Does Matthew 22:14 prove Calvinism and Predestination?

[nolidad]

Jesus described his doctrine through parables so that "seeing they may see, and hearing they may not understand."

Those who argued with their meaning and refused to accept them, well they are in that blind and deaf category. Don't be one of those people and claim that all Jesus was doing was spinning stories. What a callous disregard for his teaching that is.

It is truly sad that you read only half of a persons response then put your foot in your mouth by implying something I definitely deny in my post you cite!

And please cite scripture that showed one person arguing with Jesus parables. You probably do not even know why Jesus starting in Mathew 13 spoke to the crowds in parables.

 

[Al Touthentop]

I do not ignore what Jesus says here, but what mens opinion says about what Jesus actually said!

I didn't quote scripture there. I wrote what Peter would have had to say in response to the Jews on the Day of Pentecost if your doctrine were correct.

 

[BNR32FAN]

All are born sinful in Adam. God grants faith and repentance to some through a radical change in heart, called the New Birth. He withholds it from most. Free will can only mimic this through the flesh.

Why do you think God would be so cruel to some but not to all since none are worthy? You don’t believe God loves the world so why does He love any if all have sinned against Him and none are worthy?

 

[BNR32FAN]

Then one must conclude that you must believe repenting is not a good thing, nor is a spiritual thing, nor something God commands!

Romans 8:7-8 King James Version (KJV)
7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

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

It is not me you have a prblem with, but God who declared these things!

Yes I know the verses Calvin so stupidly interpreted to support his theology so let me ask you this, were the Corinthians fleshly and had they repented?

 

[Dave L]

Why do you think God would be so cruel to some but not to all since none are worthy? You don’t believe God loves the world so why does He love any if all have sinned against Him and none are worthy?

He displays his attributes through the use of sinners. The saved show his love, mercy, grace, sovereignty. The damned show his goodness, wrath, righteousness, justice etc., etc.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Well you almost got it right! Let us look at verse 6.

Verse 2: 2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit.

Verse 6: 6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.

Once again, the primary definition of airo is to lift up. Everyone Jesus spoke this too would understand Jesus to say that the branches IN HIM (key phrase) that is not bearing fruit, He lifts up.

Now verse 6, branches that are not in Him, (not is important) are tossed.

Given the rest of the verses where Jesus and the Apostlesd promise eternal security- and the fact that one who is in Christ is dead and their life is hidden in Christ, and is already perfected forever, and seated with Christ. You cannot use the tertiary definition. Once again the primary is to be used unless it does not fit! That is grammar!

Sorry, but the Bible does not declare a God who is ready to toss His children aside if they don't measure up to some man made system of good works!

Eternal security is only promised to those who abide in Christ. So the definition of airo in verse 2 is lifted up huh. Ok When did Jesus ever “lift up” anything that didn’t bear fruit? Did He lift up the fig tree? What about the tree in Luke 13?

“And He began telling this parable: "A man had a fig tree which had been planted in his vineyard; and he came looking for fruit on it and did not find any. And he said to the vineyard-keeper, 'Behold, for three years I have come looking for fruit on this fig tree without finding any. Cut it down! Why does it even use up the ground?' And he answered and said to him, 'Let it alone, sir, for this year too, until I dig around it and put in fertilizer; and if it bears fruit next year, fine; but if not, cut it down.'"”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭13:6-9‬ ‭NASB‬‬

There’s no mistake in definition here. Those that don’t bear fruit are cut down. It’s the same message. The Father is the man who planted the tree and Jesus is the vineyard-keeper.

Your overlooking an important factor here in verse 6. These branches were in Him at one time. That’s why He said anyone who does not ABIDE (to stay, remain, continue) in Me is cast away... In order for them to stay, remain, or continue in Him they must already be in Him. If it is impossible, as you assert, for a person to fail to remain in Christ then this entire message would be completely pointless as He would be warning His 11 faithful apostles of doing something that they are ,according to you, incapable of doing. If you were correct and they were incapable of failing to abide then verse 7 also makes no sense.

