Curious about the Reform view of God.

[Rev. Smith]

I am an Old Caholic, by affiliation, training and belief. Since we are a very theological body I spend (probably too much) time reading amongst the thinkers. I recently finished Institutes, and of course read City of God in seminary.

As an assumption check I understand total depravity to mean: Man, as a result of original sin, is incapable of choosing to love God, or have faith in God. Therefore man comes to faith in God only after God has called him to that faith through Grace.

Second assumption check: Election means that God does not offer this grace to all men, but rather elects some men (perhaps most, or perhaps a tiny minority) to receive this grace.


Third assumption check: Reform theology churches, like most Protestant groups, assert that being a Christian (of some sort or variety) is a prerequisite for being saved.

Question 1 is, are my assumptions about your theology correct?

If so, why does God seem to have disdain for Asians, Arabs and Africans. While the northern hemisphere has, or has had, substantial majorities of Christians in Asia and Africa the community of Christian believers is a tiny minority.

Put another way, having read St. Augustine and Calvin; the myopia of their views was one of the reasons that I rejected their propositions.

If God operates as Calvin projects he does, is God a raceist?

((arn't you glad this isn't about gay marriage? ))

 

[CoffeeSwirls]

I'm not sure I understand the question. Who ever said that God hates any race? And why would an apparent lack of visible Christianity in any country that is considered Muslim be seen as such? Likewise, how do we define who is Christian and who is not?

There is a harvest in every country around the world just waiting to be reaped. Every country bar none. As long as we keep in mind that it is God who saves His people and not us, we can confidantly go anywhere with the knowledge that our only duty is to preach the word faithfully to anyone who will listen. It is not our place to save a single soul.

Again, my answer may not be in line with your question. But there are some assumptions made in the question that no reformed person would say are correct. Just as it was the sufficiency of God's justification, not the presence of justification, sparked the reformation, it would be beneficial if we could all be interpretting terms in the same way for the best responses to these questions.

 

[Rev. Smith]

I'm not sure I understand the question. Who ever said that God hates any race? And why would an apparent lack of visible Christianity in any country that is considered Muslim be seen as such? Likewise, how do we define who is Christian and who is not?

There is a harvest in every country around the world just waiting to be reaped. Every country bar none. As long as we keep in mind that it is God who saves His people and not us, we can confidantly go anywhere with the knowledge that our only duty is to preach the word faithfully to anyone who will listen. It is not our place to save a single soul.

Again, my answer may not be in line with your question. But there are some assumptions made in the question that no reformed person would say are correct. Just as it was the sufficiency of God's justification, not the presence of justification, sparked the reformation, it would be beneficial if we could all be interpretting terms in the same way for the best responses to these questions.

My inferance is as to results, not possibility. IE, like a scientists in any other discipline (theology is, or at least ought to be a science, and operate under confirmable method).

You are correct that how the terms are used matter, which is why I included what I understand the three terms that apply to the question (total depravity, election and the definition of the "narrow door").

So let me rephrase: would Calvinists agree with the propositions:

1.Faith in God, and therefore salvation can only be attained by those who God chooses for salvation. Such salvation is obtained through a gift of grace from God, and can not be otherwise sought or attained by man.

2. That such faith is Christ is essential to salvation. God does not call man to salvation through other religious traditions. ie, there are no "saved" Muslims, Buddhists of Hindus. (This pre-supposes that there can be former Muslims, Buddhists or Hindus who are saved via 1.)


If so, why does it appear that for the past 1000 years or so God has choosen to select the vast majority of his "elect" from amongst people living outside of Asia, Arabia and Africa. According to the World Christian encylopedia Cristains accounted for +- 34% of believers in a religion in 1905, and are expected to account for 35.5% by 2025. Geographic mapping indicates that almost 70% of those Christians reside in North America, Europe and South America.

If God is doing the electing, Why?

CoffeeSwirls; my question was not about our work in preaching the word as much as how do Calvinists view this apparent favor God has shown to one, smallish, portion of humanity? (Outside of the Jews, whom he choose to receive his revelation).

