Examining Calvinistic "Proof Texts"

[bcbsr]

So if God UNCONDTIONALLY elected me to be saved, then God has obligated Himself to save me, He UNCONDITIONALLY OWES me salvation independent and regardless of what I do.

That's one of the implications of Calvinism. Though I wouldn't say "owes me" any more than the one who promises owe it to the one he promises to fulfill the promise. I would say, he obligates himself in light of his character. Though in the Calvinist case it's not a promise but simply an arbitrary (unconditional) choice on God's part.

In regards to the "regardless of what I do", realize that Calvinism is a puppet theology, so he controls people in puppetlike fashion to, for example, come to faith in Christ, apart from any free will (non-existent from the Calvinist's perspective) on the individual's part.

 

[bsd058]

That's one of the implications of Calvinism. Though I wouldn't say "owes me" any more than the one who promises owe it to the one he promises to fulfill the promise. I would say, he obligates himself in light of his character. Though in the Calvinist case it's not a promise but simply an arbitrary (unconditional) choice on God's part.

In regards to the "regardless of what I do", realize that Calvinism is a puppet theology, so he controls people in puppetlike fashion to, for example, come to faith in Christ, apart from any free will (non-existent from the Calvinist's perspective) on the individual's part.

I, as a Calvinist, would say that it isn't puppet-like. That's close to panentheism, that He is in all things. Albeit, I can see why you would say it's close to puppet-like. I would have said it when I was an Arminian. I think I would stick to saying that "He works all things after the counsel of His own will."

Now that we have been given new natures we are no longer enslaved to our sin which we committed without ceasing (Rom 3, Gen 6:5, Gen 8:21) prior to being born again. We now wish to please God after being given hearts of flesh and having our hearts of stone removed.

 

[JoeP222w]

Calvinism denies that each individual is responsible and accountable for their own sins committed in their own life, and will not be damned for the sins of anyone else, as the Bible teaches:

Complete misunderstanding and mischaracterization of Calvinism.

 

[TheSeabass]

I think this was a poor handling of the verse in its context. I'll quote the whole passage.

2 Peter 3:3-9 - Know this first of all, that in the last days mockers will come with their mocking, following after their own lusts, and saying, "Where is the promise of His coming? For ever since the fathers fell asleep, all continues just as it was from the beginning of creation.” For when they maintain this, it escapes their notice that by the word of God the heavens existed long ago and the earth was formed out of water and by water, through which the world at that time was destroyed, being flooded with water. But by His word the present heavens and earth are being reserved for fire, kept for the day of judgment and destruction of ungodly men. But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day. The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.

The argument in this passage from the unbelievers is that God is not going to keep his promise because nothing has changed since the beginning of the universe. He promised, but he never comes or judges.

Peter responds that God is waiting because he is "patient toward YOU." The "you" in this passage refers to the ones being written to, namely believers. God's patience is toward his people, not willing that any of them should perish. So if this verse were regarding all men, then God would never come, because there will never be a time when all men be saved. Peter says that the reason God is waiting is for all to come to repentance. But since that cannot mean all men and the patience that God has is toward "you," the only way to take this verse is that God is waiting for his people to repent.

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

The Greek word for 'any' is tinas and is an indefinite pronoun (1). Since it does not refer to anyone specifically it can refer to anyone, everyone.

(1) 2 Peter 3:9 Greek Text Analysis

So the pronouns "any" and "all" do not have to have the same antecedent (believers) as "you-ward".

Note also the pronoun "some" comes from the Greek word 'tines' and is also an indefinite pronoun. Tines is from the same Greek form of the pronoun "any"(tinas). If "some" must have the same antecedent to the nearby pronoun "you-ward" then that implies that Christians/believers count the Lord being slack in His promises. But this is not right for the verse does NOT read "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise as some of you count slackness" The pronoun "some" refers to the scoffers all the way back up in verse 3. There is no rule of grammar that says the pronouns "some", "any" or "all" must refer to the same antecedent(believers) as "you-ward".


