans, etc.

And....because of Adam.... each of these groups are BORN DEAD.
None of these people have the ability (of themselves) to change
from DEATH TO LIFE.... except the "wheat" who were elected to believe.

When the Bible uses the term "world" or "all men" or "whosoever"...
In some verses it is talking about #a and #b and #c.
In some verses it is talking about #a and #b only and
In some verses it is talking about #a only.
We must discern WHICH is the case
with "harmony of Scripture".

Our conclusion must harmonize with ALL SCRIPTURE not just some select passages.
Arminianism does harmonize with SOME passages.... in fact most heresies harmonize
with SOME passages... but that is not the measure of Biblical Truth. The ONLY measure
of Biblical Truth is harmony with ALL RELATED SCRIPTURES and Particular Atonement
does just that.

BTW.... if people had to choose from one of many "doors"....
that would be a "work"... and therefore, a false gospel.

In conclusion... the confusion (and error) or Arminianism rests on two points:
(1) Not understanding the DEFINITION of TERMS... like "world" or "whosoever"
(2) Not harmonizing ALL RELATED SCRIPTURES... like NO MAN will choose any
better than Adam and Eve.... that is why they are "elected" regardless of their works.

It is true that the Bible says "whosoever" will believe....
It is also true the Bible say NONE will believe unless they are "drawn"
and ALL that are drawn "shall come".... and Jesus will lose NONE of them.
You cannot just decide that "whosoever" means everyone who is born....
because that does not harmonize with ALL RELATED SCRIPTURES,
(even though it harmonizes with some select passages).

Again.... most theological error and most heresies are based on PARTIAL-Truth
and, therefore, they can harmonize with SOME SCRIPTURE... but that is not the
measure of Truth. The measure of Truth is harmony with ALL RELATED SCRIPTURE.

5thkingdomofheaven

Jim

 

[ClementofA]

Is this grace, this wooing, this courtship, irresistible? No, we have free will and we can (and do) resist, even to the damnation of our souls, but God does everything short of making us automata (preprogrammed puppets) to draw us into His forever family.

If every free will choice has a 50% chance of going either way, it would be mathematically impossible for one to reject God forever. Although once one is saved & immortal, what happens to freewill then? Does God take free will away to keep everyone safe and saved, or does He allow His created beings the chance to rebel again? Does incorruption imply that there will not be free will to sin?


https://www.tentmaker.org/books/hope_beyond_hell.pdf

 

[5thKingdom]

If every free will choice has a 50% chance of going either way, it would be mathematically impossible for one to reject God forever. Although once one is saved & immortal, what happens to freewill then? Does God take free will away to keep everyone safe and saved, or does He allow His created beings the chance to rebel again? Does incorruption imply that there will not be free will to sin?


https://www.tentmaker.org/books/hope_beyond_hell.pdf

When people speak of "free will" they often conflate subjects.
We always have the "free will" to decide whether we wear white socks or black socks.
And we always have the "free will" to decide to sin (while in this corruptible body)
But that does not mean we have the "free will" to be "born again".

If your question is whether we (Saints) have "free will" in the "New Jerusalem"....
then your question is whether the angels who did not rebel have "free will"....
since we will be like them.

So.... are you talking about "free will" (of Saints) BEFORE we receive our incorruptible bodies...
or, are you talking about the "free will" (of Saints) AFTER we are resurrected?

Jim

 

[5thKingdom]

If every free will choice has a 50% chance of going either way, it would be mathematically impossible for one to reject God forever. Although once one is saved & immortal, what happens to freewill then? Does God take free will away to keep everyone safe and saved, or does He allow His created beings the chance to rebel again? Does incorruption imply that there will not be free will to sin?


https://www.tentmaker.org/books/hope_beyond_hell.pdf

First.... I find your book is based on the idea that we have "free will" to be regenerated.
So that is a presupposition that will only cause error to multiply.

Second.... your premise is that God would not create creatures if the MAJORITY of them
will experience eternal punishment. But apparently you are comfortable with the idea that
God would create creatures (angels) when a very high percentage of them (1/3rd) rebel
and must experience eternal punishment.

Why is eternal torment "justice" for fallen angels... but not unsaved men?

I have no problem reading your book.... but within the first pages I have found MAJOR
problems with your presuppositions and with your conclusions. It seems to me that
you are creating a BUNCH of strawmen to knock down.... and that proves nothing.

If you would be so kind.... direct me to your STRONGEST argument against eternal torment
so I do not need to read over 100 pages of strawmen arguements.