“If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.”
‭‭John‬ ‭15:7‬ ‭NASB‬‬

Why would Jesus say IF you abide in Me if they are incapable of failing to abide in Him? Why would He say in verse 4 Abide in Me if they are incapable of failing to abide in Him? John 15 destroys Calvin’s theology. It takes some pretty fancy scriptural acrobatics to interpret John 15 in such a way to be in harmony with Calvin’s theology and in the end it doesn’t line up with other scriptures and it doesn’t make sense at all.

 

[Dave L]

Eternal security is only promised to those who abide in Christ. So the definition of airo in verse 2 is lifted up huh. Ok When did Jesus ever “lift up” anything that didn’t bear fruit? Did He lift up the fig tree? What about the tree in Luke 13?

“And He began telling this parable: "A man had a fig tree which had been planted in his vineyard; and he came looking for fruit on it and did not find any. And he said to the vineyard-keeper, 'Behold, for three years I have come looking for fruit on this fig tree without finding any. Cut it down! Why does it even use up the ground?' And he answered and said to him, 'Let it alone, sir, for this year too, until I dig around it and put in fertilizer; and if it bears fruit next year, fine; but if not, cut it down.'"”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭13:6-9‬ ‭NASB‬‬

There’s no mistake in definition here. Those that don’t bear fruit are cut down. It’s the same message. The Father is the man who planted the tree and Jesus is the vineyard-keeper.

Your overlooking an important factor here in verse 6. These branches were in Him at one time. That’s why He said anyone who does not ABIDE (to stay, remain, continue) in Me is cast away... In order for them to stay, remain, or continue in Him they must already be in Him. If it is impossible, as you assert, for a person to fail to remain in Christ then this entire message would be completely pointless as He would be warning His 11 faithful apostles of doing something that they are ,according to you, incapable of doing. If you were correct and they were incapable of failing to abide then verse 7 also makes no sense.

“If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.”
‭‭John‬ ‭15:7‬ ‭NASB‬‬

Why would Jesus say IF you abide in Me if they are incapable of failing to abide in Him? Why would He say in verse 4 Abide in Me if they are incapable of failing to abide in Him? John 15 destroys Calvin’s theology. It takes some pretty fancy scriptural acrobatics to interpret John 15 in such a way to be in harmony with Calvin’s theology and in the end it doesn’t line up with other scriptures and it doesn’t make sense at all.

You are turning a trait of the saved who abide in Christ. Making it a self-righteous work the unregenerate must enact in order to save themselves. = not abiding in Christ, but in themselves.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Yep! Just like the parable of the sower and the seeds and the four grounds the seed was sown on!

But you cannot make doctrine from parables, for they simply are spun stories to help explain spiritual realities.

But let us look at the olive tree. It has borne no fruit! It is not a vine growing on the ground and the pores get clogged so it cannot bear fruit, so the farmer elevates the vine, the pores are cleansed and it bears fruit (that is how that works) This is a barren lifeless tree! Give it one more try and if it doesn't come alive- it is dead!

Just like th eparable of the wheat and tares and Matt. 7 about people who look religious but were never saved!

Why would the vineyard-keeper dung it and give it time to bear fruit? He obviously has expectations of the tree that are uncertain. If it were a barren and lifeless tree as you say then there would be no reason not to chop it down. The expectations of the man and the vineyard keeper are obviously HOPING that the tree will bear fruit with no certainty whether or not it will so obviously this does not support a predetermined outcome as Calvin’s theology suggests.

 

[BNR32FAN]

You are turning a trait of the saved who abide in Christ. Making it a self-righteous work the unregenerate must enact in order to save themselves. = not abiding in Christ, but in themselves.

