Does the Bible Support or Oppose Five-Point Calvinism?

[rnmomof7]

Spiritual things are spiritual discerned so the vote does not surprise me

 

[WirSindBettler]

The only alternative to Calvinism is the notion that salvation is ultimately by our own will or decision. To me that borders on heresy and very unscriptural.

Not true at all. Just look at Lutheranism.

 

[WirSindBettler]

NOTE: IF YOU'RE GOING TO VOTE "OPPOSE" PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR SCRIPTURAL REASONING.

Calvinists need to pay heed to 1 John 2:2: "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world."

 

[rnmomof7]

Calvinists need to pay heed to 1 John 2:2: "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world."

So then everyone is saved ?

 

[WirSindBettler]

So then everyone is saved ?

Not all are saved, but Christ's death was efficient for all men, rather than only sufficient for all and efficient for the elect as Calvinism seems to claim.

 

[rnmomof7]

Not all are saved, but Christ's death was efficient for all men, rather than only sufficient for all and efficient for the elect as Calvinism seems to claim.

I do not think there is a clear rendering of that verse ... many would agree it was sufficient for all, but applied only to the elect .... but there are others that would argue the words .."whole world" is intended to teach the Jews that the propitiation also is applied to gentiles ..

 

[WirSindBettler]

I do not think there is a clear rendering of that verse ... many would agree it was sufficient for all, but applied only to the elect .... but there are others that would argue the words .."whole world" is intended to teach the Jews that the propitiation also is applied to gentiles ..

I tend to take "whole world" as meaning "whole world." But if that doesn't work for you, we can always go for 2 Corinthians 5:14-15:

"For Christ’s love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died. And He died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for Him who died for them and was raised again."

Or maybe 1 Timothy 2:5-6?

"For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time."

 

[rnmomof7]

I tend to take "whole world" as meaning "whole world." But if that doesn't work for you, we can always go for 2 Corinthians 5:14-15:

"For Christ’s love compels us, because we are convinced that one died for all, and therefore all died. And He died for all, that those who live should no longer live for themselves but for Him who died for them and was raised again."

Or maybe 1 Timothy 2:5-6?

"For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time."

As for the whole world



The Pharisees said to each other, "This is getting us nowhere. Look! The whole world is following him!"( John 12:19)







The same translation problem come with all

It can mean all of one kind, or all that were there

examples


“When Herod the king heard this, he was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him” (Mat 2:3)


“Then Jerusalem and all Judea and all the region about the Jordan were going out to him, and they were baptized by him in the river Jordan, confessing their sins. (Mat 3:5-6)



“Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory.” (Mat 4:8)






.

 

[nobdysfool]

Not all are saved, but Christ's death was efficient for all men, rather than only sufficient for all and efficient for the elect as Calvinism seems to claim.

If Christ's death was efficient for all men, then the conclusion follows that all men are saved. Yet you deny that conclusion. Seems like you're wanting to have your cake, and eat it too.

Calvinism is correct on this point, that Christ's death was sufficient for all, but efficient only for the elect, i.e. those who the Father has chosen, and avail themselves of the benefits of Christ's death through faith, not of themselves, but a gift from God. Such a position exalts God, and diminishes man. Ever since the serpent said, "yea, hath God said...?" in the garden, man has sought to exalt himself at God's expense.

 

[FreeinChrist]

MOD HAT

There has been some clean up in this thread. Please remember that the
Soteriology DISCUSSION Statement of Purpose
includes:​

• Words and phrases which have a negative connotation in Scripture should not be used to describe a member, group of members, or a theological viewpoint. Some examples (including but not limited to): false gospel, false prophet, heretics, blasphemers, evil, sheep in wolves clothing, different God.

 

[FreeGrace2]

I read the OP and the next 5 posts, each one expounding on one of the five points. Then I began reading the various responses, and stopped at #12 by the original poster, who said this:

So Christ's death was worthless? Why then did He die if not as penal substitution?

No, Christ's death was not worthless. Quite the opposite. His death paid for all sin. The payment resulted in the purchase (agorazo: 1 Cor 6:20, 7:23, 2 Pet 2:1) free gift of eternal life that is available to everyone or anyone who believes in Christ for it. 1 Tim 1:16 says - But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his unlimited patience as an example for those who would believe on him and receive eternal life. That's God's plan; believe and receive. Anyone or everyone may receive eternal life.

