Hating Calvinists?

[frumanchu]

Calvin asserts that you can come to saving faith without hearing the Gospel, just from looking at the works of His hand around us. So either saving faith is not faith in Jesus Christ dying for our sin but simply an awareness that there is a God who has created all of this, OR Calvin is wrong.

Which do you think?

Calvin maintains nothing of the sort, Pete. Please provide us with any proof you have from Calvin's works that you think do state this and we will show you the error. The openning chapters of Romans establish concretely man's universal guilt in rejecting God right down to the notion of his very existence. No man will have an excuse in saying "I didn't know you existed." His existence is self-evident in creation and in our very conscience. The issue is not one of ignorance, but one of rebellion. Only by the regeneration of the Holy Spirit can man break off the shakles of his slavery to his own sinful desires and discern the spiritual truths that bring salvation.

Calvin does not maintain that mere acknowledgement of the self-evidence of God in Creation is sufficient for salvation.

 

[john14_20]

Calvin does not maintain that mere acknowledgement of the self-evidence of God in Creation is sufficient for salvation.

Hey Fru, how are you? I did not say that Calvin did assert this. I said that Calvin asserted that one can come to saving faith through natural theology alone. My proof of this is the quote from the Institutes posted by Gamecock.

Have I read that wrong?

Blessings to you, Pete

 

[rnmomof7]

I've heard there was more, but I'm not interested enough to track it down.
The papal juggernaught has the the lion's share (pardon the pun).
Besides, Protestants have the best crack, baby.lol

I believe you are in error.
Your assessment of the Servetus event is inaccurate anyway . That was not Calvin's decision alone.He had warned Servetus not to come to Geneva as there would be a problem.

The purpose of Servetus was to take over the Protestant City State
He was guilty of heresy and sedition

 

[Reformed Baptist]

I hate the name Calvinist, I perfer Christianist.

 

[frumanchu]

Hey Fru, how are you? I did not say that Calvin did assert this. I said that Calvin asserted that one can come to saving faith through natural theology alone. My proof of this is the quote from the Institutes posted by Gamecock.

Have I read that wrong?

"We cannot open our eyes without being compelled to behold Him. His essence, indeed, is incomprehensible, utterly transcending all human thought; but on each of His works His glory is engraven in characters so bright, so distinct, and so illustrious, that none, however dull and illiterate, can plead ignorance as their excuse."

Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 1, Chapter 5, Section 1

It says pretty much what I explained...that God is self-evident in Creation and that only through willful rebellion can man feign ignorance. I don't see anywhere here that it says man can come to salvation through "natural theology" alone. What is leading you to make that assertion, Pete?

 

[john14_20]

Ok cool. i have gone back and read this thread all the way through. First, it seems to me that Calvin's quote posted by Gamecock is a bit out of context. It doesn't really seem to fit with the conversation, but maybe I am missing something. (always open to that!)

Second, as we are in the Soteriology section, I perhaps incorrectly assumed, that the quote was speaking of Salvation.

So Calvin says that God is self-evident in Creation and no-one can claim ignorance as an excuse.

The question is...an excuse for what?

Blessings to all, Pete

 

[rnmomof7]

I hate the name Calvinist, I perfer Christianist.

I prefer the name Christian too...but I do not "hate' the term Calvinism.

It is nothing more than a "nick name" for the doctrine of the Reformation .

Welcome to CF

 

[rnmomof7]

Ok cool. i have gone back and read this thread all the way through. First, it seems to me that Calvin's quote posted by Gamecock is a bit out of context. It doesn't really seem to fit with the conversation, but maybe I am missing something. (always open to that!)

Second, as we are in the Soteriology section, I perhaps incorrectly assumed, that the quote was speaking of Salvation.

So Calvin says that God is self-evident in Creation and no-one can claim ignorance as an excuse.

The question is...an excuse for what?

Blessings to all, Pete

The Judgment of God on them .

No one can say "I didn't know" ..no one can claim ignorance


Rom 1:18**
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

Rom 1:19**
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed [it] unto them.


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:

 

[Romanbear]

Hi Rnmomof7;

No one can say "I didn't know" ..no one can claim ignorance

What good does it do to know without understanding? Without understanding you don't really know. You can have all truth in your hand and it's worthless without understanding. If Clavinism is correct in total depravity then man does have an excuse. He is still ignorant.