John Calvin's commentary on 2 Pet 3:9 "Not willing that any should perish. So wonderful is his love towards mankind, that he would have them all to be saved, and is of his own self prepared to bestow salvation on the lost." Obviously Calvin did not limit the pronouns "any" and "all" to just believers (you-ward) but applied "any" and "all" to all mankind.

Calvinist John Gill's commentary on 2 Pet 3:9 "Now this being deferred longer than was expected, the scoffers or mockers take upon them to charge the Lord with slackness in the fulfilment of his promise:" Gill also sees that the "some" who count the Lord's promise with slackness in verse 9 are the scoffers in v3. Again, no rule of grammar says that the immediate pronouns "some" 'any' and "all" must have the same antecedent as "you-ward"(believers). Just a theological bias would say "some" "any" "all" must have the same antecedent as "you-ward".

 

[TheSeabass]

Ya...I just think the "automatically" should be removed. It is a certainty though.

I meant "certainty" by the word "automatic". Sooner or later they will automatically believe if predetermined by God to do so.

 

[TheSeabass]

Just because he has chosen to save you doesn't mean that he owes it to you.

If God predetermined that I be saved, yet I live a ungodly unrighteous life does God still UNCONDITIONALLY OWE me salvation? God would put Himself in a position where He would have an UNCONDITIONAL obligation to give me salvation no matter how I live. There is no obligation upon me to live any particular way.

 

[bsd058]

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

The Greek word for 'any' is tinas and is an indefinite pronoun (1). Since it does not refer to anyone specifically it can refer to anyone, everyone.

(1) 2 Peter 3:9 Greek Text Analysis

So the pronouns "any" and "all" do not have to have the same antecedent (believers) as "you-ward".

Note also the pronoun "some" comes from the Greek word 'tines' and is also an indefinite pronoun. Tines is from the same Greek form of the pronoun "any"(tinas). If "some" must have the same antecedent to the nearby pronoun "you-ward" then that implies that Christians/believers count the Lord being slack in His promises. But this is not right for the verse does NOT read "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise as some of you count slackness" The pronoun "some" refers to the scoffers all the way back up in verse 3. There is no rule of grammar that says the pronouns "some", "any" or "all" must refer to the same antecedent(believers) as "you-ward".


John Calvin's commentary on 2 Pet 3:9 "Not willing that any should perish. So wonderful is his love towards mankind, that he would have them all to be saved, and is of his own self prepared to bestow salvation on the lost." Obviously Calvin did not limit the pronouns "any" and "all" to just believers (you-ward) but applied "any" and "all" to all mankind.

Calvinist John Gill's commentary on 2 Pet 3:9 "Now this being deferred longer than was expected, the scoffers or mockers take upon them to charge the Lord with slackness in the fulfilment of his promise:" Gill also sees that the "some" who count the Lord's promise with slackness in verse 9 are the scoffers in v3. Again, no rule of grammar says that the immediate pronouns "some" 'any' and "all" must have the same antecedent as "you-ward"(believers).

John Calvin wasn't perfect either. Clearly from the context it did not mean all men in the sense of everyone. The context suggests that the patience is toward the elect and is waiting for them to repent.

Ask yourself this (maybe you already have):
In the Calvinist viewpoint he is waiting for his people to repent.

In the Arminian what is God waiting for according to this passage, before he comes back to judge?

 

[bsd058]

If God predetermined that I be saved, yet I live a ungodly unrighteous life does God still UNCONDITIONALLY OWE me salvation? God would put Himself in a position where He would have an UNCONDITIONAL obligation to give me salvation no matter how I live. There is no obligation upon me to live any particular way.

If you were elect, then he would take out that heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh that pleases him. Works could never justify a man. But they can show what he is like on the inside.

 

[hedrick]

So if God UNCONDTIONALLY elected me to be saved, then God has obligated Himself to save me, He UNCONDITIONALLY OWES me salvation independent and regardless of what I do.

No. It means that God's plan involves having the necessary things happen in your life so that you come to faith.

 

[TheSeabass]

John Calvin wasn't perfect either. Clearly from the context it did not mean all men in the sense of everyone. The context suggests that the patience is toward the elect and is waiting for them to repent.

Ask yourself this (maybe you already have):
In the Calvinist viewpoint he is waiting for his people to repent.