 

[Elderone]

As an assumption check I understand total depravity to mean: Man, as a result of original sin, is incapable of choosing to love God, or have faith in God. Therefore man comes to faith in God only after God has called him to that faith through Grace.

Correct.

Second assumption check: Election means that God does not offer this grace to all men, but rather elects some men (perhaps most, or perhaps a tiny minority) to receive this grace.

Correct.

Third assumption check: Reform theology churches, like most Protestant groups, assert that being a Christian (of some sort or variety) is a prerequisite for being saved.

Not correct.

A person is saved, redeemed, or born again, and then they are a Christian. Many people assume because they attend church they are Christians. Attending church only makes you a church attendee. The misunderstanding may also be because of the term "born again Christian". A person is a Christian after being saved, redeemed, or born again, which ever term you prefer, by being given God's gift of Grace. They are not Christians and then saved. Any church or denomination that believes otherwise doesn't know their Bible. I serously doubt a Reformed Church believes otherwise.

Question 1 is, are my assumptions about your theology correct?

No.

If so, why does God seem to have disdain for Asians, Arabs and Africans. While the northern hemisphere has, or has had, substantial majorities of Christians in Asia and Africa the community of Christian believers is a tiny minority.

Fact: The largest and fastest growing Christian church in the world is in South Korea.

Fact: In China people in large numbers are meeting in "House Churches" in spite of being jailed, tortured or murdered.

Fact: A good many of the Officers of the Christian church in Uganda are converted "Witch Doctors".

None of these things happen unless the Holy Spirit has been at work, and He works at the request of God the Father.

Anyone that says the Bible, or John Calvin or any of the other great theologians, is racist doesn't know what their talking about.

As CoffeeSwirls said, God has given His people the task of spreading the Word. It may have taken many years to get to some parts of the globe, but as of about a year ago God's word has been preached in all countries.

One thing we must not forget, God is in charge and everything is done according to His plan, not according to how we think it should operate.

 

[rnmomof7]

If so, why does God seem to have disdain for Asians, Arabs and Africans. While the northern hemisphere has, or has had, substantial majorities of Christians in Asia and Africa the community of Christian believers is a tiny minority.

Excuse my confusion but what does this have to do with Calvinism?

If Calvinism is false would one holding and Arminian view say that God just forgot those peoples or overlooked them .

Is a distracted or indifferent God more acceptable than a sovereign God in your view?

Why did God chose to disclose Himself to a small Semitic group of nomads while the majority of the nations surrounding them were worshipping a plurality of gods?

Why would He order the slaying of the gentile nations including woman and children?

The answer to my Calvinist mind is that He will have Mercy on whom He will have Mercy .
He will not lose one of his sheep. He will find them and carry them on His back .

We are told that God has always had a remnant set aside for Himself .
Knowing that God will accomplish the salvation of all that he elects and that He loses none is better in my mind than a god that is just too busy to notice . An indifferent God is a blessing to no man.


Deu 7:6 For thou [art] an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that [are] upon the face of the earth.


Deu 7:7 The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye [were] the fewest of all people:


Deu 7:8 But because the LORD loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers, hath the LORD brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.

 

[Rev. Smith]

Excuse my confusion but what does this have to do with Calvinism?

If Calvinism is false would one holding and Arminian view say that God just forgot those peoples or overlooked them .

First I know less about Arminian views than I do about Calvanist ones, so I have no idea what they might say. This has to do with Calvin's views because under those views, as I understand them, God selects the saved, as others have said to me "man has nothing to do with it." In Old Catholic views of salvation, noting what Paul teaches in both Romans and Acts (that the Jew will be judged in the Law, the Pagan whose conscience is writ with the law by the law and the Christian by Christ) - we are unconcerned by the issue because we assume that the rightious Jew or Pagan will be saved. So for those who do not hold Calvanist views (or frame their views by opposition to same which I assume is the Arminian proposition?) this question doesn't exist.

Is a distracted or indifferent God more acceptable than a sovereign God in your view?