Jim

BTW.... I would be glad to have this conversation through private emails.
if that would be better for you. And Augustine did not invent the concept
of eternal torment.... so I don't know why you imply otherwise. Also,
when you talk about "traditions"... remember that slavery existed during
the Lord's time on earth... and He commanded slaves to obey their
masters. I have only read a few pages, but they seem riddled with
presuppositions and opinions and personal "feelings".

-----
BTW.... the Bible tells us WHEN the just penalty for sin ends and WHEN
someone in the Lake-of-Fire can enter into the temple.... when the seven
plagues are fulfilled. Unfortunately, they are NEVER fulfilled.

Rev 15:8 And the temple was filled with smoke from the glory of God, and from his power; and no man was able to enter into the temple, till the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled.

------
.
Your four "pillars" of Chapter one are fallacious.
First... truth is NOT determined by what the early Christians understood.
That is easy to prove as they did not understand the FULFILLMENT of the
Four (temporal) Kingdoms before the last (eternal) Kingdom.
They did not understand the Great Tribulation is a separate "age"
from the Christian Kingdom (age) and the Jewish Kingdom (age)
and separate from the eternal Kingdom (age). So, in that alone,
you demonstrate another fallacious presupposition to build more error.

Secondly... the issue is not the definition of "hell".
The issue is the DURATION of the "Lake-of-Fire"...
remember that death and hell are cast into the Lake.
The argument is NOT whether death or hell are eternal...
the issue is whether the "Lake-of-Fire" is eternal.

------
While I am scanning the book... it appears that you have made "free will"
the fourth "pillar" of your argument. That is hilarious.

If a person is born spiritually DEAD...
how do they have the "free will" to become UNDEAD?

You are admitting that you are basing all your opinions on the basis
that DEAD MEN have the ability to "choose" to not be DEAD.
That is not what the Bible teaches.

Therefore, since I could not make it through your FIRST CHAPTER
(or even the introduction) without finding numerous errors, I will not
bother to read further - unless you point me to a particularly strong
argument.

However, you have shown NOTHING with referrals from pastors/teachers
who already have rejected eternal punishment... and who are Arminian.
Of course they agree with your strawman arguments.

Again... I would be glad to discuss ANY (and all) of your personal opinions
but you have NOT written a book that refutes anything when you BEGIN
your study with presuppositions that are not valid or Biblical. In that case
you cannot help but to build error on top of error.

Which is exactly what the Gospel foretold.
It was always PART of the Gospel that the church would be infiltrated
by unsaved "tares". And the "leaven" of their false doctrines would
corrupt the churches and eventually the entire "Kingdom". In fact,
read Revelation chapters 2 & 3 to see the extent of this corruption
before the end of the FIRST century. The fact that today we have
HUNDREDS of churches preaching false gospels is the FULFILLMENT
of the prophecy of the "leaven" of the "tares" corrupting the Gospel.

Yes... I know the Lord promised to protect the real church....
however the word "church" could mean (a) the saved "wheat" or
(b) both the "wheat and tares".... so you must first discern WHICH
group is in view. It is true that God promised eternal protection to the
TRUE CHURCH (the "wheat") but it is equally true He promised eternal
punishment to the "tares"... and all those OUTSIDE of the "Kingdom"
(Jews, Moslems, Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists, Humanists, pagans, etc)

.

.

.
.

 

[ClementofA]

When people speak of "free will" they often conflate subjects.
We always have the "free will" to decide whether we wear white socks or black socks.
And we always have the "free will" to decide to sin (while in this corruptible body)
But that does not mean we have the "free will" to be "born again".

Even monkeys make choices similar to choosing between sock colours.

Having freewill to sin & only sin is not freewill worthy of the name freewill. It is instead a bondage of the will, slavery of the will, not "free" will.

Real freewill means being given an absolutely unforced choice betweeen alternates related to offers prompted by our conscience and/or the Holy Spirit.

While a person with free will may respond positively to hearing the gospel, it is God Who responds to that by causing the person to be born again or regenerated. According to the theory of free will herein stated.

If your question is whether we (Saints) have "free will" in the "New Jerusalem"....
then your question is whether the angels who did not rebel have "free will"....
since we will be like them.

So.... are you talking about "free will" (of Saints) BEFORE we receive our incorruptible bodies...
or, are you talking about the "free will" (of Saints) AFTER we are resurrected?

I asked 3 questions:

"If every free will choice has a 50% chance of going either way, it would be mathematically impossible for one to reject God forever. Although once one is saved & immortal, what happens to freewill then? Does God take free will away to keep everyone safe and saved, or does He allow His created beings the chance to rebel again? Does incorruption imply that there will not be free will to sin?"

