Examining Calvinistic "Proof Texts"

[TheSeabass]

Predestination and calvinism

If Calvinism's idea of predestination is right per the above link, then in John 8:41 the Jews said they were of God, that God was their Father. Then according to the Calvinistic proof text of John 10:26, those of God, Christ's sheep, will automatically believe in Christ and be saved, yet these Jews were rejecting Christ. So why were these Jews who said God was their Father rejecting Christ?


======


Mt 23:37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"


1) If these Jews were predestined by God to be saved, then why were they rejecting Christ, killing the prophets of God sent unto them?

2) If these Jews were predestined by God to be lost, then why was Christ wanting them to be saved? Why did Christ love them and not 'hate' them as God 'hated' Esau?

 

[Widlast]

There are several problems with Calvin's theology.
It ignores free will, it makes God a murderer, and the idea of "total depravity" does not describe what anyone can see in their fellow man by just taking a look.

God would that all would be saved. If Predestination was true, that previous bit of scripture is a lie.

 

[Tree of Life]

Predestination and calvinism

If Calvinism's idea of predestination is right per the above link, then in John 8:41 the Jews said they were of God, that God was their Father. Then according to the Calvinistic proof text of John 10:26, those of God, Christ's sheep, will automatically believe in Christ and be saved, yet these Jews were rejecting Christ. So why were these Jews who said God was their Father rejecting Christ?

These unbelieving Jews who rejected Christ claimed that God was their Father. Jesus claimed that their father was the devil. Who do you think was right?

Mt 23:37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"

1) If these Jews were predestined by God to be saved, then why were they rejecting Christ, killing the prophets of God sent unto them?

Who said that Jews who rejected Christ were predestined by God to be saved?

2) If these Jews were predestined by God to be lost, then why was Christ wanting them to be saved? Why did Christ love them and not 'hate' them as God 'hated' Esau?

Jesus is simply saying here that he (as God) often longed for Israel to repent. But since they did not they were going to be destroyed. God desires, in one sense, that all persons would be saved. He calls all - especially all within the church (i.e. Jerusalem) to repent and be saved. Calvinists have no problem saying this.

 

[Hank77]

Mt 23:37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"

That is such a clear statement of They had a choice, it was their choice, and that God would not force them to come to Him.

 

[Hank77]

According to Calvin's theology of predestination infants and small children, who couldn't even understand what sin is, would be doomed for the lake of fire if they died and that was their predestination.

Even Spurgeon, probably the greatest Calvinist preacher that has ever lived, could not tolerate this belief and clearly said so, saying that he did not serve a God like Molech.

 

[Tree of Life]

Mt 23:37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"

That is such a clear statement of They had a choice, it was their choice, and that God would not force them to come to Him.

Calvinists don't disagree with this.

 

[Hank77]

Calvinists don't disagree with this.

If one is predestined to salvation or to condemnation from the foundation of the earth, before they are even born, how could it be any other way?
Calvin's theology does teach this and Spurgeon even said that it did.

 

[Tree of Life]

If one is predestined to salvation or to condemnation from the foundation of the earth, before they are even born, how could it be any other way?

Calvin taught that God legitimately calls all men to repentance and that sinners freely reject God of their own free will and that if anyone turns to God in repentance it's because they truly desire to do so of their own free will. God does not force anyone to accept him or reject him.

Calvin's theology does teach this and Spurgeon even said that it did.

I've read most of Calvin's writings and I've never encountered anything like this. Could you supply a passage from Calvin that proves your point?

 

[Hank77]

Calvin taught that God legitimately calls all men to repentance and that sinners freely reject God of their own free will and that if anyone turns to God in repentance it's because they truly desire to do so of their own free will. God does not force anyone to accept him or reject him.

I don't know what you have been reading but I have read Calvin's writings too. Calvin did not believe in 'free will'.
Calvin said that there were two calls that God made. One is 'irresistable' and 'effectual' this is basic Calvinism.
The other was what Calvin called the 'general' call that is not 'effectual'. It does not have any effect.

Unconditional Election:
God does not base His election on anything He sees in the individual. He chooses the elect according to the kind intention of His will (Eph. 1:4-8; Rom. 9:11) without any consideration of merit within the individual. Nor does God look into the future to see who would pick Him. Also, as some are elected into salvation, others are not (Rom. 9:15, 21).
The Five Points of Calvinism, TULIP

I don't feel that I should say anymore on the subject, each person needs to do their own study and relate to God the way they are lead.

 

[Tree of Life]

I don't know what you have been reading but I have read Calvin's writings too. Calvin did not believe in 'free will'.

Could you cite Calvin on this issue? I've read nothing in Calvin to this affect.

Calvin said that there were two calls that God made. One is 'irresistable' and 'effectual' this is basic Calvinism.
The other was what Calvin called the 'general' call that is not 'effectual'. It does not have any effect.

I agree that Calvin talked about an effectual calling. However this does not negate free will.