No, but I don't see those as the only choices. We could take that question up in another thread, since I'm not permitted to debate here.

Why did God chose to disclose Himself to a small Semitic group of nomads while the majority of the nations surrounding them were worshipping a plurality of gods?

Why would He order the slaying of the gentile nations including woman and children?

The answer to my Calvinist mind is that He will have Mercy on whom He will have Mercy .
He will not lose one of his sheep. He will find them and carry them on His back .

Again, responding would require me to break, or stretch, the debate ban for non Reform Christians here, your points are important but I'm not sure they address the OP.

We are told that God has always had a remnant set aside for Himself .
Knowing that God will accomplish the salvation of all that he elects and that He loses none is better in my mind than a god that is just too busy to notice . An indifferent God is a blessing to no man.

I would agree, but again don't see those as the only choices, nor does either effect the OP question, although the nature of God is the single most important area of query for theology.

Deu 7:6 For thou [art] an holy people unto the LORD thy God: the LORD thy God hath chosen thee to be a special people unto himself, above all people that [are] upon the face of the earth.


Deu 7:7 The LORD did not set his love upon you, nor choose you, because ye were more in number than any people; for ye [were] the fewest of all people:


Deu 7:8 But because the LORD loved you, and because he would keep the oath which he had sworn unto your fathers, hath the LORD brought you out with a mighty hand, and redeemed you out of the house of bondmen, from the hand of Pharaoh king of Egypt.

Yup - but still not either expositive or negative on the question.

 

[Elect]

is God a raceist?

Rev 5:9 And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
Nope!

 

[Jon_]

If God is doing the electing, Why?

Greetings, brother. You are asking a question that simply cannot be answered. Essentially, your question requires that we know something of God's criteria for election; however, you missed assumption check #4: election is unconditional. That means that there is nothing inherent in humanity that causes God to choose his elect. His selection is done according to his own pleasing will, which is too wonderful for us, too high to understand, just as the Psalmist said.

I understand your struggle, but you will never find an answer to it. Quite simply, we are not privileged to know God's purpose for election. This is far from a myopia. Instead, it is a reverence of God's eternal, hidden decree.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[Rev. Smith]

Greetings, brother. You are asking a question that simply cannot be answered. Essentially, your question requires that we know something of God's criteria for election; however, you missed assumption check #4: election is unconditional. That means that there is nothing inherent in humanity that causes God to choose his elect. His selection is done according to his own pleasing will, which is too wonderful for us, too high to understand, just as the Psalmist said.

I understand your struggle, but you will never find an answer to it. Quite simply, we are not privileged to know God's purpose for election. This is far from a myopia. Instead, it is a reverence of God's eternal, hidden decree.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

Since he made me to keep seeking him and his ways I'm going to keep trying, I suppose if you guys are right I am one of the damned, since I don't accept that we can't know Him. but I'll soldier on anyway. (Who knows, maybe some of my congregatns are elect and will send me care packages in hell for helping them along the way).

 

[AndOne]

Rev -

It would appear to me that you are trying to read racism into Calvinism in order to justify rejecting it. Looking back through time you will find that none of the Reformers preached or taught the conclusions that you are drawing from the doctrine. I would also submit to you that it is probably more likely that there are more "true" Christians in the countries and areas you are naming than there are in Europe and America. Should the waves of persecution somehow land upon our shores I suspect that you would find that there would be a great many abandon the faith - that is only my opinion - but in light of all the spiritual pollution that is prevelant in our society in this day and age I don't think its an unrealistic one.

Jon_ - outstanding reply above brother!!

 

[Jon_]

Since he made me to keep seeking him and his ways I'm going to keep trying, I suppose if you guys are right I am one of the damned, since I don't accept that we can't know Him. but I'll soldier on anyway. (Who knows, maybe some of my congregatns are elect and will send me care packages in hell for helping them along the way).