That’s just a bunch of nonsense that doesn’t address any of the problems I presented with a Calvinist interpretation of these verses. If you can actually address the issues I described here then we can have some sort of meaningful discussion but if your going to just make empty claims then it’s really not profitable to anyone.

 

[Dave L]

That’s just a bunch of nonsense that doesn’t address any of the problems I presented with a Calvinist interpretation of these verses. If you can actually address the issues I described here then we can have some sort of meaningful discussion but if your going to just make empty claims then it’s really not profitable to anyone.

This is your fundamental error. "Whoever believes has eternal life" = a trait of those whom God saves. You say instead, reading free will into scripture, "whoever "chooses" to believe has eternal life" making you the savior.

 

[Dave L]

Why would the vineyard-keeper dung it and give it time to bear fruit? He obviously has expectations of the tree that are uncertain. If it were a barren and lifeless tree as you say then there would be no reason not to chop it down. The expectations of the man and the vineyard keeper are obviously HOPING that the tree will bear fruit with no certainty whether or not it will so obviously this does not support a predetermined outcome as Calvin’s theology suggests.

God secures the elect in the vine.

 

[nolidad]

I didn't quote scripture there. I wrote what Peter would have had to say in response to the Jews on the Day of Pentecost if your doctrine were correct.

Not only do you misunderstand Gods Word, but you fail in stating what you think I imply and what the Word of God actually says.

common ploy of those ensnared by faulty doctrine taught to them.

 

[nolidad]

Yes I know the verses Calvin so stupidly interpreted to support his theology so let me ask you this, were the Corinthians fleshly and had they repented?

Well many in the church (believers) were becoming carnal (o back to live in the old man instead of the new man), that is called sin, whether it is one sin or living in a series of sins.

As Paul called them saints and the church (the body of Christ), so the saved ones were saved! they had repented unto salvation. After that there is no more repentance, but acknowledging that sin is sin. 1 JOhn 1:9

Well I can't speak for what Calvin did or did not do with Romans 8, I just gave you the passage without reinterpretation or retranslating. I think God, speaking through Paul was clear enough and doesn't need you or me telling the world that He didn't quitre mean what He said so let us correct God for Him.

 

[nolidad]

Eternal security is only promised to those who abide in Christ. So the definition of airo in verse 2 is lifted up huh. Ok When did Jesus ever “lift up” anything that didn’t bear fruit? Did He lift up the fig tree? What about the tree in Luke 13?

“And He began telling this parable: "A man had a fig tree which had been planted in his vineyard; and he came looking for fruit on it and did not find any. And he said to the vineyard-keeper, 'Behold, for three years I have come looking for fruit on this fig tree without finding any. Cut it down! Why does it even use up the ground?' And he answered and said to him, 'Let it alone, sir, for this year too, until I dig around it and put in fertilizer; and if it bears fruit next year, fine; but if not, cut it down.'"”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭13:6-9‬ ‭NASB‬‬

There’s no mistake in definition here. Those that don’t bear fruit are cut down. It’s the same message. The Father is the man who planted the tree and Jesus is the vineyard-keeper.

Your overlooking an important factor here in verse 6. These branches were in Him at one time. That’s why He said anyone who does not ABIDE (to stay, remain, continue) in Me is cast away... In order for them to stay, remain, or continue in Him they must already be in Him. If it is impossible, as you assert, for a person to fail to remain in Christ then this entire message would be completely pointless as He would be warning His 11 faithful apostles of doing something that they are ,according to you, incapable of doing. If you were correct and they were incapable of failing to abide then verse 7 also makes no sense.

“If you abide in Me, and My words abide in you, ask whatever you wish, and it will be done for you.”
‭‭John‬ ‭15:7‬ ‭NASB‬‬

Why would Jesus say IF you abide in Me if they are incapable of failing to abide in Him? Why would He say in verse 4 Abide in Me if they are incapable of failing to abide in Him? John 15 destroys Calvin’s theology. It takes some pretty fancy scriptural acrobatics to interpret John 15 in such a way to be in harmony with Calvin’s theology and in the end it doesn’t line up with other scriptures and it doesn’t make sense at all.