Unconditional Election:

God does not base His election on anything He sees in the individual. He chooses the elect according to the kind intention of His will (Eph. 1:4-8; Rom. 9:11) without any consideration of merit within the individual. Nor does God look into the future to see who would pick Him. Also, as some are elected into salvation, others are not (Rom. 9:15, 21).
The Five Points of Calvinism, TULIP

I agree that Calvin taught "Unconditional Election" as it is called above. This, however, does not negate free will.

 

[TheSeabass]

These unbelieving Jews who rejected Christ claimed that God was their Father. Jesus claimed that their father was the devil. Who do you think was right?

That means John 10:26 is not Christ proving Calvinistic predestination, but John 10:26 is Christ disproving those Jews claims that God was their Father.

Calvinistic misinterpretation of Jn 10:26 has one first saved (of God) BEFORE one even believes which changes the order of many many verses that put belief before salvation/being of God.

Who said that Jews who rejected Christ were predestined by God to be saved?



Jesus is simply saying here that he (as God) often longed for Israel to repent. But since they did not they were going to be destroyed. God desires, in one sense, that all persons would be saved. He calls all - especially all within the church (i.e. Jerusalem) to repent and be saved. Calvinists have no problem saying this.

1) If these Jews were predestined by God to be saved, then why were they rejecting Christ, killing the prophets of God sent unto them?

2) If these Jews were predestined by God to be lost, then why was Christ wanting them to be saved? Why did Christ love them and not 'hate' them as God 'hated' Esau?

Both 1 and 2 is difficult to explain if Calvinistic predestination were true.

You say that Jesus "longed for Israel to repent. But since they did not they were going to be destroyed"

If these Jews were predetermined by God to be lost, then why would Jesus long for them to be saved when He (as God) already predetermined them to be lost??? That is a contradiction within the nature of God.

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:"

2 Peter 3:15 Peter and Paul both agree that the longsuffering of the Lord is salvation. If God predetermined these Jews to be lost/vessels of wrath, then why would He then be longsuffering that they be saved? It would be like I bought a blue car but I was wanting a red one. What sense does this make when the color of the car I got was 100% in my control? What sense does it make for God to be longsuffering that these Jews be saved after having already He predetermined they be lost and their salvation was 100% in God's control?

 

[TheSeabass]

Mt 23:37 "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"

That is such a clear statement of They had a choice, it was their choice, and that God would not force them to come to Him.

Yes, Matthew 23:37 shows man's free will and not what God forces/predetermined for man.

For again, "IF" God predetermined these Jews to be saved, then why were they rejecting Christ?
On the other hand, "IF" God predetermined these Jews to be lost, then why "would" Christ want them be saved,be under His protective wing and did not 'hate' them as God supposedly 'hated' Esau?

 

[Hank77]

Yes, Matthew 23:37 shows man's free will and not what God forces/predetermined for man.

For again, "IF" God predetermined these Jews to be saved, then why were they rejecting Christ?
On the other hand, "IF" God predetermined these Jews to be lost, then why "would" Christ want them be saved,be under His protective wing and did not 'hate' them as God supposedly 'hated' Esau?

And why did He weep over Jerusalem?

 

[Tree of Life]

That means John 10:26 is not Christ proving Calvinistic predestination, but John 10:26 is Christ disproving those Jews claims that God was their Father.

Calvinistic misinterpretation of Jn 10:26 has one first saved (of God) BEFORE one even believes which changes the order of many many verses that put belief before salvation/being of God.

I'm not really sure how you're reaching this conclusion. I think Jesus is saying in John 10:26 that the reason that they don't believe is because they are not of God. God is not their Father. This is John's way of saying that they are neither elect nor regenerate.

You say that Jesus "longed for Israel to repent. But since they did not they were going to be destroyed"

If these Jews were predetermined by God to be lost, then why would Jesus long for them to be saved when He (as God) already predetermined them to be lost??? That is a contradiction within the nature of God.

I don't think so. I view it as the prescriptive and the decretive will of God. Prescriptively speaking, God desires that all people would repent. But according to God's secret decrees he was pleased to only ordain some to salvation.

Anyway, if this "contradiction" is a problem for you then you have a problem with Scripture itself - which poses this apparent contradiction. Some passages seem to clearly say that God desires all to repent. Other passages say that God has only elected some to be saved (Romans 9:22, Ephesians 1:5, Proverbs 16:4). Calvinists explain this apparent contradiction by referring to God's decretive (secret) will and God's prescriptive will. You can read more about that in this short article.

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:"

2 Peter 3:15 Peter and Paul both agree that the longsuffering of the Lord is salvation. If God predetermined these Jews to be lost/vessels of wrath, then why would He then be longsuffering that they be saved?

God's patient endurance of the sins of his people is for their salvation. But God's patient endurance of the wicked is not for their salvation. Rather, as Romans 9:22 says, God's long suffering in their case is to show his wrath and make his power known for his glory and for the salvation of his elect on the day of judgement.