Secondly, the word 'redemption' means an exchange. In the case of Christ's death on the cross, it was His death that was exchanged for the free gift of eternal life available to everyone.

That is why Scripture says that Christ is the Savior of the world in 1 Tim 4:10 - (and for this we labor and strive), that we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, and especially of those who believe.

Clearly He hasn't saved all men, but He purchased (agorazo) the free gift of eternal life for all men. We know this because Heb 32:9 says He tasted death for everyone (pas = all). It does not say "all the elect". Also, 2 Cor 5:14,15 both say that "Christ died for all". That settles it.

As far as the other 4 points of Calvinism, the Bible never says or even implies that man cannot believe the gospel. And that is proven countless times as one reads Time or Newsweek of articles written by unbelievers who clearly explain the gospel all the while rejecting its claims.

Election isn't about being chosen for salvation. The favorite proof text for Calvinism is Eph 1:4. However the text plainly says that God chose believers..,to be holy and blameless. It does not say that God people to believe, or that He chose people to save unconditionally. We know that the "us" in v.4 means "believers" because Paul defined "us" as believers in Eph 1:19 - and his incomparably great power for us who believe. That power is like the working of his mighty strength.

Throughout Eph1 and 2 the "us" and "we" occurrences are about believers. God chose believers, not people to believe.

The point of irresistible grace is refuted by Acts 7:51. To "resist the Holy Spirit" is tantamount to resisting God's grace.

And the point of the perseverance of the saints is refuted by clear texts that say that some "believe for a while" and then "fall away", or that in "later times, some will abandon (apostatize) from the faith".

The correct doctrine is the preservation of the saints, or OSAS.

Let me ask another basic question. Is faith something we do, or is it something God does for us? If it is something we do, then surely do we not to some extent save ourselves?

If "faith" is being used as a verb, it's what man does. He believes the gospel promise. If "faith" is being used as a noun, which means the body of what is believed, then that comes from God.

As a verb, it does NOT to ANY extent that the believer is saving himself. Why not? Because the Bible doesn't say that our action of believing has any saving power. Where is the saving power? In God alone.

1 Cor 1:21 - For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.

God saves those who believe. He does not choose who will believe. No Scripture says that.

 

[rnmomof7]

Did the apostles choose Christ ?

God holds all the ballots and has the final vote.. we do no elect Him...He elects us

 

[FreeGrace2]

The only alternative to Calvinism is the notion that salvation is ultimately by our own will or decision.

This is a rather narrow view of things. It is God's will to give eternal life to those who believe, per John 6:40. What is by our "own will" is whether or not we will accept or reject God's promise to give eternal life to us for believing in His Son.

To me that borders on heresy and very unscriptural. God does not do 99% of the work of redemption and that 1% is left for me to do which finally determines whether I receive salvation or not.

Common fallacy to consider the action of believing as any kind of "work". Faith is non-meritorious. That means we don't earn anything by it, nor do we deserve anything from it. It is by God's grace that He saves those who believe in His Son.

 

[FreeGrace2]

WirSindBettler said: ↑
Calvinists need to pay heed to 1 John 2:2: "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world."

So then everyone is saved ?

No. What is the point here? One is saved by grace through faith. The Bible never said that one is saved by grace through the death of Christ.

Christ's death provides redemption. Those who remember "green stamps" knows what a "redemption store" is. One exchanges their green stamps for stuff in the store. In like manner, Christ's death on the cross is an exchange: His death purchased (agorazo-1 Cor 6:20, 7:23, 2 Pet 2:1) eternal life for everyone. But as a gift, it must be received.

It is received when one believes. 1 Tim 1:16 - But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his unlimited patience as an example for those who would believe on him and receive eternal life.

This is God's plan: believe and receive.

 

[rnmomof7]

WirSindBettler said: ↑
Calvinists need to pay heed to 1 John 2:2: "He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the sins of the whole world."

No. What is the point here? One is saved by grace through faith. The Bible never said that one is saved by grace through the death of Christ.