As you can see they refer to when one is "immortal" & has "incorruption".

https://www.tentmaker.org/books/hope_beyond_hell.pdf

 

[ClementofA]

First.... I find your book is based on the idea that we have "free will" to be regenerated.
So that is a presupposition that will only cause error to multiply.

Second.... your premise is that God would not create creatures if the MAJORITY of them
will experience eternal punishment. But apparently you are comfortable with the idea that
God would create creatures (angels) when a very high percentage of them (1/3rd) rebel
and must experience eternal punishment.

Why is eternal torment "justice" for fallen angels... but not unsaved men?

I have no problem reading your book.... but within the first pages I have found MAJOR
problems with your presuppositions and with your conclusions. It seems to me that
you are creating a BUNCH of strawmen to knock down.... and that proves nothing.

If you would be so kind.... direct me to your STRONGEST argument against eternal torment
so I do not need to read over 100 pages of strawmen arguements.

Jim

BTW.... I would be glad to have this conversation through private emails.
if that would be better for you. And Augustine did not invent the concept
of eternal torment.... so I don't know why you imply otherwise. Also,
when you talk about "traditions"... remember that slavery existed during
the Lord's time on earth... and He commanded slaves to obey their
masters. I have only read a few pages, but they seem riddled with
presuppositions and opinions and personal "feelings".

-----
BTW.... the Bible tells us WHEN the just penalty for sin ends and WHEN
someone in the Lake-of-Fire can enter into the temple.... when the seven
plagues are fulfilled. Unfortunately, they are NEVER fulfilled.

Rev 15:8 And the temple was filled with smoke from the glory of God, and from his power; and no man was able to enter into the temple, till the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled.

------
.
Your four "pillars" of Chapter one are fallacious.
First... truth is NOT determined by what the early Christians understood.
That is easy to prove as they did not understand the FULFILLMENT of the
Four (temporal) Kingdoms before the last (eternal) Kingdom.
They did not understand the Great Tribulation is a separate "age"
from the Christian Kingdom (age) and the Jewish Kingdom (age)
and separate from the eternal Kingdom (age). So, in that alone,
you demonstrate another fallacious presupposition to build more error.

.

.
.

First, the book referred to is not mine.

Second, I did not say demons won't be saved. They will be.

Third, if you wish to discuss the doctrines of eternal torment vs universalism, i believe the Controversial Christian Theology forum is the place to do it. I have 100's of posts there on the topic.

 

[5thKingdom]

Even monkeys make choices similar to choosing between sock colours.

Having freewill to sin & only sin is not freewill worthy of the name freewill. It is instead a bondage of the will, slavery of the will, not "free" will.

Real freewill means being given an absolutely unforced choice betweeen alternates related to offers prompted by our conscience and/or the Holy Spirit.

While a person with free will may respond positively to hearing the gospel, it is God Who responds to that by causing the person to be born again or regenerated. According to the theory of free will herein stated.

First... monkeys do not have a soul.
So your analogy falls way short.

Second... you have just ASSUMED that "free will" applies to being able
to resist sin. That is not the case because we are not talking about sin.
Instead, we are talking about "translating" between a soul that is DEAD
and a soul that has LIFE.

Third... you have just ASSUMED that men have "free will".
That is a fallacious assumption if the soul of man is DEAD...
as is the case for all humans after Adam and Eve.

As I said... I would be willing to debate this with you on another thread
or in personal messages. However, you cannot START with the presupposition
that fallen men (men with DEAD souls) have something called "free will" to reverse
that death.

Your FIRST ARGUMENT has to be to show Scripture teaching that men who
have DEAD SOULS can also have "free will" related to that soul...
you have not done that.... and the book just ASSUMES that.

This is a calvinistic thread.... why not argue whether men have "free will"
(showing SCRIPTURES to support your argument) rather than just ASSUME
men can choose LIFE when they are already DEAD?

Again.... the Bible teaches the world consists of three (3) different groups of people:
(a) the saved "wheat" in the Kingdom and
(b) the unsaved "tares" in the Kingdom and
(c) the lose souls OUTSIDE of the Kingdom

Please show me ONE VERSE in the Bible that teaches that these three groups
have "free will" to salvation.

BTW.... even using YOUR DEFINITION (below) your argument fails... you said:

While a person with free will may respond positively to hearing the gospel, it is God Who responds to that by causing the person to be born again or regenerated. According to the theory of free will herein stated.

First... you assume "free will" to salvation exists (that contradicts Scripture)

Second.... you ADMIT that man must "work" before God "responds" (that contradicts Scripture)
You admit that man is sovereign in the process - as man must work (choose/accept/decide)
before God then "responds" to that action (work). That is completely backward.