 

[Tree of Life]

@TheSeabass What do you think is so dangerous about Calvinism? Obviously you believe it's erroneous but your intense interest in it suggests that you think it also harms those who believe in it.

I don't believe that the rapture is a biblical concept but I don't think that, of itself, it's all that harmful. So I don't start threads focusing on defending against it.

What harm do you think that Calvinism does to its adherents?

 

[TheSeabass]

And why did He weep over Jerusalem?

For He loved them.

Yet if Jerusalem was predetermined to be lost, then why did He want them to be saved, be under His protective wing? Calvinists tell me God does not love all* the world but tell me that God 'hates' those that have predetermined to be lost and does not love them?


* Calvinists have argued with me that "all" does not literally, primarily means "each and every person universally" but God loves just some.

 

[JoeP222w]

2) If these Jews were predestined by God to be lost, then why was Christ wanting them to be saved? Why did Christ love them and not 'hate' them as God 'hated' Esau?

Matthew 23:37 is a statement of Judgment. It is not about Salvation. Context matters.

And the amazing thing is not that God hated Esau, but that God loves anyone. God is not obliged to man.

 

[TheSeabass]

I'm not really sure how you're reaching this conclusion. I think Jesus is saying in John 10:26 that the reason that they don't believe is because they are not of God. God is not their Father. This is John's way of saying that they are neither elect nor regenerate.

Jn 10:26 "But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you."

I have seen Calvinists twist this verse into meaning that one must first be of God (chosen before the foundation of the world to be saved) before one can believe. This is NOT what Christ is saying. Jn 10:26 is how Christ proved those Jews were not of Christ as they had claimed is all the verse is about. If those Jews truly were of God, then they would have easily known Jesus was the Messiah and would have believed Him. The fact they did not believe HIm was the proof they were not of God. No Calvinism in the verse.

I don't think so. I view it as the prescriptive and the decretive will of God. Prescriptively speaking, God desires that all people would repent. But according to God's secret decrees he was pleased to only ordain some to salvation.

Anyway, if this "contradiction" is a problem for you then you have a problem with Scripture itself - which poses this apparent contradiction. Some passages seem to clearly say that God desires all to repent. Other passages say that God has only elected some to be saved (Romans 9:22, Ephesians 1:5, Proverbs 16:4). Calvinists explain this apparent contradiction by referring to God's decretive (secret) will and God's prescriptive will. You can read more about that in this short article.

No verse shows were God decreed only certain men to be save unconditionally.

2 Pet 3:9 "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance."

"Willing" shows God's preceptive will in willing/desiring/wishing all men would use their free will and choose to come to repentance and be saved. Again, no verse shows God's decretive will that only certain men be saved unconditionally and apart from their will.

Romans 9:22 etc say nothing about only some elected by Gods decretive will to be saved unconditionally and apart from their own free will. If God decreed that some men be vessels of wrath and be lost with no hope of salvation, then why would He then be longsuffering that they be saved when He already decreed they be lost. Confusion on God's part?

God's patient endurance of the sins of his people is for their salvation. But God's patient endurance of the wicked is not for their salvation. Rather, as Romans 9:22 says, God's long suffering in their case is to show his wrath and make his power known for his glory and for the salvation of his elect on the day of judgement.

But God's longsuffering in Rom 9:22 was for the "vessels of wrath" and not the "vessels unto honor" 2 Timothy 2:20,21. Again, the purpose of God's longsuffering is salvation 2 Peter 3:15. There is no point in God having longsuffering for anyone for any reason when God is forcing thru predetermination some to be either saved and others lost. God's longsuffering/patience is God's preceptive will in desiring these vessels of wrath come to repentance and be saved 2 Peter 3:9. God would not be loving nor good in saying God was longsuffering/patient/enduring those whom He already predetermined to be lost. But God was loving and good in enduring/being patient with the Jews that that would choose come to repentance and be saved.

 

[JoeP222w]

If one is predestined to salvation or to condemnation from the foundation of the earth,

Equal Ultimacy Error.

 

[TheSeabass]

@TheSeabass What do you think is so dangerous about Calvinism? Obviously you believe it's erroneous but your intense interest in it suggests that you think it also harms those who believe in it.

I don't believe that the rapture is a biblical concept but I don't think that, of itself, it's all that harmful. So I don't start threads focusing on defending against it.

What harm do you think that Calvinism does to its adherents?

False teachings cause men to be lost. When you look around, what you see in the "religious world" is not Christianity for Christianty nor the bible is not full of contradicting doctrines. There is "one faith" Eph 4:4,5 and that one faith is not made up of many contradicting doctrines. Whatever is not of that "one faith" will be rooted up on judgment day Matthew 15:13. Man has attempted to undermine the bibles authority, its genuineness, its doctrines and substitute a whole host of false ideas thereby make an attempt to get rid of the bible and replace it with a believe-whatever-you-want-to free for all.

Does the bible teach many paths, many ways that lead to salvation or just one way? It teaches one way yet men claim there are many ways. Can you not see the danger in what men claim?