YOu must e a city dweller and know nothing of simple farming! Trees are planted in the ground and thus should be able to produce fruit on their own! If not, the tree was no good to start with and barren (it happens just like the weeds and the wheat) It didn't start good then turn bad, it was never good to begin with.

Teh grapes on the other hand were blocked from bearing fruit by dirt. By lifitng up the branch, it allows that branch to bear fruit. Jesus says it is a branch in HIm in that parable! The branches that were cut and burned Jesus specifically said were not in HIm!

We abide in Christ because of HIM and not how many good deeds we do!

Colossians 3:3-4 King James Version (KJV)
3 For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God.

4 When Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall ye also appear with him in glory.

Galatians 2:20
I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

Learn the truths of these verses and stop living thinking that if you have a bad season in your life god will get angry with you and kick you out of the kingdom! That cannot happen!

 

[nolidad]

Why would the vineyard-keeper dung it and give it time to bear fruit? He obviously has expectations of the tree that are uncertain. If it were a barren and lifeless tree as you say then there would be no reason not to chop it down. The expectations of the man and the vineyard keeper are obviously HOPING that the tree will bear fruit with no certainty whether or not it will so obviously this does not support a predetermined outcome as Calvin’s theology suggests.

Well as olive trees are not grown in vineyards and are not vines that would grow along the ground, that should answer your question!

And once again you are ignoring the clear absolute doctrinal statements of soteriology in order to make a doctrine out of a parable. This is a dangerous thing to do!

So that must mean you do not think God is omniscient as your Arminian theology declares. But I can answer your false logical conclusions from Scripture!

 

[BNR32FAN]

This is your fundamental error. "Whoever believes has eternal life" = a trait of those whom God saves. You say instead, reading free will into scripture, "whoever "chooses" to believe has eternal life" making you the savior.

That’s a ridiculous statement because believing doesn’t atone for our sins now does it.

 

[BNR32FAN]

God secures the elect in the vine.

You still keep avoiding all my questions because you can’t answer them because it doesn’t make sense according to Calvin’s theology.

 

[Dave L]

You still keep avoiding all my questions because you can’t answer them because it doesn’t make sense according to Calvin’s theology.

You have interpretations of scripture only?

 

[Dave L]

That’s a ridiculous statement because believing doesn’t atone for our sins now does it.

The blood of Christ atones for sins. You deny this when you turn faith into a sacrament and place your trust in it.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Well many in the church (believers) were becoming carnal (o back to live in the old man instead of the new man), that is called sin, whether it is one sin or living in a series of sins.

As Paul called them saints and the church (the body of Christ), so the saved ones were saved! they had repented unto salvation. After that there is no more repentance, but acknowledging that sin is sin. 1 JOhn 1:9

Well I can't speak for what Calvin did or did not do with Romans 8, I just gave you the passage without reinterpretation or retranslating. I think God, speaking through Paul was clear enough and doesn't need you or me telling the world that He didn't quitre mean what He said so let us correct God for Him.

Paul addressed all of them as saved because his epistle was written to
“the church of God which is at Corinth, to those who have been sanctified in Christ Jesus, saints by calling, with all who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, their Lord and ours:”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭1:2‬ ‭NASB‬‬

And Paul says to these saints

“And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to infants in Christ. I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able, for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men?”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭3:1-3‬ ‭NASB‬‬

These “who have been sanctified in Christ are still fleshly and yet they have repented. They are still new Christians and still have much to learn which takes time which is what Paul is saying in chapter 2. Nobody is baptized coming out of the water suddenly understanding all that the Spirit has to teach. So your statement that the carnal man cannot repent is false because 1 Corinthians is a prime example of carnal people who have repented.