Christ's death provides redemption. Those who remember "green stamps" knows what a "redemption store" is. One exchanges their green stamps for stuff in the store. In like manner, Christ's death on the cross is an exchange: His death purchased (agorazo-1 Cor 6:20, 7:23, 2 Pet 2:1) eternal life for everyone. But as a gift, it must be received.

It is received when one believes. 1 Tim 1:16 - But for that very reason I was shown mercy so that in me, the worst of sinners, Christ Jesus might display his unlimited patience as an example for those who would believe on him and receive eternal life.

This is God's plan: believe and receive.

Believe what about Him ?

In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;eph 1:7

 

[FreeGrace2]

Believe what about Him ?

You don't know??!

To believe that He is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in Him, you will have eternal life in His Name.

So says John 20:31 - but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.

 

[rnmomof7]

You don't know??!

To believe that He is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing in Him, you will have eternal life in His Name.

So says John 20:31 - but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.

So his death was unnecessary . You could have had salvation without the cross?

 

[Dialogist]

NOTE: IF YOU'RE GOING TO VOTE "OPPOSE" PLEASE EXPLAIN YOUR SCRIPTURAL REASONING.

I originally opened this thread in the wrong forum, but would like to reopen it here.

After a bit of a discussion on the topic of OSAS, I want to ask a simple question: do the canonical 66 books of Scripture support or oppose Five-Point Calvinism? What Scriptural proof is there?

Below is basic Scriptural evidence for each of the five points of Calvinism. I would love other thoughts and opinions [including opposition].

Reminder: The five points of Calvinism can be summarized by the acronym TULIP.

Total Depravity

• As a consequence of the Fall, all men are born in bondage to sin, unable to refrain from evil, choose God, or accept the gift of salvation, save by the efficacious and sovereign grace of God.

Unconditional Election

• Also known as double predestination.

Limited Atonement

• Christ's work on the cross was sufficient for all, but it was the free and gracious will of the Father that the enlivening and saving effectiveness of Jesus' death work itself only on the elect, thereby leading them without fail to salvation [i.e. Christ's death counted only for the elect].

Irresistible Grace

• God's grace is irresistible, and cannot be denied or fought against.

Perseverance of the Saints

• Also known as eternal security. Sometimes referred to as "once saved, always saved" though the latter is often distinct.

I am an Eastern Orthodox Christian.

The Orthodox Synod of Jerusalem was held in 1672 to address a supposed Confession of the Patriarch of Constantinople supporting Calvinist beliefs. The Acts and Decrees of the Synod of Jerusalem included an excerpt entitled "The Confession of Dositheus" which refuted the basic tenets of Calvinism, though I don't think the Confession maps point-by-point into TULIP (in fact, I don't think TULIP mapped into TULIP when Calvin wrote The Institutes).

My unqualified opinion is that beliefs like Calvin's ultimately find their root in the medieval tract, Cur Deus Homo, supposedly authored by the Roman Catholic Anselm of Canterbury. There is very little, if any, connection to how the Church Fathers interpreted the Apostolic teaching.

 

[FreeGrace2]

So his death was unnecessary . You could have had salvation without the cross?

What would give anyone that unbiblical idea? I backed up my answer with Scripture.

Of course His death was necessary. That's where the redemption comes from. Everyone knows He died. That isn't saving faith. What is saving is trusting that His death provides eternal life.

Or is there disagreement on that? If so, on what basis? Please provide Scripture.

 

[rnmomof7]

I am an Eastern Orthodox Christian.

The Orthodox Synod of Jerusalem was held in 1672 to address a supposed Confession of the Patriarch of Constantinople supporting Calvinist beliefs. The Acts and Decrees of the Synod of Jerusalem included an excerpt entitled "The Confession of Dositheus" which refuted the basic tenets of Calvinism, though I don't think the Confession maps point-by-point into TULIP (in fact, I don't think TULIP mapped into TULIP when Calvin wrote The Institutes).

My unqualified opinion is that beliefs like Calvin's ultimately find their root in the medieval tract, Cur Deus Homo, supposedly authored by the Roman Catholic Anselm of Canterbury. There is very little, if any, connection to how the Church Fathers interpreted the Apostolic teaching.

And as you know the church fathers did not even agree with each other most of the time..