The Bible is clear that ALL REPENTANCE is the result of regeneration... not the cause.
"as many as were ORDAINED to eternal life believed".


.[/QUOTE]

 

[5thKingdom]

First, the book referred to is not mine.

Second, I did not say demons won't be saved. They will be.

Third, if you wish to discuss the doctrines of eternal torment vs universalism, i believe the Controversial Christian Theology forum is the place to do it. I have 100's of posts there on the topic.

First... I assumed the book was yours. I was mistaken.

Secondly.. if you want to say demons will be saved.... please provide some SCRIPTURE
to prove that opinion - otherwise it means nothing.

Third... this thread is entitled "could someone explain Calvinism"....
and you did the exact opposite. You tried to explain Arminianism and you used
several strawman arguments as your presupposition. So I see no LOGIC in your position
that this is the wrong thread... as I am simply responding to YOUR WORDS.

BTW.... when you are talking about unsaved men (or demons)
being forgiven (without a Savior) .... TECHNICALLY you are correct.
They can be forgiven at the END of eternity.

Again... the Bible tells us WHEN the just penalty for sin ends and WHEN
someone in the Lake-of-Fire can enter into the temple.... when the seven
plagues are fulfilled. Unfortunately, they are NEVER fulfilled.

-------

Rev 15:8 And the temple was filled with smoke from the glory of God, and from his power; and no man was able to enter into the temple, till the seven plagues of the seven angels were fulfilled.

------




.

 

[5thKingdom]

I asked 3 questions:

"If every free will choice has a 50% chance of going either way, it would be mathematically impossible for one to reject God forever. Although once one is saved & immortal, what happens to freewill then? Does God take free will away to keep everyone safe and saved, or does He allow His created beings the chance to rebel again? Does incorruption imply that there will not be free will to sin?"

As you can see they refer to when one is "immortal" & has "incorruption".

https://www.tentmaker.org/books/hope_beyond_hell.pdf

You asked three questions:

(1) The first is a STRAWMAN because you assume that "free will" to salvation exists.

(2) The premise of your second "question" is fallacious because it builds on the error of the first.
And it ignores the fact that salvation is a TWO-PART process. Our SOULS are eternally saved
when we are regenerated.... however our BODIES are not until the Seventh Trumpet.
So we continue to sin... even though we have the "earnest" of our eternal life.

(3) The third question (essentially, can an person with an incorruptible SOUL and BODY
have the "free will" to sin?)... is the only question you really asked. And that is a question
for a different thread.

Which, of course, begs the question of WHERE would the TEMPTATION to sin come from?
If both body and soul are incorruptible and Satan and his demons have no power....
where would the temptation to sin come from?



.

 

[ClementofA]

First... monkeys do not have a soul.
So your analogy falls way short.

Define soul.

I never said they have a "soul".

How does the analogy fall short?

 

[ClementofA]

Second... you have just ASSUMED that "free will" applies to being able
to resist sin. That is not the case because we are not talking about sin.
Instead, we are talking about "translating" between a soul that is DEAD
and a soul that has LIFE.

Your second sentence does not follow from the first.

Translating "between a soul that is DEAD and a soul that has LIFE." Huh?

 

[ClementofA]

Third... you have just ASSUMED that men have "free will".

Many Calvinists believe in free will. You don't?

 

[5thKingdom]

Your second sentence does not follow from the first.

Translating "between a soul that is DEAD and a soul that has LIFE." Huh?

What do you think happens when we are "born again"?
Our soul (which was DEAD) is given LIFE by His "indwelling Spirit".
This is a very basic and essential element of the Christian Gospel.

Long story short... when Adam rebelled we DIED.
When we are regenerated we (our soul) is "translated" from Death to Life
as we (our soul) is "translated" from Satan's Kingdom to the "Kingdom of God".
Our bodies remain in Satan's Kingdom until we die or the Seventh Trumpet sounds.


Here are a couple of verses that teach this Truth:


Col1:13 Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness,
and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son:


Joh 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water
and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. Joh 3:6 That which is born
of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.


Joh 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him
that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation;
but is passed from death unto life.


Eph 2:5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ,
(by grace ye are saved Eph 2:6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together
in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: Eph 2:7 That in the ages to come he might shew the
exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. Eph 2:8 For
by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
Eph 2:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.


1Jn 3:14 We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love
the brethren. He that loveth not his brother abideth in death.


..

 

[5thKingdom]

Many Calvinists believe in free will. You don't?

I am not a Calvinist... I am a man who believes the Bible.
And Jesus clearly taught election. In fact, when His disciples realized
that Jesus taught salvation by election MANY of them abandoned Him.
John 6:65-66



.