 

[rnmomof7]

Hi Rnmomof7;
What good does it do to know without understanding? Without understanding you don't really know. You can have all truth in your hand and it's worthless without understanding. If Clavinism is correct in total depravity then man does have an excuse. He is still ignorant.

No not ignorant ..rebellious..just like his parents Adam and Eve

 

[john14_20]

The Judgment of God on them .

No one can say "I didn't know" ..no one can claim ignorance


Rom 1:18**
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;

Rom 1:19**
Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed [it] unto them.


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:

So no one can say that they weren't given a chance to be saved. What about those people in different cultures? Can they come to a saving faith in Jesus Christ from natural theology?

Blessings, Pete

 

[rnmomof7]

So no one can say that they weren't given a chance to be saved. What about those people in different cultures? Can they come to a saving faith in Jesus Christ from natural theology?

Blessings, Pete

God is the one that said they are without excuse (not me:>)

The point of Romans is that God has shown Himself to all men , they have His law written on their heart.
Inspite of that law being in their heart (or on the tablets )they choose to sin against it.
They have no excuse for that sin and will stand in judgment for it.

Romans is teaching us the purpose of the Law here, and that no man can keep it perfectly . So we all need a saviour

 

[john14_20]

God is the one that said they are without excuse (not me:>)

The point of Romans is that God has shown Himself to all men , they have His law written on their heart.
Inspite of that law being in their heart (or on the tablets )they choose to sin against it.
They have no excuse for that sin and will stand in judgment for it.

Romans is teaching us the purpose of the Law here, and that no man can keep it perfectly . So we all need a saviour

If I haven't already taken this thread far off topic, I'm about to. So I'll be brief and understand if the conversation ends here.

I am happy enough to say that man has no excuse for his decision to sin, but he does (potentially) have an excuse for not accepting Jesus Christ as his Saviour - that he has never heard the Gospel.

But then I got to thinking about the first bit - I'm not even sure about that. Are we not born under the curse of sin? Are we not born totally and utterly depraved?

How then is it possible for us not to sin?

Blessings to all, Pete

 

[JeffreyLloyd]

I like the Calvin from the comic strip.. ya know the one with Hobbes

 

[rnmomof7]

If I haven't already taken this thread far off topic, I'm about to. So I'll be brief and understand if the conversation ends here.

I am happy enough to say that man has no excuse for his decision to sin, but he does (potentially) have an excuse for not accepting Jesus Christ as his Saviour - that he has never heard the Gospel.

But then I got to thinking about the first bit - I'm not even sure about that. Are we not born under the curse of sin? Are we not born totally and utterly depraved?

How then is it possible for us not to sin?

Blessings to all, Pete

Exactly the point of Romans

There is no one that deserves heaven , we all deserve hell.
Unregenerate man can choose only between the greater or lesser sin.
We are born sinners and we are born with a will to sin.
Men are not sinners because they sin. They sin because they are sinners .

The point in Romans is that all men are accountable before God for that sin , because it is a choice made by men.

He gave us the law so that we would know what sin was . No matter how hard a man tries he can not not sin.

If a cave man having a knowledge of God and the law written on his heart He was and is responsible for every one of those sins.

We know the Jews were saved because they had faith and looked forward to the promise , without the gospel.

 

[john14_20]

Exactly the point of Romans

There is no one that deserves heaven , we all deserve hell.
Unregenerate man can choose only between the greater or lesser sin.
We are born sinners and we are born with a will to sin.
Men are not sinners because they sin. They sin because they are sinners .

The point in Romans is that all men are accountable before God for that sin , because it is a choice made by men.

He gave us the law so that we would know what sin was . No matter how hard a man tries he can not not sin.

If a cave man having a knowledge of God and the law written on his heart He was and is responsible for every one of those sins.

We know the Jews were saved because they had faith and looked forward to the promise , without the gospel.

They say in theology that every answer brings with it a new question. I think that is right.

I have to ask - you say we are born sinners. You say we sin because we are sinners. You say that no matter how hard a man may try, it is impossible for him not to sin. But then you say that God holds him accountable for that sin? And that the man 'chose' to sin?

I so don't understand!

Blessings to all, Pete

 

[Received]

There is no one that deserves heaven , we all deserve hell.

We deserve neither heaven nor hell; either destiny is contingent on our belief. We are condemned before the law, and such makes it capable of us to realize our need for salvation -- that is, redemption from sin (Matt. 1:21)

I think you're jumping the gun by asserting that men deserve hell by nature. My opinion.