In the Arminian what is God waiting for according to this passage, before he comes back to judge?

What rule of grammar says that the pronouns "some" "any" or "all" in 2 Peter 3:9 MUST have the same antecedent as "you-ward"? None, just a theological bias would have it so.

Natural reading and understanding: "......but (God) is long suffering to us-ward (believers) to the extent that He is not willing that any (believers and unbelievers) should perish....."

God's long suffering/patience is not limited to believers only but also to unbelievers(vessels of wrath) (Romans 9:22) therefore the "you-ward" is part of the "any" and "all".


God's long-suffering towards believers is grace/salvation 2 Peter 3:15. God's grace is seen in His patience in that those who were unbelievers (Gentiles) had the time to become believers before God comes in His judgment of mankind. Peter is writing to Gentiles that had become Christians (2 Peter 1:1). The gospel was to go to the Jew first but due to their rejection of it, the gospel then went to the Gentiles more quickly. God's long suffering in dealing with the Jews is eventually what brought salvation to these Gentiles, Romans 11:25 the fulness of the Gentiles come in.

 

[TheSeabass]

No. It means that God's plan involves having the necessary things happen in your life so that you come to faith.

So God must also force a person to live a godly life in order for that person to believe?

 

[TheSeabass]

If you were elect, then he would take out that heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh that pleases him. Works could never justify a man. But they can show what he is like on the inside.

Works do justify as Abraham's works justified him.


God removes the heart of stone by His word, not by a supernatural act apart from the word. Those that reject His word maintain their heart of stone while those that accept it have their hearts softened by that word.

 

[TheSeabass]

No. It means that God's plan involves having the necessary things happen in your life so that you come to faith.

Does the elect have the free will choice to live ungodly?

 

[EmSw]

John Calvin wasn't perfect either. Clearly from the context it did not mean all men in the sense of everyone. The context suggests that the patience is toward the elect and is waiting for them to repent.

Ask yourself this (maybe you already have):
In the Calvinist viewpoint he is waiting for his people to repent.

In the Arminian what is God waiting for according to this passage, before he comes back to judge?

So, salvation is conditional. Can you be saved without repenting? Jesus says you can't.

 

[hedrick]

So God must also force a person to live a godly life in order for that person to believe?

God doesn't always work that way. With Paul yes, but normally he arranges is so people learn at least some things for themselves.

 

[jimmyjimmy]

Complete misunderstanding and mischaracterization of Calvinism.

What else is new? It happens constantly here.

 

[EmSw]

What else is new? Happens constantly here.

Yes, even Calvinists misrepresent Calvinism. By the way, which group of Calvinism do you belong? Which one of the following has the truth, and which ones are lying?

1). Total hyper-Calvinism:

2). Partial hyper-Calvinism:

3). Ultra-High Calvinism

4). Regular High Calvinism

5). Moderate Calvinism

6). Lower Moderate Calvinism (may pre-date the confessions)

7). Lower Calvinism

8). Lowest Calvinism

 

[Samson Reaper]

Complete misunderstanding and mischaracterization of Calvinism.

Hmm, wondered when someone would say that I did not understand Calvinism!

 

[Samson Reaper]

"EmSw, post: Yes, even Calvinists misrepresent Calvinism. By the way, which group of Calvinism do you belong? Which one of the following has the truth, and which ones are lying?

1). Total hyper-Calvinism:

2). Partial hyper-Calvinism:

3). Ultra-High Calvinism

4). Regular High Calvinism

5). Moderate Calvinism

6). Lower Moderate Calvinism (may pre-date the confessions)

7). Lower Calvinism

8). Lowest Calvinism[/QUOTE]

Good point

 

[hedrick]

Hmm, wondered when someone would say that I did not understand Calvinism!

If you think "Calvinism denies that each individual is responsible and accountable for their own sins" then you do in fact misunderstand it.

What I think you mean is that you don't see how it makes sense to consider someone responsible in the situation described by Calvinism. I can understand that reaction, but I also think there are answers.

Whether holding the non-elect responsible is just is something we can discuss. But claiming that Calvinists deny something that they explicitly affirm is not going to lead to any useful exchange.