There is no condemnation for those who diligently seek him. I should make it very clear that I do not judge you, or any other. All the elect are as wind to our eyes. We do not see the thing itself, only the effects thereof. For that is how we shall know them: by their fruits.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[frumanchu]

Rev, your argument is a simple post hoc ergo propter hoc argument. Calvinism is quite clear on the point that election is unconditional, so race (being a condition) would not be a factor. With respect to whether or not God reveals Himself through other religions, that is not merely an issue with Calvinists but with Christians in general.

 

[Elderone]

Since he made me to keep seeking him and his ways I'm going to keep trying, I suppose if you guys are right I am one of the damned, since I don't accept that we can't know Him. but I'll soldier on anyway. (Who knows, maybe some of my congregatns are elect and will send me care packages in hell for helping them along the way).

Rev. Smith

From the above quote it sounds as though you are diligently seeking the Lord, or being drawn to Him by the Holy Spirit

Since he made me to keep seeking him and his ways I'm going to keep trying.

You also say

if you guys are right I am one of the damned because I don't accept that we can't know Him.

If I may ask, why do you believe you "don't" know Him?

 

[rnmomof7]

First I know less about Arminian views than I do about Calvanist ones, so I have no idea what they might say. This has to do with Calvin's views because under those views, as I understand them, God selects the saved, as others have said to me "man has nothing to do with it." In Old Catholic views of salvation, noting what Paul teaches in both Romans and Acts (that the Jew will be judged in the Law, the Pagan whose conscience is writ with the law by the law and the Christian by Christ) - we are unconcerned by the issue because we assume that the rightious Jew or Pagan will be saved. So for those who do not hold Calvanist views (or frame their views by opposition to same which I assume is the Arminian proposition?) this question doesn't exist.

That is not the teaching of Roman. Romans says every man is without excuse.

We know from scripture that God has revealed himself to all men.

We know that He gave the law to the Jews and wrote the laws on the heart of the Gentiles.

We know that the purpose of the law, both written and on the heart is to condemn not save.
It is the "schoolmaster" that shows us we are sinners in need of a Savior.

So there is no biblical excuse for ignorance . Every man knows the law and no man can keep it.

Rom 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:


Rom 2:1 Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.



Rom 2:12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;


Rom 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law [are] just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.


Rom 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:


Rom 2:15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and [their] thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another


Rom 2:16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.


There is no teaching in scripture that there is any other means of salvation but Christ.

Jhn 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

As a Calvinist I would just note that God will see the Gospel gets to the most foreign places. He will see that His elect hear the gospel, He will not miss one of them.

While it remains foolishness to many in the "western world" to the elect in far off lands it is the gospel to salvation.

God never fails.. every one that He teaches comes to Him .

 

[rnmomof7]

Since he made me to keep seeking him and his ways I'm going to keep trying, I suppose if you guys are right I am one of the damned, since I don't accept that we can't know Him. but I'll soldier on anyway. (Who knows, maybe some of my congregatns are elect and will send me care packages in hell for helping them along the way).

That is not consistent with our beliefs.

Where has anyone said you are damned? That is kinnda a defensive posture.

As a Calvinist I see every man as potentially one of Gods elect.
God has His elect in every church and every nation and every tribe. Calvinism is an accurate reading of scripture from my perspective, but holding it is not a salvation issue.

Those that want to hold correct doctrine and study the word will come to an understanding of the Sovereignty of God in salvation and His election of His remnant IMHO.


The fact is no one but God knows who are His. He will call who He will call.
One thing we do know that no man can come to Christ unless the Father draws him , and all that He draws will come and be saved..

That is the word of God

 

[cygnusx1]

Since he made me to keep seeking him and his ways I'm going to keep trying, I suppose if you guys are right I am one of the damned, since I don't accept that we can't know Him. but I'll soldier on anyway. (Who knows, maybe some of my congregatns are elect and will send me care packages in hell for helping them along the way).

this is one for the books ................ a person who rejects Calvinist beliefs while at the same time acting fatalistically !!

Just because you don't agree with Calvinists doesn't mean you are damned .Other Church's may give that impression I hope no Calvinist here EVER would ......

First Trust in Christ and His Word then Repent and continue to obey The Lord and you will be saved!