 

[Rick Otto]

Recieved, your opinion is unscriptural, dude.
Our nature is fallen, we're born losers.
Only mercy will save us, justice won't.
If our destiny is contingent upon our belief, we are all lost, for none can know or even desire to know the things of the spirit. It is the work of God that we believe, not the work of ourselves. That's why it's oxymoronic to ask,"What must we DO to be saved?"
Our salvation is not our doing, but rewards in heaven will reflect our participation.
The only way to redeem the statement that anything is contingent upon our belief is to place it within the context of that belief being contingent upon God's salvific interference with our fallen wills.

Momo'7, I know Calvin himself tried to prevent the murder of Servetus.
I just find it interesting that most the people that point to him in an effort to equate the Inquisitors w/the Reformationists, don't know that the Catholics were tryin' to barbecue Servetus as well.

I'm a big fan of Romans 1:20 & have pondered the fate of those who've lived conscientiously w/out ever hearing the gospel. I wonder if there ISn't enough of the gospel in creation to affect a conversion.
How did the magi know to come to Bethlehem?
They had the teachings of Daniel, but they had something more.
Did you know that all ancient cultures had the same 12 major constellations, each w/3 decans(sub-constellations)?
The Sphinx was the key. It told where to begin & end in the story told within the Mazzeroth, or Zodiac as it came to called. The head(begining) is Virgo(the virgin) & the tail(end) is the Lion(of Judah).
Genesis3:15 I will put enmity between thee & the woman, between her seed & thy seed. Thou shalt bruise his heel, but he shall crush your head."
Oops... how'd I turn the italics on?

The book of Enoch reveals this knowledge was given to him by archangels. This book is referenced in Jude 14,15 "Now Enoch, the 7th from Adam, prophesied about those men also, saying,"Behold, the Lord cometh w/10,000 of His saints."

Here's the bombshell:
"The heavens declare the glory of God, & the firmament sheweth his handiwork. Day unto day uttereth speech, & night unto night sheweth knowledge. There is no speech nor language where their voice is not heard. There line is gone out thru all the earth, & their words to the end of the world. In them hath he set a tabernacle for the sun, which is as a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, and rejoiceth as a strong man to run a race. His going forth is from the end of heaven, and His circuit unto the ends of it: and there is nothing hid from the heat thereof." Psalm 19:1-6

"And God said, let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, & for seasons,& days, & years." Genesis 1:14,15

I've got a book called "A Voice Crying in the Heavens" by Robert Scott Wadsworth & Daniel G. Stockemer, and one called "The Witness of the Stars" by E.W.Bullinger

 

[rnmomof7]

If I haven't already taken this thread far off topic, I'm about to. So I'll be brief and understand if the conversation ends here.

I am happy enough to say that man has no excuse for his decision to sin, but he does (potentially) have an excuse for not accepting Jesus Christ as his Saviour - that he has never heard the Gospel.

But that is not what the bile says it says that every man is without excuse. Either the Bible is right or you are:>)


God purposed to reveal Himself to all men through creation. Then He placed the law in the heart of every man.
Man is fully responsible for that knowledge God has given Him and He will be judged on that.

(remember the story of Helen Keller? When she was given the sign for God..she signed back I knew who is is , i just did not know His name)

Remember that there are Jews that were saved by faith .

The devil has done a fine job making man think he is the arbiter of fairness.

It implies that fairness as man defines it means we all deserve the same things. That is a sin rooted philosophy . It elevates man and places his position above Gods.
God does not "owe" man anything. God is the standard of "fairness" . Our standard is self serving and self seeking.

If you read some of the parables..especially the one about the laborers in the field , you get a vision of Gods fairness.(Matt 20)

But then I got to thinking about the first bit - I'm not even sure about that. Are we not born under the curse of sin? Are we not born totally and utterly depraved?

How then is it possible for us not to sin?

Blessings to all, Pete

It is not possible for us not to sin , but that is not the issue. The issue is not our sin..God sent a Savior as an answer to that sin .

Heaven will be filled with sinners just like Hell.

The difference is the Saints have put on Christ and wear His righteousness.

No one will be in Hell that did not deserve it and no one will be in heaven that deserves it.

That is the meaning of mercy

 

[armothe]

I know Calvin himself tried to prevent the murder of Servetus.

Actually, John Calvin took full credit for the murder of Servetus in a 1561 letter from him to Marquis Paet of Navarre.

-A